imported post
Last year there was a lot of concern about SSN's being available from the Clerks office, online.
I talked to the owner of the Va Watchdog about publishing the social of all Hanover's officers as well as their addresses. They would have the online requirements changed quickly. It's easy enough to get ...LEGALLY.
BJ and I both agreed it was improper to publish the Deputies information. I decided not to publish any of the retaliatory information, including salaries (Yes Officers saliries are FOIA able if over ten grand).
BJ took the middle ground and published pay for the entire county but left the Deputies names blank. She also published the SSN' on record of several public servents, but not Deputies.
That prompted the General Assembly to pass a bill to prevent it. She beat them in court on appeal...so yes it is legal, but should be, used with considerable descretion.
As much fun as it is rattle a cops chain now and again, endangering his family is NOT ETHICAL or in anyone's best interest.
So yes, what this woman did was legal...but IMHO....not right.
Last year there was a lot of concern about SSN's being available from the Clerks office, online.
I talked to the owner of the Va Watchdog about publishing the social of all Hanover's officers as well as their addresses. They would have the online requirements changed quickly. It's easy enough to get ...LEGALLY.
BJ and I both agreed it was improper to publish the Deputies information. I decided not to publish any of the retaliatory information, including salaries (Yes Officers saliries are FOIA able if over ten grand).
BJ took the middle ground and published pay for the entire county but left the Deputies names blank. She also published the SSN' on record of several public servents, but not Deputies.
That prompted the General Assembly to pass a bill to prevent it. She beat them in court on appeal...so yes it is legal, but should be, used with considerable descretion.
As much fun as it is rattle a cops chain now and again, endangering his family is NOT ETHICAL or in anyone's best interest.
So yes, what this woman did was legal...but IMHO....not right.