►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting 07-28-09 10b. City Records Retention Schedule
A
B
You,
mr.
vice
mayor,
so
this
evening
were
requesting
that
the
City
Council
adopt
a
new
records,
a
retention
program
and
I
have
to
say
this.
The
pleasure
of
both
myself
and
the
city
clerk
who
has
worked
on
this
quite
a
bit
to
present
this
program
and
while
records
retention
might
not
seem
the
most
exciting
topic.
I
have
to
tell
you.
It
is
really
really
an
important
thing
to
do.
For
two
reasons.
B
One
is
that
this
records
retention
program
will
put
us
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
the
government
code,
which
has
a
statutory
scheme
that
sets
forth
when
public
records
may
be
destroyed
or
how
long
they
need
to
be
retained
when
they
may
be
destroyed
and
under
what
conditions.
So
this
would
bring
us
into
compliance
with
that
and
we
do
have
an
existing
policy
that
it
was
very
difficult
to
use
and
therefore,
records
have
been
retained
much
longer
than
perhaps
they
need
to
be.
B
Which
brings
me
to
the
second
reason:
it's
important
to
have
a
good
records
retention
policy
and
program,
and
that
is
for
the
efficiency
of
the
organization.
It's
good
government
and
it's
part
of
Best
Managed
best
practices
and
what
a
records
retention
program
when
it
is
well
done,
can
do
for
a
city
in
terms
of
its
efficiency.
Is
it
can
help?
You
really
better
know
what
records
you
have
make
it
easier
and
more
efficient
for
staff
to
identify
and
locate
records.
It
will
make
it
easier
for
the
public.
B
Excuse
me
for
the
public
to
access
records
under
Zack
requests
and
for
employees
to
identify,
locate
and
provide
those
documents,
and
it
also
reduces
costs,
because,
when
you're
retaining
documents
for
long
periods
of
time
that
perhaps
are
duplicates
or
are
unnecessary
for
the
organization
to
maintain
beyond
a
certain
point
that
we're
just
paying
huge
storage
costs
to
keep
them
for
no
real
reason
and
that
takes
away
from
efficiency
and
increases
our
cost.
The
way
that
the
policy
was
developed.
What
was
in
consult
in
consultation
with
a
records
expert?
B
There
was
great
coordination
among
the
departments,
and
our
directive
from
the
city
manager
was
to
ensure
that
the
policy
did
a
couple
of
things,
but,
most
importantly,
that
it
be
internally
consistent
and
then
we
exercise
care
to
not
destroy
records
unnecessarily,
to
make
sure
that
they
were
retained
for
the
minimum
period.
That
is
required
not
only
under
the
government
code
but
for
the
efficient
operations
of
our
government.
B
And
lastly,
we
wanted
it
to
be
really
understandable
and
easy
to
follow,
which
the
last
records
retention
program,
the
reason
was
not
used
was
because
it
wasn't
created
in
consultation
with
all
of
the
staff
members
and
was
not
easy
to
follow.
One
example
of
it
if
I
can,
if
I
can,
if
you
can
bear
with
me
on
this,
if
you
look
in
the
packet
at
the
retention
policy
and
I'm
looking
at
the
very
last
page-
and
this
is
the
one
I'm
probably
most
familiar
with
it.
B
Just
to
give
you
an
example:
it's
how
the
policy
applies
to
my
department,
the
City,
Attorney's
Office,
so,
for
example,
claims
which
you
know
we
receive
government
claims
alleging.
You
know
various
issues
for
which
the
city
could
be
potentially
liable.
This
is
on
about
the
I
think
about
the
fourth
line.
B
We've
indicated
here
what
formats
they
can
legally
be
converted
into
and
destroy
the
paper
document
and
also
the
different
government
code
or
other
applicable
statutes
that
might
need
to
be
consulted
before
a
record
is
destroyed
and
the
way
the
record
would
be
destroyed
is
pursuant
to
the
minimum
statutory
period
or
excuse
me
policy
period.
It
would
still
need
to
be
the
approval
and
consent
of
both
the
department
of
the
department
head,
the
city
clerk
and
the
city
attorney.
So
that's
a
way.
We've
organized
the
program.
B
What
your
resolution
would
do,
if
you
authorize
it
this
evening,
is
it
would
adopt
this
new
policy.
It
would
rescind
the
old
policy
it
would
allow
documents
to
be
retained
and
destroyed
along
the
lines
that
have
indicated,
and
it
also
provides
the
authority
to
the
city,
manager
and
consultation
with
the
department
heads
the
clerk
and
city
manager
to
make
adjustments
as
we
go
along
in
this
program
to
the
retention
period.
At
this
times
as
the
City
Council
have
any
questions
for
me,
questions
of.
C
Do
it
sheriff
a
couple
questions
so
obviously
there's
various
methods
in
which
the
information
will
be
stored
and
then,
of
course,
the
hard
copy
will
be
destroyed.
So
let's
say
we're
doing
document
imaging
as
one
method
is
there
any
system
or
anyone
that's
going
through
to
do
spot
checks
to
verify
that
the
imagery
is
actually
legible
and
clear
so
that
there's
a
checks
and
balance
to
be
so
we
don't
destroy
it
all
of
a
sudden
go
to
retrieve
it
and
all
of
a
sudden.
It
just
didn't
work
that
way.
B
C
B
That's
what
I'm,
referring
to
you,
raise
a
really
good
point,
because
not
all
formats
are
it's
not
necessarily
always
a
good
idea
to
convert
something
to
a
different
format
because
of
those
issues
and
because
of
changes
in
technology.
So
sometimes
it's
actually
better
just
to
keep
the
paper
until
the
end
of
the
retention
period.
Okay,.
C
And
I
know
that
it
probably
has
been
some
time.
Maybe
since
City
Hall
moved
to
bay
hill,
since
of
records
have
been
gone
through
and
boxes
and
I
obviously
know
we
have
an
abundance
and
I
remember
doing
microfiche
imaging
when
I
was
for
the
city
when
I
work
for
the
city
and
saw
it
goes
back
a
long
way
and
I
know
that
that
is
outdated
technology
and,
as
you
said,
it
does
change.
One
of
my
other
questions
was
on
the
resolution
under
Section
3.
C
It
makes
reference
that
with
the
consent
of
the
department
had
city
clerk
manager
and
attorney
updates
to
the
retention
periods
are
hereby
authorized
to
be
made
in
the
records
retention
schedules
without
any
further
action
by
the
council
of
the
city
of
San
Bruno.
So
why
would
the
council
not
want
to
be
updated
or
have
any
type
of
an
input,
if
necessary
in
regards
to
modifications
or
changes
to
that?
You.
B
Can
certainly
retain
the
authority
to
do
it
and
the
question
is:
do
you
really
want
this
to
come
to
City
Council
for
making
minor
modifications
to
retention
schedules,
as
I
indicated
as
we
go
along
and
using
it,
we
may
find
that
there
are
some
changes
that
may
be
necessitated,
so
it's
really
just
a
question
for
you
whether
you
want
to
retain
all
of
that
authority
or
whether
you
think
it's
appropriate
for
the
city
manager
and
consult
in
consultation.
I
consent
with
those
four
name:
department,
heads
and
the
city,
clerk
and
city
manager.
C
We
just
said
it
was
just
that
up
here,
maybe
if
it's
to
modify
them
to
have
state
statutes
or
requirements,
but
here
to
me
it
leaves
it
open
to
the
discretion
of
these
folks
to
modify
it,
which
could
be
different
than
the
state
statute.
Technically,
are
you
saying
we
can't
supersede
that
so
in
essence,
it
can
be
no
shorter
than
only
it
can
write
longer
them
correct.
C
There
anything
that
falls
under
here-
that's
not
statutory,
then
for
the
city
of
the
municipal,
the
city
that
we're
doing
here,
that
we're
making
determinations
I'm
sorry.
So
there's
certain
state
requirements
for
a
lot
of
stuff.
Is
there
it
I
tamir.
There
are
not
under
the
state
statute
for
destruction
only.
B
Whether
when
there's
a
question
of
interpretation,
as
do
we,
you
know
not
every
single
type
of
document
is
listed
under
the
government
code.
So
one
of
the
problems,
for
example,
with
our
last
policy,
was
it
wasn't
necessarily
clear
what
it
fell
under.
So
we've
made
a
decision
about
what
category
that
falls
under
and
therefore
the
minimum
requirement
for
that
document.
I
hope.
C
That
it
it
does-
and
it
just
brings
me
back
to
the
point-
I
understand
the
State
statue
and
that
dictates
to
us.
So
it
is
what
it
is,
but
when
we
start
having
gray
areas,
I
don't
know
if
that
is
something
that
should
not
at
times
come
back
for
council
review
just
so
that
the
council
is
aware
of
what
is
being
destroyed
and
at
what
time
line.
That's.
D
A
Sorry
to
me,
the
interplay
we're
getting
organized,
but
it's
my
understanding
that
there
are
departments
that
there
is
just
so
much
so
many
files
that
are
backed
up
and
everything
are
actually
stored
in
various
parts
of
the
city
of
it
is.
Is
that
going
to
make
it
take
a
significant
impact
or
we're
going
to
be
able
to
eliminate
yeah.
A
B
I
think
from
state
statute,
and
the
one
thing
I
wanted
to
be
clear
about
is
in
some
cases,
we've
elected
to
have
a
longer
period,
certainly
not
less
than
the
state
requires,
but
we
were
more
conservative
in
our
approach
to
a
number
of
documents
to
ensure
that
they
were
available
to
the
institution
I'm
going
forward.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
and.
B
C
I'm
just
going
to
go
back
to
the
section
three
that
I
would
like
to
see
that
modified
to.
We
don't
need
to
see
things
or
state-mandated
I,
don't
want
to
overwhelm
us,
but
things
that
don't
fall
under
that
jurisdiction.
I
would
like
to
see
that
I'm
recommending
that
those
items
come
back
to
the
council
if
they're
modifying
destroying
records
so.
C
B
I
was
saying
was
making
a
discrimination
is
to
what
category
certain
records
fall
under
and
then
based
on
that
category.
You
know
it
could
be
two
years
five
years,
ten
years.
That's
where
our
last
policy
really
wasn't
clear.
It
just
listed
all
this
stuff
and
then
it
left
it
open
to
interpretation
as
to
which
minimum
standard
applied,
and
now
that's
been
clarified.
So
I'm
sorry,
I
didn't
answer
that
very
well
previous
good.