Laserfiche WebLink
Attorney O'Brien advised that the law wasn't clear and an <br />Attorney General's opinion seems to concur. He believed the <br />responsibility for making the decision rested with the Department <br />of Revenue (DOR). <br />Frank Zorc, 2044 De Leon Avenue, expressed his gratitude to <br />the Board for their continued interest in public access to public <br />documents. He expressed his opinions on the first three options <br />listed in the memorandum. <br />Mr. Zorc recounted his recent telephone conversation with the <br />DOR, during which they indicated they were in the process of moving <br />to a different building and it would be at least a week before they <br />could begin reviewing something like this. They recommended a <br />declaratory judgment, which would settle the matter. <br />Mr. Zorc supported the fourth possible course of action <br />because of the low cost, and he reiterated his offer of $500 toward <br />same. He urged the Board to seek a declaratory legal action. <br />Attorney Jim Wilson, 3625 20th Street, representing Frank <br />Zorc, contended that a declaratory action was not necessarily <br />adversarial, but only a determination of law. In his opinion, the <br />records should be released because the Statutes protected records <br />that were submitted to determine taxable value, not exemptions. He <br />believed the Statutes relied upon by Mr. Nolte's office were not <br />relevant to applications for exemption. <br />Attorney Wilson urged the County to file the declaratory <br />action as being the most efficient and cost-effective method of <br />resolving the question. He declared that an opinion from the DOR <br />would not be binding upon the Property Appraiser, if he disagreed. <br />Commissioner Bird questioned the premise that a declaratory <br />judgment was non -adversarial. <br />Attorney Wilson maintained it was just a determination of the <br />law, that it did not have to be an adversarial action, that <br />reasonable people had differed, there was no authority on it, and <br />public interest was involved in determining whether or not the <br />records should be released. <br />Chairman Tippin inquired whether records of all non-profit <br />groups would be subject to public scrutiny. <br />Attorney Wilson replied that if the County initiated the <br />action and prevailed, all records would be opened; however, if Mr. <br />Zorc initiated the action it would be limited to the specific <br />records and the law would be universally applied if anyone else <br />went to court after Mr. Zorc, because a precedent would have been <br />created. <br />24 <br />November 15, 1994 <br />