Bloomington - Consultant Violates Law
Throughout the city council's efforts to impose a Government Managed Trash Collection system upon residents, they have relied on the "go-to" consultant that many cities have used to help them achieve this goal. The consultant's name is Dan Krivit, who works for the firm Foth Infrastructure and Environment, LLC (FOTH).
The City of Bloomington has paid Mr. Krivit's firm over $250,000 in consulting fees. Most recently, the city approved a contract extension for an additional $100,000+.
Garbage Haulers for Citizen Choice (GHCC), in its review of Bloomington city emails, uncovered numerous instances where Mr. Krivit labeled emails as being confidential non-public when they in fact were public documents. On September 29, 2014, Mr. Krivit attempted to override the Bloomington City Attorney and City Clerk in proclaiming that copies of garbage bills voluntarily sent to city staff were non-public. A month later, in an email dated November 1, 2014 he talked of how he would work with city staff to "shred/delete" this same data.
Mr. Krivit also advised city staff to keep certain discussions outside of email so they could not be reviewed through public information requests. In addition, he also made unprofessional comments about GHCC, its members, or those working for GHCC.
What particularly drew our attention to Mr. Krivit's actions was his instruction to city staff to send him data which he stated he would keep in his possession in order to keep it away from the public. GHCC knew this was illegal. The Minnesota Data Practices Act clearly states that not only do the state's public information laws apply to government, they also apply to those who have contracts with government, regardless of whether the contract states this or not. In the case of the City of Bloomington, Mr. Krivit was explicitly informed in two different contracts that he was required to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The law does not allow contractors to collude with the city to hide, shred, or delete data.
On February 23, 2015, GHCC filed a Minnesota Data Practices Act request with the city and Mr. Krivit to obtain public data that was in the possession of FOTH. Days went by, which turned into weeks, and then over a month. Mr. Krivit refused to respond to the public information request. GHCC knew Mr. Krivit had received the request as Bloomington city staff stated that Mr. Krivit was upset that city staff provided his contact information. Staff also informed GHCC that Mr. Krivit was speaking with the city attorney in an apparent attempt to shield himself and his company from having to respond.
On April, 8, 2015, GHCC filed a complaint with the State of Minnesota concerning Mr. Krivit and FOTH's violation of the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The complaint was filed with the State of Minnesota, Department of Administration, Information and Policy Analysis Division. They are in some respects a state watchdog for government data and open meeting issues and have the power to issue formal opinions under Minnesota law.
On May 21, 2015, Department of Administration Commissioner Matthew Massman issued a formal opinion stating that both Mr. Krivit and FOTH violated the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The Commissioner stated that Mr. Krivit is mandated to comply with the law, that he failed to respond to an information request as required by law, and that he was falsely claiming that Bloomington data in his possession was non-public. Mr. Krivit even claimed that data in his possession fell into certain non-public categories that didn't exist under Minnesota law.
To date, Mr. Krivit refuses to respond to GHCC's information request. The City of Bloomington refuses to enforce their contract with FOTH which requires them to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
GHCC anticipates that it will have to take legal action against Mr. Krivit and FOTH, asking the Court to compel them to follow the law. Under a provision of the Minnesota Data Practices Act, the Court must award attorney fees in a situation where a consultant such as Mr. Krivit and FOTH refuse to comply with the law.
May 21, 2015 State of Minnesota Advisory Opinion 15-003 (4 pages)
April 8, 2015 GHCC complaint to State of Minnesota (23 pages)
In June 2015, the Risk Management Department at FOTH, located in De Pere, WI, contacted GHCC indicating that it intended to follow the State's Advisory Opinion and provide all information requested. To date, Mr. Krivit has refused to contact GHCC himself. FOTH's Risk Management Department claims that company policy prohibits the deletion of emails. GHCC will be doing spot comparisons between FOTH and city files to confirm this.
Updated: 6/8/15
Throughout the city council's efforts to impose a Government Managed Trash Collection system upon residents, they have relied on the "go-to" consultant that many cities have used to help them achieve this goal. The consultant's name is Dan Krivit, who works for the firm Foth Infrastructure and Environment, LLC (FOTH).
The City of Bloomington has paid Mr. Krivit's firm over $250,000 in consulting fees. Most recently, the city approved a contract extension for an additional $100,000+.
Garbage Haulers for Citizen Choice (GHCC), in its review of Bloomington city emails, uncovered numerous instances where Mr. Krivit labeled emails as being confidential non-public when they in fact were public documents. On September 29, 2014, Mr. Krivit attempted to override the Bloomington City Attorney and City Clerk in proclaiming that copies of garbage bills voluntarily sent to city staff were non-public. A month later, in an email dated November 1, 2014 he talked of how he would work with city staff to "shred/delete" this same data.
Mr. Krivit also advised city staff to keep certain discussions outside of email so they could not be reviewed through public information requests. In addition, he also made unprofessional comments about GHCC, its members, or those working for GHCC.
What particularly drew our attention to Mr. Krivit's actions was his instruction to city staff to send him data which he stated he would keep in his possession in order to keep it away from the public. GHCC knew this was illegal. The Minnesota Data Practices Act clearly states that not only do the state's public information laws apply to government, they also apply to those who have contracts with government, regardless of whether the contract states this or not. In the case of the City of Bloomington, Mr. Krivit was explicitly informed in two different contracts that he was required to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The law does not allow contractors to collude with the city to hide, shred, or delete data.
On February 23, 2015, GHCC filed a Minnesota Data Practices Act request with the city and Mr. Krivit to obtain public data that was in the possession of FOTH. Days went by, which turned into weeks, and then over a month. Mr. Krivit refused to respond to the public information request. GHCC knew Mr. Krivit had received the request as Bloomington city staff stated that Mr. Krivit was upset that city staff provided his contact information. Staff also informed GHCC that Mr. Krivit was speaking with the city attorney in an apparent attempt to shield himself and his company from having to respond.
On April, 8, 2015, GHCC filed a complaint with the State of Minnesota concerning Mr. Krivit and FOTH's violation of the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The complaint was filed with the State of Minnesota, Department of Administration, Information and Policy Analysis Division. They are in some respects a state watchdog for government data and open meeting issues and have the power to issue formal opinions under Minnesota law.
On May 21, 2015, Department of Administration Commissioner Matthew Massman issued a formal opinion stating that both Mr. Krivit and FOTH violated the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The Commissioner stated that Mr. Krivit is mandated to comply with the law, that he failed to respond to an information request as required by law, and that he was falsely claiming that Bloomington data in his possession was non-public. Mr. Krivit even claimed that data in his possession fell into certain non-public categories that didn't exist under Minnesota law.
To date, Mr. Krivit refuses to respond to GHCC's information request. The City of Bloomington refuses to enforce their contract with FOTH which requires them to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
GHCC anticipates that it will have to take legal action against Mr. Krivit and FOTH, asking the Court to compel them to follow the law. Under a provision of the Minnesota Data Practices Act, the Court must award attorney fees in a situation where a consultant such as Mr. Krivit and FOTH refuse to comply with the law.
May 21, 2015 State of Minnesota Advisory Opinion 15-003 (4 pages)
April 8, 2015 GHCC complaint to State of Minnesota (23 pages)
In June 2015, the Risk Management Department at FOTH, located in De Pere, WI, contacted GHCC indicating that it intended to follow the State's Advisory Opinion and provide all information requested. To date, Mr. Krivit has refused to contact GHCC himself. FOTH's Risk Management Department claims that company policy prohibits the deletion of emails. GHCC will be doing spot comparisons between FOTH and city files to confirm this.
Updated: 6/8/15