WSPC00738 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'. :"~ . ' ;" ~ I .-,/ 'r-.. 356 Colo. -, " .---- 826 PACIFIC REPORTER; 2d SERIES , presented by its applieation as one relating to the "Dl&llDer" of _ to public recorda which an eJeetronieaJly stored. We dis- agree. , The corporation, argues that the only fcmn in which electrunicalJy stored public recorda can be made available for iDapee- lion is through the use of a computer, essentially beeause that is the fonnat in which the public recorda are kept. Henee, it maintains that, the department regula- lions, which explicitly bar public WIll of the treasurer's office computer terminals, oper- ate to d8nIl, rather than regulate, access to such public recorda. " Since the euaetment of the Open Recorda Act in 1968, no Colorado case has specifi- eaJIy addressed the nature of the right to inspect public recorda which are, as here, aImoet exclusively maintained and stored electronically on magnetic computer tapes. A number of fedetal and state courts, how- ever, have addressed this issue" and we conclude that two eases. Dimauka lI. De- paTt1Mftt of InUriDr, 603 F .supp. 760 (D.D.C-1984) and AFSCME lI. County of Cook, 136 IIl.2d 334, 144 m.Dec. 242, 555 N.E.2d 361 (1990), frame the issue raised by the corporation's first contention of er- ror. In Dimauku, the plaintiff sought a copy of the Department of Interior's computer tape but receiv~, iDatead, the same infor- mation on microfiche, the form in which the requested infonnation Was routinely made available to, the public. In.sanctioning the department's substitution in format, the, court noted that the fundamental objective of the Freedom of Infonnation Act, 5 U.S.C.A. I' 552 (1977), is to iDauie public accessibility to the infornu.tiim4l content of the public record. Thwi, the public may not dictate the fonnat in which the infor- mation wJ1l be provided.' Moreover, the government agency, in discharging ita obli- gation under the act,' :"need only proVide responsive ... information in' a reasOnably accessible form" which does not alter the content ,of the information. Dimauka lI. DepaTt1Mftt of Interior, IUpro. SU alia Sttigls lI. Barry" 422 So.2d 63 (FIa.App- 1982). :',," In contrast, the Illinois Supreme CoUli in AFSCME, IUpnI, revensed a ruling . the appellate court which had approved th eounty's presentation of public inforinatio , to plaintiffs in the form of a compute print-out, rather than ,in the form of computer tape, as requested. The COUl construed the Illinois Freedom of Infonm tion Act (Illinois Act) to emphasize publi 7'U01Ti8, not simply their informational COt tent. Thus, the court held ,that requeste information must be made available "in th form in which it is normally kept." Neither of these cases is, of course er tirely 'analogous to' the situation pres:nte, here in which the corporation does not see: a coW of the computer tape but' dire<: access to the original magnetic datab... However, these cases J1Iustrate that th issue here turnS on whether the basic 'pW pose of the Open Recorda Act is 'one 0 public accessibility to the inf0rm4tiona content of public recorda or is, instead, on of access to the public TtICOf'fU in the fon in which they are nonnally kept. Citing If 24-72-201 :md 24-72-20~ C.R.S.. (1988 Repl VoI.10B); the corpol'll tion relies on the general assembly's use 0 the terms "inspect" and "public recorda" ~ assert that the latter articulates the pUt pose of the Open Recorda Act. For th, following reasons, we disagree. First, the Open Recorda Act waSp..sse, following a year-long study by' a specia committee of the Colorado Legislativ, Council, A review of this committee's re port indicates that the committee's concerl was public access to public inf0rm4oon Colorado Legislative Council, Researcl Publ. . # 126, Open RcCOf'fU for CQlorad, (1967). Indeed, the committee repeatedl~ referred to public information and, in ill initial finding and conclusion, stated that "[I]J;>creased awareness on the part of ,.., the public has led to greater emphasis or the need for statutory guarantees of pub lit: GCcess to 'public informati07L" (em phasis added) , " . - ... .j"";.": Second, f 24-7Z-201and f 24--7Z-20: specifically qualify the right to inspect pub lie recorda. : Section 24-7Z-201, which setl forth the policy of the Open Recorda" Act