THE STATE Department of Natural Resources ALASKA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 550 West 7' Avenue. Suite 1310 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3565 GOVERNOR MICHAEL I. DUNLEAVY 907.269.8700 Lt Gov Kevin Me) er. Chair Wag. ne Jensen. Member Talis Colberg. Vice-Chair Rebecca Poulson, Member Judith Bitlner. Member Mark Rollins. Member Alisha Drabek. Member Jonathan Ross. Member Michael Ha? ?eld. Member July 20. 2020 John Kennedy, Chair Christopher Coons, Ranking Member Subcommittee on Financial Services and Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government General Government 218 Russell Senate Of?ce Building 416 Russell Senate Of?ce Building Washington, DC. 20510 Washington, DC. 20510 Dear Chairman Kennedy and Ranking Member Coons: The members of the Alaska Historical Commission, the state board that advises the governor and Alaska legislators on issues related to history and historic preservation, discussed the sale of the National Archives at Sand Point and move the records to California and Missouri at their last meeting. In late December 2019 the Public Buildings Reform Board recommended that the Seattle branch of the National Archives at Sand Point be sold and all records moved to California and Missouri. The recommendation was accepted by the Of?ce of Management and Budget on January 24, 2020. The Alaska Historical Commission urges the OMB to keep these records in the region. We are concerned that moving these records to Missouri and California will make it ?nancially and logistically dif?cult or impossible for users to access, and will gravely undennine the mission of the National Archives and Records Administration: ?Public access to government records strengthens democracy by allowing Americans to claim their rights of citizenship, hold their government accountable, and understand their history so they can participate more effectively in their government.? For over 50 years the National Archives has operated the Seattle archives and records center, of records pertaining to Oregon, Idaho, Alaska and Washington, states which comprise roughly half the land mass of the United States. These records are essential for ongoing legal issues, property disputes, and policy, in areas including ?sheries management, navigability, resource extraction and Native land claims, and for academic and personal historical research, by users including state, local, federal agencies and Tribes, individuals, universities, students and historians. The records at the facility are of special importance to Alaska due to the pervasive federal presence in the decades before statehood and since by federal agencies such as the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management. Alaska materials would not only be farther out of reach for researchers, students, Tribes, and government agencies, but the closure of the Seattle facility likely would delay the digitization of Alaska records promised by NARA when it closed the facility in Anchorage in 2014. We are concerned that there was no noti?cation of stakeholders before this drastic decision was made. Only one state Representative was noti?ed. The Congressional delegations of the states became aware of the possible closure through members of the public,just days before the OMB decision. The Page 2 of 2 Congressional delegations of all four states signed a letter urging the OMB to reject the sale, but the sale was approved anyway. The Public Building Reform Board?s process, of identifying ?High Value Assets? for sale through the FASTA (Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act) is deeply flawed: According to the report, only ?nancial value ofa sale was considered, not the value to the public or ofthe financial costs ofa sale. The mandate was to identify assets worth at least $500 million, and the list had to be approved or rejected as a whole. The rationale in the report is weak, at best. The building needs $2.5 million in deferred maintenance, but the amount negotiated for the cost of moving and required upgrades to the destination archives is not disclosed, nor an estimate for the cost to lease back the facility until the move could take place. The report states that public access will not be affected, which is obviously not the case. Most problematic, the NPRB had only six months to identify properties, and the report notes that they had no staff for the ?rst four months, which made it impossible to gather adequate data on the real estate, much less on the value to the public of a property?s operation. The NPRB did not follow their own methodology, which includes to ?solicit input from stakeholders and public,? including ?Congressional and municipal engagement.? The Alaska Historical Commission urges the Of?ce of Management and Budget to work with stake holders to reevaluate this decision, keeping foremost the impact on the mission of the agency, in particular, public access to our federal records and archives. If the facility must be sold, find an alternative facility in the region. The records total 58,000 cubic feet roughly a football field, packed knee high - of papers, photographs and other materials. Digitization is not an option. This takes professional skill and familiarity with the materials, and enormous amounts of time to digitize and organize files so they can be located by researchers. Less than one thousandth of the records are currently digitized. The Alaska records were moved to Sand Point in 2014 with the promise of digitizing a portion of high-interest records, but little progress has been made even on this relatively small project. We urge the Office of Management and Budget to keep these records in the region, ideally in Seattle. If the current facility must be sold, it is essential to find an alternative location that would keep these records accessible. Sincerely, MM Kevin Meyer Lieutenant Governor Cc: Senator Murkowski Senator Sullivan