Thanks again to PI Buzz for posting this tidbit, I felt it appropriate to post too, since after all this is the Public Records Guy blog.
In a May 20, 2008 Opinion Memorandum, the California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr. via Deputy Attorney General Daniel G. Stone clarified a longstanding misconception by County Assessors. It pertains the online inquiries for property assessments, etc. They frequently post a disclaimer, erroneously citing a section of the law that actually does not apply to their very claim.
Why do they do this? Because they can. Have you ever tried to challenge an ill-informed County Employee? They are practically immune to “common sense”, “logic”, “intelligence”, etc. They will fight for the sake of fighting. Their jobs are stable, secure, and it would take an act of God to remove them or hold them accountable for this behavior, but I digress.
California Government Code 6254.21 states that “No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of the individual.”
I’m stealing this quote from Tamara at PI Buzz because it sums it up quite well:
As a practical matter, we believe that a broad and overly literal reading of section 6254.21(a) would lead to unworkable results. Some public agencies…might conclude that they were forced to refrain from making any property-related database accessible to any internet technology, no matter how secure or limited the network, due to the possibility that the data could contain home information of public officials. Other public agencies… might conclude that they were forced to review and redact their databases… Such an identification process would be difficult, time consuming, and inevitably incomplete. Furthermore, the resulting revised property databases… would no longer be comprehensive and would therefore be of diminished utility to users. We are hesitant to conclude that the Legislature could have intended such impractical results.
So what’s next? Let’s ask our County Assessors what they think.
Here’s Contra Costa County’s “misguided” logic.
Contra Costa County Assessor – ” Through this portal you will find a wide variety of information about properties in Contra Costa County, such as: zoning, orthophotography, assessed value and jurisdictional information. This application runs best in Internet Explorer 6.x or above
California Government Code 6254.21 states that“No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual.” As the cost to collect and continuously update that information is prohibitive, the CCMap web site does not display the Assessee name information.”
Since when does “cost to collect…prohibitive” mean you can avoid doing your job? Paying your salary is prohibitive.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! 
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
The President of the California Assessors Association, Mike Strong (Sutter County Assessor; MStrong (at) co (dot) sutter (dot) ca (dot) us), doesn’t agree with my reading of the Attorney General opinion. Here’s the text of his email to me:
“Here is what the AG opinion says (with my emphases added):
CONCLUSION
Where a county maintains a comprehensive database of property-related information that may incidentally contain the home addresses and telephone numbers of persons who are elected or appointed public officials, but who are not identifiable as such from the data, Government Code section 6254.21(a) does not require the county to obtain permission from those officials before transmitting the database over a limited-access network, such as an “intranet,” “extranet,” or “virtual private network.”
A limited-access network is just that – limited. The terms “intranet,” “extranet,” or “virtual private network” all apply to restricted or limited access networks.
The internet is not a limited-access network and the AG opinion, therefore, does not change or reinterpret Government Code section 6254.21(a), as it applies to database information available to the general public via the internet. “
June 2nd, 2008 at 11:28 am
Interesting. I guess we’ll have to see if his County Counsel agrees. I find it interesting that El Dorado County Counsel was the one who inquired, meaning they had to be facing this issue. I’m tired of these “public servants” refusing to accept the fact that they work at our behest. We are the Government.