Lastly, Ms. Davies argues that the Commissioner should not issue an opinion in this matter because not all of the facts have been provided to the Commissioner. This is a particularly ironic argument because District 829 was given notice of Ms. Kerr's request and afforded the opportunity to offer any information in support and explanation of what happened. Instead of offering information, the District now says the Commissioner should not issue an opinion because she does not have enough information. As she is required to do, the Commissioner will issue an opinion based on the information that has been presented to her. In summary, Ms. Kerr's request is within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner and the other arguments raised by Ms. Davies are not persuasive that the Commissioner should decline to issue an opinion.
Access can mean either inspection of the data or receipt of copies of the data.
What kind of access is provided is dictated by the nature of the request made by the data subject. In this particular instance, Y stated her initial request very clearly. This kind of request, delivered to a school district, is also regulated by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 13.32. Subsequently, Y's attorney learns that District 829 or its attorney may be maintaining additional educational data on X and asks for that data. In part as a response to that request but also as part of evidence disclosures required for a due process hearing, the District and its attorney agents make additional data available to the attorney for X's parents.