Privacy Task Force

1. Privacy Task Force Denver, CO November 9, 2010

2. Welcome • Introduction of PTF Organizers • Opening Remarks • Introduction of Attendees • PRIA, PREP and PTF

3. Contact Information Christopher Broekema National Director Property Information Systems christopher.broekema@redvision.com 303-801-9802 David Floyd PresidentSKLD Information Services, LLC dfloyd@skld.com 303-695-3896 Nancy Sotomayor Douglas County Recording Manager NSotomay@douglas.co.us 303-663-7644 Sherrie Swisher Larimer County Recording Manager SSwisher@larimer.org 970-498-7864 Jeff Wolff Vice President Security Title Guarantee Co jswolff@stgco.com 970-226-1901

4. 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)

5. 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.”

6. 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.

7. 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

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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.

11. 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

12. 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. 

13. 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

14. 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!

15. PTF Representatives • Statement from the Attorney General’s Office • Statement from the Secretary of State’s Office

16. 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

17. 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 numberon 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 numberover the internet, unless the connection is secure or the social security numberis encrypted. • Require the use of a social security numberto 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 numberon any materials that are mailed to the individual, unless state or federal law requires, permits, or authorizes the social security numberto be on the document to be mailed. • C.R.S. 6-1-715

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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)

22. Break Time • Coming up after the break: • Stories from the Front Line

23. 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.

24. 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.

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. Questions

32. Real World Examples • Texas – Jay Sibley, President and CEO of Title Data, Inc • 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

33. 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”

34. 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

35. 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

36. Questions

37. PRIA – Groundwork a Solid Foundation • Social Security Number and Privacy Protection Act • Legislative summary

38. PRIA – Groundwork a Solid Foundation • PRIA Summary all State redaction laws at:http://www.pria.us/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3368 • Link to Standards and Publications: http://www.pria.us/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageID=3281

39. 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

40. Word on the Street • What’s Happening in your World?

41. Next Meeting December 7, 2010 9 a.m. – 11 a.m. Colorado Secretary of State’s Office

42. Contact Information David Floyd President SKLD Information Services 303-695-3896 dfloyd@skld.com Sherrie Swisher Larimer County Recording Manager 970-498-7864 sswisher@larimer.org