►
Description
Live Stream provided by LRC Staff
A
Let's
call
this
task
force
meeting
on
electronic
recording
of
official
documents
by
county
clerks
to
order
first
order
of
business
is
a
roll
call.
Madam
secretary.
B
B
A
A
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
think
I'm
gonna
yield
to
gino
to
do
his
presentation.
First.
He
and
I
had
a
little
discussion
before
the
the
sessions.
I
think
we'll
have
geno
go
first
and
then
I'll
follow
up.
That's
okay,.
D
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
chairman
and
members
of
the
task
force.
I
appreciate.
D
You're
allowing
me
to
come
back
again
and
talk
to
you
about
my
favorite
topic,
and
so
I
do
really
appreciate
it.
I
know
that
everybody
has
a
lot
going
on
right
now
and
with
elections
and
everything,
so
this
topic
is
super
important
to
all
of
us
and
in
the
mortgage
industry
and
also
in
other
industries,
so
so,
where
I'm
going
to
spend
my
time
today
is
much
surrounding
how
how
important
it
is
within
the
movement
we've
seen
so
remote
online
notarization.
D
As
you
all
know,
we
all
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
a
room
discussing
remote
online
notarization
a
few
years
ago
and
it
finally
got
passed
in
the
commonwealth.
I
was
a
big
deal
and
it
definitely,
I
think,
really
helped
to
prepare
us
for
cobid,
and
so
that's
where
I'm
going
to
spend
that
my
a
lot
of
time
here
hold
on
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen.
D
And
so
so
we
saw
in
precove
that
there
were
a
number
of
states
that
had
passed
remote
online
notarization.
D
And
saw
about
22
states
that
had
ron
laws
on
the
books
about
15
were
ready
to
do
we're
business
to
go,
live
going
to
2020.
I
think
we
were
all
on
thinking
that
you
know
things
were
getting
an
e-recording
was
get
adopted,
e-closings
were
somewhat
new
to
the
industry
and,
and
there
wasn't
a
full
adoption
or
you
know,
remote
notarizations
were
not
being
fully
utilized
in
all
way,
shapes
and
forms,
and
so
I
think
the
industry
was
taking.
D
It
really
slow
each
step
at
a
time
and
then
obviously
copic
hit
and
kind
of
we're.
At
now,
everybody
looked
overnight
to
find
a
solution
to
be
able
to
notarize
documents
electronically
or
submit
documents
electronically
to
be
recorded
because
in-person
interactions
were
were
not
allowed
or
very
limited,
and,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
danger
and
still
it
can
be
in
those
settings,
and
so
you
saw
a
lot
of.
D
D
Governors
come
out
and
release
executive
orders
to
allow
some
form
of
remote,
remote
inc,
notarization
or
remote
online
notarization,
or
allowed
some
variation
of
the
two.
And
so
you
saw
definitely
some
some
movement
there
to
create
more
of
this
digital
experience
to
allow
protections
to
clients
and
and
any
parties
in
that
transaction,
and
so
we
saw
27
states,
get
run
laws
on
the
books,
24
we're
ready
and
live
right
now
to
do
business,
and
then
two
states
were
kind
of
on
the
regulatory
framework.
D
And
so
we
see
this
this,
this
momentum
carrying
into
next
year
I'll
just
highlight
a
few
things-
is
that
we
see
a
lot
of
states
that
are
very
big
into
this.
D
This
this
movement
coming
on
stage
next
year
and
actually
pennsylvania
just-
is
about
to
pass
their
iran
laws,
and
so
why
this
is
important
and
why
I'm
spending
my
time
here
is
his
covet
has
really
brought
front
and
center
the
impact
and
the
need
for
a
digital
experience
or
digital
recordings,
because
when
covid
hit,
many
of
us
in
the
mortgage
industry
were
very
afraid
that
we
couldn't
close
closed
loans.
We
had
people
that
were
sitting
in
moving
trucks.
D
We
had
folks
that
needed
to
save
money
because
of
financial
hardships.
We
had
families
that
were
left
homeless,
and
so
we
we
had
to
figure
out
ways
to
close
continue
to
close
those
loans
to
help
americans
and
citizens
in
in
kentucky
to
still
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
those
things.
And
so
I
I
think
it's
very
important
that
this
is
where
the
digital
experience
really
could
fit.
D
That
need,
and
so
we
worked
with
many
clerks
across
the
nation
to
make
sure
that
they
were
essential
employees
to
make
sure
that
they
could
still
close
those
loans.
This,
I
think,
really
brought
to
the
main
stage
to
the
rest
of
the
the
folks
and
constituents
out
there
that
there
was
a
need
for
a
digital
constituent
option
and
covid
has
really
you
know,
impacted
the
remote
online
notarization
world
and
in
an
effort
to
really
bring
it
to
main
stage.
D
I
think
a
lot
more
lenders
are
going
to
be,
or
other
industries
are
going
to
be
a
lot
utilizing
this
a
lot
more.
So
I
think
this
this
further
expands
the
importance
of
why
moving
into
the
the
digital
recording
space
becomes
more
important
as
we
move
forward
ron
again
is
not
just
ron.
We
need
to.
We
need
all
the
other
parts
to
make
it
happen
and
without
all
those
other
parts
we
we
really.
D
You
know
with
ron
and
by
itself
it
doesn't
it's
not
as
powerful
and
it's
moved
into
not
how
we
do
ron.
But
it's
not
how
or
not
to
do
wrong
or
e-recording
or
e-closing.
It's
it's
really.
But
how
can
we?
D
How
can
we
do
it,
and
so
I
think
that's
important
and
I
didn't
want
to
spend
too
much
time
on
ron,
but
I
wanted
to
give
a
highlight-
because
I
know
mark
is
the
expert
here
and
give
him
the
time,
but
it's
really
going
to
be
a
game
changer
once
there
is
more
e-recording
options
out
there.
D
It's
it's
a
better
constituent
option.
It's
a
better
industry
option.
It
creates
many
efficiencies
for
all
of
us
involved
and
it's
not
just
it's
not
just
the
lenders
that
benefit
it's
everybody
that
benefits
from
this
process.
So
I
know
that
this
is
a
really
quick
presentation,
but
I
wanted
to
just
highlight
how
important
it
can
be
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Thank
you
geno.
I
do
have
a
question
here.
The
obviously
the
coronavirus
has
accelerated
the
need
for
in
every
form
of
e-commerce,
whether
it's
real
estate,
banking
lending,
car
sales,
everything
is
done
digitally
these
days
and
it
needs
to
be
done
digitally.
Is
there
anything
you?
I
saw
your
map.
There
were
some
green
states
up
there
that
you
indicated
were
in
the
forefront,
I
believe,
of
moving
this
digital
transaction
economy
forward.
D
Yeah
I
mean
I
know
that
the
focus
has
been
to
to
help
the
counties
that
are
adopting
e-reporting
to
to
become
part
of
that.
I
think
that's,
that's
the
focus
I
think
each
like
I
mentioned
earlier
is
that
each
part
of
this
puzzle
really
makes
it
makes
everything
work
in
harmony,
because
if
we
just
have
ron
that
stands
alone
and
then
there's
not
this
e-reporting
option,
what
happens?
D
Is
we
move
into
that
paper
ring
out
option
which
becomes
burdensome
and
isn't
really
efficient,
while
it's
a
great
option
for
those
folks
who
can't
necessarily
record
or
digitally
that
there
is
an
option
for
them
to
do
papering
out,
but
it
takes
away
from
the
entire
experience,
and
so
I
think
you
know
if
we,
if
we
can
work
in
a
way,
that's
not
a
mandate
necessarily
but
a
partnership
and
and
moving
forward
to
where
we
can
help
foster
the
ability
to
do
more
e-recording
and
and
bring
on
more
counties.
D
I
think
that
you
are
going
to
see
more
folks
move
into
this
digital
space.
I
think
that's
been
a
a
hurdle
for,
for
I
can
only
speak
again
for
the
mortgage
industry,
but
if
you
don't
change
the
way
that
we
do
business,
most
people
are
just
going
to
continue
to
to
do
the
same
thing
and
I
think,
there's
an
opportunity
to
create
efficiencies
in
our
industry
and
working
with
the
clerks
and
and
other
members
of
this
task
force.
D
I
think
that
a
lot
of
folks
would
see
a
lot
of
wins
in
their
daily
lives
because
of
this
e-reporting.
A
C
I
am
thank
you
very
much,
mr
chairman,
and
so
today
I
wanted
to
talk
about
basically
two
topics,
because
I
think
that
there
were
two
items
that
were
exposed
by
the
pandemic,
one
of
which
goes,
I
think,
oftentimes
unknown,
or
at
least
under
emphasized.
The
two
items
are
recording
of
documents.
But
the
second
item
is
the
searching
of
the
already
recorded
documents
in
the
courthouse.
C
It's
obviously
very,
very
important
to
be
able
to
get
these
transactions
on
record,
but
in
order
to
produce
the
mortgage
in
order
to
manufacture
the
the
the
loan,
we
need
access
to
the
documents
that
are
already
recorded
and
that's
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
oftentimes
has
been
underestimated
or
undervalued
here.
So
I'm
going
to
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
you
know
both
of
those
items.
Today
I
provided
to
the
committee
and
I'll
share.
You
know
this
year.
C
My
computer
is
not
cooperating
on
the
sharing,
but
there
is
a
chart
in
the
committee
materials
regarding
the
state
of
adopted
or
para,
and
so
this
is
not
a
chart
that
represents
all
of
the
states
that
are
e-recording.
C
This
represents
the
states
that
adopted
or
pera
I
and
then
proceeded
with
with
e-recording,
so
very
similar
path
that
the
state
of
kentucky
eye
has
taken
there
and
you
know-
and
these
numbers
are
from
the
are
from
the
pre-op
website.
The
property
records
industry,
association
and
and
those
the
states
that
are
highlighted
in
in
green
on
the
chart
are
the
states
that
have
gotten
to
the
point
where
all
100
of
the
counties
in
that
particular
state
have
adopted
some
form
of
e-recording.
C
I
and
the
the
thing
that
I
would
note
about
that,
were
you
know.
Clarity
and
full
disclosure
is
that
the
states
that
are
have
an
asterisk
by
a
district
of
columbia-
okay,
not
a
state,
but
you
know
a
territory,
a
district
within
the
united
states,
hawaii,
maryland
and
alaska.
So
three
of
the
states
that
have
achieved
100
percent
participation
in
e-recording
are
states
that
have
essentially
one
recording
office.
Hawaii
has
offices
on
all
of
the
islands,
but
they
all
feed
into
one
single
recording
office
same
thing
in
alaska.
C
There
are
20
different
district
recording
districts
in
alaska,
I'm
sorry
three,
some
districts
in
alaska,
but
they
all
feed
into
one
system
similar
in
maryland.
C
So
while
you
know
you
can
look
at
those
and
say
that
100
of
the
counties
there
are
e-recording,
it's
it
really
only
had
to
automate
one
office,
so
just
want
to
make
that
you
know
contrast
so
that
as
we
consider
what
is
what's
the
right
path
forward
for
kentucky
that
we
compare
kentucky's,
120
counties
but
not
not
to
maryland's,
you
know
24
counties
or
34
counties
because
they
really
only
had
to
automate
one
in
order
to
get
there.
So
that's
that's
just
you
know
a
little
caveat
there
and
then
the
other.
C
The
other
part
of
this,
I
think
is
I
you
know
instructional-
is
that
the
earliest
adopters
of
of
urpera,
the
uniform,
real
property
electronic
recording
act
still
have
a
significant
ways
to
go
before
all
of
their
counties
will
be
electronically
recording.
C
So
there's
not
a
real,
you
know,
sort
of
a
you
know
magic
formula
ever
for
moving
some
of
this
forward
states
that
have
had
broad
adoption
and
are,
interestingly
enough,
a
couple
of
the
states
with
that
broad
adoption
like
colorado,
didn't
do
it
pursuant
to
the
uniform
royal
property
electronic
recording
act.
You
can
see
colorado's,
not
even
on
this
list.
C
They
never
adopted
her,
but
they
moved
forward
with
e-recording
under
ueta
and
they
had
a
secretary
of
state
that
was
very,
very
interested
in
moving
the
the
needle
forward
on
this
and
then
and
they
got
to
100
e-recording.
C
But
again
there
are
some
unique
things
in
colorado
that
drove
that.
The
way
that
their
trust
me
form
of
mortgage,
you
know
processing,
happens
the
public
trustee
there
kind
of
drove
them
to
a
statewide
program.
C
So
those
I
think
you
just
have
to
keep
all
of
those
things
in
mind,
as
we
think
about
how
quickly
can
we
move
the
state
toward
electronic
recording,
on
the
other
hand,
I'll
brag
a
little
bit
about
my
home
state
of
wisconsin,
where
wisconsin
moved
relatively,
when
I
was
the
register
of
deeds
in
racine
county
we've
started
a
recording
before
the
adoption
of
repair.
C
Again
we
started
a
recording
on
the
basis
of
ueta
alone,
but
then
the
state
came
along
in
2006
adopted
her
para,
and
it
was
only
a
few
years
later
that
the
entire
state
was
adopting
again
there.
There
was.
There
was
a
technology
fund
that
was
available
in
wisconsin,
a
segregated
fund
that
was
part
of
the
recording
fee,
that
the
recorders
had
the
opportunity
to
save
up
the
monies
to
make
sure
that
they
could
upgrade
their
systems.
C
I
should
be
ready
for
e-recording,
and
so
there
was
a
funding
mechanism
there
available
and,
and
so
some
of
those
factors
go
into
how
quickly
you
may
see
a
state,
a
dot,
e-recording
and
have
a
you
know
large,
you
know
percentage
of
their
counties
electronically
recording.
C
So
that's
one
aspect
of
of
the
equation:
is
the
ability
for
counties
to
start
e-recording
and
how
quickly
can
we
expect
counties
to
start
ie,
recording
and
we're
already
seeing
you
know
a
number
of
counties
in
the
state
of
kentucky
have
already
adopted.
C
I
know
that
I
I
checked
with
our
county
integrations
team
yesterday
and
there
are
at
least
a
half
a
dozen
more
counties
that
are
in
the
process
that
we
are
aware
of.
So
it's
looking
like
it's
taking
a
normal
progression.
What
we
normally
typically
see
as
states
adopt
enabling
legislation
there.
So
then
the
other
issue
becomes
the
ability
to
search
documents
and
well.
Our
company
does
not
directly
get
involved
with
you
know:
converting
records
from
a
in
a
non-digital
format,
whether
that's
paper
or
microfilm,
to
a
digital
format.
C
I'm
as
the
past
president
of
the
property
records
industry
association,
I
was
able
to
take
a
couple
of
calls
to
some
friends
who
do
work
in
that
space.
I
and-
and
they
tell
me
that
again,
depending
on
the
mix
of
microfilm
and
books
and
how
many
years
worth
of
records
need
to
be
converted
and
obviously
the
size
of
the
county.
C
You
know
that
will
impact
how
long
one
of
these
backfile
conversions
it
will
take,
but
they
estimate
that
most
of
the
projects
that
they
see
run
anywhere
from
six
months
to
a
year
and
that
it
may
take
one
or
two.
You
know
project
what
could
be
a
year
to
two
years
worth
of
conversion
time
to
actually,
you
know,
convert
a
county's
records
so
that
they're
available
online
and
and
of
value
to
the
searching
you
know
community.
C
I,
in
that
there
are
enough
records
available
to
search
that
that
go
back
far
enough
in
time,
so
that
I
don't
have
any.
I
don't
have
so
much
cost
estimates
on
because
again
there's
that
that
varies
widely
and
I
didn't
want
to
commit
any
of
the
other
vendors
to
any
kind
of
a
price
range,
but
they,
but
they
did.
They
were
all
in
that.
You
know
six
months
to
two-year
kind
of
time
frame
depending
on
the
the
size
and
number
of
records
available
in
the
county.
C
So
I
think
those
are
two
things
we
need
to
think
about.
As
we
go
forward
is
how
quickly
can
counties
come
on
board
and
it
seems
like
the
kentucky
counties
are
embracing
the
adoption
of
e-recording
at
a
pretty
typical
pace
I,
but,
but
then
also
how
do
we
get
the
records
that
are
not
currently
in
electronic
format
into
an
electronic
format
so
that
they
can
be
searched
in
in
the
case
that
the
courthouse
is
not
available
and-
and
you
know,
by
the
way
we
all
are
thinking
about
pandemics.
C
C
You
know
for
the
records
to
be
searched,
and
you
know
we
wear
that
in
places
like
louisiana
when
hurricanes
come
through
or
you
know,
other
places
grand
forks
north
dakota
several
years
ago
had
a
river.
You
know
flood
linn
county
iowa.
It
was
actually
a
lake
in
wisconsin
that
broke
loose
from
its
banks.
I
and
flooded
you
know
the
river,
then
the
impact
was
felt
a
state
away
and
flooded
the
first
two
floors
of
the
courthouse
in
lynn
county.
C
So
you
know
not
just
you
know,
global
pandemics,
but
in
other
natural
disasters
could
cause
a
courthouse
to
not
be
available
for
searching
of
the
records.
I
just
think
that's
that's
the
other
aspect
of
this
that
we
need
to
think
about.
So
so
those
were
some
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to.
You
know
provide
and
happy
to
take
any.
A
Questions.
Thank
you
mark
interesting
presentation.
Any
members
have
a
question
for
mark.
I
you
were
talking
mark.
You
were
talking
about
digitizing
existing
title
records
and
does
you
say
wisconsin
does
have
that
capability?
All
counties
have
that
capability.
C
No,
a
number
of
counties
have
done
that
in
wisconsin
and
again
because
they
have
a
technology
fund
available
to
them.
It's
actually
called
a
land
records
modernization
fund
so
that
it
covers
a
broad
spectrum
of
technologies.
So
a
number
of
counties
have
taken
advantage
of
that,
but
not
not
all.
I'm
not
aware
of
any
state
where
all
of
the
counties
have
converted
their
their
tangible
records
to
digital
records.
Yet
there
are
individual
counties
that
have,
but
I'm
not
aware
of
any
state
that
has
full
coverage
on
that
is.
Is
that.
C
Right,
the
way
that
the
model
that
wisconsin
used
was
to
establish
a
of
a
fund
of
you
know
a
charge
that
was
added
into
the
recording
fee.
I,
and
so,
as
if
you're
presenting
a
document
to
be
recorded,
the
the
fee
is
35
in
the
state
of
wisconsin,
and
once
you
pay
that
fee,
then
you
know
by
statute
the
recorder.
C
That's
aside,
I
believe
you
know
it
was
two
or
three
dollars
of
that
fee.
That
goes
into
the
fund
in
the
county
that
the
county
recorder
retains
and
has
control
over
for
these
types
of
land
record
modernization
expenses.
But
then.
D
C
Also,
a
portion
that
goes
into
a
common
fund,
it's
a
smaller
amount,
a
dollar
from
each
of
those
documents
goes
into
a
smaller
fund
that
is
administered
there
was
that
the
large
counties
that
you
know
have
a
large
volume
could
help
smaller
counties
that
didn't
have
as
large
a
volume
and
share
the
wealth
a
little
bit
so
out
of
that
common
fund,
there
are
grants
given
and
it
you
know
they're
available
to
all
of
the
counties.
C
But
you
know
the
the
focus
was
on
providing
those
funds
to
smaller
counties
that
didn't
have
the
resources
of
say,
a
milwaukee
county
or
a
racine
county
that
had
larger
recording
volumes.
So
again,
it
just
appears,
as
the
recording
fee
is
35
and
then
the
accounting
for
those
funds
that
happens
invisible
to
the
to
the
to
the
consumer,
who's
actually
paying
the
recording.
A
Fee,
okay,
I
believe,
as
part
of
senate
bill
114,
we
did
include
some
extra
fees,
at
least
for
the
digitation
for
or
new
filing
e-recording
of
new
filings.
I
don't
think
we
included
any
part
of
that
for
actually
digitizing
existing
records,
so
that
would
be
a
concern
for
us
going
through
the
chair.
Yes,
mr.
E
Chair
tom
blevins,
hey
don,
may
I
help
you
out
a
little.
Certainly,
we
did
in
fact
increase.
Add
a
certain
fee
dedicated
to
just
this
topic
as
a
part
of
senate
bill
114,
it's
called
the
document
storage
fee
and
it's
ten
dollars
for
every
permanent
document
that
goes
into
a
county.
Clerk's
office
is
dedicated
just
to
this
problem
so
that
that
fee
went
into
effect
on
january.
The
first,
as
you
know,
and
just
as.
E
However,
covet
is
kind
of
side
practiced
and
my
brain
has
been
on
nothing
but
elections
since
basically
april,
and
so
that
I
think
that's
true
of
every
county
clerk
across
the
state.
E
I'd
like
to
also
add
that
we
had
a
few
early
adopters
in
the
state
like
debbie
donnelly
who's
on
the
call,
if
you
all
have
questions
for
how
it's
actually
going.
That's
super
important
because
those
early
adopters
will
give
a
sense
of
comfort
to
the
smaller
counties
in
particular,
who
believe
it
or
not,
are
already
ready
to
do
this.
Their
software
can
do
it.
It's
literally
flip
a
switch
and.
E
Electronic
document
recording
in
those
counties,
the
challenge
is
what
mark
was
referencing
and
that
is
going
back
in
time
and
scanning
the
older
documents
to
bring
up
to
date.
You
know
your
your
entire
document
database,
if
you
want
to
think
of
it
that
way
and
covet,
has
dramatically
exposed
the
weak
side
of
kentucky
in
this
particular
regard,
because
many
of
our
documents
are
not
available
online.
For
this
very
reason,
so
that's
another
application
of
that
same
fee.
In
addition,
from
years
ago,
we
created
a
smaller
fund
with
one
dollar
per
document.
E
I
believe
it
is
that
goes
to
kdla
the
kentucky
department
of
librarian
archives,
for
which
they
administer
a
grant
program.
Now,
that's
meant
for
more,
like
you've
got
to
replace
some
book
binders
or
you
need
to
replace
some
shelving
and
those
kinds,
it's
relatively
small
grants,
but
they
really
help
the
smaller
counties
offset.
You.
A
E
20
000
purchase
of
shelving,
or
something
like
that,
and
so
now
the
document
storage
fee
from
senate
bill
114
can
be
used
for
these
technology
upgrades
you
last
earlier.
I
promise
I'll
shut
up
in
a
second.
You
had
asked
earlier
about
some
legislative
changes
that
might
be
necessary.
Here's
a
couple
of
things
we've
uncovered
this
year
that
you
might
be
interested
in
the
first
one
is
in
smaller
counties.
They
have
to
return
what
are
called
excess
fees
at
the
end
of
every
calendar
year.
E
If
we
don't,
we
tried
to
write
senate
bill
114
so
that
this
fee
was
exempt
and
certain
fiscal
courts
are
arguing
with
certain
county
clerks,
so
I'll
just
say
that
it's
difficult
to
build
up
a
capital
reserve
to
do
a
big
document
scanning
project
when
you
have
to
get
rid
of
the
money
every
year.
So
that's
something
that
the
legislature
might
want
to
take
a
look
at.
The
second
thing
is
the
ongoing
nagging
problem
of
fee
pooling
this
is
where
fiscal
court,
in
some
cases
willingly
joins
the
county.
Clerk
willingly
joins.
E
Pool
all
their
funds
together
and
then
in
other
cases,
fiscal
courts
have
aggressively
forced
a
clerk
to
join
them
in
feet
pulling.
As
you
know,
fiscal
courts
are
facing
the
same
revenue
challenge.
Everybody
is
and
now
that
document
storage
fee
is
very
tasty,
so
they're
trying
to
take
the
money
from
the
clerk
so
language
to
the
effect
of
saying
no.
This
is
special.
We're
going
to
reserve
that
fund
in
a
special
fund
that
can
spend
say
four
years
of
the
term
of
the
clerk,
then
you've
got
something
to
work
with
now.
E
The
larger
counties,
the
ones
that
are
over
70
000
we're
fine,
because
we
only
return
our
excess
fees
every
four
years
anyway.
It's
the
much
smaller
ones
that
are
in
these
two
particular
situations.
So
thank
you
for
letting
me
ramble
on.
I
just
wanted
to
clear
up
kind
of
where
we
are.
I
think,
we're
poised
in
great
shape.
Honestly,
if
it
hadn't
been
for
coving,
we
would
have
seen
a
lot
more
roll
out
this
year.
E
The
county
clerks
association
hasn't
been
able
to
meet
in
person
for
months,
and
that's
where
a
lot
of
these
offhand
com,
you
know
conversations
occur
where
debbie
can
say
to
other
people.
Hey
it's
working
great.
It
makes
my
office
run
great.
You
should
try
it
that
those
conversations
are
invaluable
for
spreading
this
around
the
state.
Thank
you
for
letting
me
speak.
A
E
E
Particular
fee
right,
that's
that's
that's
the
argument.
People
are
having
now
fee
pooling
is
where
they
all
mix
their
money
together
in
an
accounting
sense,
and
so
the
county,
clerk's
money
just
goes
directly
into
the
fiscal
court's
purse
and
then
the
county
clerk
just
gets
to
draw
down.
You
know
whatever
expenses,
the
fiscal
court
feels
necessary
to
give
them.
A
Okay:
well,
are
there
any
other
questions
from
members?
A
What
I'm
proposing
to
the
members
for
the
next
meeting
is
that
we
kind
of
get
together
our
ideas
for
new
legislation
or
just
to
report
to
the
legislature
of
what
needs
to
be
tweaked
in
this
statute
for
the
next
legislative
session.
That
might
include.
A
Money
for
digitizing
existing
records
or
not
allowing
some
of
this
pooling
or
return
of
excess
funds.
Things
like
that
are
great
ideas
for
legislation,
so
I
would
invite
the
clerks
to
submit
some
ideas
for
tweaking
this
legislation
going
forward.
I
wouldn't
invite
the
title
insurance
companies
if
they
would
like
to
see
digit,
especially
digitizing,
existing
deeds
and
land
records.
I
think
that
would
make
their
job
a
lot
easier,
going
forward,
the
bankers
and
and
the
secretary
of
state's
office.
A
I
believe,
mentioned
something
in
our
our
last
meeting
about
the
things
we
might
need
to
memorialize
in
statute
that
might
already
be
being
regulations,
so
that
will
be.
That
would
be
our
meeting
next
time,
so
we
can
prepare
a
a
report
for
our
next
legislative
session
if
there
are
any
any
other
business
to
go
before
the
committee
hearing.
None
this
meeting
is
adjourned.
Thank
you
all
wait,
a
second
one,
not
adjourned.