The Virginia Watchdog

HERE'S HOW HB 2426 GOT GUTTED IN THE VIRGINIA SENATE IN 2003

It was disgusting that the one bill which started out with some meat in it to protect our records in the Clerks of Circuit Courts offices was gutted by our Virginia Senate because special interests won out!

Here's how it happened....I was there for every committee meeting and taped every one.

When HB 2426 first started out in the VA House of Delegates, it was put in the House's General Laws committee chaired by Del John Reid of Henrico who then steered it into the FOIA sub-committee. The meeting for that sub-committee was at 7 AM on Jan. 28th, 2003 and the only two speaking for the bill were Del. Sam Nixon one of the two co-chief patrons and Betty "BJ" Ostergren, founder of The Virginia Watchdog coalition.

Speaking against the bill in the sub-committee hearing were the Virginia Coalition for Open Gov't (Forrest G. "Frosty" Landon), the Virginia Press Association's lobbyist, and a representative from American Cadastre (AMCAD) to name just three.

The bill passed out of sub-committee and was then heard before the FULL committee at 8:30 that same morning. Speaking AGAINST the bill were Chesterfield Circuit Court Clerk Judy Worthington, Henrico Circuit Court Clerk Yvonne Smith, Richmond City Clerk Bevill Dean, State Corporation Commission Clerk Joel Peck, the Virginia Press Association lobbyist, the Virginia Association of Broadcasters, VA Coalition for Open Gov't's Frosty Landon, and the VA Association of Realtors representative. They all want your records/lives on the internet with your personal information on them. They were all against the bill. It's all on tape!

So then bill came up for the House vote and passed amended only with language that wouldn't interfere with "Postings of historical, genealogical, interpretive, or educational documents and information about historic persons and events." The vote was 68-29 (two were absent and 1 abstained).

When the bill got to the Senate, it was then assigned to the Senate's General Laws committee which is headed by Sen. Stosch of Henrico who then dumped HB 2426 into the "FOIA sub-committee" chaired by Sen. Edward Houck who represents Culpeper, Louisa, Madison, Orange, part of Spotsylvania, and part of Fredericksburg City. He then got two committees together which are comprised of himself and Sens.Bill Bolling, Jay O'Brien of northern VA, Frank Wagner of VA Beach, and Leslie Byrne of northern VA.

AND here's how it all played out in the subcommittee: First Sens. Byrne and Houck wanted to sink the bill and get it into Del Devolites sub-committee where it could be studied to death for the next two years or so and, in the mean time, more records could be put online by the various clerks and your personal information would be put in jeopardy. When that motion failed, the subcommittee heard from the three people who spoke in favor of the bill - Del. Sam Nixon, Betty "BJ" Ostergren, and Robert Stolle of the Richmond Tech Council.

Then the long line of lobbyists, etc. against the bill came forward: Speaking against the bill were: Craig Merritt representing the Virginia Press Association; Fairfax Circuit Court Clerk John Frey; Alan Albert - highly paid lobbyist with Troutman Sanders law firm representing the Clerks' Association; Henrico Circuit Court Clerk Yvonne Smith; State Corporation Commission Clerk Joel Peck; Doug Gray of the VA Association of Realtors; a man representing title examiners; a man from the VA State Bar Assn. (last name Arrington); Guy Rolling from American Cadastre (AM CAD); Mark Singer (Association of Surveyors); a real estate attorney; AND Frosty Landon of the VA Coalition of Open Gov't (whose membership includes almost every newspaper in the state and TV/radio stations, too!

Now you know why you didn't see any decent coverage of this bill as it traveled through the House and Senate and when you did, it was often misleading (like the two stories in the Richmond Times Dispatch last week by Alan Cooper) and kept referring to the records as "Land Records" or "Real estate records" - two terms which the casual reader would never understand to mean their final divorce decree, their marriage licenses, their financing statements, their name change documents, wills, list of heirs, inventories of estates, judgments, liens, and their own Deeds and Deeds of Trust, etc. The first two paragraphs of his story said, "Personal information such as Social Security numbers would not be available on openly accessible Virginia court Web sites as a result of legislation adopted by the General Assembly this week." That is true.

His second paragraph says, "However, some records could become available under a fee-based subscription system to be developed..." Some records? SOME????? Where has he been? ALL THE RECORDS WOULD BECOME AVAILABLE! That was the amendment - that if the site was a "secure" site -(which won't protect our records) then the Clerks would not have to remove the personal info out of the records named in the first paragraph of HB 2426 like SS#s, DOBs, etc. But Cooper's story says "SOME records" could become available.... But the RTD is a member of the Virginia Press Assoc. and the VA Coalition for Open Gov't!

Anyway, after all the people opposed got to speak, then Sen. O'Brien read out his amendment which was if the site was restricted access meaning you had to sign up, then the info could stay in the records.....The committee recessed and met the next day. The only good idea was Sen Bolling's who suggested in the form of a motion which was not seconded to put a moratorium on the Clerks. When the motion failed then the vote was taken and all voted for the amendment except Byrne (I'll cover her tomorrow) who voted no. But she wanted it studied some more....

The bill then went to he full committee and they voted for the gutted version. Byrne again voted against it (she wanted it "studied" remember) and then onto the Senate Floor where it was voted on and passed in its gutted/worthless version 36 - 3 (not voting was Sen.K.G. Miller who represents Rockingham County whose records are for sale through American Cadastre (AMCAD) but the good folks in Rockingham don't even know it - yet!)

The bill then traveled back to the House and they accepted the gutting/trashing of the bill and that's the rest of the story. One good bill gutted because the newspapers want your life online. And so do the Clerks! Not one Clerk told the committees they were FOR HB 2426! The Clerks' mouth piece was a highly paid lobbyist who said they were against the bill.

HERE'S HOW HB 2426 STARTED OUT (the worthwhile version)....

2.2-3808.2. Posting certain information on the Internet; prohibitions.

A. Beginning July 1, 2003, no state agency or court clerk shall post on a state agency or court-controlled website any document that contains the following information: (i) an actual signature; (ii) a social security number; (iii) a date of birth identified with a particular person; (iv) the maiden name of a person's parent so as to be identified with a particular person; (v) any financial account number or numbers; or (vi) the name and age of any minor child.

B. Every agency and every court clerk that posts any document on a state agency or court-controlled website may require that any party who files documents in any form with such agency or clerk provide, in addition to the original document, a redacted copy of such documents that excises the information prohibited by subsection A. Failure to provide such redacted copy shall relieve the agency or court clerk of any liability or responsibility in the event that such information is posted on a state agency or court-controlled website.

Each such agency and clerk shall post notice that (I) includes a list of the documents routinely posted on its website, (ii) the information listed in subsection A shall be redacted from such documents, and (iii) such documents are for informational purposes only. Such notice shall indicate the location of the original document.

C. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit access to any original document as provided by law.

HERE'S HOW IT ENDED UP (THE WORTHLESS/GUTTED VERSION - read paragraph D1).....

2.2-3808.2. Posting certain information on the Internet; prohibitions.

A. Beginning January 1, 2004, no court clerk shall post on a court-controlled website any document that contains the following information: (i) an actual signature; (ii) a social security number; (iii) a date of birth identified with a particular person; (iv) the maiden name of a person's parent so as to be identified with a particular person; (v) any financial account number or numbers; or (vi) the name and age of any minor child.

B. Each such clerk shall post notice that includes a list of the documents routinely posted on its website.

C. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit access to any original document as provided by law.

D. This section shall not apply to the following:

1. Providing remote access to any document by means of a network or system that is certified by the Department of Technology Planning to be secure and to provide for restricted access pursuant to security standards developed in consultation with the circuit court clerks, the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court, the Compensation Board, interested citizens, and users of land and other court records. Such standards shall include, but not be limited to, a requirement, as a precondition for access, for registration by users in person or by means of a notarized or otherwise sworn application that establishes the prospective user's identity; purpose of access, business or residence address, and citizenship status;

2. Postings related to legitimate law-enforcement purposes;

3. Postings of historical, genealogical, interpretive, or educational documents and information about historic persons and events; and

4. Postings of instruments and records filed or recorded prior to 1902.

That the provisions of this act shall expire on July 1, 2005.

(NOTE: the bolded lettering in paragraph D 1 represents the floor amendments Sen. Bolling got passed)

The bill will protect nothing now! The only way the records will be protected is to keep them in the courthouse and off the internet... There is no such thing as a "secure" website!

But the special interests won out so everytime you pick up your newspaper, just remember they went against you - and your personal information! While the Devolites subcommittee "studies" it, more records will go online and more of your personal info will, too!

Thank the media and your Clerk because they make up the three major groups opposing the bill: The Virginia Press Assoc., The VA Coalition for Open Gov't, and the Clerk's Association!

Just follow the money!

Note: Senator Stosch may have a daughter and son-in-law named Karen S. Watson and Gary Watson of Wyndham who have their SS#s on a Deed of Trust in Henrico Circuit Court Clerk's office. That Deed of Trust - the signature page and the first page was given to Sen. Stosch, but apparently he didn't care that Karen and Gary's SS#s would appear on the internet! A packet was given to each Senator on the full committee and some packets contained their own personal info like Sen Martin's DOT complete with his and wife's SS#s and Sen. Ben Lambert's SS# on tax lien documents and a DOT with his and his wife's SS#s on it. Those three people got info that was collected personally from the local Clerk's offices and was an attempt to show them they would have their own info - or their family's - put online if the bill wasn't passed in its UN-GUTTED form! They didn't care because they never made a motion to put the bill back in its un-gutted form!)

RETURN TO THE VIRGINIA WATCHDOG HOME PAGE