HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Agenda Report - 2006-04-26 - 4 - Records etsc)t)o 2X6—Ic
t
ORIGINAL. _ t.,�_Cathedral Ii ITY CLERK / '
CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY
F l L E, CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
CLERK'S DEPT TO DESTROY SPECIFIED RECORDS PURSUANT
TO THE CITY'S RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk MEETING DATE: April 26th, 2006
CONTACT PERSON: Pat Hammers, CMC DEADLINE FOR ACTION:
City,Clerk
APPROVED: �!l .�;�;,
Department j% City Manager Finance
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution authorizing the destruction of specified records marked
Exhibit "A".
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Clerk has established a procedure for the destruction of records as
follows:
(a) Review and list city records on the "Request to Destroy Records" form
which have outlived their historical, legal, administrative, and/or fiscal
value
(b) Obtain department head approval;
(c) "Request to Destroy Records" form must then be presented to the City
Attorney each time the destruction of a city record, document,
instrument, book, or paper is sought by the Department Head; and
(d) Execution of said form to be completed by the City Attorney.
Pursuant to the City Clerk's Records Retention Schedule, certain records
identified on "Request to Destroy Records" Form, marked and attached
hereto Exhibit "A" have been maintained for the minimum period of time and
are no longer of use to the City. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed
the form(s) and approved the items for destruction or erasure. 41
S{{
III. BACKGROUND:
California government Code Section 34090 provides for a procedure
whereby, with the approval of the legislative body by resolution and the
written consent of the City Attorney, the head of a City department may
destroy any record, document, instrument, book or paper, under his or her
charge , without making a copy thereof, after the same is no longer required.
The City Council adopted on November 17th, 2003 Resolution No. 2003-57
which updated various departments records retention schedules.
IV. FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to destroy above-referenced items is nominal compared to the cost
of maintaining official records having no administrative or other value.
Further, a procedure for the regular destruction of public records will
minimize the City's liability in retaining records that are no longer needed.
V. ALTERNATIVES:
Do not adopt the proposed Resolution and continue to retain documents.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Resolution
Exhibit "A"
2