[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HISTORIC PRESERVATION VS. KATRINA: WHAT ROLE SHOULD FEDERAL, STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLAY IN PRESERVING HISTORIC PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY
THIS CATASTROPHIC STORM?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERALISM
AND THE CENSUS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
NOVEMBER 1, 2005
__________
Serial No. 109-110
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
25-541 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee DIANE E. WATSON, California
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
DARRELL E. ISSA, California LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
JON C. PORTER, Nevada C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
KENNY MARCHANT, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina Columbia
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania ------
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio (Independent)
------ ------
Melissa Wojciak, Staff Director
David Marin, Deputy Staff Director/Communications Director
Rob Borden, Parliamentarian
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Phil Barnett, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel
Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio, Chairman
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
------ ------
Ex Officio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
John Cuaderes, Staff Director
Jon Heroux, Counsel
Juliana French, Clerk
Adam Bordes, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 1, 2005................................. 1
Statement of:
Holmes, H.T., director, Mississippi Department of Archives
and History; Mitchell J. Landrieu, Lieutenant Governor,
State of Louisiana; Derrick Evans, founder/director, Turkey
Creek Community Initiatives; Patricia H. Gay, executive
director, Preservation Resource Center of New Orleans; and
David Preziosi, executive director, the Mississippi
Heritage Trust............................................. 4
Evans, Derrick........................................... 31
Gay, Patricia H.......................................... 36
Holmes, H.T.............................................. 4
Landrieu, Mitchell J..................................... 18
Preziosi, David.......................................... 59
Nau, John L., III, chairman, Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation; Janet Matthews, associate director for
cultural resources, National Park Service; Richard Moe,
president, the National Trust for Historic Preservation;
and Norman L. Koonce, executive vice president and CEO, the
American Institute of Architects........................... 88
Koonce, Norman L......................................... 113
Matthews, Janet.......................................... 97
Moe, Richard............................................. 106
Nau, John L., III........................................ 88
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Dent, Hon. Charles W., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Pennsylvania, prepared statement of............... 79
Evans, Derrick, founder/director, Turkey Creek Community
Initiatives, prepared statement of......................... 33
Gay, Patricia H., executive director, Preservation Resource
Center of New Orleans, prepared statement of............... 38
Holmes, H.T., director, Mississippi Department of Archives
and History, prepared statement of......................... 6
Koonce, Norman L., executive vice president and CEO, the
American Institute of Architects, prepared statement of.... 115
Landrieu, Mitchell J., Lieutenant Governor, State of
Louisiana, prepared statement of........................... 21
Matthews, Janet, associate director for cultural resources,
National Park Service, prepared statement of............... 99
Moe, Richard, president, the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, prepared statement of........................ 108
Nau, John L., III, chairman, Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, prepared statement of........................ 91
Preziosi, David, executive director, the Mississippi Heritage
Trust, prepared statement of............................... 61
HISTORIC PRESERVATION VS. KATRINA: WHAT ROLE SHOULD FEDERAL, STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLAY IN PRESERVING HISTORIC PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY
THIS CATASTROPHIC STORM?
----------
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Michael R.
Turner (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Turner, Dent, and Foxx.
Also present: Representative Melancon.
Staff present: John Cuaderes, staff director; Jon Heroux,
counsel; Peter Neville, fellow; Juliana French, clerk; Adam
Bordes, minority professional staff member; and Cecelia Morton,
minority office manager.
Mr. Turner. Good morning. A quorum being present, this
hearing of the Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census will
come to order.
Welcome to the subcommittee's hearing entitled, ``Historic
Preservation vs. Katrina: What Role Should Federal, State and
Local Governments Play in Historic Preservation Properties
Affected by this Catastrophic Storm?''
As we all know, Hurricane Katrina slammed into the gulf
coast on August 29, 2005, heavily damaging the entire region.
The storm will be the costliest in U.S. history, and maybe the
greatest natural disaster ever to hit our Nation. The first
priority, of course, is rebuilding the lives, communities, and
businesses impacted by the storm. Nonetheless, historic
preservation should be part of our response, both as an
economic revitalization tool and to save our historic legacy.
From a historical perspective, the gulf coast region is one
that is abundant in national treasures. For example, it is the
site of numerous ancient Native American mounds and structures,
it is the site of many remnants of the Nation's colonial roots.
It is a memory of a time when Louis XIV first determined that
the French should have a stake in the new world. It is an
example of the former glory of Spain, and it is rich in African
American history and culture. It is the birthplace of jazz and
Mississippi Delta blues. It is a place of tradition and beauty.
It is nothing less than a showcase of not only our national,
but of world history.
The destruction of historic properties has been massive.
The numbers are staggering because the gulf coast region has
one of the Nation's highest concentrations of historic
structures. Historically important properties can be found
throughout the hurricane-impacted area, and thousands of them
are at risk of being lost forever.
Federal, State and local governments, as well as the
nongovernmental associations, need to coordinate a timely,
sufficient, targeted response to this historic preservation
disaster. Time is an issue. Historically important structures
have already been torn down, and structures that can be saved
must be stabilized before they too are lost forever. There is
hope. The infrastructure needed to implement historic
rehabilitation programs is already in place. The National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 created a strong Federal
preservation program which is administered by the Department of
the Interior. This program relies heavily on the State Historic
Preservation Offices and their local partners.
Even though the National Historic Preservation Act has a
built-in infrastructure to deal with saving our historical
structures, Hurricane Katrina was so massive and widespread
that we need to explore additional ways to ensure that historic
preservation is a priority. A coalition of national
preservation organizations, led by the National Trust for
Historic Preservation and the American Institute of Architects,
have proposed a legislative package for preservation efforts in
the disaster area. The package proposed using the existing
structure to provide new grants, tax credits, and waivers as
incentives to restoring historic properties damaged by the
hurricane.
Today's hearing will explore the roles of the Federal,
State and local governments in responding to Katrina, the
legislative package proposed by the National Trust and the
American Institute of Architects, and other recommendations.
To help us address these issues, we have nine distinguished
witnesses on two panels. On the first panel we will begin by
hearing from the Honorable Mitchell Landrieu, the Lieutenant
Governor of Louisiana, who I understand is going to be late
today, will share his State-level perspective, and we will
recognize him when he joins us. We will then hear from Mr. H.T.
Holmes, director of the Mississippi Department of Archives and
History, which has responsibility for Mississippi historic
properties.
We will next hear from Derrick Evans, founder and director
of the Turkey Creek Community Initiative in Mississippi,
recognized in 2001 as 1 of Mississippi's 10 most endangered
historical places. The Turkey Creek Estuary was settled after
the Civil War by African-American freed men. Mr. Evans has been
working to protect the historic Turkey Creek area from urban
sprawl, and is now working to recover from Katrina.
We will then hear from Patricia Gay, Executive Director of
the Preservation Resource Center of New Orleans. Prior to
Hurricane Katrina, Ms. Gay focused her work on revitalizing New
Orleans historic neighborhoods, and now her challenge has taken
a new course.
We will then hear from Mr. David Preziosi, executive
director of the Mississippi Heritage Trust, where we will learn
of his efforts of assessing the damage to historic properties
in Mississippi.
On the second panel we have four distinguished witnesses.
First we will hear from John Nau, chairman of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation, which advises the President
and Congress on national historic preservation policy.
We will then hear from Dr. Janet Matthews, Associate
Director for Cultural Resources at the National Park Service
which administers the Federal Historic Preservation program.
Then we will hear from Richard Moe, president of the
National Trust for Historic Preservation, who will address
their efforts in the Katrina response in the proposed
legislative package.
And finally, we will hear from Norman Koonce, executive
vice president and CEO of the American Institute of Architects,
who will tell us of their response efforts and the legislative
package they have proposed.
I look forward to the expert testimony on our distinguished
panel of leaders and what they will provide us today, and I
want to thank each of you for your time and welcome you.
I will now recognize Virginia Foxx and appreciate your
attendance today.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm looking forward to
hearing the comments here.
My husband and I have been involved a little bit in some
historic preservation, although we don't talk about it a lot,
and love to see older buildings and facilities preserved and
enhanced. And so I look forward to hearing the comments today
and thank all these folks for being here today.
Mr. Turner. We will now hear from the witnesses. Each
witness has kindly prepared written testimony which will be
included in the record of this hearing. Witnesses will notice
that there is a timer light at the witness table. The green
light indicates that you should begin your prepared remarks,
and the red light indicates that time has expired. The yellow
light will indicate that you have 1 minute left in which to
conclude your remarks.
It is the policy of this committee that all witnesses be
sworn in before they testify. If all witnesses would please
rise and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Turner. Let the record show that all witnesses have
responded in the affirmative.
And we will begin with Mr. Holmes. If you will turn on your
mic, there is a button at the bottom. And again, we will begin
with 5-minute rounds of comments. So if you will summarize your
written testimony, and then subsequent to the presentation of
your testimony we will enter into a round of questions from the
Members.
Mr Holmes.
STATEMENTS OF H.T. HOLMES, DIRECTOR, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
ARCHIVES AND HISTORY; MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU, LIEUTENANT
GOVERNOR, STATE OF LOUISIANA; DERRICK EVANS, FOUNDER/DIRECTOR,
TURKEY CREEK COMMUNITY INITIATIVES; PATRICIA H. GAY, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, PRESERVATION RESOURCE CENTER OF NEW ORLEANS; AND
DAVID PREZIOSI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE MISSISSIPPI HERITAGE
TRUST
STATEMENT OF H.T. HOLMES
Mr. Holmes. Chairman Turner, distinguished members of the
subcommittee, I am H.T. Holmes, director of the Mississippi
Department of Archives and History, and, as such, serve as both
the State historic preservation officer and the State
historical records coordinator for----
Mr. Turner. Mr. Holmes, if I could have you pause for a
moment; and for each of you, these mics are relatively
directional. If you would take your mic and turn the top of it
down so that it is pointed directly at you, great.
Mr. Holmes. Hurricane Katrina dealt a deadly blow to more
than 300 buildings in Mississippi that are listed in the
National Register of Historic Places. Our current assessment
count indicates that at least 1,000 properties were severely
damaged, including Beauvoir, the National Historic Landmark
home of Jefferson Davis. Unlike Beauvoir, many of these 1,000
properties are beyond repair and will be lost. Many of the
region's public spaces, museums, libraries, archives, city
halls and courthouses were hit hard.
In the days immediately following the storm, the staff of
the Mississippi Department of Archives and History mobilized an
all-for-salvage-and-recovery support. Teams of archivists,
museum curators, and historic preservation specialists daily
drove 6 to 8 hours round trip, 7 days a week, to devote 8 to 10
hours in damaged buildings assessment and to salvage artifacts
and documents from flooded museums, libraries, and courthouses.
I am very proud of the Department's response effort, which
continues even as we speak. And I am deeply grateful for the
assistance offered by government agencies such as the National
Historical Publication and Records Commission, and private
organizations such as the National Trust Historic Preservation.
What we have learned is that for publicly owned historic
resources, emergency recovery funds are available through FEMA
and other sources, but the historical character of this region
depends not just on public buildings, but also on privately
owned historic properties. The destruction of hundreds of these
properties has unalterably changed the area's character. Almost
immediately it became clear that many of the damaged products
could perhaps be restored if immediate measures were taken to
stabilize them, either by the property owner or by a local
government entity. Sadly, no funds have been available to
assist private property owners or local governments in
emergency stabilization of private historic properties.
A significant number of properties are owned by not-for-
profit groups. Many of these historical buildings housed local
museums and archives. For emergency relief, these nonprofits go
to the Small Business Administration for a loan. Unfortunately,
most of these groups operate with an all-volunteer staff and a
shoestring budget; they simply do not have the resources to
repay a loan.
We must now look at what remains with the new vision. New
structures that were considered of marginal historical value
before Katrina may now be seen as precious because they're the
only surviving evidence of earlier times and because they are
survivors of Katrina, Mississippi's most recent historical
watershed. An illustration is the Turkey Creek Community that
we have discussed--mentioned.
The built environment there has been modified over the
years as fortunes improved and residents were able to add to
their homes. So according to our current interpretation of
standards for listing a district in the National Register,
Turkey Creek may fall short in the eyes of Federal reviewers;
but in a broader sense, this indigenous community possesses
tremendous historical significance. The people of Turkey Creek
and other indigenous communities in this region stand ready to
preserve and restore their historic properties. So do the not-
for-profit groups that operate historic sites. I hope that the
private property owners can gain the recognition they need to
continue their preservation work.
In written testimony I submitted earlier, I supported the
three major packages of points of the National Trust
legislative package: establish historic preservation disaster
relief grants; establish a disaster relief historic homeowner
assistance tax credit; provide waivers to the existing historic
preservation tax credit. These recommendations can be
implemented within this Nation's existing historic preservation
program.
I would like to add a fourth recommendation, one for which
a ready-made program does not come to mind, but nonetheless
speaks to the heart of our efforts to preserve our history and
culture. To assist local museums, historical societies, and
archives operated as not-for-profit organizations, please
ensure that FEMA has some specific authority to provide
emergency recovery assistance for the archives, records, and
artifacts of which these groups serve as caretakers.
Mississippians now face a staggering task in attempting to
rehabilitate the historic fabric that survived Hurricane
Katrina and in recapturing the sense of place that existed in
their communities before August 29, 2005. Those resources that
withstood Katrina and remain today will become the symbols of
stability and continuity around which our communities will
rebuild. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holmes follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.012
Mr. Turner. At this point I'd like to acknowledge Mr.
Landrieu, who is the Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana, who has
joined us.
Mr. Landrieu, we swear in our witnesses. And if you would
please rise at this point, I will administer the oath to you
and then we can recognize you for your testimony.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Turner. Please let the record reflect that he has
responded in the affirmative.
And Mr. Landrieu, if you are ready, you can begin your
comments. You may have heard as Mr Holmes was beginning, we
have your written testimony. We appreciate both your time with
us today and your efforts in preparing this testimony.
We would ask that your oral presentation be 5 minutes in
length, and there is a timer light on the table. And then after
everyone's testimony, we will then go to a question and answer
period for the Members.
STATEMENT OF MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU
Mr. Landrieu. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I
thank you for the opportunity to testify before you.
As has been said often in the last 8 to 10 weeks, this was
an American tragedy that requires an American response. It's a
tragedy that had a number of different acts. The first was
rescue. That was a very difficult task for all of us, but we
have completed that task.
We then went through the phase of recovery, which for those
of us sitting at the table was very personal and very
difficult, because many of our brothers and sisters and mothers
and fathers and aunts and uncles did not survive this tragedy.
We are working through that phase, but we are not quite
complete.
But the third part, which is what we're here to talk about
today, is the rebuild phase. The hard work has yet to begin.
The hard work is beginning now. Many of us said during the
storm--and it has come to pass--that when the television
cameras leave and the country is onto other things like Supreme
Court nominations, other difficult issues during the day, it's
going to be hard to stay focused on fulfilling the promise that
President Bush made to the country that we're going to rebuild
the gulf coast of this country, not only because it's the right
thing to do but because it's essential.
And as we sift through when and how and who and what, it's
important for us to understand that everybody in the Deep South
knows what accountability means. And the people who are most
adamant about that are actually the people who are affected.
And I can assure you that the people of Louisiana, Mississippi,
and Alabama will make sure that every dollar that is sent by
this Congress will be put on top of private investment
insurance and the hard work and the blood, sweat, and tears of
the people in the Deep South.
The other thing I think is important to remember is that as
we talk about the sense of place that Mr. Holmes talked about,
we not only need to talk about it in terms of past history, but
what is the future. And the fact of the matter is that food,
music, culture, historic preservation, are not just nice things
for people to see, but they mean business. And in the State of
Louisiana and Mississippi, one of the things that we understand
is that when you talk about historic preservation, you're not
really talking about the past, you're talking about the future;
because we have found innovative ways to restore properties,
historic preservation, and to bring them into commerce and to
create jobs.
And the fact of the matter is that culture means business,
and it also means tourism. And in Louisiana, for example, the
tourism industry is responsible for a $9.6 billion piece of the
economy that provides 126,000 jobs. If you define the cultural
economy in its broader context, the food, historic
preservation, architecture, and things of that sort, it
provides 144,000 jobs. And so there is this wonderful
convergence that's been taking place in the New South in the
past 10 years as most of the people within this Nation have
moved there. We find that people really like culture and they
like food and they like architecture and they like historic
preservation. And those great cities and great places in the
world that focus on those kinds of things are finding that
they, in fact, are more economically viable than places that
just look like everyplace else.
In Louisiana we have developed a rebirth plan to try to
find a way to regrow the cultural economy. And Dick Moe and the
National Trust for Historic Properties and the American
Institute of Architects has partnered with us, and we adopt the
legislation they're proposing. But in the South it's important
for us to acknowledge a number of things: No. 1, diversity is a
strength, not a weakness. No. 2, we have to find new ways to
create jobs, not just relying on one industry, but on many. The
third thing we have to do is we have to begin to think
regionally so that we can compete globally, because it is not
parish versus parish or county versus county, it's the Deep
South and the New South competing with the Northeast and the
West and in fact really, and more importantly, China.
We also have to find ways to add value to our raw material,
our raw data, our intellectual capital, that we have a way of
just exporting from the Deep South to other places so that
people can add value there and then sell it back to us. What we
want to do in the New South is add value to our raw material
and to our intellectual capital and sell it to the rest of
world.
And finally, it's important for us to really understand
that in the New South that we talk about, where we know that
knowledge is the currency of the new economy, we have to
understand that it's high standards that we have to set for
ourselves. The Southern average is not acceptable anymore
because the Southern average, by definition, it is lower than
the national average.
There are those of us in the southern region of this
country who think that we can compete nationally and
internationally, and so what we want to do now as talk about
rebuilding the South is to set international standards that we
think we can hit. We are an international competitor in
tourism, we're an international competitor in oil and gas,
there is really no reason why we can't be an international
competitor on anything that we set our mind to. And it's
important for the country to recognize that people in the South
are smart, they're tough, they're fast, they're people of
faith, family and country, and we believe that we can compete.
And so as we move into this rebuilding phase, let's go back
to the past where we can create a future. How do we invest in
our culture and our history, and how do we invest in
technological innovation that can actually make us more of a
unique place than we have been?
I look forward to working with you and the committee and
Congress to make this happen. I thank you for your time, and I
thank you for the opportunity to rebuild one of America's great
assets. Thank you very much.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Landrieu follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.022
Mr. Turner. Mr. Evans.
STATEMENT OF DERRICK EVANS
Mr. Evans. Chairman Turner, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to appear before you
today.
My name is Derrick Evans, and I am a sixth generation
descendent of the men and women who settled coastal
Mississippi's Turkey Creek Community in 1866, year 1 of
reconstruction, following Southern slavery and Civil War. I am
also the founder and executive director of Turkey Creek
Community Initiatives, a local 501(c)(3) organization engaged
in the comprehensive revitalization of our historic and
beleaguered community.
Today I would like to share some insights relevant to our
mutual concern, the historic preservation in the aftermath of
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
First and foremost, we must broaden from this point on what
we mean by American, Mississippi, and coastal heritage, and
what we consider to be historic resources. In coastal
Mississippi, heritage discussions and National Register
listings often continue for a variety of reasons to exclude a
range of traditionally overlooked communities and sites. Even
the 2004 congressional legislation enabling the creation of a
Mississippi Gulf Coast National Heritage Area failed to mention
African Americans when listing our region's many diverse
cultural influences. The same basic tendency has of course held
true with respect to low- and moderate-income communities that
have not traditionally been engaged in active or deliberate
historic preservation. Indeed, regardless of race or class,
nonproximity to the beachfront or to a downtown business
district, has repeatedly served to exclude some very important
resources from our regional sense of self. Nevertheless, in the
aftermath of Katrina it is largely these nonlisted people and
places that do still stand to reflect, in the vernacular sense,
our shared local and regional character.
Since Hurricane Katrina hit, I have worked with architects
and planners affiliated with the Governor's Commission on
Renewal and with structural engineers and architectural
historians representing FEMA, the National Trust, and the
Mississippi Department of Archives and History.
Since long before that, I have done the same with city,
county, and regional planners, observing in each of these
contexts that incomplete and fragmented data has prevented some
otherwise very good ideas from moving forward. While it is
obvious that updating, organizing, and disseminating coastal
Mississippi's heritage data remains a pressing issue, I submit
that an even deeper need for newer and intensive visioning
exists. Without GIS data based on additional community surveys
and covering a more complete range of National Register-
eligible structures and areas, the basic values and goals that
have brought each of us here today will not bear fruit.
In addition to greater inclusion, we must begin to broaden
what we mean by heritage preservation itself, because for the
foreseeable future the most productive use of our region's
historic resources may very well be housing.
Whether it is preservation standards and resources or rehab
project management, homeowner education has become increasingly
critical on the gulf coast. Needless to say, financial and
technical support remain even more so, and herein lies the crux
of the challenge that I believe we now face due to a sweeping
and unparalleled disaster. Mississippi is one of the Nation's
poorest States, and Hurricane Katrina has only worsened the
economic prospects for her coastal residents. A very large
number, like my mother, have lost everything they own, save for
a solid old house, minus its sheetrock, insulation, roofing
material, carpeting and so forth. Most Turkey Creek residents
were never in a financial position to benefit from historic
preservation tax credits, and they are even less likely to need
them now.
On the other hand, grants made directly to homeowners of
National Register-eligible properties will do far more to
courage Federal historic preservation among low- and moderate-
income people as well as among minorities in general. The same
holds true for grants or loans to damaged churches and small
businesses and neighborhoods where their continued existence is
both vital and reflective of their community's culture.
Finally, and perhaps most important regarding the central
issue of housing, a combined preservation and rehabilitation
mortgage loan with low down payment and interest rate could
achieve in one sweep several distinct goals that from time to
time concern this subcommittee: home ownership, historic
preservation, housing rehabilitation, and neighborhood
revitalization.
Based on my own experience, HUD's 203(k) program would be
an ideal model, as its intended purpose has always been to
promote owner-occupant first-time buyers who revitalize
existing distressed housing. While working with a HUD-certified
fee inspector to complete the standard write-up and jointly
approved draws from a rehab escrow account, I became a
homeowner in 1997 while restoring a turn-of-the-century classic
Boston triple-decker to its original architectural integrity.
Perhaps this option, with the additional goal of National
Register listing, will be made available to gulf coast
residents through congressional legislation in the wake of
Katrina. Whatever it is, something must be done soon, or more
homes and potential heritage structures will be lost in very
short order.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Evans follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.025
Mr. Turner. Ms. Gay.
STATEMENT OF PATRICIA H. GAY
Ms. Gay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee, for the opportunity to present recommendations at
this policy hearing today.
We greatly appreciate the concern for our unique city, and
we hope that as we craft our recovery efforts, that other
cities might also benefit. Ours is a story of a city of almost
half a million, with tens of thousands of buildings that were
flooded and remain empty today.
It is particularly appropriate that this committee address
this topic, because preservation provides one of the best
examples of the three levels of government working in
partnership, and also of how public and private sectors can
work together for the benefit of all citizens. These
partnerships have been instrumental in reversing urban decline
in most American cities; indeed, we wish there would be more
recognition of this fact.
First and foremost, of course, our levees must be rebuilt
stronger than before if our city is to recover and grow. But as
we plan our recovery, we should look to past successes in our
own city and in others. When we do so, we see that wherever
historic architecture and neighborhoods are protected, property
values increase, economies improve, and cultural heritage is
enriched and perpetuated for future generations.
The reason New Orleans has generated so much love and
veneration from people around the world before and after the
storm is because of historic preservation. The city we know
today simply would not be but for the legislative act that
created the Vieux Carre Commission in the 1930's, action that
has been economically effective as well, and that anchored all
other older neighborhoods in New Orleans in the following
decades when other cities experienced major decline.
The role preservation has played in our city's growth must
be understood, and preservation must be a critical part of our
recovery efforts. The disaster's flooding occurred in our 20th
century neighborhoods, some of which are on the National
Register or are eligible for National Register listing. We know
there is hope for these areas, but not unless we do the right
things. However, our older neighborhoods, which developed prior
to 1900, did not suffer serious damage, all having been built
on higher ground. Down river from the Vieux Carre, or French
Quarter, we have Faubourg Marine, New Marine and Bywater, which
suffered minimal damage. Even Holy Cross in the Lower Ninth
Ward was built on higher ground, and it will regain vitality
once electricity and water are restored.
Going north from the Vieux Carre toward the lake, beautiful
Esplanade Ridge and Treme are basically, as is Algiers Point,
across the river. All of the neighborhoods upriver from the
Vieux Carre that one would see from the St. Charles Avenue
Street Car line or from the McGavin Street bus did not flood,
and suffered comparatively minimal wind damage. Many avenues
lined with live oak trees are still with us.
So foremost in our recommendations is that our city value
this good fortune and take the opportunity to put in place
planning and regulation to guide new development and protection
and restoration measures for what remains.
All proposed development and recovery efforts must enhance
and complement the irreplaceable economic resource of the
city's historic architecture and neighborhoods. Already a 30-
story building is proposed for Rampart and Canal Street in the
Vieux Carre. Here in Washington such a project would not be
acceptable. We can look to our capital city for inspiration in
seeking solutions that would attract appropriate development
and to rebuild our population.
Our next recommendation addresses the need to attract
homeowners back to our city. We urge this committee to support
the creation of a grants program, as advocated by the National
Trust, that would be administered by the National Park Service
and the State Preservation Office, and to support a one-time
rehabilitation tax credit for homeowners in the disaster areas.
Here in Washington you have seen how effective such initiatives
can be for rebuilding populations. We truly need these Federal
incentives for homeowners to return and repair their houses.
At the local level, our city must devise a plan and apply
resources to encourage and assist homeowners in returning to
their homes. This is a priority for my organization, working
with the National Trust, but much more must be done. The State
should be encouraged to take advantage of successful
preservation programs to stimulate economic development, such
as the expanded use of the Main Street program, and of our
brand new State homeowner rehab tax credit.
Regarding HUD programs, we urge that the objective of mixed
incomes and neighborhoods be a guiding principle in use of
funds.
Finally, we cannot stress enough the importance of a
section 106 review process of the National Preservation Act. We
feel confident in this process. However, we are concerned that
there may well be renewed enthusiasm for demolitions without
the use of Federal funds, which triggers a review. This could
be prevented by having sound planning, regulation and
protection in place, as mentioned earlier.
I have submitted other recommendations in writing to you,
and I thank you sincerely for this opportunity to address this
topic today.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Gay follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.086
Mr. Turner. Mr. Preziosi.
STATEMENT OF DAVID PREZIOSI
Mr. Preziosi. Chairman Turner and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today.
Mississippi was forever changed on August 29th when Katrina
ripped through the State. Not only did she take lives, but she
also took the very heart and fabric of many of Mississippi's
historic communities. Katrina's path left unimagined
devastation, destroying complete blocks of historic houses, and
left others in shambles. Many important historic landmarks are
gone all along the coast, including the 1856 Tullis-Toledano
Manor, which was crushed by a casino barge that was dropped on
top of it by the storm surge.
While the damage extended well inland in the State, the
three coastal counties of Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson were
the hardest hit. In those three counties, there are 15 National
Register historic districts and 114 individually listed
National Registry properties, as well as two National Historic
Landmarks. Approximately 22 individually listed buildings and
300 buildings in historic districts were lost, with at least
1,000 more sustaining varying degrees of damage.
My first trip to the coast involved a visit to Beauvoir,
one of two National Historic Landmarks on the coast. I was
astounded to find the destruction to the main house and the
site was massive, with several historic outbuildings completely
gone, and the wrap-around gallery torn off the main house.
Traveling further down the coast I witnessed massive
destruction to both historic and nonhistoric buildings alike,
but was surprised to see that many historic buildings survived,
but with varying degrees of damage.
After that trip, the State Historic Preservation Office
staff and I began to do damage assessment in each of the
coastal communities. To date, we have surveyed over 1,200
historic structures and have assessed along the coastline. We
encountered numerous historic buildings with extensive storm-
surge damage or structures that were pushed completely off of
their foundation, such as the charming houses in Ocean Springs
attributed to Frank Lloyd Wright. Along the coast were also
extensive roof damage from wind, tornadoes, and fallen trees,
such as in Bay St. Louis.
The Federal role in the preservation of historic properties
damaged by Katrina should begin with additional technical
support for FEMA in the field. More structural engineers and
architects familiar with historic structures are needed to help
evaluate the condition of damaged properties listed on the
National Register. Currently in Mississippi, FEMA has only
contracted with one structural engineer, three preservation
consultants, and an architectural historian. All of them have
to cover 72 miles of coastline and 12 municipalities in three
counties, not including the other noncoastal counties also
affected by Katrina. Structural engineers are key in helping
property owners and local building officials evaluate the
structures to determine if they are salvageable.
Another major role of the Federal Government would be to
help provide disaster relief assistance for historic properties
through programs like the historic homeowners assistance tax
credit and $60 million historic preservation disaster relief
plans proposed by the National Trust. This grant money could
help stabilize damage to historic properties, provide owners
time to figure out what can be done to save their properties,
and be used for gap funding where insurance does not cover the
full repair to historic structures, or where lower-income
historic property owners may not have adequate insurance. In
many cases, people that suffered flood damage outside of the
FEMA flood zones did not have flood insurance, and that damage
was not covered by regular insurance, only covering wind and
rain damage.
The State role in the preservation of historic properties
should be to provide additional technical assistance and
services to historic property owners and cities with damaged
National Register properties within their boundaries. The other
role is for the State emergency agency, MEMA in Mississippi, to
work more closely with the State Historic Preservation Office
and FEMA. We have little support from MEMA regarding cultural
resources, which has hampered efforts of the FEMA staff which
must be asked in reviewing by the State. There needs to be a
mechanism to override this requirement if necessary.
The local role is to work with the Federal and State
agencies to better protect local historic resources. Local
governments need to give the historic property owners the
chance to evaluate their structures to see if they can be
salvaged before they are tagged for removal in the cleanup
process. They also need to keep their local preservation
controls and ordinances in place to help protect the remaining
historic character of the community. It has been absolutely
heartbreaking to see so many of our beloved historic structures
in ruins or severely damaged.
Much work lies ahead if we are to save the remaining
historic places that are important to the historic character of
Mississippi, which is crucial to the historic tourism market in
the States. All levels of government--Federal, State, and
local--must work together and form partnerships that strive to
give every effort and assistance possible to those who own
properties important enough to be listed on the National
Register.
We must not let Katrina take any more historic structures
through a lack of effort or coordination on the part of the
different levels of government. When you have pieces of your
historic fabric ripped from you so violently and quickly, it is
important that we do all that we can to save the remaining
historic structures that now define the historic character of
the coast. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Preziosi follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.047
Mr. Turner. I again appreciate each of you and the time
that you have spent on this issue and bringing attention to it.
We all know, and it's acknowledged in your comments, that this
issue certainly is subordinate to the issues of safety and
personal needs of communities.
But as is evident in each of your comments, with the issue
of historic preservation, so many times it's an issue of
decisions that are being made where we are not aware of them,
we're not preparing for them, we're not planning, and so
through that we might lose some national treasures.
It is my honor now to recognize Mr. Melancon, who is from
Louisiana, from the Third District, who has joined us for his
opening comments and questions.
Mr. Melancon. I didn't really have any prepared comments. I
came today because of my concern for Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, and of course the preservation of historic property
structures and whatever throughout the area.
With my work with the Lieutenant Governor and other people
housed in the State legislature, historic preservation in New
Orleans was always one of the forefronts of things that we
concern ourselves with, and this storm has not made that easy.
As I look at what is happening and hear that there is a 50
percent threshold on demolition of structures in New Orleans--
and I don't know if that is actually the fact, I wonder--and
one of the questions I would like to put forth is what exactly
do we know what FEMA and the Corps of Engineers' marching
orders are toward demolition of property; and in particular,
how do we know how they are going to treat historic properties?
That's kind of why I came, to hopefully see if anybody knows
what's going on. And I appreciate the opportunity of being
allowed to sit in with the committee. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Turner. From a practical standpoint, we have two panels
that includes from the first panel, individuals from the
affected communities who can speak to their experience and what
they're seeing on the ground. And then also in the second
panel, we have individuals from the national perspective who
will be talking about the obligations and coordination efforts.
In response to that, if any of you would like to speak as to
how that coordination is occurring. Throughout most of your
written testimony you talk about ways in which this effort can
be improved with FEMA and its coordination.
Lieutenant Governor, would you like to begin?
Mr. Landrieu. I'll take a crack at that, Mr. Chairman.
Congressman, it is nice to see you. Thank you for coming this
morning.
Mr. Chairman, just in response to some of the comments you
made briefly, there is no question that the priorities in the
gulf coast are levees, and then of course wetland restoration,
because those are the things that will protect whatever it is
that we build back. However, it would seem to beg the question
that once you build the levees and the wetlands to protect
something, the question is what are you trying to protect? And
what we're trying to protect will be a result of choices that
we make. And the choices that we make will be guided by the
principles that we think are important. And if we believe that
historic preservation is economic development, which many of us
in the Deep South believe--and we have seen many examples of
that in recent years--and it is important for the tax policy to
reflect principles that are going to allow us to make those
choices that will then yield the consequences that we intend.
And I think that's why many of us are here today. Not just
to say let's restore what was there, but to talk about how you
can build jobs with historic preservation and economic
development.
Congressman Melancon, the answer to your question is: I
don't know right now. I think that the mayor of the city of New
Orleans and the Governor and their two commissions are working
with FEMA to design a process that will address what needs to
be torn down and what can be preserved. What we're trying to do
is to inform them, through the advocacy groups that we have,
about how important is to have embedded in their assessment
teams individuals from the American Institute of Architects or
folks from the Historic Trust, so that when those decisions are
made they're not just made without regard to the consequence of
the decisions that they make.
I know that in a couple of weeks there is going to be a
summit that's being held by both the Governor and the mayor and
the American Institute of Architects to actually talk about
this 50-percent-plus-1 rule, because there is some confusion
about what it really means. And of course it may change from
neighborhood to neighborhood. I think that's an unsettled issue
as of now. You won't be surprised to know that sometimes there
are mixed signals coming out of FEMA on this issue. I think
they are trying to figure out exactly what it means. And it may
mean something different in Mississippi than it does in
Louisiana. But I agree we have to find the right approach, the
right rule, and then we have to make sure the assessment teams
are in the place.
As Mr. Preziosi said, there are not a lot of feet on the
ground; actually, we need more feet on the ground, and
assessment. There are people that have offered to do that for
us, and hopefully the Governor and the mayor will take
advantage of that. And I'm sure in Mississippi the same will be
true as well. Thank you.
Ms. Gay. The 50 percent rule is a very subjective thing,
and I think it's going to be subjective geographically as well.
It is something that concerns me. We see people cleaning out
their buildings and preparing them for livability that were
perhaps more than 50 percent damaged. Yet we see many streets
where nobody is coming back yet, and we're very concerned about
these properties. People are afraid of the mold. We are giving
mold workshops. The mold can be removed. There is a lot of
hysteria about it. It's a lot of hard work to get rid of, but
it can be eliminated. Houses can be restored to livability. And
our focus, of course, is the historic properties, the National
Register, and eligible areas.
But think of it this way: A city is a living organism. I
think, OK, my head is very important, but I'm not going to
worry about my arms and legs. The whole city is very important
to us, and whatever happens to one half of our city certainly
will affect the remaining historic properties.
So we do try to look at the city holistically, at the same
time focusing our efforts on the National Register areas or
eligible areas. And we are pleased that the FEMA team is
agreeing with us. We have a member of our staff who has been
out on several of the team's inspections, and we are in
agreement about the properties. So we feel good about that part
of FEMA. But as the Lieutenant Governor said, we do not know
what is happening in the other areas, we do not know what is
planned for the newer parts of our city.
Mr. Turner. Does anyone else wish to comment on this issue?
If not, I will recognize Mr. Dent from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Dent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing
to investigate the effects of Hurricane Katrina on the historic
culture and infrastructure of the gulf coast region.
Much has been said--I'll submit my statement for the
record--but I am excited to be here to discuss this important
subject.
My question, though, really is going to be directed, I
guess, to Ms. Gay from New Orleans. How effective do you
believe these historic preservation tax credits will be as
opposed to, say, a direct grant program, particularly for the
low/moderate income folks?
Ms. Gay. Well, I think we have to have in the tax credit,
grants provision so that a low-income homeowner could utilize
it fully, either through a rebate or certificate or something.
I think that the success of the tax credit program is
outstanding. I mean, it is remarkable, the effectiveness of it.
It goes through the State Preservation Offices, as you know.
And our office does a really good job. It is one of the most
outstanding in the country. So it gives credibility there and I
think confidence in the grants that the Federal Government
might see fit to give.
Mr. Dent. I have observed it's a good program as well. My
main concern is, you know the circumstances of the folks down
there better than I do right now. And I just wonder if a direct
grant approach would be more effective at this particular
moment than a tax credit program. If anyone else would like to
comment on that, feel free.
Mr. Landrieu. I would like to comment on that if I could.
First of all--and Congressman Melancon will understand this--
for the record, all of southern Louisiana, almost all of it got
hit from Lake Charles to Cameron to Vermilion, some structures
in Baton Rouge, even in Lafayette, and then in the home of
Thibodaux, Terrebonne, New Orleans, Washington, St. Tammany, we
had 13 parishes. And so all of the comments that we're making
relating to historic preservation applies equally to those,
maybe in a different context, but they've been decimated as
well.
And Congressman, I would say this to that request. Both of
them are necessary and both of them are important for the same
reason. One of the principles that we're trying to really push
is that diversity is a strength, not a weakness. Having mixed-
use neighborhoods is really critically important.
The historic tax credit that Patty Gay told you about has
been just a great tool to revitalize historic neighborhoods.
The Warehouse District, which basically blossomed after a
failed World's Fair, was a result of historic tax credits; a
tax abatement program where people actually went in and took
old warehouses for furniture and have turned them into to the
Renaissance Arts Hotel which has used the historic tax credit
to renovate an old building and made a hotel and created jobs.
There is a museum in it, and a wonderful restaurant by a world-
class chef. That is the cultural economy. And that happened
because of the historic tax credit.
When you're looking at other neighborhoods, I'm not talking
about renovating big buildings into condos under the historic
tax credit, but when you're talking about specific structures
in mixed-use neighborhoods, having grants are important, but
also having tax credits that can be taken advantage of by
lower-income individuals are critical to that very basic
principle.
So I would rather not have to choose between the two and
really promote both of them, because at the end of the day,
again, we need the levees and the wetlands. The question is
what are you going to protect? And that has to be worthwhile as
well, which is why on this housing strategy, that needs to be
the goal we're trying to achieve. And we find the different
kinds of tools that can get us there.
Mr. Dent. Mr. Evans, do you have a comment on that?
Mr. Evans. Well, I would agree that you don't want to have
it reduced to a choice between the two; it's all needed. But I
live in a community that is a low-income census track in the
city of Gulfport that was annexed about 10 years ago. Many of
the houses that--the older homes that would be National
Register-eligible, don't just have storm damage, don't just
have a need to meet the Secretary of the Interior's standards,
particularly on the outside of the home to, you know, to get
this listing or to qualify for some of these credits and so
forth.
They also have, as a result of poverty, some deferred
maintenance issues. And some of these homes have never met the
Gulfport code because they were built 70 years before we were
part of Gulfport. So the people I'm talking about, they don't
have the startup capital to wait for a tax credit or a rebate
to kick in later. In fact, even though we have been celebrating
with great glee the very timely decision by the Department of
Archives and History to make the recommendation that the entire
community be considered by the Interior Department for registry
listing, the fact remains that even though in one sense it
seems like we're off to the races, well, in another sense, we
don't have a horse yet.
Mr. Dent. Understood. And my observation in my own district
is that these historic preservation tax credits have been
enormously effective in my area over the years. At the State
level we have done some interesting work on that issue.
But one more question. And Governor Landrieu, last time I
saw you we were at a hearing, Transportation Infrastructure
Committee, and I raised a question to Mayor Nagin about what
appeared to be, hopefully, a proposal that has gone by the
wayside that would essentially create a Las Vegas life in New
Orleans. I'm told--is it true that proposal is now off the
table? I hope it is.
Mr. Landrieu. Yes.
Mr. Dent. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Charles W. Dent follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.092
Mr. Melancon. One of the dilemmas--and this is an
observation for the members of the committee, because many of
the areas were in nonFEMA-designated flood zones--no mortgage
required any flood coverage. What has happened with the flooded
area is that the insurance companies are denying claims other
than if it's roof damage or it's something that can be proved
that it's wind damage. Then on the other hand those people--and
Gene Taylor and I authored a bill about flood insurance--but
those people that were in nonflood-prone areas in some of these
historic preservation homes didn't have to buy flood insurance,
and so they've got no coverage whatsoever, even though they
bought what policies they thought they needed to take care of a
situation like this. So we've got a lot of structures. And if
you're looking into low-income areas, first of all, the
insurance factor; the second thing is affordability. And if
you're going to preserve any of these things, you're going to
have to have some grants coupled with tax incentives, because
otherwise some of these will never get back up.
Mr. Evans. That's right.
Mr. Turner. Ms. Foxx.
Ms. Foxx. I'm fine, thank you.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Evans, in talking about the efforts that
you have undertaken in both preserving your community and
redeveloping your community, you have the issue of the
preservation of heritage, and you have the added issue, as you
have indicated, of the issues of poverty, which has become a
significant issue as we look to the evacuation processes and
individuals who were not given the assistance that they needed,
both during evacuation and postevacuation.
You raised an important issue, and that is home ownership
and the opportunity to look at both the grant structures and
the programs that we provide for assistance in the area to
provide an opportunity for home ownership. And you mentioned,
of course, your own experience with HUD's program and how it
might be able to apply in your community. And I want to give
you an opportunity to speak some more on the issue of the
importance of opportunities for home ownership through grant
programs.
As we look to each of these funding opportunities for
reconstruction, redevelopment, I think one of the things that
you have raised in the issue of home ownership is that we will
also have an opportunity to couple that with having an impact
on people's lives. And if you would speak on that, I would
appreciate it.
Mr. Evans. Yes. I think at the end of the day what we all
want as much as possible is people owning homes, living in
those homes, those homes being insurable, those homes being
mortgageable, and those people taking a responsibility, the
personal responsibility to maintain that home. And it's almost
like making lemonade out of lemons, you know, in the aftermath
of Katrina, that where you see now that so much of what is left
of our architectural heritage in my part of the coast are some
of the more humble, scalewise, structures, coastal bungalows,
even some shotgun homes. But there are plenty of people in the
city of Gulfport now, evacuees who would relish an opportunity
to call one of those places home, and who would speak with
pride about the additional benefit or even contribution to
society of having that home being a reflection to all of our
shared coastal and southern and American heritage.
I think we have an opportunity here, by joining together,
marrying together some of these normally disunited or
disobjectives, literally--no pun intended--under one roof. I
think we ought to jump on that. I mean, it's just something I
think is as clear as water.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
Many times in the testimony that we have been provided the
106 review process is identified and discussed both in its
importance and in the issue of the need to provide additional
resources to the area so that the 106 review process can be
utilized effectively. There are, as you know, many critics of
the 106 review process. And these critics, in looking at the
issue, many times believe that the process inhibits
redevelopment, growth, or development potential.
I think the theme in the testimony that we have before us
is so important to focus on, and that is the issue of the
importance of 106 review process--what it gives us, what it
accomplishes--and also the issue that has an impediment. The
issue of resources is really where we need to focus, and it can
make the process more effective.
I would like it if each of you would comment on that, and
we'll begin with the Lieutenant Governor.
Mr. Landrieu. The 106 review process is implemented in
State government under the auspices of the Department of Parks
and Recreation and Tourism, which is the department that I help
run. It's a very important process.
It's not the process itself that is the problem, and as
Patty said earlier, so much of this is subjective, it's what
the principles are that guide the review process. And so as we
think through this, if we get the principles right and we have
the resources, then it seems to me that the consequences will
be good ones rather than bad ones. There is always almost a
zero-sum game that goes on between developers and those that
are interested in historic preservation. It doesn't have to be
a zero-sum game.
There is a tremendous amount of consensus that can come to
the floor when you're talking about development and the
preservation of historic properties, especially if you accept
the principle that historic preservation is economic
development. And there have been many wonderful examples, as
Ms. Gay said earlier, especially in Louisiana and many in
Mississippi as well, where we have really kind of led the
Nation in showing people that you can actually do both.
You also now know from Mr. Evans how critical it is if
you're trying to create a mixed-use neighborhood, how you can
do that with grants and historic tax credits for low-income
folks.
So again, I don't think it's the process that's the
problem. I think it's really how it's been used and maybe how
it's been abused; how it's been perceived by both. But this has
given us a new opportunity, because as many people have seen,
the things that we have taken for granted are the things that
the country seems to miss the most already. And when we talk
about rebuilding the soul of America, one of the things we're
talking about is our history and our sense of place and our
sense of music. And all those cultural things that we think
just happened by accident, unfortunately they're not going to
be there by accident anymore. And so we have to go back in and
look at the process, make sure that it's used appropriately,
and perhaps most importantly, make sure we have the resources
to actually do the job.
There is going to be some philanthropic fatigue that sets
in. The American Institute of Architects will only do things
for free for us for so long. Folks will only come in for a
short period of time. But if you don't have the people on the
ground and the resources to get the job done and have somebody
from the SHPO offices embedded in each one of those FEMA teams
over the long haul--because make no mistake about it, there are
no easy fixes, as Mr. Dent said about the mayor's casino
proposal. There is no quick start to economic revitalization.
This is a long haul.
This is a long haul. It's going to take a long time, and if
we're committed to it, we have to have the resources to get it
done. Then if we do, I think we'll do a good job.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Holmes.
Mr. Holmes. Unfortunately, it is very seldom a win-win
situation between the preservationists and the developers. On
the Mississippi gulf coast, because of some of the good work
that we have done with the historic preservation work, the
staff of the Department and with the Mississippi Heritage
Trust, we have any numbers of people calling us begging us to
come in as soon as possible to do assessments. They were very
protective of their neighborhoods. This was pretty much across
the spectrum down there.
We were in fear that there might be some hurry-up activity
down there from a city engineer or Corps of Engineers to get
started with destruction, but overall it has been a good
situation in the sense that the public recognition of this
review process is there, and there was a very strong desire
that the communities be preserved. So in this case we're able
to go down and work with the communities, with the local
governments that for the most part have been very supportive of
this process. Of course, they're in the process now of
fusioning the new coast, and we hope to have very much a strong
role in playing, in suggesting a large part of our heritage
needs to be preserved in that.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Evans.
Ms. Gay.
Ms. Gay. I have a slightly different perspective. I think
the preservation program, as I said earlier, is an exemplary
example of Federal, State, local agencies working together,
public and private, and section 106's review process is a
critical part of the program. There are many other aspects of
the program. We need all of them. And I was just talking to Ed
McMahon of Urban Land Institute a few days ago, and he was
pointing out that the cities with rules and regulations are the
cities that are doing the best economically. Developers will
not leave when you have rules and regulations; in fact, that's
a sign that you know what you're doing, your city has its act
together. And so it attracts development.
So section 106 is a way to deal with the fact that you have
Federal moneys and programs that are often hard for local and
State governments to say no to, and yet we can't say, oh, we
have to save those buildings in the face of all this money that
might be coming. That's why we put it in place. And it has
worked very well, and I guess perhaps we're lucky that we have
such a good preservation office in the Department of Culture,
Recreation and Tourism.
But I would also like to say that some States even have the
equivalent of a section 106 process, and I wish we had it in
Louisiana, and I think it's good for the Federal Government to
do it; why shouldn't the city do it? Why shouldn't a city say,
well, how would our funding this project affect our historic
resources? I think it's a good example that the Federal
Government has set, and I hope that we see more of a review
rather than less. Thank you.
Mr. Preziosi. I think section 106 process is really crucial
to saving our historic properties. One thing that we found
being on the coast and holding public meetings with the local
people there, they're terrified their houses are going to be
torn down without their approval. A lot is rumors and things
floating around, but section 106 at least slows down that
process and gives owners and cities a chance to look at the
buildings and determine whether or not they are salvageable. I
realize many of them won't be salvageable and will be taken
down, but at least the 106 process gives it that time to review
it and to make sure that every effort is taken to save it.
I had one property owner on the gulf coast who was afraid--
it was going to cost him $45,000 to tear down his house. He
wanted to save his house, but he didn't want to pass up the
time limit for the demolition removal by FEMA, which now has
been extended to the end of November. But he was scared if he
tried to find somebody to look at his house and investigate
whether or not it could be saved, that he would pass that
period, and he would have to spend the $45,000 to demolish his
house. So I think by having the 106 process, at least it slows
it down a little and gives people a little bit more time to
investigate, and I think that's the biggest benefit of having
it in place.
Mr. Turner. In looking at the testimony and focusing on the
issue of gap needs, where we're already having significant
discussion and where we are not, one of the things that I think
was very helpful was the discussion of the need for dollars
with respect to stabilization of structures in an attempt to
save them for the future, and/or, as you were saying, Mr.
Preziosi, to do additional evaluation prior to demolition.
I appreciate in all of your recommendations there are some
great information here on what we need to do with the existing
Historic Preservation Tax Credits as we look to rehabilitation
and the economic development for the area, historic home
ownership assistance tax credits and others grants. If you
would take a moment to speak of the need for stabilization
moneys as we look to try to both evaluate and preserve these
for the future.
Lieutenant Governor.
Mr. Landrieu. It's critical. It goes back to Mr. Dent's
question about whether grants or tax credits. The truth is you
need both.
The same thing is true with the gap as well. You have a
problem, and it's called cash-flow, and some people have it,
and most people don't. And so you have to find a way to make
that happen in order to stabilize these structures.
A lot of this is a timing issue as well. If you can
envision, for example, the whole neighborhoods in the New
Orleans area, also some in Cameron Parish, that are just gone.
So it's not an issue whether you maintain historic
properties or not. Some neighbors have some historic
properties, some don't. As the city tries to figure out what
they're going to do with FEMA, folks actually are sitting there
waiting. Some people have resources, some people don't. So just
the stabilization of these particular structures is of critical
importance to us as we look to what's going to happen a year
from now, 2, 3 years. It's not as though people are there and
somebody is going to flip a switch and start working tomorrow.
Just the mundane stuff of getting building permits out of the
city of New Orleans that as recently as 2 weeks ago laid off
3,000 people as you can see is not as easy as folks seem to
think it is.
So anything that we can do to stabilize what is there now
is going to be very helpful. If you don't, you will get to the
point, as Mr. Evans said earlier, by attrition destroying
things that the storm actually did not destroy.
Mr. Holmes. Over the last three decades we have responded
to various hurricanes on the coast. Katrina has rewritten so
many rules because this hurricane was so different from
anything that we've ever had, and one of the big differences
was in its widespread catastrophic devastation. In previous
hurricanes the damage was fairly localized so that the support
services along the coast were still there. Very quickly people
could come in and help owners of private homes to do
stabilization. The devastation was so widespread here. No
support services existed for several, several days; that if we
in Jackson had some grant funds to work with immediately to be
able to provide minimal stabilization of some of these
structures, it's quite possible that they could have been
saved, again with a minimum of taxpayer money spent, but it
just takes a little sometimes to be able to help.
These folks were trying to get their lives back together in
ways that they never had to try before, and we were there to
provide assistance, but also step back to be there for the
future as people began to rebuild and provide resources for the
long term.
This occurs with all sorts of historic resources there, but
as I said earlier, it was probably the biggest need early on
was to have little funds to be able to provide immediate
assistance to these owners.
Mr. Evans. Well, Turkey Creek is in a unique and ironic
position right now. The fact is that for years before Katrina,
we had been the squeakiest wheel, not necessarily the most
historic black community on the gulf coast. But in the
aftermath of Katrina, as Mr. Holmes and I were talking before
this hearing, he indicated that the storm made it crucially,
patently clear to his department how special and worth the
extra effort a place like Turkey Creek actually was because of
how much was lost.
I think, however, that the flow of information to other
neighborhoods and communities, not just African American
communities, communities where this potential for not losing
potentially habitable heritage structures that can provide home
ownership opportunities for people, they're not as ramped up as
well as the Turkey Creek community is about the resources that
are available as far as immediate assessments from structural
engineers and so forth.
I mean, I have watched these structural engineers and the
architectural historians walk through several times in the city
of Gulfport, and they're very responsive to calls from people
that are curious to know, but I just think that they're
overstaffed--they're understaffed, I assume underfunded, time
is of the essence, and in varying degrees the squeaky wheel
gets the grease. And I have thought and talked over dinner with
several of the folks on these assessment teams about things
like how do you prioritize. Should they go hunting, if you
will, for areas where, say, for instance, you might get 10 or
20 of these type of potential heritage new home ownership
opportunities compared to something that maybe the mayor of a
particular coastal community told them to go spend some time
assessing like, you know, a grand antebellum something down on
the beach front or a public building that is of more immediate
concern to the local leadership because of their understanding
of heritage priorities at this point.
I don't think--so I think a lot of people are on a learning
curve right now, and some folks are not in the same place. I
think we in Turkey Creek know about as much going on because of
what we've been involved with these departments for quite a
while, and I think it's one of the unwritten tragedies of
Katrina that may very well spell a tremendous amount of more
loss of things that the storm didn't take out, and that has to
do with the understanding and the flow of information and the
dialog and process. These folks are doing their job.
Ms. Gay. I'd like to say I'm sure we all want to leverage
any dollars public or private, but we're talking about public
here, as much as possible. There's one thing that we need to
think a little differently about, and that is the energy and
the heart and soul, the dedication of the individual homeowner.
There are thousands of New Orleanians who haven't come back.
They haven't come back to Gentilly Terrace, Broadmoor, to South
Lakeview, to Mid-City and Parkview. Some of them are just
waiting, they're just waiting. Some brave souls are coming and
said, I'm going to do my house no matter what. This is energy,
when one person comes back, then another one comes back, then
another one comes back.
We have to think of how can we make this happen in a bigger
way, not just the National Register districts, but in other
districts; how can we leverage this incredible strength and
energy of the individual homeowner. I was reading in the
Washington Post this morning about a homeowner who'd gotten
evacuated and is in Washington and finally gotten a job, but
sounds like he's crying every day that he's not back home in
New Orleans. It didn't say where his house was. There is that.
So what can we do, how can you help us? I think the
symbolism of the grants and tax incentives is as important as
the actual dollars, because it shows we want you to come back.
I have seen that in preservation grants time and time again.
The main street grants, they're small. They really in the end
don't make the difference financially in a project sometimes,
but it is the symbolism of it, the commitment to the whole main
street, the fact that they're not going to be the only one
doing it. It's a government program, and it's a good government
program. Let's not overlook that. Thank you.
Mr. Preziosi. I think stabilization is crucial at this
point. I think with a little effort with stabilization at the
beginning, we can save a lot more buildings. For instance,
there's a house in Pass Christian that the storm surge washed
out the first floor, and the second floor was being held up by
its interior wall studs and chimney, and I was there on
September 16th and photographed that house, and almost 2 weeks
later, on September 28th, the house had completely fallen. So
if there was some way to stabilize that at that point, we could
have saved that house.
At the Mississippi Heritage Trust we're doing a
stabilization pilot program with some money that we received
from the National Trust and from Johnson & Johnson to actually
go out in the community and do stabilization of about 10 to 20
homes. We're working on selecting those homes right now to
prove that with a little bit of money, we can stop these houses
from deteriorating any further. Give the owners some time to
help to figure out, work with insurance, work with other
agencies to get the money to eventually restore the house and
save the house.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Dent.
Mr. Dent. I just wanted to clarify, in my district we've
had some great success with historic preservation using various
incentives, I don't recall if we used tax credit or not, and I
know that under normal circumstances restoring historic
properties is very difficult, and it's a lot of hard work, and,
as Ms. Gay has suggested, the people who do this see things
that a lot of the rest of us just don't. We can drive by an old
property, and it's a cruddy old property, and somebody else
sees a beautiful historic property in a vision.
I guess my question is you're not operating under normal
circumstances by any means down there, and so the question is
you have to restore basic service and rebuild infrastructure
and stabilize all these damaged properties and buildings and
other facilities. And we all believe in historic preservation.
Where does that fit into the grand scheme of things? Maybe the
question should be addressed to the Lieutenant Governor. As
you're trying to do all these things simultaneously, how do you
set priorities? Where does historic preservation fit into that
grand scheme?
Mr. Landrieu. Well, I think it's a very high priority for a
number of different reasons. Obviously, the first priority is
to protect yourself from the next storm. That's levees, and
that's wetlands. Those are both really big ticket items for the
American people, but they're necessary. You can't afford not to
do them unless you're willing to write off the gulf coast of
the country, and I don't think anybody in this country is
proposing that seriously. I know some people are proposing it,
but I don't think they're serious about it.
But again, the next question then gets to be what do you do
next; police, fire, all of those essential services. The point
that is you really have to do them all, and there are many of
us working on many different fronts that have responsibilities
for particular areas, and our responsibility at this table is
historic preservation, but, again, not just for the point of
preserving it. It gets you payback that I think many people
have underestimated.
In Louisiana we're really trying to get people to
understand what the words ``cultural economy'' mean so that
when you are renovating a historic property, not only are you
putting that property back in commerce, not only are you maybe
creating a homeowner, but also putting an artisan back to work,
bricklayer or brick mason. You have an architect that's working
in a way they don't really get to work when they're working on
modern buildings. You have a whole scale of employment that
responds to that, that in Louisiana provides 144,000 jobs.
That's a big deal. And so if people are going back to work and
making money, they can then afford to do what they're going to
do in their own homes and neighborhoods. So it's a critical
piece of it.
I guess maybe another way to answer is if we didn't pay
attention to it and didn't care and wasn't a priority, then
what would happen? What would happen is the consequence would
be that you would have an area that doesn't look anything like
it looks now, and you would lose a very important piece of
American history and American culture.
So I think it's a dangerous trap to get into, and I got
into this trap, when you're running for office, somebody says,
what do you like better, police and fire, or the arts, as
though that's a good choice. Well, if you ask them, well, let's
talk about funding the arts, and let's talk about what it
means.
Mr. Dent. I understand we have to find ways to preserve
this history, these properties; the question is when. You have
so many things on your plate, the question is, I understand
it's a priority, but I guess timing.
Mr. Landrieu. You have to do it all simultaneously, and you
have to find a way to make that right. The people that are
working on levees are not talking about historic preservation,
but the people talking about the housing strategy as opposed to
building a level at Cat 5 or building a wetlands in a
particular way, there's a whole other group of individuals that
have focus on housing and what housing means. When you start
talking about that, I would argue strenuously you can't speak
about housing without talking about historic preservation and
architecture and having the kinds of folks we talked about
embedded in that process so that when it's designed from the
beginning, you have a pretty good idea of what the consequences
are that you want to yield. So, unfortunately, we're compelled
to do a lot of things at once, and we better get it right,
because we're not going to have the chance to do it again.
Mr. Dent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Turner. I want to thank everyone on this panel for
participating, both your preparation for coming here, the time
that you have spent here, but also the things that you're doing
in your community to make certain recovery continues and that
historic preservation is an issue that is addressed in the
process. So on behalf of all the members of the committee, we
want to thank you, and I certainly encourage you to look to
ways we might be able to assist your successful efforts. Thank
you.
At this time then we'll turn to panel two, which includes
John Nau, chairman of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation; Dr. Janet Matthews, Associate Director for
Cultural Resources, National Park Service; Richard Moe,
president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation;
Norman Koonce, executive vice president and CEO of American
Institute of Architects.
We'll take a 3-minute break while the next panel joins us.
We begin now with our second panel, and as you may recall
from the instruction that we gave to the first panel, there is
a timing light on the table in front of you. We have the
written testimony that you provided to us, and we appreciate
the work that has gone into the preparation of that testimony.
We would ask that you provide us a 5-minute oral summary of
your testimony. The lights on the table will give you a yellow
cautionary and then a 5-minute red light.
It is the policy of this committee that all of our
witnesses are sworn in, so if you would please rise to receive
the oath.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Turner. Please let the record show that the witnesses
have responded in the affirmative.
We'll begin this panel with Mr. John Nau, chairman of the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
STATEMENTS OF JOHN L. NAU III, CHAIRMAN, ADVISORY COUNCIL ON
HISTORIC PRESERVATION; JANET MATTHEWS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR
CULTURAL RESOURCES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE; RICHARD MOE,
PRESIDENT, THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION; AND
NORMAN L. KOONCE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CEO, THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS
STATEMENT OF JOHN L. NAU III
Mr. Nau. Chairman Turner and members of the committee,
thank you for providing this important forum to consider how
best to treat historic properties in the devastating wake of
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and, as importantly, plan for
future catastrophic events.
Now, since submitting my written testimony, I was able to
visit New Orleans last Friday and tour many of the areas of
destruction within the city; meet with FEMA, State and city
officials. I left New Orleans with a sense of profound sadness,
seeing firsthand the massive extent of destruction and the
immense emotional and physical trauma suffered by the city, its
historic neighborhoods and, of course, its residents. But I
also left with a sense of confidence that New Orleans will
heal, and it will recover. And that the city's rich heritage
will play a key role in this recovery.
The gulf coast region's heritage assets are extremely
important not only as significant components of the Nation's
diverse architectural, cultural and historic record, but also
as an economic asset making essential contributions to these
communities and to our Nation. In New Orleans alone there are
18 historic districts included in the National Register of
Historic Places. Heritage tourism is a key industry that
significantly impacts the economic well-being of many of the
communities affected by these storms.
As the Federal Government moves to support the recovery of
the region, Federal decisions will significantly affect the
future of these heritage assets. The National Historic
Preservation Act and its section 106 process, which the ACHP
oversees, assures that historic preservation values are
considered by Federal agencies in carrying out their
activities. Thus, I fully expect that the ACHP and section 106
will have a critical role to play as the Federal agencies
decide how best to reflect historic preservation values as they
carry out their duties.
It is essential that the Federal Government promote the
preservation and rehabilitation of important historic assets in
this region. Through our work with FEMA during the past 16
years on a variety of disasters, the ACHP has come to
appreciate FEMA's grasp of historic preservation issues and its
growing sophistication in meeting its section 106
responsibility. FEMA has a record of which it can be proud in
responding to historic preservation issues in the wake of
previous natural disasters, but FEMA now recognizes that the
immense scope of Katrina and Rita's impacts to heritage assets
pose unimagined challenges. The ACHP will be detailing staff
members to the region to work with FEMA and other Federal
agencies involved in the recovery effort. Our goal is to make
section 106 reviews a valuable tool to foster informed and
efficient decisionmaking by Federal agencies.
Mr. Chairman, I point out that there are 12, at least 12,
Federal agencies plus FEMA in 4 States, with many local
stakeholders. It's a scale that the National Historic
Preservation Act has never previously faced. From my visit it
is clear to me that we will confront some very difficult
decisions with many historic structures damaged beyond repair.
The scope of the disaster threatens to overwhelm the
capability of the State's historic preservation officers and
the ACHP staff to meet their responsibilities under the NHPA.
To meet these challenges for both the immediate crisis and
future disasters, I think we must learn from Katrina and Rita.
I offer the following recommendations for a national disaster
program for historic properties.
First, the Federal Government should provide adequate
direct assistance to State Historic Preservation Offices for
human resources, housing, transportation and other response
needs to facilitate recovery efforts and the delivery of
Federal assistance. The experience and the knowledge of the
SHPO is vital to any recovery effort.
Second, the Federal Government, through section 106
reviews, should ensure historic properties and their values are
adequately considered both as irreplaceable links to the past
and a valuable economic asset for the future in any disaster
recovery decisions.
Third, Congress should provide direct funding through the
Historic Preservation Fund for repair and rehabilitation of
damaged historic properties. Congress should also expand the
current Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits to include
owner-occupied residential buildings as well as commercial
historic properties.
Fourth, Congress should provide adequate funding to support
the programs and staffs of the SHPO offices through the
Historic Preservation Fund. I can't overemphasize how important
this is. Such funding should support the digitization of
historic building inventory records for use by FEMA and its
other Federal partners. In the wake of a disaster, an effective
GIS data base would provide critical information about the
location and significance of historic properties.
Historic properties are a valuable asset to our national
identity, and they are a means for a community to recover from
the devastation brought by a major disaster. By ensuring that
these properties have a future, citizens will be able to
maintain an essential connection with their community's
heritage. Again, we appreciate the subcommittee's interest in
these issues. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nau follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.053
Mr. Turner. Dr. Matthews.
STATEMENT OF JANET MATTHEWS
Dr. Matthews. Mr. Chairman and members of your
subcommittee, thank you for your thoughtful, detailed
consideration and for the opportunity to present information on
the role of the National Park Service in working with Federal,
State and local governments.
As you indicated in your remarks, Mr. Chairman, the gulf
coast has long been recognized for its centuries-old nationally
significant Native American, French Creole, Anglo American, and
African American cultures. These influences created some of the
most diversely, intensely concentrated architecture in North
America. It will be months before the full extent of the damage
is fully known. Already it's abundantly clear the storm took a
heavy toll on that heritage and the historic fabric.
Our National Center for Preservation Technology and
Training worked with FEMA, the affected States and other
preservation partners to design rapid and detailed building and
site condition and assessment forms, related tools and
guidance. National Park Service provided maps of impacted
historic districts to the States.
As you mentioned earlier, the center in the ongoing work we
do through the Federal operations results in such things as the
center meeting once a week and now every other week with all
parties who were interested and able to attend to help make
informed decisions about preservation and performed selective
demolition only where necessary.
The National Park Service posted technical information on
the recovery of wet objects to assist museums and private
citizens in preserving damaged objects, documents and
photographs. We provided cooperative workshops regarding water-
damaged collections to over 110 museum and library
professionals throughout Mississippi alone. The National Park
Service Incident Management Team fielded questions to provide
technical assistance to sites and private citizens, and the
National Park Service is the lead Federal agency in historic
preservation coordinating programs, such as the National
Register of Historic Places, as you have heard repeatedly from
your testifiers.
States, Federal, and including the State Historic
Preservation Offices, provided documentation and technical
information and assistance services as defined, as you
mentioned, by the Conventional Wisdom, Inc., in the
establishment of the State Historic Preservation Offices and
the National Register of Historic Places in 1966, 40 years ago.
In Louisiana alone we know that we have identified 1,286 NR
listings. Those include 84 NHLs, some 52,000 significant
historical properties; in New Orleans alone, 138 listings,
including 26 National Historic Landmarks, 40,800 significant
historic properties. In all of Mississippi there are 1,290
listings, including 38 National Historic Landmarks, 15,000
significant historic properties. In the 22 affected counties in
Alabama, 15,892 significant historical properties within 619
listings include 17 National Historic Landmarks.
As you have heard today repeatedly, these lie within public
and private ownership, proud and humble places, rural and urban
settings. The context of all the environment, significant or
not, extends and emanates from the Native American to the
recent past periods.
Throughout the disaster areas, National Park Service teams
assisted parks. Over 78 National Park Service units, employees,
have volunteered their services and stand ready to respond to
FEMA requests for assistance.
Under the National Response Plan, the Department of the
Interior is the lead agency for the national cultural/ resource
historic properties protection part of emergency support
function No. 11. The National Park Service coordinates the
cultural resources components within this hurricane season. As
cooperatively agreed, the Departments of Interior and
Agriculture supply cultural resource volunteers in response to
FEMA's requests. NPS employees have been assigned to FEMA
headquarters, the National Response Coordination Center, the
Louisiana Mississippi joint field offices.
To date, the Park Service has fulfilled FEMA requests for
professionals in various fields required. The National Park
Service pre-positioned incident management teams for rapid
response. Once the areas were secure, the Park Service deployed
historic preservation specialists and museum specialists to the
affected sites. Teams assessed damage in historic structures,
evacuated threatened and flooded museum collections, stabilized
historic structures, provided archaeological assessment and
salvage. These teams have completed their work, and park unit
staffs are managing the long-term recovery.
The Park Service is proud of the rapid response of
employees to this emergency in all areas of need, including
historic preservation. We stand ready to provide further
response as called upon by FEMA under the National Response
Plan.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you again.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Dr. Matthews. The slide show that
you brought with us certainly provided some dramatic examples
of issues that you were raising.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Matthews follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.060
Mr. Turner. Mr. Moe.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD MOE
Mr. Moe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much, members of the
subcommittee, for holding this hearing, and thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for the great leadership that you and Congressman
Miller are giving to the Historic Preservation Caucus. It's an
important vehicle that we all appreciate.
This hearing is important primarily because it gives due
recognition, I think, to a very unique threat to historical and
cultural resources in this country as we've never experienced
before. If we don't get this right in the next few months and
years to come, this will not only be remembered as a great
human tragedy, but it could very well go down in history as the
greatest cultural tragedy to affect this country because of the
loss of significant historic resources.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, the National Trust was chartered
by this Congress in 1949 to be the Nation's leading private
preservation organization. We do a lot of different things, but
among them is dealing with disasters, and we've had a lot of
disaster experience in the last several decades. I'm very
pleased to say we have a working relationship now with the
organizations and offices represented by both panels that you
have called here today.
I have had a chance to visit both New Orleans and the
Mississippi gulf coast in recent weeks, and as has been said,
this is unbelievable damage. Both places look like war zones.
They're totally devastated in their own ways. I have submitted
some photographs for your record, which I'd appreciate being
included in the record if it's possible, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just say in New Orleans you have heard some
descriptions, there are 20 National Register historic districts
in New Orleans. They comprise half of the area of the city, and
they contain over 37,000 historic buildings. There is not a
concentration of historic structures like that in any city in
America. New Orleans, as we all know, is a very special place,
but it's been estimated that two-thirds of these structures,
the historic structures, have been damaged by wind or water or
both, so there's an enormous need. If this city is to retain
its character and to come back, there's an enormous need to
address that. In Mississippi the need is somewhat different due
to the surge and the wind, but we've already lost 300 historic
properties; 12,000 remain. Most of those are damaged.
The National Trust has set up the National Hurricane
Recovery Fund in order to help send in survey teams to work
with local officials. We've opened offices in both communities.
We're offering technical assistance on mold and other issues,
and we're already giving stabilization grants in Mississippi
and will very soon be undertaking demonstration projects with
our partners in New Orleans to show how these houses, middle
and low-income houses, can be saved and brought back. And, of
course, we're partnering with all of these organizations.
The vast majority of the historic properties in both
Mississippi and New Orleans are privately owned, and there are
not, unfortunately, existing programs to really help these
private property owners to bring back their properties. FEMA
money, as you know, cannot be used for the restoration of
private property. So we have proposed together, and I think
it's fair to say this is a consensus program, Mr. Chairman,
that we have put together as preservation communities as a
whole, to urge the Congress to respond quickly and creatively
to give us some tools that we need in a very targeted way to
help property owners and community leaders to bring back their
communities.
First and by far the most urgent is the need for grants.
We've proposed a $60 million grant program that would be
administered through the State Historic Preservation Offices
that have real experience. Mississippi and Louisiana have two
of the best State Historic Preservation Offices. They would
have ideally a lot of discretion in how to give out these
grants to fill out the gap in the financing needed for these
recovery efforts, but there's a real urgent need for that.
We would hope also that somewhere between $2 and $5 million
of that money could be earmarked for main street
revitalization. The National Trust is very proud to have had a
main street program for the last 25 years to help business
communities revitalize the downtowns and commercial areas, and
there are a number of wonderful main street communities in this
area.
We also propose some changes to the historic tax credit
that have been discussed: One, to extend it to include the
owners of historic homes, and also to provide for some waivers
and new provisions, most of which are fairly technical in
nature, but which would make it easier to use the tax credit.
I would just say that in answer to Mr. Dent's question
earlier, the credits and the grants really are complementary to
each other. In a sense they serve different constituencies, but
they are really complementary in that the owners of low-income
homes who find it very difficult to access the tax credit, but
they could use the grants more easily, where as you go up the
income scale, it's more useful to use the tax credits. In any
case, this is a variety of tools, Mr. Chairman, we propose that
we ask your serious consideration for. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Moe follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.065
STATEMENT OF NORMAN L. KOONCE
Mr. Koonce. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, good
morning to you. My name is Norman Koonce. I'm the executive
vice president and CEO of the American Institute of Architects.
We greatly value the opportunity to appear before you here this
morning for this very important subcommittee deliberation on
significant historic preservation issues in the wake of these
hurricanes.
The American Institute of Architects represents 76,000-plus
members, representing a large majority of the Nation's
architects, with their collective staff, their firms
professionally dedicated to creating and preserving
environments that elevate and enrich the human experience,
exceed a third of a million people. Their interest as well as
that of the public everywhere is focused on what is happening
and what will happen in New Orleans and the Mississippi gulf
coast and south Louisiana.
Something has come up since we presented our paper to you
in writing that I think we should report on, and that is at the
request of Lieutenant--excuse me, Louisiana Governor Blanco and
with the encouragement by Lieutenant Governor Landrieu as well,
the AIA is organizing and managing the Louisiana Recovery and
Rebuilding Conference that will be convened November 10th-12th
in New Orleans. We'll be joined by a very strong group of
sponsors including the American Planning Association, the
National Trust for Historic Preservation, the American Society
of Civil Engineers and others who can address the issues that
will be facing those who design the solutions in the near
future.
The purpose of the conference is to develop appropriate
principles for use by each political jurisdiction to use in
designing, planning and implementing redevelopment efforts. One
major emphasis will be the appropriate stewardship of our
architectural heritage in all of those areas, as it should be,
and as that pertains to the discussion here this morning.
I'd like to mention that we would be pleased to respond
further to the issue of this conference in a Q-and-A period
that follows in the event that you have additional interest in
that.
Concerning the why of preserving our historic past, I would
say that the largest, most dense concentration of historic
structures in America exists in New Orleans, characterized by
scholar Pearce Lewis as the inevitable city on an impossible
site. What a contradiction, but we all recognize that. It's a
city that developed under many flags, ruled at least once by
Spain, France, Great Britain and, of course, the United States.
It was considered inevitable because of its strategic location
that just can't be abandoned, obviously. But there's nothing
else like it.
Consider, too, that each of the other areas that have been
treated so severely by the hurricanes convey their own cultural
identities which are very important to them and to all of us.
In fact, anthropologists tell us today that nothing better
expresses a culture of a civilization than its architecture. It
speaks to how people lived and, even more importantly, what
values were important to them. It is those values that we must
preserve and we must recognize in the process.
We believe, along with the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, that the Federal Government should provide those
property owners who have been so crucially affected with a
package of grants and tax incentives to leverage local dollars
and attract outside investments that will enable the healthy
and respectful building efforts that are required. We believe
it is both affordable and greatly needed.
Details are involved or included in the written testimony
that we provided earlier. We'd be glad to discuss those more if
necessary, but I think that Mr. Moe has done a good job in
presenting those details.
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, as a native of
Louisiana, and an architect with the Committee for Historic
Preservation, and one with the responsibility to represent the
interests of all of our architects, we all thank you for
focusing on this vital national issue.
I'd like to close with a more personal note, sharing an
example of the influence that historic architecture has had on
each one of us in this room, whether we know it or not. Dr.
Jonas Salk, the developer of the vaccine for polio, became a
personal friend. He shared his experience with me that as he
was discovering or attempting to discover the vaccine in the
mid-1950's, he encountered one big problem after another, so he
decided to take a respite from that work and to go to the 13th-
century village, the place where the people train to become
ministers in the 13th-century village in Assisi. He was
distancing himself from the frustration he felt.
He shared this very important finding. He said the
spirituality of the architecture in that setting was of such
great inspiration to him, he was able to do intuitive thinking
far beyond any he had ever done before. Under that influence,
he said, I was able to intuitively design the research that
resulted in the polio vaccine. He was indeed correct. We owe a
debt of gratitude to the architecture in Assisi for that
inspiration provided to him.
He also provided a favorite admonition to us often; he
said, we must all seek to become good ancestors for future
generations. You have and we all have an opportunity to become
good ancestors today by properly addressing the problem that
relates to our historic past and our future. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Koonce follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.075
Mr. Turner. I appreciate your time with us here today, and
recognizing that all of our panelists began their discussion
with their personal tragedies of Katrina, and recognizing that
historic preservation is a forward-thinking issue and
obligation after we initially turn to the needs of the
individuals impacted by the tragedy.
A lot of the discussion in all of the written data that we
have deals with issues of administration, deals with issues of
existing programs or proposed programs, and some
recommendations as to what we need to do. Normally whenever we
have a hearing, we structure it first where the national
experts or the representatives of the national governments
speak first. In this instance, we flipped the normal structure
of the hearing process so that we could hear from the people
who were local, on the ground, facing these issues, and then
we'll hear the national perspective from our national
institutions and our national government so that you would have
an opportunity to respond then to the information that you
heard.
When you prepared your written testimony, you might have
been aware of some of the things that they were going to be
saying, but having sat through the testimony of the first
panel, I'm certain that each of you had some thoughts or ideas
that related to what your proposals were, what your
recommendations were, but also something you might want to
embellish as a result of their comments.
So I want to ask each of you to, if you would, in an open
question give us some of your thoughts with respect to what you
heard from the first panel, some of the things that you think
were of value and of importance that we need to highlight, and
how their comments relate to some of the things that you were
speaking of before us today.
I'll begin with you, Mr. Nau.
Mr. Nau. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was struck by something
the Lieutenant Governor said when he was asked about the 106
process when he said it's probably not a process problem, that
it's more a resource problem. And I reflect back to the
discussions I had Friday when I was in New Orleans and with the
FEMA and State and city people, and if you can picture a
funnel, and in that funnel are all these 12 or more Federal
agencies, the States involved, and where that funnel comes to a
very narrow opening is the State Historic Preservation Office.
All of those 106 reviews have to funnel through that one
spot, and I can't imagine any State that has staffed up and
planned for this level of disaster. And I would say from the
Federal agency standpoint, the efficiency of being able to
address all of the 106 reviews, whether it's the Corps of
Engineers, FEMA has to do every one, Park Service, everyone is
going to have to go through these 106.
I think it should be the focus of the Federal effort right
now to try to widen and put resources into the SHPO offices;
obviously Louisiana, Mississippi, some to Alabama and some to
Texas because of Rita's impact in the Beaumont, Port Arthur and
east Texas area.
So my big takeaway from what I saw Friday and what I heard
from the Lieutenant Governor, I echo what he said, it's not a
process problem. That process has worked very, very well for 40
years. It's about resources. And if we don't address that, then
I would suggest to you that the efficiency of the process is
going to bog down, and then there will be cries against the 106
process, when, in fact, it's simply going to be a resource
issue. Thank you.
Dr. Matthews. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would harken back to three or four things I heard very
briefly. First is the value issue. Mr. Koonce, sitting to my
left, grew up in Louisiana where the National Center for
Preservation Technology and Training occurred. He cited Jonas
Salk's influence in a monastery. He and at least one other very
distinguished leader in historic preservation architecture grew
up in this little town; probably not an accident that they
among many others became professionals in this field because
they were impacted by the place they came from.
As you carry this forward from knowing on the ground the
grass-roots influence, the long, long reaction of the kind of
impact of living in a place where you connect and where the
environment connects you to something that just happens because
you're there, I would suspect you have convened this
subcommittee hearing in part because you know this really
matters.
New Orleans is unique, is distinct. Forty years ago you all
passed, your predecessors did, the National Historic
Preservation Act, which established the SHPOs that John talked
about, the 106 process, the identification of significant
resources. That identification made it possible in this
terrible crisis to go straight to those targeted areas. Whether
they were significant or not, they defined the character of the
places; the humble, the proud, the grand, the small, the
neighborhood, the grandmothers' back houses, the houses we saw
washed off foundations, which might be put back if they're not
demolished first. The National Historic Preservation Act as
defined by Congress in 1966 has made it possible 40 years later
in a crisis no one anticipated to go in with a target, a target
to use as a guide. The 106 process requires that they be taken
into consideration.
I heard on the radio this morning that children in New
Orleans last night went trick-or-treating; some of them went as
mold. Did you hear that? They're so impacted by this mold
growing on everything that some of them last night dressed as
mold.
Second, following up on John, the economic benefit is that
in Florida when I was State Historic Preservation Officer, we
solicited proposals for a grant and found that $4.22 billion a
year came directly back to the State of Florida in direct State
revenues based on heritage tourism, historic sites, and
everything that generates, and that is probably a lot more than
you wanted to know about what I was thinking.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that opportunity.
Mr. Moe. Mr. Chairman, what I heard from the earlier panel
was what we've been hearing from these organizations and their
spokesmen for months now. One of the things we do at the
National Trust is to try to convene the State and local
partners of the preservation movement in both the public and
private sector as well as our national partners, and we came
very quickly to a consensus, as I think you heard today, about
the need for a Federal response. And it was very easy to start
out using the example of the historic tax credit because, as
has been said, that's such a successful vehicle. Its been
responsible for the private investment of $38 billion in
different projects in this country the last 20-some years.
Where we had to be more creative was on the grant side. It
used to be--when we went through the Mississippi River floods
in 1993 and the Northridge earthquake the next year, FEMA had a
discretionary fund that we were able to tap into for historic
resources very easily and very effectively. Obviously the needs
in those two instances and others were more limited, but
somewhere along the line that fund disappeared. Therefore, we
saw the need, particularly for a disaster of this scale, for a
new major congressionally authorized grant program, because
there is simply no substitute for getting dollars quickly into
the hands of property owners to fill in the gap of financing
this recovery.
The other thing that I've learned was from Mitch Landrieu,
Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana. I participated in a program
with him some weeks ago in New Orleans, and he, I think has
very effectively put together a program of using culture as a
means of recovery in New Orleans. There is no city in America
like New Orleans, not simply because of its architecture, but
because of its unique culture. Jazz, gumbo, and architecture,
that's what makes New Orleans. And that is the basis for the
very effective historic tourism program that they have.
And so it is not only important culturally to bring these
properties back, but it is important for the economy of New
Orleans to get the tourism economy going again.
Finally, one of the things that I learned from my visits to
both areas was that FEMA has been doing--in New Orleans has
been doing a very effective job on the historic preservation
front. They have very able leadership in the historic
preservation front, and we've been working very closely with
them on the 106 issues and so forth, which is critical to
authorizing demolition by the city because they can't do it
without Federal funds.
One of the things I found in Mississippi was a great need
for more FEMA engineers to help go out and do the surveys.
There is a critical need for engineers to speed up this process
so that a lot of these damaged properties don't disappear.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Koonce.
Mr. Koonce. One of the things that we've heard is that
there are so many agencies in this country that can have a very
positive effect on the outcome of this recovery effort, and I
think we should all be extremely proud of the amount of intense
effort and resources that are being put into that effort. They
need help, and that was one of the things that I heard during
the earlier presentation. We need to find a way to empower them
to do what they're designed to do, capable of doing and want to
do.
There are more than just agencies who need to be equipped,
however; there are the political jurisdictions, there are the
individuals. Everybody has been so devastated by the
overwhelming losses that took place here. And the thing that I
think I also heard in most of the discussions is that
leadership is required. All of the business entities and
citizens, the political jurisdictions, are not going to
magically start working in concert because there is a lot of
talk about it. There are so many diverse solutions in the
people's minds that we should go ahead and implement
immediately because it is what needs to happen.
But there is not just one solution, there are many
solutions that need to be developed. Not all those solutions
that are being discussed today I think you could consider to be
totally good. So there is an obvious reflex that needs to be
addressed. How do you address it? It is, independent of the
American of Institute of Architects, the worst thing we can do
is for everyone to suddenly just rebuild everything that they
had before without consideration to whether it was the best
solution then. I'm not talking in terms of the historic
architecture. That which has endured for many, many years has
earned its place in the environment of every city. But
everything about our city has not been exactly as they should
have been, and we need to give careful attention as to how we
go about rebuilding, accommodating the interest of the business
community, the citizens, a place for housing, a place to bring
together people in the central business districts and to create
more sustainable, livable, healthy and safe communities.
I think that what we need to have is some conceptual
guidepost, something that says here's the manner in which we go
about addressing the problem. Now, that doesn't give you
individual answers to every community's needs, every city's
needs or every State's needs, obviously, but it does give a
guidepost around which decisions can begin to be made that will
yield the greatest benefit in the future.
I guess when we start thinking about this rush to do
something, we begin to be admonished by the statement, if we
don't have time to do it right, when are we going to have time
to do it over? And the same thing applies to the money; if we
don't have the money to do it right, when are we going to find
the money to do it over? So the admonition should be to all of
us that we do it right, as right as we possibly can the first
go-around, so we don't have these guessing efforts to contend
with.
Mr. Turner. That's an excellent saying. Thank you, Mr.
Dent.
Mr. Dent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Now Mr. Koonce, I noticed during your testimony you made
reference to Dr. Pierce Lewis. You made a reference to Dr.
Pierce Lewis in your remarks, from Penn State, the geographer.
I thought you quoted him. He was my professor at Penn State
University. I thought that was interesting. He was a great
geographer, and I'm sure he had interesting comments on the
city of New Orleans and why it exists where it does. Very
interested man.
My question to you, though, Mr. Koonce is this: If the
legislative package that you propose is successful, it's going
to take time for these Federal grants to get on the ground.
Will they be likely too late for stabilization efforts?
Mr. Koonce. I'm having difficulty hearing you. I'm sorry.
Mr. Dent. If the legislative package that you have proposed
here today, if it's successful, it is going to take time for
those grants to get on the ground. Will they likely be too late
for stabilization efforts?
Mr. Koonce. I'm not sure that it's going to be so quickly
solved that it would not be possible for the tax credits and
the other issues that you may be promoting to be used. Maybe
there is some effort that could be exerted in the interim that
would help people to make decisions, particularly when property
ownership is a problem, that they can't meet the demands all at
this point in time. I really don't have an answer to that.
I guess it's the prerogative of architects to look at the
longer-term solution, and we will look to those who have the
knowledge of the disbursement of money from the Federal
Government to come up with a manner that can get it into the
hands at the earliest possible time.
Mr. Dent. Mr. Moe, a question for you. You mentioned a few
moments ago that about $3.8 billion in private investment has
been leveraged by the historic preservation tax credit.
Mr. Moe. It was $38 billion.
Mr. Dent. $38 billion; I'm sorry. I thought I heard $3.8.
OK. Are you aware of any studies indicating how much
private investment could be leveraged by extending these tax
credits to private homeowners?
Mr. Moe. No. We don't have specific recent information. I
think there are some studies that we undertook some years ago,
and we would be happy to provide those to you. But there is no
question but that if the experience of the existing tax credit
is any indication, there is a very high leveraging ratio. I
can't give you a specific number.
But what is so attractive about the existing tax credits is
that it usually is the last piece that's needed to fill in the
financing gap for these redevelopment projects. And it's an
indispensable piece, because what they've done is they've
basically tapped out the private markets.
I think the same concept would apply with homeowners, where
they have some insurance, they have some mortgage ability, some
other means, but they don't have the total amount needed to
restore their houses. So I think the same principle would
apply.
Mr. Dent, if I may respond to a question briefly that you
asked Mr. Koonce. If the Congress authorized the grants
immediately, there is no question they could be dispensed in
very short order because the State Historic Preservation
Offices are equipped, ready, and manned to dispense these
grants. Our fear is that the Congress may not act until
December, and hopefully they will act, but not before then.
There is some risk that there will not be enough stabilization
money between now and then to save some of these at-risk
properties.
The National Trust has set a goal of raising at least $1
million, hopefully a lot more, most of which we will be giving
out in the form of stabilization grants and pilot projects in
both Mississippi and New Orleans, but this will not address the
full need of stabilization. So there is a real urgency behind
the need for these grants.
Mr. Dent. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. To expand on Mr. Dent's question, one of the
important opportunities that rebuilding the gulf area presents
to us is to look at some of the economic development tools, the
urban redevelopment tools, historic redevelopment tools that
we've all talked about but have not yet been able to implement,
that we could on a pilot basis place in the gulf area and
determine their effectiveness. The historic homeowner
assistance tax credit has been one that many people have
discussed. It's in the recommendations from Mr. Koonce in the
Historic Trust, and you were speaking about it briefly, Mr.
Moe. I wanted to open it broadly to other members of the panel
to talk about the opportunity of the historic homeowners
assistance tax credits.
And I'm going to begin with you, Mr. Koonce, since you have
a specific proposal that's outlined in your recommendations. We
are talking about the historic homeowner assistance tax credit
recommendation that's in your comments. If you can talk about
the specifics as to how your recommendation, you would see this
working. And then if the other members could talk about how
this could fill a need that currently is not present and might
be an economic development tool and, again, something that we
could try on a pilot basis that we see as a need throughout
many communities in the country.
Mr. Koonce.
Mr. Koonce, I know you are having difficulty hearing us. In
your testimony you begin in the section dealing with historic
preservation disaster assistance package of outlining several
elements, one of which would be the historic homeowners tax
credit.
Mr. Koonce. This package is put together as a partnership
between the National Trust Historic Preservation and the
American Institute of Architects. I have been involved to a
greater extent in looking at the conference that I mentioned to
you a moment ago, but I am confident that my good friend, Mr.
Moe, is going to be able to address that much better than I. So
I think in the interest of expediency I would defer to him.
Mr. Moe. Mr. Chairman, the proposal that we've put before
the Congress is for a 30 percent credit against qualified
expenditures for the restoration of historic homes. This would
provide a very significant gap in the funding that I talked
about earlier.
What is unanswered here, and which we must deal with, is
the administration of these tax credits. We do have an existing
infrastructure in both the National Park Service and in the
State Historic Preservation Offices for administering the
existing tax credit, and that's assumed by everyone, I think,
that same infrastructure would be used for these credits.
However, because the amounts are so much lower, we have to take
a real look at the transaction costs involved and whether or
not they're realistic and reasonable in the context of the work
being done. So we don't have all the answers there, but we hope
that we can get a focus to answer those questions. But there is
no question that it can be uniquely helpful.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Nau, Ms. Matthews, either one of you wish
to comment on historic homeowners tax credits?
Dr. Matthews. I can only comment that the administration
hasn't taken a position on the tax credit and set of waivers,
so I can't comment at this time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
Mr. Nau. The ACHP endorses this concept because we feel
that it would be an effective way to stimulate the
rehabilitation of these historic owner-occupied properties;
trying to predict what the economic impact of that is, I think,
is what Dick has said is very difficult. But based on that,
that's been in the available commercial historic properties, it
only says that success breeds success. And this kind of a
concept I think provides a hand to private property owners that
says the government is with you if you're willing to go back
and rebuild it and preserve it. So I applaud the National Trust
and AIA for taking this lead. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Koonce, in your written testimony and in
your presentation, you talked of the issue of the conference
that's upcoming. It certainly is a wonderful opportunity to
garner resources, specifically at the issues of what needs to
be done with respect to the gulf area and historic
preservation.
What are some of the issues that you expect to be
highlighted and to come out of the conference that might be
helpful to us in the future?
Mr. Koonce. Thank you. That is more in my area of
knowledge, which I can----
Mr. Turner. I thought I'd help you out.
Mr. Koonce. Thank you. Well, you might say that there has
been a totally separate effort in the gulf coast of Mississippi
that has been produced by the Congress of New Urbanism and some
of their people who subscribe to those philosophies of design
of communities. They have obviously done a thorough job there,
and are to be commended. I'm sure that one solution is not
going to fit all of the communities there in Mississippi and
our gulf coast.
On the other hand, the conference that is to be conducted
in just 10 days I guess, or less, beginning in New Orleans, is
the conference for recovery and rebuilding in Louisiana. So the
outlook is very diverse there, looking at not only the city of
New Orleans, but other smaller communities, and those that are
almost isolated that are down on the very gulf coast like
Cameron and other cities.
What will happen is that we will convene a group of very
qualified people in a number of different areas of expertise.
There will be architects, engineers, there will be planners,
there will be historians, there will be economists, there will
be psychologists. There will be those who can orchestrate
discussions of great intensity while recording electronically
and enabling opportunities for people to respond electronically
to all of the issues that are on their mind.
The audience or the group of participants for that
conference will be leaders from every jurisdiction, every
community, every city, every parish that's affected in the
State; they will come to represent the interests of their own
section of Louisiana and to be informed about what there is
that they can take home with them.
The process will be on the first day to discuss a number of
very important principles and designs considering elements of a
design and planning of their communities that must be given
strong consideration, and looking at the characteristics of
solutions that can be derived in each of those cases. All of
the folks will be seated around tables, some 500 to 600
participants, able to respond immediately to their thoughts
about the applicability of those principles in their own
communities.
So we will be able to help them record what they generally
are thinking throughout the entire conference.
In addition, however, to giving the general principles on
the first day by qualified experts and having feedback, on the
second day we will be bringing people into their own
characteristic groups, having them discuss small-city issues
among small-city representatives. Larger-city issues will be,
in like manner, separated from the entire discussion.
Toward the end of the conference there will be recaps, of
course, every day. But there will be a final one that says
here's what we've learned about the redesign of your cities, of
your communities, of your parishes. There will be some folks
then that can give the picture about how they will be able to
work with those who are commissioned to actually lead the
planning and redesign of their communities, letting them be
good clients because they will know what is important to them
based on the 3 days of discussion that they've had in a very
intense sharing of the best principles for creating communities
that are sustainable, that are healthy, that are safe, that are
properly integrated with all the other elements of the
communities.
So we are trusting that those 500, 600 people, who will be
a tremendous core for good design, to leave that place
responding to the concepts that have been mentioned and created
and substantiated and agreed to by them as the elements of the
relationship that will exist between them and the firms or the
groups of people who are establishing the responsibility for
redesign of their communities.
Mr. Turner. Thank you. Although I have a background in law,
my background in the legal profession is not one of a
litigator. Litigators have a greater sensitivity to the issue
of a transcript and what the final document that comes out of a
hearing looks like. Having done now, this year, chaired the
subcommittee, I'm getting a greater sensitivity to the issue of
a transcript and what's in it and what is not, and having
looked at some of these hearings and reflected on what we had
hoped would be in the text of the hearing by the people who
have testified.
Because of that, I want to give each of you an opportunity
to give us, if you will, a commercial. We have, from each of
you, the greatest resources of national experts before us on
the issue of historic preservation. And one thing I don't want
to have missed in the transcript when we turn back to this is
the issue of why is this issue today important; why is it
important that we even look to what we need to be doing in
historic preservation in the face of this large natural and
national disaster? So if you would each take a moment and
provide us that text example of why this is important to us as
a country.
Mr. Nau.
Mr. Nau. I think that's the most important question when
you address historic preservation issues is why are you going
to preserve them? In one context, it's about heritage, it's
about community values. If you look at whether it's the
National Park System or county and State-owned assets, it is
about the accumulated experiences of who we are as a people.
You only are able to feel that by having a sense of place. And
if these places are destroyed, you lose the ability to connect
to that accumulation of values. That's the hard one to get our
arms around.
The easy one for me as a businessman is the economic
development aspects of heritage tourism that many of the
witnesses today have talked about. There is--someone in the
first panel said this is ground zero for heritage and cultural
assets. The tourism industry there was not all about just
gumbo, it was about these places all across that gulf coast.
And to walk away from the preservation of these assets is to
walk away from an industry also hit with the oil and gas. The
petrochemical industries were hurt. We would not walk away from
those industries. And here I would submit to you the economic
development, the future of heritage tourism is in the
collective hands of the States, the Federal Government and the
cities and the citizens. It's economic development as much as
it is the soft side of values and community history. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Ms. Matthews.
Dr. Matthews. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ditto to everything he said. On top of which, as a
historian, the National Historic Sites Act of 1935, passed by
you all, was established for the purpose of benefiting,
inspiring, and educating the Nation as a whole. As a result, we
have 2,500 National Historic Landmarks, many of which lie in
the area we've talked about this morning and you have so
generously given time to talk about this morning.
The 1966 National Historic Preservation Act, which I think
of as the blue collar Congress, the Congress largely educated
by the G.I. bill as the first people in their families who had
the opportunity to go to college, and came back and said I
think neighborhoods are important. As a Congress we think that
back yards are important, we think that the context of history
is important, which is what we've talked about all morning, the
context of a very neat place in a dire situation because of a
catastrophic event.
The 1966 act resulted in 80,000 National Register listings
which represent 1.4 million properties. So our job is to carry
forward for future generations the sense of what has kept many
of us, thanks to your generous use of your time, in this room
for a long time, things that really matter to us, and if we can
put a face on our own minds and experiences and those of all we
know regarding a sense of place in this great Nation.
So while the children who dressed last night as mold--that
grows on wet buildings, that can be handled properly with
professional application--well, the children who dressed up as
mold last night, and the little girl on the same radio report
who put a blue tarp over her Barbie dollhouse because she
wanted it to be protected and not demolished, will those
children walk away 15 years from now with a sense of a Nation
that could rebuild a city or the sense of a Nation that could
not?
Mr. Moe. Mr. Chairman, I think there are at least three
primary reasons why it's important, if not essential, to save
these historic places. No. 1, it does represent our shared
heritage. It's obviously an important part of the heritage of
New Orleans and the Mississippi gulf coast. But this is
America's heritage, too. It tells an important part about who
we were, where we've come from, and hopefully where we're
going. The heritage is enormously important.
As has been said, it is also important because of the
economic development opportunities it provides in terms of
employment, in terms of the overall recovery effort, and
especially in terms of the heritage tourism opportunities that
it presents.
And third, it's important because of the concept of
community. Too often, I'm afraid, preservationists are accused
of focusing on the need to save buildings without the human
dimension. Well, here's an instance where the human dimension
is front and center and must be front and center. All of these
buildings that are damaged are somebody's homes, small
businesses, places of worship. These people need these places
to maintain and come back to their communities. If not, those
communities are gone. In New Orleans, for example, 18 of the 20
historic districts are what I would call vernacular
neighborhood districts; for the most part, middle and lower-
income neighborhoods filled with Creole cottages, shotgun
houses, corner stores. These are the places that are in the
greatest need of assistance, and that is because they are
essential to what the residents of those communities view as
their communities.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Koonce.
Mr. Koonce. The American Institute of Architects and some
of its related partners is on the brink, I think, of
discovering some amazing things about the power of architecture
in each of our lives. Our surroundings, they are determining--
the newer scientists who are working with us are--that
surroundings have a great deal to do with our sense of well-
being, our cognitive skills, our ability to do creative and
conceptual thinking, and to do conflict resolution and
negotiation are all very important issues. It has to do with
longevity of our life.
It's impossible to say at this point in time that there is
a direct correlation between historic architecture and that
which is not, and this theory that's being projected. But it is
appropriate to say that we have historic buildings because they
have endured for a reason. Many other buildings have been built
in the past that have been just simply done away with because
they did not have this ability to inspire, or they did not meet
the needs of accommodation that were prescribed in their
design. Subsequently, I think we need to think about the reason
we still have them. They do represent all of those interests in
our culture, in our values and our past that Mr. Moe mentioned
just a moment ago. But it's important to think about those
buildings that have survived because of the effect they have on
each one of us in our daily life, and I think that's a very
important criteria.
The other thing is that it was mentioned earlier that we do
have process, and that's not the big issue, and I agree with
that; but there is such a mad rush in some corners to just go
ahead and tear down and rebuild, that if we don't provide the
revenues or the money that is necessary to properly invoke the
processes that we have, I'm afraid we will be losing some
things in the interim that we really will regret having lost.
We need to think in terms of private ownership as well. A
lot of the privately owned historic buildings are going to be
more difficult for individuals to restore and to maintain than
those that are publicly owned or owned by large associations.
So it's another issue that it's important for us to act quickly
on this entire issue.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
Well, before we adjourn, I want to give anyone who has
anything they would like to add to the record or has a question
that we have not asked that they wanted to contribute, to give
any closing remarks. It is really not required that anybody
provide closing remarks, but at this time, if you did have any
items that you wanted to bring to our attention or include in
the record, I wanted to give you that opportunity. Does anyone
have anything they want to add before we adjourn?
Mr. Moe. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to thank you for
your holding this hearing and raising the visibility of these
issues because we hope what these panels have had to say will
have an impact on the jurisdictional committees that will be
considering some of these issues going forward. Thank you very
much.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Nau.
Mr. Nau. Let me echo Mr. Moe. And one thought that I would
like to put on the record: Right now FEMA does not have the
ability to fund either the SHPO offices or bring some of these
resources to bear. Mr. Moe referenced that earlier in the
grants program. We would recommend that you all really look
into that and reconsider it. They're on the ground, they have
the ability and knowledge, whether it's this disaster or the
next one. They need to be able to try to bring those resources
to bear quickly, and right now they can't do it. But thank you
for your leadership in this, sir.
Mr. Turner. Thank you. That was an excellent point
concerning FEMA's authority.
I would like to thank each of you for participating today
and thank you for your continued efforts as you impact our
Nation on this important issue. And I'd like to thank my
colleagues for participating today.
The National Preservation Act of 1966 put in place a
workable infrastructure for Federal, State, and local
governments and nongovernmental organizations to partner in
historic preservation efforts, but as we have heard today, more
can be done. Today's witnesses testified, along with their
recommendations, on how Congress can adapt that infrastructure
to better respond to Katrina and future disasters. This will
provide us invaluable information as we make key policy
decisions on this subject.
In the event that there may be additional questions, the
record will remain open for a period of 2 weeks for submission
of additional questions. We would appreciate if you would be
kind enough to answer them if we receive them from members.
With that, we thank you all, and we'll be adjourned. Thank
you.
[Whereupon, at 12:29 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5541.078