Voice from the Vault
By Gregory Sanford, State Archivist

Public records certainly have been getting a lot of ink lately. National attention has been drawn to Howard Dean’s gubernatorial records. Databases compiled by municipal appraisers have been subject to litigation pitting right to know arguments against privacy concerns. A legislatively-mandated study committee on municipal land records is wrestling with traditions of local control confronting the centralizing tendencies of economic and technological realities. Hearings on allowable charges for copies of public records heard from public officials about unremunerated costs of staff time, and from citizens about how staff time charges would make copies prohibitively expensive. A fire in the Winooski municipal clerk’s office made us all think about disaster planning and the security of our records.

Government recordkeeping does not usually receive such attention. And that is as it should be; recordkeeping should be invisible. And yet recordkeeping does not take place in a vacuum and changes in the larger society affect the environment within which recordkeepers work.

The unusual and heavy use of gubernatorial records is obviously related to the successes of Howard Dean’s campaign for the presidential nomination. Beyond the immediate impact on staff time, the use of the Archives for political, as opposed to institutional, purposes inspires a rethinking of traditional processes. What is it we want or need to document about a gubernatorial administration and what records best support that goal? How do we balance our right to know with the legal authorities a governor properly exercises to protect policy development? How can we separate the intertwined realities that gubernatorial records document both individual administrations and institutional continuities that bridge administrations? And how, when news media begin to focus on the use of the records, do we protect researchers’ ability to inspect records without media scrutiny?

The issues surrounding the municipal appraisal records are linked, in part, to enhanced access through new technologies. What to we mean by "public" record when public now entails the ability to share information globally through the Internet? The changing nature of "public" leads us to re-examine what information government collects, in what form, and whether privacy safeguards can be established without diminishing our right to know? For an earlier discussion of this issue see Voice from the Vault in the October 2003 Opinions.

Changing technologies and economic patterns also raise questions about cherished traditions of local control versus external centralizing forces. The study committee on municipal land records has heard strong arguments against mandates on how a municipality manages land records. It has also heard from key users of land records about how local control has created a patchwork of practices that may lead lending institutions and title insurers to withhold services from some municipalities. How can we shape recordkeeping practices so that local governments can respond to change without being overwhelmed by technological and market forces—or by new mandates? For an earlier discussion of standardization see Voice from the Vault in the September 2003 Opinions.

The information held in public records is, arguably, the most valuable resource controlled by government. Public records prove a citizen’s and government’s ownership of property, provide government accountability, allow for the measurement of policy decisions, and contain significant economic, environmental and demographic information. Extracting that information in response to requests for copies of public records can be expensive, particularly in terms of staff time. Who should bear the costs? Can we rethink our recordkeeping systems to allow the better identification of records, including distinguishing between open and exempt records, to reduce the costs of responding to copy requests? However we define the issue or whatever solutions we envision, how do we effect a cultural change in an environment where recordkeeping is seen as separate from, and subservient to, service delivery?

The four hour fire rated vault in the Winooski municipal offices, by all accounts, protected the records stored within it. Yet the potential loss of electronic records because computers were not effectively backed-up raises questions for all of us charged with preserving public records. Again, this more than a technology-inspired issue. For example, recent case law and legislation has extended the range of documentation associated with maintaining marketable title to property. In many cases those (primarily zoning) records are not stored in town vaults but in the offices of the administrators. What would happen to property titles if those records were lost in a fire? But how can municipalities afford vaults adequate to the growing volume and extent of public records?

Each of these recent records-related stories raises opportunities to emphasize the importance of recordkeeping and attract support for our work. The Archives hopes to add a new section on disaster planning to its web site, while the collections care program of the Vermont Museum and Gallery Alliance is developing a cooperative emergency response program for records. The legislature may soon be taking up a wide range of record issues, providing opportunities for municipal and state recordkeepers to shape new approaches. Our time is now—let us make the most of it.

Table of Contents     |     Past Issues of Opinions     |     Secretary of State's Homepage
 

Opinions of Opinions

1. Nominating Petitions Must Include Office and Term Length. In municipalities using the Australian ballot system for election of officers Vermont law requires that candidates clearly indicate the office and term length on the petition prior to circulating it for signatures. 17 V.S.A. §2681(b). For example, a candidate cannot circulate a petition for selectboard without indicating which term he or she is seeking. It is permissible for a person to circulate two or three different petitions for selectboard, one petition for the one year seat, one for the remaining year of a three year term, and one for the three year term, and then wait until the filing deadline to decide which petition to submit to the Town Clerk. However, a candidate cannot circulate a petition for signatures without a term length and then add or change the term length after signatures have been obtained.

12. Board Of Abatement Has Alternative Quorum Requirements. The board of civil authority, with the listers and the town treasurer, makes up the board for the abatement of town, town school district taxes, and current use taxes. In the alternative the quorum requirement will be met if the town treasurer, a majority of the listers and a majority of the selectmen are present at the meeting. Unlike most other local boards, an act of a majority of a quorum at a meeting is all that is required for the board to act. 24 V.S.A. § 1533.

Mark Your Calendar with the
Vermont League of Cities and Towns' Upcoming Events!

Table of Contents     |     Past Issues of Opinions     |     Secretary of State's Homepage
 

Announcing the 2003-04 Poster and Essay Contest

Tip of the Month
By Doreen Aldrich, Clerk/Treasurer from Rockingham

Volunteers Wanted: VPSA 2004

Mailing List Updates

December 2003 Calendar

January 2004 Calendar

January 2: (60 days before Town Meeting) Last day to warn the first public hearing if a charter adoption,amendment or repeal is to be voted at Town Meeting. 17:2641(a), 2645(a)(6)

January 6: Legislature reconvenes (second year of biennium).

January 15: Last day for Tax Collector to deliver unpaid real and personal property tax lists to Treasurer. 32:5162

January 15: Last day for Town Clerk to remit to State Treasurer an accounting of dog
and wolf-hybrid licenses sold and remit the license fee surcharge for an animal and rabies control program. 20:3581(f)

January 19: Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Birthday. 1:371

January 22: 40 days before Town Meeting
· Last day to file petitions signed by at least five percent of voters with Town Clerk for articles to be included in Town Meeting warnings. 17:2642(a)
· The legislative body has its first opportunity to warn the annual Town Meeting and the Presidential Primary for Major Party Candidates, and post the warning and notices in two public places and in or near the Town Clerk’s office. 17:2641(a), 17:2642, 17:2701

January 25: State Withholding Tax Return is due (actual date by which return must be postmarked is shown on printed return) if reporting less than $2,500 per quarter. More than $2,500 requires monthly report; more than $9,000 requires semiweekly report. 32:5842

January 26: (Sixth Monday before election) 5:00 p.m. deadline for filing with the Town Clerk nominating petitions for town offices to be filled by Australian Ballot. 17:2681(a) Within 24 hours from receipt Town Clerk must return nominating petitions found not to conform, stating in writing the reasons why they cannot be accepted. 17:2681(e)

January 27: Last day for Auditors to post 10 days’ notice of their meeting to examine town accounts. 24:1681

January 28: (Wednesday after filing deadline) 5:00 p.m. deadline for candidates to file written consent for the candidate’s name to be on the ballot. 17:2681(a)

January 28: 5:00 p.m. deadline for a person to withdraw after he or she has consented to be nominated. 17:2681(d) or 5:00 p.m. deadline for candidates to file supplementary petitions if initial petition was not accepted. 17:2681(e)

January 30: Last day for Town Clerk in municipality with fiscal year ending December 31 to publicly disclose fees kept as compensation for that fiscal year. 24:1179

January 31: Last day to mail W-2 Withholding Forms to employees and last day to file Form 941 (Quarterly Withholding Return) with the IRS.