ERSC Meeting Minutes May 19, 2000The meeting of the Electronic Records Study Commission was held in Little Rock at the Newspaper Center, 411 Victory at 10:00 a.m. pursuant to written notice fixing the place and time. The meeting was recorded by audiocassette tape. The following Commission members were present or absent as indicated below: Name of Commissioner / Appeared Susan
Cromwell - In Person The meeting was called to order by Susan Cromwell and the Secretary, Patti Hill, called the roll. Following is the agenda and a summary of that meeting. AGENDA
Susan Cromwell thanked Dennis Schick with the Arkansas Press Association for hosting the meeting and introduced one new member, Doug Elkins, who was appointed by the Director of DIS, Don Melton, to replace Julie Cullen to serve as co-chair. Mark Hayes with the Municipal League was introduced as an interested party. Patti Hill went over the corrections that had been recommended last month for the March Minutes. She reported that the tapes were not in a useable condition and she knew of no other avenues to search for an accurate record. Susan Cromwell asked for a motion on what to do about the March Minutes. Carol Griffee recommended the March Minutes be tabled. John Watkins made a substitute motion to accept the Minutes as a reconstructed version of what occurred, that they not be a part of the permanent record of the Commission -- only for perusal purposes. Stewart Nelson seconded that motion. Susan Cromwell asked for further discussion or exceptions. Carol Griffee voiced her exception. Susan Cromwell repeated the motion of John Watkins to label the March Minutes as follows: “Reconstructed Minutes Not to Be Considered an Official Record of Proceeding of March 17th Meeting.” She asked if there was any further discussion and then for a vote. All those in favor? All Ayes save Carol Griffee. Carol Griffee went on record as opposed. Susan Cromwell led the discussion back to the agenda, recognizing Diann Duty’s participation and support from the Attorney General’s Office and proposed that this group extend a sincere thank you to the Attorney General and request that Office’s continued support from Diann for the life of this Commission. Stewart Nelson so moved and the vote was unanimous. Susan Cromwell submitted the April Minutes for inspection and approval. After a long and labored discussion by the Commission members, John Watkins suggested that if a complete transcription of the meeting is available, the minutes should be about a page long and report who was present, who was not, what the agenda was, and if votes were made on something they should be reflected. Jeff Porter suggested the transcript be posted on the web site. Kristen Gould said she spotted one minor typo at the top of page six, top line, “countess” should be “counties”. Dennis Byrd made a motion that the transcript, if available, become part of the permanent record for each meeting and the minutes will be but a brief version of what occurred including votes, issues, attendance, consensus, and other things deemed important or appropriate by the person taking those minutes. Kristen Gould seconded the motion. Susan Cromwell asked for a vote. All said aye. Dennis Byrd made a motion to approve the April 18th Minutes. Mac Norton seconded the motion. Susan Cromwell asked for a vote. All Ayes save Carol Griffee, who opposed. Susan Cromwell directed the discussion toward the “issues” document and discussion followed. The group had previously agreed to make every effort to identify whether the issues that had previously been stated have been addressed through our fact-finding, discussions, and creation of principles. Using all of these as input, the group will begin to construct a process for making recommendations from those bodies of work. Stewart Nelson raised the issue of the importance of having certain standards for data storage and retrieval that could be part of the ERSC recommendation. John Watkins commented about the discussion regarding Shared Technical Architecture that he had heard at the Information Network of Arkansas Board Meeting and concurred that standards should be used by all. Carol Griffee asked whether it was within DIS enabling legislation to require such standards of cities and counties. Susan Cromwell stated that while Act 914 does indicate that standards should be developed and used by state agencies, there is no requirement that they be adopted by others. The members agreed it would be important to address this in their recommendations. A short five minute break was taken and the meeting resumed at 12:30 p.m. Susan Cromwell introduced Melanie Bayne from DIS, the Office of Information Technology. Ms. Bayne proceeded to present a short video seminar on the subject of open architecture of data exchange on a State level. The seminar was not recorded. Following the seminar, guests were asked for their input. Dennis Schick, Arkansas Press Association, spoke briefly about that day’s newspaper articles involving FOI. He then introduced Milton Scott of the Farm Bureau, who spoke briefly about his long time experience submitting bills to the Legislature. Susan Cromwell then brought the meeting back to order and handed out articles regarding privacy in the internet age to the members for their perusal. She then requested attention be directed to making recommendations on the issues and principles documents. No motions were made and no votes were taken on these documents. Stewart Nelson next drew the discussion back to the technology of encryption. Upon discussion by the members on this and other questions on the issues document, it was resolved to add two principles: one on encryption and one on time limits for responding to FOI requests made electronically. No motions were made nor votes taken. John Watkins dissuaded the group from trying to vote to consensus on every matter discussed, given that “the only real vote that matters is going to be the one that is taken last on the product recommendation of issues.” It was the finding of the Commission the FOI doesn’t define the word “custodian” and that a definition should be addressed by this Commission. In-depth discussion followed. The term “service provider” was also discussed as needing a definition distinguishing its role as data warehouse or storage provider, not custodian It was also discussed that the Commission should go back and check the Federal Law to see how it phrased the requirements that requests are made with a certain level of specificity and that agencies publish specific materials on the web . Susan Cromwell summed up by pointing out there clearly is a need for a work assignment before the next meeting regarding definitions of record and electronic records that deal with the custodian issue. She also suggested that a definition for time limits regarding response to FOI requests should be defined. The June meeting was discussed and set for Wednesday, June 14th from 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. including a working lunch. There being no further business to be transacted and upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. |