VA-ROL Archives

March 2006

VA-ROL@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mark Walsh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Virginia Records Officer's Listserv <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:51:20 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (133 lines)
Folks can also see the text of HB 209 at
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+ful+HB209ER 


G. Mark Walsh, C.A.
Records & Information Analyst
Archival & Records Management Services
Library of Virginia
(804) 692-3650

-----Original Message-----
From: Virginia Records Officer's Listserv
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jones, Virginia
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Senate Bill 461

For those who are interested, the wording of the new law can be found at
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+ful+SB461ER


Ginny Jones
(Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI)
Records Manager
Information Technology Division
Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities
Newport News, VA
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Virginia Records Officer's Listserv
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ervin L. Jordan Jr.
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Senate Bill 461

Conley:
        Could the law be reworded to require destruction of materials
within 6 months after signed approval on a RM-3 form?
EJ
Prof. Ervin L. Jordan Jr.
University of Virginia Records Manager
Research Archivist, Special Collections

--On Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:37 AM -0500 "Jones, Virginia"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Conley:
>
> I see that SB461 has passed and been enrolled as law, thus creating 
> multiple retention issues for localities.
> I note that section "B" of the law now states that we MUST destroy 
> records within six months of the expired retention period "in 
> accordance with the provisions of this chapter."  I also note that the

> provisions include the statement "authorized to be destroyed or 
> discarded in accordance with subsection A." Like many others, we are 
> in the process of updating our Department retention schedule and have 
> determined some records series require a longer retention period than 
> established by the general schedules due to business need 
> (Administrative Value).
> What is the process for "renegotiation of the relevant schedule" as 
> stated in subsection "A" of the enrolled bill?  Would we use this 
> process to receive approval for our longer retention periods based on 
> Administrative Value?  If not, what process shall we use?
>
> Ginny Jones
> (Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI)
> Records Manager
> Information Technology Division
> Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities Newport News, VA 
> [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Hathcock [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: Jones, Virginia
> Cc: Conley Edwards
> Subject: Senate Bill 461
>
> Ginny:
>
> Thank you for your inquiry about Senate Bill 461. A subscriber to the 
> list sent your message to me since Conley Edwards and I have been 
> working on this legislation. Since I am not a member of your list can 
> you post my reply to the group? Thank you.
>
> In our discussions with members of the General Assembly and the 
> Attorney General's Office we have repeatedly emphasized the complexity

> of the issues of the retention and destruction of public records. We 
> also pointed out that the study commission on the Virginia Public 
> Records Act was unable to reach consensus on this issue. Both
> HB959 and SB461 were part of the Attorney General's legislative 
> package.
>
> Conley Edwards is out of the office until Monday. He has been working 
> with Senator Davis, Delegate Cox, the Attorney General's Office and 
> the lobbyist for the Circuit Court Clerks on this legislation. Several

> changes to this legislation were considered. Hopefully, the reporting 
> requirement will give us an opportunity to again highlight concerns 
> and problems with this legislation as it relates not only to the 
> Library of Virginia but to state and local agencies.
>
> I am certain that Conley will get in touch with you upon his return 
> with his thoughts as to how the Library will address this legislation.
>
> Jan Hathcock
> Library of Virginia
> 800 East Broad Street
> Richmond, VA 23219-8000
> 804-692-3592
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, change options, or subscribe, please see the 
> instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-rol.html (If 
> using Netscape, must have version 6.1 or higher to view the above 
> page)

To UNSUBSCRIBE, change options, or subscribe, please see the
instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-rol.html
(If using Netscape, must have version 6.1 or higher to view the above
page)

To UNSUBSCRIBE, change options, or subscribe, please see the
instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-rol.html
(If using Netscape, must have version 6.1 or higher to view the above
page)

To UNSUBSCRIBE, change options, or subscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-rol.html
(If using Netscape, must have version 6.1 or higher to view the above page)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2