Livescan fingerprint system may get wider use

A technology that has significantly reduced the waiting period for teachers needing background checks may be expanded for use by cities, counties and other government agencies.

Legislators are exploring the possibility of utilizing the Livescan fingerprinting system, which electronically scans fingerprints for immediate processing, throughout state and local government in an effort to boost security and, more important for state leaders, protect children from potential predators.

Using Livescan eliminates the need for people to blot their fingers in ink and press their print on a card, which is then mailed to the Bureau of Criminal Identification (BCI).

Livescan is being used by the state Office of Education and by some school districts, at their own expense, after the wait to run a background check on new teachers stretched to four to five months earlier this year. Schools as a result were forced to employ teachers who had not been cleared, which is a requirement for final certification.

"Waiting a short time is understandable," Rep. Brad Dee, R-Washington Terrace, said during a Political Subdivisions Interim Committee meeting Wednesday. "But waiting six months when these people are working with our most vulnerable population really concerns me."

Criminal checks are backlogged at the state because requests have increased dramatically since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. There has also been a continued rise in concealed weapon permit applications combined with generally longer waits at the federal level, said BCI Chief Ed McConkie.

Livescan, however, can slice a lot of those wait times because it eliminates the need to mail the fingerprint cards and scan them into computers.

That comes at a price: $10,000 each and $2,500 in annual maintenance and operational costs. McConkie said demand is driving those prices down.

Whether those costs would have to be covered by local governments (school districts had to cover the costs for their machines) or funded at the state level would probably not be decided until next year's general session.

"We have a public-good responsibility, a safety responsibility, and a fiduciary responsibility," Wallace said. "The real question here is where Utah is putting its priorities, and whether we are putting our resources in the right place."

---

E-mail: jloftin@desnews.com