A bill to remove the members of the board of trustees of the Alabama Department of Archives and History and change the way the board is appointed won approval in a Senate committee after a public hearing on Tuesday, with Republicans supporting the bill and Democrats opposing it.
Speakers at the public hearing all opposed the legislation and questioned why the Legislature would make such a change at an agency they say has operated successfully for more than a century.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Chris Elliott, a Republican from Baldwin County, has said his main concern is that under current law, the board is self-perpetuating, with members appointing new members when there are vacancies. Elliott said the change in appointing authority will bring more accountability to the agency.
Friction between Republican lawmakers and the agency surfaced last summer, when Elliott and some others opposed Archives and History’s hosting of a lecture on the history of LGBTQ people in Alabama.
They complained to Archives and History Director Steve Murray, but the agency went ahead with the lecture, which had been scheduled for months as part of Archives and History’s noontime Food for Thought series.
Elliott sponsored a bill last year to strip the agency of a $5 million supplemental funding bill, saying the agency should have been responsive to the legislators’ concerns. The bill did not pass.
Elliott’s current bill would remove the 15 members of the board of trustees and replace them with a board appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House, and president pro tem of the Senate. Each of those officials would have three appointees, who would serve at the will of the appointing authority. The governor would be a voting member of what would be a 13-member board.
Under the current law, there are two board members for each Alabama’s seven congressional districts, plus two at-large members, and the governor. Under current law, the board appoints members to fill vacancies, and those are subject to confirmation of the state Senate. Board members are not paid except for reimbursement of expenses related to board business.
Last year’s lecture on LGBTQ history was not mentioned during the hearing. Elliott noted that, under his bill, members of the current board would be eligible for reappointment.
The program that caused the disagreement last year was called “Invisible No More: Alabama’s LGBTQ+ History,” which Archives and History hosted in June.
In a letter to the Legislature last year, Murray wrote that he had spoken to nine legislators who called about the program and day before it was to take place. He explained why the program fit Archives and History’s mandate in state law for the “diffusion of knowledge” about the history of the state.
Delores R. Boyd, a retired attorney and former U.S. magistrate judge who has been on the board since 2011 and now serves as chair, told the committee on Tuesday that lawmakers need to explain the need to change the board.
“The starting point then for this committee’s deliberations on a bill which replaces the board with political appointees who serve at will is why.” Boyd said. “What is the compelling problem or need warranting such a radical change? Nothing in the bill documents or even suggests any fraud, mismanagement or improprieties which implicate agency’s staff or trustees. There can be no credible complaint that the agency is not fulfilling each of the objects and purposes outlined in the originating statute. Senate Bill 77 does threaten to disrupt the continued stability of the Archives’ operational mission with adverse and consequential effects on the trust and goodwill of those we serve and the donors we must solicit to enrich and expand our museums.”
As an alternative to Elliott’s bill, the agency proposed a bill that would have added the speaker of the House and the president pro tem of the Senate, or their designees, as voting members of the board of trustees. Murray said he believed the agency is already responsive to lawmakers but said adding the legislative leaders to the board should address any concerns about that.
Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham, offered that bill as a substitute to Elliott’s bill in committee, but it was rejected on a party-line vote. The committee then voted to approve Elliott’s bill, moving it into position for a vote by the Senate.
Coleman-Madison voted against Elliott’s bill, saying she was concerned that political considerations would influence how history is presented.
“As someone said, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, basically,” Coleman-Madison said.
“I think if we go down this slippery slope, one of these days we’re going to find out that maybe our own history or our ancestors’ history is also being taken away or not recorded accurately because we have made it a political football,” Coleman-Madison said.
Two Republicans on the committee who approved the bill, Sens. Greg Albritton of Atmore and Clyde Chambliss of Prattville, said they had concerns and would seek changes before the Senate votes on the bill.
Albritton said Archives and History’s policies should not change depending on whether Republicans or Democrats appoint the board members.
“You’re going to be faced with seesawing back and forth,” Albritton said. “We’ve got to make sure we protect the institutions as much as possible.”