The recent California Supreme Court decision overturning California’s law banning same-sex marriage as unconstitutional provides a timely discussion of the domestic partnership registry. California, among other states and municipalities provides a means for couples — variously, same or opposite sex in civil unions or domestic partnerships — to register their relationship.

I don’t know of any online database of names of registered domestic partners, but there are data sources. This is the old-fashioned and still often the most reliable means of confirming a fact: call or visit the relevant government office! In California, the Secretary of State records the Declaration of Domestic Partnership and the Termination of Domestic Partnership. This office responds to telephone inquiries and will search by a name, providing the partner name, date of registration and the residential address. You can also go to one of the offices to get a copy of either form.

Oregon defines a domestic partnership registration as a vital record, which is confidential. Domestic Partnership Registration in New York City is with the City Clerk. County Recorder offices and state health departments are also repositories for these filings. Some cities, counties and states that have civil union or domestic partnership laws are listed here.

Currently, there are 49,550 registrations on file at the California Secretary of State. Of these, about 5,600 have filed terminations. By law, this office only accepts terminations up to 5 years after registration. Beyond that time, couples must go to court to end a domestic partnership.

What has been your experience requesting information from a domestic partnership registry?

Complaints by residents in Oregon has lead to the removal of some property owner’s names from PortlandMaps, the city’s online mapping program of assessor’s data and building permits. Portland offers a vague explanation for the decision to allow a search by address only.

Ohio media outlets may have to add a requirement to the standard job description: must have photographic memory. That is, if they want to peruse particular public records which cannot be copied. That’s the law in Ohio. The opinion of the Ohio Attorney General adds absurdity to confusion in his assertion that reporters can inspect the gun permit owner lists kept by the Sheriffs’ offices but are not allowed to write anything down. Keep your eyes peeled for a clarifying law, sure to be stupider than the first.

Meanwhile, the Wisconsin Attorney General has issued an opinion that may make police agency’s records more available to the public. The AG stated that a 1991 state Supreme Court ruling exempting from the open records law district attorney files does not apply to police reports. A police spokesperson objected, claiming that open access would give a defense attorney “tactical advantage over a prosecutor who has not yet examined the police reports”, according to this story. Will someone make a list of all the arguments public agencies have offered for keeping public records out of our hands?

Search the online records of disciplinary actions from 2000 to 2007 for funeral homes and funeral practitioners at the Maine Board of Funeral Service. Use this advanced search query at the Google search engine. In this example, I’ve searched the name “Fernald”. Note the Web address in the search bar.

Use the same Google search format to identify Pennsylvania professional license disciplinary actions, including for funeral directors and funeral homes, from 1999 to 2007.

The Oregon Mortuary and Cemetery Board has images of Notice of Proposed Disciplinary Action and Consent Order for cases filed from 2005 to 2007.

The Texas Funeral Service Commission has a one page list of disciplinary actions taken against licensees since September 2006. The record has a name, violation, action taken and date.

This document has hyperlinks to all the state funeral regulatory boards.

A federal legislative hearing spotlighted (once again) the widespread display of Social Security numbers in public records.Various speakers at the recent House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security discussed the problems of identity theft. Justin Yurek of ID Watchdog, recommended that Social Security numbers should be removed from all public records and should never be sold to unaffiliated 3rd parties for any reason.

The summary of the Government Accounting Office (GAO) report, Social Security Numbers: Use is Widespread and Protection Could be Improved notes that information resellers have few restrictions on their ability to obtain and sell public records, including Social Security numbers. The full report advises the IRS and Attorney General establish a policy of truncating Social Security numbers on all lien filings and notices.

Sen. Charles Schumer pointed to the differing strategies in masking Social Security numbers in online government and private company databases.

First, we need to have uniform standards for protecting Social Security numbers by hiding either the first five digits or the last four digits.

The good news is that federal agencies have started hiding the first five digits of Social Security numbers in public record documents. The very bad news is that data brokers and other entities are going in the opposite direction of hiding the last four digits.

…

This makes it very easy to use public sources to piece together a full nine-digit Social Security number that could be used for identity theft. The GAO was able to do this in just one hour, from their desks. An identity thief could do the exact same thing – from anywhere in the world.

Perhaps of concern to reporters, investigators and attorneys is proposed legislation by Schumer that could restrict the information databrokers provide.

That’s why I am proposing new legislation that will require the Social Security Administration to set standards telling public agencies and private businesses exactly what method of truncation to use.

The Oregon Secretary of State announced new standards for acceptance of filings - which must mask certain personal identifiers.

After July 15, 2007, the Secretary of State may refuse to file documents containing a Social Security number, a state identification number, a driver license number, a credit or debit card number, or an account number that is not redacted to at least the last four digits of the number.

The February 2007 Federal Trade Commission report on identity fraud presents a statistical analysis of the types and extent of reported identity theft and fraud.

The South Dakota Supreme Court relied on the U.S. Supreme Court conclusions in California v. Greenwood in upholding the legality of curbside garbage searches. [State of South Dakota v. Wayne R. Stevens]

A review of these statutes shows no granting of authority to a municipality to place with its citizens an objective expectation of privacy in one’s trash when it has been put on the curb for city collection.

…

To establish a protected privacy interest in trash, a person (1) must have “‘exhibited an actual subjective expectation of privacy’” and (2) society must be “‘willing to honor this expectation as being reasonable.’”

The State of Oregon Supreme Court ruled in several related cases that no possessory interest in the garbage was retained once it was collected by the sanitation company, suggesting that there may be an reasonable expectation of privacy when the trash is curbside prior to collection. [See STATE OF OREGON, v. GARY DEAN DAWSON and STATE OF OREGON v. SHARON DAWN HOWARD]

Previous postings on this topic:

Check local ordinances before dumpster diving

Why your neighbor’s garbage is yours, or not

Law enforcement dumpster diving in Indiana

It appears that a case involving the hiring of an out of town private investigator on a death penalty case may have an impact on how the state pays court appointed investigators.

It all started when a Hillsboro lawyer hired Dave Panter, an ex-cop from Tillamook and an investigator from a nearby county to defend a murder case. However, the state Office of Public Defense Services refused to cover the investigator’s travel expenses from his office to Hillsboro.

The state offered to pay for Panter’s hotel and meals in Hillsboro, but it refused to pay him the standard state rate of $34 an hour for a capital case, plus 40.5 cents a mile for gas, to make the 60-mile drive between Tillamook and Hillsboro.

Since the state has refused, and a Washington County Circuit Court judge is set to decide the issue in a hearing Thursday, May 10.

“These guys haven’t had any raises since the 1970s,” says Barbara Baughman, a Portland private investigator who charges $75 an hour.

What do you think about the fees and expenses associated with court appointed investigator cases?

The Colorado Secretary of State has removed UCC document images from the Web site until such time as the Social Security numbers are redacted. The Secretary of State intends to issue new UCC forms that will not include the option of listing Social Security numbers. The policy also suspends bulk electronic sales of the Department’s UCC database. Colorado joins California, which recently instituted the same measures, along with Oregon, Mississippi, Missouri and a half dozen other states

In favorable public records’ news, the Oregon Secretary of State has expanded their online Business Registry Database, adding a search by individual name of Agent, Partner, Manager, President and Secretary.

The Vermont Secretary of State has introduced a “Right To Know” database of resources and laws related to Vermont public records. Search by statutory language, an agency or department’s name, exemption category or exemption and agency.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided that Board of Bar Overseers and Office of Bar Counsel are judicial agencies which are exempt from the public records provisions. Only documents held by government agencies within the executive branch are subject to the public records act.

Massachusetts criminal show cause hearings will remain closed, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial decided.

Add Florida to the list of states that are concocting ill conceived “identity theft” legislation. Before long it’ll be a crime to know another person’s name. HB 1117 seeks to make possession of personal identifying information on a person without their prior approval a felony. The legislative staff analysis provides a summary.

HB 1117 also creates a new section of statute which provides that any person who willfully possesses “sensitive personal information” concerning an individual without first obtaining that individual’s consent commits a third degree felony. The term “sensitive personal information” is defined to mean any name or number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual
including any:
• Alien registration number
• Government passport number
• Employer or taxpayer identification number
• Medicaid or food stamp account number
• Bank account number
• Credit or debit card number
• Unique biometric data, such as fingerprint, voice print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical representation

Unlike the identity theft statute, this section will not require proof that the person possessed the sensitive personal information with intent to fraudulently use it – only that the person willfully possessed it without first
obtaining permission of the individual.

Florida Bill HB 1211 would make distributing personal information without that person’s permission a misdemeanor. Are legislators being lazy in crafting laws that are so broad, or are they trying to bring legitimate business and the functions of the courts to a complete standstill?

HB 1213 bars the release of personal identifying information in public records. Other proposed legislation would remove certain information from court files and restrict the release of motor vehicle records.

I’d like to hear from private investigators, attorneys and journalists in Florida about the prospects of these measures. I sure hope they’re all working together.
AP story: Scores of legislative bills seek to limit public’s access to Florida records

On a more upbeat note, an Oregon government site has created a directory and search engine for locating databases of city, county, state and federal licenses, certifications, permits, and registrations. Quickly locate the Web site to lookup professional licenses and business permits. This is an ongoing project and most of the current links are state agencies.

A Kansas newspaper editorial elucidates just one of the many reasons why the Kansas Supreme Court’s mandate that government agencies redact personal information before releasing records to the public is harmful. The case is Data Tree, LLC v. Bill Meek, Sedgwick County Register of Deeds.

Unsolved criminal case files may be public records, not necessarily “open investigation” cases, according to the Georgia Court of Appeals. The court sided with the newspaper in, Athens Newspapers, L.L.C. v. Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County, which asserted that a 1992 unsolved murder case was dormant and the police were defeating the purpose of the Open Records Act by claiming the case was still pending.

The Del Norte County California Tax Assessor records can be searched by parcel number.

Sometimes public records that are not available at a government site can be found at a free private Web site. Newspapers have gathered records and built searchable databases, as is the case with crime reports in San Antonio, Texas. The Express-News Crimebase can be searched by type of offense, ZIP code, street names, reporting officer or report number.

The Kentucky Court has been mandated to destroy all misdemeanor files older than 5 years. Cases filed before 2001 have already been purged.

The Multnomah County, Oregon Auditor’s Office has released its report, Public Records: Eliminate barriers to citizen access, a brief examination and statistical compilation of the response of county agencies to public record act requests. The Oregonian concludes that the county may be in violation of Oregon’s Public Records Law.

A new player in the very active online real estate listings competition is PropertyShark, which, unlike Zillow, provides the current owner at an address, and also customizes demographic maps for the geographical region of an address.

At the Zillow site you can look for real property valuations and aerial photographs by property address. It covers many more cities than does PropertyShark but the tools at this site are a unique supplement to the other property listing and mapping Web sites.

A PropertyShark search by address (after free registration) returned a profile with the current ownership, last deed transfer, demographic maps, building permits, neighbors and nearby property sales. Coverage is strongest in New York, particularly Manhattan, for which there are photographs of properties, but take a look at all the site features. Cities in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Florida, Texas, Washington, Oregon and California are currently included.

Map your life in Los Angeles and plot crime and property sales within the circumference of a specific address.