Dear cousins, In case you receive NorCal-L or SoCal-L, you can ignore this, but if you don't, this is, I believe, important. Maybe you can help keep this information available to those of us who rely on retrieving data via computer. Thanks, Carol De Priest >X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/ >Resent-Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 23:51:50 -0600 >X-Original-Sender: [email protected] Wed May 1 23:51:48 2002 >Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 01:50:37 -0400 >From: Nan & George Wolf <[email protected]> >Subject: CA STATE BIRTH AND DEATH INDEXES MAY BE CLOSED >Sender: Nan & George Wolf <[email protected]> >Old-To: Norcal-L mail list <[email protected]>, > SOCAL-L mail list <[email protected]> >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by lists5.rootsweb.com >id g425pmM11535 >To: [email protected] >Resent-From: [email protected] >X-Mailing-List: <[email protected]> archive/latest/10525 >X-Loop: [email protected] >Resent-Sender: [email protected] >X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.3 required=5.0 >tests=SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS version=2.11 > >Hi: > This is an extra report from Iris Carter Jones, our CA Genealogical > Alliance watchdog at >Sacramento. It doesn't look good. Please send this to any CA researchers >you know. > Last year the NORCAL and SOCAL lists were a great help in getting > behind the formation of >a CA historic cemeteries commission. Now, we are hoping you can help >again by sending a SNAIL >mail letter to the addresses below. They get so much e-mail - they more >or less ignore it but >a piece of paper (lots of pieces of paper) give a definite message. > What is interesting is that this bill leaves the county indexes open so > identity theft is >still possible through county records. So why close the state >indexes? County recorders don't >have the resources to accomodate family researchers. And, having the >state indexes online has >been a godsend for us researchers. Iris also explains below that almost >all identity theft >is not done using these indexes. So, sit down and give this a read and >then get out that stamp >and envelope. > If you want to copy and paste into a letter - I would suggest the three > paragraphs - the >first of which begins "There is no indication" (Use your Find feature). > Iris has given the addresses below but in case you have a problem > finding them in this long >report here they are again: > "Consider writing to the author Senator Speier, State Capitol, Room >2032, Sacramento, CA 95814. (916) 445-05032/Fax (916)327-2186 ><[email protected]>. > "Consider writing to the members of the >Judiciary Committee: Senator Martha Escutia (Chair), Room 5080; >Senator Ray Haynes (Vice Chair), Room 2187; Senator >Dick Ackerman, Room 2032; Senator Sheila Kuehl, Room 4032; Senator >Jack O'Connell, Room 5035; Senator Steve Peace, Room 3060; Senator >Byron Sher, 2082. These too should be mailed to the State Capitol, >Room #, Sacramento, CA 95814." > >Regards, > Nan Wolf > [email protected] > >-------------Forwarded Message----------------- > >From: Iris Jones, INTERNET:[email protected] >To: Master List 3, INTERNET:[email protected] > >Date: 5/1/02 4:08 PM > >RE: Leg: Extra SB1614 > > >On Wed, 01 May 2002 16:07:44 -0700, Iris Jones <[email protected]> >wrote: > >LEGISLATIVE REPORT - EXTRA - SB1614 - MAY 1, 2002 > >In my last report we covered Senator Speier SB1614 on vital records >indexes and informed readers that the bill was scheduled to be heard >on April 23, 2002, but the bill was amended April 15th in which all >the indexes except the birth records were eliminated. The hearing on >April 23, 2002 was canceled by the author and rescheduled on April >30, 2002. Again the bill was amended on April 24, 2002. This time it >includes both birth and death record indexes. It requires that these >indexes be considered confidential and be removed from coverage under >the California Public Records Act. It requires the State and county >recorders to develop a 'noncomprehensive index' for each which will >contain some of the information included in the present indexes. These >will then be available at the offices of the county recorders for >'viewing only' by the public. But government agencies are exempt. The >next hearing is set for May 7, 2002. > >Meanwhile, the bill did not meet the scheduled cut off of April 26, >2002, the last day for policy committees to hear and report on fiscal >bills introduced in their house. But the Senator was able to get an >extension. > >I have included below the copy of the Counsel's Digest and the Bill >language, if you want to read it yourself. > >Commentary: If the researchers in California do not want to see these >important tools done away with and removed from 'Public Records' then >it is imperative that you let the Senator and the Judiciary Committee >know how you feel. > >There is no indication that these indexes contribute to identity >theft. In fact, the most recent studies show, according to First >Amendment Coalition's latest statements, that most identity thefts >occur through the literal theft by friends, relatives, fellow workers >or strangers, of wallets, purses or mail, or fraudulent address >changes. This is what I have said all along. That the 'Indexes' do >not create a threat to the theft of personal identities, but are a >marvelous tool for family historians, family health researchers, heir >finders, and estate lawyers. The loss of these indexes will be >crippling to research. > >That the 'noncomprehensive index' can be viewed at the offices of >county recorders is of little consolation. California researchers >already know that more than half our county recorders, either do not >have the manpower to facilitate the demands at the present time or >will not willing comply. We have, over the years, fought at the county >level to improve these situations, but in some cases it has prove >useless. > >This mandate will just add to the overburdened State and county >recorders, additional expenses and more work. This type of band-aid >legislation does nothing to solve the problems of identity theft, and >does punish the law abiding, voting, taxpayers, who have legitimate >uses for the indexes. Energy would be better spent encouraging the >enforcement of the present laws; furnishing our courts with the funds >needed to do their jobs and help law enforcement do the same. > >The bill if passed out of the Judiciary Committee on May 7, 2002, must >still go to another policy committee for hearing before going to the >floor of the Senate for a vote. > >Consider writing to the author Senator Speier, State Capitol, Room >2032, Sacramento, CA 95814. (916) 445-05032/Fax (916)327-2186 ><[email protected]>. Consider writing to the members of the >Judiciary Committee: Senator Martha Escutia (Chair), Room 5080; >Senator Ray Haynes (Vice Chair), Room 2187; Senator >Dick Ackerman, Room 2032; Senator Sheila Kuehl, Room 4032; Senator >Jack O'Connell, Room 5035; Senator Steve Peace, Room 3060; Senator >Byron Sher, 2082. These too should be mailed to the State Capitol, >Room #, Sacramento, CA 95814. >---------------------------- > >LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST: SB 1614, as amended, Speier. Public >records: vital statistics > Existing law requires the Director of Health Services, as the State >Registrar of Vital Statistics, to administer the registration of >births, deaths, fetal deaths, and marriages. Existing law requires >the State Registrar to arrange and permanently preserve the >certificates in a systematic manner and to prepare and maintain a >comprehensive and continuous index of all certificates registered. > Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and >local agencies to make records that are not otherwise exempt from >disclosure available to the public upon receipt of a request that >reasonably describes an identifiable record, and upon payment of fees >to cover costs. > This bill would require the comprehensive index described above, >and birth and death record indices prepared or maintained by local >registrars and county recorders, to be kept confidential, except that >these indices may be disclosed to government agencies as prescribed by >law. This bill would exempt these indices from disclosure under >the California Public Records Act. > This bill would require, on or before an unspecified date, the >State Registrar to establish separate noncomprehensive electronic >indices of all California birth and death records and make the indices >continuously, electronically available to county recorders' offices >statewide. > This bill would require the noncomprehensive indices to be >available at the State Registrar's office and in county >recorders' offices for public inspection and viewing only, by >individuals who have signed a standard form certifying, >under penalty of perjury, that the information they view will not be >used for criminal purposes. By expanding the scope of the crime of >perjury, and by increasing the duties of local officials, this bill >would impose a state-mandated local program. > The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local >agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. >Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that >reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund >to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide >and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed >$1,000,000. > This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no >reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. > With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if >the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains >costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be >made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. > Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. >State-mandated local program: yes. > >THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: > > SECTION 1. Section 102230 of the Health and Safety Code is amended >to read: 102230. (a) (1) The State Registrar shall arrange and >permanently preserve the certificates in a systematic manner and shall >prepare and maintain a comprehensive and continuous index of all >certificates registered. (2) The birth and death record indices >prepared pursuant to paragraph (1), and all birth and death record >indices prepared or maintained by local registrars and county >recorders, shall be kept confidential and shall be exempt from >disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 >(commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the >Government Code). > (3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the release of the >information contained in comprehensive birth and death >indices to government agencies as prescribed by law. > (b) In addition to the indices prepared pursuant to subdivision >(a), the State Registrar shall prepare separate noncomprehensive >electronic indices of all California birth and death records that >shall be made available for public inspection pursuant to Section >102231. > SEC. 2. Section 102231 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to >read: > 102231. (a) On or before ____, the State Registrar shall establish >separate noncomprehensive electronic indices >of all California birth and death records and make the indices >continuously, electronically available to county >recorders' offices statewide. Notwithstanding the California Public >Records Act (Chapter 3.5 >(commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the >Government Code), no part of these indices may >be released to any individual or entity except as authorized by this >section or Section 102230. > (b) The separate noncomprehensive electronic indices prepared >pursuant to this section shall be available at the State Registrar's >office and in county recorders' offices for public inspection only and >shall be subject to the following restrictions: > (1) Availability to public inspection shall be limited to viewing >only. > (2) An individual who wishes to inspect the indices shall sign a >standard form, as described in subdivision (d), certifying under >penalty of perjury that the information he or she views will not be >used for criminal purposes. > (c) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, including the >California Public Records Act, the separate noncomprehensive >electronic indices prepared pursuant to this section shall be the only >birth and death record indices open to public inspection or otherwise >available to the public. > (d) The State Registrar shall develop a standard form to be signed >by persons who wish to inspect the indices pursuant to paragraph (2) >of subdivision (b). > (e) For purposes of this section, "noncomprehensive index" means an >index that contains some of the information contained in the index >described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 102230. >The State Registrar shall determine the information from birth and >death records that shall be included in the noncomprehensive index >based on the lawful uses that may be made of the noncomprehensive >index and the privacy needs of individuals whose records are included >in the index. > SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to >Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain >costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district >because in that regard this act creates a new crime or infraction, >eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime >or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government >Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of >Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. > However, notwithstanding Section 17610 of the Government Code, if >the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains >other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies >and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 >(commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the >Government Code. If the statewide cost of the claim for reimbursement >does not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000), reimbursement shall >be made from the State Mandates Claims Fund. > >-- >Iris Carter Jones >CSGA Legislative Coordinator > >----------------------- Internet Header -------------------------------- >==== SOCAL Mailing List ==== >Please use relevant subject lines. Carol De Priest <mailto:[email protected]> <http://www.azstarnet.com/~depriest/>