STATE ARCHIVES AND RECORDS COMMISSION
Minutes of the Quarterly Meeting
March 10, 2005
Department for Libraries and Archives
The State Archives and Records Commission met at 10:00 a.m., Thursday, March 10, 2005, in the Board Room, Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives (KDLA), 300 Coffee Tree Road, Frankfort, Kentucky.
Members present: Dr. Thomas D. Clark, representing the University of Kentucky; Sandra L. McAninch, representing the Kentucky Library Association; James F. Kastner, representing the Kentucky Historical Society; Paul F. Coates, representing Citizens-at-Large; Dr. Jack D. Ellis, representing Citizens-at-Large; James E. Horner, representing Citizens-at-Large.
Representatives present: Sally Hamilton, representing Virginia G. Fox, Secretary, Education Cabinet; Amye Bensenhaver, representing Gregory D. Stumbo, Attorney General; Brian Lykins, representing Crit Luallen, Auditor of Public Accounts; Geoff Pinkerton, representing Brad Cowgill, State Budget Director, Governor’s Office of Policy and Management; Leslie Smith, representing; and Charles Robb, representing Michael Inman, Commissioner of Technology, Commonwealth Office of Technology.
Members not present or represented: James A. Nelson, Chairman; Joseph E. Lambert, Chief Justice, Supreme Court; Robert Sherman, Director, Legislative Research Commission; and Lynne Hollingsworth representing Citizens-at-Large.
Public Records Division staff present: Richard N. Belding, Director, Public Records Division; Barbara Teague, Manager, Archival Services Branch; Jerry Carlton, Manager, Local Records Branch; Glen McAninch, Manager, Technology Analysis and Support Branch; Jim Cundy, Acting Manager, State Records Branch; Mark Myers, Resource Management Analyst; Larry Barnett, Local Records Regional Administrator; Trace Kirkwood, Local Records Regional Administrator; Tim McIntosh, Local Records Regional Administrator; and Sunnye Smith, Local Records Grants and Contracts Specialist.
Guests present: There were no guests present.
Richard Belding presided, in the absence of James A. Nelson, Chair.
Belding called for introductions by those present.
Dr. Ellis made a motion to accept the minutes of the previous Commission meeting, seconded by Ms. McAninch. The vote by members and representatives present was unanimous.
NEW OR REVISED RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULES
Lexington/Fayette Urban County Government (LFUCG) Retention Schedule
Carlton was the regional administrator working on this schedule. The schedules under consideration are the Department of Public Works, which includes of the Division of Sanitary Sewers (changes to series L5404, L5409, L5411, L5413; adding series L5810); the Department of Finance, which includes the Division of Accounting (change to series L3202); and the Department of Administrative Services, which includes the Division of Risk Management, Claims Unit (adding series L5808). The three schedules were considered as a group.
Carlton said that this is a part of the continuing effort to update the LFUCG Records Retention Schedule that the State Archives and Records Commission approved on September 9, 2004. The Department of Public Works is adding two series to encompass all daily and monthly reporting by Public Works staff: Series L5409 is changing from Start/Run Time Report for Pump Stations to Daily Reports. Series L5413 is changing from Sludge Hauling Monthly Report to Monthly Reports. Series L5810, Permit File, allows LFUCG operation of wastewater treatment plants. This permit is federally mandated and available through Kentucky’s Division of Water. Series L5808, Insurance Policy File (Property and Casualty) was an inadvertent omission from the LFUCG schedule and its retention period matches the retention period for the equivalent series on the Local Government General Records Retention Schedule.
Dr. Clark made a motion to adopt the schedule, seconded by Mr. Coates. The vote by members and representatives present was unanimous.
Public School District Retention Schedule – Student Records
Carlton was the regional administrator working on this schedule. The series being added to the schedule is L5807, Section 504 Record File (504) Plan.
Carlton said that this series involves the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a civil rights statute. This legislation requires a plan for every student qualifying under the statute, which covers physical and mental disabilities. This series was brought to his attention by the senior attorney for the Kentucky School Boards Association.
Ms. McAninch made a motion to adopt the changes, seconded by Mr. Horner. The vote by members and representatives present was unanimous.
The next item was Other Business.
Belding said that he had distributed KDLA’s legislative tracking document to commission members. This document took in fifty-six bills that had passed both houses, four of which had been signed into law. He called attention to HB 59, “An Act relating to public agencies and declaring an emergency.” He noted the bill’s homeland-security focus, and that it amended 61.878 to create new exceptions to the Open Records Act. The primary target of the legislation is assessment studies of vulnerabilities of government or other facilities that might be open to terrorism. It also applies to certain aspects of the Commonwealth’s information technology and to records that might go into the creation of vulnerability studies. Horner asked if there were a provision in the bill for an appeals process. Bensenhaver responded that the existing process for resolving open records disputes, through the Office of the Attorney General, applies in this case.
Belding called attention to HB 77, “An Act relating to the dissemination of public information.” As originally drafted, the bill related to distribution by the Office of the Attorney General to a wide variety of public officials of information relating to the Open Meetings Act, Open Records Act, and the state’s public records management laws. A Senate Committee Substitute required that KRS 61.878 be amended to provide a legal structure for a deed of gift for a federal official who wished to leave his/her public papers to a university, or a similar institution, and to be able to define the terms of access to those papers. The bill is said to apply only to federal officials, rather than to state or local officials, though it would need to be tested. He noted the department’s support for efforts to locate public officials’ papers in an environment that would facilitate research by historians and others, and that this bill may provide further legal support for those efforts.
He said that as a substantive portion of the bill involves the dissemination of records management information to a large selection of public officials in the Commonwealth (local government officials, superintendents of public school districts, and presidents of public universities), the bill is of special interest to KDLA. While the bill places the responsibility for dissemination of the information with the Attorney General’s Office, KDLA would be working closely with that office to determine the content the information would include and the different means by which the information would be disseminated (e.g., electronically, etc.). He noted that the bill also calls for the disseminator of the information to require signatory proof from officials that they had received the information and to retain the documentation as proof of the officials’ receipt. He said that this represented an opportunity for the systematic heightening of awareness of records management among public officials, especially where there had been turnover in a given office.
In response to a question by Horner, Belding noted that the bill becomes effective July 13, 2005 and that the department is required to provide the Attorney General information for dissemination within sixty (60) days of that date. The Attorney General then has thirty (30) days to see that the information is distributed. He noted that this represents an opportunity to examine the information distributed to local officials, to assess the format in which the information is distributed, and to account for the varied levels of preparation and understanding among officials regarding records management.
Belding noted that the department plans to submit another request for the upcoming capital planning budget. The purpose of the request is to facilitate more effective storage of records in original format, of which the department still maintains a substantial amount in spite of the increasing prevalence of records in electronic format and because of the unlikelihood of funding for reformatting. He noted that capital planning by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) involves $205 million for facilities that have little space for records storage. This is due to the belief of AOC decision makers that records storage and research access are KDLA’s responsibility, rather than that of the local courts. This means that KDLA will need to have adequate storage space to house the 30,000 – 60,000 cubic feet of judicial records that it will be accessioning in the relatively near future. This is in addition to the records that KDLA accessions from other state agencies. Thus, the need for an upgraded facility affects not only KDLA, but state government as a whole. He said that the capital budget planning process would begin with the department’s submission of a request to the Education Cabinet and to the Capital Planning Advisory Board by April 15, 2005. The Board would hold public hearings regarding individual projects in July and August, and would make recommendations to the Governor in late September or early October.
Belding also noted that he had met with management staff of the Buffalo Trace Distillery, where the department leases 55,000 square feet of space and maintains approximately 100,000 cubic feet of records. Seventy-five agencies make use of the facilities and approximately 35,000 transactions take place annually that involve the department’s leased space there. Distillery management may need additional warehouse space for alcohol storage, so that they may be reducing leased space. This means that lessees may need to relocate at some time in the future. There is no definitive time-table for this, though department staff would need to know when this is going occur so it could be included in KDLA’s capital request. The request includes a section regarding projected impacts on space over the next three biennia (2006-2012). Buffalo Trace management staff do not foresee drastic changes before 2007. The department needs to plan for this. One possible solution is a build-to-suit option in which a landlord is given a tenancy commitment in exchange for the landlord’s construction of a facility to suit the department’s needs.
Belding raised the issue of the commission’s adoption of a code of ethics statement of agreement, which had been tabled at the last meeting. He said that he had spoken to the commission’s former counsel Ryan Halloran, and that Halloran would try to secure copies of agreements other boards and commission has passed. Belding noted that several members of the Archives and Records Commission had expressed concern over potential conflicts between their roles as commission members and others of their duties, and that examples from other entities might help those members in the adoption of an appropriate code of ethics. He recommended that the issue be tabled until the next meeting, when members would have those examples before them.
Mr. Horner made a motion to table the completion of a statement of agreement with a code of ethics that is specific to the State Archives and Records Commission until the June 9, 2005 meeting, seconded by Mr. Coates. The vote by members and representatives present was unanimous.
Belding noted that the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) had been zero-funded in President Bush’s proposed budget. The NHPRC is the grant funding unit of the National Archives and Records Administration. It operates locally through State Historical Records Advisory Boards (SHRAB), the aggregate of which is the Council of State Historical Records Coordinators (COSHRC). Kentucky’s SHRAB has existed since 1976, and numerous and varied repositories throughout the Commonwealth have benefited from NHPRC grants. Interested parties should contact legislators, especially Senator McConnell, who serves on the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Representatives Rogers and Northup, both of whom serve on the House Appropriations Committee. Belding said that this was money that had been spent effectively throughout the Commonwealth and that commission members had been provided with a packet in front of them detailing NHPRC’s contributions to archival programs and initiatives in Kentucky. In response to a comment by Dr. Clark, Belding noted that, in addition to grant funds, funds for publication would be ceased. Belding also said that, while there has been movement toward combining separate administrative entities into one large entity to give grants, the grants awarded by NHPRC tend to be smaller and would not likely be competitive with other types of grants, for example, those given by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Belding moved to consideration of Local Records grants. He recognized Carlton who expressed appreciation for his staff. Carlton said that, due to the current vacant Regional Administrator position, the Regional Administrators completed work in counties in addition to their regularly assigned ones. Sunnye Smith performed administrative work on all the grants, completing them in a timely and admirable fashion. The Local Records Branch has $430,000 to award as grant funds for FY2006. The total before the commission is $328,890, with the remainder to be awarded at the June 9, 2005 commission meeting. Nearly one-half of the grant funds awarded this round ($162,107) is for microfilming, the top priority of the grants program. More and more of any future microfilming will be done from digital images of public records. Changes in technology have also allowed the distribution of grants to help address the presence of aperture cards in county clerks’ offices. Six or seven of these offices have utilized them at some point in the past. Of particular note, the Barren County Clerk is receiving funds to have electronic images created from aperture cards. Those images will be downloaded into the clerk’s imaging system. Belding noted that aperture cards are IBM-type cards containing both information about a record and a window displaying a film insert of the record. The challenge is to capture the information on both the card and the film, digitize them, and combine them through indexing. The department has acquired software that allows this to be done.
Ms. McAninch asked about instances in which amounts recommended exceed amounts requested. Carlton responded that this occurs in grants given for microfilming which involve duplication and quality control after the microfilming is completed. Quality control work is an essential part of the microfilming process.
Dr. Clark made a motion to recommend the grants to Commissioner Nelson for his approval, seconded by Dr. Ellis. The vote by members and representatives present was unanimous.
Belding said that the amendment to the existing administrative regulation giving instruction to state agencies regarding distribution of their electronic publications was heard by the State Government Committee in late February and was formally effective on March 3, 2005. The regulation will be updated on the Internet on April 1, 2005. As with HB 77, this represents an opportunity for contact with agencies to update officials and staff on proper records management procedures.
Pinkerton noted that in its Conference Committee changes to HB 267, the legislature recommended that the Kentucky History Center be renamed the Thomas D. Clark History Center.
There being no further business, Belding adjourned the meeting at 11:00 a.m.