I!@#$%^ Land Records Office
:good:
All I ask of them is to just charge me what it costs to perform the service - don't look to this as an endless source of revenue.
This will result in the need for less courthouse space and fewer employees - which is a net gain for the user and taxpayer.
Its only right to pay to make up for the cheats that have left holes in the budget.
I'm just glad we still have these civil servants and courthouses and records.
!@#$%^
That is speculative at best.
I think the County Recorder, an elected official, sets the fees based on a staff report in this state. I haven't looked at their budget process so I don't know how much, if any, general fund money they get.
The state of mind of most people is that they would rather get something for free than pay for it so it is natural to conclude I am being ripped off although that may not be justified.
I!@#$%^ Land Records Office
Have you guys actually investigated this or is it just a gut feeling? Maybe the actual truth would hurt. If you want to make allegations then you should gather evidence not just base it on feelings. I'm sure the budgets are public record.
Surveyors constantly whine about how the public doesn't understand the true costs of doing surveys but then are quick to jump on some other entity that is ensuring their own financial health by charging sufficient fees to cover the cost.
Doesn't this come down to what "public" is all about?
Isn't the idea of "public", the entire reason for having recorders?
A public record should be available and viewable by anyone for no charge and unencumbered by bureaucratic requirements.
To think that there are some . . . here . . . that seemingly wouldn't have a problem with paying just to "see", public records, is . . .
[flash width=480 height=360] http://www.youtube.com/v/KNQRqAoT-2c?version=3&hl=en_US [/flash]
What gives with the idea they can make us turn off our cell phones? They can kiss my fire trucking assortment.
Okay, I Apologize, Retired69
That post was smarta@#$ and really not called for. The post about the landmen scanning pages of deeds and not paying for them reminded me of this video and I was laughing so hard, I had to post it. I do agree with you concerning viewing public records, just viewing records shouldn't be fee contingent.
If the public government fees are out of line with the private for profit fees of copy house businesses, then there is reason to believe that something is out of whack with the beaucratic set fees.
> In Florida the laws says that "The clerk shall make available to the public a full size copy of the record plat at a reasonable fee."
>
> In my neck of the woods that means $5.00 a sheet for plats and $1.00 a sheet for copies of anything from the public records. But, most everything is available on-line for free viewing and printing which saves a trip to the court house. However, most documents recorded before the mid to late 80's are not available on-line so then you do have to go and pay if you want copies.
True, most counties in Florida offer their Official Records and Plats for free online viewing and printing. Unfortunately not all. Here in Marion County you have to pay a yearly subscription of $150.00 to view recorded plats and right-of-way maps online. Sumter County you have to shell out $350.00 for a CD of their plats and $100.00 a year for updates thereafter.
There ought to be a law! Only upside I see is that it makes it harder for surveyors out of the area to compete with us locals that have subscriptions.
The Bow Tie Surveyor.
What on earth is wrong with everyone??
"If the public government fees are out of line with the private for profit fees of copy house businesses, then there is reason to believe that something is out of whack with the beaucratic set fees."
I am absolutely astounded with the idea of comparing the two for any reason(for-profit & bloated government).
The jobs of the bloated government's elected officials are mandated and the public access to records is mandated by the bloated government.
Taxes have been collected for over a hundred years to pay for these records to be recorded(by the "then", less bloated government), and through the years the wages for these often "less", than stellar employees have increased dramatically for the now much more bloated government.
We already pay for the building
we already pay for the wages
we already pay for the utilities
we already pay for the vacations and retirements
we already pay for the equipment
we already pay for the supplies
in many cases, we even pay employees to take lunches
. . . we pay
. . . . . . .we paid
. . . . . . . . . . and we will always pay
I take less money home in my paycheck to pay these people and to pay for everything related to their duties.
Thousands more also pay for these people and for everything related to their duties
Still, it's never enough
and to think of how many of the people here agree that it's not enough . . .
That more yet, needs to be charged
And for those who "really" want to compare government to private, who's willing to bet that "private" couldn't do the same as the "government" for 1/3 or 1/4th the price?
I have no problem with a "reasonable" charge for having used a sheet of paper and a little bit of toner, but not to the tune of actually returning an excess to the general operating fund at the end of the year . . . that's plain & simple taxation.
Somehow the term "bend over", almost seems appropriate.
What on earth is wrong with everyone??
Well, that was my point actually, when the public entity, funded by our taxes is charging more than a private enterprise, then something is out of whack.
> I can understand paying to print - but paying just to view. It might help too if their indexes told you something too. So do a search, guess and pay. Nice racket
I have always wondered what would happen if someone with a subscription to one of these document services actually download all of the scans an put them on a free website for everyone to use.
I know one of the counties that I subscribe from states that the records cannot be "reproduced, resold, or made publicly available on the internet for anyone outside the end customer’s office without the express written consent of the Clerk of Court". I am not sure what legal grounds they have for making such a statement. Isn't it public domain?
The Bow Tie Surveyor
Paid for with "public" funds
maintained with "public" funds
even the employees are paid with "public" funds
The only possibility I can see is if a private company was contracted to do all the scanning and such and that company maintained some sort of rights.
I do not believe the government has any right to restrict use of public records.
That has happened in California.
The Recorder sells a CD set with all the filed maps from Day 1. Someone put all of the maps up on a website for free. The Recorder can't stop that because it doesn't have any sort of copyright on the maps. You would have to buy a new CD a couple of times a year to get the updates.
In some Counties you can go to the County Surveyor's office and get all the copies you want for free.
> That has happened in California.
>
> The Recorder sells a CD set with all the filed maps from Day 1. Someone put all of the maps up on a website for free. The Recorder can't stop that because it doesn't have any sort of copyright on the maps. You would have to buy a new CD a couple of times a year to get the updates.
>
> In some Counties you can go to the County Surveyor's office and get all the copies you want for free.
In the one CD that I get from one of the counties, all of the plat images are in some binary proprietary format. You have to login to the database program on the CD to run an inquiry on which plat you want to view. Then you can export to a bitmap (huge image files) or you I can print to PDF through my PDF writer. Not easy to work with (or copy).
The Bow Tie Surveyor
Abut the golf course . . .
some people, such as me would argue, as was argued regarding the Tennessee Valley Authority project that government has absolutely NO RIGHT to directly compete with private business in ANYTHING.
Government has an unfair advantage with the capability of taxing.
They can use tax dollars of citizens that don't actually use the . . . whatever . . .
Private business doesn't have the luxury of making a million people pay if only 100,000 people use their . . . whatever . . .
About the light houses . . .
Excellent post, gschrock.
I say that, of course, because I agree with you, but, hey, you're right.
🙂
Don
!@#$%^
> The state of mind of most people is that they would rather get something for free than pay for it so it is natural to conclude I am being ripped off although that may not be justified.
I totally disagree with that statement.
I see how much my LS license fees vary state to state. So, you're telling me, that in one state the processing only requires $50 per year, while others it requires $300 per year? That right there tells me that my money's going somewhere else.
Sorry, Dave, but your bias is showing.
!@#$%^
Your analysis tells half the story. Now you need to compare your state's board's budgets, their enforcement activity level, the number of members, the number of surveyors that support the board, the support staff, how much tax revenue each board receives from the general coffers, are they a shared board with engineers, etc., etc.
To give an example, Florida doesn't have an income tax, so we have higher fees. Trust me, we are paying for it, one way or the other.
