POCATELLO — Countless unfettered federal construction projects and the decimation of historic preservation protections could be the outcome of a sweeping regulatory rewrite that could transform Idaho and states across the nation.
For nearly 60 years, the National Historic Preservation Act has ensured that when a federally funded or backed project affects a place of historical or cultural significance, that place must first be identified, evaluated and considered before decisions are made.
That process has helped protect Idaho’s archaeological resources, cultural landscapes, and the schools and communities that make up the Gem State’s story.
On Friday, July 24, a federal panel will vote on a sweeping rewrite of the regulations that have governed historic preservation review for nearly six decades — a move Idaho preservationists say could gut protections for places such as Historic Downtown Pocatello, tribal lands and rural landscapes.
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, or ACHP — the federal agency that administers Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act — circulated the draft rewrite July 17 and asked its 24 members to vote on it by July 24.
Preservation Idaho board president Brittney Scigliano said she only learned of it earlier this week.
Preservation Idaho and other advocates have been scrambling to respond, including sending a letter to Meridian Mayor Robert Simison, who holds the mayoral seat on the ACHP board. Simison, appointed to the council by President Trump, issued a response indicating that he intends to vote against the proposal. Despite his support, Scigliano cautioned he is one of many votes and the outcome is uncertain.
Scigliano said the rewrite would lower the bar for what large projects owe historic communities in return for that impact and reduce the standing of the state and tribal offices, local governments and consulting parties — taking power away from the people.
“Section 106 is a mitigation process that’s federally mandated anytime federal funds are being used for historic renovations or demolitions or repairs,” Scigliano said. “So anytime federal funds are being used for a property that is historic, listed on the National Register or eligible to be listed on the National Register ... it enters into what’s called the Section 106 process.”
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation rarely intervenes directly, reserving comment for significant projects. In Idaho, one recent exception was the Lava Ridge Wind Project near the Minidoka National Historic Site.
Mitigation looks different depending on the project, Scigliano said.
“When the state received funds to replace or repair many of the bridges throughout the state, that entered into a Section 106 process that required a pretty significant amount of mitigation funds to then go back into the community to support other historic projects,” she said. “Preservation Idaho actually manages all of those funds right now. We just did our first grant release to several communities who were directly affected by the loss of several of their historic bridges.”
Rural and small-towns in Idaho stand to lose the most if that requirement is loosened, Scigliano said, because heritage tourism dollars flow disproportionately to small museums and historic downtowns.
“It will have a tremendous impact on the entire state of Idaho financially,” she said.
Those spaces often lack the staff or volunteers to negotiate adequate mitigation on their own without help from groups like Preservation Idaho — a nonprofit itself composed of volunteers that relies on donations and grants.
She pointed to the Gateway West transmission line, a roughly 1,100-mile, multi-segment high-voltage project already under construction across southern Idaho. Scigliano recalled a conversation with a fellow board member and a Gateway West representative from the Twin Falls area who, tracing the transmission route on a map, named some 20 historic sites along the corridor.
Large transmission projects elsewhere in the country have generated significant mitigation funding for affected communities, she said, and a weakened Section 106 process could mean Gateway West and other projects deliver little to Idaho even as they erase or damage places of historical significance.
Without Section 106, the recent Lava Ridge Wind Project, a wind energy plant that was set to be built in the Magic Valley region, would have roughly doubled its turbine count. The company was also forced to push the nearest turbines miles away from the Minidoka National Historic Site due to Section 106.
Developers have five years to appeal the project’s cancellation, and Scigliano said Preservation Idaho expects them to. Rewriting Section 106 could reduce required mitigation funding and fast-track large-scale developments if the Lava Ridge Wind Project ever reemerges.
The draft would also curb the standing of tribal historic preservation offices, Scigliano said, diminishing input from tribes such as the Shoshone-Bannock in Fort Hall on decisions affecting their land and cultural sites.
In addition to tribal lands, remote Idaho ghost towns and sites still working toward historic status could become an afterthought to large federal construction projects.
“Every historic structure could be affected by this throughout the country, and we have a lot of them in Idaho,” Scigliano said.
The federal fight arrives on top of a separate state-level change that happened in early July. The Idaho State Historic Preservation Office moved out of the Idaho State Historical Society and into the newly formed Office of Species, Minerals and Energy Coordination, a merger lawmakers passed this year over objections from preservation groups and the Kootenai Tribe, who warned of a conflict between an office focused on resource extraction and one meant to regulate against it. Scigliano said the change has already increased the workload for her organization’s volunteer board, even before the federal rewrite.
The regulatory rewrite also follows recent Trump administration projects in Washington, including a proposed arch near the National Mall, changes at the Kennedy Center and work on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
“The president doesn’t seem to have a heart for historic preservation,” Scigliano said. “He’s a developer at heart and that’s what his business has always been. I don’t know his motives, but I do know that if he wants to build an arch, there are better ways to get that done. It just may not happen at the speed that he wants it to be done, or exactly as he envisioned. But life is a compromise ... That would be a much better scenario than these sweeping changes, so that he or anyone else can put in the structures or projects that they want.”
If the council approves the rewrite, it moves to the Office of Management and Budget before opening for a 30-day public comment period. Once the rule is published in the Federal Register, comments become part of the official rulemaking record and can be cited in any future legal challenge.
Scigliano believes Idahoans take great pride in their history and their access to public lands, and stressed the importance of letting their voices be heard.
“If these changes happen, that reduces their access to public lands without some sort of protection. It reduces, or can eliminate, some of our most important history,” Scigliano said.
As the new draft looms, Scigliano is urging Idahoans to send letters to the ACHP and to Gov. Brad Little’s office.
“Tell them there’s no one that supports this,” Scigliano said. “Idaho doesn’t support this. States across the country do not support this. Our history is not something that should be taken lightly. Development is going to happen, and development should happen, but it can live side by side, and it can work together. It’s sort of that compromise mentality of we all give a little something, but we all retain something as well. To be able to retain as much of our history as possible is hugely important to the state, because if we lose all of that history and all of those special places, then who are we? What are we? We don’t have a story to tell. We’re strip malls and power lines and solar and wind farms. It’s about maintaining our integrity.”