Agenda - 12-16-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

006 -2- It is not clear why eleven different permanent indexing systems continue to be used after the adoption in 1978 of a new set of indexing guidelines by the Register of Deeds Association. Statutes already exist which set forth time limits by which temporary and permanent indexing must be completed. Based on these standards and the guidelines adopted in 1978, an organization should be established and charged with the responsibility of developing and proposing a set of indexing standards based upon what is important for legal continuity across the State. However, proposed standards cannot be developed without taking into account the requirements and systems of other departments of county government which rely on information maintained by the register of deeds office. Simply placing the register of deeds under state administrative control not only seems incongruous with the needs of these other areas of county operations and the goal to establish a coordinated land records system within each county, bit also precipitous until a plan for standardization is developed and the extent of required change assessed. After adequate time has been allowed for review and comment, the standards could be enacted into law and enforced through procedural audits as fiscal control procedures are enforced by the Local Government Commission of the Treasury Department. Lack of Funding to Modernize Offices One of the findings implies that failure to modernize offices is primarily due to lack of funding by counties. This assumption fails to pinpoint responsibility. Failure to authorize and implement improvement measures could result from opposition by a number of groups or individuals, including register of deeds, county manager, county commissioners, or local bar groups. The assumption also misleads by making no distinction between those registers of deeds who have actively sought funding and those who have not communicated their needs. Moreover, statutes provide that redress can be found in the courts if a board of commissioners refuses to supply adequate money for the operation of the office. These safeguards to ensure that the system functions properly should be exercised before throwing out the system. The same error may be made when referring to a lack of standards in the use of computers. To say that the registers of deeds of this state are without guidance or technical direction and expertise is to ignore the existence and work of the State Land Records Management Program the Center for Urban Affairs at N.C. State University, and the counties which have developed and shared their software packages. Notwithstanding, there is need for a higher level of funding in many counties. Based on the comparative information provided to the Task Force, North Carolina is far behind other states in charges for services. Fees should be adjusted to help pay for upgrading offices. While a simple add-on user fee could be applied to existing charges, other fees such as transfer tax, per-line indexing charge, and parcel identifier number assignment fee should be considered as well. Additional funds could be made available to finance improvements through use of a capital reserve fund, as authorized by G.S. 159-18.