JIS Data Dissemination Committee

September 30, 2011

Judge Wynne called the meeting to order and the following items of business were discussed.

1. The Minutes of May 20, 2011, were approved as written.

2. United States District Court Request for Fee-Waived JIS-Link Access

The Committee discussed the written request of the United States District Court (Western Washington) for fee-waived JIS-Link access. Mr. McCool, the Administrator for that court, stated that the access would be for the district court judges, the bankruptcy court judges, their law clerks and other members of the judges’ chambers.

It was moved, seconded and passed that fee-waived JIS-Link access will be provided to the United States District Court (Western Washington) (hereinafter referred to as the USDC) judges, including the bankruptcy court judges, and the individuals in the judges’ chambers, for use related to the business of the court, that the security level for the USDC will be level 20, and the USDC will be required to enter into an Agreement with the AOC governing the permissible use of the JIS link information which will include requiring the members of the judges’ chambers with access to the JIS to sign annual confidentiality agreements similar in form to those signed by state court employees.

Further Action: Staff will prepare an Agreement for JIS access by the USDC on the terms and conditions authorized by the JISC Data Dissemination Committee.

3. Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) Request for Expanded Access to JIS-Link

The Committee discussed the request of the WSBA for expanded access to the JIS-Link. Ms. Temple, who serves as a disciplinary counsel for the WSBA, explained that WSBA investigators would like JIS information on attorneys who are the subjects of grievance investigations, on applicants for admission to the bar, and on persons who file grievances. When asked why information was needed on grievants, Ms. Temple explained that investigators sometimes meet with grievants at grievants’ homes, and it would increase investigator safety to know more about the grievant.

It was moved, seconded and passed that the WSBA be provided with security level 20 access for WSBA investigators and the WSBA system administrator for use solely in disciplinary and bar admission investigations. WSBA employees will be required to sign a confidentiality agreement annually, in a form similar to the agreement signed by court employees.

Further Action: Staff will prepare an Agreement on the terms and conditions authorized by the Data Dissemination Committee for signature by the WSBA.

4. Information Technology Governance (ITG) Request 90 –Password Protection for the Attorney’s Search Feature on the Washington Courts Website

The committee was asked to be the ITG endorser of this request. At the last committee meeting, the committee asked to be provided with more information about the request from the requestor, attorney Kevin Tarvin. Mr. Tarvin responded with a written statement to the committee that although the website is very useful for attorneys, it is not necessary for the public to have access to an attorney’s court schedule.

It was noted that the website attorney’s search feature has been available for several years, that hundreds of people have e-mail subscriptions to the feature, and this is the first complaint AOC has received about this feature.

There was no motion to have the committee endorse this request to move forward in the ITG process. It was suggested that Mr. Tarvin be told that if a group of attorneys (such as the WSBA or some other bar group) expresses the need to have the feature be password-protected, or if there is evidence of an actual problem caused by the website, that the committee would be willing to review this issue again.

Further Action: Staff will communicate the committee’s decision and suggestions to Mr. Tarvin.

5. Defendant Case History (DCH) Screen

Ms. Miner asked the committee to discuss the JISC Data Dissemination Policy (DD Policy) provisions regarding the dissemination of the DCH screen. Under the DD Policy, the screen is not accessible because it is a compiled record. The DD Policy does allow the subject of a compiled record to obtain a copy of that record from the court. The subject may also designate a representative to be given a copy of the DCH screen. Ms. Miner suggested that it may be time to change the policy so that the subject of the record is not allowed to obtain a copy of this screen. One of the reasons that Ms. Miner is raising this issue is because the DCH which the subject is given is the “court view” of the screen, which will include information on the existence of a sealed juvenile case if the subject has such a case, even though RCW 13.50.050 (14) limits who can be told about the existence of a sealed juvenile case.

The following comments were made during discussion on this issue:

• RCW 13.50.050 (14) is not violated by including information on a sealed juvenile case on a DCH given to the subject or the subject’s designee.
• Consider amending the DD Policy so that only the subject, but not a designee, can be given a copy of the DCH.
• As a matter of fair information practices, the subject of a record should be able to obtain a copy of his or her DCH screen.
• Consider creating a new view of the DCH screen for the court to give to the subject of the record or his/her designee which does not include sealed juvenile case information.
• If a new view of the DCH screen is created to give to subjects, make sure the clerk does not need to log-out of JIS and log-in as another type of user to print out a copy of this new screen. Clerks do not have time to do this.
• Defendants need a copy of their DCH because they are required to take a copy to their substance abuse evaluations.
• The written release that the subject of a record signs to allow a designee to obtain a copy of the subject’s DCH screen should include a statement that the DCH may contain confidential information.
• There are many reasons why a person may need to designate another person to obtain a copy of a DCH screen; for example, the subject of the record may be living/working/stationed out of the area, or be incarcerated, or have disability access issues.

Judge Wynne appointed a subcommittee to discuss this issue and bring a recommendation back to the committee: Ms. Miner, Judge Rosen or his designee, and Mr. Holmes.

Further Action: Staff will set a teleconference meeting of the subcommittee.