In my search for answers about the county and courthouses' charging and/or
contracting out or not allowing persons to get xeroxes or even view the
records, I had 2 wonderful messages from one of the county clerks. In these
messages were many things that I felt the Indiana genealogical community
would like to read. I have NOT asked this person's permission to quote from
message, but everything I quote here is generalized stuff and I don't think
they would mind. Because of lack of permission I am not giving name, county,
etc. I am not putting this here as a means of saying this is way everything
should be, but just so others have "several sides of the 'picture'" of
our
courthouse research and the resulting problems we may/may not encounter with
these offices and the records. Many valid points and observations were made
and pointed out here. [For those on the list that held these 2 answers of
his, my apologies for repeating, but would like you to read my response at
end at least/jm]
I am also going to send parts of my most recent reply which points out some
other things which go along with having records available to the public
(something that occurred in our family) as well as just some "thrown your
way" suggestions of things that could be done.
I do not need a reply back to this message -- just thought it was
interesting reading and you would like to see what was said, plus learning
more of "both sides of the coin".
-Quote Msg#1-
I have the ability to look at this issue from both sides of the coin, and
while I cannot speak for all of my colleagues, I know this issue has been
discussed at length among public officials all over Indiana. As an avid
genealogist I understand the importance of having access to public records of
all types of research. As a public official I also understand the
importance of preserving these records for future generations and for use by
individuals as eager as myself to find that 'missing link'. While I have
never denied access to anyone to inspect a public record allowable by law, I
also would like to point out that public officials are not required to do
genealogy, but are only required to provide access to records. For those of
you who are actually denied access to records, provided that they are not
sealed or confidential, I would also find that frustrating. Please,
however, remember that there may be various reasons why these public
officials act the way they do. I know of instances in my county where
someone took advantage of the openness of our records to take the original
records from the office for themselves. Also, as many of our records become
older and more fragile, officials may be hesitant to allow access until
microfilming or imaging may be performed. Ultimately this is of benefit to
the researcher, but I agree it is not what the statutes require.
Regarding passing these requests on to private contractors, please remember
that the main responsibility of these offices is not necessarily to cater to
you and I in a genealogy function. Clerks of Courts are responsible to keep
a myriad of records for the courts, collect all court monies, administer
elections, collect and disburse child support, etc. Our duties and
workloads are always increasing, but our staffing is not. Utilizing private
contractors may be the difference between getting the information within
days or having it lay on someone's desk until they get time to take care of
the request.
...
There are bad apples in every line of work. But there are many more of us
good ones. I can share as many horror stories of genealogists with
attitudes as you can clerks with one.
...
-UnQuote Msg #1-
-UnQuote Msg #2-
An old saying in Indiana government circles is that we are 92 different
'states' because of the way each county performs certain functions. Sometimes
that can be good because not everything that works in Marion County
(Indianapolis) would not apply here in XXXXX [I removed county name/jm]
County.
The other side is what you are experiencing with the various problems in
obtaining access to records. A good example is the price for copies. State
statute requires the clerk of the circuit court to charge $1.00 for a copy
of a clerk record, and an additional $1.00 to place the document under seal
(certify it). There is no statute, however, for the other courthouse offices.
That is up to the individual county's commissioners who set the rates for such
things. That is why you will find not only differences among counties but
also within counties. My first six years in office I followed this law and
charged the $1.00 per page. What I found was that local attorneys would sign
out files (yes, actually take them out of my office) to take back to their law
offices and copy what they wanted. Signing files out was an old practice in
existance long before I was around and the judges were hesitant to allow me to
stop it. What I finally did was lower my price to 25 cents a copy and not
allow the files out of the office. Yes, I'm breaking state statute, but it
was one of those situations that called for a local policy change. In
contrast, my Recorder's office next door charges 50 cents a copy. And I'm
really not sure what the Auditor's office charges.
As I mentioned, I would also agree that not allowing access to public records
is a violation of state law. Why certain offices choose this stance, I do not
know. I must say I have never had that kind of problems in the counties I
research, but that is not to say it doesn't happen. A recent investigation of
various county offices by several Indiana newspapers discovered the same
problem, but the offices with the most violations were those of the
sheriff's departments. I agree that maybe our state legislature should look
at the situation. But I don't want to see this backfire and make us like
Tennessee where marriage records have to become so many years old before
they become public record.
Maybe a letter to the elected or appointed department head of the county
office you are having trouble with would help. It is possible that that
person is not aware of any problem.
...
[This person mentioned that there is an annual state clerk's conference held
-- I didn't even know this organization existed and it enlightened me -- at
least with the clerks gathering to analyze problems we might also get help
in resolving or standardizing the issues we may have here in the
genealogical community/jm]. Also mentiooned was that there are
representatives from the State Court Administration (a division of the
Indiana Supreme Court), another interesting fact of which I hand not been
aware even existed./jm]
-UnQuote-
-My last response sent back-
You furnished to me here some info that I have been trying to find out and
no one could tell me -- that is the state statue of $1 + $1 for seal as well
as the one about being allowed to look at the records, etc.
You have overall given me answers that (for some unknown reason) my many
calls to the county offices were unable to obtain. Thank you so much.
I too agree that I would NOT like to see the records kept for x number of
years. But I too can see the reasoning behind this law (privacy of
individuals, etc. as well as the preservation of the documents themselves).
Again, a double street that we have to figure out what which way is more
important, etc.
I also know that access to death and birth recrods are used a lot in crimes
(especially immigration ones) and this in itself has "hit home" in
particular. My son was born in San Antonio, Texas and got his social
security card there. Because of this record being open to the public, some
illegals got his birthdate, his parents names and birthdates, address and
other things. They then applied for another social security card and birth
certificate, and obtained drivers licenses. In turn they sold these to
other illegals in California and Texas and Florida. (somehow they made new
documents that passed those 3 states' examinations) and then started working
under that name and social security card, opened bank accounts, etc. We did
not even know this was going on (and this might even still be occurring in
other persons in the family without us knowing). He decided on a whim to
check his social security card account and found out there was showing he
had worked in places he had never even been. Then about a week later he
started being hounded by creditors trying to say he had ran up $xxx debts
and they were trying to collect on these California and Texas debts these
illegals had run up.
Now going on what has happened to my son, people could cry "seal the
records" but what really should be done is NOT the sealing of the records
but CHANGING the ways the records are maintained and handled.
For instance -- if when a person dies a copy of this info could be forwarded
to the social security office, statedrivers license bureau AND the place of
birth (this can be done by an electronic media and a database that
interfaces with one another) then when someone tries to get a copy of the
birth certificate, drivers license, social security card, etc. it would FLAG
a response to that department that this person has died. Now that would NOT
help in the case of FBI federal protection programs, but then they have
their methods anyway. It would NOT have helped in the case of my son since
he had not died (but death is only one example I used here) but if the
social security office had noticed that they were getting money for same
dates of work in different locations then it would have alerted them that
there is a problem and then notified the different employers and possibly
immigration or the local authorities too so they could determine which is
the correct person with this social security number. (again only an example
of what could be done with the cross-referencing). (BTW -- many persons I
have spoken with who work at social security say they KNOW this exists and
that they have hundreds of these monthly show up -- but because of their
supervisors' instructions (and desire to keep their jobs, not be
trouble-makers, etc) these duplicates are just ignored).
Another method of change would be to ALLOW the genealogists ACCESS to these
records to be scanned and/or typed into databases and maybe even use of the
microfilm camera setups themselves (so they could VOLUNTEER in typing up
data, getting the scanned or microfilmed images of pages of these books,
etc. in exchange for being allowed to type this info into computer and
GETTING the necessary xerox copies/computer COPIES of things they typed up
and/or hardcopy of the information they typed into the computer databases to
have for their own research records. With this free help we could get these
records ALL on microfilm and computerized into databases at minimal cost to
the county (the payroll, soc. sec, insurance the county has to pay to have
this done or contracted out would be zilch, and this would allow them the
extra money to put into the computer, microfilm processing, etc. necessary
for carrying out this work). Of course once this is in the computer AND
VERIFIED by at least one other person, then the access to the actual books
themselves would be minimal (saving the books and amount of clerks' time and
number of clerks needed) since people could then use the databases, the
microfilms, and the digitized images of these documents (and so on) from
their home via inernet, or by purchase of cds (which purchase monies could
help the county in making the cds, computer upkeep, etc). The counties have
lots of free resources (the people who make up the genealogical community)
which could be used on a volunteer basis. When you think about the HUGE
number of persons who use the county's resources each day just for vital
statistics and genealogical research, and all that wasted energy that helps
only the genealogists and not the county itself, it really is a shame that
some type of method could not obtained so it helps the county and
genealogists both at minimal cost to the county. Sort of one hand shaking
the other's hand to benefit both.
Of course these are just ideas -- but if one analyzes the wpa movement and
the work that these wpa workers did for the genealogical community and
counties too (although not 100% accurate because the typing and indexing was
not cross-checked by another individual, lack of good typewriters and
frequent cleaning of the type) you can see that there ARE "do-able" methods
and resources out there if we just tapped into them.
I did like your method of changing the state statute to fit your needs and
at the same time you were bringing in revenue for the county that would
otherwise have been lost (from them using their own xerox machines) and also
preserving those documents from coming up missing, destroyed, etc. Sounds
like your method was the better one over the state statues' method.
Congratulations for making such a wonderful decision for your county.
Again, thanks so much for this info you provided to me -- it is truly
refreshing to know that persons such as yourself exists in the county
clerks' offices.
Judy M.
-end of my response-
As mentioned before, no need to respond to this is necessary -- there were
just some things brought up I thought you would enjoy reading. My
courthouse problem/question has really given me some extremely wonderful
insights into things I had never encountered or really thought about much.
(the above is only one aspect I received back in the answers). Thanks to
everyone who had previously replied to my question.
Judy M.