Editorial: Public records should not be courthouse cash machines

Too many public officials look at public records as a cash cow.

In Cabell County or Huntington, if you are involved in a traffic accident, you probably need a copy of the police report for your records and for your insurance company. To get that report, you need $20. That's $20 for someone to run one or two sheets of paper through a photocopy machine.

There's no reason for a traffic accident report to cost someone that much money.

However, people in fender benders have it good compared to some folks.

According to The Associated Press, the West Virginia Supreme Court is being asked to overturn a ruling that allowed a private company to pay less than $20 for electronic versions of tax maps that would have cost more than $225,000 as paper copies.

Harrison County software company Seneca Technologies secured 28,206 maps from the state Tax Department for $18.56. It is now offering those maps to the public for free on its Web site.

Here's the problem for local officials: Under state law, county assessors charge $8 for each copy of a map. Of that amount, $4 goes to the county assessor's office, $3 goes to the fund for courthouse upkeep and $1 goes to the state Tax Department.

But state law also says public records requested under the Freedom of Information Act must be provided at cost.

Kanawha County Circuit Court Judge Irene Berger ruled that Seneca, which used the Freedom of Information Act to request the maps, needed to pay only the cost of producing three DVDs.

If Berger's ruling is allowed to stand, Gatson and others argue it would have disastrous financial ramifications for the courthouse fund and county assessors across the state.

Patrick Lough, a software engineer for Seneca Technologies, said Thursday that the company maintains that any information created by the government should be available to the public for free.

This is a case where technology has zoomed past the ability of local government to control information. Once a person secures a public document, it can be placed on the Internet for all to see.

The Supreme Court should consider who owns the information on these maps. Then it should be clear that there is no reason for courthouse officials to charge exorbitant fees for hard copies of public information.