FARMINGTON — The county’s case against turning over public records to a private company for expansion of its Web site was heard before a Cumberland County judge Friday, a lawyer for the County Commission said Tuesday.

Frank Underkuffler told county commissioners that MacImage of Maine LLC now has three weeks to respond to the county’s position, and the county has a week to respond to the MacImage response before the judge’s final decision.

With a plan to expand its Web site, www.RegistryofDeeds.com, MacImage has asked Maine counties to provide access to all land records. Through a Freedom of Access Act request, it is asking for copies of all electronic land records in the possession of the counties’ registry of deeds offices.

Two counties, Franklin and Sagadahoc, filed for court judgment after Hancock County lost a case with MacImage based on the cost of providing the information. Other county lawyers present Friday indicated their counties continue to work on setting a price, which is a real disappointment, Underkuffler said.

“These two counties represent 4 percent of Maine’s population,” Underkuffler said. He expressed hope that other counties would consider what the case could mean financially and the effect it could have on local control.

Franklin County faces an economic impact of turning a database of 600,000 deed transactions that cost local taxpayers $2.5 million to compile and maintain while losing annual revenue of $40,000 from subscribers and charges for copying records. That money helps offset the cost of three employees and maintaining an office to house the records.

The county can’t sell the records and let MacImage take on the responsibility, Commissioner Fred Hardy said. The county is charged by the state with providing the records, he said.

There’s also a question of the autonomy of county government, Underkuffler said. If the court sides with MacImage, the court and one private company will be telling the register of deeds what to do and the county would lose control, he said.

In addition to providing records, MacImage wants the counties to acquire the software necessary to make them ready for its Web site and to provide daily updates indefinitely as transactions occur.

The Register of Deeds Office is immune from court action for any mistakes in information it makes, but MacImage isn’t and could come back on the county if there is a mistake in the information provided, Commissioner Gary McGrane said. The county’s insurance would not cover this, leaving taxpayers “holding the bag.”

MacImage is basing its position on the Freedom of Access Act, something commissioners don’t deny.

“There’s no denying the right to know,” Hardy said. “Everyone has access to these files.” 

 
The act was not designed “to set people up in business at taxpayers’ expense,” Underkuffler said. In the county’s defense, he contends that holding private deed transactions that are on display for public viewing is not part of the right of people to know what their government is doing.

The Freedom of Access Act was post-Watergate and prevents government action taken behind closed doors, giving the public the right to know what their government officials are doing, Underkuffler said. Except for deeds concerning state or county transactions, they are private transactions, recorded by the county.

“The 600,000 private deeds don’t tell you what your government is up to,” he said.

Although the county’s software provider, BROWNtech, provided information on what would be needed and the cost to the county to provide the records, Underkuffler presented the judge with an affidavit from owner Cliff Brown, who has no intention of turning over information to a competitor.

Brown or any business could set up a Web site similar to MacImage’s proposal to provide access to all land records in the state, but he has no intention of doing it because he realizes how damaging it could be to the counties, he said.

MacImage has since offered to provide its software at no cost to acquire the records.

[email protected]