History Colorado’s board of directors condemned proposed changes to the National Historic Preservation Act this month, saying a new rule would upend the goal of learning about — and from — the nation’s past.
They also said the federal government’s “fast-moving draft rule” concerning Section 106 of the Act “weakens protections for historic sites and cuts essential voices out of the process,” .
This pushback comes after the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, a little-known, independent federal agency with members appointed by President Trump, voted on July 24 to advance the draft rule that would relax the Historic Preservation Act; passed in 1966, the Act preserves historical, archaeological, and cultural sites.
“The Council’s proposed changes are sweeping, including consolidating decision-making authority at the federal level, weakening consultation with state and Tribal governments and local communities, and reducing what is considered ‘historic’ in ways that will exclude traditional cultural places and threaten rural historic districts,” History Colorado’s board said.
History Colorado president and CEO Dawn DiPrince added that she is grateful to board members for adding their voices to the many people opposed to the proposed revisions, which would “erode our shared commitment to preserve our shared culture and heritage,” she wrote in an email to The Denver Post.
“Collaboration is at the heart of this Act, and the proposed revisions nearly erase this most central tenet,” she said.
State appointees, local issues
Gov. Jared Polis appoints History Colorado’s to three-year terms; the group is currently led by chairwoman Nancy E. Chisholm , following .
DiPrince declined to answer a question about whether the board’s statement could endanger her organization’s federal funding. Public statements against federal actions are rare at state historical societies, which rely on federal grants to boost their budget and are officially nonpartisan nonprofits. But various federal edicts under President Trump to restrict or rewrite historical displays have prompted strong rebukes and warnings from a growing number of experts.
“Historic preservation has always been an issue that spans the divides of politics, geographies, and economics,” DiPrince said. “Historic preservation crosses every demographic, unifies communities, and is beloved across Colorado.”
History Colorado operates the History Colorado Center in Denver and nearly a dozen other museums and historic sites around the state, receiving just over $1.2 million in federal funding each year to support the State Historic Preservation Office. That enables them to fulfill their obligations for Colorado under the National Historic Preservation Act, DiPrince added.
History Colorado’s 2024-25 budget was about $40.8 million, according to , with money flowing from gaming revenues and state allocations. Last year, the office awarded .
Historic preservation work in Colorado has created more than 27,000 jobs since 1981 and generated nearly $3.9 billion in direct and indirect economic impacts, adding $2.2 billion to Colorado’s GDP, according to History Colorado.
Disputing U.S. history
National groups such as the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians have strongly condemned federal actions this year that they allege are .
Last week, for instance, placed in front of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C. about what his administration has termed “inaccurate information presented in the Museum,” including “divisive” mentions of slavery and the slaughter of Indigenous people.
And last year, the Trump administration said visitors at U.S. national parks should report any displays or exhibits saying “negative” things about Americans living in the past or present, which has alarmed preservationists as the government seeks to downplay or remove references to slavery, climate change and other subjects it deems unsuitable for public display. In June, to restore any of the changes it had made.
As for the proposed Section 106 changes, state historical societies in Louisiana, Georgia and Washington state have also opposed them, as have national groups such as the American Historical Association.
“Especially as we reflect on the important anniversaries of this year — America’s 250th and Colorado’s 150th — we cannot support any effort that devalues the voices of Colorado communities and Tribal nations, imperils the irreplaceable places that form our heritage and culture, dismisses the knowledge of Tribes and descendants, and betrays our obligations to preserve the important history of our nation,” History Colorado’s board said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
