Another Albemarle list member wrote... > But doesn't it say that the information shall not be posted on state agency or >court controlled websites? I don't see where it mentions personal websites and >I am sure they are refrring to living persons information. First, in Virginia there is no such thing, legally, as "legislative intent." There is only the exact wording of the law. The committee substitute, previously quoted on this board, is not limited to living persons or even to recent documents. It would apply whether the document was written in 2003 or 1607, if the state agency or court clerk seeks to post the document on the agency's/court's website after July 1, 2003. It would not apply to personal websites, but as "state agency" is such a broad term (see § 2.2-3801 of the Code of Virginia for the applicable definition (minus the local units of government and departments): http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+2.2-3801 ), it would apparently apply to the Library of Virginia, and the various libraries, historical and research centers that are part of Virginia's public universities and colleges. It would apply to documents signed by or containing the listed information on any person, living and not, even if posted with their consent, or their descendants' consent. And, it would apply to any other entity that the state agency or court contracts with to prepare/post the documents. Let's look at some not so far-fetched examples -- - If Alderman library had access to and wanted to post, to the University's website, an original letter in which Lewis & Clark reported to Thomas Jefferson on their trek west, they would have to redact the explorer's signatures. - Any letter or other document stating a particular person's birthdate ("January 1, 1864, My darling husband -- Our new son/daughter was born this morning and awaits your return...") would have the forbidden information ("this morning" and/or the date?) redacted before posting. - State agencies will have to make sure there's no mention on any state website of the exact birthdates being remembered/celebrated for - * Martin Luther King, Jr. Day * Lee-Jackson Day * Washington's Birthday (It's not "President's Day" as the sale brochures would have you believe, but that's another discussion.) OK, the holiday example is a bit far out, but since there is no definition of "document" in the bill or the applicable definitions section, conceivably everything posted to the state agency's or court's website could be considered "a document." The bill came out of the House General Laws committee on the following vote -- (HB2426) 01/28/03 House: Reported from General Laws with sub (14-Y 8-N) YEAS--Reid, Cox, Drake, Jones, S.C., McQuigg, Suit, Bolvin, Rapp, Oder, Saxman, McDougle, Gear, Miles, Abbitt--14. NAYS--Albo, Wright, Marshall, D.W., Almand, Woodrum, Phillips, Armstrong, Barlow--8. It is now before the full House of Delegates, where the members will vote on passage on THIS SATURDAY (2/1) if it is not further delayed ("passed by for the day"). So, if you want to be heard on the bill, the time to call or e-mail your local member in the House of Delegates is Friday, 1/31. See legis.state.va.us for phone numbers and e-mail addresses. If it passes the House, then the Senate will have a shot at it. Then the Governor.

In California similar legistation is being worked on as well, which is also extreme. Other states will more than likely do the same. With so many states being billions of dollars under budget they would save money. Patti