[mccookgazette.com] Fair ~ 77°F  
High: 87°F ~ Low: 63°F
Thursday, July 2, 2015

County compromises on assessor's website

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

McCOOK, Nebraska -- Red Willow County's assessor will make changes to the county's property search website following action at the county commissioners' weekly meeting Monday morning.

Danny Berndt of rural Danbury, Nebraska, a Red Willow County property owner and tax payer, requested that the assessor remove all photographs from the assessor's online property records available at www.co.red-willow.ne.us/webpages/assesso... and clicking on Red Willow -- GIS Workshop Property Search.

Assessor Sandra Kotschwar proposed a compromise to commissioners and recommended that the property search website include photographs of only each property's "primary structure," and not all the outbuildings. The primary structure is usually a house, but Kotschwar explained that on a rural property with no house or an unused/abandoned house, the "primary structure" might be the barn or an outbuilding.

Berndt told Kotschwar and commissioners that including photographs of his all of his properties on the website is "an invasion of my privacy." Another property owner and tax payer Agnes Roberts of rural McCook, agreed with Berndt, asking, "Why should someone in Timbuktu know what I've got?"

Berndt said that people cannot physically come onto his property without trespassing and breaking the law, but that the county's Internet website allows anyone in the world to "come onto his property" without permission.

Berndt said that 99 to 100 percent of rural people "don't like this. There is a sense of invasion of privacy."

County commissioner Vesta Dack told Berndt, "It (the information) is detailed and it is accessible. There is kind of a feeling of invasion."

Berndt told commissioners and Kotschwar that he has no objection to the information -- owner(s), address and legal description, type of structure(s), purchase date and price, taxes, dimensions of building(s) -- being available on the website, nor does he object to the availability of the photographs in Kotschwar's office. He just doesn't want photographs on the property search website, he said.

Commissioner Steve Downer told Berndt that he feels his complaints about the photographs are "unfounded. These (photographs) aren't real time. They can be up to six years old."

Kotschwar said the property information is public record, but it was her office's decision to include the photographs on the website. Some counties do not include photographs of properties on the websites, she said; some include only a house or primary site. The use of photographs is not regulated by state statute, said commission chairman Earl McNutt.

Kotschwar said she checked with state officials. "It is public information," she said. "We're not doing anything wrong."

Kotschwar said the website grew from the county's implementation of GIS software several years ago that allowed her office to more accurately measure agricultural land and determine soil types.

"There's lots of wonderful information on the website," she said. "We need the pictures for our own office's valuing. I would hate to lose the pictures in the office. I'd hate to do away with all of it."

"There are lots of people using the website," McNutt said. Kotschwar reported that an average of 626 people access the website each month; the heaviest use is typically during June and July when property owners/tax payers are researching information for tax valuation protests and comparable properties.

Others using the website on a regular basis are real estate agents, insurance agents, mortgage company personnel, appraisers, those doing title searches, potential property buyers and bidders wanting to purchase properties at county tax sales.

Berndt said he's not concerned with making these people's jobs easier by providing photographs on the property search website. "The information's there. Just remove the photographs. Rural residents would feel more comfortable," he said. "We're not affecting Sandy's (Kotschwar's) office. Her office will run as it always has."

Kotschwar said the website has definitely resulted in fewer customers coming into her office requesting the same information available now on the website.

Berndt suggested that commissioners "run a trial. Remove all pictures and see if you get any complaints."

Kotschwar suggested a compromise -- running a picture of only the "primary structure" on each property and eliminating pictures of secondary structures, on all properties throughout the county, not just rural properties. The photographs would still be available in the assessor's office. "I'd have no problem with that," she said. "That's a starting point."

Downer said he would not object to removing photographs of outbuildings. "We're still serving the public," he said. Downer continued that he does not want to meddle with the operations of individual county offices. "It's Sandy's decision how she wants to operate her office," he said.

Dack agreed, saying she does not want to micro-manage county offices.

Commissioners voted unanimously to support Kotschwar's recommendation to remove pictures of all but each property's primary structure from the county's property search website.

Kotschwar did not discourage Berndt from moving forward with his concerns, or from contacting state senators about the possibility of addressing restrictions on the use of photographs on property search websites.


Fact Check
See inaccurate information in this story?


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on mccookgazette.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

This is rediculous. I use these pictures all the time for my buisiness. I have no idea what would drive a preson to this level of paranoia.

I don't like people walking by my house in town and looking in my windows! Boo Hoo! Let's make it illegal for everyone to walk down my sidewalk just because I don't like it. It's an invasion of my privacy.

You bet I'll be contacting my commissioners about this.

Danny, are you going to take on Google Earth next?

Are you doing something out there you're not supposed to be doing?

-- Posted by Justin76 on Wed, Mar 2, 2011, at 12:48 AM

I believe that there is some room here for their concerns.

If the photo is one where the doors are open to their equipment shed/barn and it shows what they have in the shed, crooks can take advantage of that by being able to see what they have in there.If it is a site where no one lives, they would know exactly what is in there,making their "job" easier.

The compromise is a decent one, perhaps the owners should request that no photos showing contents of their sheds be posted and if they are not happy with what is posted they could supply the county with one that both they and the county are agreeable to.

Justin you are a businessman, that has a lot of expensive equipment, I'm sure you do everything to protect your investment from theft, I think that is what their main concern is.

The web is a great thing, but it has opened up many new avenues for crooks to practice their trade!

-- Posted by goarmy67 on Wed, Mar 2, 2011, at 9:44 AM

Yes, because there are so many crooks cruising the county website to "case a joint" in Red Willow County. Taking a wrong turn out in the country, pull into one of these properties and head back and you're likely to have seen what they are putting on the website. Except what you're seeing is not near as outdated as the website pictures. I just hope they get my home's "good side" when they take their pictures. Much ado about nothing, really.

-- Posted by McCook1 on Wed, Mar 2, 2011, at 10:31 AM

Im going to go take a picture of this guys house from the sidewalk and put it up on my web site. I will get alot of good angles

-- Posted by president obama on Wed, Mar 2, 2011, at 1:01 PM

Having 4 properties myself, seeing a picture of the outside has very little use in determining value unless we are talking acreage. So unless the person just needs to see the vicinity of the property such as on google earth I don't really see a reason for the pictures.

I do understand the standpoint of farmers and dealers of large ticket items such as combines having an issue for those casing property. I no longer live in McCook, but Kansas City and I think if you look outside the community, you may find this to be an uncommon practice.

How about doing research on similar sites to compare these photos. Are they the same detail? If not, maybe people need something more to do with their time than be overly nosy.

Bigdawg, please consider next time you have a public complaint, like the neighbor kids car ablaring! I'll make sure everyone I know drives down your street with the window open. I'll play Slim Whitman just to make your day!

-- Posted by sclary on Thu, Mar 3, 2011, at 8:07 PM

How about allowing only pictures taken from a public road?

-- Posted by azulancer on Fri, Mar 4, 2011, at 12:39 PM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: