The Sand Creek Massacre Foundation joins the growing chorus of diverse professional organizations in registering its strong opposition to provisions of S. 5153, the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA), especially, but not limited to, Title III, Section 2301 (Historic Preservation).

The Sand Creek Massacre Foundation is a 501(c)3 organization supporting the educational purposes of the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site. The national historic site preserves and commemorates the broad landscape across which the United States Army slaughtered 230 innocent Cheyenne and Arapaho men, women, children and elders on Colorado’s southeastern plains in 1864. Its preservation by the National Park Service memorializes the site’s profound significance in America’s history and its sacred position in the cultural identities of the Cheyenne and Arapaho people today. The successful preservation of the Sand Creek Massacre Site is emblematic of a process in which Tribal cultural knowledge and expertise, integrated with public participation and federal agency decision making, as well as a recognition that national historic significance takes many forms, including intangible qualities of place and spiritual meaning, all worked together. The result of a robust preservation process in this case is an irreplaceable cultural resource that remains protected, accessible and unimpaired for future generations. These are among the historic preservation principles of which the BAAJA is devoid.

The Sand Creek Massacre Foundation’s opposition to S. 5153 is consistent with our previous comments and opposition to the drastic revisions to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) proposed by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). Those regulatory revisions, while seemingly antithetical to the purposes for which the ACHP was created, are at least subject to public comment once they are published in the Federal Register.

Proposing similar revisions to those of the ACHP in Section 2301 of the BAAJA circumvents the public comment process by simply codifying changes to the NHPA and its regulations for a Congressional vote without a formal public review and comment period. But precluding public participation in the federal decision-making process appears to be a major point of the proposed revisions in the first place.

The proposed rewriting of the Section 106 process undermines 60 years of historic preservation policy and threatens the future of irreplaceable historic sites, places and landscapes that represent the nation’s shared history and cultural heritages. Ironic, considering that these provisions are being introduced during the commemoration of the nation’s 250th anniversary as we presumably reflect on and celebrate the icons of our history that have made us uniquely American.

Detailed analyses of the ways in which Title III, Section 2301 of the BAAJA guts the existing Section 106 process have been provided by many other historic preservation professionals and organizations, upon which we can not improve with our comments. Suffice to say that the Sand Creek Massacre Foundation fully aligns with comments submitted by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the coalition of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Association on American Indian Affairs, Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes, National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, National Congress of American Indians, Native American Rights Fund, Rocky Mountain Tribal Leaders Council, Tribal Self-Governance and the United South and Eastern Tribes Sovereignty Protection Fund.

Like our colleagues across the country, we urge postponement of a vote on this draft legislation until there can be robust collaboration among a broad range of stakeholders to make the historic preservation process workable for all Americans, not just the development sector. Please do not vote to sacrifice the nation’s irreplaceable, non-renewable, cultural heritage sites and landscapes for the sake of expedited, unilateral, federal permitting processes without a great deal more thought and public input. Ultimately, history will reflect on the irreversible consequences of the decisions that are made in this moment.