VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. RECORDS DISCLOSURE. COMPUTER TAPE NOT IN POSSESSION OF PUBLIC OFFICIAL.

September 19, 1979

The Honorable Lee T. Keyes
Commissioner of the Revenue for Loudoun County

79-80 387

You have asked whether a computer tape containing county real estate assessment information is an "official record" as defined by the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (the "Act") and, if so, whether you are required to make the tape available for public inspection and copying in your office. Your letter indicates that the computer tape in question is owned by the county but is in the possession of a private corporation, located in the City of Richmond, which produces and maintains the tape under contract with the county. You further indicate that the same information which is contained on the computer tape is printed in county real estate records which are available in your office for public inspection and copying.

Section 2.1-341(b) of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended defines "official records" as all "written or printed books papers letters documents maps and tapes photographs films sound recordings reports or other material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, prepared, owned, or in the possession of a public body in the transaction of public business." I, therefore, conclude that the computer tape you described is clearly an official record of the county as defined by the Act.

Section 2.1-340.1 sets forth the purposes of the Act and provides, in relevant portion, that the Act is designed "to insure to the people of this Commonwealth ready access to records in the custody of public officials.... (Emphasis added.) Section 2.1-342 provides that, except as otherwise specifically provided by law, all official records shall be open for inspection and copying by the citizens of this State "during the regular office hours of the custodian of such records." (Emphasis added) The foregoing provisions indicate that the Act is intended to make available for public inspection those official records which are in the custody of public officials and to provide for citizen inspection at the offices of public officials. The computer tape in question here is not in the possesion of public officials because of the practical necessities of the contractual arrangement between the county and its contractual agent. Moreover, as you have indicated, the same information which is contained on the computer tape is presently available for public inspection and copying in printed form in county offices. Under these circumstances I conclude that the Act does not require the county to obtain tape or a copy thereof and provide the same for citizen copying and inspection.