Public Records Blog

Texas Attorney General Issues 60-day Abatement of GA-0519 - Redaction of Social Security Numbers

2007-03-01T04:59:00.000-06:00

Attorney General Greg Abbott yesterday abated his February 21st Opinion GA-0519 for a period of 60 days, "in order to allow the Legislature ample time for deliberation, and action."

The last week in February 2007 was a nightmare for County Clerks and people who rely on liberal access to Property Records such as Landmen, Title Companies, Abstracters, Surveyors and others.

As I suggested in my earlier blog, "The County Clerk's offices could turn into a complete zoo with people in long lines waiting for the local deputy to read documents and redact them "on the spot." This is exactly what happened.

CourthouseDirect.com sponsored a Webinar on February 28 titled, "Emergency Meeting - Redaction of Public Records in Texas" and we had over 200 attendees on the phone call. Early in the discussion, Marian Cones, CFO of Integrity Title Records, predicted that some quick resolution would come about because of the impact on the economy the AG's opinion was having. Sure enough, at approximately 9:40 a.m., we got word the Attorney General had abated GA-0519 for 60 days.

On the line in the Webinar were Kristy Parsons, President of Residential Services, Inc. and Carol Grogan, Partner of Central Tejas Research & Title Services.

Kristy's company has researchers throughout the state and explained what she was hearing from her contacts on the ground. Carol gave us a report on County Clerks offices around the Austin area. Carol Grogan's office is two blocks from the capital so she ran over to the legislative hearing of the Energy Resources Committee scheduled at 9:00 a.m and called back into the Webinar. The committee was fast tracking HB 2061 to repeal Section 552.147 of the Government Code. HB 2061 - See ANALYSIS & BILL TRACKING .

By the time Carol Grogan made it to the hearing we received word of the 60-day reprieve. When Carol called into the Webinar she reported the room was already clearing out but there appeared to have been a large crowd represented at the hearing.

By the end of the day, most Clerks had restored their usual procedure and some had put their records back online. But, during the "crisis" County Clerk offices had removed records from the Internet and made it practically impossible to obtain a copy of a real property document, even at the courthouse.

Fortunately, the AG's Opinion was released while the Legislature was in session so that a statutory resolution could be found. If he had delivered this Opinion when the Legislature was out of session then the situation could have been much worse. Since the Legislature was in session, the issue received the attention it demanded immediately.

This is a dilemma over privacy rights versus the public's right to know.

The 79th Legislature passed a law (Government Code, Section 552.147) that County Clerks "may" redact Social Security numbers. The result of the statute, after interpretation by the AG, was that commerce slowed or in some cases came to a grinding halt.

Now the ball is back in the court of Legislature to fix the statute by providing Clerks with additional funding and/or giving them time to put the infrastructure in place for redaction.

Going forward, there is little doubt that documents will need to be redacted or may not be recorded until the filer redacts the Social Security Number.

The Bill under consideration now by the Texas Legislature would place the burden on the filer to make sure that confidential information does not appear on the documents they are recording. The benefits of such a procedure are:

The County Clerk would not have to redact social security numbers of dead people
Counties with limited budgets would NOT have to spend milions (Houston Chronicle Article estimated $17 Million for Harris County alone)
People would take personal responsibility to make sure their own records are redacted
The flow of commerce would not be disrupted

This seems like a workable solution.

The IRS has been redacting all but the last 4 digits on their filings for some time now, and some studies have shown that this information alone resulted in a high "hit" rate in matching individual names with Social Security Numbers.

We will continue to monitor this situation and keep you posted. Thanks.

Texas Counties Required to Redact Social Security Numbers

2007-02-25T15:33:00.000-06:00

AG's Opinion
Shockwaves rippled through the Real Estate, Mortgage and Title industry after Texas Attorney General, Greg Abbott Opinion GA-0519 was released. Styled "Release and Redaction of Social Security Numbers under the Public Information Act, section 552.147 of the Government Code," this opinion answered a Request for Opinion (RQ-0418-GA) from Fort Bend County Clerk, Dianne Wilson.

On Wednesday, February 21, 2007, the State of Texas Attorney General issued a ruling making it mandatory and not permissive for County Clerks to redact Social Security Numbers from documents before they are provided to the public via the Internet or otherwise. Failure to do so could result in criminal penalties. In response, County Clerks throughout Texas immediately stopped providing access to online documents such as Deeds, Mortgages, Liens and other recorded instruments. In addition, records in the public area of the Clerk's office have been made off limits. As reported New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung online newspaper in New Braunfels, "yellow caution tape and deputies blocked the Comal County Clerk's record books from public view on Friday."

The impact of removing public access to property records on the Internet is important. Timely access to real estate information is critical to conducting commerce in the state. Consumers, Buyers, Sellers, Title Companies, Lenders, Real Estate Agents and others involved in real estate or loan transactions will all be effected by this ruling. In addition, oil and gas landmen will find it more difficult to the access the records they need to search mineral titles.

The Texas Land Title Association and Texas Association of Realtors are concerned about how this Ruling will effect its member and are pushing for emergency legislation to address their concerns.

County Clerk Requirements
This ruling places the burden on County Clerks to redact Social Security Numbers (and other confidential information) from documents provided to the public. Many Clerks started redacting records in anticipation of this Opinion based on their interpretation of the 2005 Statute (Texas Government Code, Section 552.147). The language in Section 552.147 was vague in that it says, "A governmental body may redact the social security number..." which implied voluntary instead of a mandatory redaction. Now, based on the most recent Attorney General Opinion GA-0519, Clerks MUST redact Social Security Numbers or face criminal liability.

Practical Results
The result of the recent Ruling GA-0519 regarding the Release and Redaction of Social Security Numbers under the Public Information Act, section 552.147 of the Government Code will be:

Consumers will seek records from sources other than the County Clerk's website
County Clerks will need to redact ALL records. This will be a slow process because most Clerks currently lack the proper infrastructure to do so.
Title companies will be unable to obtain records which will delay closings and increase the cost per file, and the risk of closing transactions.
A large number of manual searches will be required to be done at courthouses and those working in courthouses will be dealing with Clerks still uncertain about what records they may legally provide.
The County Clerk offices could turn into a complete zoo with people waiting in long lines waiting for the local deputy to read documents and redact them "on the spot."

Initially, Clerks will be managing the inquiries and complaints about why the records which were available for years are no longer accessible. In the meantime, Clerks will need to get busy redacting records if they want to continue to facilitate the free flow of commerce in their county.

Although not obvious to most consumers, unfettered access to public records has made doing business in Texas easier for transferring real estate, borrowing money and performing due diligence. Unlimited access to public records allows lenders and title companies to make sound underwriting decisions fast.

The immediate impact will be the slowing down or delay in closings of loan and real estate transactions.

We will be monitoring this AG's Opininion and the County Clerk's reactions to it so stay tuned.

Searching Public Records Effectively - Part 1

2006-09-22T07:00:00.000-05:00

Public Records are your first line of defense in business. The information available in the real estate and court records can tell you plenty about the person or company you are contemplating doing business with.

Unfortunately, there are those who would take advantage of unsuspecting parties in real estate transactions and those who order products or services with no intention to pay. The former is fraud and the latter is theft but to pursue your legal remedy through litigation can be very expensive and time consuming.

Therefore, it is important to protect yourself before someone takes advantage of you.

Many businesses protect themselves through credit checks (dated if over 30 days old) or criminal background checks. These are important precautions but relying on a third party's investigation may be risky. Since most major counties now have public records online it is advisable to do your own checking also.

Before discussing what records to check it's important to undertand the types of public records and where they are found in the courthouse:

County Clerk's (Recorder's) Office:

Real Property Records (Grantor / Grantee Indexes) - Deeds, Mortgages, Internal Revenue Liens, State Tax Liens, Abstracts of Judgment, Powers of Attorney, Hospital Liens, Child Support Liens, Labor Liens, Mechanic's and Materialmen's Liens, Releases, Assignments, Lis Pendens and Affidavits. Click for a complete list of [Abbreviations] [Definitions]

Probate Records - Administrations, Wills, Inventories and Orders Entering Wills to Probate

County Courts at Law - certain claims with with dollar amounts up to $10,000 may be litigated in the County and typically, in Texas, Condemnation cases are handled in the County Court at Law.

District Clerk's Office

District Court a/k/a Superior Court - Law Suits, Divorces, Name Changes, Damage Claims, Tax Suits and most other actions requiring litigation between the parties.

Small Claims Court - these courts handle disputes involving dollar amounts less than $5,000.

What records should we check? It depends on what we are trying to find...

Ownership of Property
Descriptions of Land
IRS & State Tax Liens against an individual or company
Hospital Liens, Child Support Liens, Community Association Liens, etc...
Judgments or Lawsuits in which your Party is the Judgment Debtor
Ownerships of Companies or Corporations
Real and Personal Property Taxes and Taxpayers
Current and past Litigation
Recorded Deed Restrictions and Subdivison Plats
Condominium Declarations and Covenants
Easements and Rights of Way

Most of the information listed above can be found in the Real Property Records of the County Clerk's office, in many areas of the country this is known as the "Recorders" Office.

Ownership of Property - the steps to to determine the ownership of land are as follows:

Check Tax Records for Taxpayer's Names
Research Real Property Record Grantor / Grantee Index
Read carefully the Vesting Deeds or other Documents

First find out who is paying taxes on the property. You may need an address, a Tax I. D. Number or a Legal Description to get started. Tax information is available from the Assessor's Office and/or the County Appraisal District. If you know who is paying taxes then 80%-90% of the time this is the owner of the property.

After finding who the taxpayer, search the names in the Grantor / Grantee Index for the County. The Seller is typically the Grantor and the Buyer is typically the Grantee in a Deed. After finding the deed then run the Buyer's name (as specified in the Deed) in the Grantor Index to see if the property has been subsequently sold. If the property has not been sold then you can reasonably conclude that the Grantees on Deed you found are still the owners.

The language in a Deed that designates the conveyence of property are, "Grant, Sell and Convey". If this language does not exist in the instrument then it is unlikely the property is being conveyed. It is important to read the documents very carefully or seek advise from an attorney or someone skilled at title research.

For Step by Step instructions of how to research property ownership [Click Here]

Descriptions of Land - if you are filing a lien claim or want to convey a parcel of property then you need an accurate legal description of the land. This discussion is Texas-speak. In many states property is described as being out of a"Township & Range" which we will discuss in another post.

Real Property is found in a "Recorded (Platted) Subdivision" or out of a "Survey" or "Abstract".

Recorded Subdivisions - when an area of land is platted or subdivided in a "recorded" subdivision in the County Clerk's office the the dimension of the land are defined by the recorded plat. Therefore, a property can be sold by refering to a Subdivision, Lot, Block and recordation of the plat in Clerk's office in lieu of a metes and bounds description.
Metes and Bounds Descriptions - if a property is not within a recorded subdivision then the property is described by metes and bounds out a Survey or Abstract. The Survey name is the name the original Patentee by the State and the Abstract Number identifies the survey in the County. Sometimes survey names are repeated in a county but each survey is identified by its own unique Abstract number. Licensed Land Title Surveyors are the only ones qualified to prepare proper legal descriptions which are based upon monumentation found on the ground. Once the Surveyor writes the legal description then this is provided to the attorney drafting the Deed or conveyance document.

Coming Up - Part 2 - How to Research Adverse Liens and Abstracts of Judgment

Open Government Training & Information from AG

2006-09-20T08:37:00.001-05:00

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has an excellent website for Open Records and Open Government at [website].

The State of Texas serves a model for Open Government and this website includes:

In addition, effective January 1, 2006, elected and appointed public officials are required by a new state law to receive training in Texas open government laws. The Office of the Attorney General offers free video training courses, which were developed in compliance with a mandate from the 79th Texas Legislature that the Attorney General establish the formal training necessary to ensure that all elected and appointed government officials have a good command of both open records and open meetings laws.

This Web site contains links and information designed to assist public officials and public information coordinators in complying with the open government training requirement and Texas open government laws.

Even if you are not a government official the videos are worth watching. [Open Governement Training]

The definitive text, on open meetings titled the Open Meetings Act Handbook and the Public Information Act Handbook can be found at this site.

Another great tool for those requesting Public Records can be found at, "What Requestors Should Know" page.

FOIFT State Conference

2006-09-10T08:30:00.000-05:00

Last Friday, we attended the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas "FOIFT" annual State Conference. Discussions focused on:

Public records on the Internet
Privacy issues and public records
Legislative issues concering public records and open meetings
Steps to obtain access to public records
Privatization of public records

The stated purpose of the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas is to encourage, sponsor and facilitate a greater appreciation, knowledge and understanding of the First Amendment. Working to ensure that the public's business is conducted in public, the FOIFT has successfully helped citizens access open meetings and documents that should be a matter of public record.

The keynote speaker, U.S. Senator John Cornyn, spoke of his efforts to implement at a national level some of the things he advanced as the former Attorney General in Texas. Senator Cornyn said there is a culture in Washington that believes information is power and the release of information may constitute a loss of power.

The Senator said whether it is a Republican or Democratic administration it is important to err on the side of openess. Sometimes labels such as, "Secret"or "Sensitive" are used to keep embarrassing or unflattering information from citizens improperly. He emphasized, in these times, it it important to protect certain information from our enemies but he acknowledged there are abuses in the name of national security which sometimes takes place.

Sen. Cornyn said his is working closely with fellow Juduciary Committee member Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy to streamline access to public records.

The first working session of the day was titled, "Public Records and the Internet: Oil and Water?" panelists included Cynthia Figueroa-Calhoun, County Clerk of Dallas County and Dianne Wilson, Ph.D., County Clerk of Fort Bend County. Also on the panel were Hadassah Schloss, Cost Rules Administrator, Office of the Attorney General of Texas and Gary Chapman, Director of the 21st Century Project, University of Texas at Austin.

The County Clerks spoke of the benefits consumers and businesses enjoy because of access to public records. Ms. Calhoun said access to public records has streamlined commerce, helped speed real estate transactions and has been a tremendouse benefit to attorneys and others using online public records in Dallas County.

The County Clerks expressed concerns that some privacy advocates, which Gary Chapman spoke in favor, might convince the legistlature and other governmental bodies to prohibit public records from being made available online and in doing so might have a negetive impact on commerce and the citizens ability to access inforamation when they need it.

Another issue the Clerk's discussed is "redaction" or the editing or revising a documents to black out Social Security Numbers or other information. The question remained, should Clerks redact records which makes it harder (but perhaps not impossible) to access; and, will the next step be for other parts of documents be redacted such as addresses and signatures?

The Clerks in attendence are generally advocates of open records but there was a realization that because there are 254 counties in Texas that means 254 opinions. Hadassah Schloss whose job is to help enforce the Open Records Act for the AG's office indicated it is a challenge to educate all public officials and their vendors of the laws regulating public records but progress is being made in that regard.

Following this session, the luncheon guest speaker was Attorney General, Greg Abbott. General Abbott spoke about the efforts his office has made to keep records and meetings open to the public. General Abbott spoke specifically of lawsuits his office have untaken and currently pursuing.

As someone who has worked closely the staff of the Attorneys General office, I can state without hesitation that Greg Abbott's office has been consistant and diligent in their efforts to educate and encourage county officials to follow the Open Records Act. The AG's office is committed to pursuing all legal remedies to make sure that's done. General Abbott confirmed in his remarks that his office will take all steps neccessary to make records available to the public.

During the luncheon in a questions to General Abbott I pointed out that the problem many of us face is the "Privatization of Public Records" and asked, "What can we do to stop the delay by governmental officials who use the excuse that the records are with the Vendor and they do not have the technical ability to provide the records?"

General Abbott indicated this type of activity will not be tolerated by his office and suggested that we may need to do something legistlatively to make these Clerks and vendors more responsive.

The first afternoon session, "Legislative Issues: The Public's Agenda" addressed specifically what the Legislature can do to promote more openess in government. Much of the discussion focused on the practice of "voice votes" in the Texas House of Representatives in which lawmakers are not accountable for their votes because they are not recorded.

The final session titled "Friends on the Frontline" included a historian, Dr. Don Carleton, a librarian, Cathy Hartman, an attorney, Joe Larson and Greg Simpson, Chief of Open Records Division of the Attorney Generals' office.

Dr. Carleton was concerned about the indifference or complacency on the part of the public in standing up for their rights and being more involved in Public Record and Open Record issues. He said that sometimes because things are in digital format the originals are discarded which may make it difficult as a historian to reconstruct the past particularly because electronic data can be altered if not properly preserved.

Ms. Hartman spoke of the the concerns she has when federal government officials inquire through National Security "demand letters" to know what books are being read by who. She questioned whether or not it is right for the government to know what we read and how easily a librarian should release this kind of information.

Joe Larsen with Ogden, Gibson, Broocks & Longoria, LLP was asked what makes him the maddest about what he sees in his practice dealing with open records and apparently he had a long list but high on the list was the privitization of records when public officical hire outside contractors.

Mr. Simpson, again voiced his and the AG offices' willingness to prosecute violations of the Open Records Act in Texas.

Most of the members of the FOIFT are jounalists so there was a fair amount of discussion about the most recent attempts by the federal government to limit freedoms of the press.

The 2006 James Madison Awards recipents were Craig Flournoy, Dan Malone and Gail Reeves.

A good day was had by all those attending. It is refreshing to know that there are people working every day to keep our government as tranparent as possible.

If you are interested Open Records or the want to have a voice in the issues the Freedom of Information Foundations covers then you can make a Donation or become a Member at whatever level you feel is appropriate.

Privacy vs. Public's Right to Know

2006-07-15T17:01:00.000-05:00

We are at a critical juncture where citizens concerned about their privacy want to limit access to public records while others want to use the power of the Internet to protect themselves from unscrupulous or irreputable persons before doing business with them.

There is a chance these divergent interest will intersect but it will take time.

Identity theft is a problem and has been for some time. Privacy advocates believe limiting access to public records will reduce identity theft. Open record supporters argue it is access to public records which affords us greater protection.

In our society, the public's right to know is paramount. We should have the right to know who is living next door, who we are marrying and who we are doing business with. The review of public records is a good means to determine another party's credibility and veracity.

Does a person's right to know outweigh the privacy of the individual? The scales should lean heavily on a person's right to know. It is imperative people have quick, ready access to as many public records as are available with all its blemishes.

A few days ago in Houston, a bigomist by the name of Eric Cooper copped a plea for a 15 year prison sentence for forging a car title. The writing was on the wall for Mr. Cooper when his 7th wife testified of fraud and theft committed against her and her family. Mr. Cooper accepted a plea bargain before the judge had a chance to sentence him. Although this is an extreme case, Mr. Cooper was revealed through a search of online public records.

As business owners or creditors, when we provide products or services to companies and/or individuals we want to know who we are doing business with.

Just a few things we may want to know about the other party:

Have they sued others?
Have they ever been sued?
Do they have any State Tax liens?
Do they have any Internal Revenue liens?
Do they have Abstracts of Judgment filed against them?

Let's assume the party you're doing business with has an IRS lien filed against them. If the Social Security Number is "redacted" i. e. removed by a County Clerk for privacy reasons, then how will you verify the information? If you ask the other party you may get an answer like, "Not me, must be another John Smith."

As any creditor can tell you, it's very difficult to recover your money or products after they've been delivered.

Critical business decisions are made every day and they can not wait for someone to drive to the courthouse to view the "unredacted" records. Free and unfettered access to public records, when readily available, is in the best interest of businesses and the free flow of commerce.

Identity theft is a reality and it should be prosecuted vigilantly. Persons should take common sense steps to protect their identity. See "Steps to Protect Against Identity Theft."

The genie is out of the bottle. Technology is driving the information revolution and liberal access to public records gives us greater protections from those who would perpetuate fraud and deceptions.

If you're a victim of identity theft then the culprits should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But, if you are a creditor who saved yourself several thousand dollars and years of attorney's fees and lawsuits by prequalifying the other party then your inspection of the public records and due diligence will have paid off.

Future post:

Who owns Public Records - The Public, Right?
The Privatization of the Public Records
How to Use Public Records Effectively