Each year, in the first week of March, preservationists from around the country converge on our nation's capitol. Preservation Lobby Day, sponsored by Preservation Action, a nationwide advocacy group, is designed to raise awareness of preservation concerns among policy makers, to keep or increase funding for existing programs, to support new programs, and to educate members of the preservation community about national issues with local impact.

What were the big issues this year?

Legislative initiatives this year included some perennial "meat and potatoes" items. The federal historic preservation program funds a number of basic programs, including the State Preservation Offices ($34.5 million in FY2004), Tribal Historic Preservation Offices ($3 million in FY2004) as well as the Save America's Treasure's Fund, a Clinton Administration program ($33 million in FY2004) and a very small portion of funding for National Trust historic sites ($500,000 in FY2004).

The State Historic Preservation Office: The Historic Preservation Fund supports half the cost of our state preservation offices - the rest of the funding comes from state governments. This program leverages approximately $2 billion a year in local investment and economic development activity through the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit program. The state office also administers the Certified Local Government program which provides much needed seed money to preservation projects around the state. The state also administers National Register nominations and provides information to the general public about a wide variety of preservation-related issues.

The SHPO also provides much needed insight on the impact of federal projects on historic resources throughout the state.

The State Preservation Offices, throughout the country, have seen diminished budgets since 2001 when the annual allocation hit $50 million (split 50 ways). On the surface, this was the highest budget in history for the program, but if inflation is figured in, federal funding for preservation programs has been winnowing since the mid-1980s.

What happens if the federal budget for the HPF stagnates, or continues its downward trajectory? The Minnesota State Preservation Office is closed one day a week. This may not seem like a big deal, but the cumulative impacts of reduced service weaken preservation's place in state government and the communities it serves. It also suggests that preservation isn't a full time government function.

Some might argue that given our federal deficit, and the amount of money spent on defense, the US really doesn't have the means to pay for preservation. Federal dollars are actually split into two general categories, one large, one small. 82% of government spending goes toward Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and defense spending. 18% goes toward nondefense discretionary funds, which include everything else. Federal preservation funding comes from this, not the larger fund.

At Lobby Day this year, we heard about a possible Conservation Trust Fund that would help protect the natural and cultural environment. Such a fund would help stabilize preservation spending - preservation expends a lot of energy trying to hold its own against chronic budget cuts.

Changes in the Tax Code: Nothing puts a crowd to sleep like a discussion of tax codes, but at Lobby Day this year, the group got a peppy overview of proposed changes which, if implemented, will have a dramatic effect. Most in attendance were, therefore, riveted.

Several changes will have significant impact on those looking to take advantage of the federal tax credit programs for historic preservation:

The 10% tax credit, currently available for properties older than 1936 that are not landmarks or contributing to a district, is not available for owners of rental properties. Advocates for alterations in the tax code are asking that rental property owners be included in this incentive program.

Due to a lack of foresight on the part of the code's writers in 1986, the language currently reads that properties older than 1936 are eligible for the programs (that would have been 50 or older in 1986). Advocates hope to change the code to read "resources 50 years old or older."

Basis reduction: The current preservation tax program offering a 20% credit proscribes that for every project dollar you lose a dollar of the basis reduction. Advocates propose a return to 1981 ratios, when the basis reduction was 50 cents loss in basis reduction per dollar spent.

Fewer complications for the tax exempt: Tax exempt rules affecting schools, churches, not for profit institutions, and governments make using the rehabilitation tax credit unduly onerous. Proposed changes, following the structure of Low Income Housing Tax Credit rules, would make it so that tax-exempt organizations can more easily finance rehabilitation of historic properties using the rehab credit.

Help for smaller projects: Currently, the tax code works best for projects over $10 million. Changes would provide a 40% credit for the first million dollars of preservation projects totaling under $2.5 million, and that projects receiving this enhanced credit be limited to an officially "difficult to develop area" (a DDA) or a qualified census tract (QCT). This change is supported by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Credits for those difficult to develop areas: Changes would provide tax credits on 130 percent of a project's qualified rehabilitation expenditures in qualifying areas. This change was conceived to aid preservation in poorer areas.

Barn Preservation Incentives

Funding for a five year federal barn preservation program was authorized in FY2002. The National Trust for Historic Preservation in partnership with Successful Farming has created a program to promote this initiative. The federal appropriation for this program was a part of the Farm Security Act of 2001.

Conservation Trust Fund

In 2000, Congress established the Conservation Trust Fund (CTF) to address chronic underfunding of programs protecting our natural and cultural environment. The CTF is a mechanism to support the Historic Preservation Fund, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery, state Wildlife Grants, the Cooperative Endangered Species Fund, the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund, the US Geological Survey State Planning Partnerships, Forest Legacy, Landowner Incentive and Stewardship, the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program, the Urban and Community Forestry program, and Youth Conservation Corps.

The mechanism supporting the CTF expired in 2003, and appropriators in both the House and Senate reduced the CTF allocation by $500 million. Hopefully, the CTF will receive $1.68 billion from the Interiors Appropriations bill, although the president has proposed just $1.165 billion.

Considering ongoing threats to the Historic Preservation Fund, the CTF could provided much needed stability.

Transportation Enhancement Reauthorization

The federal government currently sets aside money to mitigate impacts of large transportation projects. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), which was preceded by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) expired in October of 2003. Preservation advocates are asking that the program be reauthorized - it's done a lot of good in our community; $5 million of the fund has been allocated to the King Street Station project among others. Lobbyists are asking for a 10% set aside of general surface transportation funding.

A related mandate, 4(f) directs federal agencies to opt for the path of least destruction when planning transportation projects. There has been some concern that 4(f) makes the transportation planning process overly onerous and time consuming, although specific examples of projects held up by 4(f) are not cited. Environmental policies dictate evaluations and alternatives as well. Generally, hold ups occur when the effected communities are not engage, residents get angry, and sue. This is often avoided with thoughtful planning - the foundation of 4(f) thinking.

Other issues in play right now are a Preservation Caucus, which would support preservation policies by getting legislators to talk to one another about the "big picture." Caucuses are proactive measures for better policies, and create a community of support for specific issues. Washington state has a heritage caucus that meets once a week.

A Presidential Sites Improvement Act and a Route 66 Corridor Preservation Program are looking for appropriations, but neither of these programs relates to Washington state projects.

Who went?

Going to Washington DC to ask legislators to support preservation can be intimidating. Washington state had, nonetheless, 14 members in its lobbying delegation this year. How did that happen?

Thanks to the ebullient leadership of Jack Williams, the Chair of the Washington State Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, participation in Lobby Day is a blast. The conference of preservationists is a great time to mingle and talk about preservation efforts around the country. The multi-day event includes many receptions and lunches, which facilitate engagement. Some information about specific legislation is provided the day before scheduled meetings with legislators, which helps newcomers feel more confident.

Washington had a diverse delegation. Preservationists from around the state came - North Bend's ex-Mayor, Joan Simpson came, as did Rebekah Monette, one of Washington's state tribal preservation officers. The Washington Trust's Executive Director, Lisbeth Cort, Mary Thompson ex-State Historic Preservation Officer and preservation policy maven, Allyson Brooks, Washington's State Preservation Officer, Sondra Purcell, Tacoma preservationist, Katie Franks, Bellingham preservationist, David Harvey, Hanford historian and advocate for the Hanford preservation district, Joanne Moyer, Spokane preservation advocate, Ginger Wilcox, Chair of the Seattle Landmarks Preservation Board, Joe Finnie of Port Townsend, on the board of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, and Elizabeth Godlewski who is actively trying to raise funds for the preservation of Spokane's Fox Theater. And the author of this article, Heather MacIntosh, Historic Seattle's preservation advocate.

How to get involved

Anyone can go to Washington, DC to ask your elected official to support preservation. It's easy to get your feet wet by meeting with legislator's locally - each has two offices, one in Washington DC and one in their district.

If you're interested in participating in Lobby Day, or attending "in-district" meetings locally, contact Jack Williams at (206) 325-6441.

View last month's Public Policy article

Back to Top