Seattle National Archives slated for closure

Margaret DeLacy's picture


Below are links to and excerpts from two stories that appeared earlier this month concerning a proposal to close the NARA facility in Seattle, divide up the records, and sell the property.

"Federal panel recommends closure and sale of Seattle National Archives facility" by By Feliks Banel for MyNorthwest (KIRO radio). January 15, 2020 at 10:01 am

"A federal panel is recommending closure and sale of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) facility in Seattle’s Sand Point neighborhood. If the closure goes through, the research services and historic materials currently held there would be moved to facilities in Missouri and California. "


"Advisory panel recommends putting 12 high-value federal properties up for sale" By Jory Heckman

Federal News Network, January 13, 2020 5:57 pm

"The board, created under the 2016 Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act (FASTA) will submit its recommendations to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval. OMB has until Jan. 26 to approve or decline the board’s recommendations.

From there, agencies have a 60-day period to submit their excess property reports to GSA. After accepting those reports, GSA has one year to sell those properties, but the board can ask OMB to extend that deadline by an additional year."

Good news!
According to the American Historical Association's Fortnightly News, posted Feb. 23, 2021, "The efforts of the American Historical Association (AHA) and co-plaintiffs in State of Washington et. al. v. Russell Vought et. al. have successfully halted the sale of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) facility in Seattle, Washington. A federal judge in Seattle blocked the federal government’s plan to expedite the sale of the facility and the removal of the records from the Pacific Northwest. The delay provides time for the Biden administration to reconsider the facility’s closure and sale, which from all appearances seems to have been focused more on real estate than archival or community priorities."

Margaret DeLacy (acting as subscriber)