The irony is that SSNs were never supposed to be
in land record documents as they have no
requirement for them. What happened was hapless
bank officials, attorneys, or their staff mistook
"SS" - meaning signature - for social
security. Nobody complained until clerks and
registers of deeds started scanning them to make
them more efficiently available. In my former
role with the State of New Jersey, I worked
closely with the 21 Clerks and Registers of Deeds
on the implementation and certification of their
document imaging systems and electronic filing
portals. They are the ones caught between a rock-and-a-hard place:
* everybody wants the electronic access to
all their records and they want it NOW
* they did not erroneously fill out the documents
* they have to pay for the redaction which
either means higher fees (statutorily set) or
higher taxes or staff/services reduction
And on top of it all, you end up with private
industry requesting all the records via open
public records requests (pay a pittance for it)
so they can re-purpose it and sell it.
That's my 2¢ rant
Thanks -- Dan
At 2/26/2007 05:20 PM Monday, bobd wrote:
>Thanks Doug for the text of the press release.
>
>The document was long because the clerk needed to blame the attorney general
>for doing his job of protecting the personal information of the residents of
>the State of Texas.
>
>She could have announced that because of privacy issues non-redacted records
>will not be available on-line. Instead as punishment to the residents she
>will withhold all on-line records including records that have already been
>redacted. To add to the discomfort of the public they must now submit a
>request in writing at two specific locations. If the clerks office was so
>technology advanced, why not allow the public to send a request by email
>with the redacted copy by return email.
>
>Apparently until the Attorney General acted she didn't give a hoot for the
>privacy of the individual by publishing the SSN's.
>
>Sound like spite reaction on the clerks part.
>
>Robert W. Dalton, CRM
>Dalton Consulting
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>Of Allen, Doug
>
>
>
>DIRECT ACCESS TO PUBLIC RECORDS TEMPORARILY PROHIBITED
>
>The opinion released late last week appears to definitively state that,
>beginning immediately, the County Clerk must not reveal SSNs to anyone
>either online or in the office. Due to the many questions this opinion
>raises, we have decided to withhold direct public access to our redacted
>and non-redacted records until further clarification of the opinion can
>be obtained.
>
>An individual who wishes to view a document filed in the Clerk's Office
>will be required to place a request at either our Airport Boulevard or
>Courthouse location. The Clerk's staff will research the request,
>review the records, make a copy of any page that has an SSN, and then
>make the redacted copy available to the customer. This is in stark
>contrast to the streamlined process of giving customers the ability to
>research documents on their own. At this time, we are unable to predict
>how long it may take to fill any particular request.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Douglas P. Allen, CRM, CDIA+
>
>
>List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
>Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
>List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
>Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
Daniel W. Noonan, MLS, CDIA+
Electronic Records Manager/Archivist
University Archives
The Ohio State University
600 Ackerman Road, Room 5822
Columbus, OH 43202
614.247.2425
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
http://library.osu.edu/sites/archives/
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
