10-2060 Annual Achievements Report for Certified Local Governments

NPS Form 10-2060 (Rev. 11/2020)
National Park Service

OMB Control Number 1024-0038
Expiration Date: xx/xx/xxxx

National Park Service
Heritage Preservation Assistance Programs
State, Tribal, and Local Plans & Grants Division

National Park Service Annual Products Report for CLGs
LOCAL GOVERNMENT NAME: _______________
STATE: _____________________
PERSON WHO CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS
ABOUT RESPONSES TO THIS FORM:_______________ TELEPHONE: ________________
FEDERAL
FISCAL YEAR:

E-MAIL: __________________
(October 1,

-September 30, )

Please read "Guidance for Completing the National Park Service Annual Products Report for CLGs". This
guidance defines terms, explains what to count, answers frequently-asked questions, etc.; e.g., what is the difference
between "CLG Inventory" and "Local Register"?

1. CLG Inventory Program
During the reporting period, how many historic properties did your local government add
to your CLG inventory?
_______

2. Local Landmarks and/or Historic Districts (a.k.a.. Local Register) Program
a. During the reporting period, did your local government have the legal authority to create/amend local
landmarks/local historic districts (or a similar list of designations created by local law)? Yes
No
b.

If the answer to question 2a is "No," please leave question 2b's blank empty and proceed to question 3a. If the
answer is "Yes," during the reporting period, how many historic properties (i.e., contributing properties) in local
historic districts/landmarks did your local government add to your local register (or similar list created by local
law)?
_________

3. Local Tax Incentives Program
a. During the reporting period, did your community have a tax incentives program/process
under local law that could be used to benefit (directly or indirectly) historic properties?
Yes
No
b. If the answer to question 3a is "No," please leave question 3b's blank empty and proceed to question 4a. If the
answer is "Yes," during the reporting period, how many historic properties did your local government assist
through the local tax incentives program?

(Continued on next page)

LOCAL GOVERNMENT NAME:

STATE:

(Annual Report -- Continued from the previous page)
4. Local "Bricks and Mortar" Grants/Loans Program
a. During the reporting period, did your community have a local government-funded grants/loans program that
could be used for rehabilitating/restoring/preserving historic properties?
Yes No
b. If the answer to question 4a is "No," please leave question 4b's blank empty and proceed to question 5a. If the
answer is "Yes," during the reporting period, how many historic properties did your local government assist
through your local government's program?
________

5. Local Design Review/Regulatory Compliance Program
a. During the reporting period, did your local government have a historic preservation regulatory law(s) (e.g.,
an ordinance requiring Commission/staff review of l) local government activities and/or 2) changes to, or
impacts on, properties within a historic district)?
Yes
No
b. If the answer to question 5a is "No," please leave question 5b's blank empty and proceed to question 6a. If the
answer is "Yes," during the reporting period, how many historic properties did your \local government
review for compliance with your local government's historic preservation regulatory law(s)?

6. Local Property Acquisition Program
a. During the reporting period, aside from eminent domain, did your local government have a program that could
be used to acquire (and/or help others to acquire) historic properties in whole or in part through purchase,
donation, or other means?
Yes
No

b. If the answer to question 6a is "No," please leave question 6b's blank empty. You have finished the Annual
Report. If the answer is "Yes," during the reporting period, how many historic properties did your local
government acquire (and/or help others to acquire) in whole or in part through purchase, donation, or other
means?

Notes/Comments:

Thank you for filling out this form. For maximum benefit, please send it, no later than
State, Tribal, and Local Plans & Grants Division Attention: John Renaud
Preservation Assistance Programs
National Park Service
1201 Eye Street NW (Organization Code 2256),
Washington, DC 20005

to:

Because of its long-term uses, it will never be too late to provide this report's information. For information
collection burden language, see the guidance for completing the report.

NOTICES
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 300101 et. seq., the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR 61, Procedures for State,
Tribal, and Local Government Historic Preservation Programs.
Purpose: The National Park Service collects this information as part of the process for reviewing the procedures and
programs of State, Tribal, and Local governments participating in the National Historic Preservation Program and the
Historic Preservation Fund grant program.
Routine Uses: The information collected will be used to evaluate programs and procedures for consistency with the
National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, (54 U.S.C. 300101 et. seq.) and compliance with government-wide
grant requirements.
Disclosure: Your response is required to obtain or retain a benefit under these programs. Failure to provide the
information requested may impede the processing of your form.
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT
We are collecting this information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501) to provide Historic
Preservation Program managers the information needed to administer program participation and grant management. All
applicable parts of the form must be completed in order for your request to be considered. You are not required to
respond to this or any other Federal agency-sponsored information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. OMB has approved this collection of information and assigned Control No. 1024-0038).
ESTIMATED BURDEN STATEMENT
The public reporting burden for the collection of this information is estimated to average 2 hours per response, including
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other
aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information Collection
Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 112201 Sunrise Valley Drive Reston, Virginia 20192; or by email to
phadrea_ponds@nps.gov.. Do not send your completed form to this address.

NPS Form 10-2060 (Rev. 11/2020)
National Park Service

OMB Control Number 1024-0038
Expiration Date: xx/xx/xxxx

National Park Service
Heritage Preservation Assistance Programs
State, Tribal, and Local Plans & Grants Division

GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING
THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ANNUAL PRODUCTS REPORT FOR
CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (CLGs)
1.

What is the purpose of this report?
The report data that you provide each year contribute to documenting those achievements of the national
historic preservation partnership that CLGs accomplish. The data that we request all relate to key program
elements for every CLG; i.e., the designation and protection of historic and prehistoric properties. Except for
the CLG inventory (which is a Federal requirement), this report focuses on CLG accomplishments under
local laws and programs. We have information from other sources concerning CLG contributions to historic
preservation under Federal and State law and programs. This report's data provide critical information and
documentation for the Administration's and the Congress' budgetary decision-making process. For your use
and perusal, we will post report results on our web site (http://www.nps.gov/clg -- click on the "Find a CLG
(CLG Database)" button on the right hand column). For data entered on-line by the State CLG Coordinator,
the posting should be instantaneous once the system is fully updated for the current year. In this way, we can
share information about your program and achievements with your colleagues and with the public. We also
expect that this information will be useful to you and to your colleagues in your State Historic Preservation
Office. This information can be helpful in explaining to your local and State government decision-makers
what your program has accomplished for historic preservation during the year. We are seeking this
information because it is not available anywhere else on a national basis.

2.

In the categories that you ask about, we have done nothing (or very little). Do you want us to
send you a report with such low numbers?
Your report is valuable to us no matter how little you have to report. The Annual Report only asks six
questions seeking numbers. Many CLGs respond to the questions by answering "0" or "1 " because 1) one of
their programs is just getting started, 2) they had other historic preservation priorities for that reporting year,
3) the level of public demand was low for the program, 4) there was not much left to do in that program area,
or 5) because of a myriad of other reasons. We make no judgments of the quality of your historic preservation
program based upon the numbers that you supply in your annual reports. Don't worry about not having much
to report for a given year. We think that it is a big deal for any local government to commit in writing to
historic preservation by enforcing appropriate laws for the designation and protection of historic and
prehistoric properties. We recognize that the categories that we ask about do not cover all of the CLG's
activities.
Small CLGs with not much action in the categories that the National Park Service asks about are just as
important as big CLGs with a lot of action. Each year, approximately 900 (out of almost 1,900) CLGs
respond to the annual report. We then extrapolate the figures from the reporting CLGs to produce national
estimates for all CLGs. Thus, the more CLGs that report, the more accurate the projections will be. Given
that there are more small CLGs than big ones, it is important that as many small CLGs as possible report;
otherwise our national projections will be too high.
Finally, it is useful to know which kinds of historic preservation programs your community has the legal
authority to carry out. This helps NPS to describe the national CLG program as a whole.

3. We only just became a CLG. Do you still want us to send you a report?

1

If your local government only recently became a CLG, there are a number of factors that should go into making
your decision of whether or not to complete a report. If your local government became a CLG prior to
September 1st, please prepare a report. If your local government became a CLG during September and you have
accomplishments to report, please prepare a report. If your local government became a CLG during September
and you have no accomplishments to report, it is up to you/your State CLG Coordinator as to whether you
should prepare a report. If your local government became a CLG after the reporting period, there is no need for
you to prepare a report.
4.

Who can use the on-line data entry option for submitting this report?
Right now, other than National Park Service staff, only each State's CLG Program Coordinator has the option
of using the on-line data entry option for this reporting. We will reexamine this policy within the next few
years. There is a data security issue at play. With NPS' limited staffing available for this purpose, it is a lot
easier to assign and administer passwords for 50 State CLG Coordinators than it would be to handle
passwords for more than 1,900 CLGs. As the technology gets better and we gain more experience with the
use of the system, we will reexamine the issue of on-line data entry. Any State CLG Coordinator or official
CLG contact can use the Google forms option because that information does not go automatically into our
secure database.

5.

The on-line form has a different appearance than the hard-copy form which looks different than
the Google Forms version. Why is that?
Most of the differences are due to creating an on-line data entry option and how that system works. A hard
copy or e-mail version of the form needs instructions on where to send the completed form; guidance that is
clearly not needed for the on-line version or the Google forms version. The fringe benefit of these revisions
is that a CLG no longer needs to send in a new multi-year cumulative Baseline Questionnaire merely to
report a change in its local government historic preservation-related program area offerings. To preserve the
ability to add a narrative note, on all versions of the form we have included a notes/comments box. For
similar structural reasons, the Google forms version looks different than the other versions.

6. Do we have to use the form that NPS has provided?
For the on-line version and the Google forms version of the form, the answer is "Yes." For the hard copy or
e-mailed version of the form, the answer is "No." We care more about the content of the data that you provide
than we care about the format in which you provide it or the medium by which you transmit it to us. As long
as NPS can clearly tell which data relate to which question on the form and you provide information
corresponding to every blank on the form, we are satisfied. E-mail messages, spread sheets, State report pages,
etc. are all acceptable.
If you do choose to report to NPS using a different format, please be explicit about which parts of your format
(e.g., in your State-required report) match with each of the NPS form's questions. Also, please ensure that the
guidance for completing the alternative form is consistent with the guidance in this document.

7. What definitions or special instructions do I need to know to properly complete this report?
"Designation" as used in this document means that the local government has officially identified the property
as historic. Most CLGs have two levels of designation. That is, one level of designation is an evaluation of
significance that carries no consequences. CLGs often refer to this as "the inventory" or "the survey." The
other level of designation carries consequences such as eligibility for benefits or some level of
protection/restriction such as being subject to design review for proposed changes. CLGs often refer to this
second level of designation as "the local register," "the landmarks list," "local historic districts," etc.
The "Federal fiscal year" begins on October I and ends the following September 30. For example, Federal
Fiscal Year 2014 began on October l, 2013, and ended on September 30, 2014.

2

"Historic Property" means a property that, regardless of government action (i.e., whether it is listed or not),
meets the eligibility criteria l) for creating a local landmark and/or local historic district (a.k.a., "Local Register")
or 2) for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. A historic property can include archeological as well
as above-ground resources. Other properties are outside the purview of this
questionnaire. In some
communities, this term is equivalent to "historic resource," "historic landmark," or some other similar term.
Notes, Paradoxes, and Anomalies. If you wish to, please feel free to use the "Notes/Comments" section to
explain your answers, paradoxes, or anomalies. For example, it would be very unusual for a CLG to have a design
review program or a local tax incentives program or a "bricks and mortar" local grants/loans program without also
having the legal authority to create/amend a local landmark/local historic district. In most
communities, a
local designation is a prerequisite for a historic property to be eligible for/subject to the other local programs.
Similarly, it would be very unusual for a CLG's accomplishments to produce identical, large numbers as the
answer to multiple questions. Finally, if a very large number is the answer to a question, it would be a good
idea to explain the accomplishment in the "Notes/Comments" section. Thus, NPS will feel confident that the
large number is not a typo and, more importantly, such information might merit explicit mention in a
State/NPS narrative report. Also, feel free to use the "Notes/Comments" section to identify noteworthy
accomplishments even if they are not large.
Number Blanks — Numbers Only. For the "how many properties" questions, do not use a check, an "X", or
words such as "same as last year, several," or "unknown." If your local government offered the program
during the reporting period, please insert "0" if the subject matter applies, but there was no activity during the
last completed Federal fiscal year. If you are not sure what the correct answer is, please make your best
estimate.
Number Blanks — When to Complete/Relationship to "Yes" and "No" Boxes. For questions 2b, 3b, 4b,
5b, and 6b, if the subject matter does not apply to your local government's historic preservation
programs/legal authorities/processes (i.e., you answered "No" to the "did you have the program" question),
leave the related "historic properties" question's blank empty. For example, you should leave the blank empty
for question 3b if your government did not have a local government tax incentives program that could benefit
historic properties and thus you answered "No" for question 3a.
Generally, for every local program question for which you entered a "No" in question 2a, 3a, 4a, 5a, or 6a, we
would expect to see an empty blank in question 2b, 3b, 4b, 5b, or 6b. Conversely, if you entered a "Yes" for
any "did you have a program" question, we would expect to see a number in the corresponding "how many
properties" question.
"Program" means the legal authorization/authority (created by legislation or by administrative action) to
conduct a series of activities. As long as the authorization/authority exists, the program exists regardless of
whether or not the authorization/authority has been exercised during the reporting period. A good example in
many communities is the authority to create/amend historic districts. Often, the legal authority to create/amend
local historic districts exists but has not been used in a number of years.
"Protection" as used in this document means that because of government action, a historic property retains
those elements that make the property historic.
"Yes" and "No" Boxes. For questions 2a, 3a, 4a, 5a, and 6a, please mark or circle the "Yes" or "No" box as
appropriate. If the program existed at any time during the reporting period, please answer "Yes," even if the
program no longer existed by September 30th. If you are not sure what to answer, please consult your State
CLG Coordinator.

8.

We don't use the same terminology that appears on the form and in this guidance. Do we have
to change how we refer to things?
That decision is between you and your State Historic Preservation Office. A national report needs to use
national terms that follow Federal statutes and policy. For your own purposes, you should use terms that

3

make sense to you. All we ask is that you know how your terms relate to the national terms because we
won't understand the relationship. Therefore, for this report please make the conversion from your
terminology to the national terminology.

9.

The fiscal year in my State and community does not match the Federal Fiscal Year. What should
I do in preparing this report?
Our first preference is that you convert your fiscal year's results to the Federal fiscal year. This is because we
are preparing a report for Federal decision makers about accomplishments during a given fiscal year.
If our first preference is not readily achievable for you, please pro-rate/estimate your fiscal year's results for
conversion to the Federal fiscal year. An estimate of what was accomplished during the Federal fiscal year is
better than no response at all. For example, if your government's Fiscal Year 2014 began on July 1, 2013,
and ended on June 30, 2014, your results converted to the Federal FY 2014 would be a combination of nine
month's (or 75 percent) of you State's FY 2014 results plus three months (or 25 percent) of your State's FY
2015 results. If your FY 2015 (in this example) is not yet over when you prepare this report, make an
estimate now and send us an update later if needed.
If neither our first not our second preferences are readily achievable for you, provide the results in accordance
with your fiscal year. We would rather have data that is partially from the wrong fiscal year than have no
response at all.

10. How do I report on historic properties whose protection is not carried out or monitored by my
office/ the Commission?
You don't have to. For the purposes of this inquiry, report only those historic properties whose designation or
protection has involved your local government's historic preservation office/commission in some way;
e.g., through review, approval, project administration, covenant or easement oversight, etc. or for which your
office has the data.

1l. We don't have anything called a "local inventory" or a "local register." but we do have other
lists and overlay zones that indicate historic properties. Should I count those? Should I include
local government-owned properties?
Yes, as long as you can count the number of historic properties that those lists or overlays, include. Don't
worry about the titles given to the information that you have about historic properties. Use the guidance in the
answer to question 13 (below) to help you determine where in the report to include the number of historic
properties. In some cases, you should report the number in both the blanks for question I and question 2b and
in some cases just in the blank for question 1 about CLG inventories.
With' regard to local government-owned properties, you should count them in the answer to question 2b only
if they are subject to local government historic preservation laws/policies. For the purposes of this report,
ownership of the property does not matter.

12. Is there a relationship between the local landmarks/local historic districts questions and the
other questions in this report?
Yes. If your CLG has a design review program, a local tax incentives program, and/or a local "bricks and
mortar" grants/loans program, it most likely also has the legal authority to create/modify local historic
districts/landmarks, even if no local designation has taken place for a while. This relationship is due to the
fact that most communities have a mechanism through which historic properties are made eligible for local
benefits and/or made subject to local restrictions.
In most situations, you can think of historic properties that are on your list of local landmarks/historic
districts as a subset of the historic properties that are included in your CLG inventory. Because of the
consequences under local law that often attend being added to a list of local landmarks/historic districts, in

4

the multi-year, cumulative baseline context, a CLG will always have at least as many historic properties in its
CLG inventory than it has on its list of local landmarks/historic districts. The annual additions to each will
vary.

13. What is the difference between a "CLG inventory" and list of local landmarks/historic districts
(a.k.a. "local register")?
As a CLG, under Federal law, you already have a CLG inventory, but you might not have locally-created
local landmarks/historic districts which we will refer to collectively as a "local register." You have a "local
register" only if your State's CLG procedures require it and/or your local government has created a
registration/designation process under local law. Your community may have given your local register some
other name that means a list of locally-registered historic properties. Another way of putting it is that your
"local register" is the sum of all contributing properties in all of your local landmarks and in all of your local
historic districts.
A CLG inventory encompasses everything that you know about the resources within the jurisdiction of the
local government regardless of how you got the information. It doesn't matter, for example, if the inventory
information was gathered as a part of a State or federally-funded survey. For question 1, we are interested in
the number of CLG inventory properties that are historic properties. Under Federal law, there are no legal
consequences when you add property to your CLG inventory. Your local register (or whatever name you give
it), on the other hand, usually has consequences under local law. In fact, if your State's CLG procedures
require a local registration/designation ordinance, there must be consequences under local law for properties
newly added to the local register. Usually, when a historic property is added to a local register, the property
becomes subject to some kind of review process and/or becomes eligible for some kind of local benefits. In
other words, every historic property that is on the local register is also on the CLG inventory, but not every
historic property on the CLG inventory is on the local register.
If your local government has the legal authority to create/amend local landmarks/local historic districts, answer
"Yes" to question 2a even if that authority wasn't exercised during the reporting year.

14. How should I count local historic districts?
Do not count a district as a single property. Count the total number of buildings, structures, sites, or objects
that contribute to the significance of the district. If you do not know the number of contributing properties,
please provide your best estimate of the number. NPS takes this position because historic preservation
decisions tend to affect individual properties within a district rather than the district as a whole.

15. Last year. due to demolition (or other reasons). we had to remove some properties from our
CLG inventory and/or our list of local landmarks/historic districts (a.k.a. "local register"). Do
you want us to adjust our annual figures for the CLG inventory and local register to reflect
those losses?
No. Just report the number of historic properties newly added to your CLG inventory and/or local register.
We don't want to have your successes obscured by your losses. However, if you have readily available an
estimate of the number of properties removed during the reporting year; please give us that information in the
notes/comments section. In such a situation, it would also be helpful to provide updated multi-year
cumulative baseline figures in the following year. For example, the impact of properties demolished during
FY 2014 would be reflected in adjusted multi-year cumulative baseline figures in the FY 2014 cumulative
Baseline Questionnaire.

16. For some of our local programs. the main purpose is not historic preservation. but the programs
protect historic properties as an incidental consequence. Housing programs are a good example.
Should I count historic properties that are protected by those programs?
Yes. As long as historic properties are protected and your office is involved or has the data, count the programs
and the historic properties that they protect.

5

17. Some historic properties are protected more than once (e.g.. tax benefits achieved and permits
reviewed). Should I count a property only once or each time that it is reviewed. receives a grant.
etc.?
Count a property each time that it is reviewed, receives a grant, etc. during the reporting year. This approach
gives you credit for all the protection that you give to a historic property, not just the initial instance. Note that
for this reporting you do not have to know or provide a list of what happened to each historic property. What
you need to know for this report are total figures for each category; i.e., the total number of properties listed,
receiving tax benefits, etc.

18. There are some State laws that require local government legislative action (e.g. passing an
ordinance) for the law to go into effect. This sometimes occurs with regard to Tax Incentives
and sometimes with regard other programs. Would this situation count as a local program for
the purposes of this report?
It depends. See the analysis below.
The Situation. There is a State law that provides direct and/or indirect protection to historic properties. The
State law a) rewards historic property owners for the historic significance of their properties, b) helps them to
correct problems threatening the properties' significance, and/or c) requires the owners to maintain the
properties for a specified period of time. The State law requires some degree of local government participation
to implement the State legal authority. The State law might also require/authorize some level of participation
by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to implement the law.
The Question, The National Park Service (NPS) asks States to report on accomplishments under State law and
asks Certified Local Governments (CLGs) (either directly or through the SHPO) to report on accomplishments
under local law. Should a State law/program that requires local action for the protection of historic properties
be reported in the State Report, the CLG Report, or both?
Purposes and Principles. Some of the purposes for and principles behind the State and CLG reports will help
answer the question.
a. Both the State and the CLG reports are designed to help measure the success of the national historic
preservation partnership. As official partners, both States and CLGs carry out historic preservation
activities that are not paid for by Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) and matching funds. We want to give
full credit to the historic preservation work that our partners do and avoid (where possible) the
underreporting of accomplishments.
b. The partnership work carried out outside of the HPF grant program is not reported on a national basis
anywhere else. Therefore, the answer to the question must be one that does not lose the ability to get credit
for the protection made possible by such a hybrid State law.
c. NPS asks only for information that is (or should be) readily available. No record-keeping should be done
solely for the purposes of these two NPS reports.
d. Although the unit of measure for both the State and the CLG reports is the number of historic properties,
what we are really counting is the number of times a historic property is protected. For example, if during
the reporting period a historic property both is awarded a Certificate of Appropriateness and a local tax
incentive, that situation counts as "two" (one in the Design Review category and one in the local tax
incentives category). Thus, if the answer to the question is to count the properties protected in both the
State and CLG reports that would not be double counting.
e. Often in historic preservation, there is not a clear division of responsibility for the result of an owner of a
historic property receiving a local benefit/protection under a State authorization/mandate. For example, to
obtain a local protection, a sign-off on eligibility could be required from both the SHPO and the CLG
Commission.

6

f.

Nationwide (and sometime within a single State) there can be a great deal of variability in the role of the
State and the local historic preservation offices in the implementation of such a State hybrid law. It would
be overly cumbersome and nearly impossible for NPS to try to describe and provide an answer to every
possible fact pattern. Consequently, it makes sense to provide the range of possible answers and the criteria
that should be applied in arriving at the appropriate answer for the particular situation.

The Answer. In the case of a hybrid law -- that is, a State law requiring some measure of local government
participation to confer a historic preservation benefit -- depending upon the situation, it could be appropriate to
report the resultant number of historic properties protected just in the CLG Report, just in the State Report, or
in both reports. Apply the criteria below to help determine the appropriate response in a given situation.
The Criteria.
l) Whose tax coffers are affected? For example, in a tax incentive situation, if the owner of a historic property
receives only a local tax benefit, then it could be appropriate to report the protection in the CLG report.

2) Does the local government have any options in whether or not (or how) to take advantage of the State law?
For example, if local government participation is mandatory and thus is acting solely as an agent of the
State government, it could be reasonable to treat the program as a State program.

3) Which level of government is best able to keep track of the number of historic properties that take advantage
of the property tax incentive? If only the SHPO or only the CLG has easy access to the information, that is
where the program should be reported. One of the principles behind the NPS reports is that we are asking
only for information that is (or should be) readily available. No record-keeping should be done solely for
the purposes of these two NPS reports. The flip side of this criterion is that SHPO and/or CLG possession
of the data is a good rationale to include the data in the State and/or CLG Report. We don't want to miss
out on the data altogether.

4) Which level of government has to review the application to determine the property's eligibility to take
advantage of the historic preservation benefit? A reasonable argument could be made that whichever level
of government's historic preservation office makes the final decision regarding a historic property's
eligibility for the benefit should get credit for the protection. On the other hand, if both the State and CLG
historic preservation bodies are involved in the process, an equally good argument could be made that the
final protection/benefit would not take place without the participation of both the State and the CLG and
therefore the number of historic properties protected should be reported in both the State and the CLG
reports.

5) Other criteria? Depending upon the particular situation, there may be other criteria that would aid in the
decision of whether to report the number of historic properties protected in the State Report, the CLG
Report, or both.

6) How does your State CLG Program Coordinator recommend solving this issue? Please check with her/him.
Within every State, similar program questions should be resolved in a parallel fashion.

19. Our historic preservation financial assistance programs (grants. loans. etc.) are not funded every
year. Should I report that we have a program. or not?
It is helpful to think of this question in terms of legal authorization for funding being separate from the actual
provision of funds.
Answer "Yes" to question 4a and report on the number of properties in the "grants/loans" blank (question 4b),
if the ordinance authorizing the financial assistance was still in effect during some portion of the reporting
year. If the authorizing ordinance was not in effect at all during the reporting year, and your local government
requires an authorizing statute for grant programs, answer "No" to question 4a and leave question 4b's blank
empty.

7

If no authorizing ordinance was involved in the financial assistance program, answer "Yes" to question 4a and
fill question 4b's blank with the number of newly protected properties if the financial assistance program was
in effect during the reporting year. Otherwise, answer "No" to question 4a and leave the blank empty for
question 4b.
For the purposes of the local historic preservation grant or loan blank, count a historic property if rehabilitation,
restoration, preservation, etc. work (a.k.a. "bricks and mortar") is involved. Report elsewhere (e.g., under
Acquisition) those properties that your local grants or loans assisted in other ways (e.g., to help a nonprofit
organization purchase a preservation easement).

20.

We administer some grants from the State and the staff of the State Historic Preservation Office
helps us with some of our locally-funded programs. Similarly. in some Federal financial
assistance programs. the Federal funds are legally transformed into local funds. How should I
treat these situations in responding to question 4 on grants and loans?
Count only historic properties protected through grants supported by funds coming from local government
sources. Do not count: 1) grants from Federal (or matching) funds administered by State or local agencies or
2) State government grants. For example, don't count historic properties that you protect through Historic
Preservation Fund CLG subgrants. These are counted elsewhere on State or Federal Government forms.
However, if the funds are local, count the benefiting historic properties in this report even if you receive
technical assistance from other sources. See question 13 above for additional guidance in related situations.
Similarly, count in this report those few Federal (or State) programs that award funds to local governments and
for which, as a matter of Federal (or State) law, those funds legally become transformed from Federal (or State)
to local funds. This is a rare situation. The best known Federal example is the Community Development Block
Grant program.

21.

Many of the historic preservation accomplishments in our community are achieved through the
financial support of the private sector or through non-profit organizations such as the National
Main Street program. Should we include these achievements in our reporting on the number of
historic properties that we protect through grants or loans?
No. Although we recognize that a large percentage of current historic preservation would not take place
without the financial support of non-profit organizations and the private sector, this report is focusing on the
achievements of local government historic preservation programs. However, action by one of these
organizations does not prevent the counting of a property/protection if it simultaneously receives a local
government benefit. One example would be a simultaneous Main Street and local historic district designation.

22.

What should I count in the "Local Design Review/Regulatory Compliance Program" blanks?
What does "review and compliance" mean?
For the purposes of the "Local Design Review/Regulatory Compliance Program" blanks, include only those
activities for which local laws have provided protection in a regulatory setting; e.g., through a review,
permitting, or certificate of appropriateness process. This type of program is often referred to as "review and
compliance." "Review and compliance" refers to the review of permits, plans, applications, etc. to help ensure
compliance with local regulatory laws related to the protection of historic properties. In many communities,
there is a review of proposed changes to locally-designated landmarks and properties within locallydesignated historic districts. In some communities, the CLG Commission also reviews local government
activities that might have an effect on historic properties. This is sometimes called a "local Section 106" after
the parallel provision (for Federal agency undertakings) in the National Historic Preservation Act.
Do not count (in these blanks) historic properties that local laws have protected through financial incentives
(e.g., tax laws) or financial assistance (e.g., bricks and mortar grant programs). Report that information
elsewhere in the report.

8

23.

Sometimes
we
review/approve
requests
for
demolition
or
make
other
decisions/recommendations that do not result in the protection of properties. These reviews are
a legitimate part of our workload. Should we count these for question 5b?
No. If it is easy for you to separate out those reviews/recommendations that are likely to result in a historic
property's destruction or loss of significance, don't include them in this report. We are trying to get an estimate
of the number of historic property reviews where preservation is a likely result. If it is difficult to separate
your regulatory reviews by result, don't worry -- just give us the total figures.

24.

What does "Acquisition" include? What about eminent domain? Doesn't every general-purpose
unit of government have this power?
"Acquisition' refers to any legally-binding, title-related interest in the historic property that the local
government has obtained (or has helped others to obtain) thereby making the property subject to your local
historic preservation laws and policies. The interest in the property's title could be anything ranging from fee
simple absolute (i.e., complete title) to an easement (e.g., facade or preservation easements). With the exception
of eminent domain, the method of acquisition is not important here.
Do not consider eminent domain in your answer to question 6a. Because every general-purpose local
government (with very few exceptions) has the power of eminent domain, to include it in answering question
6a would obscure the presence or absence of other kinds of acquisition programs. For answering question 6b,
include in your count any historic property that has come into local government ownership (even through
eminent domain) as long as local government ownership made the historic property subject to local government
historic preservation laws/policies.

25.

Where do I report on publications, brochures, public education, site interpretation, historic
preservation plans, historic plaques and markers, and other historic preservation
accomplishments?
These are not part of this report. While important, for purposes of this report we have limited the products to
those that more directly affect individual historic properties. This reduces the burden in gathering and reporting
this data. However, you may include your other accomplishments as part of your periodic reporting to your
State Historic Preservation Office (in some States this is required) or, if you wish, report directly to us by the
use of the "Notes/Comments" section.

26.

Why do you have separate questions for the number of "designated" and "protected" historic
properties throughout this report? Why not just ask for the number of properties in our CLG
inventory? In that way. with one question. you could account for all historic properties that
have been designated and protected. All of our locally "listed" properties are included on our
CLG inventory. All of our properties that have been "protected" in one way or another are also
"designated" properties.
Reporting separately on "designated" historic properties and "protected" properties better represents the
historic preservation work that you do. Each time the local government designates a property or (for example)
provides financial assistance to a property, that action adds to the protection inherent in being part of your
CLG inventory. We wish to give you full credit.
Also, this is the kind of information that citizens in your CLG and your colleagues in other CLGs or local
governments want to know. Folks living in a CLG or thinking about moving there may want to know what
kinds of historic preservation opportunities exist. Communities that are considering creating new historic
preservation programs/legal authorities want to know who else has the programs so those wheels don't have
to be re-invented.

27.

The questions that you ask relate primarily to CLG workload. Wouldn't it be better to ask how
many of our historic properties are still in good condition? In the final analysis. preserving our
irreplaceable resources is the true test of our success as historic preservationists.

9

If funding and staffing were no object, we would want both workload information and data on the condition
of historic resources. One of the aims of this report is to make use of readily available information rather than
to create a new workload in gathering and tracking data. Especially for larger CLGs, data on the condition of
historic and prehistoric properties often are not readily available. Another purpose of this report is to gauge
the contribution that CLGs make to historic preservation. In assessing a property's condition, without asking
the property owner it is difficult to distinguish which parts (if any) of a property's good condition are due to
local, State, and/or Federal historic preservation program efforts. CLG workload data on the other hand
usually are readily available, readily assignable to CLG efforts, and can be used to draw reasonable
inferences about the condition of historic properties.

28.

What should I do if my office missed a report or we discover that we made a mistake in an
earlier report?
Because of the long-term uses for this information, it will never be too late to provide this report's
information. We hope that you take advantage of opportunities to update the information that we have about
your program. You have a choice as to how to accomplish this. You may either provide/correct the earlier
report or you may prepare a new multi-year cumulative Baseline Questionnaire response for a more recent
year. For example, if your local government became a CLG during FY 2010 but your office has not
responded to any of the subsequent requests for information as of the end of FY 2014, you would have had
the following options. Your first option would have been to prepare and send us a FY 2010 multi-year
cumulative Baseline Questionnaire response plus an annual report for FY 2011, FY 2012, FY 2013, and FY
2014. You could have used the current year's forms by changing the fiscal year. Your second option would
have been to provide questionnaire answers and multi-year cumulative baseline data through FY 2013 plus a
FY 2014 annual report. Other combinations of baseline questionnaires and annual reports are also possible.
o rs

10