Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Records Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Register of Deeds reports steady recording revenue; seeks improved digitization of archival records
Summary
The Register of Deeds reported monthly recording revenues rising through July and described talks with US Imaging to improve the quality of archived images; staff said onsite rescanning of original books stored in the Hutchinson salt mines will be needed to improve image clarity and that costs and timing remain unspecified.
Montgomery County's Register of Deeds reported rising recording revenue through July and updated commissioners on plans to improve digital images of historical records.
Mary, the register of deeds, told the board that monthly revenue had increased since January: just over $18,000 in January and February, more than $20,000 in March and April, about $19,000 in May, more than $20,000 in June and roughly $24,500 in July. She described the trend as encouraging relative to recent years.
Mary said she has been working with US Imaging, the county's off-site archival vendor, to improve image quality for older microfilm and scanned records. US Imaging told her that the currently stored digital images could not be improved remotely and that improving them would require on-site rescanning of the original books in Montgomery County to create higher-quality digital files. Those original books — and some microfilm holdings — are stored off-site in the salt mines in Hutchinson as part of the county's preservation arrangements.
Mary said the county has not yet received a firm cost estimate or appointment date for the on-site imaging work. She also said that the office has scanned records from about 1992 forward and that older records have been scanned intermittently since 2002 but that current staffing limits (three employees) make an expanded in-house scanning effort impractical. She said the county's technology fund has not been fully used in recent years while she sought pricing and planning information for the archival work.
Commissioners asked for timeframe and volume questions; Mary said counties with available funds have pursued the onsite rescanning approach, while others are continuing with limited image quality. She said other registrars reported satisfaction after on-site rescans.
Why it matters: Clear, searchable images support public access to vital records and long-term archival preservation. Upgrading image quality may require a one-time vendor engagement to rescan original books and an associated budget allocation.
What’s next: Mary will continue to work with US Imaging, seek a price and schedule for on-site rescanning and update commissioners when the vendor confirms timing and cost.
