1999 Minnesota Statutes

     299C.65 Criminal, juvenile information policy group. 

    Subdivision 1.    Membership, duties.  The criminal and 
 juvenile information policy group consists of the chair of the 
 sentencing guidelines commission, the commissioner of 
 corrections, the commissioner of public safety, and the state 
 court administrator.  

    The policy group shall study and make recommendations to 
 the governor, the supreme court, and the legislature on:  

    (1) a framework for integrated criminal justice information 
 systems, including the development and maintenance of a 
 community data model for state, county, and local criminal 
 justice information; 

    (2) the responsibilities of each entity within the criminal 
 and juvenile justice systems concerning the collection, 
 maintenance, dissemination, and sharing of criminal justice 
 information with one another; 

    (3) actions necessary to ensure that information maintained 
 in the criminal justice information systems is accurate and 
 up-to-date; 

    (4) the development of an information system containing 
 criminal justice information on gross misdemeanor-level and 
 felony-level juvenile offenders that is part of the integrated 
 criminal justice information system framework; 

    (5) the development of an information system containing 
 criminal justice information on misdemeanor arrests, 
 prosecutions, and convictions that is part of the integrated 
 criminal justice information system framework; 

    (6) comprehensive training programs and requirements for 
 all individuals in criminal justice agencies to ensure the 
 quality and accuracy of information in those systems; 

    (7) continuing education requirements for individuals in 
 criminal justice agencies who are responsible for the 
 collection, maintenance, dissemination, and sharing of criminal 
 justice data; 

    (8) a periodic audit process to ensure the quality and 
 accuracy of information contained in the criminal justice 
 information systems; 

    (9) the equipment, training, and funding needs of the state 
 and local agencies that participate in the criminal justice 
 information systems; 

    (10) the impact of integrated criminal justice information 
 systems on individual privacy rights; 

    (11) the impact of proposed legislation on the criminal 
 justice system, including any fiscal impact, need for training, 
 changes in information systems, and changes in processes; 

    (12) the collection of data on race and ethnicity in 
 criminal justice information systems; 

    (13) the development of a tracking system for domestic 
 abuse orders for protection; 

    (14) processes for expungement, correction of inaccurate 
 records, destruction of records, and other matters relating to 
 the privacy interests of individuals; and 

    (15) the development of a database for extended 
 jurisdiction juvenile records and whether the records should be 
 public or private and how long they should be retained.  

    Subd. 2.    Report, task force.  The policy group shall 
 file an annual report with the governor, supreme court, and 
 chairs and ranking minority members of the senate and house 
 committees and divisions with jurisdiction over criminal justice 
 funding and policy by December 1 of each even-numbered year.  

    The report must make recommendations concerning any 
 legislative changes or appropriations that are needed to ensure 
 that the criminal justice information systems operate accurately 
 and efficiently.  To assist them in developing their 
 recommendations, the chair, the commissioners, and the 
 administrator shall appoint a task force consisting of the 
 members of the criminal and juvenile justice information policy 
 group or their designees and the following additional members:  

    (1) the director of the office of strategic and long-range 
 planning; 

    (2) two sheriffs recommended by the Minnesota sheriffs 
 association; 

    (3) two police chiefs recommended by the Minnesota chiefs 
 of police association; 

    (4) two county attorneys recommended by the Minnesota 
 county attorneys association; 

    (5) two city attorneys recommended by the Minnesota league 
 of cities; 

    (6) two public defenders appointed by the board of public 
 defense; 

    (7) two district judges appointed by the conference of 
 chief judges, one of whom is currently assigned to the juvenile 
 court; 

    (8) two community corrections administrators recommended by 
 the Minnesota association of counties, one of whom represents a 
 community corrections act county; 

    (9) two probation officers; 

    (10) four public members, one of whom has been a victim of 
 crime, and two who are representatives of the private business 
 community who have expertise in integrated information systems; 

    (11) two court administrators; 

    (12) one member of the house of representatives appointed 
 by the speaker of the house; 

    (13) one member of the senate appointed by the majority 
 leader; 

    (14) the attorney general or a designee; 

    (15) the commissioner of administration or a designee; 

    (16) an individual recommended by the Minnesota league of 
 cities; and 

    (17) an individual recommended by the Minnesota association 
 of counties. 

 In making these appointments, the appointing authority shall 
 select members with expertise in integrated data systems or best 
 practices.  

    Subd. 3.    Continuing education program.  The criminal 
 and juvenile information policy group shall explore the 
 feasibility of developing and implementing a continuing 
 education program for state, county, and local criminal justice 
 information agencies.  The policy group shall consult with 
 representatives of public and private post-secondary 
 institutions in determining the most effective manner in which 
 the training shall be provided.  The policy group shall include 
 recommendations in the 1994 report to the legislature.  

    Subd. 4.    Criminal Code numbering scheme.  The policy 
 group shall study and make recommendations on a structured 
 numbering scheme for the Criminal Code to facilitate 
 identification of the offense and the elements of the crime and 
 shall include recommendations in the 1994 report to the 
 legislature. 

    Subd. 5.    Review of funding and grant requests.  (a) 
 The criminal and juvenile justice information policy group shall 
 review the funding requests for criminal justice information 
 systems from state, county, and municipal government agencies.  
 The policy group shall review the requests for compatibility to 
 statewide criminal justice information system standards.  The 
 review shall be forwarded to the chairs and ranking minority 
 members of the house and senate committees and divisions with 
 jurisdiction over criminal justice funding and policy. 

    (b) The policy group shall also review funding requests for 
 criminal justice information systems grants to be made by the 
 commissioner of public safety as provided in this section.  
 Within the limits of available appropriations, the commissioner 
 of public safety shall make grants for projects that have been 
 approved by the policy group. 

    (c) If a funding request is for development of a 
 comprehensive criminal justice information integration plan, the 
 policy group shall ensure that the request contains the 
 components specified in subdivision 6.  If a funding request is 
 for implementation of a plan or other criminal justice 
 information systems project, the policy group shall ensure that: 

    (1) the government agency has adopted a comprehensive plan 
 that complies with subdivision 6; 

    (2) the request contains the components specified in 
 subdivision 7; and 

    (3) the request demonstrates that it is consistent with the 
 government agency's comprehensive plan. 

    Subd. 6.    Development of integration plan.  (a) If a 
 funding request is for funds to develop a comprehensive criminal 
 justice information integration plan to integrate all systems 
 within a jurisdiction, the requesting agency must submit to the 
 policy group a request that contains the following components: 

    (1) the vision, mission, goals, objectives, and scope of 
 the integration plan; 

    (2) a statement of need identifying problems, 
 inefficiencies, gaps, overlaps, and barriers within the 
 requesting agency's jurisdiction, including those related to 
 current systems and interfaces, business practices, policies, 
 laws, and rules; 

    (3) a list of agency heads and staff who will direct the 
 effort and a statement demonstrating collaboration among all of 
 the agencies involved; 

    (4) a statement that the integration plan would integrate 
 all systems within the six major business functions of the 
 criminal justice community, including incident reporting, 
 investigation, arrest, detention, adjudication, and disposition, 
 including postsentence supervision and treatment, and related 
 civil, family, and human services proceedings, processes, and 
 services, to the extent it was cost beneficial; 

    (5) a statement demonstrating that the requesting agency 
 has consulted with individuals involved in day-to-day business 
 practices, use, and operation of current criminal justice 
 information systems so as to identify barriers and gaps; 

    (6) a planning methodology that will result in at least the 
 following deliverables: 

    (i) an identification of problems in the state's criminal 
 justice data model, where applicable, including data policy 
 problems and proposed changes; 

    (ii) a function and process model that includes business 
 process improvement and redesign opportunities, prioritized 
 business change objectives, and short-term opportunities for 
 improvement that can be pursued immediately while developing and 
 implementing the long-range integration plan; 

    (iii) a technology model that includes network, 
 communication, and security standards and guidelines; 

    (iv) an application architecture; 

    (v) a complete gap analysis that includes identification of 
 gaps, omissions, and redundancies in the collection and 
 dissemination of criminal justice information in the requesting 
 agency's jurisdiction; 

    (vi) an assessment of current and alternative directions 
 for business practices, applications, and technology, ranging 
 from simple modifications to complete redesign; 

    (vii) a business process redesign model, showing existing 
 and redesigned process and process vision, future performance 
 targets, design principles, new process flow, and benefits; and 

    (viii) a long-range integration plan that includes time 
 frames for the retirement, renewal, or redevelopment of systems 
 and applications identified in clauses (i) to (vii) along with 
 justification based on age, business processes not supported, 
 and data deficiencies; 

    (7) projected timelines for developing and executing the 
 plan; 

    (8) an estimate of the resources needed to develop, 
 execute, operate, and maintain the integration plan; 

    (9) a statement that the final integration plan will 
 contain all the components in this subdivision in final form; 

    (10) an identification of how the applicant will satisfy 
 the match requirements of subdivision 8; and 

    (11) any other matters the policy group deems necessary for 
 successful development or implementation of the integration plan 
 and resulting systems. 

    (b) An agency may submit an interim integration plan to the 
 policy group if it identifies high priority integration tasks 
 during the development of the integration plan.  The interim 
 plan shall identify the tasks and the business case for 
 completing these tasks in advance of completing the entire plan. 

    Subd. 7.    Implementation of integration plan.  If the 
 request is for funds to implement an integration plan, the 
 requesting agency must submit the following to the policy group: 

    (1) an integration plan containing the components described 
 in subdivision 6; 

    (2) a description of how implementation of the integration 
 plan will improve operation of the criminal justice system in 
 the requesting agency's jurisdiction; 

    (3) an identification of how the applicant will satisfy the 
 match requirement in subdivision 8; and 

    (4) a means for evaluating outcomes of the plan's 
 implementation. 

    Subd. 8.    Local match.  The policy group may approve 
 grants only if the applicant provides matching funds to pay 
 one-half of the costs of developing or implementing the 
 integration plan.  The policy group shall adopt policies 
 concerning the use of in-kind resources to satisfy a portion of 
 the match requirement and the sources from which matching funds 
 may be obtained. 

    Subd. 9.    Documentation and reporting requirements.  
 Every recipient of matching funds to develop or implement an 
 integration plan shall submit to the policy group all requested 
 documentation, including final plans and a report evaluating 
 whether and how the development or implementation of the 
 integration plan improved the operation of the criminal justice 
 system in the requesting agency's jurisdiction.  The policy 
 group shall establish the recipient's reporting dates at the 
 time funds are awarded.  

    HIST: 1993 c 266 s 33; 1994 c 576 s 41; 1997 c 239 art 8 s 17; 1999 
 c 216 art 2 s 14-19