[OR_Archaeology] Oregon Heritage wants your comments on the National Register program

POULEY John * OPRD John.Pouley at oregon.gov
Wed Aug 5 08:10:48 PDT 2020 

Oregon Heritage wants your comments on the National Register program

Oregon Heritage is seeking comments on the draft state rule for the administration of the federal National Register of Historic Places program. The National Register recognizes properties of historic significance across the nation. Over 2,000 properties, including 133 historic districts, located across the state's 36 counties and representing many aspects of our state's rich history are now listed in the National Register.

We are asking that your organization consider commenting on the rule, or the program generally as part of our public process. Listing in the National Register sends a powerful message about what we value about our past as a state, and enables owners of listed properties to leverage tax incentives and grants to preserve these places. Please consider responding before the public comment period ends on August 31st. The attached press release (also copied at the end of this message) includes details on how to comment.

Main Street -
Why should you review these rules?

  *   If you are a community hoping to create a National Register Historic District in your downtown.
  *   If you have properties in downtown that would like to be listed to access grants and tax incentives.

What areas might be of interest?

  *   Consulting parties - is your organization included in a way that makes sense?

Reference: [Definition of public comment period, OAR 736-050-0230(19)]; [Public comment period, OAR 736-050-0250(8) and (9)]

  *   Definition of owner - is the definition clear and do the rules provide adequate direction in this area?

Reference: OAR 736-050-0230(16)

  *   State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation - do the rules related to commission support adequate expertise and representation for your constituents in the National Register process?

Reference: Organization and duties of the review committee, OAR 736-050-0240

  *   National Register nomination staff and committee review - do the rules provide enough clarity to understand why a nomination may require revision or be rejected?

Reference: [Definition for substantive revision, OAR 736-050-0230(21)]; [OAR 736-050-0260(2), (11), and (12)]

  *   Owner and community consent - How does your community and individual property owners comment on, support, or object to forming a historic district?
     *   Reference: [Definition of owner, OAR 736-050-0230(16)]; [OAR 736-050-0250(12)(b and c)]

What should you share?

  *   Do these rules create barriers for local properties to be listed? If so, in what way?
  *   Do the rules provide clear boundaries for the process?
  *   Do the rules provide clear points of participation for your organization?

Tribes
Why should you review these rules?

  *   If you want to comment on National Register nominations.
  *   If you want to list properties in the National Register of Historic Places.
  *   If you are concerned about the confidentiality of cultural resource information.

What areas might be of interest?

  *   Consulting parties - is your organization included in a way that makes sense?

Reference: [Definition of public comment period, OAR 736-050-0230(19)]; [Definition of tribe, OAR 736-050-0230 (22)]; [Public comment period, OAR 736-050-0250(8) and (9)]; [Local government objections, OAR 736-050-0250(10)(b)(C)]; [Submission of nominations to the National Park Service, OAR 736-050-0250(14) and (15)(b)]

  *   Definition of owner- is the definition clear and do the rules provide adequate direction in this area?

Reference: OAR 736-050-0230(16)

  *   State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation - do the rules related to commission support adequate expertise and representation represent your constituents in the National Register process?

Reference: [Committee provides courtesy comments on nominations submitted on behalf of a tribe, OAR 736-050-0260(13)

  *   Confidentiality - does this address your concerns with the sharing of information in nomination documents and processes?

Reference: [OAR 736-050-0250(6) and (7)

  *   Objections to nominations - are the rules clear and do they provide enough direction to manage the process?

Reference: [SHPO determination of number of objections, OAR 736-050-0250(12) and (13)]

  *   National Register nomination staff and committee review - do the rules provide enough clarity to understand why a nomination may require revision or be rejected?

Reference: [Definition for substantive revision, OAR 736-050-0230(21), page 4]; [OAR 736-050-0260(2), (11) and (12)]

What should you share?

  *   Do these rules create barriers for properties significant to Tribes to be listed? If so, in what way?
  *   Do the rules provide clear boundaries for the process?
  *   Do the rules provide clear points of participation for your Tribe?
  *   Do you believe that the rules adequately address confidentiality?

CLGs
Why should you review these rules?

  *   CLGs are required to comment on National Register nominations.
  *   If you want to list properties in the National Register of Historic Places.
  *   If local governments want to object to a nomination.

What areas might be of interest?

  *   Definition of owner- is the definition clear and do the rules provide adequate direction in this area.

Reference: OAR 736-050-0230(16).

  *   CLG review and comment requirements - are these clear and manageable as a CLG?

Reference: [Definition of public comment period, OAR 736-050-0230(19)]; [Public comment period, OAR 736-050-0250(8) and (9)]; [CLG opportunity to waive comment opportunity, OAR 736-050-0260(4)]

  *   Objections to nominations - are the rules clear and do they provide enough direction to manage the process?

Reference: [SHPO determination of number of objections, OAR 736-050-0250(12)]; [CLG objection process, OAR 736-050-0250(10)]

  *   National Register nomination staff and committee review - do the rules provide enough clarity to understand why a nomination may require revision or be rejected?

Reference: [Definition for substantive revision, OAR 736-050-0230(21)]; [OAR 736-050-0260(2), (11), and (12)]

What should you share?

  *   Do these rules create barriers for local properties to be listed? If so, in what way?
  *   Do the rules provide clear boundaries for the process?
  *   Do the rules provide clear points of participation for your organization?


Organizations representing underserved communities
Why should you review these rules?

  *   If you want to comment on National Register nominations.
  *   If you are interested in equity in state processes and access to federal programs.
  *   If you want to list properties in the National Register of Historic Places that represent Oregon's diverse history.

What areas might be of interest?

  *   Consulting parties - is your organization included in a way that makes sense?

Reference: [Definition of public comment period, OAR 736-050-0230(19)]; [Public comment period, OAR 736-050-0250(8) and (9)]

  *   State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation - do the rules related to commission support adequate expertise and representation represent your constituents in the National Register process?

Reference: OAR 736-050-0240

  *   Objections to nominations - are the rules clear and do they provide enough direction to manage the process?

Reference: [SHPO determination of number of objections, OAR 736-050-0250(12)]

  *   National Register nomination staff and committee review - do the rules provide enough clarity to understand why a nomination may require revision or be rejected?

Reference: [Definition for substantive revision, OAR 736-050-0230(21)]; [OAR 736-050-0260(2), (11) and (12)

What should you share?

  *   Do these rules create barriers for local properties to be listed? If so, in what way?
  *   Do the rules provide clear boundaries for the process?
  *   Do the rules provide clear points of participation for your organization?




[cid:image003.png at 01D66AFF.EB858850]News Release
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 4, 2020

Media Contact

Chris Havel
Associate Director
503-931-2590 or chris.havel at oregon.gov<mailto:chris.havel at oregon.gov>

Ian P. Johnson
Associate Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
503-986-0678 or ian.johnson at oregon.gov<mailto:ian.johnson at oregon.gov>

Public comments extended through Aug. 31 for updates to state rules for national register program

Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) is extending the date to accept public comments on proposed changes to rules governing how the state protects important historical places until 5 p.m. Aug. 31, 2020. The extension comes with a new opportunity on Aug. 18 for local and tribal governments to learn more about the proposed rules and comment on them.

The state is proposing updates to the Oregon Administrative Rules that govern how the state administers the federal National Register of Historic Places Program, which lists buildings, districts and other sites important to local, state or national history. The Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) - an office of OPRD - administers the local program, which is run by the National Park Service.

In Oregon, 2,065 properties - including 133 historic districts located across the state's 36 counties and representing many aspects of our rich history - are now listed in the National Register.

In the last several years, several high-profile, controversial nominations exposed problems with the National Register process, including determining owner consent and public involvement. Proposed changes seek to establish a fair and transparent process in alignment with federal requirements.

In addition to extending the comment period, OPRD will have an informational webinar at 10 a.m. Aug. 18 for government staff and leaders to learn more about the proposed rules and potential impact on communities, local governments and tribes.  The webinar will be open to the public and end with an opportunity to provide public comment. Register to attend at oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx<https://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx>.

"Local governments and Native American tribes are a critical partner in the national register program," said Ian Johnson, associate deputy state historic preservation officer.

The Oregon SHPO provides local governments participating in the federal Certified Local Government (CLG) Program grants to list properties in the federal National Register of Historic Places. Using SHPO grant funds, the City of Jacksonville listed the Britt Gardens and the City of Gresham listed the Roy E. and Hildur L. Amundesen House in the National Register.

Local governments may comment on National Register nominations. Local governments participating in the CLG program may object to a nomination, ending the nomination process unless appealed. The revised rule includes updated procedures for hearing notifications, including specific provisions to notify CLGs, as well as a provision that allows the SHPO to coordinate outreach efforts with local governments. The revised rule also now includes provisions for comments from Oregon's nine federally-recognized Native American tribes.

OPRD will accept public comments on the proposed changes through 5 p.m. Aug. 31, 2020. Comments can be made online, in writing or via email:

  *   Online: oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx<https://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx>
  *   In writing: Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, attn. Katie Gauthier, 725 Summer St NE, Suite C, Salem OR 97301
  *   Email: OPRD.publiccomment at oregon.gov<mailto:OPRD.publiccomment at oregon.gov>
  *   Informational, online webinar to discuss potential impacts of proposed rules on local governments, communities and federally-recognized Native American tribes.  The webinar is set for 10-11:30 a.m. Aug. 18.  Register at oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx<https://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx>.
After reviewing public comments, OPRD staff plan to present a final recommended rule for consideration to the Oregon State Parks and Recreation Commission.

The full text of the proposed change is available online: oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx<https://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PRP/Pages/PRP-rulemaking.aspx>.

Properties listed in the National Register are:

  *   Recognized as significant to the nation, state or community;
  *   Considered in the planning of federal or federally assisted projects;
  *   Eligible for federal and state tax benefits;
  *   Eligible for historic preservation grants when funds are available;
  *   Eligible for leniency in meeting certain building code requirements.

National Register listing does not place any restrictions on a property at the federal level, unless property owners choose to participate in tax benefit or grant programs. State law requires local governments to review the demolition or relocation of all properties listed in the National Register at a public hearing, and allows local governments to add additional regulations following a formal public process. Learn more about the National Register of Historic Places program in Oregon at oregon.gov/oprd/OH/pages/national-register.aspx<https://www.oregon.gov/oprd/OH/pages/national-register.aspx>.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/or_archaeology/attachments/20200805/cfc3040e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 30049 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/or_archaeology/attachments/20200805/cfc3040e/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 21996 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/or_archaeology/attachments/20200805/cfc3040e/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 8-4-20 NR rule comment extended.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 157800 bytes
Desc: 8-4-20 NR rule comment extended.pdf
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/or_archaeology/attachments/20200805/cfc3040e/attachment.pdf>

More information about the OR_Archaeology mailing list