Key Legal Protections for Historic Places Under Immediate Threat
| Some of you may have heard of the incredibly concerning threats to Section 106. The urgency of these threats has not been overstated. We are taking this opportunity to further publicize the instructions put together by the California Preservation Foundation. We will continue to update you as opportunities for concrete action emerge. Click Here to Email the ACHP Before Friday For those who have not heard of Section 106, here is the definition from the website of the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, the organization that administers and has now imperiled it. “Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires federal agencies to consider the effects on historic properties of projects they carry out, assist, fund, permit, license, or approve throughout the country. If a federal or federally-assisted project has the potential to affect historic properties, a Section 106 review will take place. Section 106 gives the ACHP, interested parties, and the public the chance to weigh in on these matters before a final decision is made. This process is an important tool for citizens to lend their voice in protecting and maintaining historic properties in their communities.”   A little-known federal proposal could have a major impact on historic preservation in California and across the country. Dear CPF Members and Preservation Partners, The California Preservation Foundation – along with preservationists across the country – are urgently asking for your help. On Friday, July 24, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is expected to vote on proposed revisions to the regulations that implement Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act—one of the nation’s most important tools for protecting historic places. If you’ve never heard of Section 106, you’ve almost certainly benefited from it. For nearly 60 years, Section 106 has required federal agencies to consider the impacts of federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects on historic resources before decisions are made. It has ensured that preservation professionals, Tribal governments, local governments, and the public have a voice in decisions affecting historic buildings, neighborhoods, archaeological sites, cultural landscapes, and other irreplaceable places. The proposed revisions would significantly change that process. |
| Click Here to Email the ACHP Before Friday Among the proposed changes are: Reduced opportunities for public participation. A diminished role for State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices. Greater authority for federal agencies to make decisions with less independent review. New exemptions that could allow some federally funded projects to bypass Section 106 review. Less emphasis on avoiding or minimizing harm to historic resources. While these may sound like technical changes, they could have lasting consequences for how historic places are identified, evaluated, and protected throughout California and across the nation. Please Take Action Before Friday The Council is expected to vote on the proposal this Friday. While the proposal may move forward, your voice can still make a difference. If approved for publication, the proposed rule will be followed by a 30-day public comment period—a critical opportunity to influence the final regulations. Messages submitted now can also encourage the Council to ensure a transparent process and meaningful public engagement. Here’s how you can help: 1. Contact the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation before Friday.Ask the Council to:Delay the vote to allow additional stakeholder review; orAt a minimum, commit to a robust and transparent public comment process once the proposed rule is published. Email: achp@achp.govPhone: (202) 517-0200 2. Reference the proposed revisions to 36 C.F.R. Part 800.Request that your comments be shared with the full Advisory Council before the vote. Consider expressing concern that the proposal would reduce public participation, weaken the role of State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, expand agency discretion, narrow consideration of impacts to historic and cultural resources, and weaken one of the nation’s most effective preservation review processes. The California Preservation Foundation believes that better projects result from thoughtful planning, meaningful consultation, transparency, and public participation. Whether you send a message before Friday’s vote or participate during the upcoming public comment period, every voice matters. Thank you for standing with us to protect California’s historic places and our shared heritage.Sincerely, Cindy HeitzmanExecutive DirectorCalifornia Preservation Foundation |