|
County fights back in court records debate
(The Olathe News (Olathe, KS)(KRT) Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) Jan. 13--A Johnson County state senator has introduced legislation to block a Kansas Supreme Court measure that would restrict access to a database of District Court records and end free use of the system.
Sen. John Vratil, a Leawood Republican, introduced Senate Bill 353 on Tuesday to maintain a Johnson County Web site that provides 10th District Court records online at no cost.
The county's Justice Information Management Systems was developed using more than $425,000 in taxpayer funds in 1993.
Now, the system integrates information from the Sheriff's Department, district attorney's office and community corrections system into one searchable database. It is used by offenders, victims, attorneys and other organizations that track court dates, restitution progress, case history and other judicial information.
The online database, at www.jococourts.org, attracts between 250,000 and 270,000 inquiries per month, according to county data.
The Supreme Court in November moved to make access of state court records uniform by prohibiting city- and county-initiated systems. Instead, the Supreme Court plans to charge individuals $2 per search for court records. Some organizations also would be required to pay annual membership fees.
"Public records ought to be readily, easily accessible to the public," Vratil said. "To charge for those public records over the Internet is not a reasonable position."
Tim Mulcahy, director of the Johnson County system, said Thursday that if the Supreme Court's action is upheld, court records still would be accessible without charge at county courthouses, but that "in today's society, that does not make very good sense."
A spate of supporters urged the Johnson County Commission on Thursday to object to the Supreme Court's move and, if necessary, approve a resolution in support of Vratil's legislation.
"The citizens of Johnson County will be dis-empowered" if the Supreme Court doesn't reconsider, said Linda Carter, who spoke for Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison. "There will be a barrier placed between them and the information they seek, and they will not be able to monitor what should be a transparent criminal justice process."
Some supporters pointed out that taxpayer money was used to develop the system.
"Since they have paid for it, they now should be entitled to use it," Sheriff Frank Denning said.
Mulcahy predicted an increase in staffing levels at the Sheriff's Department, the district attorney's office and the courthouse if the Supreme Court's plan goes forward.
Since its inception, the system has reduced the amount of foot traffic and telephone inquiries at those offices by people seeking, Mulcahy said.
A background paper presented to the board Thursday suggested the Supreme Court's plan is more focused on creating a revenue source than improving accessibiilty.
"The question that should be posed to the members of the esteemed Supreme Court is the same that we should pose to all in public service," Olathe Commissioner Doug Wood said. "That question is, which are we to serve -- the citizens or only the institutions that we work in? My answer is, first the citizens and second the institutions."
Commission Chair Annabeth Surbaugh objected to the possibility of charging county residents for access to the system they funded.
"Johnson County citizens have already paid for this, and they have a right to access it," she said.
Assistant District Attorney Rick Guinn said the move could take away a resource from victims or witnesses, who without the system could be targets for retribution or other criminal activity.
"You might ask judges how frequently is it that persons charged with crimes violate court orders during their cases," Guinn said. "You'll find that there are an alarming number of people that could just give a hoot about what a judge has to say.
"They're going to get their pound of flesh. They're going to even the score. They're going to do bad things to a victim or a material witness who has come forward with information," Guinn continued. "What this system provides for those people is a heads up."
Jennifer Keating, an Olathe parole officer, said her office tracks 50 cases using free access of the database.
"It would be devastating to my officers if we were to lose this," she said.
Officials for the Information Network of Kansas (INK), which would be the exclusive provider of electronic Kansas district court records if the Supreme Court's plan proceeds, will meet Thursday to consider a contract for the service.
But Vratil said an agreement wouldn't mean the county would be forced to take its system offline immediately.
"I don't think it makes any difference if the Supreme Court signs a contract with INK," Vratil said. "If the law allows a county to provide those records free of charge, that law supercedes any contract provision."
Meanwhile, Vratil's bill -- which specifically would allow counties to provide the records online -- has been assigned to the Senate's Judiciary Committee.
"The Supreme Court has just laid down an edict and said that this is the way it's going to be," Vratil said. "My hope is this bill will cause them to rethink that position and come back to the negotiating table. If it doesn't have that effect, then I'm fully prepared to have a hearing and work the bill."
[ Back To TMCnet.com's Homepage ]
|
INDUSTRIES
Activate Email 
Find Solutions for Enterprises, SMBs & Service Providers at the INTERNET TELEPHONY Conference and EXPO East, January 20-22, 2010. Miami, FL.
