JeffThigpen.com

Team USA needs a new coach:  Barack Obama.

I can’t believe I’m as tall as Steve Smith….

News and Record editorial staff urges more government attention.

“And Guilford Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen leads his counterparts in the state’s other 99 counties in redacting from online documents as much personal information as state law allows.”

“While hazards exist, Thigpen has been a leader in confronting security issues. Now, the state should take the initiative and address those concerns.”

While I appreciate that vote of confidence after a hectic week, more needs to be done and I’m not satisfied.  Register of Deeds’ in North Carolina are a vanguard of public records but don’t have the resources and clarity in law to implement additional security protections, identification requirements, etc., in accessing this public information.   While there needs to be a balance, it is important to know existing laws create an inherent imbalance toward openness precisely because we are public records offices.   My staff and I will continue to address these kinds of issues and concerns with Commissioners and the General Assembly.

The News and Record ran an article  Wednesday and Rhino Times on Thursday as a follow-up to comments made by Internet Expert Linda Criddle at last Thursday’s Board of Commissioner’s meeting.   I’ve  spent much of this past week correcting a great deal of her misleading and damaging statements about the Register of Deeds, explaining my office’s role as  it relates to public records law in North Carolina, and sharing actions taken over the past year to adhere to and exceed NC General Statutes in being sensitive to citizen’s private information.

During Speakers from the Floor, Ms. Criddle commented she was there at the “ask or recommendation of the NC Attorney General’s office.  That is not true.  Guilford County Attorney Sharron Kurtz and I spoke with David Elliott and Caroline Farmer from the Attorney General’s office and that was confirmed she in no way speaks for them and/or Attorney General Roy Cooper.

Ms. Criddle made the assertion that the Register of Deeds was in violation of federal law.  That is not true.  There is one federal law mentioned in the Register of Deeds Guidebook outlining the laws and statutes government our office.  The only federal law that applies relates to when a deed conveys property as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the federal Bankruptcy Code, by federal law no excise tax may be charged.  (11 U.S.C. 1146 (c))  There are federal laws relating to State Vital Records forms and death certificates, but they do not apply to the operation of Register of Deeds offices.

Ms. Criddle was correct that public documents such as birth records, death records, mortgage information, and in some cases, information with social security numbers were available in the Register of Deeds office and online.   Based on that rationale, Ms. Criddle recommended online services be shut down immediately.  She made the comments that the Register of Deeds needs to address “information breaches” and that my office provided information “that is in fact illegal by law to have in place”.  That is not true.  There are no “information breaches” and all information available to the public is authorized by NC General Statutes.  

While I appreciate Ms. Criddle’s desire to promote Internet safety, the Guilford County Register of Deeds is a public records office governed by NC General Statutes.  Any recommendations to change or modify my office’s business practices have to be weighed with an understanding of applicable law.    Based on law, copies of these records shall be provided to any person upon request with three exceptions:  medical information on birth certificates from 1968-forward; military discharges; and citizen requested redaction of private information (including social security numbers) as defined by the Identity Theft Protection Act of 2005.  {G.S. 130A-99; G.S. 132-6(a); G.S. 130A-92; G.S. 47-113.2(f); and G.S. 132-1.10(f)}

All the documents mentioned by Ms. Criddle are public records, whether she or I like it or not.   The Register of Deeds current business practice is to allow online public search for land records along with a registration and verification system for access to birth, death and marriage abstract (limited) information.   Over 9000 individual customers use the land records system each month.  In addition, 3600 are registered for the vital records abstract information, with only 700 actual users due to the verification requirements.  Those requirement include showing a driver’s license to our staff before being allowed to use the system.

While there have been some social security numbers on land record documents, citizens do have a remedy for online documents given through the NC Identity Theft Protection Act of 2005.   Individual’s can present a request to the Register of Deeds to remove any specific “personal information” as defined in the Act and we are required to redact it from the online record.  Related to vital records, social security numbers are required by federal law to be on death certificates.  NC Vital Records follows that federal law and copies of death certificates are in Register of Deeds offices pursuant to NC General Statutes. It is important to note, social security number information is not indicated on online vital records abstracts in our office.

Due to low number of requests from citizens for redaction of private information on land records, I decided to take additional steps to protect citizens.  Our office is not only in compliance with the Identity Theft Protection Act, we are the only Register of Deeds public agency in North Carolina that has initiated an automated redaction program using OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software to search 8 million land records and redact thousands of social security numbers.  We are a leader in this effort and I hope the NC Identity Theft Protection Act will be amended to give express authority to all Register of Deeds and public agencies to redact that information.

The Register of Deeds office strives to follow the laws that govern our office, serve our customers with integrity, and I’m proud of my staff.  They are knowledgable and strive to do their jobs well.

I will be submitting my own recommendations on how to address these issues shortly.  I have appreciated the many calls and comments over the past week from customers and citizens.  We all know these are important issues and they have to be addressed at the appropriate levels.  I’ve committed myself to this effort and will work to do my part.

 From Factcheck.org

Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

Biden incorrectly said “John McCain voted the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. The two were actually on opposite sides.

Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

Biden wrongly claimed that McCain “voted the exact same way” as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it.

Biden was referring to an amendment that didn’t address taxes at that income level.

Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain’s plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said “he wouldn’t even sit down” with the president of Spain. Actually, McCain didn’t reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.

Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

Correction Oct 3: This article originally faulted Biden for saying that McCain had voted “the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. We said  that McCain was absent for the vote and so didn’t vote at all. Biden was however correct.

CORRECTION:  McCain did vote against the troop-funding bill in question, H.R. 1591, on March 29, 2007, when it originally cleared the Senate. The vote to which we referred, and which McCain missed, was a later vote on the House-Senate compromise version of the same bill, on April 26, 2007. McCain opposed the bill, which Obama supported, because it contained language calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Biden was responding to Palin’s accusation that “Obama voted against funding troops.”  Obama voted for the bill March 29 and April 26, then on May  24, 2007, following a veto by President Bush, Obama  voted against a similar troop-funding bill, H.R. 2206, that lacked any withdrawal language.