SD40 - Current Statutes Governing Information Policy in Virginia

  • Published: 1995
  • Author: Council on Information Management
  • Enabling Authority: Senate Joint Resolution 238 (Regular Session, 1993)

Executive Summary:
Information policy clearly constitutes an emerging challenge for public officials in Virginia in the·1990s. Although state and local governments have always recognized their role in managing and providing access to public records, the advent and increasing use of computers and other advanced information technologies have increased the complexity of this task and have revealed ways in which the Commonwealth's information policies can sometimes conflict.

Over the past few years, a number of issues have been raised concerning access to government information, preservation of electronic records, privacy and intellectual property which may call into question the efficacy of Virginia information laws in the electronic age. Because new technology is putting considerable pressure on the laws that were passed to regulate government information policy when government information was recorded primarily on paper, there may be a need to amend those laws in order to make certain that the policies represented in those laws are not lost as that information becomes electronic.

Senate Joint Resolution 238 was adopted by the General Assembly in January 1993. This resolution called for a study to determine whether current law ensures public access to government information, protects the rights of the individual to control information about himself, promotes the accuracy and integrity of public records and protects the taxpayer's investment in collecting, developing, storing .and maintaining public records.

To ensure a thorough discussion of the issues, the Council on Information Management ("Council") formed a committee of policy experts. Serving on the committee were:

Robert D. Harris, Chair, Council on Information Management
Rodney A. Smolla, The Institute of Bill of Rights Law
John Westrick, Office of the Attorney General
Charles C. Livingston, Department of Information Technology
Marie B. Allen, National Archives
Jean Ann Fox, Virginia Citizens Consumer Council

The committee was assisted by a member from each of the Council's advisory committees, representing the technology community in state and local governments:

Dr. Franklin E. Robeson, The College of William and Mary, Education Advisory Committee
Jacqueline M. Ennis, Department of MHMR/SAS, Agency Advisory Committee
H. Bishop Dansby, GIS Law, Advisory Committee on Mapping, Surveying, and Land Information Systems
Robert Yorks, Local Government Advisory Committee

A second group of individuals was formed to provide specific policy assistance in the areas of copyright, privacy, access and public records:

J. T. Westermeier, Fenwick & West
David H. Flaherty, Woodrow Wilson Int'l. Center for Scholars
Edward Jones, The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, Virginia)
A. W. Quillian, Department of Motor Vehicles
Louis Manarin, Library of Virginia

The committee held a series of meetings at which individuals and representatives of organizations who had expressed interest in this topic attended and were given an opportunity to express their concerns and recommendations.

The Council has concluded that the tension between the Commonwealth's current policies cannot be completely eliminated but rather calls for a balancing of objectives. The Council believes that many of these tensions can be addressed administratively or with relatively minor statutory changes. The Council recommends that compliance with minimum requirements as well as full attainment of the Commonwealth's policies regarding access, privacy, and records preservation can best be addressed in a programmatic fashion through ongoing development of guidance that relates compliance with these laws to the evolving technology and overall management of information technology planning and acquisition. Protecting the taxpayer's investment in collecting and maintaining government databases and protecting the citizen's ability to control information about himself cannot be fully accomplished within the current statutory framework and will present significant policy issues that the General Assembly may wish to address.