Joan: You and your society have certainly done an excellent job of getting our point across to significant legislators who hopefully can persuade their colleagues to agree with our position from a genealogical perspective. Congratulations on a fine report and we will continue to keep our fingers crossed. Ken > Hello Everyone > > Time for an update on the Assembly Bill we all love to hate! (A-1390, > the vital records access legislation) However, this time the news is > good! Please forward this message to other lists, as you did with our > original emails on this issue. > > On Tuesday, 3/21/06, Assemblywoman Joan Quigley met with two > representatives from GSNJ and one from the Advocates for NJ History. > GSNJ was represented by Barbara Babcock and me, Joan Lowry. (Barbara is > the GSNJ member who got the whole meeting ball rolling. Thank you > Barbara for all your help!) The representative for the Advocates was > their lobbyist (yes, a real live lobbyist!), Judy Shaw. > > The meeting went exceptionally well and I was very glad to have these > two more politically experienced hands on board for the meeting. > Assemblywoman Quigley was very pleasant and more than willing to > entertain our suggestions. I felt that she was open and interested and > that she was upfront with us. > > She readily agreed that the years we suggested remain readily accessible > (80 years for births, 50 for marriages and 40 for deaths) were more than > reasonable. She seemed to suggest that adding in language that states > that allows for informational or non-certified copies within those > guidelines would be no problem. She also said that she had no problem > with simply deleting the section that said no sharing or disclosing the > information. > > In addition, we discussed the possibility of further changing the bill, > using language that was recently drafted by the Advocates and GSNJ with > guidance and input from the NJ State Archives. It might be possible to > basically redraft the whole bill and make it a really good bill from all > viewpoints. This language is not yet posted anywhere. It may be fairly > soon - and, when it is, I'll let you know. > > The new language would make more clear what records would be > "restricted" and who and how people would be able to get those more > recent records. It would also make clear what records would remain and > become available and allow for more ready access to them. The newer > language we suggested also includes language that would allow for (or > actually require) the Dept of Health to turn over more of the older > records to the archives. This would continue to make them available to > the public to search and would allow for archives staff (rather than the > Health Dept) to service the mail requests for copies of the records. > > Assemblywoman Quigley was interested in the proposal and promised to > consider the newer suggestions. We offered to be available to work with > her (and her staff) on the language if she wanted and suggested that we > would be glad to answer any questions that might arise. She offered to > allow us to see a draft of the new language before it gets released so > that we can make sure that it meets our needs. > > All in all, it was a very positive meeting with a legislator who was > responsive to our needs and anticipates working with us to (try to) make > everyone happy. > > GSNJ and the Advocates for NJ History will stay in touch with > Assemblywoman Quigley's office and will make sure that progress > continues to be made. Assemblywoman Quigley, however, is also on the > Assembly Budget Committee and she and her staff will have their hands > fairly full over the next few weeks with the budget battle. We won't > let them forget about us - but can't push too hard right away. > > For now - we do suggest that if you have already written - please hold > off on making further contacts until they have a chance to consider what > we gave them. If you haven't already written, please contact > Assemblywoman Quigley's office and offer your support of our proposed > changes You also could mention that you appreciate her willingness to be > so responsive to our concerns. > > I have many off-list emails from list members that haven't been answered > on this issue yet. I hope this may answer some of your questions and do > promise to try to get to all the individual emails as soon as I can. > > Thank you all for your help, concern, contacts, and willingness to be > involved in the process. > > Joan M. Lowry, President > Genealogical Society of New Jersey > mailto:membership@gsnj.org > website: www.gsnj.org > > > > > ==== NJ-GSNJ Mailing List ==== > GSNJ Newsletter: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~njgsnj/newsletter.html > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >