The minutes of the November 30, 2001 meeting were approved as written.

Seattle Times Request for Modifications to Standard Contract Language

The Seattle Times wants to subscribe to obtain the public indexes, but wants changes to the standard contract provisions on audit requirements. The committee agreed that the changes are acceptable subject to the approval of the full JIS Committee.

Proposed Comprehensive Court Rule

The committee and guests discussed the draft court rule on Public Access to Court Records.

It was agreed that section 1-Purpose and section 2 General Policy should be combined into one paragraph with the policy statement being the first line. Numerous revisions were proposed and language for this section was agreed upon.

Section 3 was changed to Scope. The statement "files created or maintained by the courts" was removed. Other revisions were suggested and language for this section was agreed upon.

The group discussed various proposed definitions for record and case record. Questions were asked on how these terms were being used in the rule. It was suggested that definition should use the state archivist definition of record. No specific language was agreed upon.

The definition of case record was discussed. Concern was raised that judicial notes and working papers should not be included. The group agreed to add language that specifically excluded data maintained by or for a judge pertaining to a particular case or party such as personal notes, memoranda, drafts or other working papers.

It was agreed that the restricted personal identifier section should use the word "person's" instead of the word "parties".

The financial source definition was revised to add "include but is not limited to documents such as".

Ms. Woods brought copies of ALJR9 and asked if this rule was going to supercede ALJR9. She indicated the courts of limited jurisdiction like this rule and wanted the provisions included. The group discussed the different practices in the various superior courts. The question was raised about what rules were being superceded by this rule. Also, the question about the JIS Data Dissemination Policy being superceded was raised. Judge Grosse indicated this committee was charged with writing a comprehensive rule that covered access to court records. Judge Ramerman asked for a general outline of the rule to make it easier to work on the overview of the rule. The outline should include a list of the superceded items in the current policy. Judge Grosse suggested that the draft rule should be completed by June so it can be sent to the Supreme Court Rules Committee.

Judge Grosse indicated that he could not attend the March 29, 2002 meeting. He asked Judge Ramerman to chair that meeting.

Action items:

• Prepare agenda for next meeting for Judge Grosse's review next week.-AOC staff
• Prepare an outline of the rule and gather rules and other materials for Judge Ramerman's review for the next meeting. Include a list of open items and issues.-AOC staff

The next meeting will be Friday, March 29, 2002 from 9:00 AM to approximately 10:30 AM (prior to the JIS Committee meeting).