The minutes of the January 25, 2002 meeting were approved as written. The February 22, 2002 minutes were amended by removing The Computer Usage Policy for Judicial Officers paragraph and was approved as amended..

Court Request to Remove the Parties' Address from CLJ Printed Docket Report

Judge Stilz does not want to remove the address from the printed report. He indicated that he uses the address in court. Ms. Kuriyama reported that this is a report developed for the benefit of the court that compiles information from the person database, clerk's docket, and hearing information. Judge Heller indicated that the report also provides a number of personal identifiers for the parties. The group agreed to defer any decision until the next meeting when a representative from the requesting court can attend to present their position.

Labor and Industry Crime Victims Compensation Program Request

The subcommittee reviewed the request for the Case Obligation Status (COS) screen. They looked at the additional access that would be granted, the risk, and the need for this access. A motion to grant level 25 access passed.

GR-22 Proposed Amendments

Mr. Weiss presented the WSBA proposed amendments to GR22. Mr. Weiss pointed out the substantive division of the retirement plan is set forth in the decree but sometimes supplement orders are required by the plan administrator. These supplemental orders often contain detailed retirement account information and social security numbers. This order is part of the public record. He is proposing treating this type of order as a sealed financial source document. He added a definition of "retirement plan order" to the definitions section and modified the sealed financial source documents to include retirement plan orders. Section (d) is modified. The comment to section (d)(3) has additional language. Sanction language has been added to section (e). Judge Ramerman indicated that King County is looking at adding guardianships to GR22 by local rule. Many of the sensitive information and documents are part of guardianship files. Ms. Kuriyama pointed out that the JIS Committee had also discussed adding anti-harassment cases to GR22. Judge Ramerman offered to bring additional proposed amendments to GR22 that adds guardianship and anti-harassment cases. Mr. Weiss suggested adding these types of cases to the family law case definition. Ms. Miner commented that there might be some additional documents that need to be looked at. Mr. Thompson indicated that the credit community may have problems with sealing the retirement plan orders. Judge Wynne pointed out that the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decree would have enough information for the commercial community. Ms. Miner asked if this was a pattern form. Mr. Weiss indicated that it cannot be a pattern form because the different retirement plans require different information. Judge Ramerman suggested that the subcommittee members review the proposed amendments and discuss this at our next meeting.

Proposed Comprehensive Court Rule

• Expand workgroup

The group discussed whether the rule was developed enough to invite other interested groups to the meeting. Ms. Miner suggested adding a CLJ court administrator and a court of appeals administrator. The subcommittee decided that the rule is not developed enough to formally invite other groups to the discussion.

• Definition of a Case Record and Computer Database Records

Judge Ramerman presented 2 approaches to defining a case record. One is to take a very broad definition and exclude items and the other is to take a narrow approach and add the documents/records. He indicated his concern with the broad definition because it is easy to not think of certain types of records. Judge Wynne suggested the NCSC model rule definition. After he read the definition he indicated that definition was even broader than the one we started with.

Ms. Miner suggested that the group look at the NCSC bulk distribution and compiled report section. Judge Stilz raised the question of whether we should care about compiled reports. However, he was concerned that we do not certify accuracy of the reports. Judge Heller was concerned about the release of compiled reports. He was concerned that old misdemeanors should be removed. Judge Stilz pointed out the public already can put together compiled information-it just takes longer. Judge Wynne suggested that residential address not be released and only mailing address. Mr. Liles indicated the credit reporters need the address to verify the person. Ms. Miner indicated the WSP has a fingerprint based criminal history that is available to the public. Mr. Thompson asked why can't the courts provide compiled reports. There is a public need for the information. Judge Stilz pointed out that the court records are not fingerprint based. Judge Ramerman said that the committee should look at the release of address realistically and see what address information is currently available. Mr. Liles indicated the WSP provides the address, social security number, and personal identifiers. Judge Heller commented that the courts will not release the social security number. Judge Heller asked why someone with a 5 mph over the speed limit should loose their address privacy. Judge Ramerman pointed out that address can protect people by showing that it was someone else. Mr. Weiss was concerned that by flagging DV and anti-harassment addresses people might abuse the system by claiming to fall into this category.

Ms. Miner suggested separating the provisions dealing with compiled reports from the commercial purpose public records prohibition. Mr. Backus pointed out this is our contact list prohibition. Mr. Thompson indicated the Department of Revenue and the County Assessors provide lists.

The subcommittee asked the AOC staff to present a demonstration at the next meeting on what is available on public access.

The group discussed having a meeting prior to the May 24^th meeting. Judge Ramerman suggested a change in the structure of how this is being processed. Noon time telephone conference calls were suggested with the discussion being limited to only certain agenda topics. The first telephone conference call should establish the list of things that need to be done, such as definition of case records, address, compiled reports, contact lists, replacement of JIS Data Dissemination Policy.

The next meeting will be Friday, May 24, 2002 from 9:00 AM to approximately 10:30 AM (prior to the JIS Committee meeting).