THOMASON HOPES FOR ACCESS-TO-RECORDS CHANGES

JEFFERSON CITY -- Larry Thomason wanted to know how many single women there were in Cole County between the ages of 20 and 26, 5 feet 3 inches tall with blond hair and blue eyes, and weighing under 120 pounds.

He learned there were 165 women fitting that description. But not only did he find out how many, he also got their names and addresses. And, had he requested it, he could have also gotten their Social Security numbers and photos.

The type of list Thomason requested could have been sought for any county in the state, or the entire state. His motives for seeking the information were irrelevant; all he had to do was request the information and pay the appropriate fees for copying it. In this instance, the names of the women cost Thomason about $35.

Thomason, a state representative from Kennett, requested the list to show why legislation he is sponsoring in HB-1158, which limits access to public records, is needed.

The source of his information? The Missouri Department of Revenue. Everything Thomason requested is on file with the state agency through driver's license records.

Thomason presented the list Tuesday afternoon at a subcommittee meeting of the House Governmental Organization and Review Committee, which was appointed to review concerns raised by the proposal. Thomason offered the list to the subcommittee, calling it "my Ted Bundy list," in reference to a serial killer who stalked female victims across the country.

He presented the list "to graphically explain to them why we need this bill. Wouldn't serial killer Ted Bundy have enjoyed this list?" Thomason asked.

Thomason said he was told by the Department of Revenue that it receives requests like his all the time, and has no authority to determine who should have such records, including individuals that might be potential Ted Bundys.

"People seek information like this for beauty contests all the time, I was told. This is a standard kind of request they get at the department," said Thomason.

Such information is also used by insurance companies to compile sales mailing lists; many companies seek the information to target mailings. Sellers of pre-need funeral insurance can easily get names of recently widowed men and women, who are often easy prey to purchase burial insurance plans.

The full committee may take up the bill for action today.

HB-1158, which is also sponsored by Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, has drawn fire from the Missouri Press Association. The press group contends that the public's access to public records should not be limited in any way.

"Our contention is basically all people should be treated equally before the government, and when you start setting up exemptions on who gets records and who doesn't that's where we have problems with the bill," said Doug Crews, executive director of the Missouri Press Association.

Crews said, "If government doesn't want citizens to see the information it gathers, it should not gather the information. What the record is used for after it is obtained from the government should not be an issue."

Said Thomason: "Their argument is everything in state government should be absolutely 1,000 percent wide open. To them I agree, but not to everyone. Open records are there to protect the public, not to set them up as potential customers."

Thomason said the law does not give any state departments discretion in whether to provide records that are requested.

Under the proposed legislation, the controlling agency of the information would decide what information would be disseminated and the charge. The bill would also allow state agencies to charge not only for the cost of duplicating records, but for the time it takes employees to find the records.

But Crews said raising prices for records could be discriminatory against people who don't have the money to pay for such records. The press association's position is that state government, as a matter of policy, should not be in the business of selling public information at a profit, and that all people are equal in their standing before state government.

The press group also maintains that records access should be provided at the lowest possible cost in accordance with the current statute in Chapter 610.026, which says, "Fees for copying public records shall not exceed the actual cost of document search and duplication" and subparagraph 2, which says, fees for providing access to records stored on computer, audio or video shall "include only the cost of copies and staff time required for making copies."

Thomason said it is only fair to taxpayers that the state be able to recover the actual costs of providing information about records, and that taxpayers are not subsidizing businesses that want the information for commercial purposes. The representative said he favors providing the information to news media at a lower cost because they are disseminating that information to the public.

The legislation also sets up a procedure for groups or individuals to seek access to records that a department contends should not be available.

Thomason said he is willing to work with the Missouri Press Association and other groups to make changes in his bill that they can live with.

"I'm open to all kinds of suggestions to make it fair and even. One thing I would not want to do is limit access of the press to information necessary for doing a story," said Thomason. "My degree is in communications. The last thing I want to do is restrict the press."

Thomason said the list he received from the Department of Revenue illustrates the point that not everyone should have access to all available records from state agencies.

"I just wanted to give them an example," said the legislator. "The whole point is: that is what this bill is about. It is not about limited press or limiting free enterprise; it is about what kind of information the public should have available to them."

Under the current open records law, Thomason said basically every record in the state is open to the public just for the asking.

"State agencies need to have some authority to say you can't have a certain list or information, and right now they don't have that right," said Thomason. "I think that is wrong and that is not the reason for open records."

He said: "We have a state law that mandates before you drive a car in Missouri you must have a license. We collect the information from them and then are forced by this bill to give it out to every Tom, Dick and Harry that wants it. If Ted Bundy had a profile, he could come to the Missouri Department of Revenue and have them fill his profile list. That is wrong."

Crews said he fears legislation like this will lead to a time when "the only people with access to records on you and me is the government. I don't think we want that."

Some of the other examples of records requested from the Department of Revenue that Thomason plans to present to the committee hearing his bill are:

-- A car company wanted to know all owners of Mercedes Benz cars.

-- A mailing company wanted the names and addresses of people 70 and older with eyeglass restrictions.

-- A dating service wanted all available information about individuals ages 17-19.

-- A beauty pageant company paid $204 for a list of 6,500 16-year-old females in the state; the list included heights, weights, dates of birth, addresses and eye colors.

-- Several individuals have asked for names of people with specific birth dates.

-- One individual wanted the names of females with four specific birth dates.

One that Thomason said bothers him is a request from an individual wanting information on females on four specific birth dates and males on one specific date that included the names, addresses, sex, heights, weights, eye colors, license numbers, expiration date of licenses, any restrictions on driving, and any other available information. The names were sorted by date of birth, sex, eye color, height, and alphabetically.

"I don't know what he wanted this kind of information for, but if you look at all the possibilities, it is scary," said Thomason. The person making the request paid $126 for 631 records.

Another person paid $117 for 92 records with information on females born on a specific birth date. "That could be a real innocent request or it could be a Ted Wayne Bundy," said Thomason.