A bill to make public records available electronically passed the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee Wednesday, a milestone for a controversial bill.

“It has indeed been an interesting journey and a work in progress,” said Senate Bill 40‘s sponsor, John Kefalas, D-Fort Collins,

After similar legislation, Senate Bill 37, died in committee last year, Secretary of State Wayne Williams stepped in. His office opposed the bill last year but led a 16-member working group to develop this year’s compromise bill.

The compromise carves out exemptions for small towns or agencies that cannot meet the request for information without investing in software and other allowances.

More amendments to safeguard sensitive information were tacked on in committee. Sens. Vicki Marble, R-Fort Collins, and Lois Court, D-Denver, voted for the bill with “reservations,” both said.

The bill passed 4-1 and heads next to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, said the bill was improved by compromises and amendments, but said it’s still a muddled mess.

Williams provided open records electronically whenever possible to support public records laws and because it made good business sense not to belabor the CORA request.

“It’s faster and cheaper to provide it that way,” Williams said. “If someone asks for something, send it off in an e-mail and be done.”

Journalists and news organizations testified about the laborious task of searching written records that effectively makes public information unavailable to the public and the press, much less cross-reference information. In most cases the data already is in a digital form.

“Government data is hugely important,” said Brian Gryth, a board member with Colorado Common Cause. “This bill helps bring Colorado into the fold of being in compliance and into the modern era of providing open data.”

Sen. Ray Scott, R-Grand Junction, chairman of the committee, called Colorado Open Records Act a trainwreck and called for it to be rewritten to accommodate many of the concerns he head Tuesday.

He said the federal Freedom of Information Act is better than Colorado’s law.

“It’s not perfect, by any means, but it’s a heck of lot better than CORA,” he said. “In my mind, it wouldn’t be that big a deal to cut and paste and say, ‘Boom, here we go,’ but that’s my opinion.”

Opponents said the bill would open the door to data-mining companies to request volumes of information or access to databases to build their customer lists or more nefarious purposes.

While companies could get those records on paper now, the ability to electronically search records and associated databases was risky. The University of Colorado has 25,000 employees and scores of associated databases.

Doug Kemper, executive director of the Colorado Water Congress, said the bill amplifies weaknesses in existing open records laws and could make the state’s water system vulnerable to terrorism.

Richard Orf, representing the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado, said that even with the exceptions local government, private information and proprietary data are still at risk.

Redacting that information is not as simple as supporters suggest, when it comes to small towns and counties.

The rural governments he represents are not at the technological level of big cities and probably don’t have the expertise to redact information from complex databases, spreadsheets or e-mails with enough proficiency to make sure private information can’t be recovered through metadata, so mistakes are bound to happen.

Orf said even with the exceptions, small government agencies still could wind up in court over the new law, “which is time-consuming and expensive.”

He said most operations of government – meetings, the budget and so forth – usually are already available online.

“The information we’re worried about accidentally releasing are Social Security numbers, county health records, personal information that isn’t public information,” Orf said. “It’s the data of private individuals, that’s people. Some of it is public information, but it’s inherently tied to information that is private or proprietary.”

He said data-mining companies could use the information to build customer lists, for example.