Florida Archaeological Council, Inc.

Statement Concerning the Effects of the Proposed 2003-2004 State Budget on Florida’s Historic Preservation Program

Summary

The Florida Archaeological Council, Inc. (FAC) is concerned that the proposed reorganization of the state’s Division of Historical Resources, to be implemented as part of Governor Bush’s 2003-2004 budget, will adversely affect the ability of the state to manage its historic preservation program according to the provisions set forth in Section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Chapter 267, Florida Statutes. The proposal calls for 1) transfer of 26 positions from the Division’s Bureau of Archaeological Research to the Department of Environmental Protection, along with the responsibility for managing significant archival materials, archaeological and historical collections, and the archaeological conservation laboratory; 2) elimination of all positions at the Museum of Florida History, with a transfer of management and staffing to DEP’s Division of Parks and Recreation; 3) elimination of the Regional Historic Preservation Offices, which provide technical assistance to local communities, elimination of the Historical Museum Grants-in-Aid program, which provides support for local museums, and elimination of the Florida State Library; and 4) a reduction in staff positions within the Division’s Bureau of Historic Preservation.

The FAC is opposed to this proposal for the following reasons:

4 Dividing existing programs between two or more Departments will result in 1) reduced effectiveness in carrying out the state’s historic preservation responsibilities under federal and state laws; 2) substantial cost to Florida taxpayers if archaeological and archival collections, the conservation lab, and the State Library are moved to other locations; 3) a lack of qualified professionals, adequate facilities, or funds to manage collections and administer programs.

4 A reduction in the number of qualified and experienced staff will result in unnecessary delays for both public and private-sector development projects, a corresponding increase in costs for development projects, and a potential loss to the state of federal funds.

4 Elimination of historic preservation assistance programs will negatively impact the ability of local governments to inventory, manage, and protect their archaeological sites and historic structures.

4 Staff reductions and agency reorganization will reduce the number of cultural resource investigations that are performed, thereby creating a negative economic impact on the cultural resource and historic preservation industry.

4 Fewer surveys will result in fewer archaeological, historical, and cultural resources being discovered and protected, thus impacting our state’s rich cultural heritage.

In short, the proposed changes will not enhance the services being provided to taxpayers nor will they contribute to better, more efficient government. Instead they will severely limit the ability of the state to protect and manage Florida’s rich cultural heritage. The FAC recommends that the Governor’s proposal be tabled until a Blue Ribbon Committee, that includes professionals in the field of cultural resource management and historic preservation, is formed to consider ways to achieve government cost-efficiency while maintaining a strong historic preservation program that is in compliance with federal law.

Introduction

"The rich and unique heritage of historic properties in this state, representing more than 10,000 years of human presence, is an important legacy to be valued and conserved for present and future generations. The destruction of these nonrenewable historical resources will engender a significant loss to the state's quality of life, economy, and cultural environment" ? Chapter 267.061(1)(a), Florida Historical Resources Act.

These words lay the foundation for the State of Florida’s policy regarding archaeological sites and historic structures. That policy, as outlined in subsequent sub-sections, is to:

1. Provide leadership in the preservation of the state's historic resources;

2. Administer state-owned or state-controlled historic resources in a spirit of stewardship and trusteeship;

3. Contribute to the preservation of non-state-owned historic resources and to give encouragement to organizations and individuals undertaking preservation by private means;

4. Foster conditions, using measures that include financial and technical assistance, for a harmonious coexistence of society and state historic resources;

5. Encourage the public and private preservation and utilization of elements of the state's historically built environment; and

6. Assist local governments to expand and accelerate their historic preservation programs and activities.

Perhaps the most important statement is the first – it is the policy of the State of Florida to "provide leadership in the preservation of the state’s historic resources" (emphasis added). From this statement all other policies follow. It is the opinion of the Florida Archaeological Council, Inc. (FAC) that the writers of these words took their task seriously and meant for them to express the desires of the residents of this state. The acknowledgement of the state’s leadership role in the protection of its archaeological and historical resources was recognized legislatively over 30 years ago when the original Florida Antiquities Act was passed in 1965. This law was later amended to become the Archives and History Act in 1967 and the Florida Historical Resources Act in 1987, with further amendments in 2002. Each of these amendments has strengthened the ability of the state to manage cultural resources on state-owned or state-controlled lands, ensured that impacts to cultural resources are considered during state or state-assisted undertakings, and enabled the state to assist federal and state agencies and local governments in achieving their historic preservation goals. The fact that Florida has maintained one of the strongest and most effective historic preservation programs in the nation for over 30 years, with little controversy and the support of both Republicans and Democrats, attests to its strong commitment to preserve its history.

However, it also is the opinion of the FAC that Governor Bush’s proposed 2003-2004 budget, and the resulting reorganization of the current Division of Historical Resources that it entails, threatens the very leadership role that the State of Florida has expressed in law as part of its mission. As a result, it places our state’s rich historical and cultural legacy in a perilous position that could result in the destruction of unknown numbers of archaeological sites, historic structures, archaeological collections, and historic documents through neglect, mismanagement, and inadequate funding. Moreover, the changes that are proposed under the Governor’s budget also threaten the multimillion dollar cultural resource and historic preservation industry that is dependent on the effective functioning of the various programs administered by the Division of Historical Resources for its existence. The following section details our specific concerns.

Statement of Concerns

Decentralization of Division Programs

The Governor’s budget proposal involves the merger of the present Department of State with the Department of Community Affairs, with the new agency to be called the Department of State and Community Partnerships (DOSCP). Under the merger, DOSCP will retain elements of the Division of Historical Resources’ Bureau of Historic Preservation (BHP) and the Florida Master Site File (FMSF), but the Museum of Florida History will be managed and staffed by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), as will state-owned historic sites. Positions now within the Division’s Bureau of Archaeological Research (BAR) also will be transferred to DEP, along with the responsibility for managing significant archival materials, archaeological and historical collections, and the archaeological conservation laboratory. It also is planned to eliminate the Business Trust Fund that provides dedicated monies to the Division’s Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid program, the Regional Historic Preservation Offices that provide technical assistance to local communities, and the Florida State Library.

The FAC has several concerns regarding these proposed changes.

Reduced Effectiveness. The FAC believes that it makes better organizational sense to retain all programs related to the state’s historic, archaeological, and cultural heritage under one administrative roof. While the Governor’s desire to reduce redundancy in agency functions is a laudable goal, such redundancy does not exist with regard to the Division of Historical Resources since no other agency is charged with the responsibility for managing archaeological, historical, and cultural resources within the state.

The interrelated nature of the Division’s bureaus and the tasks they perform, makes any consideration of their separation and reorganization under different agencies a recipe for confusion and inefficiency. Federal and state agencies (including the Florida Department of Transportation), developers, and permit applicants all require rapid agency response to compliance review projects mandated under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Chapter 267, F.S. For these entities, time equals money. At present, the Division’s Compliance Review staff has 30 days to respond to a request for comments on a project and they are exceptionally efficient at achieving that goal, despite the large number of projects that cross their desks daily.  The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), Compliance Review Section, the Florida Master Site File (FMSF), Survey and Registration, the State Archaeologist, and collections and archives are all involved in the information gathering and exchange that occur as part of the compliance review process. If these offices and collections are divided among two or more different agencies, it is difficult to see how comments will be provided within a reasonable time frame. This has the potential to cost Floridians hundreds of thousands of dollars in unnecessary project delays.

The tasks associated with a typical cultural resource assessment survey will illustrate the interrelated nature of the Division’s bureaus. During a typical project, it is not uncommon for a private consultant assisting a client in Section 106 or Chapter 267 compliance to be involved in multiple acts of coordination and consultation with various parts of the Division. For example, as the only central repository for all recorded archaeological sites and historic structures in the state, a search of the FMSF is always performed to identify previously documented sites and structures in or near a project area. The FMSF office also contains copies of most reports documenting cultural resource survey and excavations that have been performed in the state. Thus, consultants and researchers must regularly visit this office and consult these reports prior to performing an investigation. The Compliance Review Section (maintained within the BHP), the SHPO (for federal projects), and at times the State Archaeologist (who resides within BAR), are regularly consulted with regard to survey requirements and methods, the development of preservation or mitigation treatments, documentation standards, and other project-related business. The BHP’s Survey and Registration staff may be consulted with regard to assessing the significance of standing structures found during surveys and to discuss appropriate mitigation measures when significant historic structures cannot be avoided or preserved.

The State Archaeologist also is responsible for administering the provisions of Chapter 872, F.S. (Offenses Concerning Dead Bodies and Graves) when unmarked human remains are encountered either inadvertently during construction activities or during archaeological investigations. The law applies to all unmarked human remains, whether they are on public or private lands. Many Native American cemeteries and some unmarked historic cemeteries are encountered during compliance surveys required by law. Consequently, individuals involved in an 872 issue often must coordinate with both the State Archaeologist (regarding Ch. 872) and the BHP’s Compliance Review Section. Archaeological projects funded by Historic Preservation grants administered by the BHP’s Grants Program often take place on state lands, thereby requiring coordination between BHP and BAR staff. Archaeologists who wish to conduct investigations on state-owned or controlled lands are required to obtain a 1A-32 Archaeological Research Permit, which is issued by BAR. Archaeological collections, archival materials, and the State Library may also be used for compliance-level projects or research. All are well organized and managed by knowledgeable staff and are easily accessible. Dividing the Division up among other Departments will destroy the very integration that enables the Division to work so effectively now.

Cost to Taxpayers. Moving collections and facilities from the R.A. Gray Building to another location would be a major undertaking that could only be achieved at a substantial cost to the state’s taxpayers. In addition to the costs to agencies, developers, and permit applicants associated with delays in the administration of project reviews mandated by federal and state laws, the FAC is concerned about the costs to taxpayers if the state’s large collection of artifacts, its sophisticated conservation laboratory, and the State Library are moved to other locations. While the current plan is to keep the archaeological collections and conservation laboratory within the R. A. Gray Building, the FAC fears this may change if DEP is authorized to manage them. The Division presently is responsible for curating all artifacts recovered from state-owned or state-controlled lands, including submerged lands, with ownership of said artifacts vested with the Division under Chapter 267.115, F.S. This collection includes thousands of artifacts and samples, along with their associated field notes, maps, photographs, and other documentation, from some of the state’s most important archaeological and historical sites (e.g., the Miami Circle, Harney Flats, Aucilla River, the DeSoto Winter Camp Site, and San Luis). It is an invaluable resource for scholars, students, and the public. Artifacts from the collection are on display in the Museum of Florida History and are on loan for display to other museums throughout the state. The BAR’s conservation laboratory is a state-of-the-art facility that stabilizes and preserves through specialized treatment hundreds of artifacts that have been recovered from submerged sites in Florida, including many shipwrecks. The R. A. Gray Building was designed and built specifically to house the collections, the conservation laboratory, and the State Library. Moving these facilities from the R.A. Gray Building to another location is not a simple undertaking and would result in excessive costs that are not in the best interests of the state’s residents.

Inadequate Staffing. It is the FAC’s position that the proposed budget and resulting reorganization will inhibit the ability of the state to carry out its legally mandated duties and responsibilities through a loss of qualified personnel. These responsibilities are outlined under ss. 267.031 of the Florida Historical Resources Act. Among these are 1) to cooperate with federal and state agencies, local governments, and private organizations to direct and conduct a comprehensive statewide survey of archaeological and historic resources, 2) to maintain an inventory of such resources, 3) to develop a comprehensive statewide historic preservation plan, 4) to identify and nominate eligible properties to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), 5) to assist federal and state agencies and local governments in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities, 6) to provide public information, education, and technical assistance related to historic preservation, and 7) carry out on behalf of the state the programs of the National Historic Preservation Act . These duties and responsibilities mirror those of Section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which specifies the responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Thus, state law and federal law are consistent with regard to the duties and responsibilities of the state to ensure that significant archaeological sites and historic structures are inventoried, evaluated for National Register eligibility, and, when determined eligible, nominated to the NRHP. In addition, Section 101 establishes that the SHPO will serve in an advisory capacity to assist federal agencies in carrying out their historic preservation obligations under Section 106 of the Act.

Under the Governor’s proposed budget, 26 positions would be transferred from BAR to DEP. How the positions will be used and who will fill them will be decided by DEP. Thus, there is no guarantee that these positions will be filled by professional archaeologists. Rule Chapter 1A-46.001(3) requires that all Principal Investigators performing cultural resource investigations for state or state-assisted projects must meet the minimum qualifications for archaeology, history, architectural history, or historic architecture as contained in 36 CFR, Part 61 ("Procedures for Approved State and Local Historic Preservation Programs, Appendix A, Professional Qualification Standards"). Since one of BAR’s principal duties is to survey state lands for archaeological sites and historic structures and to assist various state agencies in developing management plans for protecting these resources, those positions must be filled by individuals who meet these minimum qualifications. The FAC is very concerned that the transfer of BAR positions to DEP will not be a simple administrative change, but will instead result in a diminished number of personnel with the necessary training and experience to adequately conduct such surveys and/or to provide appropriate recommendations to state agencies that possess cultural resources on their lands.

Another important duty of BAR is to curate artifacts recovered from state-owned lands. The artifacts must be organized, stored, and maintained in a condition that will allow for long-term use in research and public display. Given the large numbers of materials and associated documentation contained within the BAR collections, their permanent curation and management is no small task. Again, it is essential that qualified, experienced staff is available to undertake this responsibility. This level of expertise is unlikely to be maintained if positions now allocated within BAR are filled by non-archaeologists.

Under the proposed budget, the Museum of Florida History will lose all of its current positions and will be staffed by DEP personnel from the Division of Parks and Recreation. While Parks and Recreation staff may possess the training and expertise to manage park lands effectively, they do not have the training and knowledge necessary to manage a historical museum, along with the many artifacts and displays that require special handling, care, and treatment. The Museum is accredited by the American Association of Museums, and as such is able to receive federal funds. Accreditation is based, in part, on having administrators and staff who meet minimum professional qualification standards. Staffing the museum with Parks and Recreation personnel who do not meet these minimum qualifications will jeopardize the museum’s accreditation status and federal funding.

Finally, the proposal to eliminate the State Library and either move the books and documents to a new, non-government related location or to disperse these among a variety of institutions also is of grave concern to the FAC. Many libraries already are struggling with small staffs and limited funds to manage existing collections. Without a commitment on the part of the state to provide additional funding, it is doubtful that the important historical collections contained within the State Library will be adequately cared for if moved. Moreover, if such funds are to be provided to other institutions, it would seem more prudent to keep the State Library in Tallahassee as part of the Division of Historical Resources, where it can be managed efficiently and with care by the current library staff.

Inadequate Staffing and Funds to Administer Federal and State Mandated Programs Effectively

The FAC is very concerned that insufficient staffing and funds will be available to adequately administer federal and state mandated historic preservation programs which could result in a loss of federal funds. In order to receive federal historic preservation funds, each state’s Historic Preservation Program must pass an annual review by the Secretary of the Interior and meet federal standards for levels of staffing and performance. Although the Division’s Bureau of Historic Preservation is to be retained within the new Department of State and Community Partnerships, the number of positions will be reduced, impacting the agency’s ability to administer its many important programs. One of BHP’s most important duties is to review development projects for potential impacts to archaeological and historical sites under federal (Section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act) and state (Chapter 267, F.S.) law. This dual responsibility is acknowledged specifically in ss. 267.031(5)(h) of the Florida Historical Resources Act where it states that it is the responsibility of the Division "to establish, maintain, and administer a state historic preservation program meeting the requirements of an approved program and fulfilling the responsibilities of state historic preservation programs as provided in Section 101 of [the National Historic Preservation Act]."

As part of the state’s federal responsibilities under the NHPA, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is to serve in an advisory capacity for those projects that are conducted within the state by federal agencies or for which federal funding or permits are required. The SHPO consults with the agencies to ensure that the provisions of Section 106 of the NHPA are met. The types of projects that require SHPO involvement include state highway projects that receive federal funding through the Federal Highways Administration, energy projects that require Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval, cell towers and other communication projects that are permitted by the Federal Communications Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dredge and fill projects, and activities on military and National Guard bases, among others. Individual projects are reviewed by the staff of the Bureau of Historic Preservation’s Compliance Review Section. Similarly, the Compliance Review Section reviews projects performed pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 267.061(2). Under ss. 267.061(2)(a), all state agencies of the executive branch must provide the Division of Historical Resources with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the potential effects that any state or state-assisted undertaking may have on archaeological sites or historic structures that are eligible for listing on the NRHP. Moreover, ss. 267.061(2)(b) requires that these state agencies must also consult with the Division to ensure that no prudent and feasible alternative exists for using, demolishing, or otherwise impacting NRHP-eligible resources as a result of state or state-assisted projects, and, if no such alternative is determined to exist, to ensure that appropriate measures are developed to mitigate impact to the resource.

The number of projects that the Compliance Review Section must process yearly as a result of these legislative mandates totals well into the thousands. The current staff of Compliance Review consists of four full-time equivalent and six OPS positions while the Survey and Registration staff consists of four full-time equivalent and two OPS positions. Any reduction of staff would increase review time and negate any organizational attempts to streamline the state and federal permit review process. The Florida Master Site File contains information on over 25,000 archaeological sites and over four times as many historic structures. Requests for site file information are received and processed daily by a staff of 3.5 full-time equivalent and 12 OPS positions. Having a trained staff on hand to process these requests, manage the large database of files, and assist other agencies that require cultural resource data is essential for this program to function efficiently.

Elimination of Important Historic Preservation Assistance Programs

Staff reductions will inhibit the ability of the Division to provide technical assistance. Providing technical assistance to local governments and, when requested, serving in a review capacity for locally mandated archaeological and historic preservation projects, is another important function of the Division’s Bureau of Historic Preservation. Few local governments have qualified archaeologists, historians, architectural historians, or historic preservation professionals on staff to review reports and recommendations submitted in compliance with local ordinances. Consequently, many local governments request that the Division provide this expertise under the provisions of Chapter 267.031(5)(e). Without adequate staff, it will be difficult for the Division to provide this important service in a timely manner.

Elimination of the Regional Historic Preservation Offices will further limit the ability of the Division to provide local governments with historic preservation assistance. The Division’s Regional Historic Preservation Offices also provide assistance on historic preservation matters to local governments and organizations. The regional offices are staffed with individuals who are knowledgeable about the resources in their areas and consequently can provide information and advice that are suited to local conditions. By eliminating these offices, the Governor will place an economic burden on local governments by requiring them to staff similar positions for which funding may not be available. The alternative is to allow archaeological sites, historic structures, and other cultural resources to be neglected and mismanaged.

Eliminating the Historical Museum Grants-in-Aid program will limit the ability of museums to educate the public about Florida history. The proposed elimination of the Historical Museum Grants-in-Aid program will remove an important source of funding for local museums. These funds typically are used in to support programs and develop educational exhibits on Florida history and prehistory. Because few local museums have the money or resources to develop quality exhibits without outside funding, the elimination of these grants will be a severe financial blow to small museums.

Economic Impact to the Cultural Resource and Historic Preservation Industry

Agency reorganization and staff reductions would jeopardize a multi-million dollar industry composed of private, for-profit businesses that conduct cultural resource, historic preservation, and related projects in the state. These businesses are dependent on projects that are generated by the federal and state laws that require cultural resource assessments and mitigation projects to be performed as part of the development permitting process. They, and the private and public clients they represent, rely on the efficient processing of project reviews by Division staff to meet permitting and construction deadlines. Under federal and state law, the SHPO has 30 days to provide comments on a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking. If the SHPO fails to respond within the 30-day time limit, the agency or permit applicant may proceed with the project under the assumption that there are no cultural resource concerns. Thus, any reduction in staff that reduces the ability of the SHPO staff (i.e., the Compliance Review Section) to comment on proposed undertakings in a timely manner, has the very real potential of reducing the number of surveys that will be required and, hence, would have a negative economic impact on these businesses and their employees.

Elimination of the Business Trust Fund and its corresponding impact on the Division’s Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid program also will affect the cultural resource industry. While these grants are typically given to governmental bodies or non-profit organizations, a large percentage of the technical work associated with grant-funded projects is contracted to private businesses, including cultural resource consulting firms, architectural firms, construction and restoration companies, and companies that design and develop educational materials for museums and schools. Many of these firms are "small businesses" and eliminating the funding source for the Division’s Grants-in-Aid program will take away a major source of income and jeopardize their existence.

Impact to the State’s Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural Resources.

Important archaeological sites, historic structures, and cultural properties will be lost to development, neglect, and indifference. In 1980, there were less than 6000 archaeological sites listed on the FMSF. In 2002, over 20,000 archaeological were listed. Thus, in the span of just 22 years, the number of archaeological sites listed on the FMSF has more than tripled. Not coincidentally, it was during this same period that cultural resource assessment and grant-funded surveys began to be conducted in earnest. The vast majority of the sites added to the FMSF from 1980 to the present were discovered during these types of survey efforts. If the Governor’s budget proposal is enacted, it has the potential to diminish greatly the ability of the Division of Historical Resources to perform its legislatively mandated duties with the result that fewer surveys will be performed and fewer sites will be identified, recorded, and preserved.

The impact will be most acute for precolumbian archaeological sites because many of these lie buried beneath the surface and so are not easily seen. Even mounds and middens are difficult to recognize if one is not trained to look for them. This means that the cultural group that stands to lose the most from a diminished historic preservation program is Florida’s Native Americans.

Several Native American tribes, including the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, are culturally affiliated with Florida and hold an interest in the federal and state-mandated preservation programs. Native American concerns center on protecting their cultural patrimony and heritage, which includes cultural and sacred sites. Other concerns center on religious freedom and tribal sovereignty. The only way that cultural and sacred sites are protected off tribal lands is through federal and state laws, specifically Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Chapter 267, F.S, and Chapter 872, F.S. These laws require federal and state agencies to ensure that tribal values are taken into account as part of the nation’s preservation program. They also recognize, and in some cases mandate, the recognition of Native American rights concerning cultural patrimony and give them a voice in deciding the fate of such sites. In Florida, these laws are administered by the SHPO through the Division of Historical Resources. Specifically, the Compliance Review Section plays an essential role in fulfilling these mandates and is seen as vital to ensuring that Native American concerns are addressed. The Florida Master Site File also represents an integral part of this process as it serves as the repository of information about known cultural sites in the state. Surveys required by federal and state laws provide a direct means by which Native American cultural and sacred sites are identified. Without them, many burial mounds and cemeteries would go unnoticed, unrecorded, and unprotected, increasing the likelihood that they will be destroyed by development or vandalism.

Conclusion

The State of Florida is fortunate in having a historic preservation program that serves as an example for other states to emulate, justifying the vision and hard work of state legislators, administrators, and staff who have helped create and maintain it. It is unfortunate that 30 years of effort by a wide spectrum of committed individuals may be destroyed with one swift stroke of the Governor’s pen. Such a loss would be a tragedy for the State of Florida and its residents. The proposed changes will not enhance the services being provided to taxpayers nor will they contribute to better, more efficient government. Instead, in the absence of an active and effective historic preservation program, we will have fragmentation, inefficiency, and loss of leadership. As a result, the state’s archaeological, historical, and cultural resources will face increased threats of destruction and neglect. The FAC urges the Governor and the Legislature to reconsider this proposal and take steps to maintain the Division of Historical Resources as a strong, integrated agency within the Department of State and Community Partnerships, staffed with qualified professionals who are committed to protecting our state’s cultural heritage.

The FAC recommends that the Governor appoint a Blue Ribbon Committee, which would include among its members professionals in the fields of cultural resource management and historic preservation. The Committee should consider ways to achieve government cost-efficiency while maintaining a strong historic preservation program that is in compliance with federal law and which is staffed and funded sufficiently to ensure protection of Florida’s archaeological, historical, and cultural resources.