Opinion: Secrecy in age of information
July 26, 2010 | Filed in: Open
records | Right to Know
Law
OPINION
The [Scranton] Times-Tribune
Most public officials in 2010 would blush at acknowledging that staff members do not know how to use e-mail or electronically transfer data. But not Wyoming County Recorder of Deeds Dennis Montross. He thinks his staff's alleged technological ignorance is a valid excuse to maintain the secrecy of public records.
After The Citizens' Voice, The Times-Tribune's sister publication in Wilkes-Barre, requested records of natural gas leases in an electronic format, Mr. Montross responded with an astonishing affidavit: "My office staff, including myself, are not trained or familiar with loading information on a 'flash drive' as suggested by the requester."
The newspaper made the suggestion to load the data on a memory card after the office declined to provide the data by e-mail, the fastest, easiest method.
Apparently, Mr. Montross views his staff's supposed technical ignorance as a bulwark against transparency. He should note, however, that the ignorance that he has failed to correct through training likely puts his office in violation of the state Right to Know Law. It requires offices such as Mr. Montross' to provide data in electronic formats when it is stored electronically.
The point, of course, is that the records in question clearly are public records. The Citizens' Voice wants them for its electronic database on the burgeoning natural gas industry.
But, according to Nancy Klimas, a deputy in the recorder of deeds office, the records are the province of the office alone.
"We have to protect our records," she said, apparently worrying that e-mailing or downloading records somehow could corrupt them.
What the office is trying to protect, however, is a revenue stream. It sells paper copies of the documents to banks and others. Despite selling the reports to commercial enterprises, Mr. Montross claimed that the lease documents are internal reports that are not subject to public disclosure.
While Mr. Montross and his staff might be flummoxed by technology, the true issue is much more fundamental. Contrary to Ms. Klimas' assertion about "our records," the recorder of deeds is merely a custodian of public records. Mr. Montross should train his staff in basic electronic communications technology, and turn over the public records for public dissemination, as required by Pennsylvania law. The objective should be easy access, not needlessly producing copies to generate revenue.
The [Scranton] Times-Tribune
Most public officials in 2010 would blush at acknowledging that staff members do not know how to use e-mail or electronically transfer data. But not Wyoming County Recorder of Deeds Dennis Montross. He thinks his staff's alleged technological ignorance is a valid excuse to maintain the secrecy of public records.
After The Citizens' Voice, The Times-Tribune's sister publication in Wilkes-Barre, requested records of natural gas leases in an electronic format, Mr. Montross responded with an astonishing affidavit: "My office staff, including myself, are not trained or familiar with loading information on a 'flash drive' as suggested by the requester."
The newspaper made the suggestion to load the data on a memory card after the office declined to provide the data by e-mail, the fastest, easiest method.
Apparently, Mr. Montross views his staff's supposed technical ignorance as a bulwark against transparency. He should note, however, that the ignorance that he has failed to correct through training likely puts his office in violation of the state Right to Know Law. It requires offices such as Mr. Montross' to provide data in electronic formats when it is stored electronically.
The point, of course, is that the records in question clearly are public records. The Citizens' Voice wants them for its electronic database on the burgeoning natural gas industry.
But, according to Nancy Klimas, a deputy in the recorder of deeds office, the records are the province of the office alone.
"We have to protect our records," she said, apparently worrying that e-mailing or downloading records somehow could corrupt them.
What the office is trying to protect, however, is a revenue stream. It sells paper copies of the documents to banks and others. Despite selling the reports to commercial enterprises, Mr. Montross claimed that the lease documents are internal reports that are not subject to public disclosure.
While Mr. Montross and his staff might be flummoxed by technology, the true issue is much more fundamental. Contrary to Ms. Klimas' assertion about "our records," the recorder of deeds is merely a custodian of public records. Mr. Montross should train his staff in basic electronic communications technology, and turn over the public records for public dissemination, as required by Pennsylvania law. The objective should be easy access, not needlessly producing copies to generate revenue.