Unintended Consequences of National Historic Preservation Act Debated

Draft proposals would take private property rights, development into consideration

For Immediate Release
April 21, 2005
Contact Matt Streit or Jennifer Zuccarelli at (202) 226-9019


Washington, DC - Subcommittee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) and other members of the Subcommittee on National Parks convened today to hear testimony on a discussion draft to reform the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The draft would reauthorize the Historic Preservation Fund and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and would also address private property rights concerns.

"The National Historic Preservation Act has long been a useful tool in protecting our dwindling number of historic resources around the country," said Subcommittee Chairman Nunes. "However, there is a disturbing trend of abuse that has emerged, especially in the last decade. The Act has increasingly been used to trample the rights of property owners. I believe common sense reform to the Act will not only ensure its continued success, but protect the rights of individuals who are unfairly targeted under a loophole in the law."

The testimony was focused on a draft proposal to the law that would prohibit a determination of eligibility to the National Register from moving forward over the objections of the property owner. Also debated was a draft provision that would reform Section 106 of the law related to federal undertakings. This section is commonly viewed by many to be used to impede development projects due to its broad definition of what meets "eligibility for inclusion in the National Register." The draft provision would limit the review of the federal undertaking to those sites on the National Register and those sites determined eligible by the Secretary of the Interior.

"Congress recognized many years ago the importance of preserving our nation's historic places and landmarks," said House Resources Committee Chairman Richard W. Pombo (R-CA). "However, in our attempts to preserve these places, it is important to remember one of the most important foundations of our great nation, and that is an individual's right to private property."

According to witnesses at the hearing this morning, state and local preservation ordinances, rules and programs are often used to prohibit property owners from developing or even maintaining these historic structures and buildings.

Peter Blackman, an owner of a property on the National Historic Register, testified that the National Register is used as “a bludgeon against the property owner [to] trample his property rights.” According to Blackman, “the cause of this problem is what [he] calls the “add-ons” to the National Register.” The “add-ons are most often local or state preservation regulation that kicks in when a property has National Register status.”

A number of other witnesses testified to the NHPA’s impacts on development, wireless technology, and even protecting sacred tribal sites and resources.

###