[MassHistPres] Proposed Rule Changes National Register of Historic Places

[Dennis De Witt]

Marge

1 — click on the link at the bottom below

2  — enter the number 1024-AE49 in the search box

3 — There is a “comment now” button on the page that appears

Or you can go first to “open docket folder” to see other comments — 380 as of this morning — but DO NOT SIMPLY CUT AND PASTE ONE OF THEM — they are being machine counted and exact dups are discarded.  Personalize the text.  

There is also a “comment now” button on this page.

4 — follow prompts  (Did you see the inconspicuous check box acknowledging that you have read the page?)  You do not need to give address and contact information to have the submission accepted.

Hope this helps.

Dennis De Witt
Brookline

> On Apr 10, 2019, at 3:21 PM, Marge Ghilarducci <margecris at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Can anyone help me.? I have tried to put this comment in numerous times.  Also my address and contact information.  It keeps saying that I have to correct error, but I cannot find any.    Anyone have a clue on how to put this in - what am I not doing?
> 
> I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed changes to the way the National Register currently operates.  We must respect and protect our National resources.  There are many places for developers to build and operate without violating our natural and national assets.  It is our duty and obligation to leave a legacy of natural resources and open spaces for future generations.                         
> 
> Thanks for any insights
> Marjorie Ghilarducci
> Berkley, MA
> 
> 
>> On Apr 10, 2019, at 12:25 PM, Diane Gilbert <d.m.gilbert at comcast.net <mailto:d.m.gilbert at comcast.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello masshistpres members,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So far only a few of us are weighing in. I urge everyone to comment. This proposed change is among my worst nightmares of preservation work. This is also totally unnecessary except to appease certain constituencies. It's about trying to save our historic places/properties with our arms tied. Heritage landscapes are just as important as heritage buildings. This important work is always felt at the local level.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This proposed change is shocking but not surprising nor unanticipated under the current administration. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> 
>> Diane Gilbert
>> 
>> President, Dartmouth Heritage Preservation Trust, Inc.
>> 
>> Dartmouth, Massachusetts
>> 
>> (508) 965-7265
>> 
>> www.dhpt.org <http://www.dhpt.org/>On April 9, 2019 at 6:21 PM Judy Neiswander <jneiswander at gmail.com <mailto:jneiswander at gmail.com>> wrote: 
>>> 
>>> This is catastrophic. It would doom the grassroots effort in my town to get the 1641 Mother Brook canal on the National Register. I will definitely write & encourage others to do so. 
>>> 
>>> Judy Neiswander
>>> Dedham Historical Commission
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:19 AM Friedberg, Betsy (SEC) < betsy.friedberg at state.ma.us <mailto:betsy.friedberg at state.ma.us>> wrote: 
>>> Hello masshistpres members,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> The National Park Service is seeking public comment on proposed revisions <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-3D001irck9BZOhMRTuH-2Dxq0cQoxC8DQHdL4QVouhs0AycMoPQLBGby2-2DnNVXNGnoVUVYLlZSoOntZjzgmT3gocFB2GJWoiSTKr2dD2sDNi-5Fr6fxVFXhCV-2DVa8NXb5bXKYI8niKpEUqlRrOx9CN6luQDkjEC7kQRrxSaLfO2RUTY2YgkBvWvOOGJprFFCGcTEvNGs17A7en1E6fyXRkQmJI0l4ofW5YyGGNgN-5FIVQn482swifqSlZQEmLVSCNCniI7f3hW5Zlb4sMgzGlSVyFTBgwlL4Ox9SM-2DxL0i-26c-3DGUaYBYvlBbDzdzWsrhhwn3Zt0w2xXSKsQWMHtxXWW7n7qgVyMAFUOA-3D-3D-26ch-3DLXBoaduvDQECLjdpmViY-2DRE1gl5RnviM04lg6JIdNXZp-2D0DrdhnS-2Dg-3D-3D&d=DwMFaQ&c=lDF7oMaPKXpkYvev9V-fVahWL0QWnGCCAfCDz1Bns_w&r=DfNGaYNXvFPLFjLav-jmKRtJ9aFunE_MoeCKX-EdijU&m=6C--qkCtzlNZi4mp7CHgeTtokDT7gkVs3UynXlvIVMM&s=7EaCwN2FfyNzTjSOqLmsV8bkJuIzHwBLzylDBaVMu8A&e=> to National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) regulations that would have a substantial impact on how properties are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Several of the proposed rule changes go well beyond the intention of the NHPA.  The proposed rule would give federal agencies sole authority to identify or nominate historic properties on federal lands.  This would contradict current rules, under which State Historic Preservation Officers are required to weigh in on National Register nominations by federal agencies, and where SHPOs as well as communities can pursue nominations that include federal properties. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> In addition, the proposed rule would change the rules regarding owner objection in nominations of National Register historic districts.  Presently, if the majority of private property owners object, a nomination cannot go forward.  But the proposed rule adds that a district cannot be listed if the owners of a majority of the land area object, even if the majority of owners support the nomination. This contradicts the democratic principles underpinning the National Register nomination process, and means that the concept of “one owner/one vote” would no longer apply. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Please consider commenting on the proposed changes, summarized in the attached Alert from the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO). Public comments are due electronically by April 30, 2019. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> To review the proposed rule changes and to submit comments, please see the link below:
>>> 
>>> http://www.regulations.gov <http://www.regulations.gov/>
>>> and search for the RIN(1024-AE49).
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Betsy Friedberg
>>> 
>>> National Register Director
>>> 
>>> Massachusetts Historical Commission
>>> 
>>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20190411/02882613/attachment-0001.html>