[MassHistPres] S.2053 A Bill to Reduce MHC's review of state projects that have an adverse effect on historic properties in MHC's Inventory

[Dennis De Witt]

The story below from the Fall River Herald News of 11/15/11, sounds somewhat hopeful.

Dennis De Witt



Calling Meditech’s proposed $65 million project “a game-changer for the region,” Fall River’s economic development chief called on state officials, including Gov. Deval Patrick, to extend or reconvene the state legislative session in order to remove obstacles the company says have been created by the Massachusetts Historical Commission.

“I respectfully request that the Patrick administration become actively engaged in this project,” Kenneth Fiola Jr., of the Fall River Office of Economic Development, wrote in an email Tuesday afternoon to Gregory Bialecki, secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Community Development.

One week after Fiola, the local legislative delegation and others met with Secretary of State William Galvin, who chairs the MHC, and  commission leaders, he said Meditech’s plan to build a new SouthCoast facility is “at an impasse.”

“Meditech is not interested in the compromise” with MHC, said Fiola, the company’s designated spokesman. The two sides held a meeting last week, at which the MHC issued a requirement that 5 to 7 of 21 acres set aside for the project be machine stripped in order to protect archaeologically sensitive land and possible Indian graves of historic significance.

“Meditech could not agree to MHC’s required machine stripping of the impact area required by MHC,” wrote Fiola, referencing a June 24 letter from MHC Executive Director Brona Simon that Meditech said caused them to believe the entire 21 acres must be dug up.

They transferred another 117 acres for open space within Freetown’s Riverfront Business Park facing the Taunton River.

In the letter to Bialecki, also a member of the MHC, Fiola referenced Senate Bill 2053, which seeks to eliminate the commission's authority over land not listed on the historic register. That measure would clear the way for the Meditech project to move forward.

The bill, sponsored by state Sen. Michael Rodrigues, has been referred to the Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight. Rodrigues said he hopes the bill will get a hearing soon.

With the legislative session scheduled to end Wednesday, Fiola asked the Patrick administration to support the proposed bill, help reconvene the session for a vote on the bill, initiate emergency legislation exempting Meditech from MHC review and revisit language in the Massachusetts Environmental Protection Act that could allow the project to proceed without MHC oversight.

He said Meditech has “acknowledged that they will abide by state law as it pertains to any unmarked graves or the unearthing of any bones during construction.”

Bialecki’s office did not respond to a request for comment, and Galvin’s spokesman said he had not been informed about Fiola’s request to the Patrick administration.

Rodrigues, who’s been encouraging local citizens to email legislators, also could not be reached.

State Rep. Kevin Aguiar, among the legislators at last week’s meeting, put the onus on Meditech for the impasse.

“There’s been a reasonable compromise on this issue, in my opinion, and Meditech is choosing not to take it,” Aguiar said.

“The Meditech folks, for whatever reason, do not want to go with what most people see as a reasonable compromise.”

Aguiar, said he was not speaking for his colleagues but believes they may line up the same way, making legislation as a difficult route.

“We need cooler heads to prevail,” he said, “rather than drawing lines in the sand.”

Fiola said the prospect of 800 to 1,000 college-level jobs and Fall River’s unemployment rate, which is nearly double the state average, justifies the request.

Meanwhile, Green Futures, a local environmental advocacy group, announced that a Bridgewater State University college student has created a petition “to help stop Senate Bill 2053.”

Fiola also said he believes Richard Sullivan Jr., state secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, committed an error in his assignment of the MEPA permit and asked Gov. Patrick to review that.
That was because the MEPA permit allowed MHC oversight authority over land that it is not listed on the state historic register, Fiola said.

Most of his points for taking extraordinary steps to put the Meditech project on track have been well publicized. In addition to the preserved, donated land and building a 186,000 square-foot facility, they included the prospects of jobs paying in the range of $30,000 to $40,000 and the project becoming a “foundation” for the region.

It would also help recruitment of companies to the nearby 300-acre SouthCoast Life Science and Technology Park at Fall River, also accessed from new Route 24 ramps, and create more jobs.

Fiola’s FROED office is also strongly involved with that project, which lost steam during a yearlong effort to convert biopark land for a  destination casino. The state’s decision at the end of last year’s legislative session not to legalize gaming, coupled with a citizen lawsuit, caused Mayor Will Flanagan to pull the casino land sale off the table.





On Nov 3, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Anne Louro wrote:

> Attached is the link to the New Bedford Standard Times Editorial on this subject:
>  
> http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111103/OPINION/111030314
>  
> Anne Louro
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of mfenollosa
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:00 PM
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] S.2053 A Bill to Reduce MHC's review of state projects that have an adverse effect on historic properties in MHC's Inventory
>  
> Let me add to Michael's post (he hit "send" about a minute before I was going to!)  with apologies for the length of this post...
> 
> The bill is being fast-tracked through the Massachusetts Senate and will severely restrict the Massachusetts Historical Commission's  regulatory oversight on historic properties throughout the Commonwealth.  As the law (Mass General Laws Chapter 9, Section 27C) now reads, MHC has the ability to comment, and cause the applicable state agency or private developer to eliminate, minimize or mitigate, adverse effects on any projects, if the project is listed on the State Register of Historic Places or, most importantly, if the property is on any town Inventory of historic assets.  The State Register only includes National Register properties and those in local historic districts, so many, many other locally-deemed significant properties would NOT be reviewed if this legislation were to go into effect.  In Lexington, for example, we have some 1300 properties on our Inventory; only a tiny fraction are on the National Register. The vast majority are located outside our local historic districts.  And as we all know, it is not easy or quick to set up local historic districts or get properties listed on the National Register.  Worse yet, the proposed legislation appears to have retroactive effect -- forever!
> 
> So, for example,under the proposed law, the MHC would not be able to comment, as it has done countless times, when a utility wanted to enlarge or reconfigure a steeple on  an inventoried church to accommodate a cell tower.  Or a state agency wanted to expand a road that would destroy the setting of a historic property.  Or a private developer wanted to build a housing project that would result in the demolition of historic resources after any applicable demo delay period had run.  Or a civilian airport wanted to tear down a hangar that had historic significance and could be repurposed.  The MHC has not always been effective in getting the results we would prefer, but they have been important allies when it's "only" local preservationists trying to stop big projects.  State involvement brings credibility to local action.
> 
> The legislation is the result of an unhappy developer on the south shore whose project was "derailed" by MHC review.  The developer wanted to build a large industrial facility on a property on PreservationMass's 10 Most Endangered list a couple of years ago -- Peace Haven, a 600-acre site along the Taunton River in Freetown, just north of Fall River’s city boundary, whose historic significance dates back to King Philip’s War in 1675. Its archeological resources from this time and earlier are amazing and documented at the State Archives. Though no historic buildings are still remaining, the incredible landscape, cultural and archeological history make this a rare treasure in that part of the state.  An article from yesterday's Herald describes the situation (from the developer's point of view):  http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x780401655/Rodrigues-bill-targeting-Historical-Commission-clears-another-hurdle 
> 
> As noted in the Herald article, the legislation has been referred to the state Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight, chaired by Lexington's Senator Ken Donnelly. And there appears to be no opposition to its passage. 
> 
> So please consider contacting Senator Donnelly and/or your own legislators, and ask interested colleagues to do so as well, to voice your objections to this proposed bill.  You can do it by e-mail:http://www.malegislature.gov/Committees/Joint/J25 will get you to the committee, http://www.malegislature.gov/will get you to a list of everyone else in the legislature, and clicking on the name will give you the e-mail address.  It would be helpful to note projects where the MHC has made a difference in preserving historic assets through their participation and oversight.
> 
> The text of the proposed bill is set forth below, with my red highlighting.  Many thanks for anything you can do to help!
> 
> Best,
> 
> Marilyn Fenollosa
> Bill S.2053
> 
> An Act relative to certain projects referred to the Massachusetts historical commission for consultation
> 
> By Mr. Rodrigues, a petition (subject to Joint Rule 12) (accompanied by bill, Senate, No. ) of Michael J. Rodrigues, David B. Sullivan, Steven Howitt, Marc R. Pacheco and other members of the General Court for legislation relative to certain projects referred to the Massachusetts historical commission for consultation. Tourism, Arts and Cultural Development.
> 
> 
> SECTION 1. The first paragraph of section 27C of chapter 9 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2010 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out the fourth sentence and inserting in place thereof the following 3 sentences:- If a determination of adverse effect has been made on any property, site or structure listed in the state register of historic places, the state body undertaking the project or the private entity proposing the project shall adopt all prudent and feasible means to eliminate, minimize or mitigate the adverse effects. If a determination of adverse effect has been made on any property, site or structure not listed in the state register of historic places, the state body undertaking the project or the private entity proposing the project shall consider, but need not adopt, the commission’s recommendations to eliminate, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects the commission has determined to exist, if such recommendations are issued within 30 days of such determination. Under no circumstances shall such a state body or private entity be required to adopt the commission’s recommendations relative to a site or structure not listed in the state register of historic places. 
> 
> SECTION 2. This act shall apply to projects referred to the Massachusetts historical commission, pursuant to section 27C of chapter 9 of the General Laws, on and after the effective date of this act. This act shall apply to such projects referred to said commission, pursuant to said section 27C of said chapter 9, before the effective date of this act if: (i) either a determination relative to adverse effect or the results of consultation or consideration following a determination of adverse effect is pending on the effective date of this act; (ii) said commission has issued recommendations to the state body undertaking the project or the private entity proposing the project but such recommendations have not yet been adopted on the effective date of this act; or (iii) projects for which a copy of an environmental notification form prepared pursuant to section 62A of chapter 30 is provided to the Massachusetts historical commission, or for which a project notification form is filed with said commission, pursuant to section 27C of chapter 9 of the General Laws. 
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/3/2011 11:47 AM, Steinitz, Michael (SEC) wrote:
> Dear MassHistPres Listserve Members:
>  
> I would like to call you attention to Senate 2053.  Go to http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/Senate/S02053  to read it.
>  
> Basically, the bill would reduce the Massachusetts Historical Commission's review of state projects that have an adverse effect on historic properties (buildings, districts and sites) that are in MHC's Inventory but not yet listed in the State Register of Historic Places, by permitting the project proponent to ignore MHC's recommendations for preservation or mitigation.  The bill would also be retroactive to any previous state project reviews that MHC has done in the past.
>  
> It is presently in the Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight.  Letters, email and phone calls in opposition to the bill should be directed to the two chairmen and your local state senator and rep if they are committee members.  Go to http://www.malegislature.gov/Committees/Joint/J25  for contact information for the chairmen and committee members.
>  
> According to the Fall River Herald News, the Committee might schedule a hearing for this bill as early as next week, since the formal Legislative session will end in mid-November.
>  
>  
> Michael Steinitz
> Director
> Preservation Planning Division
> Massachusetts Historical Commission
> 220 Morrissey Blvd
> Boston MA 02125
> 617-727-8470
> 617-727-5128 (fax)
> michael.steinitz at state.ma.us
> 
> 
> 
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1834 / Virus Database: 2092/4592 - Release Date: 11/02/11
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20111117/f4078b07/attachment-0001.htm>