|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
U.S. Rep. Kevin Mullin joined historians, researchers and community advocates in San Bruno on Monday to push back against the planned closure of the National Archives facility.
The press conference on Aug. 24 was held outside the National Archives at San Francisco, which is located at 1000 Commodore Drive in San Bruno. Speakers described how records kept there have helped them trace family histories and preserve stories tied to communities across California and the Pacific.
The event was the latest step in an ongoing effort to stop the National Archives and Records Administration from closing the facility as part of a broader push to cut operating costs and reduce the agency’s physical footprint.
The federal agency responsible for preserving and providing public access to historically significant federal records, NARA has said the closures are intended to improve efficiency as more government records become digital, though it has not publicly detailed how much the San Bruno closure itself is expected to save.
On Wednesday, Aug. 19, Mullin (D-San Mateo) and Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) led a bipartisan, bicameral group of 37 lawmakers in sending NARA a letter urging the agency to reconsider the closure. The San Bruno facility holds immigration, naval, geological and tribal records dating as far back as the 1850s and covering California, Nevada, Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa and other parts of the Pacific.
Mullin’s office also said that he had introduced the National Archives Protection Act, which would require congressional approval before NARA could close an archives facility, federal records center or research room.
Lawmakers say they still lack specific information about the financial rationale for closing the San Bruno facility, including how much money the federal government expects to save.
Their letter asks NARA how much the facility costs to operate, how much closing it would save, what it would cost to move the records and whether less expensive alternatives could keep the collection in the region.
Monday’s event was also a demonstration of what access to the archive has meant to people who have used it.
Anna Eng, a University of California at Berkeley lecturer and member of Save Our National Archives, said her family had long known through oral history that her great-great-grandfather died in a mining accident, but had no documents explaining what happened. She said records preserved by NARA eventually gave her details and evidence her family had not previously had.
“In these files are precious family heirlooms, photographs, wedding certificates, detailed maps of home villages, materials too delicate and brittle to be scanned or transported,” Eng said.
She said moving those records away from the communities whose histories they document could make similar discoveries more difficult for future generations.
“To remove these materials from the communities and regional history from which they emerge would be to deny descendants and future generations access to these stories,” Eng said.
Chu didn’t attend Monday’s event, but Julie Soo read remarks on her behalf. Chu said the San Bruno records give descendants a way to learn directly about relatives whose experiences, particularly under the Chinese Exclusion Act and during the incarceration of Japanese Americans in World War II, have often been overlooked or erased from the broader historical record. She pointed to her own grandfather, who immigrated from China to San Francisco in 1904, saying records like those housed at the archive help families preserve evidence of where they came from and what was endured by earlier generations.
The lawmakers’ letter says descendants have used the San Bruno collection to learn directly about relatives affected by the Chinese Exclusion Act and the incarceration of Japanese Americans.
The archive remains actively used. According to the letter, about 500 researchers visit the facility in an average year and use roughly 3,000 original records in its research room. Staff also handle nearly 2,000 written reference requests annually.
Lawmakers say the closure could result in the collection being divided among six facilities around the country, potentially requiring families and researchers to travel farther to see original documents. They also warned that locations elsewhere may be less familiar with the regional immigration patterns and history represented in the records.
The letter also raises concerns about physically moving more than 100,000 cubic feet of permanent records within the proposed two- to three-year closure timeline. Some documents date to the late 1800s and could be vulnerable to damage during transportation, lawmakers wrote.
The group has asked NARA to respond to its questions by Sept. 18 and reconsider the closure.
Mullin’s legislation would go further by requiring Congress to approve future NARA facility closures, while the immediate fight in San Bruno remains focused on keeping the records close to the communities whose histories they preserve.
This story was written by Christopher Vinasco for Bay City News.
