Information Technology Commission

in government regulation, as well as the use of social security numbers for identification.
    
    Richard North, Executive Director, Information Technology Commission, explained that the plan for the Commission meetings has been to break the issue of privacy into four sections. After reviewing the existing market presumption, he noted, they would attempt to identify the issues and present the Commission with some recommendations for legislation.

    Reed Gardner, Chair of University of Utah's Department of Medical Information, briefed the Commission on the global direction privacy in medical information is taking. He distributed a handout and reviewed how physicians are using technology to access a patient's data, noting that with the exception of psychiatric data, care givers have access to a patient's data at the bedside. He reviewed an audit trail that indicated how and who accesses a patient's data. He reviewed the Kennedy-Kassebaum bill that is being considered on a national level. He reviewed pro's and con's of the bill. He explained a privacy agreement that is being used, and will soon be required for all employees to sign regarding confidentiality. He recommended the Legislature not make rules for computer records because they are more secure than the paper records. He also recommended giving the federal government another nine months to see if they can pass legislation which would be more effective than regulation from Health and Human Services. If not, he emphasized Utah will need to address the issue.

3.     Internet Data Privacy Web Site Demonstration

    Richard North electronically presented some web sites on the Internet that collect a variety of information about people and businesses. He explained that, for a cost, anyone can find any information about anyone on the web. He demonstrated how data is gathered through credit cards, personal checks, and "cookies" and then sold to another entity. He noted the government sector is more regulated than the private sector.

4.     Utah: An Information Technology Freeport/Taxation of Telecommunications

    Peter Genereaux, Utah Information Technology Association (UITA), asked the Commission to reaffirm the recommendation made last December to the Tax Review Commission (TRC) and to the Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee(PUT) to:

    1.     Not extend sales tax to those telecommunication services for which presently sales taxes are not levied, e.g., interstate long distance; and
    2.     Remove sales taxes from existing telecommunication services for which they are presently being sales taxed, e.g., intrastate long distance.

    Mr. Genereaux indicated that "both consumers and business users throughout the state would be significant beneficiaries."

    Rep. Chard clarified Mr. Genereaux's request that the Tax Review Commission continue to study the impact of those recommendations.

    Gary Cornia, Chairman of the Tax Review Commission, addressed the Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee on June 18, 1997 and reviewed recommendations of the TRC a year ago. The recommendation was that the Legislature should take no action on any form of telecommunication taxation for the foreseeable future because of the national initiatives that are pending.

    Sen. Steele commented he supported this Commission's recommendation last year for no taxes during the '97' General Session, but this year he is more interested in seeing what the federal level initiative will be and then respond to that.

    As Mr. Genereaux concluded, there is confusion about sales tax on the use and access to telecommunications and the sales tax of electronic transactions. He emphasized UITA is not advocating not collecting taxes on transactions, but is advocating no taxes on the access to and use of telecommunication services.

    Rep. Chard indicated that November is the time when the legislators look for a convergence of the recommendations from the various committees, commissions, and task forces. He suggested this Commission may want to take action on this recommendation in the October or November meeting.

    Mr. Hood expressed concern that the voice of the Commission be made known to the Legislature; and if there is a feeling that the information is not yet available, he would support waiting. He went on record as saying, "provided it became a tabled matter and that it is considered before the November meeting of this Commission and action is taken."

    Mr. Ames suggested that the claims of benefits be validated when this issue is presented to the Legislature.

    Mr. Genereaux indicated that this issue should be the subject of an impact study done by the TRC. However, the TRC, at this time, has not yet studied this issue even after the recommendation of this Commission.

    Rep. Chard indicated this issue will be put on the October or November agenda.

4.     What Is the State Policy Regarding Information Access?

    Jeff Johnson, Director of Archives, gave an overview of the Government Records Access and Management Act (RAMA) and the Utah State Archives and Records Service. He stated the

two goals of the GRAMA: 1) to provide guidelines to government agencies about access to their records; and 2) management of those records. He then reviewed the history of the GRAMA.

    Gordon Peterson reviewed the sharing of information between agencies. The feeling is that if the state is in error, the error is in trying to protect privacy.

    Tim Shea, Court Administrator's Office, distributed and reviewed a memo and reports produced by his office. He noted they have developed policies over the last few years to protect the privacy of individuals. He indicated their progress toward video recordings. He also indicated the present policy of the office is that a judge has discretion to select an audio or video or written report.

    Doug Bates, Office of Education, reviewed the different types of records they store, how they are archived and accessed, and by whom. He also reviewed the sources of information. He explained that once his office has touched a record, it becomes a state record, which he does not feel is wise. The districts are urged to keep records that may become important in litigation, etc., he noted.

    Rep. Chard indicated this problem should go before another committee and this Commission should not make a recommendation regarding Mr. Bates' issue.

    Dr. Mike Peterson, Board of Regents, distributed a memorandum that reviewed the Higher Education Data Information Task Force recommendations. He referred to the principles that should underlie the provision of information within the system of higher education. He also referred to core-data elements that higher education wants to have readily available and reviewed the State Board of Education information management policy adopted in November of 1996.

    The Commission rescheduled the next meeting for August 27, 1997 at 1:30 p.m.

MOTION:    Mr. Genereaux moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was passed by unanimous vote.

    The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.