Transcript Privacy Task Force

Privacy Task Force
Denver, CO
November 9, 2010
Welcome




Introduction of PTF Organizers
Opening Remarks
Introduction of Attendees
PRIA, PREP and PTF
Contact Information
Christopher Broekema
National Director Property Information Systems
[email protected]
303-801-9802
David Floyd
President SKLD Information Services, LLC
[email protected]
303-695-3896
Nancy Sotomayor
Douglas County Recording Manager
[email protected]
303-663-7644
Sherrie Swisher
Larimer County Recording Manager
[email protected]
970-498-7864
Jeff Wolff
Vice President Security Title Guarantee Co
[email protected]
970-226-1901
What is PRIA?

PRIA = Property Records Industry
Association
“PRIA is the bridge that crosses the boundary between
two interdependent segments of the American
economy. PRIA’s success depends on the mutual
commitment of business and government leaders to
achieve their common goal of keeping the nation’s
property records industry sound.”
(PRIA website www.pria.us October 2010)
PRIA’s Goal
“To provide a forum for the identification,
research, discussion, development,
drafting, and implementation of national
standards, best practices, and new
technology solutions to promote the
integrity of the public records system, the
efficiency of industry operations, and the
effectiveness of interfaces between the
two.”
How does PRIA work?





PRIA has established important alliances with various industry
partners including ALTA (American Land Title Association)
and MISMO (Mortgage Industry Standards Maintenance
Organization).
PRIA is comprised of volunteers from the public and private
sector.
Committees and sub-committees have been created and each
is co-chaired by both a business sector and government
sector representative
The committees work together toward reaching PRIA’s goal.
To make the work relevant on the local level, the PREP
program was developed.
What is PREP?


PREP = Property Records Education
Partners
PREP provides:
- A local structured forum for stakeholders of the
property records industry to meet and work together
more effectively
-
A way to share perspectives and information
between national and local industry participants
The PREP Difference

PREP Chapters are local and some states have a chapter in
each region – Colorado currently has one for the entire state.

Interested parties do not have to belong to PRIA to belong to
PREP or vice versa.

While PRIA holds 2 large yearly conferences, PREP chapters
meet more often and not always in person.

PRIA committee work typically encompasses projects/tasks
that have impact on a national level. PREP work is focused on
the local level.
From PRIA to PREP to PTF

Timeline of Events:


August 2008- IRS notifies Colorado County Clerk’s
of a Federal requirement to display SSN's on Federal Tax
Liens as presented, regardless of state and local law
September 2008- Colorado County Clerks Association
(CCCA) receives a letter from the Attorney General
strongly encouraging them to remove any online
documents displaying SSN or sensitive information while
his office considers a legislative fix


CCCA Attorney, Willis Carpenter, emails an opinion to
county clerks agreeing with the AG
Jack Arrowsmith (Douglas County Clerk and Recorder)
reaches out to the AG's Office and requests an opportunity
for clerk representatives to meet with the AG and his staff
Starting Down the Road to
PTF

September 2008 (continued)


Clerk representatives meet with the AG and staff.
Discussed are the AG's plans and intentions for
possible legislation, definitions of redaction
considerations, the clerk's processes, costs associated
with redaction, and a go forward plan that the AG
would like to utilize.
The AG indicates he would like to see a working group
involving the SOS and clerks. He asks clerk
representatives to provide names from the clerk’s
organization and specifically requests small counties
be involved.
The Road to PTF


January 2009- The CCCA President provides a
letter to the AG identifying county representation
and offering several points for consideration
in development of the Privacy Task Force
February 2009- The AG sends a letter to the
Secretary of State requesting they take the lead
in carrying out the work of the Task Force. The
AG offers to actively participate through a
representative

Six days later CCCA President receives a request from
the SOS Office, requesting a copy of the January 2009
letter from the CCCA to the AG
Still on the Road to PTF


April 2009- Douglas County Clerk emails the
SOS in regard to SB 09-283 and requests the
PTF move quickly in an effort to be ready for the
2010 legislative session
May 2009- Clerk representatives meet with
representatives from the SOS Office.


Attendees explore the recent redaction effort of the
SOS Office for UCC's as well as the direction of the
PTF.
The SOS Office announces their preference to serve
on the PTF in an advisory, rather than directive, role.
Next Stop - PTF


June 2009- The CCCA asks their
representatives in the Colorado PREP
Chapter to make a formal request for
PREP to build and facilitate the PTF
July 2009- The Colorado PREP Chapter
meets and determines they will facilitate
the start-up of the PTF
The PTF

October 2009 to present




A subcommittee of the Colorado PREP Chapter began
meeting to develop a foundation for the creation of the
formal Colorado Privacy Task Force
Redaction information from across the nation was
researched and analyzed
A synopsis of positive and negative legislative impacts
and attributes were condensed into a key points
summary
This group also identified those entities who utilize or
are impacted by the public records. And here you are!
PTF Representatives


Statement from the Attorney General’s
Office
Statement from the Secretary of
State’s Office
What’s Out There Now?


Colorado Statute or Not?
"Personal information'' means first name or first initial and last
name in combination with any one or more of the following
data elements when the data elements are not encrypted,
redacted, or secured by any other method rendering the name
or the element unreadable or unusable:

Social security number
Driver's license number or identification card number
Account number or credit or debit card number, in combination
with any required security code, access code, or password that
would permit access to a resident's financial account.

C.R.S 6-1-716


Colorado Statute or Not?

Colorado Statute or Not?

A person or entity may not





Publicly post or publicly display in any manner an individual's
social security number.
Print an individual's social security number on any card
required for the individual to access products or services
provided by the person or entity.
Require an individual to transmit his or her social security
number over the internet, unless the connection is secure or
the social security number is encrypted.
Require the use of a social security number to access an
internet web site, unless a password or unique personal
identification number or other authentication device is also
required to access the internet web site.
Print an individual's social security number on any materials
that are mailed to the individual, unless state or federal law
requires, permits, or authorizes the social security number to
be on the document to be mailed.

C.R.S.
6-1-715
Colorado Statute or Not?

A register of deeds may remove from an image or copy of an
official record placed on a register of deeds' Internet Web site
available to the general public or an Internet Web site
available to the general public used by a register of deeds to
display public records by the register of deeds, a person's
social security, employer taxpayer identification, drivers
license, state identification, passport, checking account,
savings account, credit card, debit card number, date of birth,
or personal identification (PIN) code or passwords contained
in that official record

Proposed Legislation in North Carolina
Colorado Statute or Not?

It is unlawful for a person to knowingly make
available on the internet personal information about
a law enforcement official or the official's immediate
family member, if the dissemination of the personal
information poses an imminent and serious threat to
the law enforcement official's safety or the safety of
the law enforcement official's immediate family and
the person making the information available on the
internet knows or reasonably should know of the
imminent and serious threat.

C.R.S 18-9-313
Colorado Statute or Not?

An agency may withhold access to a record if disclosure of the
record would constitute a “clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy”. To withhold a record, the agency must
show an individual has a significant privacy interest in the
information and the significant privacy interest is not
outweighed by the public interest in the disclosure. “Significant
privacy information” includes SSNs, medical history,
and financial information.

Any judgment, order or decree for real property recorded shall
only contain the last 4 digits of the individual’s SSN

Hawaii 92-F and HB3170
Colorado Statute or Not?

The custodian shall deny the right of inspection of the following
records, unless otherwise provided by law: except that any of the
following records, shall be available to the person in interest under
this subsection



Military records filed with a county clerk and recorder's office
concerning a member of the military's separation from military
service, including the form DD214 issued to a member of the military
upon separation from service. If the member of the military about
whom the record concerns is deceased, the custodian shall allow the
right of inspection to the member's parents, siblings, widow or
widower, and children.
Applications for a marriage license submitted. These records may be
inspected by immediate family members. “Immediate family member"
means a person who is related by blood, marriage, or adoption.
C.R.S 24-72-204 and 5 U.S.C. sec. 552 (b) (6)
Break Time

Coming up after the break:

Stories from the Front Line
Primary Goals Initial Group


To fully understand the role of
personally identifiable information
(PII) within the public records.
To identify the national and local
legislative trends and conditions that
relate to consumer privacy and
access to public records.
Primary Goals Initial Group

To provide guidelines and
recommendations for public policy,
including any future legislation, which
work to protect the privacy of
consumers’ Personally Identifiable
Information (PII), while preserving
access to public records and
minimizing potential impacts on
commerce.
Real World Examples

Florida – Carol Foglesong, Assistant
Comptroller, Orange County
Comptroller’s Office




Property Records Industry Association
National Association of County Recorders,
Election Officials, and Clerks
Central Florida PREP
Electronic Documents and Records
Management Professionals
Florida called it in 2002

In 2001, passed law requiring:




In the public’s interest
All index data back to at least 1990 to be
online by 7/2002
All images back to at least 1990 to be
online by 7/2006
Then 9/11/01 happened
May 2002 law changes

Certain documents too confidential to
show on publicly available internet


Death certificates, military discharges,
and court documents from juvenile,
probate, mental health, and
family/domestic relations divisions
Redact (cover up) the FL 5:

Social security numbers, bank account
numbers, credit card numbers, debit card
numbers, and charge card numbers
Costs





Put out RFP; selected firm
Had to define which numbers were to
be redacted or not (e.g., Fed ID #)
Cost per image/page = $0.0235
Total number of images reviewed =
over 34 million
Total cost = just over $800,000
Results



Total pages with one of FL 5 to be
redacted = 2.82%
Total documents with one of FL 5 to be
redacted = 6.6%
Remember: every final judgment or
order in each and every court case
recorded into land records in FL
Lessons learned




Make law that document preparer is
not to put pii onto documents which
are going to be recorded
Do not require redaction of 1st 5 digits
of SSN, leaving last 4 viewable
Find/create way to specifically fund
redaction
Redaction software doesn’t work on
paper or microfilm
Questions
Real World Examples

Texas – Jay Sibley, President and
CEO of Title Data, Inc
o
o
o
Texas Land Title Association Legislative
Committee Member
Freedom of Information Foundation of
Texas Board Member
Chair, American Land Title Association’s
Real Property Records Committee
Texas


Senate Bill 1485 was signed into Texas Law
and became effective in September 2005
This 60 word bill added the following to the
Texas Public Information Act (TPIA):

“The social security number of a living person is
exempt from the disclosure requirements of the
TPIA and a governmental body may redact a
social security number without the necessity of
requesting a decision from the Attorney General”
Real World Implications

While this bill was intended to clarify
whether and how SSNs could be
disclosed… it had the opposite effect


A county clerk inquired November 2005 as to
the effect of this bill
The attorney general rendered a decision
November 2007 stating that SSNs could not be
disclosed by a county clerk, and if disclosed he
or she could be incarcerated in the county jail
Fixing the Issue



In reaction to the attorney general’s opinion most
county clerks immediately shut down access to their
records, including land records, which nearly shut
down the title and oil-gas industries
The Attorney General abated this process in order
for the legislature to fix the problem
The new law states that a county or district clerk
may disclose a SSN in the ordinary course of
business and such disclosure is not official
misconduct nor is the clerk criminally liable
Questions
PRIA – Groundwork a Solid Foundation


Social Security Number and Privacy
Protection Act
Legislative summary
PRIA – Groundwork a Solid Foundation

PRIA Summary all State redaction laws at:
http://www.pria.us/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pa
geid=3368

Link to Standards and Publications:
http://www.pria.us/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pa
geID=3281
What’s Next?

In our review of national privacy legislation,
two primary issues surfaced:



1) What information is made available via the
internet and
2) What, if any, information should be redacted
from the public record.
This review lead to the creation of the Key
Points Summary which will be discussed at our
next meeting
Word on the Street

What’s Happening in your World?
Next Meeting
December 7, 2010
9 a.m. – 11 a.m.
Colorado Secretary of State’s Office
Contact Information
David Floyd
President SKLD Information Services
303-695-3896
[email protected]
Sherrie Swisher
Larimer County Recording Manager
970-498-7864
[email protected]