2005 03 17 HPC�a(�uun}Q'c
c&tc, 4 ,�LQum&
L �z
P,y OF'CXy,O
Historic Preservation Commission Agendas
are now available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.org
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AGEN®A
The Regular Meeting to be held in the Session Room at the
La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
17
MARCH 1-4, 2005
3:00 P.M.
Beginning Minute Motion 2005-006
CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Historic Preservation
Commission on matters relating to historic resources within the City of La Quinta
which are not Agenda items. When addressing the Historic Preservation
Commission, please state your name and address and when discussing matters
pertaining to prehistoric sites, do not disclose the exact location of the site(s) for
their protection.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Approval of the Minutes for the meeting of February 17, 2005
,._,. ,'- 001
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Paleotological Resources Assessment Report;
Applicant: Monroe Dates, LLC
Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Harry Quinn,
Geologist/Paleontologist)
Location: West side of Monroe Street at Avenue 61 (60-995 Monroe Street).
B. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of a 28.73 Acre Property and Phase II
Test of Site Ca-RIV-7138/H
Applicant: Monroe Dates, LLC
Archaeological Consultant: Archaeological Advisory Group for (Phase I and
CRM TECH for Phase II
Location: West side of Monroe Street at Avenue 61 (60-995 Monroe
Street).
C. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report for Tentative: Tract Map
32979
Applicant: Foxx Homes (David Kulstad, Vice President)
Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Michael Hogan, Principal)
Location: West of Washington Street and North of Avenue 47.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Copy of Interim Tribal Consultation Guidelines for implementation of Senate
Bill 18,
B. Discussion regarding field trip on April 10, 2005.
VIIl. ADJOURNMENT
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the
foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Historic Preservation Commission meeting of Thursday,
March 17, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle
Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, Chamber of Commerce, and
Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Monday, March 14, 2005.
DATED: March 14, 2005
AitTy
. x e Secretary 0 C 2
Uinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\HPC\hpc Agenda.doc
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
February 17, 2005
This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by
Chairman Allan Wilbur at 3:03 p.m. He then led the flag salute and asked for the
roll call.
CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance.
B. Roll Call.
Present: Commissioners Mouriquand, Puente, Sharp,
Wright, and Chairman Wilbur
Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary
Carolyn Walker
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente and Sharp to approve
the minutes of January 20, 2005 as submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Phase II Testing and Data Recovery at the Hammer Propert
Applicant: City of La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Archaeological Consultant: The Keith Companies (John Goodman and
Leslie Mouriquand)
Location: North corner of Avenue 48 and west of Dune Palms Road
1. Commissioner Mouriquand stated she had a conflict of interest
regarding this item as her employer had been contracted to
prepare the report for the Agency. She then withdrew from the
Commission.
1L.. 003
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
2. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
3. Mr. John Goodman, representative of The Keith Companies,
was introduced and went over several sections of the report
beginning with information regarding his unsuccessful inquiries
to the Torres -Martinez Tribe and the Native American Heritage
Commission. His conclusion was to wait until the land was
rough -graded to decide where the bones could be re -interred.
At that time, a Native American representative could come out
for a ceremony and have the remains interred in an appropriate
site. He showed photos of remains and examples of fragments
located on site, including rim sherds, fragments of two bowls,
and fragments of brownware. He commented there was nothing
to indicate there were any further sherds floating on other levels
since this site had previously been disturbed.
4. Commissioner Sharp asked if the vessel could have been used
to hold remains, or if it had been used for water or food. Mr.
Goodman said they weren't sure because there were various
uses for these types of vessels. He went on to explain that one
thing that distinguishes the late prehistoric sites from earlier
sites ones is the introduction of pottery and bows and arrows.
When Native American groups became less nomadic they began
to produce ceramics, baskets, etc. He expressed concern about
whether the sherds should be interred with the bones. He
suggested more value could be gained by putting them in a
museum. Commissioner Sharp commented that was the
decision of the Torres Martinez Tribe.
5. Mr. Goodman also brought in some faunal fragments.
Commissioner Sharp asked what faunal fragments were. Mr.
Goodman replied it was an archaeological term to distinguish
animal bones from human bones. Mr. Goodman distributed
some beads (Olavella Disc Beads) that were used for currency.
Earlier Sidewall Disc Beads were more perfect than the later
beads. Mr. Goodman commented on daub and showed the
Commissioners a sample from the site. He said daub was very
important because it is no longer used. He said where there
was daub, there was a house. He explained the differences in
usages and techniques of daub. Mr. Goodman brought in a
004
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc 2
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
throwing dart which was used with a throwing stick made in a
curved shape. With the introduction of pottery and more
sedentary village life, there was a shift to the bow and arrow.
The disadvantage of the throwing system was you had to stand
up to use it and your prey could spot you. You could remain
hidden with a bow and arrow.
6. Commissioner Sharp asked if the arrowheads shown were
authentic. Mr. Goodman replied no, they were just
representative of the Desert Side Notch arrowheads. He
explained the Indians use of arrowheads, as well as dogs, for
hunting.
7. Commissioner Sharp asked how the arrowheads were attached.
Mr. Goodman said they were attached in several ways,
including asphaltum, derived from creosote or pine pitch, and
charcoal. The final wraps were done in sinew. He explained the
time investment was in making the shaft of the arrow straight
and was more important than the perfection of the point.
8. Mr. Goodman displayed two additional tiny bowls that were
very common. These bowls could have been toys, or used for
ointments. Commissioner Sharp mentioned the glass Egyptian
pots. Mr. Goodman referenced the practices of new
archaeologists doing sherd analysis. He suggested they get
back to basics, such as form and shape and not try to be overly
scientific with regard to clay sourcing.
9. Commissioner Sharp asked if the remains were interred or being
stored. Mr. Goodman replied they were currently being stored to
prevent pot hunters from removing them from the site. Later
they would be put in an appropriate receptacle and presented to
the Tribe. He did not expand on the type of bone fragments
found but explained they would be re-patriated on site.
Commissioner Sharp thanked Mr. Goodman
10. Chairman Wilbur said he appreciated the thoroughness of the
report.
11. Commissioner Sharp asked if the photos in the report were
digitally mastered. Mr. Goodman replied they were.
005
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc 3
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
12. Commissioner Sharp asked what era the brownware carve from.
Mr. Goodman replied over 1,000 years ago. He said 1,500
years ago brownware was found in the Coachella Valley. Mr.
Goodman then gave a brief history of brownware versus
buffware and their connection to the Coachella Valley:
13. Commissioner Wright said he appreciated the documentation on
the structure.
14. Chairman Wilbur asked if the Commission would like to have an
addendum. Mr. Goodman said he would prepare one for
presentation to the Commission. He said he would include
more information on the disposition of the remains.
15. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and
Puente to adopt Minute Motion 2005-003 accepting the: results
of the Phase II Testing and Data Recovery Report for the
Hammer Property as submitted. Unanimously approved with
Commissioner Mouriquand absent.
Commissioner Mouriquand rejoined the meeting and Commissioner Puente left the
meeting due to a prior commitment.
B. Paleontoloaical Resources Assessment Report For The Griffin Ranch
(Tentative Tract 32879):
Applicant: Transwest Housing, Inc.
Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Michael Hogan, Principal)
Location: Southeast corner of Madison Street and Avenue 54.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Commissioners Sharp and Mouriquand commended the
applicant on the report.
3. Commissioner Wright asked if they were going to continue to
monitor the site as he wanted to know about the rennoval of
trees. Staff replied the monitoring would be continued as far as
the Paleontological Report was concerned. Once the developer
goes below the surface grade, the report does recommend
monitoring.
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc 4
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
4. Commissioner Mouriquand said it would depend on how deep
they go and if a crater is created when they take the trees out.
Plow zone is usually 18 inches. She asked if they were going
to excavate more than 18 inches below the surface.
5. Commissioner Wright asked if the tamarisks were going to be
left in.
6. Mrs. Marty Butler, representative of Transwest Housing, stated
the tamarisk trees on the east, west, and along Avenue 54
would be removed. Acceptable trees would then be planted
around Mr. Griffin's house.
7. The Commissioners agreed the trees were not valuable. They
were great windbreaks, but were a problem in landscaping.
8. Commissioner Wright asked if they were going to remove the
House, Lake, and the Guesthouses. Mrs. Butler said they were
going to remove the racetrack and Mr. Griffin would only keep
40 acres.
9. Commissioner Mouriquand asked about additional archaeological
monitoring. She suggested the monitoring be left up to the
discretion of the project archeologist. Commissioner Wright
agreed.
10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand and
Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2005-004 accepting the
Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for The: Griffin
Ranch (TT 32879) as submitted. Unanimously approved with
Commissioner Puente absent.
C. Archaeological Testinq and Evaluation Report Sites CA-RIV-7521 to
7526 For The Griffin Ranch (Tentative Tract 32879):
Applicant: Transwest Housing, Inc.
Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Michael Hogan, Principal)
Location: Southeast corner of Madison Street and Avenue 54
Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
007
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doe 5
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
2. There were no comments from any of the Commissioners.
3. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and
Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2005-005 accepting the
Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Report for Site CA-RIV-
7521 to 7526 For the Griffin Ranch (TT 32879). Unanimously
approved with Commissioner Puente absent.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. A handout of the Conference of California Historical Societies,
February 18-20, 2005 at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Palm Desert and
the Holiday Inn Express was given to the Commissioners by
Commissioner Mouriquand.
B. Commissioner Sharp asked about the field trip which was brought up
at the last meeting. Commissioner Mouriquand brought the
Commissioners up-to-date on the replies she had received and gave a
brief overview of the sites she had chosen for the field trip. 'The trip
was tentatively scheduled for April 10th and Commissioners were
encouraged to bring their cameras and dress appropriately.
C. Chairman Wilbur asked staff if there was any information on available
grant money. Staff said they were still researching the subject.
D. Commissioner Sharp commented there was an upcoming Native
American Film Festival that he thought began on March 15th.
E. Commissioner Mouriquand commented March 121h was the 9th Annual
CVAS Symposium at the Pollock Theater, on the COD campus. There
is no charge for admission.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Sharp and Mouriquand to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the
Historic Preservation Commission to the next Regular Meeting to be held on
March 17, 2005. This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was
adjourned at 4:02 p.m. Unanimously approved.
008
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc 6
Historic Preservation Commission
February 17, 2005
Submitted by:
Carolyn Walker
Secretary
0 CI 9
P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 2-17-05.doc
AaM
DATE:
ITEM:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
PALEONTOLOGICAL
CONSULTANT:
BACKGROUND:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MARCH 17, 2005
PALEOTOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT REPORT
60-995 MONROE STREET
WEST SIDE OF MONROE STREET AT AVENUE 61
MONROE DATES, LLC
CRM TECH (HARRY M. QUINN, GEOLOGIST/
PALEONTOLOGIST)
The 30 acre property is rectangular in shape and located in the southeast area of
La Quinta. A paleontological resource assessment has been submitted to allow
development of a single family subdivision (Attachment 1). This assessment will
be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application.
DISCUSSION:
A paleological records search for the property was conducted at the San Bernardino
County Museum and Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. The records
search indicated no localities (sites) have been recorded on the study area or in a
one mile radius of the study area. However, paleontological localities (sites) have
been found outside of the one mile radius.
The on -foot field survey of the study area found shell materials in open portions of
the property with some in the grove and road areas. No fish bone or other
vertebrate fossil remains were found. The report concludes the study area has a
low potential for vertebrate fossil remains but a high potential for invertebrate
remains.
Based on the results of the study, the report concludes a surface collection of the
freshwater mollusk remains should be done prior to any earth -moving activities.
Furthermore, paleontological monitoring of all earth -moving activities is
recommended in the report.
010
P:\stan\hpc\rpt tt 31434 ph I paleo. doc
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Paleontological Resources
Report" 60-995 Monroe Avenue", as prepared by CRM TECH, subject to the
recommendations in the report and the following conditions:
On- and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and trenching in areas identified
as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be conducted by a
qualified paleontological monitor. The monitor shall be equipped to salvage
fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove
samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil
invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large
specimens. Proof that a monitor has been retained shall be given to City prior
to issuance of first earth -moving permit, or before any clearing of the site is
begun.
2. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and
permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates.
3. A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall
be submitted to the City prior to the first occupancy of a residence being
granted by the City. The report shall include pertinent discussions of the
significance of all recovered resources where appropriate. The report and
inventory, when submitted will signify completion of the program to mitigate
impacts to paleontological resources.
4. Collected resources and related reports, etc. shall be given to the City for
curation. Packaging of resources, reports, etc. shall comply with standards
commonly used in the paleontological industry.
Attachment:
1. Paleontological Resources Report" 60-995 Monroe Avenue, City of La
Quinta, California (Commissioners only)
Prepared by:
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
pl\stan\hpc\rpt tt 31434 ph I paleo.doc ,,. O i l
N113061
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 17, 2005
ITEM: PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF A
28.73 ACRE PROPERTY AND PHASE II TESTING OF SITE
CA -RI V-7138/H
LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF MONROE STREET AT AVENUE 61
APPLICANT: MONROE DATES, LLC
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS: ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY GROUP (AAG) — PHASE I
CRM TECH - PHASE II
BACKGROUND:
The 30 acre property is rectangular in shape and located in the southeast area of
La Quinta. A Phase I cultural assessment survey and Phase II testing program of a
historic/prehistoric site have been submitted to allow development of a single
family subdivision (Attachment 1). These assessments will be part of the
environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
for the project application.
PHASE I DISCUSSION:
A records search was conducted through the Eastern Information Center of the
California Historical Resources Information System at UC Riverside. The search
found the study area (project site) had not been included in any previous
archaeological studies and no cultural resources had been previously recorded on
the property. In the immediate vicinity of the study area a number of
archaeological sites and isolate finds have been found.
An archival records search was conducted and the report states two residential
structures were constructed on the property by 1925. A swimming pool was
constructed by 1941. The residential structures were demolished in 2003, shortly
after annexation of the property into the City in February, 2003. most of the
property is planted in date palm trees, but the exact date of planting is unknown.
A Sacred Lands search with the State Native American Heritage Commission was
negative. Letters were also sent to the Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians and
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. No responses were received in time to be
pl\stan\hpc\rpt tt 31434 ph I archaeo.doc
012
included in the report. However, a response was received by AAG on January 23,
2004, from the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians indicating the property is in
the area designated as the Tribe's Traditional Use Area (Attachment 21. They
requested a Native American Monitor be included in the monitoring crew.
During the field survey of the study area one prehistoric or protohistoric site, CA-
RIV-7138 was found, along with two abandoned historic water wells (Primary Nos.
33-12757 and 33-12758) used for the date palm farm. The wells sites were
determined not to be worthy of preservation or further research.
Site CA-RIV-7138 consisted of a scatter of pottery sherds and chipped stone mixed
with late 19" century historic artifacts. The report concluded that a Phase II test
program be conducted at Site CA-RIV-7138 in order to evaluate its significance.
Additionally, monitoring of earth moving and trenching activities is recommended in
the report. Following is the results of the Phase II testing.
PHASE II DISCUSSION:
CRM TECH conducted a Phase II testing and evaluation of the identified
archaeological site. The site was re -surveyed, surface artifacts were collected, and
excavation of six surface scrapes and two test units were dug, and all cultural
materials recovered received laboratory analysis.
The recovered artifacts consisted of ceramic sherds, several chipped stone pieces,
and nine mammal bone remains. The historic -era artifacts consisted of pieces of
glass and whiteware, a nail and an iron fragment, probably from a wagon. The
report states the site may have been a temporary encampment from the Late
Prehistoric Period, most likely after ancient Lake Cahuilla had receded. The historic
artifacts are probably trash discards.
The report concludes the site does not constitute a "historic resource" under CEQA
definitions and the proposed project will not have an adverse impact on any historic
resources. Monitoring during earth moving and grading activities is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Phase I Cultural Resources
Assessment of 28.73-Acre Property at Monroe Street and Avenue 61, City
of La Quinta, California", as prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group
2. Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Archaeological Testing and
Evaluation Report — Site CA-RIV-7138/H 60995 Monroe Street, City of La
Quinta, California", as prepared by CRM TECH, subject to the
recommendations in the report and the following conditions:
pl\stan\hpc\rpt tt 31434 ph I archaeo.doc
- 013
A. The site shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough
grading by qualified archaeological monitors. Proof of retention of
monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -
moving or clearing permit. Monitoring crew shall include a Native
American representative.
B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first
Certificate of Occupancy for the project.
C. Collected archaeological resources shall be properly packaged for long
term curation, in polyethylene self -seal bags, vials, or film cans as
appropriate, all within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively
labeled archive boxes and delivered to the City prior to issuance of the
first Certificate of Occupancy for the property.
Attachment:
1. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of 28.73-Acre Property at Monroe
Street and Avenue 61, City of La Quinta, California (Commissioners only)
2. Letter from Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
3. Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Report — Site CA-RIV-7138/H, 60995
Monroe Street, City of La Quinta, California (Commissioners only)
Prepared by:
�-3 LGy►1. �G�In17ti _
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
014
pl\stan\hpc\rpt tt 31434 ph I archaeo. doc
BI #C
DATE:
ITEM:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
CONSULTANT:
BACKGROUND
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MARCH 17, 2005
HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT
FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32979
WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET AND NORTH OF AVENUE 47
FOXX HOMES (DAVID KULSTAD, VICE PRESIDENT)
CRM TECH (MICHAEL HOGAN, PRINCIPAL)
The study area encompasses a four acre parcel located adjacent to the foothills on
the west side of Washington Street just north of Avenue 47. The old La Quinta Arts
Foundation grounds are located immediately to the east between the site and
Washington Street. This land has been approved for a residential subdivision. The
vacant property is situated on a large sand dune with some desert shrubs and
wildflowers growing on it.
The City is currently processing an application to allow a single-family residential
development on the property ITT 32979) which will have connecting streets with the
tract to the east. A Phase I (survey level) Archaeological/ Historical Resources
Assessment has been completed for the property. The Assessment includes a record
search and field reconnaissance of the property. This Assessment will be part of the
environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for
the project application.
DISCUSSION
An archaeological records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern
Information Center located at UC Riverside and in the CRM TECH library. The records
search indicated the study area has been surveyed three times over the past 30
years. Three prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded on the property.
They have been evaluated through archaeological testing with determinations made
that they did not constitute "historic resources". All sites were determined to need
archaeological monitoring during grading.
Historical background research was conducted at the Science Library Map Room at
UC Riverside and at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) office in Moreno Valley.
The search indicated that one structure existed on the property by 1941 but has since
been removed with all evidence of its existence gone.
P:\Reports - HPC\2005\3-17-05\rpt tt 32979 foxx ph 1 archaeo.doc
0.15
The report indicates that all 12 persons and organizations in the Native American
Heritage Commission's referral list were contacted, but as of the date of the report no
responses were received. All responses will be given to the City when received. One
Native -American monitor shall be included in the monitoring crew should the tribes
request it.
The on -foot field survey was conducted by walking parallel north -south transects
spaced fifteen meters apart. As a result of this survey two ceramic sherds were
found in the area of Site CA-RIV-6245, one of the three previously recorded sites.
No other artifacts of historic/archaeological interest were observed on the ground. No
evidence of the other two sites (Site CA-RIV-2199/4168), later determined to be one
Site was found during the recent survey.
Although no "historic resources" were found the report states that the previously
recorded sites in the study area, the two found isolates, and large number of recorded
sites that exist in the surrounding area indicate a high sensitivity for possible
subsurface archaeological remains. Therefore, the report recommends on -site
monitoring during earth -moving activities.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Historical/Archaeological Resources
Survey Report — Canyon Ridge Project, A Portion of Tentative Tract 32979, City of La
Quinta, Riverside County, California", as prepared and recommended by CRM TECH,
and subject to the following conditions:
A. The site shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough grading
by qualified archaeological monitors. Proof of retention of monitors shall be
given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit.
B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of
Occupancy for the project.
C. Collected archaeological resources shall be properly packaged for long term
curation, in polyethylene self -seal bags, vials, or film cans as appropriate, all
within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively labeled archive boxes and
delivered to the City prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for
the property.
D. The applicant shall provide the Community Development Department: with all
written responses received from Native American tribes or their representatives
contacted prior to issuance of an earth -moving or grading permit. One Native -
American monitor shall be included in the monitoring crew should any of the
tribes request it.
.... _,. O1 3
PAReports - HPC\2005\3-17-05\rpt tt 32979 foxx ph 1 archaeo.doc
Attachment:
1. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report — Canyon Ridge
Project, A Portion of Tentative Tract 32979 City of La Quinta, Riverside
County, California, (Commissioners only)
Prepared by:
e I ✓ow-k
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
w... _ 017
PAReports - HPC\2005\3-17-05\rpt it 32979 foxx ph 1 archaeo.doc
CI #A
T4',v°F ZfvQ,uMrw
MEMORANDUM
TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FROM: STAN SAWA, PRINCIPAL PLANNER *n
SUBJECT: INTERIM TRIBAL CONSULTATION GUIDELINES FOR SENATE
BILL 18
DATE: MARCH 17, 2005
Attached is a copy of the Interim Guidelines developed by the State of California
Office of Planning and Research (OPR) required to implement Senate Bill 18, signed
into law last year. These Guidelines will be a supplement to the State General Plan
Guidelines and according to OPR are the result of input and review by numerous
organizations and individuals including the Native American Heritage Commission
and its staff, California Native American Tribes, City and County Governments,
State agency representatives, professional associations, and academic institutions.
These Guidelines are open for final public comment for 45 days which began on
March 1, 2005.
Please note this Senate Bill only applies to general plan and specific plan adoptions
and amendments. In La Quinta, this means some applications includiing site
development permits, tentative tract maps, and village use permits are not subject
to these new requirements. These applications sometimes are required by
approval of a specific plan. Staff is reviewing the Guidelines to determine how we
will implement them and if deemed necessary will submit comments to OPR.
018
P:\stan\ttms\hpc\memo hpc sb 1 8.doc
SUPPLEMENT TO GENERAL PLAN GUIDELINES
Tribal Consultation Guidelines
(Interim)
March 1, 2005
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
019
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Director's Message
March 1, 2005
The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) is proud to announce the publication of
the 2005 Supplement to the General Plan Guidelines. The 2005 Supplement provides advisory
guidance to cities and counties on the process for consulting with Native American Indian t6bes
during the adoption or amendment of local general plans or specific plans, in accordance with the
statutory requirements of Senate Bill 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004). At a future date, this
2005 Supplement will be incorporated into the General Plan Guidelines as a new chapter on
tribal consultation. It is our hope that this 2005 Supplement will be useful not only to city and
county planning staffs for complying with the new statutory mandates, but also to local elected
officials, planning consultants, landowners, and tribal members who are involved in the general
plan process.
In all of its work, OPR attempts to encourage more collaborative and comprehensive land use
planning at the local, regional, and statewide levels. These goals are consistent with the goals of
Senate Bill 18, which for the first time in the nation, requires cities and counties to consult with
Native American tribes when adopting and amending their general plans or specific plans.
The completion of this 2005 Supplement would not have been possible without the advice and
assistance of many organizations and individuals, whose support OPR acknowledges and
appreciates. These organizations and individuals include the Native American Heritage
Commission and its staff, the members and representatives of numerous California Native
American tribes, many city and county governments, state agency representatives, professional
associations and academic institutions. We appreciate their assistance in preparing this 2005
Supplement, including participation at several meetings and public workshops.
OPR typically takes a year or more to update and republish its General Plan Guidelines. This
2005 Supplement was developed in five months because SB 18 mandates issuance of OPR
guidelines by March 1, 2005. OPR's resources were intensely focused on meeting the March I
deadline, and included outreach and consultation with a wide range of stakeholders before and
during the crafting of the guidelines. We consulted with city and county representatives
(planners, legislative staff and legal counsels); tribal representatives and associations; staff of the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), including attendance at two NAHC
commission meetings; federal agencies with experience in tribal consultation; academic
institutions; and professional associations that deal with archaeological and cultural resource
protection. In addition, we consulted with numerous tribal liaisons within state government and
sought the input of the League of California Cities and the California State Association of
Counties.
03/01/05 020
20
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Based upon this consultation, OPR issued Draft SB 18 Tribal Consultation Guidelines (this 2005
Supplement) on February 22, 2005 for public review and comment. OPR conducted a public
workshop on February 25, 2005, which was well attended and resulted in a productive discussion
of the process envisioned by SB 18, as well as many specific recommendations for
improvements to the 2005 Supplement. In addition, we heard clearly a request from many
parties for additional time to consult with OPR regarding the 2005 Supplement.
OPR has met its statutory responsibility by issuing the 2005 Supplement on March 1, 2005. It is
OPR's normal practice to periodically review and update the General Plan Guidelines to
incorporate new information and practical advice, and we are committed to doing this with the
2005 Supplement. Upon conclusion of our public review process, we believe that additional
time for consultation with stakeholders is warranted. Our office will therefore continue to reach
out to stakeholders and consult with them over the next 45 days to ensure that stakeholder
interests are heard.
We hope that you will find this 2005 Supplement to be an informative guide and a useful tool in
the practice of local planning. I invite your suggestions on ways to improve OPR's General
Plan Guidelines and this 2005 Supplement, as OPR continues to refine and update all of its
guidance to city and county planning agencies.
Sean Walsh
Director, OPR
03/01/05
191.. `1 - O 21
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Table of Contents
Part A: SB 18 Context and Basic Requirements........................................................................ 5
1.
Introduction......................................................................................................................
5
11.
Background Information..................................................................................................
6
California Native American Cultural Places...................................................................
6
California Native American Tribes..................................................................................
8
III.
Basic Requirements of SB 18..........................................................................................
9
Responsibilitiesof OPR...................................................................................................
9
Responsibilities of Local Governments............................................................................
9
ResponsibilitiesofNAHC..............................................................................................
10
OtherElements of SB 18................................................................................................
10
Process Overview: General Plan or Specific Plan Adoption or Amendment ................
11
Part B:
When and How to Consult with California Native American Tribes ......................
13
IV.
Consultation: General Plan and Specific Plan Adoption or Amendment ......................
13
What Triggers Consultation?.........................................................................................
13
Identifying Tribes through the NAHC............................................................................
13
Contacting Tribes Pursuant to Government Code§65352.3.........................................
14
After Notification is Sent to the Tribe............................................................................
15
Conducting Consultation on General Plan or Specific Plan Adoption or Amendment.
16
Whenis Consultation Over?..........................................................................................
19
V.
Consultation: Cultural Places Located in Open Space ..................................................
19
What Triggers Consultation?.........................................................................................
19
Conducting Consultation Regarding Open Space.........................................................
20
Whenis Consultation Over'?..........................................................................................
21
Part C: Pre -Consultation ...
22
VI.
Preparing for Consultation.............................................................................................
22
Part D: Preservation, Mitigation, Confidentiality, and Landowner Participation ...............
24
VII.
Preservation of, or Mitigation of Impacts to, Cultural Places ........................................
24
What are Preservation and Mitigation?........................................................................
24
Mitigation"Where Feasible..........................................................................................
25
Monitoring and Management........................................................................................
25
Mitigation and Private Landowner Involvement.. .........................................................
26
VIII.
Confidentiality of Information .......................................................................................26
03/01/05
022
3
».._
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Public Disclosure Laws................................................................................................. 27
PublicHearings............................................................................................................. 28
Additional Confidentiality Procedures.......................................................................... 28
Confidentiality Procedures for Private Landowner Involvement .................................. 29
IX. Procedures to Facilitate Voluntary Landowner Protection Efforts ................................ 30
Landowner Education and Participation....................................................................... 30
Private Conservation Efforts......................................................................................... 30
PartE: Open Space..................................................................................................................... 32
X. Open Space for the Protection of Cultural Places.......................................................... 32
Part F: Additional Resources..................................................................................................... 33
XI. Additional Resources..................................................................................................... 33
4
0 2 13/01/05
N.. � . 6
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part A
SB 18 Context and Basic Requirements
Sections I through III of the 2005 Supplement provide background information to familiarize:
local government agencies with the intent of Senate Bill 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of
2004) and the importance of protecting California Native American traditional tribal cultural
places. Local governments will be better prepared to enter into consultations with tribes if they
have a basic knowledge of tribal concerns and the value of cultural places to tribes. The key
provisions of SB 18 are also outlined in table and text form.
I. Introduction
This 2005 Supplement to the 2003 General Plan Guidelines addresses the requirements of
SB 18, authored by Senator John Burton and signed into law by Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger in September 2004. SB 18 requires local (city and county) governments to
consult with California Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal
cultural places ("cultural places") through local land use planning. SB 18 also requires the
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to include in the General Plan Guidelines
advice to local governments for how to conduct these consultations.
The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate
in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating
impacts to, cultural places. The purpose of involving tribes at these early planning stages is to
allow consideration of cultural places in the context of broad local land use policy, before
individual site -specific, project -level land use decisions are made by a local government.
SB 18 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to making certain planning
decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. These
consultation and notice requirements apply to adoption and amendment of both general plans
(defined in Government Code §65300 et seq.) and specific plans (defined in Government Code
§65450 et seq.). Although SB 18 does not specifically mention consultation or notice
requirements for adoption or amendment of specific plans, existing state planning law requiires
local governments to use the same processes for adoption and amendment of specific plans as for
general plans (see Government Code §65453). Therefore, where SB 18 requires consultation
and/or notice for a general plan adoption or amendment, the requirement extends also to a
specific plan adoption or amendment. Tribal consultation and notice requirements of SB 18 take
effect on March 1, 2005.
The General Plan Guidelines is an advisory document that explains California legal
requirements for general plans.' The General Plan Guidelines closely adheres to statute and
case law. It also relies upon commonly accepted principles of contemporary planning practice.
' California Government Code §65040.2
03/01/05
024
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
When the words "shall' or "must' are used, they represent a statutory or other legal requirement.
"May" and "should" are used when there is no such requirement. The 2005 Supplement:
• Provides background information regarding California Native American cultural places
and tribes.
• Outlines the basic requirements of SB 18.
• Provides step-by-step guidance to local governments on how and when to consult with
tribes.
• Offers advice to help local governments effectively engage in consultation with tribes.
• Provides information about preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.
• Discusses methods to protect confidentiality of information regarding cultural places.
• Presents ways of encouraging voluntary landowner involvement in the preservation of
cultural places.
II. Background Information
The principal objective of SB 18 is to preserve and protect cultural places of California Native
Americans. SB 18 is unique in that it requires local governments to involve California Native
Americans in early stages of land use planning, extends to both public and private lands, and
includes both federally recognized and non -federally recognized tribes. This section provides an
overview of California Native American cultural places and California Native Americans.
California Native American Cultural Places
SB 18 refers to Public Resources Code §5097.9 and 5097.995 to define cultural places?
• Native American sanctified cemetery, place of worship, religious or ceremonial site, or
sacred shrine (Public Resources Code §5097.9).
• Native American historic, cultural, or sacred site, that is listed or may be eligible for
listing in the California Register of Historic Resources pursuant to Section 5024.1,
including any historic or prehistoric ruins, any burial ground, any archaeological or
historic site (Public Resources Code §5097.995).'
These definitions can be inclusive of a variety of places. Archaeological or historic sites may
include places of tribal habitation and activity, in addition to burial grounds or cemeteries. Some
examples are village sites and sites with evidence (artifacts) of economic, artistic, or other
cultural activity. Religious or ceremonial sites and sacred shrines may include places associated
with creation stories or other significant spiritual history, as well as modern day places of
worship. Collection or gathering sites are specific places where California Native Americans
access certain plants for food, medicine, clothing, ceremonial objects, basket making, and other
z Due to a drafting error, SB 18 contains multiple references to Public Resources Code (PRC) §5097.995 which is no
longer in existence. In 2004, PRC §5097.995 was amended and renumbered to PRC §5097.993 by Senate Bill 1264
(Chapter 286). Local governments should refer to PRC §5097.993 when looking for PRC §5097.995.
' Ibid.
03/01 /05
411.1-1 U`r5
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
crafts and uses important to on -going cultural traditions and identities; these places may qualify
as religious or ceremonial sites as well as sites that are listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historic Resources.
Native American cultural places are located throughout California because California Native
American people from hundreds of different tribes made these lands their home for thousands of
years. Due to the forced relocation of tribes by the Spanish, Mexicans, and Americans, most.
tribes do not currently control or occupy the lands on which many of their cultural places are
located. As a result, California Native Americans have limited ability to maintain, protect, and
access many of their cultural places.
A number of federal and state laws have been enacted to preserve cultural resources and have
enabled some Native American tribes to promote the preservation and protection of their cultural
places. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which established historic preservation
as a national policy in 1966, includes a Section 106 review process that requires consultation to
mitigate damage to "historic properties" (defined per 36 CFR 800.16(1) as places that quality for
the National Register of Historic Places), including Native American traditional cultural places
(TCPs, as described in National Register Bulletin 38) whenever any agency directs a project,
activity or program using any federal funds or requiring a federal permit, license or approval
(36CFR800.16). The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires every federal project
to include in an Environmental Impact Statement documentation of environmental concerns.
including effects on important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage..
Presidential Executive Order 13007, "Indian Sacred Sites, ensures that federal agencies are as
responsive as possible to the concerns of Native American tribes regarding their cultural places.
The Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) makes desecration of Native American
cultural places on federal lands a felony.
California state law includes a variety of provisions that promote the protection and preservation
of Native American cultural places. A number of these provisions address intentional
desecration or destruction of cultural places and define certain of such acts as misdemeanors or
felonies punishable by both fines and imprisonment. These include the Native American
Historic Resource Protection Act (PRC §5097.995-5097.996), Public Resources Code §5097.99,
Penal Code §622.5 and Health and Safety Code §7050.5, §7052. Other provisions require
consideration of potential impacts of planned projects on cultural resources, which may include
Native American cultural places. Public Resources Code 5097.2 requires archaeological surveys
to determine the potential impact that any major public works project on state land may have on
archaeological resources. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires project
lead agencies to consider impacts, and potential mitigation of impacts, to unique archaeological
and historical resources 4 California Executive Order W-26-92 affirms that all state agencies
shall recognize and, to the extent possible, preserve an maintain the significant heritage resources
of the State. Public Resources Code §5097.9, which mandates noninterference of free expression
or exercise of Native American religion on public lands, promotes preservation of certain Native
American cultural places by ensuring tribal access to these places.
CEQA Statutes at Public Resources Code §21083.2-21084.1; CEQA Guidelines at 14 CCR 15064.5-15360.
03/01 /05 ,. 6
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
While these and other laws permit Native Americans to have some say in how impacts to cultural
places could be avoided or mitigated, the laws rarely result in Native American input at early
stages of land use planning. Generally, these laws provide protection only to those sites located
on public or Native American trust lands and address only the concerns of Native Americans
who belong to federally recognized tribes, with no official responsibility to non -federally
recognized tribes. The intent of SB 18 is to provide all California Native American tribes, as
identified by the NAHC, an opportunity to consult with local governments for the purpose of
preserving and protecting their cultural places.
California Native American Tribes
SB 18 uses the term, California Native American tribe, and defines this term as "a federally
recognized California Native American tribe or a non -federally recognized California Native
American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage
Commission" (NAHC). "Federal recognition" is a legal distinction that applies to a tribe's rights
to a government -to -government relationship with the federal government and eligibility for
federal programs. All California Native American tribes, whether officially recognized by the
federal government or not, represent distinct and independent governmental entities with specific
cultural beliefs and traditions and unique connections to areas of California that are their
ancestral homelands. SB 18 recognizes that protection of traditional tribal cultural places is
important to all tribes, whether federally recognized or not, and it provides all California Native
American tribes with the opportunity to participate in consultation with city and county
governments for this purpose. As used in this document, the term "tribe(s)" refers to a California
Native American tribe(s).
California has the largest number of tribes and the largest Native American population of any
state in the United States, according to a California Department of Finance estimate. As of 2004,
California was home to 109 federally recognized tribes, several dozen non -federally recognized
tribes, and a Native American population of 383,197.
Tribal governments throughout California vary in organizational forms and size. Some tribes use
the government form established under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (25CFR81) with
an adopted constitution and bylaws. Other tribes have adopted constitutions and bylaws that
incorporate traditional values in governing tribal affairs. Many tribal governments are comprised
of a decision making body of elected officials (tribal governing body) with an elected or
designated tribal leader. Some tribes still use lineal descent as the means of identifying the
tribe's leader. In general, tribal governing bodies and leaders serve for limited terms and are
elected or designated by members of the tribe. Tribal governments control tribal assets,
laws/regulations, membership, and land management decisions that affect the tribe.
03/01/05
n... _ 0 � l
r
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
III. Basic Requirements of SB 18
This section provides a brief summary of the statutory requirements of SB 18. Later sections of
the Supplement provide additional detail regarding these requirements and offer advice to local
governments on how to fulfill the notification and consultation requirements of SB 18. (Please
refer to Section IV and Section V of these guidelines for additional information regarding the
responsibilities outlined below.)
Responsibilities of OPR
SB 18 requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the General
Plan Guidelines to contain advice to local governments on the following:
• Consulting with tribes on the preservation of, or the mitigation of impacts to, cultural
places.
• Procedures for identifying through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAFIC)
the appropriate California Native American tribes with whom to consult.
• Procedures for continuing to protect the confidentiality of information concerning the
specific identity, location, character, and use of cultural places.
• Procedures to facilitate voluntary landowner participation to preserve and protect the;
specific identity, location, character, and use of cultural places (Government Code
§65040.2(g)).
Responsibilities of Local Governments
SB 18 establishes responsibilities for local governments to contact, provide notice to, refer plans
to, and consult with tribes. The provisions of SB 18 apply only to city and county governments
and not to other public agencies. The following list briefly identifies the contact and notification
responsibilities of local governments, in sequential order of their occurrence.
• Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local
government must notify the appropriate tribes (on the contact list maintained by the
NAHC) of the opportunity to conduct consultations for the purpose of preserving, or
mitigating impacts to, cultural places located on land within the local government's
jurisdiction that is affected by the proposed plan adoption or amendment. Tribes have 90
days from the date on which they receive notification to request consultation, unless a
shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe (Government Code §65352.3) 5
• Prior to the adoption or substantial amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local
government must refer the proposed action to those tribes that are on the NAHC contact
list and have traditional lands located within the city or county's jurisdiction. The
referral must allow a 45 day comment period (Government Code §65352). Notice must
5 This is an entirely new provision of SB 18 and applies to any amendment or adoption of a general plan or specific
plan, regardless of the type or nature of the amendment.
03/01/05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
be sent regardless of whether prior consultation has taken place. Such notice does not
initiate a new consultation process.6
• Local governments must send notice of a public hearing, at least 10 days prior to the
hearing, to tribes who have filed a written request for such notice (Government Code
§65092).'
Under SB 18, local governments must consult with tribes under two circumstances:
• On or after March 1, 2005, local governments must consult with tribes that have
requested consultation in accordance with Government Code §65352.3. The purpose of
this consultation is to preserve, or mitigate impacts to, cultural places that may be
affected by a general plan or specific plan amendment or adoption.
• On or after March 1, 2005, local governments must consult with tribes before designating
open space, if the affected land contains a cultural place and if the affected tribe has
requested public notice under Government Code §65092. The purpose of this
consultation is to protect the identity of the cultural place and to develop treatment with
appropriate dignity of the cultural place in any corresponding management plan
(Government Code §65562.5).
Responsibilities of NAHC
The NAHC is charged with the responsibility to maintain a list of California Native American
tribes with whom local governments must consult or provide notice. Upon request, the NAHC
will provide local governments with a written contact list of tribes with traditional lands or
cultural places located within a city's or county's jurisdiction. The criteria for inclusion on the
list are the responsibility of the NAHC. Please contact the NAHC for more information
(Government Code §65352.3, §65352, and §65092).
Other Elements of SB 18
In addition to the notice and consultation requirements outlined above, SB 18 amends
Government Code §65560 to allow the protection of cultural places in the open space element of
the general plan. (See Section X) Open space land is land designated in the city or county open
space element of the general plan for one or more of a variety of potential purposes, including
protection of cultural places.
SB 18 also amends Civil Code §815.3 and adds California Native American tribes to the list of
entities that can acquire and hold conservation easements. Tribes on the contact list maintained
by the NAHC now have the ability to acquire, on terms mutually satisfactory to the tribe and the
landowner, conservation easements for the purpose of protecting their cultural places. (See
Section IX)
e Government Code §65352 was amended by SB 18 to include tribes among the entities to whom the proposed
action must be referred. The term "substantial amendment" has been in the statute for many 15 years and wa, not
modified by SB 18.
r Government Code §65092 was modified by SB 18 to include certain tribes as "persons" that are eligible to request
and receive notices of public hearing. "Person" now includes a California Native American tribe that is on the
contact list maintained by the NAHC.
10 03/01/05
..... 0 2 9
d
O
�
C
;
; M
O
O
7 R•
?' �
,,,,.� coo
,�
U
R
V r
d
q U
C] U
c nn
a
O
R R
v
w
g o
a
¢
c c.�
cn
d
o
a v
8
to
c
°
N
Y
L
o A
•'
LO
C
U
U
y
U
O
a�
O 'o
O
bD
O
a
z
i
>
U
a�
�+ R
C
I
y
y
�
�
O
p ctl i
U
G
U
W
^p �
G N
y
�
�
ti
�•
C •y /�
U
U
R L
O
Y
y'
U
Lp
00
y
O
fib
a�i C7
='
°
Q
0 o
a
3
o
a
3
=
e-
w
o
0
N
o' U
^VRl
Q f�/I U
O
y
R
'=
�
o
0
a
o
ooCL
U
°
aL
Cn •
b
�
N
0.bb
N
i
y>
L
L
b
>❑
O
L
C y0
R
O
y •d 1]
O v
U 3
vUi
O>
toCl,
V
j
CL
C
U
N
°u
to
3
a
o
U b
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
CM
C)
C,
o �
c
a V)
o M
y
y
>
M
Uj y
'L F•� N �
C`
a
❑
a �a
o
>
•�-
c`i V'
o
U
O01
�
G
.a
coo
cp.
-`L E O tt
r7
U >
� L
F � p
E W
L
F
G
O V
pq
.UL'
N
Ucl
�'
a
•C . E
W
0. a �
C
W
Y
U v.
F
O
L a
F
w
s
o F.O
O
O
vi
cC 0
E R
N
iC
U y>> rai,
L;,
a' NO
X P
C
Y
a> Gto
w
U N
�
O U ti
E s
C7
>cq
a o
F Y
p
a tl
Y O
O vl
O E O U 2
> F
F
U O
bb
a
s
to
n ca o,
U
O E
�j
E
•y
L CL i 0
O F O O
rn
U
U O '�
03 F, ^C
C L O 4" N�
O.
.-.
b0
O Y
V
Q U E
L R
a °L'
F y
U m u •>7 V
E
bq N
a
ti
vi b0
U
o 3 N .° L
F L etl
E
o
a U
E
b0
W
C w CL
Y a= O
bo
z
a
o
o.0 3 c i
s U
bq
.
a
N ro> U
ti
o
�
s
F
Y o
°
acr Cl.c
Y
° o to v o c
a
fi
L
w O
_
c. N O
LO C
R
_
N Y� OL R 3
O.
OU
'.«' O. U F •L7 d
y 0
P
Y U =' O U
v� Y
O
bq a
7
O.
F
T F y y
F L
T
bD
m
E O y
Ta
F3
t0U
73
F
Uy
OtUC .
O O
II.
N ."
bA Q
Y
y L' U
F
Fr
C
ORl
b
is d
O F
O Fa~ F F CG
cC
� i3
.O
-
U
b
ai ? m 'm 7
,'
F
U W
_ q
o
Y>
Q bpn I
Q co
p^
z
U
.-1 .Vi
0
N
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part B
When and How to Consult with California Native American Tribes
Sections IV and V of the 2005 Supplement provide step-by-step guidance to local government
agencies on how and when to consult with tribes, including when to provide certain types of
notices during the planning process.
IV. Consultation: General Plan and Specific Plan Adoption or Amendment
Each time a local government considers a proposal to adopt or amend the general plan or specific
plan, they are required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC. If requested by
tribes, local governments must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to
cultural places. The following section provides basic guidance to local governments on the
notification and consultation requirements in Government Code §65352.3.
What Triggers Consultation?
Government Code §65352.3 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to the
adoption or amendment of a general plan or specific plan proposed on or after March 1 2005.
Local governments should consider the following when determining whether a general plan or
specific plan adoption or amendment is subject to notice and consultation requirements:
• In the case of an applicant -initiated plan proposal, if the local government receives a
complete application (as defined in Government Code §65943) on or after March 1,
2005, the proposal is subject to Government Code §65352.3.
• In the case of a general plan or specific plan amendment initiated by the local
government, any proposal introduced for study in a public forum on or after March 1,
2005 is subject to Government Code §65352.3. A legislative body must take certain
actions to initiate, or propose, a general plan or general plan amendment. These actions
must be taken in a duly noticed public meeting, and may include, but are not limited to,
any of the following: appropriation of funds, adoption of a work program, engaging the
services of a consultant, or directing the planning staff to begin research on the activity.
Under Government Code §65352.3, only if a tribe is identified by the NAHC, and that tribe
requests consultation after being contacted by a local government„ must a local government
consult with the tribe on the plan proposal.
Identifying Tribes through the NAHC
Once a local government determines a proposal to adopt or amend its general plan or specific
plan is subject to Government Code §65352.3, the local government should send a written
request to the NAHC asking for a list of tribes with whom to consult. OPR recommends that the
written request be sent to the NAHC as soon as possible. Local governments should consider the
following points when submitting a request to the NAHC:
• All written requests should be sent to the NAHC via certified mail or by fax.
13
03/01/05
,.... _ . 032
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
• Requests to the NAHC should include the specific location of the area that is subject to
the proposed action, preferably with a map clearly showing the area of land involved.
• Requests should clearly state that the local government is seeking information about
tribes that are on the "SB 18 Consultation List."
• Contact information for the NAHC:
Native American Heritage Commission
915 Capitol Mall, Room 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-653-4082
Fax:916-657-5390
http://www.nahc.ca.gov
A sample form for submitting a request to the NAHC is provided in Exhibit A. The tribal
consultation list request form is also available on the NAHC website.
The NAHC will provide local governments with a written contact list of tribes with traditional
lands or cultural places located within the local government's jurisdiction. For each listed tribe,
the NAHC will provide the tribal representative's name, name of tribe, address, and phone
number (if available, fax and email address). Although there is no statutory deadline for NAHC
to respond to the local government, OPR recommends that the NAHC provide written contact
information within 30 days of receiving a written request from the local government.
Contacting Tribes Pursuant to Government Code §65352.3
Once a tribal contact list is received from the NAHC, local governments should contact the
appropriate tribe(s) and invite them to participate in consultation. OPR suggests that local
governments contact tribes as soon as possible upon receiving the tribal contact list. While the
statute does not specify by what means tribe(s) should be contacted, OPR suggests that local
governments send a written notice by certified mail with return receipt requested. Sending a
written notice does not preclude a local government from contacting the tribe by telephone,
FAX, or e-mail.
Notices should be concise, clear, and informative so that tribes understand what they are
receiving. Notices sent from a local government to a tribe, inquiring whether consultation its
desired, should contain the following information:
• A clear statement of purpose, inviting the tribe to consultation and declaring the
importance of the tribe's participation in the local planning process.
• A description of the proposed general plan or specific plan being considered, the reason
for the proposal, and the specific geographic area(s) that will be affected by the proposal.
Relevant technical documents should be provided with a concise explanation that clearly
describes the proposed general plan or specific plan amendment and its potential impacts
on cultural resources, if known.
14
Gi33
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
• Maps that clearly detail the geographic areas described in the explanation. Maps should
be in a reasonable scale with sufficient references for easy identification of the affected
areas.
• The deadline (date) by which the tribe must request a consultation with the local
government. By law, tribes have 90 days from the date of receipt of the notice to request
consultation (Government Code §65352.3(a)(2)).
• Contact information for representatives of the local government to whom the tribe should
respond.
• Contact information for the project proponent/applicant and landowner(s).
• Technical reports, including summaries of cultural resource reports and archaeological
reports applicable to that tribe's cultural place(s), if available.
• Information on proposed grading or other ground -disturbing activities, if applicable.
(This may be included in the project description.)
Subject to confidentiality procedures, both parties should maintain clear records of
communications, including letters, telephone calls, and faxes. Both parties may send notices by
certified mail and keep logs of telephone calls and faxes. Any returned or unanswered
correspondence should be retained in order to verify efforts to communicate. Documentation of
notification and consultation requests should be included in the local government's public
record.
In addition to the above recommendations, local governments may develop notification
procedures as a part of consultation protocols established in cooperation with a tribal
government. Local governments may also adopt policies regarding consultation with a tribal
government. (See Section VI.)
After Notification is Sent to the Tribe
Once local governments have sent notification, tribes are responsible for requesting consultation.
Pursuant to Government Code §65352.3(a)(2), each tribe has 90 days from the date on which
they receive notification to respond and request consultation. Some key points to consider
include:
• The time period for consultation (undefined) is independent of the time period for tribes
to request consultation (90 days).
• Local governments should be aware that tribes may require the entire 90-day period
allowed by law to respond to a consultation request. Tribal governing bodies may need
to meet to take a formal position on consultation.
• Local governments and tribal governments may consider addressing the method and
timing of a tribe's response to a consultation request in a jointly -developed consultation
protocol. (See Section VI)
• At their discretion, tribes can agree to a shorter timeframe (less than 90 days) to respond
and request consultation.
03/01 /05
I
N..._ . 034
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
• After the information about a proposed plan or plan amendment is received by the tribe,
local governments should cooperate to provide any additional pertinent information about
the proposed plan or plan amendment that the tribe may request. Local governments may
consider extending the 90 day timeframe for the tribe to review the new information and
respond accordingly.
• If the tribe does not respond within 90 days or declines consultation, consultation is not
required under Government Code §65352.3.
Conducting Consultation on General Plan or Specific Plan Adoption or Amendment
Once a tribe requests consultation, both parties should begin consultation within a reasonable
time for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places. Consultation should
focus on how the proposed general plan or specific plan amendment or adoption might impact
cultural places located on land affected by the plan proposal. The objectives of consultation,
according to the legislative intent of SB 18, include:
• Recognizing that cultural places are essential elements in tribal culture, traditions,
heritages and identities.
• Establishing meaningful dialogue between local and tribal governments in order to
identify cultural places and consider cultural places in local land use planning.
• Avoiding potential conflicts over the preservation of Native American cultural places by
ensuring local and tribal governments have information available early in the land use
planning process.
• Encouraging the preservation and protection of Native American cultural places in the
land use process by placing them in open space.
• Developing proper treatment and management plans in order to preserve cultural places.
• Enabling tribes to manage and act as caretakers of their cultural places.
Consultation is a process in which both the tribe and local government invest time and effort into
seeking a mutually agreeable resolution for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating possible
impacts to a cultural place, where feasible. Government Code §65352.4 provides a definition of
consultation for use by local governments and tribes:
Consultation means the meaningful and timely process ofseeking, discussing, and
considering carefully the view of others, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties'
cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement. Consultation between
government agencies and Native American tribes shall be conducted in a way that is
mutually respectful of each party's sovereignty. Consultation shall also recognize the
tribes' potential needs for confidentiality with respect to places that have traditional
tribal cultural significance.
Effective consultation is an ongoing process, not a single event. The process should focus on
identifying issues of concern to tribes pertinent to the cultural place(s) at issue — including
cultural values, religious beliefs, traditional practices, and legal rights of California Native
16 03/01/05
035
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Americans — and on defining the full range of acceptable ways in which a local government can
accommodate tribal concerns.
Items to Consider When Conducting Consultation
The following list identifies recommendations for how local governments and tribes may
approach consultation on general plan and specific plan proposals.
• As defined in Government Code §65352.4, consultation is to be conducted between two
parties: the local government and the tribe. Both parties to the consultation are required
to carefully consider the views of the other.
• Consultation does not necessarily predetermine the outcome of the plan or amendment.
In some instances, local governments may be unable to reach agreement due to other
state laws or competing public policy objectives.
• Local governments must consult with each tribe who is identified by the NAHC and
requests consultation. The NAHC will identify whether there are, in fact, any tribes with
whom the local government must consult. One or more tribes may have traditional
cultural ties to land within the local government's jurisdiction and have an interest in
preserving cultural places on those lands. Therefore, local governments may have to
consult with more than one tribe on any particular plan proposal. OPR recommends that
local governments consult with tribes one at a time (individually). If multiple tribes are
involved and willing to jointly consult, local governments may consult with more than
one tribe at a time.
• When a local government first contacts a tribe, its initial inquiry should be made to the
tribal representative identified by the NAHC. OPR recommends that a local government
department head or other official of similar or higher rank make the initial contact.
• Government leaders of the two consulting parties may consider delegating consultation
responsibilities (such as attending meetings, sharing information, and negotiating the
needs and concerns of both parties) to staff. Designated representatives should maintain
direct relationships with and have ready access to their respective government leaders.
These individuals may, but are not required to, be identified in ajointly-developed
consultation protocol. (See Section VT) In addition, the services of other professionals
(attorneys, contractors, or consultants) may be utilized to develop legal, factual, or
technical information necessary to facilitate consultation.
• Local governments should be aware that simply notifying a tribe of a plan proposal is not
the same as consultation.$
• Local governments should be aware of the potential for vast differences in tribal
governments' level of staffing and other resources necessary to participate in the manner
'in Pueblo of Sandia v. United States, 50 F.3d 856 (loth Cir. 1995), the court held that the U.S. Forest Service had
not fulfilled its consultation responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act by merely sending Letters
to request information from tribes. The court ruling held that written correspondence requesting consultation with a
tribe was not sufficient for the purpose of conducting consultation as required by law, and that telephone calls or
more direct forms of contact may be required.
03/01 /05 17
036
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
required by Government Code §65352.3 and §65352.4. Some may be able to respond
more promptly and efficiently than others. Local governments should keep this in mind
if and when developing a consultation protocol with a tribe. (See Section VI.)
• As a part of consultation, local governments may conduct record searches through the
NAHC and California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) to determine if
any cultural places are located within the area(s) affected by the proposed action. Local
governments should be aware, however, that records maintained by the NAHC and
CHRIS are not exhaustive, and a negative response to these searches does not preclude
the existence of a cultural place. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding
the existence of a cultural place.
• Local governments should be aware that the confidentiality of cultural places is critical to
tribal culture and that many tribes may seek confidentiality assurances prior to divulging
information about those sites. (See Section VIII.)
• Tribal consultation should be done face-to-face whenever possible. While in -person
consultation is recommended, local and tribal governments may wish to define
circumstances under which parts of the consultation process can be carried out via
conference calls, e-mails, or letters. (See Section VIII)
• Tribal consultations should be conducted in a setting that promotes confidential treatment
of any sensitive information that is shared about cultural places.
• The time and location of consultation meetings should be flexible to accommodate the
needs of both the local government and tribe. Local governments should recognize that
travel required for in -person consultation may be time-consuming, due to the rural
location of a tribe. Local governments should also take into account time zone changes
when setting meeting times. Local governments should offer a meeting location at the
city hall, county administrative building, or other appropriate_ location. Local
governments should also be open to a tribe's invitation to meet at tribal facilities.
• The local government and tribe can agree to mutually invite private landowners to
participate in consultation, if both parties feel that landowner involvement would be:
appropriate.
• Local governments are encouraged to establish a collaborative relationship with tribes as
early as possible, prior to the need to consult on a particular general plan or specific plan
amendment or adoption. Local governments may consider conducting pre -consultation
meetings and developing consultation protocols in cooperation with tribes. (See Section
VI)
• Both parties should attempt to document the progress of consultation, including letters,
telephone calls, and direct meetings, without disclosing sensitive information about a
cultural place. Local governments may also want to document how the local government
representative(s) fulfilled their obligations under Government Code §65352.3 and
§65352.4.
18 03/01/05
�. 037
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
When is Consultation Over?
Alan Downer, of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, described consultation as
"conferring between two or more parties to identify issues and make a good faith attempt to find
a mutually acceptable resolution of any differences identified."9 Differences of opinion and of
priorities will arise in consultation between local and tribal governments. Whenever feasible,
both local and tribal governments should strive to find mutually acceptable resolutions to
differences identified through consultation.
When engaging in consultation, local and tribal representatives should consider leaving the
process open-ended to allow every opportunity for mutual agreement to be reached. Some
consultations may involve highly sensitive and complex issues that cannot be resolved in just one
discussion. Consultation may require a series of meetings before a mutually acceptable
agreement may be achieved. Consultation must be concluded prior to the formal adoption or
amendment of a general plan or specific plan.
Consultation, pursuant to Government Code §65352.3 and §65352.4, should be considered
concluded at the point in which:
• the parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning the appropriate
measures for preservation or mitigation; or
• either the local government or tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort,
concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning appropriate measures of
preservation or mitigation.
V. Consultation: Cultural Places Located in Open Space
If land is designated, or proposed to be designated, as open space on or after March 1, 2005, and
if that land contains a cultural place and if an affected tribe has requested notice of public
hearing under Government Code §65092, then local governments must consult with the tribe.
The purpose of this consultation is to determine the level of confidentiality required to protect
the specific identity, location, or use of the cultural place, and to develop treatment with
appropriate dignity of the cultural place in any corresponding management plan (Government
Code §65562.5). This consultation provision does not apply to lands that were designated as
open space before March 1, 2005.
What Triggers Consultation?
Government Code §65562.5 applies to land that is designated, or proposed to be designated, as
open space, on or after March 1, 2005. Local governments must consider several criteria when
determining whether consultation is required, prior to designating open space on or after March
1, 2005.
9 From "The Navajo Nation Model: Tribal Consultation Under the National Historic Preservation Act' (2000).
03/01/05 19
038
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Local governments must first learn whether the land designated, or proposed to be designated, as
open space contains a cultural place. The following are methods by which local governments
may be informed if a cultural place is located on designated or proposed open space:
• Conduct record searches through the NAHC and CHRIS to learn whether any cultural
places are located on land proposed to be designated as open space. The local
government should provide maps of lands proposed as open space to the NAHC and
CHRIS, with a request to identify whether there are any cultural places on the property.
This does not mean that the NAHC or CHRIS will provide detailed information regarding
the character or location of the cultural place, only that one or more may be present.
Local governments should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS
are not exhaustive, and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the
existence of a cultural place. In most instances, and especially because of associated
confidentiality issues, it is likely that tribes will be the only source of information
regarding certain cultural places.
• Request that tribes identify the existence of any cultural places on the proposed open
space land. Local governments should send a written request to the NAHC asking for a
written list of tribes that have traditional cultural ties to the proposed open space. The
NAHC will provide tribal contact information. Local governments should contact each
tribe on the list provided by the NAHC to learn whether any cultural places are located on
the land proposed as open space. Local government should provide the tribe with a
sufficiently detailed map of the open space together with a concise notice as to why the
tribe is being contacted. (Note: This contact is strictly for the purpose of identifying
whether a cultural place is or may be located on the proposed open space land. It does
not start consultation with a tribe.)
After a local government learns that a cultural place is or may be located on land designated or
proposed to be designated as open space, the local government must notify the appropriate tribes
of the opportunity to participate in consultation. The appropriate tribes are those which have: (1)
been identified by the NAHC, and (2) requested notice of public hearing from the local
government pursuant to Government Code §65092.
Conducting Consultation Regarding Open Space
The purpose of this consultation is to determine the level of confidentiality required to protect
the specific identity, location, character, or use of the cultural place and to develop treatment
with appropriate dignity of the cultural place in any corresponding open space management plan.
The reference to "any corresponding management plan' is not meant to imply that there is such a
plan or that the local government must develop such a management plan. This language is
intended to encourage consideration of management policies and practices which may be
discussed between the local government and tribe and incorporated into a new or existing
management plan for the cultural place.
20 03/01 /05
w..... 034)
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
The following are examples of appropriate items to consider and discuss during consultation:
• Encourage tribal involvement in the treatment and management of the cultural place
though contracting, monitoring, co -management, and other forms of joint local -tribal
participation.
• Tribes may only wish to disclose a sufficient amount of information to protect the site
and to allow for the proper treatment and management of the cultural place. (See Section
MI)
• Tribes may wish to have access to cultural places located on open space, to perform
ceremonies and/or to help maintain the site.
• Tribes may want to recommend management practices that avoid disturbing or impacting
the cultural place.
• Tribes may wish to discourage certain land uses (e.g. recreation) within the open space
that could adversely impact the cultural place. Local governments may be asked to
consider appropriate land uses in the open space designation that would avoid direct
impacts to the cultural place.
The designation of open space, as provided in Government Code §65562.5, may, but does mot
always, involve amending the general plan. In some jurisdictions, designation of open space
may occur through rezoning of land from one zone designation to an open space zone
designation, without the need for a general plan amendment. However, for proposals to
designate open space that require a general plan or specific amendment, the local government
should consider the above recommendations as well as the recommendations outlined in Section
IV of these guidelines.
When is Consultation Over?
Please refer to Section IV for additional information regarding the meaning of consultation.
LI
03/01 /05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part C
Pre -Consultation
Section VI provides advice to local governments that is intended to help them more effectively
engage in consultation with tribes. This part of the 2005 Supplement provides information that
may help local governments establish working relationships with tribes prior to entering into the
required consultation pursuant to SB 18.
VI. Preparing for Consultation
As discussed above, Government Code §65352.3 requires consultation during the process of
amending or adopting general plans or specific plans. In addition, Government Code §65562.5
requires consultation to determine the proper level of confidentiality to protect and treat a
cultural place with appropriate dignity, where such places are located on lands to be designated
as open space. Before engaging in consultation in either of these cases, local governments may
want to consider developing relationships with tribes that have traditional lands within their
jurisdiction. Although not required by law, these pre -consultation efforts may develop a
foundation for a mutually respectful and cooperative relationship that helps to ensure more
smooth and effective communication in future consultations.
Local governments way wish to consider the following when undertaking pre -consultation
meetings:
• Contact the NAHC to obtain a list of all appropriate tribes with whom to pre -consult.
Because this list may be revised over time by the NAHC, local governments should
periodically request updated contact lists.
• Contact the NAHC and CHRIS to learn if any historical or cultural places are located
within the city's or county's jurisdiction. (As previously noted, NAHC and CHRIS
records pertaining to cultural places are not exhaustive, and a negative response to these
searches does not preclude the existence of a cultural place.)
22
• Invite tribal government leaders from each tribe to meet with local government leaders
for the purpose of establishing working relationships and exchanging information about
respective governmental structures, practices, and processes. Pre -consultation meetings
may include discussion about community goals, planning priorities, and how cultural
places play a role in the tribal culture.
• Hold informational workshops or meetings with the tribe(s) to discuss the general plan
process, the existing general plan, and any contemplated amendments. Local
governments should not expect or ask a tribe to share confidential information in a
meeting with other tribes.
• Develop a consultation protocol that addresses how a cooperative relationship can be
maintained and how future consultations should be conducted. Some tribes may already
03i01/05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
have established protocols through working with other agencies, such as state and federal
entities, that can be used as models.
If a tribe and local government decide to develop a consultation protocol, both parties should
suggest topics that they believe will facilitate consultation. The following are examples of items
that may be appropriate to discuss and include in ajointly-developed consultation protocol:
• Representative(s) from each consulting party who will be designated to participate in
consultations and manage the information resulting from the consultations.
Key points in the consultation process when elected government leaders may need to be
directly involved in consultation.
• Method(s) of contact preferred by the tribal government and additional tribal
representatives that the local government should contact regarding a proposed action.
• Procedures for giving and receiving notice, including method and timing.
• Preferred method(s) of consultation. While in -person consultation is recommended, it
may be acceptable to both parties that certain aspects of consultation occur through
conference calls, e-mails, or letters.
• Preferred locations of consultation meetings.
• The tribe's willingness to participate in joint consultation, should a specific site be of
interest to more than one tribe.
• Procedures to allow tribal access to the local government's consultation records.
• Procedures for maintaining accurate, up-to-date contact information.
Over time, the initial approach to consultation may need to be updated. Both parties should, be
open to identifying and agreeing on changes to their consultation protocol.
042
03/01/05 23
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part D
Preservation, Mitigation, Confidentiality, and Landowner
Participation
Sections VII through IX provide advice to local governments for considering issues such as
appropriate means to preserve, or mitigate impacts to, cultural places; methods to protect the
confidentiality of cultural places; and ways to encourage the participation of landowners in
voluntary preservation efforts.
VII. Preservation of, or Mitigation of Impacts to, Cultural Places
Government Code §65352.3 requires local governments to conduct consultations with tribes
(when requested) for the purpose of "preserving or mitigating impacts" to California Native;
American cultural places. In the course of adopting or amending a general plan or specific plan,
local governments may be informed of the existence of a cultural place within the affected area.
Should a tribe request consultation to discuss any impacts to the cultural place, local
governments should consider a variety of factors when participating in the consultations,
including: the history and importance of the cultural place, the adverse impact the local
government action may have on the cultural place, and all available methods of mitigation that
may aid in the ongoing preservation of the cultural place.
When participating in consultations, it is important that local governments consider that, because
of philosophical differences, mitigation will not always be viewed as an appropriate option to
protect cultural, and often irreplaceable, places. Many tribes may determine that impacts to a.
cultural place cannot be mitigated; that the only appropriate treatment may be to avoid and
preserve the cultural place without impact to its physical or spiritual integrity. Of course, this is
not to say that tribes will not engage in discussions regarding mitigation of impacts to their
cultural places, but local governments should consider the vastly different perspectives that tribes
may have. What a local government may consider to be acceptable treatment under current:
environmental, land use, and cultural resource protection laws, may not be considered by a tribe
to be acceptable treatment for a sacred or religious place.
What are Preservation and Mitigation?
Preservation is the conscious act of avoiding or protecting a cultural place from adverse impacts
including loss or harm. Mitigation, on the other hand, is the act of moderating the adverse
impacts that general plan or specific plan adoption or amendment may have on a cultural place.
While local governments should strive to help preserve the integrity, access to, and use of
cultural places10, mitigation may often be achieved through a broad range of measures:
• Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation.
10 Cultural Places referring to places, features, and objects under Government Code §65352.3(a) and described in
Government Code §§5097.9 and 5097.995.
24 03/0 1/05
043
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
• Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted cultural
place.
• Reducing or eliminating the impact over time through monitoring and management of the
cultural place.
Other methods of mitigation may include:
• Designation of open space land in accordance with Government Code §65560(b).
• Enhancement of habitat or open space properties for protection of cultural place.
• Development of an alternate site suitable for tribal purposes and acceptable to the tribe.
• Other alternative means of preserving California Native American cultural features,
where feasible.
It is important that local governments consider that mitigation measures may largely differ
depending on customs of a particular tribe, the characteristics and uses of a site or object, the
cultural place's location, and the importance of the site to the tribe's cultural heritage. Where a
cultural place is affected by a proposed general or specific plan adoption or amendment,
consultations with tribes should focus on preserving, or mitigating the impacts to, that spec'r.fic
cultural place.
Mitigation "Where Feasible"
Although Government Code §65352.3(a) addresses consultation for the purpose of preserving or
mitigating against the adverse impacts that a general plan or specific plan adoption or
amendment may have on a cultural place, it is important that local governments recognize the
absence of a requirement to avoid a cultural place or adopt mitigation measures if agreement
cannot be reached. Under the definition of "consultation" within Government Code §65352.4,
local governments and tribes are required to carefully consider each other's views and are
required to seek an agreement, "where feasible." For the purposes of Government Code
§65352.4, agreements should be considered "feasible" when capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable time taking into account economic, environmental, social
and technological factors." If, after conducting consultations in good faith and within the spirit
of the definition, the tribe or local government cannot reach agreement on preservation or
mitigation of any impact to a California Native American cultural place, neither party is required
to take any action under Government Code §65352.3(a).
Monitoring and Management
During consultations, local governments should consider, as a possible mitigation measure, the
involvement of tribes in the ongoing treatment and management of cultural places, objects, or
cultural features through a specific monitoring program, co -management, or other forms of
participation.
"See State of California General Plan Guidelines, Governor's Office of Planning & Research, Glossary, page 261.
03/01/05
1
,.... Dq4
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Where a cemetery, burial ground, or village site may be present, the planning of treatment and
management activities should address the possibility that California Native American human
remains may be involved when protecting cultural features. Local governments should consider
working with tribes to develop an appropriate plan for the identification and treatment of such
discoveries in accordance with Public Resources Code §5097.98.
Mitigation and Private Landowner Involvement
During consideration of a proposed general plan adoption or amendment, a local government
may discover or be informed of a cultural place that exists on privately owned land within an
affected area. In such an instance, local governments should first contact the appropriate tribe or
tribes to offer consultations and determine an acceptable level of landowner involvement. Local
governments should be aware that there may be some occasions where a tribe may prefer to
maintain strict confidentiality without the inclusion of a private, third party landowner.
Local governments should encourage the involvement of private landowners and should consider
assisting in facilitating such involvement. It is important that local governments and tribes
understand that there is no statutory requirement to include private landowners under the
government -to -government consultations requirements of Government Code §65352.3(a).
However, because landowner participation is encouraged, local governments may consider
suggesting the following methods to facilitate landowner involvement:
• Suggesting that the tribe contact the private landowner directly to facilitate discussions
between the tribe and landowner.
• Offering to contact the private landowner directly on behalf of the tribe.
• Suggesting that the private landowner be included as a party to the consultations.
VIII. Confidentiality of Information
Protecting the confidentiality of California Native American prehistoric, archaeological, cultural,
spiritual, and ceremonial places is one of the most important objectives of SB 18. This is clearly
evidenced by SB 18's legislative intent as well as its statutory additions and amendments which
address the issue of confidentiality and requires "each city and county to protect the
confidentiality of information concerning" cultural places.12 By maintaining the confidentiality
of a cultural place, including its location, traditional uses, and characteristics, local governments
can help assure tribes of continued access and use of these cultural places, in addition to aiding in
the preservation of a cultural place's integrity. However, local governments should take into
consideration other state and federal laws which may impose conflicting public policy priorities
or requirements.
" See SB 18 § 1(b)(3), (Burton, Ch. 905, Stat. 2004); Govt. Code §§ 65040.2(g)(3), 65352.3, 65352.4, and 65562.5.
we,
045
03/01/05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Public Disclosure Laws
The California Public Records Act (Government Code §6250 et. seq.) and California's open
meeting laws applying to local governments (The Brown Act, Government Code §54950 etseq.)
both have implications with regard to maintaining confidentiality of California Native American
cultural place information. Local governments are encouraged to carefully consider the laws in
greater detail below, and adopt or incorporate these recommendations into their own
confidentiality procedures in order to avoid the unintended disclosure of confidential cultural
place information.
The California Public Records Act (CPRA)
Subject to specified exemptions, the CPRA provides that all written records maintained by local
or state government are public documents and are to be made available to the public, upon
request. Written records include all forms of recorded information (including electronic) that.
currently exist or that may exist in the future. The CPRA requires government agencies to snake
records promptly available to any citizen who asks.
While the CPRA does exempt certain types of information from public disclosure, the law is
presently unclear as to whether a public agency would be required to disclose records (written
and in a local government's possession) pertaining to cultural places under a CPRA request.
However, federal and state laws do impose significant restrictions on the maintenance, use, and
disclosure of records and information pertaining to tribal cultural places. Mindful of these
restrictions, and our state's guarantee that access to information concerning the conduct of the
people's business is a fundamental right of every person in California, and that any exceptions to
disclosure are narrowly construed,13 public records concerning the nature and specific location of
a tribal cultural place should be disclosed by a local agency in response to a request under
Government Code §6250 unless the local agency makes a written determination that:
1. disclosure of the information would create an unreasonable risk of harm, theft, or
destruction of the resource or object, including individual organic or inorganic
specimens; or
2. disclosure is inconsistent with other applicable laws protecting the resource or object; or
3. in accordance with Government Code §6255 on the facts of a particular case the public
interest served by not making the record public clearly outweighs the public interest
served by disclosure of the record.
The Brown Act
The Brown Act governs the legislative bodies of all local agencies within California. It requires
that meetings held by these bodies be "open and public." Under this Act, no local legislative
body may take an action in secret, nor will the body's action be upheld if it is in violation of
California's open meeting laws. The Brown Act defines a "meeting" as a gathering of a majority
of the members of a applicable body to hear, discuss, or deliberate on matters within the
agency's or board's jurisdiction.
"See California Constitution, Article 1, Section 3, Subdivision (b)(2); and County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court
(Axelrod), 82 Cal.App.4" 819 (2000).
03/01/05 27
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
While the Brown Act does contain some exceptions for "closed meetings," none of these
exceptions would allow the quorum of a local legislative body to participate in tribal
consultations within a closed meeting. Should a local legislative body wish to participate in
confidential tribal consultations, it is important that they do so as an advisory committee with
less than a quorum, so as to not invoke the Brown Act's requirements of public participation (see
Government Code §54952(b)). Otherwise, the Brown Act will require that the consultations be
held in public, thereby defeating the purpose of confidentiality, or, alternatively, any decisions
made by the quorum of the body within a closed meeting would be rendered invalid.
In order to efficiently conduct tribal consultation meetings, in addition to maintaining
confidentiality at all times, local governments are encouraged to develop procedures in advance
that would designate a committee or agency in charge. In doing so, local governments should
consider the problems associated with elected official participation within tribal consultations,
and should tailor their procedures accordingly.
Public Hearings
General plan amendments, specific plan amendments, and the adoption of a general or specific
plan each require both a planning commission and a city council or board of supervisors to
conduct public hearings. The decision to approve or deny these proposals must be based in
reason and upon evidence in the record of the public hearing. When addressing an adoption or
amendment involving a cultural place, elected officials will need to be apprised of the cultural
site implications in order to make informed decision. However, to maintain the confidentiality of
this cultural place information, local governments and tribes, during consultations, should agree
on what non-specific information may be disclosed during the course of a public hearing.
Additionally, local governments should avoid including any specific cultural place information
within CEQA documents (such as Environmental Impact Reports, Negative Declaration, and
Mitigated Negative Declarations) or staff reports which are required to be available at a public
hearing.
Additional Confidentiality Procedures
Additionally, local governments should consider the following items when considering steps to
be taken in order to maintain confidentiality:
• Local governments should develop "in-house" confidentiality procedures.
• Procedures should be established to allow for tribes to share information with local
government officials in a confidential setting.
• Only those tribal designees, planning officials, qualified professional archaeologists, and
landowners involved in the particular planning activity should obtain information about a
specific site.
28
• Participating landowners should be asked to sign a non -disclosure agreement with the
appropriate tribe prior to gaining access to any specific site information.
03101 /05
U47
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
• Possible procedures to require local government to notify participating tribes and
landowners whenever records containing specific site information have been requested
for public disclosure.
Local governments should also keep in mind that the terms for confidentiality may differ
depending upon the nature of the site, the tribe, the local government, the landowner, or who
proposes to protect the site. Local governments should collaborate with tribes to develop
informational materials to educate landowners regarding the cultural sensitivity of divulging; site
information, explaining the tribe's interest in maintaining the confidentiality and preservation of
a site. Landowners should be informed of criminal penalties within the law for the unlawful and
intentional destruction, degradation or removal of California Native American cultural or
spiritual places located on public or private lands (Public Resources Code §5097.995).14
Confidentiality Procedures for Private Landowner Involvement
In order to successfully mitigate against or avoid impacts to a California Native American
cultural place, local governments and tribes may often find it necessary to involve private
landowners early in the consultation process. Often, landowners may not be aware that a cultural
place exists on their property, or alternatively, may not realize that the site has become subject to
a general plan adoption or amendment. Due to the confidential nature of certain information
involved, local governments should consider working with tribes to adopt procedures that would
balance the value of landowner involvement with the need for cultural place confidentiality.
Local governments and California Native American tribes may wish to consider the following
procedures that would inform and potentially involve landowners in the consultation process, but
would not compromise the confidentiality of a cultural place:
• Local governments, at the request of a tribe, may consider contacting a landowner
directly and, without disclosing the exact location or characteristics of the site, inform the
landowner of the existence of a culturally significant place on their property. A local
government may consider inquiring as to whether the landowner would be willing to
further discuss the matter directly with the appropriate tribal representative under a non-
disclosure agreement.
• Through conducting a records search, local governments may consider giving the
landowner's contact information to a tribe so that the tribe may contact the landowner
directly if local government involvement is not desired.
• Local governments may also wish to consider informing landowners of the CHRIS
system, and their right, as landowners, to utilize the database for further information
concerning the cultural place on their property. Local governments should keep in mind
that the CHRIS system does not contain a catalog of every cultural place within
California, and may not have information with regard to a particular cultural place.
14 Due to a drafting error, SB 18 contains multiple references to Public Resources Code (PRC) §5097.995 which is
no longer in existence. In 2004, PRC §5097.995 was amended and renumbered to PRC §5097.993 by Senate Bill
1264 (Chapter 286). Local governments should refer to PRC §5097.993 when looking for PRC §5097.995.
03/01/05 29
!l;
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
IX. Procedures to Facilitate Voluntary Landowner Protection Efforts
In addition to their own consultation with tribes, local governments may help facilitate
landowner participation in preserving and protecting cultural places. While each city and county
should develop its own policies on landowner participation, general strategies for encouraging
landowner awareness of and participation in cultural place protection may include:
• Collaborating with local tribes to offer cultural awareness and other educational events
for landowners.
Encouraging landowner participation in discussions about appropriate mitigation or
avoidance measures.
Promoting the use of conservation easements and other private conservation efforts.
It should be noted that SB 18 does not require landowners to dedicate or sell conservation
easements for the purpose of cultural place preservation. Neither are local governments required
to play a direct role in any private conservation activity. Government Code §65040.2(g),
however, does require OPR to recommend procedures to facilitate voluntary landowner
participation in the preservation and protection of cultural places.
Landowner Education and Participation
Public workshops, seminars, and other educational sessions may provide forums for tribal
representatives to share tribal and cultural information and discuss general protection concerns
with landowners. These sessions may build cultural awareness, develop landowner
understanding of the importance of cultural places, and also encourage further dialogue between
tribes and landowners. These sessions should generally inform landowners of the importance of
cultural places and should not compromise the confidentiality of a specific cultural place.
Local governments may also encourage landowner participation in discussions about mitigating
or avoiding impacts to a cultural place located on a landowner's private property. Please refer to
"Mitigation and Private Landowner Involvement" in Section VII and "Confidentiality
Procedures for Private Landowner Involvement" in Section VIII for further information.
Private Conservation Efforts
Although local governments are not required to play a direct role in any private conservation
activity, they can promote the use of conservation easements and other conservation programs to
protect cultural places. Local governments may consider adoption of a policy to encourage!
voluntary landowner participation in protection programs. Local governments may also develop
and distribute informational materials about potential incentives for private conservation efforts,
such as Mills Act tax credits or the tax benefits of donating or selling conservation easements.
A conservation easement is a voluntary agreement between a landowner and an authorized party
(including a tribe) that allows the holder to limit the type or amount of development on the
property while the landowner retains title to the land. The landowner is compensated for
voluntarily giving up some development opportunities. The easement is binding upon successive
owners of the land. It is common for a conservation easement to be recorded against the
30 03 /01 /05
049
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
property as a way to inform future purchasers of the easement. Granting of a conservation
easement may qualify as a charitable contribution for tax purposes.
Should a landowner choose to sell a conservation easement, the landowner should first consult
with all tribes affiliated with the land on which the easement is proposed. It is also
recommended that tribes hold conservation easements only within their areas of cultural
affiliation.
As an alternative to conservation easements, local governments may also promote private
preservation of cultural places through the use of Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). As a
direct agreement between a landowner and tribe, a MOU allows a tribe and landowner to agree
on appropriate treatment of cultural places located on the landowner's private property and may
give certain privileges to tribes, such as access to perform ceremonial rituals. MOUs may also
be used to facilitate co -management by tribes, landowners, and conservation organizations. For
example, if a conservation easement established for wildlife protection also contains a cultural
place, the landowner, conservation entity, and tribe could agree on co -management (in the MOU)
that protects both the habitat and cultural place.
03/01 /05 31
050
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part E
Open Space
Section X provides information for incorporating the protection of cultural places into the open
space element of the general plan.
X. Open Space for the Protection of Cultural Places
SB 18 amends Government Code §66560 to include open space for the protection of cultural
places as an allowable purpose of the open space element. Local governments may, but are not
required to, consider adopting open space policies regarding the protection of cultural places.
Local governments may wish to consider the following when and if they develop such policies:
• Limiting the types of land uses allowed in an open space designation in order to protect
the cultural place from potentially harmful uses.
• Facilitating access to tribes for maintenance and use of cultural places.
• Protecting the confidentiality of cultural places by not disclosing specific information
about their identity, location, character, or use.
• Giving developers incentives to protect cultural places through voluntary measures.
• Incorporating goals for protection of cultural places in open space that is also part of a
regional habitat conservation and protection program, for example, a local or regional
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) or Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP).
• Reviewing and conforming other elements of the general plan that deal with conservation
of natural and cultural resources to the open space element.
The development of open space policies for the protection of cultural places should be done in
consultation with culturally -affiliated tribes. It is important to note that the importance of
cultural places is not solely rooted in the land or other physical features or objects related to the
land on which the cultural place is located. The sense of "place" is often as important as any
physical or tangible characteristic. It may be important to a tribe to preserve a certain non-
material aspect of a cultural place, such as views or vantage points from or to the cultural place.
Cultural interpretation and importance of the place to the tribe should be taken into
consideration, in addition to the archaeological importance of the place. With this in mind. local
governments should be prepared to consider creative solutions for preservation and protection of
cultural places.
Neither Government Code §65560(b)(5) nor Government Code §65562.5 mandate local review
or revision of the existing open space element of the general plan to inventory and/or protect
cultural places. However, local governments should consider doing so in future updates of or
comprehensive revisions to the open space element.
32 0101105
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Part F
Additional Resources
XI. Additional Resources
In addition to the information provided in the 2005 Supplement to the General Plan Guidelines,
local governments may wish to investigate additional resources that can provide more detailled
information about Native American people, cultural places, tribal governments, consultation,
confidentiality, conservation easements, and other issues related to SB 18. Sources of additional
information include federal and state government agencies that have previous experience with
tribal consultations, colleges and universities, private organizations and foundations, and the
literature and web sites associated with these groups. Although it is not intended to be a
comprehensive list, some potentially useful resources are included below. These additional
resources are arranged alphabetically.
It is important that local governments keep in mind that Native American tribes are often the best
source of information concerning a cultural place's location and characteristics. Local
governments are encouraged to seek this information, if available, directly from the tribes
themselves.
Federal Agencies
Federal Highway Administration — AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials) Center for Environmental Excellence
The AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence provides a web site designed to provide
tools for Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation Act (NHPA) tribal consultation.
This site contains documents and links to web sites that address key aspects of tribal consultation
relevant to SB 18. Information also includes federal, tribal, and state policies and protocols, case
law, and best practices as implemented by federal and state agencies and tribes.
http://environment.transportation.org/environmental issues/tribal consultation/overview.htm
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has lasting and positive relations with many tribal
governments. The "Tribal Affairs and Initiatives" section of their web site provides information
regarding the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' approach to tribal consultation and preservation of
cultural resources.
http•//www usace army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwp/tribal/index.htm
USDA Forest Service
The Forest Service has extensive experience in consulting with Native American tribes. The
Forest Service's Forest Service National Resource Book on American Indian and Alaska Native
Relations is an excellent resource book on tribal beliefs and practices, tribal consultation, and
laws affecting Native Americans. The Forest Service's Report of the National Tribal Relations
03/01/05 33
h. n
U �'
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Program Implementation Team (June 2003) reviews relationships between the Forest Service
and tribes, identifying pervasive problems and concerns and making recommendations to
improve the effectiveness of the program at maintaining long-term collaborative relationships
with tribal governments.
USDA Forest Service
Regional Office of Tribal Relations
Sonia Tamez
1323 Club Drive
Vallejo, CA 95492
Phone: (707) 562-8919
www.r5.fs.fed.us
USDA National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service (ATTRA)
The ATTRA provides information and other technical assistance to farmers, ranchers, Extension
agents, educators, and others involved in sustainable agriculture in the United States. The
ATTRA publication, Conservation Easements, Resource Series (2003), provides an overview of
what holding and selling conservation easements entail.
ATTRA - National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service
PO Box 3657
Fayetteville, AR 72702
Phone: (800) 346-9140
Fax: (479) 442-9842
http://attra.ncat.or¢/
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS)
The mission of the NRCS is to address natural resource conservation on private lands. The web
site contains links to various conservation technical resources and to additional contact
information for area offices and service centers.
California NRCS State Office
430 G Street #4164
Davis, CA 95616-4164
Phone: (530) 792-5600
Fax: (530) 792-5610
http://wwNv.ca.nrcs.usda.gov
U.S. Department of Interior — Bureau of Indian Affairs
The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is responsible for the administration and management of
55.7 million acres of land held in trust by the United States for American Indians, Indian t6bes,
and Alaska Natives. Developing forestlands, leasing assets on these lands, directing agricultural
programs, protecting water and land rights, developing and maintaining infrastructure, and
economic development are all agency responsibilities. The BIA web site includes links to other
federal agencies, inter -tribal organizations, environmental organizations, and cultural resources.
34 03/01 /05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Phone: (202) 208-3710
http://www.doi.gov/bureau-indian-affairs.htmI
U.S. Department of Interior — Bureau of Land Management
The Bureau of Land Management manages 261 million acres of land and has staff whose duties
include coordination and consultation with Native Americans. The Bureau publishes Native
American Coordination and Consultation, Manual Section 8160 with Handbook H-8160-1. The
handbook is devoted to providing general guidance for tribal consultation, and can be found
online at: http://www.blm.gov/nhy/efoia/wo/handbook/h8l60-l.html.
Bureau of Land Management
California State Office
2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-1834
Sacramento, CA 95825-1886
Phone: (916) 978-4400
Phone: (916) 978-4416
TDD: (916) 978-4419
http://www.ca.bim.gov
U.S. Department of Interior- National Park Service
The following National Park Service web site specifically focuses on cultural resource
preservation. The site includes links to tools for cultural resource preservation, different areas of
cultural resource protection and different offices of the National Park Service that handle cultural
preservation issues. Included among these offices is the American Indian Liaison Office, the
web site of which contains a number of information resources that are potentially useful to local
governments learning how to consult with Native American tribes on land use policy.
http://www.er.nps.gov
U.S. Department of Interior — Office of Collaborative Action and Dispute Resolution
This web site provides links to federal agencies' policies on tribal consultation:
http://mits.doi.gov/cadr/main/G2GAgencyPolicies.cfm
State Agencies
California Department of Conservation
Division of Land Resource Protection (DLRP)
The DLRP works with landowners, local governments, and researchers to conserve productive
farmland and open spaces.
California Department of Conservation
Division of Land Resource Protection
801 K Street, MS 18-01
Sacramento, CA 95814-3528
Phone: (916) 324-0850
http://ww-,v.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/index.htm
03/01/05 35
C 5 14
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
California Department of Housing and Community Development
California Indian Assistance Program (CIAP)
The California Indian Assistance Program's primary role is to assist tribal governments with
obtaining and managing funds for community development and government enhancement.
CIAP's 2004 Field Directory of the California Indian Community is a good reference for
California Native American tribes, including location of Indian lands, federal recognition status
of tribes, history of laws affecting tribes, and other programs and agencies involved in tribal
relationships.
California Indian Assistance Program
1800 Third Street, Room 365
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone:(916) 445-4727
http://www.hcd.ca.j4ov/ca/ciap
California Department of Transportation (DOT)
Native American Liaison Branch
The California DOT administers most of its projects with some federal funding and is therefore
subject to Section 106 consultation requirements under NHPA. The department has a Native
American Liaison Branch (NALB), with headquarters in Sacramento and Native American
Liaisons in each of its twelve districts. The NALB web site contains policy statements and links
to other useful resources.
Office of Regional and Interagency Planning
Native American Liaison Branch
1120 N Street, NIS 32
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone:(916) 651-8195
Phone: (916) 654-2389
Fax: (916) 653-0001
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/orip/na/native american.htm
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
The NAHC is the state commission responsible for advocating preservation. and protection of
Native American human remains and cultural resources. NAHC maintains records concerning
places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans, including graves and!
cemeteries and other cultural places. The NAHC reviews CEQA documents to provide
recommendations to lead agencies about consulting with tribes to mitigate potential project
impacts to these sites.
The NAHC maintains a list of California tribes and the corresponding contacts that local
governments should use for the purpose of meeting SB 18 consultation requirements.
The NAHC web site also provides a number of links to information about federal and state laws,
local ordinances and codes, and cultural resources in relation to Native Americans.
36 03/01105
t-
�J
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Native American Heritage Commission
915 Capitol Mall, Room 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 653-4082
Fax: (916) 657-5390
http://www.nahc.ca-gov
California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP)
California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS)
Pursuant to state and federal law, the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP)
administers the California Historical Resources Information system (CHRIS). The CHRIS its
organized by county and managed by regional information centers (posted on the OHP web'site).
These CHRIS centers house records, reports, and other documents relating to cultural and
archaeological resources, and provide information and recommendations regarding such
resources on a fee -for -service basis.
The OHP also provides assistance to local governments to encourage direct participation in
historic preservation. OHP provides technical assistance to local governments including training
for local commissions and review boards, drafting of preservation plans and ordinances, and
developing archaeological and historical surveys.
Office of Historic Preservation
P.O. Box 942896
Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
Phone: (916) 653-6624
Fax: (916) 653-9824
http://www.ohp.t)arks.ca.pov
Colleges and Universities
Humboldt State University
The Center for Indian Community Development (CICD)
The CICD primarily focuses on Indian language education, but also acts in the capacity of a
liaison between Native American tribes and the community. The CICD includes a cultural
resource facility where information about Native American burial grounds and cultural resource
monitoring can be found. The CICD offers useful publications on tribal governments and
cultural approaches to environmental protection of Native American lands on its web site.
Humboldt State University
Center for Indian Community Development
41 Harpst Street
Arcata, CA 95521
Phone: (707) 826-3711
http://www.humboldt.edu/—cied/
03/01/05 37
56
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
University of California, Los Angeles
American Indian Studies Center (AISC)
The AISC has spent a number of years conducting research on issues affecting Native American
Indian communities. The center has sponsored conferences on issues including California tribes,
repatriation, federal recognition, and Indian gaming. The AISC offers a number of publications
on issues ranging from Contemporary Native American Issues and Native American Politics to
Native American Theater and Native American Literature.
UCLA
American Indian Studies Center
3220 Campbell Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1548
Phone:(310) 825-7315
Fax: (310) 206-7060
http://www.aisc.ucia.edu/
University of California, Los Angeles School of Law
Native Nations Law and Policy Center (NNLPC)
The mission of NNLPC at UCLA Law is to support Native nations throughout the United States,
with a special focus on California tribes, in developing their systems of governance and in
addressing critical public policy issues and to apply the resources of state -supported education
together with tribal expertise to address contemporary educational needs for California Tribes.
The Research and Publications division secures grants, carries out research, and sponsors
conferences and roundtables drawing together scholars, tribal leaders, and federal/state policy -
makers.
UCLA School of Law
P.O. Box 951476
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1476
Phone:(310) 825-4841
http•//www law ucia edu/students/academicproarams/nativenations/nnlapc.htm
Private Organizations and Foundations
American Farmland Trust (AFT)
Since its founding in 1980, the AFT has helped to achieve permanent protection for over a
million acres of American farmland. The AFT focuses its strategies on protecting land through
publicly funded agricultural conservation easement programs and encouraging conservation
practices in community planning and growth management.
American Farmland Trust
1200 18th Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 331-7300
Fax:(202) 659-8339
http://ww-vv.farmiand.org
38 03/01/05
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Inter -Tribal Council of California, Inc. (ITCC)
The key role of the Inter -Tribal Council of California (ITCC) is to assist in bridging relationships
between California tribal governments and other organizations, including local government
agencies. The ITCC offers workshops on Native American cultural proficiency and tribal
governments for the purpose of educating non -Native Americans on how to effectively
communicate with tribal governments, in addition to other training and technical assistance. The
ITCC is experienced in assisting the development of Memoranda of Understanding and
Agreement, protocols, and educational outreach materials.
Inter -Tribal Council of California, Inc.
2755 Cottage Way, Suite 14
Sacramento, CA 95825
Phone: (916) 973-9581
Fax: (916) 973-0117
Land Trust Alliance (LTA)
The Land Trust Alliance promotes voluntary land conservation by offering training, conferences,
literature, reports, and other information on land conservation. The LTA has several publications
discussing conservation techniques. Their web site addresses different conservation options for
landowners and includes questions and answers about conservation easements, land donation,
and bargain sale of land.
Land Trust Alliance
1331 H Street NW, Suite 400
Washington D.C. 20005-4734
Phone: (202) 638-4725
Fax: (202) 638-4730
http://www Ita.org/conserve/options.htm
Native American Land Conservancy
The Native American Land Conservancy is a nonprofit corporation formed for the conservation
and preservation of Native American sacred lands.
Native American Land Conservancy
Kurt Russo, Executive Director
PO Box 1829
Indio, CA 92202
Phone: (800) 6770-6252
03/01/05 fl r�839
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
The Nature Conservancy is a non-profit organization that works with communities, businesses,
and individuals to preserve lands with natural and cultural resources.
The Nature Conservancy
4245 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 100
Arlington, VA 22203-1606
http://nature.org/
Southern California Tribal Chairmen's Association (SCTCA)
The Southern California Tribal Chairmen's Association (SCTCA) is a multi -service non-profit
corporation established in 1972 for a consortium of 19 Federally recognized Indian tribes in
Southern California. The Primary goals and objectives of SCTCA are the health, welfare, safety,
education, culture, economic and employment opportunities for its tribal members. A board of
directors comprised of tribal chairpersons from each of its member tribes governs SCTCA.
Southern California Tribal Chairmen's Association
Denis Turner
Executive Director
Phone: (760) 742-8600 x100
http://www.sctca.net/
Trust for Public Land (TPL)
The Trust for Public Land (TPL) is a national, nonprofit, land conservation organization that
conserves land for people to enjoy as parks, community gardens, historic sites, rural lands, and
other natural places, ensuring livable communities for generations to come. Since 1972, TPL has
worked with willing landowners, community groups, and national, state, and local agencies to
complete more than 2,700 land conservation projects in 46 states, protecting nearly 2 million
acres.
Trust for Public Land National Office
116 New Montgomery St., 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 495-4014
Fax:(415) 495-4103
htty://www.tpl.org
40 � 03/01/05
d059
2005 Supplement to General Plan Guidelines
Exhibit A: Sample Request to the NAHC for Tribal Contact Information
4" • .,4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT -`�
_ `II ' TRIBAL CONSULTATION LIST REQUEST
b,»`'' '•,° NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916)653-4082
f9161657-5390 - Fax
Project Title:
Local GovemmenVLead Agency:
Street Address:
City: Zip:
Specific Area Subject to Proposed Action
County:
Local Action Type:
_ General Plan
_General Plan Amendment
Pre -planning Outreach Activity
Project Description:
NAHC Use Only
Date Received:
Date Completed
City/Community:
General Plan Element
_ Specific Plan Amendment
II, 'IL 4D
Contact Person:
Phone:
Fax:
Specific Plan
Native American Tribal Consultation lists are only applicable for consulting with California Native American tribes per
Government Code Section 65352.3.
03/01/05
41
()6 0