For weeks now, I've been studying the Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA) and listening to your concerns about how the proposed Regents' policy changes might impact our campus. As you may know, I appointed a Task Force to consider how we might develop appropriate University policies consistent with IPRA that would also protect the interests of the University and its employees.
I have read every one of the 179 insightful and provocative comments submitted by faculty, staff and other concerned stakeholders regarding the new Regents policy. The input of both the Task Force and the many people who wrote me has been extremely helpful and enlightening.
On July 11, I met with the Chair of the Board of Regents; the Regents' lawyer, Ron Segel; Chuck Peifer, attorney for the Foundation for Open Government (FOG) and the Albuquerque Journal; as well as Kent Walz, editor of the Albuquerque Journal. Our purpose was to discuss the Act, our mutual interpretations of it, and the recommended policies developed by the Task Force to comply with the Act.
Our meeting lasted 3 hours and was conducted in a very positive tone. All parties made clear the importance of complying with the Act - but without subjecting UNM employees to the risks associated with identity theft or invasion of privacy. I also pointed out the serious concerns the University community expressed that our search processes could be seriously jeopardized if we have to disclose names and submissions of job applicants during the search process.
What emerged from our discussion is the attached revision of policies. These revisions represent a compromise - one which provides the maximum protection to employees while in my view keeping us compliant with both the letter and spirit of the law.
The major changes include the following:
* A recognition of the philosophy of the law in New Mexico on this subject, that all government records are public under the Act, but that some records are exempt from production pursuant to the Act itself, because of other state or federal law such as HIPAA and FERPA, pursuant to the attorney-client privilege, or because disclosure might involve trade secrets.
* Employees would be able to "opt out" of releasing their current home address, telephone numbers and personal email addresses.
* Social Security numbers, personal financial account numbers, medical professionals' DEA and BNDD numbers and personnel evaluations are always to be exempt, as well as any other documents that might be protected under federal law, such as personal medical records.
* Job application materials submitted by candidates are generally public records, but to protect the integrity of the job application process, all parties have agreed that UNM will withhold disclosure of those materials until after the closing date for submission of applications.
While I recognize that no law is perfect, I think this agreement provides a solid framework for the maximum protection of the University and our employees. The new policies will be formally proposed and discussed at the UNM Regents meeting on August 12, 2008. After much consideration, I will recommend their adoption, and hope you will concur.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the Task Force for a great deal of hard work on this matter, and to each of you who took the time to send me your comments. This has been a thoughtful and intelligent discussion, and both the Task Force and those who've written me deserve credit for helping refine and improve our approach. Thank you all.
David J. Schmidly
President, UNM
Links to the proposed policies with the President's recommendations are posted on the UNM Policy Web site.