Access to e-records stirs debate.

Strong debate and less-than-unanimous agreement marked the work of the Florida Supreme Court committee grappling with electronic access to court records.

Passionate positions and clashing views continue, since the court invited public comment on the committee's work: Privacy, Access and Court Records, Report and Recommendations of the Committee on Privacy and Court Records.

"I don't think there are any surprises. It is a controversial set of things to do. It's one of the most difficult undertakings I can imagine. We will still have conversations. There are people wanting us to let more out and there are people who don't think we should do it at all," said Chair Jon Mills, director of the Center for Government Responsibility, dean emeritus and professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law, and former House speaker.

"It ain't going to be easy," he said. "There is certainly more work to be done. I think a lot of states are looking at what we do. This is an unusual state, with constitutional provisions for both openness and privacy, so we are probably in the best position to try to sort it out."

As of February 14, 40 comments have been posted on the court's Web site at www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/ index.shtml.

They include divergent opinions from three Florida Bar committees (Family Law Rules Committee, Rules of Judicial Administration Committee, and Media and Communications Law Committee), various media and First Amendment groups, land title companies, consumer reporting agencies conducting employment background checks, court clerks, as well as individual lawyers and judges, and one man describing himself as a victim of identity theft.

The committee came up with 24 recommendations, and the court has divided them into groups for the purpose of public comment. The February 1 deadline for recommendations one through six has passed. Now, the court is accepting public comment on the second group of recommendations, seven through 10, until March 1. Comments on the third group, recommendations 11 through 24, are not being sought at this time. Oral arguments have been requested, but the court has not announced whether it will be granted.

Manatee Clerk of Court R.B. "Chip" Shore's experience as a "paperless" clerk fueled his strong objections to several recommendations.

"My primary disagreement with the report itself is the conclusion that it will take adoption of most of the 24 recommendations before electronic access to...