Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Records Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners give first reading to ordinance limiting commercial scraping of public records

La Porte County Board of Commissioners · July 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board read Ordinance No. 25-3 by title — a first reading that would let the county ask whether requests are for commercial use and require affidavits to deter bulk commercial harvesting of records; no final vote was taken.

La Porte County commissioners gave a first reading on July 2 to Ordinance No. 25-3, an ordinance intended to regulate disclosure and use of public records for commercial purposes and to protect certain lists from disclosure under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act.

The ordinance, read by title only as a first reading, would allow county staff to inquire whether a request for records is for a commercial purpose and to require a signed affidavit in cases where the purpose is unclear. Supporters said the change is meant to prevent commercial entities from imposing repetitive, staff-intensive requests that require clerical sorting and extra staff time.

The presenter said the ordinance is not intended to curtail individuals seeking records for legitimate purposes, including claims or jail records, but rather to reduce staff time spent assembling lists that commercial requesters use to solicit customers. The county cited the need to protect staff resources and avoid performing extensive compilation work that commercial entities can do themselves using public tools (for example, Odyssey).

The ordinance was identified as "Ordinance No. 25-3" and the presenter referenced the Indiana public-records statutory provisions on which the measure relies (transcript cites "5-14-3"). The measure received a first reading only; the board did not vote on adoption or amendments during this session.