Here's the best place to start learning about public records:
http://www.ag.state.oh.us/legal/sunshine.asp

It's online and you can obtain it in a hard copy.

HB9 (House Bill 9) was introduced by Marc Dann BEFORE he became Ohio Attorney General. (Remember the Worker's Comp scandal? Marc Dann's persistence to see these records is what started that.) It (HB9)was passed last December. The purpose of this bill wasn't really to make public records more accessible, it was to require more accountability on the part of those who handle public records.

Public records belong to you and me - the public. Prior to HB9 becoming effective 9/29/2007, the two words those requesting and providing public records needed to keep in mind were: prompt and reasonable. Are some records confidential? Yes. They're all listed.

When the law was written, it INTENTIONALLY did not set specific time limitations or requirements. (Not every public office has full time employees. Therefore, prompt and reasonable worked just fine.) The biggest problem I have encountered in the past 2.5 years requesting public records have been those who do not know the public records law or don't want me to see the records I have requested. I do not request information that I know is confidential; I expect SSNs be redacted; I do not expect to see personal information that is not public record.

Something new in HB9 is that ALL elected public officials MUST attend a three hour public records class. Should they have done this prior to Sept 29, 2007? Sure! Were these classes available? Not on the HB9 changes, but they've been available for years.

Should the public wait until those who need to attend classes do so? Nope. Have public records classes been offered before? Yes. Where and how often are they offered? Sunshine week is the second week in March every year. Most newspapers carry daily information about public records during this week and it seems that there are several public records classes offered around that time. The state auditor's office will conduct the classes for public officials when requested.

Mr. Dix is on the board of the Ohio Newspapers organization concerning public records. This organization has been involved with numerous newspapers in recent years who have successfully challenged public records laws.

Could Portage County's public officials have requested these training classes? Sure. Did they? I don't know.

We elected 18 county officials;
Portage County's 18 townships each elect three trustees and a clerk;
Portage County's villages each elect a mayor, six council members and some clerks (now being known as fiscal officiers);
Portage County's four cities each elect a mayor and six or more council members.

It is then up to these individuals to make sure that those they appoint and hire who handle public records know how to properly preserve, produce and destroy records.

These policies and procedures have been in place for years. There are required records meetings; required records inventories; required retention procedures; required destruction procedures.

Those who handle public records need to realize that a request does not mean a personal challenge nor is it a way to waste their time.

Did you know that you can receive the minutes to the county commissioner's meeting by email?
Did you know that you can find minutes for some county boards online or request that minutes be emailed to you?

All you need to is ask.

Here's a reference; http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/149.43

OhioGal, did we just get our hands slapped?

And a special "thank you" to all the folks at RC who were thoughtful enough to IDENTIFY WHAT FREAKING LAW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!

I'm going to take wild stab at O.R.C. Section 149.43 Availability of public records for inspection and copying. I was unable to find the alleged recent changes to this law referred to in the article.

Maybe Mike Sever would enlighten us by providing his information sources of that data so we, the puny public might read and study the information for ourselves. Was this information originally omitted because the RC doesn't think any of its readership possess the "little gray cells" to fathom such complicated information, or what?

RC, Mike Sever, you could definitely have done a better job on this piece! A little source information, PLEASE!! Geez, talk about there being room for improvement!

Who supports (financially?) the public records keepers? Is it taxpayer money? Defendant money, like from court costs and fines? I don't know does anybody?
I think they should be able with today's technology to have the "personal" information removed from the file. Mark it out, white out, a black marker, whatever. Then you scan and file. When people come in they can go to a public computer pull up the file and hit print. The page prints and a clerk hands the pages over for a 5 cents per copy fee. These records should also be available online and people can print at work, or at home or the library or wherever.
I know someone in another state who works in a clerks office. That is how she told me they do it there.
Some records like divorces (the actual agreements) are public record but due to the sensitive nature they restrict it to making people come in and print there, why ? I dunno I forgot to ask her. She said other things like copies of wills, are also not viewable, I can understand that. Where does the line get drawn? I'm not sure. She said it has caused people in her county when they get divorced to agree not to put their income and other personal things into the divorce agreement so curiosity seekers aren't satisfied.
She said all the documents get scanned in, it appears that is what portage county does as well. It's a fine line. Should we be able to read someones divorce and estate stuff, I dunno. I think crimes are a different matter. I'm perplexed on what I feel should be public info and how much information is to much and unnecessary.
As far as sex offenders I think sometimes what you will see if that you can see the prosecutors witness list and that's not good because sometimes the parent of the victim or the victim is on the witness list that by law has to be provided to the defense. Most times they try to refer to the victim with initials but sometimes they don't or it's obvious if you see the parents name. So I'm conflicted on this. Somewhere in the middle a equal boundary may be found.

Let me give you an example...

A police records clerk is busy preparing a case that needs to be at the courthouse that morning. That is because the person who was just arrested overnight for a felony domestic violence is going to appear in front of the judge - and the judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, and victim witness advocates are all waiting on the COMPLETED police report to be available for them to see.

In walks in Joe Schmo, who wants to know how many times the police responded to loud music complaints in a certain neighborhood during the past year. The clerk apologizes, but Mr. Schmo will have to wait until other priority work is completed before their request can be filled.

But, that's NOT GOOD ENOUGH for you.

DoWhatisRight, Are you telling me that the records clerk should put down the felony court case, and spend time looking up the info for the guy in the lobby? That this is the same as a waitress? That you would fire the records clerk? That she has no right to feel frustrated? You would FIRE HER because she "grunts" at having to stop her more important work because someone like you is demanding to be waited on without thinking about prioritizing the tasks at hand?

How many records clerks should the agency have on hand? Two? Three? Four Dozen? How many do you want on staff so that when you come in and "snap your fingers" there will be a plethora of public records assistants to accomodate you with every request?

You can't treat public servants like they are your PERSONAL servants. Treating people like the "hired help" is not the answer.

I hope you don't really fire your employees for such circumstances. You wouldn't have many employees left...

This is just another way the politicians are trying hide their background and what they are doing. . Public records are just that public records and should be available to anyone that walks in and wants to look at them. The devil is in the details. The law should be simple, just give the public the public records.

Most likely it will end up that public records will only be available to lawyers, so you will have to pay them $100.00 an hour to do what you could do for free. It use to be that if a renter moved out and did not pay you could get a forwarding address from the Post Office. Not now, only lawyers can get the forwarding address. This stinks.

Any politician that allows his/hers staff to refuse public records should be kicked out of office. They are just trying to hide something. Often it is one of their political buddies that they are protecting.

Any employee that complains about giving the public the public records should realize that if the public can not get the public records, we don need them to keep the public records. They are just being lazy. How long would a clerk in a store keep their job, if they felt that waiting on customers kept them from their work? What if the waitress would not serve you because she is trying to do her work.

As for grunts from the staff, I would fire any of my employees for this. They are their to serve the public and that includes getting public records for members of the public that ask for them. The politicians get away with enough now, do not let them make it easier by refusing public records.

There will be no bid contract every where, over pay for staff members, special jobs to supporters and a long list of other things if the public can not look at the records.

anyone ever tried to get a copy of federal court records? they make you wait and then charge you $.05 per page, for a federal case that can really add up

Just as long as people understand that most agencies do not have people whose ONLY job is to be dedicated FULL TIME to process the requests.

If someone from the press comes in and wants a mountain of paperwork, or items from several different places that takes a long time to look up, and it's not in their hands within 7 minutes, they get all pissy.

Be reasonable with the requests, and give the employees (who are trying to do their other assigned work) a chance to get it together. When people come in and ask for public records on an occasional basis, it does not make good business sense to hire full time employees dedicated to that only task.

Yes, providing access to public records is the law, and it is important, but not at the expense that all other work in the office needs to come to a grinding halt every time a reporter walks into the lobby...

Once they get the law straight it will be more black and white. I hope they put protections in that children are protected. When people are arrested or falsely accused if the records were able to be opened then you could see that although initially charged with something, that it never became a case. Sometimes someone can accuse you of doing something out of malicious behavior but then it never goes to court. So when people look at the record you can only see they were arrested or charged but seeing the rest of it would show that it never went anywhere. I know people who have been denied jobs because the background check shows they were arrested but from the record sometimes you can't see that it was not anything legit or that it was not prosecuted or that it was a malicious type of thing. I know people who've been accused of things out of retaliation, but from the public record that can't be obtained so the person accused looks like they did something that in fact never occurred. The law needs to be equal to the accused, the prosecuted and the innocent.

Ohio's public record law causes problems only to those who do not wish to allow the public their right to view public record. It's not a difficult thing to understand, the information is free in book form from either the State Attorney General's office or the Auditor's office. It's online.

All the public need to is ASK. If they do not receive, the issue should be pursued.

Knowing and understanding the public records law before asking is helpful. The more we educate ourselves, the better off we'll all be.