Print

Print


In my opinion the way for state agencies, municipalities, and counties that have minimum retention requirements imposed upon them by their respective State is to view it as another regulatory agency minimum requirement; same as those imposed by Fed agencies such as the SEC, NRC, FERC, EPA, OSHA, etc.

The retention policy factors of Admin, Fiscal, Regulatory, Legal, and Historic still apply with the retention for a particular record series being the longest of these considered, researched, and evaluated factors.  The state requirement is just another Regulatory factor.  None of the above regulatory agencies purport to tell us when we should destroy, just the minimum time to meet their needs..., or the purported needs of the citizenry.

With the exception of not liking regulations, I have no problem with the State having requirements just the same as do many USA Federal regulatory agencies.  I actually find the State of Nevada regulations to be a handy reference tool.

Best regards, Steve
Steven D. Whitaker, CRM
Records Systems Manager, City of Reno

>>> "King, Doug" <[log in to unmask]> 03/13/02 07:02AM >>>
Larry --

Kansas State retention schedules for counties use the "minimum retention"
wording, which seems to be a common approach for State mandated retention
schedules that apply to local governments. Part of what's going on here is
allowing local units of government a measure of freedom to run their own
affairs (or hand themselves, I suppose). There may be a bit of humility at
the State level, a recognition that one size fits all doesn't always.

For Sedgwick County Records Management Policy, drafted by me and adopted by
resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, holds that the minimum
retention periods set in State retention schedules issued by the Kansas
State Historical Society under the authority of the Kansas Government
Records Preservation Act will be the MAXIMUM retention periods for Sedgwick
County, unless a custodian recommends to the Records Manager and the RM
approves otherwise on each exception. So far, I have extended only one: the
County Controller wants to retain POs/PVs for five years, rather than the
three set by KSHS, to provide a better basis for research. And this call
proved apt -- we are currently engaged in a major research project that
involves searching back through these records. For now, this exception
process is a matter of a conversation and a handshake (we are a fairly
informal organization), but it may need to become more formal at some point.


==================================================================
Douglas K. King, Records Manager / Freedom of Information Officer
Sedgwick County DIO - Records Management Services
Sedgwick County Courthouse / 525 N Main Ste 112 /  Wichita KS 67203-3782
VOICE 316/660-9846   FAX 316/383-4699 (ATTN: DKing)
mailto:[log in to unmask]   www.sedgwickcounty.org

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance