ERSC Meeting Minutes December 15, 1999The Electronic Records Study Commission met on Wednesday, December 15, 1999 at 1:00 p.m. pursuant to written notice fixing the place and time. The following Commission members were present or absent as indicated below: Dennis
Byrd In person Little Rock being all of the Commission members appointed in accordance with the provisions of Act 1060 of 1999. Susan Cromwell called the meeting to order. A motion was made to accept the minutes from the October 13 meeting and approval was unanimous. Next the members reviewed the November 10th minutes and a motion was made and seconded to accept the minutes with minor corrections and approval was unanimous. Ms. Cromwell next explained that the Joint Committee on Advanced Communications and Information Technology had met and requested an update on the activities of the Electronic Records Study Commission. She said that she had shared some of the items in the ERSC issues document. The Joint Committee asked how it could assist the ERSC and Susan told it that the ERSC would need its support in the future regarding any recommendations to be made. Ms. Cromwell next explained that this meeting of the ERSC was to be focused on continuing presentations from state agencies regarding specific concerns regarding FOI issues. She then invited the speakers to address the Commission in terms of concerns, suggestions, or ideas regarding changes to the FOIA as pertain to electronic records. Shelby Johnson, State Land Information Coordinator Mr. Johnson explained that he wanted to give an overview of what geospatial information systems technology could offer the state and also what challenges exist in relation to the Commission’s activities. He demonstrated how data are cross-referenced against digital maps and how that data can be queried and processed for valuable statistical information regarding property assessments, ownership, school district information, etc. He explained that as the state moves forward, more of this information will be centralized and will be more accessible to the public. Mr. Johnson pointed out that it is a challenge regarding development costs to produce and build GIS systems, but that by automating the data it becomes much more cost effective and efficient both at the local and state levels. Mr. Johnson explained that high-resolution aerial digital photography is the foundation for creating comprehensive GIS systems. He mentioned that this can be used for differentiating between different kinds of land use for tax assessment valuation and that these systems are also useful for engineering projects and floodplain mapping. He also explained that there are many issues involved in how to deal with the costs of gathering, processing, and recovering the costs of making GIS data available to the public and interested parties. Mr. Johnson outlined for the Commission the color infrared aerial photography project that his office, the Land Information Board, and other interested parties were working on. This is a project that will be doing color infrared photography of the whole state, with higher resolution in urban areas. He also explained that as datasets are organized and redundancy eliminated, the long-term plan is to make such data accessible by everyone in a standardized format on the internet access at no cost. Discussion followed regarding what custodianship over such data means and who will be responsible for owning, updating and altering the data. The point was made that the Commission might need to make recommendations for future legislation that would define clearly who owns and manages the central GIS clearinghouse data. Mr. Johnson talked about how in the future there was going to be a great need for technology experts to be involved in providing assistance in response to requests for GIS data access. A discussion also arose of the important need to provide support for equal access to cities and counties with fewer resources, and also how to charge for providing data retrieval services to the public. Jim Boardman, Department of Education Kristen Gould next introduced Jim Boardman, Assistant Director for Technology, and Dr. Bobbie Davis from the Arkansas Department of Education to speak on the topic of the Arkansas Public School Computer Network (APSCN) system and maintenance of electronic data relating to the public schools. Mr. Boardman explained that the APSCN is a network where the Department of Education collects aggregate information electronically that used to be collected on paper and forms and disks. He described how this is a fairly new networked system, having gone online a year ago, and that it is still in transition. He explained that his concern is to balance providing information to decision makers and policy makers and still protect privacy and confidentiality. The Department of Education collects individual information on every student in the system as baseline data, but it does not collect student names or address. The identity of students is not needed to do the educational research for the type of analysis and reports that the DOE does. Mr. Boardman said that he has concerns about providing statistical information regarding students on the web, but that the DOE has very little information that would be a problem being released to the public. He pointed out that even with no names involved, it is possible by the process of elimination to use statistics in ways that might pinpoint specific students in specific schools based on general data such as test results linked with cultural designations. He has concerns about making this type of information available for public access. He stressed that his department tries to protect individual identifiable data that might be derived by manipulation of the information provided. Another concern Mr. Boardman voiced was that during the transition to electronic distribution of information, the Department is dealing with so much incoming data being provided by the individual schools is that it is difficult to verify accuracy. He pointed out that as more data become available, school and teacher accountability will become easier to identify as to whether students are staying in school and whether they are learning. Mr. Boardman explained that the DOE collects student information, teacher information, and financial information at the unit record. He said that they’ll be able to do some very good education research and will be able to share information, and he wants to do this by making it available on the internet. He voiced his concern about how the information is used but explained that that is not the responsibility of his department. He pointed out that information must be made available, but that it sometimes is difficult for his department to do individual requests for special reports. Mr. Boardman also explained that his office does not decide what is to be made available to the public, but that the legal staff decides that. Discussion of State of Florida Principles Document Mac Norton passed out a list of principles regarding electronic records that was extracted from the Florida Legal Review of several years ago. The members discussed items on the list, agreed to take the list with them for further thought and review, and will discuss the list again at the next meeting. Next Meeting The next meeting was scheduled for January 12, 2000, from 1 to 4, at the Department of Education video conference room. The February meeting date was set for the 9th, with the location to be announced later. There being no other business to be transacted and upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned. Patti Hill, Secretary
|