Granted: Property tax status documents from township
August 06, 2009 Filed in: Granted
| Middletown
Twp | Record
not in possession | Tax
collectors | Third-party
contractors | Compiled
records
Granted: A request to Middletown
Township for printouts of current tax year
information and payment status for three
properties. The township had denied possession of
the records, saying they were available only from
the tax office.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Granted: A request to Middletown Township for printouts of current tax year information and payment status for three properties. The township had denied possession of the records, saying they were available only from the tax office.
The Office of Open Records found:
-- That the Right to Know Law requires agencies to produce tax duplicate information, as such records are within its control, even if not in its possession.
“The OOR consistently has held that the records of a tax collector to perform collection functions on behalf of a taxing district are records ‘of’ the taxing district, such that the taxing district remains responsible for its records, despite their legal custody residing in a third party,” the OOR wrote.
The OOR noted that the township failed to address or refute previous OOR’s determinations on this same issue.
“The OOR finds that the public has a right under the RTKL to access the tax information that reveals how the township decides to assess and collect taxes, assess discounts, penalties, and grant exoneration for uncollected taxes from review of the agency’s tax collection-related records as these are inherently public functions.
“Critically, that the tax collector has physical possession of these records does not alter their public status. The OOR finds that the township has an obligation to obtain its records from the tax collector under Section 506(d)(3) which provides that “a request for a record in possession of a party other than the agency shall be submitted to the open records officer of the agency.”
-- That the request does not require the “creation of a record,” as the township had claimed.
“The printout of a number of screens from a database is no more the ‘creation of a record’ than the copying of a series of pages of a record on a copying machine,” the OOR wrote. “Accordingly, the township is required to produce the records requested, that have been deemed records ‘of’ the township, in the format in which they currently exist, to show the amounts paid as of the date the record is printed.”
The Office of Open Records addressed the concern of tax collectors that information they provide is being used and sold by data collection agencies:
“The OOR also recognizes the frustration expressed by tax collectors statewide that any requester, including a for-profit company, can request public records and use those records for its own commercial gain after an agency expends time and resources to gather them,” the OOR wrote.
“The legislature considered and addressed this concern; the law clearly provides that a requester ‘need not include any explanation of [its] reason for requesting or intended use of the records unless otherwise required by law’ ..., and clearly prohibits an agency from denying access to a public record based on the intended use ...”
Signature Solutions Inc. vs. Middletown Township -- AP 2009-0521
APPEALED TO BUCKS COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Granted: A request to Middletown Township for printouts of current tax year information and payment status for three properties. The township had denied possession of the records, saying they were available only from the tax office.
The Office of Open Records found:
-- That the Right to Know Law requires agencies to produce tax duplicate information, as such records are within its control, even if not in its possession.
“The OOR consistently has held that the records of a tax collector to perform collection functions on behalf of a taxing district are records ‘of’ the taxing district, such that the taxing district remains responsible for its records, despite their legal custody residing in a third party,” the OOR wrote.
The OOR noted that the township failed to address or refute previous OOR’s determinations on this same issue.
“The OOR finds that the public has a right under the RTKL to access the tax information that reveals how the township decides to assess and collect taxes, assess discounts, penalties, and grant exoneration for uncollected taxes from review of the agency’s tax collection-related records as these are inherently public functions.
“Critically, that the tax collector has physical possession of these records does not alter their public status. The OOR finds that the township has an obligation to obtain its records from the tax collector under Section 506(d)(3) which provides that “a request for a record in possession of a party other than the agency shall be submitted to the open records officer of the agency.”
-- That the request does not require the “creation of a record,” as the township had claimed.
“The printout of a number of screens from a database is no more the ‘creation of a record’ than the copying of a series of pages of a record on a copying machine,” the OOR wrote. “Accordingly, the township is required to produce the records requested, that have been deemed records ‘of’ the township, in the format in which they currently exist, to show the amounts paid as of the date the record is printed.”
The Office of Open Records addressed the concern of tax collectors that information they provide is being used and sold by data collection agencies:
“The OOR also recognizes the frustration expressed by tax collectors statewide that any requester, including a for-profit company, can request public records and use those records for its own commercial gain after an agency expends time and resources to gather them,” the OOR wrote.
“The legislature considered and addressed this concern; the law clearly provides that a requester ‘need not include any explanation of [its] reason for requesting or intended use of the records unless otherwise required by law’ ..., and clearly prohibits an agency from denying access to a public record based on the intended use ...”
Signature Solutions Inc. vs. Middletown Township -- AP 2009-0521
APPEALED TO BUCKS COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS