A&A: $100 fees for copies of unclaimed property data too high
October 6, 2009 by FAC
Filed under Asked & Answered
Q: I am freelance journalist taking issue with the fees charged by the California Comptroller’s Office to provide copies of the digital files of lists of abandoned/unclaimed property.
The Comptroller produces well over 1,000 of these discs each month and charges $100 each. Once the computer file is downloaded from his mainframe, the actual cost then drops to the time it takes to copy each. It is my contention that the fees are illegal since it is far higher than the cost of reproducing and mailing the data discs.
A: As you seem to know, under the California Public Records Act (“PRA”), the public has a right to inspect and obtain copies of documents collected or maintained by state or local agencies. The general rule on cost of copies of public records is that unless a particular statutory fee has been established for copies of a record, agencies can charge fees “covering the direct costs of duplication.” Govt. Code § 6253(b). With respect to paper copies, a California court has said that “[t]he direct cost of duplication is the cost of running the copy machine, and conceivably also the expense of the person operating it. ‘Direct cost’ does not include the ancillary tasks necessarily associated with the retrieval, inspection and handling of the file from which the copy is extracted.” North County Parents Org. v. Department of Educ., 23 Cal. App. 4th 144, 148 (1994). As to records held in electronic format, however, the PRA as follows: “Each agency shall provide a copy of an electronic record in the format requested if the requested format is one that has been used by the agency to create copies for its own use or for provision to other agencies. The cost of duplication shall be limited to the direct cost of producing a copy of a record in an electronic format.” Cal. Gov’t Code 6253.9(a)(2). Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the person making the public records request “shall bear the cost of producing a copy of the record, including the cost to construct a record, and the cost of programming and computer services necessary to produce a copy of the record when either of the following applies: (1) . . . the public agency would be required to produce a copy of an electronic record and the record is one that is produced only at otherwise regularly scheduled intervals. (2) The request would require data compilation, extraction, or programming to produce the record.” Cal. Gov’t Code 6253.9(b). Following is a link to the full text of Section 6253.9: http://www.cfac.org/Law/CPRA/Text/cpra_text.html
In addition to the PRA’s ordinary rules governing copies of records, therefore, there are certain circumstances where an agency may charge costs in excess of the direct costs of duplication in producing a copy of an electronic record.
Although geography may pose a barrier in this particular case, another way that the public can sometimes bypass significant copying charges is by simply inspecting records — for which there should be no charge — rather than requesting copies of records.
It is not clear whether your previous requests for the records you seek have been made under the PRA. If not, you may want to submit a written request for those records under the PRA and ask in your letter that the agency justify any fee in excess of the cost of duplication by reference to specific authority. To the extent an agency refuses to comply with the PRA, the ultimate remedy would be to file a lawsuit.
