| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | AN ACT concerning the Law Enforcement Information Task | ||||||
2 | Force Act.
| ||||||
3 | Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,
| ||||||
4 | represented in the General Assembly:
| ||||||
5 | Section 1. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Law | ||||||
6 | Enforcement Information Task Force Act. | ||||||
7 | Section 5. Task Force; purpose. There shall be created a | ||||||
8 | Law Enforcement Information Task Force to study and make | ||||||
9 | recommendations regarding criminal discovery and law | ||||||
10 | enforcement information sharing. | ||||||
11 | Section 10. Members. | ||||||
12 |
(a) The Task Force shall consist of the following members | ||||||
13 | who will not be compensated: | ||||||
14 | (1) the Director of the Administrative Office of the | ||||||
15 | Illinois Courts, or his or her designee; | ||||||
16 | (2) the Attorney General, or his or her designee; | ||||||
17 | (3) the Director of State Police, or his or her | ||||||
18 | designee; | ||||||
19 | (3.5) the Secretary of the Department of Innovation and | ||||||
20 | Technology, or his or her designee; | ||||||
21 | (4) a State's Attorney from a county with more than | ||||||
22 | 3,000,000 residents, or his or her designee; |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | (5) a public defender from a county with more than | ||||||
2 | 3,000,000 residents, or his or her designee; | ||||||
3 | (6) a representative of the Office of the State's | ||||||
4 | Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor; | ||||||
5 | (7) a representative of the Office of the State | ||||||
6 | Appellate Defender; | ||||||
7 | (8) a representative of the Illinois State's Attorneys | ||||||
8 | Association, appointed by the Governor; | ||||||
9 | (9) a representative of the Illinois Public Defender | ||||||
10 | Association, appointed by the Governor; | ||||||
11 | (10) a representative from the Illinois Judges | ||||||
12 | Association, appointed by the Speaker of the House of | ||||||
13 | Representatives; | ||||||
14 | (11) a representative from the Illinois State Bar | ||||||
15 | Association, appointed by the Minority Leader of the House | ||||||
16 | of Representatives; | ||||||
17 | (12) a representative of the Chicago Bar Association, | ||||||
18 | appointed by the Senate President; | ||||||
19 | (13) a representative from the Illinois Sheriffs' | ||||||
20 | Association, appointed by the Senate Minority Leader; | ||||||
21 | (14) a representative from the Illinois Association of | ||||||
22 | Chiefs of Police, appointed by the Governor; | ||||||
23 | (15) the chief of police from a municipality with more | ||||||
24 | than 1,000,000 residents, or his or her designee; | ||||||
25 | (16) the sheriff from a county with more than 3,000,000 | ||||||
26 | residents, or his or her designee; and |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | (17) the Director of the Illinois Criminal Justice | ||||||
2 | Information Authority, or his or her designee. | ||||||
3 | (b) The Law Enforcement Information Task Force shall be | ||||||
4 | established within the Illinois Criminal Justice Information | ||||||
5 | Authority and the Illinois Criminal Justice Information | ||||||
6 | Authority shall serve as the technology and policy advisor to | ||||||
7 | assist the Task Force. The Illinois Criminal Justice | ||||||
8 | Information Authority shall work with State and local criminal | ||||||
9 | justice agencies to promote information sharing systems | ||||||
10 | through its access to technical expertise and its grant-making | ||||||
11 | powers for technology information projects. The Illinois | ||||||
12 | Criminal Justice Information Authority shall provide staff to | ||||||
13 | serve as a liaison between the Law Enforcement Information Task | ||||||
14 | Force and its stakeholders to provide guidance in criminal | ||||||
15 | justice information sharing, best practices and strategies, | ||||||
16 | and to effectuate the mission of the Task Force. | ||||||
17 | (c) The members of the Task Force shall elect a chair of | ||||||
18 | the Task Force. The chair of the Task Force shall convene the | ||||||
19 | first meeting of the Task Force on or before August 31, 2016. | ||||||
20 | The Task Force shall meet at least twice a month thereafter | ||||||
21 | until it completes its duties under this Act, or until December | ||||||
22 | 31, 2016, whichever is earlier. | ||||||
23 | Section 15. Duties of the Task Force.
| ||||||
24 | (a) The Task Force may consult with experts to provide | ||||||
25 | assistance as necessary. |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | (b) The Task Force shall: | ||||||
2 | (1) analyze the criminal discovery process in this | ||||||
3 | State to determine the actual costs, including, but not | ||||||
4 | limited to, labor, materials, time, and other tangible | ||||||
5 | costs of the current criminal discovery process to | ||||||
6 | determine how technology can improve the process for all | ||||||
7 | participants; | ||||||
8 | (2) analyze the process for information sharing, | ||||||
9 | including, but not limited to, an analysis of record | ||||||
10 | management systems, computer aided dispatch systems, and | ||||||
11 | other technology used to process information between law | ||||||
12 | enforcement agencies in this State to determine the actual | ||||||
13 | costs of the current process; | ||||||
14 | (3) analyze the current information sharing process | ||||||
15 | between law enforcement agencies to determine how | ||||||
16 | technology can improve the process for all participants; | ||||||
17 | (4) determine which prosecutors' offices obtain all | ||||||
18 | law enforcement discoverable evidence in an electronic | ||||||
19 | format, which prosecutors' offices will soon be able to | ||||||
20 | obtain all law enforcement discoverable evidence in an | ||||||
21 | electronic format, and which prosecutors' offices will not | ||||||
22 | have that ability at any point in the future without | ||||||
23 | assistance; | ||||||
24 | (5) determine the barriers for those prosecutors' | ||||||
25 | offices that will not be able to obtain law enforcement | ||||||
26 | discoverable evidence in an electronic format without |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | assistance; | ||||||
2 | (6) determine which law enforcement agencies obtain | ||||||
3 | and utilize data entirely, or partially, in an electronic | ||||||
4 | format, which law enforcement agencies will soon be able to | ||||||
5 | obtain and utilize data entirely in an electronic format, | ||||||
6 | and which law enforcement agencies will not be able to | ||||||
7 | obtain and utilize data entirely in an electronic format at | ||||||
8 | any point in the future without assistance; | ||||||
9 | (7) study how a single statewide criminal information | ||||||
10 | sharing system or other technology may improve electronic | ||||||
11 | discovery or electronic redaction; | ||||||
12 | (8) study how a statewide standardized law enforcement | ||||||
13 | reporting form that can be easily redacted may improve the | ||||||
14 | criminal discovery process; | ||||||
15 | (9) study the short-term needs for law enforcement | ||||||
16 | agencies and State's Attorneys to facilitate greater use of | ||||||
17 | electronic discovery and information sharing; | ||||||
18 | (10) study whether a single standardized statewide | ||||||
19 | case record management system or other law enforcement | ||||||
20 | technology would provide better and additional access to | ||||||
21 | information for law enforcement; | ||||||
22 | (11) determine whether a single standardized statewide | ||||||
23 | case record management system or other electronic | ||||||
24 | discovery technology would provide for a better and more | ||||||
25 | efficient criminal discovery process and offer any cost | ||||||
26 | savings; |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | (12) determine whether a single standardized statewide | ||||||
2 | case record management system or other information sharing | ||||||
3 | technology would provide for a better and more efficient | ||||||
4 | law enforcement information sharing process and offer any | ||||||
5 | cost savings; | ||||||
6 | (13) suggest an alternative funding process to the | ||||||
7 | State's current method to pay for criminal discovery costs; | ||||||
8 | (14) suggest an alternative funding process to the | ||||||
9 | State's current method to pay for law enforcement | ||||||
10 | information sharing costs; | ||||||
11 | (15) determine which executive branch agency, judicial | ||||||
12 | branch agency, or quasi-governmental organization is best | ||||||
13 | suited to serve as a conduit and coordinator for a | ||||||
14 | statewide criminal electronic discovery system; and | ||||||
15 | (16) determine which executive branch agency, judicial | ||||||
16 | branch agency, or quasi-governmental organization is best | ||||||
17 | suited to serve as a conduit and coordinator for a | ||||||
18 | statewide criminal information sharing system. | ||||||
19 | Section 20. Preliminary and final report. | ||||||
20 | (a) The Task Force shall provide a preliminary report to | ||||||
21 | the Governor and General Assembly on or before December 15, | ||||||
22 | 2016, if the final report is not completed by then. | ||||||
23 | (b) The Task Force shall issue a final report to the | ||||||
24 | Governor and General Assembly on or before January 15, 2017. | ||||||
25 | The report shall include recommendations for legislation, use |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | of technology, and other non-legislative processes that would | ||||||
2 | improve the criminal discovery process and law enforcement | ||||||
3 | information sharing.
| ||||||
4 | Section 25. Repeal. This Act is repealed on February 1, | ||||||
5 | 2017. | ||||||
6 | Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon | ||||||
7 | becoming law. |