Bureau of Criminal Apprehension required to perform background checks at the request of the Office of the Legislative Auditor.
Summary
HF4371 amends Minnesota’s background-check statute to add the Office of the Legislative Auditor to the list of agencies that may request criminal background checks from the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA). The bill is framed as a public safety measure and updates the definition of “requesting agency” in Minnesota Statutes section 299C.76 so the Legislative Auditor can access the same background-check process already available to several state agencies and counties.
The practical effect is to authorize the BCA to conduct national criminal history record checks, under the existing federal tax information and confidentiality safeguards in the statute, when the Legislative Auditor needs them for audit-related work. The bill does not create a new background-check system; rather, it expands who may use an existing one and thereby affects the BCA, the Office of the Legislative Auditor, and the other agencies already listed in the statute.
Impact
The bill amends Minnesota Statutes 2025 Supplement, section 299C.76, subdivision 1, by adding the Office of the Legislative Auditor to the statutory definition of “requesting agency.” This change gives the auditor’s office express authority to request BCA background checks under the same legal framework that governs other state agencies, including confidentiality and handling requirements for sensitive information such as federal tax information and national criminal history record information. It primarily affects the BCA’s administrative duties and expands the auditor’s access to background-check services for oversight purposes.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the overall sentiment appears neutral to supportive. The measure is narrow, technical, and administrative in nature, and it appears designed to improve the Legislative Auditor’s ability to carry out oversight functions rather than to make a controversial policy change. There is no evidence in the provided record of organized opposition or divided voting.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The only likely issue is the scope of access to criminal background checks and related confidential information, since the bill extends that authority to the Office of the Legislative Auditor. Any concerns would likely center on privacy, data security, and whether the auditor’s office should have the same access as program agencies, but no speaker or vote record is available showing active disagreement.
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension required to develop sexual assault investigation training, peace officers required to complete training requirements, and money appropriated.