The Honorable E. L. Short 

Chairman 

Opinion No. H- 852 

Committee on Intergovernmental Re: Length of time required 

Affairs before an incorporated city 

House of Representatives may destroy the original 

Austin, Texas 78701 paper public record after 

it has been microfilmed. 

Dear Mr. Short: 

you ask when original paper public documents may be 

destroyed by a city after being microfilmed. In addition, 

you ask when the microfilm records may be destroyed. 

From 1947 to 1971, the authority of.political subdivisions, 

including cities, to duplicate and dispose of original records 

generally was regulated by article 657413, V.T.C.S., which 

specifically provided that: 

Whenever photographic duplicates of public 

records are so made . . . the original 

records may be . . . destroyed or otherwise 

disposed of, provided, however, that no 

original record shall be destroyed or otherwise disposed of unless or until the time 

for filing legal proceedings based on such 

record shall have elapsed, and, in no event, 

shall any original public record be 

destroyed or otherwise disposed of until 

said public record is at least fiver 

TEFS old . . . . 

!J&4Y-- 

-sasis added).- 

p. 3595 
The Honorable E. L. Short - page 2 (H-852) 

In 1971, article 1941(a), V.T.C.S., was enacted for counties, 

repealing article 6574b insofar as in conflict, and providing 

that counties could dispose of original records only after 

the microfilm copy had been used for five years. 

In 1975, article 6574~~ V.T.C.S., was enacted for incorporated cities. It repealed article 6574b insofar as the 

two conflicted and provided, in section 3, that cities could 

enact ordinances for disposal of their records: 

Original public records which are microfilmed in compliance with an ordinance 

authorized by this Act may be destroyed 

after five 

wm -F=' are no 

Original public records 

microfilmed in compliance 

with an ordinance authorized by this Act 

or are determined worthless by the governing body of an incorporated city may be 

destroyed as directed by the governing 

body. Notice of proposed destruction or 

disposition of original public records 

shall first be given to the State Librarian 

or State Archivist, and if such records 

are, in his opinion, needed for the State 

Library, the records shall be transferred 

thereto. (Emphasis added). 

Since your question is directed only to those paper documents 

that are microfilmed, we do not address the question of a 

governing body's authority to destroy records that are not 

microfilmed. In our opinion, it is clear that public records 

which are microfilmed may be destroyed only "after five years." 

However, you further question whether "after five years" 

in article 6574~ means five years after the document came 

into existence (i.e., "five years old" as previously provided 

in article 65746) five years after the document is microfilmed (i.e., as provided for counties in article 1941(a)). 

Article-c is ambiguous in this regard, and it is appropriate in determining legislative intent to refer to other 

statutes. includinc revealed ones. relatina to the same 

subject matter. 

51. In our opinion, 

& materia with article 6574~ is its predecessor for - 

p. 3596 
: - 

The Honorable E. L. Short - page 3 (H-852) 

incorporated citie6, article 6574b, which has been repealed 

only insofar as they conflict. See Attorney General Opinion 

H-523 (1975) . Therefore, an ord=nce passed under article 

6574~ may provide that, after microfilming, original paper 

documents are to be destroyed'once they are at least five 

years old. The ordinance similarly may provide for the 

destruction of documents already five years old at the time 

of microfilming. In neither instance, however, may such 

destruction occur until after the State Librarian or State 

Archivist has had an opportunity to order the records transferred to the State Library as provided in article 6574~. 

your last question concerns when the microfilm record 

may be destroyed. In section 2 of article 6574c, such microfilm records are defined as "original public records." It is 

possible therefore to construe section3 of the article to 

allow destruction of microfilm copies once they are five years 

old. In our opinion, such a result would be contrary to the 

apparent legislative intent evidenced elsewhere in the article, 

such as in section 1 of article 6574c, which requires that the 

microfilm process result in "permanent" copies,. In addition, 

such a result would be contrary to past legislative policy 

in favor of maintaining public records, and to: the ,historical 

purpose of microfilm copies as permitting a permanent retention of public documents with a minimum use of space. See 

s V.T.C.S. arts. 1941a, 1899, 6574b; Attorney General 

Opinions WW-1456 (19621, WW-793 (1960) and V-1079 (1950). 

We believe the section 2 description of microfilm records as 

original public records was intended only for purposes of 

the use of such records in court as provided in section 2 of 

article 6574~ and not for purposes of destruction as provided 

in section 3. 

SUMMARY 

A city ordinance passed pursuant to article 

6574c, V.T.C.S., may provide that, after 

microfilming, original public records may 

be destroyed when they are at least five 

p. 3597 
The Honorable E. L. Short - page 4 (H-852) 

years old. Article 6574~ does not provide 

for the destruction of the microfilm 

records after five years. 

APPROVED: 

ery truly yours, 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

p. 3598