Section 106 Under Threat: Guidance for Advocates

All right. Uh, welcome all. Welcome from all across the US to the National Trust's uh third webinar on this matter of section 106 under threat. Uh today we're going to hear from experts about the best ways to make a persuasive case in defense of section 106. Your speakers today will walk through key talking points and they'll provide you with their best advice about advocacy approaches. They'll point you to tools and resources that can help you and help your networks to craft clear and concise and personalized arguments in defense of section 106. Okay, as we get started, here's a couple of logistics. We are going to take questions and we're going to take questions through the Q&A function. At any time during the presentation, send your question using the Q&A function. We reserve time at the end to take questions. If we don't take your question, we will use your question, your input for um modifying frequently asked questions. And if you go to the National Trust's online resources, you'll see that we have a new FAQ that's there to be helpful. We encourage you to use the chat function to communicate with everybody and we ask you to show respect to each other by using our code of conduct. The close captioning function is available to you and you can turn it on or you can disable it. either way using the controls at the bottom of your Zoom screen depending upon which version you're using. Remember that we send out recordings of these webinars using the email address that you registered on. So shortly after we finish this webinar, we'll share it with you. And then all of the National Trust webinars are available on the trust's YouTube channel. across the country. Uh people are mobilizing right now to defend section 106 at the local and at the state and at the national levels. Many voices are needed to defend this essential tool for historic preservation. And we all know that the historic preservation movement is a broad and a pluralistic group of people. People who visit historic sites. People who provide the programming for those who visit historic sites. People who adapt historic buildings. People who raise the dollars to allow the adaptation of historic buildings. People who do the bricks and mortar work to rehab those buildings. People who administer preservation grant programs. people who manage historic districts that are designated, people who plan for the future of historic places. Our movement includes people who live in historic places, who worship in historic places, who do business in historic places, who teach and learn in historic places, people who honor their ancestors in historic places. There is a broad and a diverse group of people who care about historic places and who care about historic preservation. And we need to hear from everyone. Now, next slide, please. Today, you're going to hear from three experts. Kim and from Chris Moore and from Chris Cody. And these are people with deep experience in historic preservation who have agreed to share their knowledge and their experience with you today. Our first speaker is Kim Trent and she is the executive director of the esteemed National Preservation Partners Network. Chris, over to you. I'm sorry, Kim, over to you. Pardon? Thanks, Rob. I'm thrilled to be here today and I am thrilled that all of you have joined us. This really is a watershed moment for historic preservation. I've been involved for 30 years and I have never seen a thread like this. But I've also never seen the strong uh and immediate response from our community all across the country as everyone is weighing in, sharing information and really meeting the moment for our field at the time when they're critically needed. All of us are needed in this fight if we're going to win. And for local preservation groups, you are the boots on the ground. um you're right there where all of this is going to eventually land and you are unique in that you have very close-knit networks throughout your communities and this is going to be the time for you to access those networks and help them understand what is at stake and how they can make a difference in pushing back these threats. Next slide, please. A little bit first about the National Preservation Partners Network. We're a national nonprofit organization that's here to support nonprofit preservation organizations and professionals across the entire country. We're a membership-based organization providing training, support, networking, a shoulder to lean on for our members across the country. Next slide, please. So, I thought I'd start with a little bit of groundwork. Some of you may have heard this before if you've been engaged with us over the last several months, but I just wanted to put down a foundation so we're all on the same page as we get started. So, process and consultation changes. These proposed changes to section 106 end the avoid minivi minimize and mitigate standard and replaces it with a vague directive to merely address adverse effects which is basically a toothless directive. Um it makes public comment optional which for me is one of the most offensive parts about it. um and leaves this at the AY's own discretion discretion which really leads itself into potential federal agency overreach in your communities and it also rolls back required tribal consultation on the trib's own cultural and sacred sites. It's it's astounding to read the scope and the oversight changes. Um it cuts out state and local government's rights to be notified or comment. Communities will not know until the bulldozers show up that something is happening to the places that they value in their communities. And it lets agencies self-certify their own section 106 report in place of independent review. Talk about Fox and the hen house on that one. It also exempts broad categories of federally connected projects from review entirely. And these all combine to a massive threat to our work and historic sites all across the country. Next slide, please. So, just an update on where we are on the timing um because timing is going to be critical to your advocacy efforts and we really need you to be aware of this schedule. It all started, as you know, um, or may not know, in January where the ACP vice chairman Travis Bole said, "We're going to revisit section 106 regulations." That was really not a surprise for those paying attention with the whole discussion about streamlining and reducing regulations that are going on in Washington right now. So, in February, they said, "We're going to look at this. We're going to create working groups to look at this issue and make recommendations." Um then suddenly out of the blue on July 17th an email was sent to members of the ACP saying here's here's the new Rex. Here you go. We're going to rewrite um part 800. And they're required to come back in one week um with a vote via email. No meeting, no discussion. So right now we're in a critical part of this. Um the draft rule is under inter agency review with ORA. If you're like me as a local, you may have never heard of ORA. Well, you need to know who they are now and you need to request a meeting with them. You've got the website link there and Chris will be talking a little more in detail about this later. Even if you don't get the meeting, we need to request as many as possible to show that this wave is building in opposition to these changes. Then after oil is full is f completed um the notice of propo proposed rulemaking is published in the federal register and opening a 30-day public window for comment. This is where we need y'all to act. We need for you to get those comments in from your organization, the citizens and your communities to really show public opposition to these changes. And then finally those comments will be reviewed. changes will be made as necessary and a final regulation will be published. Next slide, please. So, if you're like me, the last year has been very frustrating as we have watched iconic historic buildings and places across the country being bulldozed, um, threatened. Um it's been a really frustrating time because most of the action has been in the courts or we've been asking Congress to act but Congress has not aven. So up until now there's not been a lot that grassroots advocates and communities can do. But today is a new day and this is the time where you can meet the moment. you can act and show that grassroots preservationists and the communities they represent across the country are opposed to these changes and that we are going to be engaged with Congress and pushing back these proposed changes to section 106. So, we're going to talk about a grassroots action plan. You may have heard some of this before, but we want to reinforce it. We're going to share these slides later so you can share that with your organizations and your communities through your newsletters, social media, every communication channel that you have to help get the word out. Next slide, please. So, action one, document the local impact. This is critically important. Um, I know when I was running a local, every once in a while I'd get a letter about a cell tower or, you know, another issue, but I, you know, we didn't really have to deal with section 106 on a regular basis. So, if you haven't dealt with this before, you're not alone. Don't worry. We're here to support you and give you the information that you need to act and protect your community. So, we need you to collect and share success stories. If you know of specific cases where 106 uh review improved or stopped a harmful project near you, you need to gather that information together. If you don't know what has happened in your community or your state, contact your shipo because they do those reviews and they can give you examples. Um here's an example from Knoxville, Tennessee, where I'm located. This is the fourth and gill historic district and neighborhood. Um several years ago when Interstate 40 was being reworked and widened through downtown Knoxville and through our historic districts, the original proposal was to demolish 11 houses like this on that street in that neighborhood, including the neighborhood center at the corner of Fourth and Gil. By utilizing the section 106 and 4F process, we were able to push back on that proposal and save all of these houses and keep that interstate system within its boundaries so it didn't encroach farther into the neighborhood. So imagine if these places had been lost. Today they're all fully occupied and well-loved and the community center still stands today because of section 106. So you need to look at things that have happened in the past where section 106 worked, but you also need to look ahead for potential future losses, places that are vulnerable that could be destroyed or compromised if the new regulations are put into place. So identify historic resources that are owned or funded by the federal government that are adjacent to state or federal highways near potential locations for data centers, cell towers, and transmission lines. So get out there in your community and look for those vulnerable places. And you need to lift those up to your representatives to tell them these are the places in our community that are endangered if these changes are approved. Next slide, please. Two, build local coalitions. The power of preservation is in local communities where people are will experience the impact of these changes if they go through. So identify your partners now. Connect with your shipo, your typo, main street programs, neighborhood organizations, preservation organizations. you are stronger together, sharing information, coordinating your advocacy efforts. So, get on that right away if you haven't already done it. But don't forget about adjacent constituencies. As we know, preservation touches everything. I know my career, I've dealt with everything from permanent supportive housing for homeless people to private country clubs. And so, you've got a wide contingency that you need to engage. That includes architects, professional and academic bodies, historical societies, and your downtown, main street, business improvement districts, your planning commission, environmental and conservation groups, they're definitely going to be impacted by these changes. Now, your civic participation and open government groups, we're we're having the public cut out of these discussions, and that does not lead to good open government. also descendant communities, cultural heritage groups and businesses who employ people in your community to do this cultural heritage resource work. And legal advocacy organizations are good to contact as well. Then you want to connect those local coalitions to national and statewide efforts. As I said, when I was doing preservation at the local level, I was not an expert on section 106. I learned from our national and statewide organizations the importance how it worked, how to fight for it, and when to get involved. So, make sure you connect with those folks and coordinate with them to get the latest information, shared talking points and letters and email templates. You do not have to be an expert to engage in this process. You can count on folks like the National Trust and all of us here today to provide the information you need that you will then personalize for your community so that you can advocate on behalf of your community. And then encourage folks in your local community to join the letterw writing goal. The trust is aiming for 250,000 letters to Congress. I do believe that would get some attention in the halls of the capital and every submission adds to the count and the impact and as some people say we need to flood the zone with preservation. So get folks engaged in that. It's an easy thing for them to do. Help them know where to send the letter. Help them, you know, tell their story and that will make a huge difference for our efforts here today. Next slide. Three, contact your elected officials. When they hear from preservationists in the scale that we're talking about, they're going to understand, if they don't already, how important preservation is to Americans and that we value the historic places in our communities and that they're willing to we're willing to fight for them. So, contact your governor and your legislators. you know, explain the stories from your town about how these changes are would impact your community or your rural area or your county. Um, connect them to the places that matter in your state and your community. And then governors do have some weight in this process. You know, when a governor picks up the phone and calls Washington, they, you know, they can have some impact and you need to help them understand why this is important and these changes need to be stopped. and then sign up for their newsletters for your governor, your legislators. I know I get mine all the time. And watch for town halls. Some of them are actually still doing town halls. Not mine, but some of yours might be doing them. And it's a great way to get that one onone contact with those folks and tell your story. And even though we're working locally, again, reach out to members of Congress. They listen when they get a lot of calls. And so call or write your representatives and your your senators and you have a window right now where they are at home in their offices. So you've got until August 31st to meet locally with your representatives in Congress and until September 14th with the senators um that represent you while they are on recess. So take advantage of this window of opportunity because it is critical that we do so. And then, as we always say, invite your legislators to visit a historic site. Whether it's a historic school that's been converted into senior housing or an actual location that was saved by section 106 or one that could be threatened under the new rules, get them to come out. And if you can get a reporter or a blogger or someone else to come along, you know, that'll be great, too, because they they love to get their faces out there as visiting local constituents. Okay, next slide. um contact your mayor and council. Your community is where the impacts of these changes will ultimately be felt directly and most powerfully. This is literally going to land on the doorstep of the residents of your community. Ask your local leaders to pass a resolution opposing the proposed changes to section 106 and share it with their federal representatives. They can easily do that on a city council or county commission agenda. and then ask your mayor and council to raise this issue with your state's municipal league and the National League of Cities so that we can get this issue elevated to that level. Um, and then help your members if you're locals, you know, help your members advocate with local elected officials. Your members and supporters are connected to a huge network throughout your community. Light that network up by sharing information with them. Share it in a way that's understandable. people's eyes glaze over when you use our jargon, which we all know, but really bring it down to what's important for them. And then provide compelling examples of those local places as we talk about over and over again. And then use images. They are powerful. You know, we have images from the destruction of um urban renewal. And people when they see those images are shocked and it's like this could come back. If there's no federal oversight and these agencies can do whatever they want without public input, we could see images like that again. Next slide. So action four, submit public comments. Start drafting what you want to say now so you will be ready when that 30-day public comment window opens. Start thinking of your story and telling your story. Um, be specific and personal. Do a specific place, a pi specific family story. Um, name the mechanisms, not just the outcome. So reference the loss of that avoid, minimize, mitigate standard. That's really big. And then the shift to optional public comment, which still is just amazing that they think that that is the way to go with the changes. And then encourage individual submissions. Um, a lot of times if there's a form letter people sign on to, just like most people, you would kind of blow that off because there wasn't much effort put into that. So personalized stories really do a better job. Next slide. So use media and storytelling. So legal and regulatory language rarely moves people. I mean, it makes them actually turn the other way. So if you can name a building, a neighborhood or a family story that tells this, it's much more powerful. Customize your message. You know, know your audience and what they are interested in, how they speak. I'm in Tennessee. I'm going to talk about states rights, federal agency overreach, eliminating the public and local governments from this process. Your community will have its own concerns that you need to speak that language to. um pitch local news outlets. We need to get as much talk about this in the media as possible. Cultivate those reporters over time. That'll be very powerful for your organization once this chapter has passed. I know here we were lucky that we had a guy named Jim Aosta who just happened to like old buildings and we cultivated a relationship with him and he did regular stories on historic preservation. So, you never know where those people are going to end up and they can do work while they're in your hometown as well. And then post with purpose. You know, share before and after examples. Use plain language. And be sure you tag all of these other organizations that you're now being made aware of to get that reach out for those posts. And then lead with people, not policy. Policy is boring. People don't want to hear it. They want to hear the story of a beloved family home or a Civil War era or World War II tour, World War II era location that needs to be protected. And then images. Again, a picture is worth a million words these days. We need them for broadcastation, streaming media, social media. So, give them what they want. Get those images out there of what could be lost. Next slide. Here's just an example that I loved. This is from Tiny Pines Preservation in North Carolina, unstaffed all volunteer organization. And this went out in their newsletter last week. They took this issue and they brought it home. The farmhouse that's still standing. They told a story about this farmhouse and Monroe County, North Carolina, and how section 106 saved this place in their community. That brings it home to people in Morg County. It motivates them to act because they understand with this simple the story how this could impact future um places in their community. Next slide. And again the images, can you imagine if that place had been torn down, if that road construction project had gone through, it would have happened had it not been for section 106. Because as they say, the Leslie Taylor farmhouse still s stands because section 106 required someone to look and to inform the public about this road project that would have demolished this place and would been gone forever. So if Little Pines Preservation in North Carolina, all volunteers can do this type of communication and light up their networks and their community on this issue, I know that you can do it, too. Next slide. So, you've probably seen a lot of these before. These are key resources. These are organizations existing right now to help you get the messaging you need, the information you need, and to connect you with broader networks across the country. We're going to share this slide deck later, so you'll be able to see all of these links and connect with those folks. Visit these websites regularly for the latest information so you can keep up to speed on what's happening and how it's going to impact your community. Next slide. So I have to end with this. A crisis equals an opportunity. So this photo is of that same street I showed you at the beginning. That house was scheduled for demolition under the highway widening project. But by using section 106, not only was that house preserved, it kept that interstate from taking that land. And so, not only did that crisis save that home, it also created the space to create even more residential units in that historic neighborhood to help meet our housing shortage crisis here in Knoxville. So, don't forget this crisis is an opportunity. The fight is shifting from the courts to the streets. And that is where we as local preservationists have the advantage. We know our communities. We know how to engage them and get them in the fight. And we know preservation is a basic American value. Everyone has a historic place that they love. We just need to remind them that they are historic preservationists already, even if they don't call themselves that, and that their voice is important in this fight. And also this has lifted preservation into the national spotlight and in the national consciousness in a way that I haven't seen in my life. It goes back to the 60s and early 70s when our movement really took root and a lot of our organizations at the local level were formed in the late 60s and early 70s. So this is a moment for us to get the attention of Americans and engage them in this movement overall. And this crisis is our opportunity, win or lose, to strengthen our movement and save more of the places that matter to all Americans. So, please don't waste it. Please engage today. It's our moment. Let's meet that moment. Next slide. Thank you very much. And now I'll hand it off to Chris Moore, executive director of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation and Preservation Partners Network partner. Take it away, Chris. >> Thank you so much, Kim. And uh I will echo everything Kim says. She included great uh just ideas, pointers, guidance on outreach on the types of messaging we need to do. Um I'm Chris Mo. I'm executive director with the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation. We are pleased to be celebrating our 50th anniversary this year. And in our work, we endeavor to partner with communities to preserve, share, and shape the future of historic places in Washington state. So, I want to build on what Kim talked about with examples uh and and sort of contextualize how we might get this message across in in a world that does include a lot of jargon for those of us in the trenches. um but really talk about how section 106 actually creates results for um for everyone for broad constituencies. Uh next slide please. So in our advocacy campaigns we talk about a six-step framework uh for leading to results education support policy advocacy implementation and benefits. and and through an example of of successful 106 I want to highlight how each of these comes to bear uh for successful outcome. Uh next slide. So this is the Beverly Bridge and and I uh talk about this case study as the intersection of policy and advocacy. Uh but really it does hit on all six of those uh steps for success that that were on the slide prior. uh like many statewide preservation organizations and and I'm sure some locals as well, we do a most endangered list uh like the National Trust. And in 2017, we actually included the Beverly Bridge in our most endangered list as a way to raise awareness about the challenges this structure was facing. So, so right there you've got your education building into your support steps when you're talking about a campaign. Um, next slide, please. Uh the bridge itself is part of a historic route known as the Milwaukee Road. Uh it was a line, a rail line that that at one point did span the entire country. Um but it stopped running like many rail lines and in 1980 the state actually purchased the right of way uh with this vision of creating a cross-state recreational trail. This was uh part of a railstorails project known as the Paloo to Cascades Trail. Uh and so in 1980, our Department of Natural Resources actually purchased the line from Burlington to Northern Santa Fe. Uh unfortunately, in 2014, before work could be accomplished to actually convert this to a trail, uh there was a fire. Um and ongoing maintenance issues meant that the bridge was inaccessible. and its inaccessibility constituted the largest gap in this proposed cross-state trail. And and and I should note this bridge spans the Colombia River, the mightiest of rivers that we have in Washington state. So that gap uh was not just physical and geographical, but in some ways it was it was almost mental, right? You've got this river, it's been uncrossable for so long. How do we connect it? Uh the key here with the advocacy piece, and this is something you all know, um and that Kim mentioned as well, but the partnerships were so key. Yes, we had preservationists involved, but we got out of our silos so that we had um the Rails to Trails folks. We had the John Wayne pioneer wagons and riders, and it's exactly what they sound like. Those are folks that go traveling across the state in their covered wagons that are horsedrawn. We had the railway enthusiasts, Cascade Rail Foundation, and then on um the from the state standpoint, we had the agency folks as well. We worked very closely with the Washington Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and State Parks as an agency. The Paloo to Cascade Trail is a state park endeavor and they were very interested in seeing how this would uh play out. So, next slide, please. Um, and this is where section 106 comes in. We knew uh at the time we included this in our most endangered list, we knew about the uh prospect of several other railroad bridges owned by BNSF needing to come down. Uh, and and these are there were three bridges along the Columbia River, not in the same area as the Beverly Bridge. They were uh further down river. Uh but we knew three were going to be slated for replacement. All three of which were National Register eligible. When we look at the the the system of 106, there's no way to avoid the adverse impacts of replacing these bridges. They needed to be replaced. There was nothing we could do about that. Same thing with minimize. You cannot minimize the impact of demolition. So we moved to mitigate and we thought how can we think about mitigation of these three bridges? Uh typically this would be a document and destroy situation, but this is where the flexibility of 106 really became an asset for our advocacy efforts. And this is the policy side of of those six steps. How do we use policy in ways that can support our our advocacy? Um because 106 is decidedly not prescriptive, we had the opportunity to be creative. Uh so next slide, please. What we were able to do is include as part of a broader mitigation package, but part of that package included $125,000 that came to the Washington Trust to conduct a rehabilitation study for the Beverly Bridge. Now, at the Washington Trust, we are multi-talented. We can do a lot of things, but we are not bridge engineers. So we did commission an engineering firm through an RFP process to do that study and ultimately they determined that um re rehabilitation of the bridge for recreational uses uh were near $5 million. Uh this is where the lobbying comes in. We took that study, we went to state parks uh who in turn included those costs as part of their capital budget request in 2019. And then of course we went to the legislature. We were lucky the governor who is a at the governor at the time a huge recreational enthusiast uh put it in his proposed budget. Then we worked with the legislature to have it in the final capital budget. All that lobbying paid off. money got into the budget and the project was completed in 2022. And um from that standpoint, our partners could see the tangible benefit of section 106. And I want to give a huge shout out to our shipo as well, our Washington state shipo played a critical role in the process. Not only were they willing to engage in creative mitigation, which was essentially in some ways a private agreement between BNSF and the Washington Trust as a nonprofit um to carry out one of the key stipulations of the MOA. Uh but they also received the funding for the rehabilitation in their agency as Shipo. Uh which really enabled them to oversee with state parks that process, the standards, all of those great things. Uh a and then it further affirmed the nexus that we have with state parks as an agency and our state parks recreation commission who sees the Washington trust as an ally in the work that they're trying to do as well. And our state parks is the single largest owner of historic buildings in the state. So that um partnership now was key. Uh next slide please. So what comes out of this is the public message. Section 106 truly equaled saving the Beverly Bridge. And this is not just a um small nuanced uh piece that is, you know, set aside in policy or a victory in documentation. This is something that makes a difference for folks who use this bridge every single day. Um not just the recreational enthusiasts. It created a um uh there. wide enough for first responders in a very rural area to get from one side to the other if needed. The local PUD runs lines across those electrified uh aerials that you see here. So, it was truly a win-win kind of for everybody. And we talk about section 106 being able to be uh part of that. That broad partner base is what made this um so helpful. And this is that implementation and benefits. That's that part of our of our steps to success. You implement the project and then the public sees the benefits. Um, next slide, please. Uh, I I do think it's important to frame the issue and be clear about what we are up against. And and I know many of you on this call undoubtedly watched the hearing on section 106 that the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held last October. So, two things stood out for me. There's consensus that section 106 is an important tool for balancing project delivery with cultural resource protection. That that was clear and that was good. But there was also consensus that reform of the process is needed. And and of course we know that prior to the ACP taking the vote that they did, Congress has already been working on legislation to amend 106. So change is coming. We need to understand that. Um next slide please. A and I just wanted to highlight what what I have heard as some of the issues that Congress and others are are concerned about the perceived ease with which litigation can be initiated. And we have to remind them of that that that um litigation is still an outlier when it comes to 106. But when it does happen and when it does create delays, we need to recognize the frustration that comes with that. I I you there's many examples that can be used, but I know recently in in Rhode Island, there was a big transportation project uh to do improvements on I95. It took over 10 years, and I'm not commenting on on the merits of that case. I know there's always good reasons to fight, but at the end of the day, 10 years is a long time. Um and and when that happens, we can sometimes uh exclude folks who should be allies. I know Senator Sheldon White House, who is typically a friend on heritage and preservation, is engaged in seeing the reform because of the time delays uh that that were perceived as happening through 106 for that project. Um it's not just the NHPA. This narrative right now is targeting many environmental laws. And the narrative I'm talking about is that abundance agenda, right? This this notion that uh we can't get out of our own way to some degree. So it's it's NEPA. It's the Endangered Species Act. It's the Wilderness Act. So on and so forth. Um and then we have to understand too that 106 reform is not standalone because they're looking at multiple elements. It's not just um 106 that is under target care. So next slide, please. I I want to quickly talk about the attributes. Um, we already know, I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this, but we know 106 is already very efficient and that litigation is an outlier. Um, vast majority of 106 consultations result in no adverse effect. I did a quick Google search. It says ACP and this is data from the ACP reviews 120,000 106 uh cases annually. And out of those, only 2,000 have a finding of of adverse effect, which means 98% of those reviews result in a no adverse effect. Talk to your shipo about this. Your shipo is such an important point of data. In Washington state, our shipo reviews roughly 6,000 uh 6,000 uh 106 undertakings annually. Their typical response time is 4 and a half days. They do they can do this because they manage digitally over 715,000 cultural resource records. So those are important figures to be able to talk about the importance here and 106 is flexible. It allows for creative solutions. So next slide please. I think we need to be part of the solution as well. We know that change is coming. These aren't ranked in any order. Uh I I don't know that there's consensus on things, but I include this list because I do think they are part of what can uh be discussed, brought forward, offered as ways for us to be part of that reform solution. Again, we know it's coming. Um next slide. But amidst it all, we still need to be vigilant in terms of what is at stake. And I show this slide because uh this is in Olympic National Park. It's of Lake Crescent and it's a view from Storm King Mountain. Um local legend, tribal legend has it that Storm King was upset at the waring tribes uh down below who had been in the region since time and memorial. And so he took a huge boulder and hurled it down to those two factional tribes uh to scatter the warriors, have them stop fighting, and as a result created Lake Crescent. When we talk about um what the administration is proposing in terms of increased logging, increased uh mining, these are the types of things that we could be at risk of losing. these traditional cultural properties, these landscapes. This is not a defined geographical area. These are the types of things we need to tell our constituents that are at risk with what's coming. So, thank you very much. I'll turn it over to Chris Cody. >> Thank you very much, Chris, and thank you very much, Kim. Um, I'm Chris Cody, senior assistant general counsel at the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and I'm going to touch on some more information about federal advocacy, building on what Kim has already shared with you. Um, for starters, on this screen are three images from excellent section 106 success success stories that are already being held up by the ACP is success stories. U, next slide, please. So, as Kim mentioned, the current status of the ACP's proposed regulatory changes are they are with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs or OIRA. Um, a relatively obscure federal agency that I was not too familiar with even until this whole process started. So, OIR has up to 90 days to review proposed rules. There is not a hard deadline and they are currently taking meetings with outside parties. So on this screen is a link to where you can request to be uh an outside party that OIR meets with and you're going to need to use the RIIN number that's on the screen. And if you do manage to get a meeting with OIR, one thing that I would specifically suggest that you focus on is the fact that OIR, one of their main tasks is to evaluate proposed new federal rules um in light of various executive orders. One of which is executive order 13132 which concerns federalism was signed into law by President Clinton back in 1999. And the proposed regulatory changes are very much anti-federalist. They take away the state's voice in federal policy which is the epitome of anti-federalism. So knowing that OIR is supposed to be evaluating these rules in light of executive orders like that one, I think that that's a particularly important point to hit on if you do have the opportunity to meet with OIRA, that this is an anti-federalist proposal from the ACP. Next slide, please. So what's happening next? What comes next after OIRA? As Kim mentioned, after OIRA uh and inter agency comments are resolved, the ACP will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register. That will then trigger a 30 to 60day public comment period. Um it as quickly as after 30 days, this rule could be adopted and made formalized. Again, just like with OIR, there's no specific uh end point for that public comment period and for the rule making process. be out be on the lookout for instructions from the National Trust and other preservation organizations. Kim posted a great list of all the resources and organizations out there that are working on this right now. Um, you're going to hear from us through social media channels, through other ways when it is time to issue these comments on the proposed rules and we're going to provide you with guidance on what to say. It's hard to tell you right now what to say because we haven't seen the final version of these rules. We still hold that hope that OIRA will submit comments and perhaps other federal agencies will submit comments to the ACP that will cause them to change what's ultimately published in the Federal Register. Um they may be slim hopes, but um be on the lookout once we know for certain exactly what the proposed new rules are going to say. We'll be developing language to help assist advocates in this public comment period. Next slide, please. So, let's put a little bit of context here to this. Uh, Chris just mentioned the Chris Moore just mentioned the hearing that the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held last fall concerning section 106. And there has truly been intense congressional interest in section 106 and the National Historic Preservation Act for quite some time. Last week, the National Trust submitted a letter to the chair and ranking members of both the House and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Commissions expressing our concern about the proposed ACP regulatory changes and identifying specific issues with those changes that we think are would make for bad federal policy and really an unsustainable regulatory regime. So, we are actively advocating to Congress. We've also seen some draft bills that members of Congress have have developed. All of these things are happening somewhat independently of each other. While Congress is working on these legislative uh changes to section 106, the ACP sort of dropped this regulatory change bomb on the whole situation. So, there's really a two-pronged outreach going on to Congress right now. one being talking about what they've been concerned about for many months now, which is improving the section 106 process, and two, trying to help make Congress aware of just how damaging and ill-thought out the proposed ACP regulatory changes are. So, another piece of the context, the larger context around all this is that there are likely going to be legal challenges if these new rules are adopted. Many of you might have participated in webinars hosted by cultural heritage partners or others where specific discrepancies between the National Historic Preservation Act statutes and what the ACP's new rules would do have been highlighted. So there's a very high probability if these rules are adopted that there will be legal challenges. Another key point to understand about the larger context of what's happening is that ongoing section 106 consultations are continuing under the existing regulations. We've had inquiries at the National Trust from folks that are involved in consultations who've said things like, "Well, gee, should we hurry up and execute a memorandum of agreement or a programmatic agreement now while the laws are still what they are? Should we wait? I mean, is there a is there a danger if we wait?" I think the only thing that we know for sure right now is that everything is continuing in section 106 world as it currently is for now. And I think that folks need to not change their attitudes or approaches to participation in existing consultations because of what's going on. Don't knee-jerk react and surrender before we've even had a chance to fight. Lastly, as has already been mentioned, and we've seen some good ones today on this webinar, preservation advocates are currently collecting case studies, and mainly we focus so far on existing section 106 success stories, things that have happened, consultations that have gone well, like what Chris Moore just shared. But Kim also mentioned very importantly that we also need to think about uh potential hypothetical situations. Next slide, please. So, what can you do? Number one, contact your congressional delegation. I think we've already heard some calls to that action. It's good here at the end of this webinar to bring you back to that. So, when contacting your congressional delegation, here are a few tips. You're going to want to advocate not just in DC and not just by sending letters, but by getting to these folks in district. Find out when they have events. Find out where they're going to be and go see them. Talk to the in district staff as well. That goes to another point. Build relationships with staff. Look, congressional staff can be hit or miss. Some offices have very experienced staff, people that have been there for years and know the issues that you can have long-term relationships with. With other congressional offices, it feels like every time you go, there's another recent college graduate sitting across from you. But let me tell you what, this is a moment in time where over the next year, having relationships with congressional staff is going to be very important because change is coming. So build relationships with staff members. Keep a portfolio on key staff members. Know what town they're from. Know what they care about because you reach members by getting through their staff. They're the gatekeepers. So make sure you have those relationships. Another thing key thing to do is to identify federal advocacy pathways. What I mean by this is how do you get to decision makers? How do you get to members of Congress? Sometimes this isn't linear. I'll share that back when uh tax reform was considering doing away with the historic preservation tax credit several years ago, one of my representatives was Senator Tim Scott. And you know, I knew that one of my friends fathers was friends with Trey Gouty who was friends with Tim Scott. So I asked my friend to set up a dinner with his dad and by the end of the dinner we got Trey Gouty on the phone who then promised to say something to Tim Scott. Now my friend's dad had never been a preservation advocate ever before. This is where the next bullet point comes into educate new advocates. But I had identified a pathway to Tim Scott to get someone who he trusted to say what we wanted to say. So think about your community. Think about who has access to these people. Think about what pathways might exist. And you might have to build whole new ones by educating new advocates, but find those people and those pathways in your community. And lastly, make sure that you activate existing advocates. Make sure that every preservationist understands that this is an existential moment. a generational moment and this is the time to get up off the bench. If you're an older board member who's rotated off or something, this is one to step up and get involved in. So, make sure that's communicated to existing advocates. What else can you do? Prepare to fight. Assemble those case studies like we were talking about. And by means of giving you an example of a hypothetical, the slides uh the images on this slide are from my hometown of Madison, Indiana, which is a national historic landmark on the Ohio River. And as you can see, we're regularly visited by cruise ships that add to our heritage tourism economy. And generally, the community is uh very much, I don't want to say dependent, but supported in a meaningful way by heritage tourism. As you can see, we're right on the Ohio River. If the Army Corps of Engineers were to change how that river is managed in such a way that we didn't have these cruise ships stop, or if the Army Corps of Engineers was to permit, let's say, a very large industrial facility on our riverfront, that would dramatically impact our heritage tourism economy. and the overall integrity and sense of place in my hometown. These are the kinds of things that section 106 would have forced the core to consider and worry about prior to the proposed regulatory changes. Under the new regulatory changes, the core wouldn't even care. And I think identifying those examples of how your community could get hurt under these new changes is an important way to bring this home to members of Congress. Another way that you need to prepare is I've already mentioned the litigation coalition that might be forming for potential legal challenges here. If you're on a part of an organization, uh prepare your board of directors for that possibility. Also, fundraising. All lobbying takes money. All of these things take effort, time, and money. And I think you need to prioritize both within your own philanthropic giving but also your organizational financial capacity how to participate in this absolutely existential once in a generation fight. Last lastly two quick tips. Prepare your community for the worst. Update your state laws. If the National Historic Preservation Act isn't going to come and save you and help you, you better have a good state historic preservation act. Now is the time to look at that and make sure that you it protects your community. and also update your local laws. In the end, you control local land use through your local zoning. Find places that are vulnerabilities where bad projects could come in and harm your community that previously would have been subject to the section 106 process, but now might not be, and go ahead and change that zoning. Protect your community on the front end. So, thank you very much and good luck to everyone in your advocacy efforts. So, uh, that is great. Um, Kim and Chris and Chris, thank you very much. We've got a bare five minutes. We've had excellent questions come in. Questions and comments all will be reviewed and shared with National Trust staff as well as partner staff so we can pick up on what you are saying. We've had questions about specific question specific changes to the NHPA. The second webinar was a deep dive into the technical side, technical legal side of this. Look at the second webinar. Analyses are underway about the implications for exemp exemption from 106 for delegated federal programs. Yes, analysis underway. Analysis underway for implications of these changes to 4F section 110 and other kinds of federal uh historic preservation protections. So, on the one hand, requests for more info on specific changes, legal technicalities. On the other hand, questions about information resources in plain language that will be accessible. Many good questions about that. Look online. Look for the National Trusts resources, letter templates. Got a great question about guidance for effective local public rallies. Take it to heart. We'll see what we can do. Um, you had an answer about what might be your focuses for OIRA. Timeline is a huge question. Stay tuned. We don't know. likely 30 days uh public comment opportunity, but we've seen those public com comment opportunities shrink uh dramatically. So stay tuned. Letter template available at savingplaces.org. Um info resources include the National Trust's August 21st letter. Very good read, short, pathy, and to the point. Kim and Chris and Chris, can you come online? Um, let's see. I guess there's an open question here about whether this is a done deal or whether Congress and other kinds of elected officials can have an influence on this. And I think the basis of all of the educational outreach by the National Preservation Partners Network, by by the Shipos, by the tribes, by all of the groups attempting to influence this is that there is hope and that we have to connect with our local officials and our state officials and our federal officials to have an influence on this. Kim, uh, 30 seconds on hope. Yeah, it is not a done deal. That has been something I've learned in preservation. Never ever give up the fight because there's always hope. There's always someone you can influence and things can turn on a dime in politics and we're dealing on the federal side with a lot of politicians and if they hear from all of us and know this issue is a priority, they will act. So do not give up. There is definitely still hope. >> Um, all of your great questions in the Q&A. Uh, we're we'll take them to heart. Um, okay. So, I see uh one group has their meeting scheduled for OIRA. Let's let's talk reach out to to Chris Cody. Reach out to the National Trust. um because all of the groups that we know of that have OIRA meetings are coordinating in advance and will debrief afterwards. Um so um next slide please. There are other resources coming your way upcoming webinar a legislative update. You can bet that there's going to be information here about what we know at this time of legislative updates. Next slide. There is the national preservation summit coming up which is broader than the section 106 crisis but you can participate online virtually. Um next slide and then the preservation law um conference itself which will be both in person and online um and it's your opportunity to really plug in to the experts on the technical legal side of this. Next slide please. Um, if you have questions and want to reach out, uh, share your thinking on this, this is unprecedented and this is an all handson deck circumstance. Reach out to forums savingplaces.org. We're going to do more webinars like this. This is the third. All three are available to you. All three can be shared by you so that this information gets out. Um, thank you. Thank you, Kim. Thank you, Chris. Thank you, Chris. Thanks, everybody behind the scenes here for our uh webinar. And thanks to everybody who tuned in. We'll see you again.