## Facts

- WIREdata, Inc. sought electronic copies of municipal real-property assessment records to make them available to real estate professionals.
- In 2001, WIREdata submitted Wisconsin open-records requests to the Village of Sussex and other municipalities for the assessment records in electronic form.
- The municipalities obtained assessment services from independent contractor assessors who entered “raw” assessment information into a software system licensed from a third-party developer.
- The assessment data were used by municipal officials to set assessed values and were paid for with public funds, but the data were maintained within the contractors’ computer system and the licensed software environment.
- Rather than provide the requested electronic records directly, Sussex directed WIREdata to the software developer or vendor.
- The vendor told WIREdata it would have to pay a licensing fee to obtain the records in the requested format, even though the records already existed in that format within the system.
- In related requests, municipalities offered WIREdata PDF or other static outputs instead of access to, or copies of, the underlying database used to create and maintain the assessment records.
- WIREdata filed mandamus actions in circuit court to compel disclosure under Wisconsin’s Open Records Law and challenged the use of third-party licensing fees as inconsistent with statutory cost limits.
- The circuit courts reached differing results in the related cases, and the appeals were consolidated in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether municipal property-assessment records stored electronically in a contractor-managed database are “public records” subject to Wisconsin’s Open Records Law.
2. Whether a municipality complies with the Open Records Law by offering only PDF/static outputs when the records are created and kept in a database and the requester seeks access to that database form.
3. Whether a municipality may respond to an open-records request by directing the requester to a third-party vendor that demands a licensing fee beyond lawful record-reproduction costs.
4. Whether independent contractor assessors who create and keep assessment records for municipalities may be treated as “authorities” subject to mandamus under the Open Records Law.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals concluded the assessment records were public records, even though they were kept in a computerized system used by contractor assessors and built on licensed software.
- The court held the municipalities could not satisfy their obligations by limiting WIREdata to PDF/static outputs while denying access to the database form in which the records were maintained.
- The court rejected the municipalities’ attempt to shift responsibility to a software developer or vendor and ruled that routing WIREdata to a third party demanding a licensing fee was not a lawful substitute for the municipalities’ duties under the Open Records Law.
- The court determined that mandamus relief was available to compel compliance with the Open Records Law and addressed the role of the contractor assessors in the consolidated disputes.
- The court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its holdings.

## Legal Principles

- Wisconsin’s Open Records Law starts from a strong presumption of public access; refusals or restrictions must be justified by the record custodian.
- Records used to carry out governmental functions and paid for with public funds remain public records even when created, kept, or managed by independent contractors.
- An authority generally may not defeat a request for records kept in electronic form by providing only static images or print-style substitutes when the records are maintained in a database and access to that database form is feasible.
- A municipality remains the responsible “authority” for producing public records and cannot avoid compliance by directing requesters to private vendors or contractors.
- Fees and conditions imposed to obtain records must align with statutory limits tied to actual, direct reproduction costs; third-party licensing demands cannot be used to impose extra charges for access to public records.

## Conclusion

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals treated the municipalities’ computerized property-assessment records as public records and held that the municipalities could not avoid open-records duties by offering only PDF-like outputs or by redirecting WIREdata to a vendor charging licensing fees; the court ordered further proceedings to compel production consistent with those obligations.


WIREdata, Inc. v. Village of Sussex, 729 N.W.2d 757 (2007)