Society for California Archaeology

Directions Website Contact the organization

Society for California Archaeology Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Society for California Archaeology, Nonprofit Organization, P. O. Box 2582, Granite Bay, CA.

The Society for California Archaeology is a nonprofit scientific and educational organization dedicated to research, understanding, interpretation and conservation of the heritage of California and the regions that surround and pertain to it.

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (BAAJA) proposes significant changes to the National Environm...
10/30/2026

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (BAAJA) proposes significant changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). With the full U.S. Senate scheduled to hold a critical vote on the bill on November 9, 2026, it is vital for California's environmental professionals to closely evaluate these shifting federal frameworks.
In response to these sweeping changes, the Society for California Archaeology (SCA) is getting the message out, ensuring the broader environmental and cultural resources community has the tools to let their voices be heard. While BAAJA has a laudable goal of streamlining the federal review process for major federal actions subject to NEPA, the approach advocated by the bill appears to circumvent the intended goal of NEPA to ensure federal agencies evaluate and consider the environmental impacts of their proposed actions before making final decisions. More specifically NEPA requires “federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their planning processes by studying potential consequences and alternatives.” It is vitally important that the collective knowledge and experience of the over 155,000 practicing environmental professionals in the United States be considered in relation to the bill.

Key provisions under consideration include:

• Narrower Scope of Environmental Review: Limits which projects qualify as a “major federal action” subject to NEPA, narrows what triggers historic preservation reviews under Section 106, reduces the analysis of environmental effects and alternatives, thus potentially limiting or avoiding federal review and resulting in the permanent loss of physical objects, buildings, structures, sites, districts, or landscapes that hold proven importance in local, state, or national architectural, engineering, or cultural achievements of the United States and indigenous people.
• Rigid Statutory Deadlines: Mandatory, compressed timelines for completing environmental assessments under NEPA and consultations under Section 106, potentially truncating vital data-gathering and collaborative planning workflows and the inadvertent loss of significant cultural and tribal cultural resources due to the inability to complete due diligence investigations.
• Increased Federal Oversight on State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) and Tribes: Provisions provide a small increase in federal funding but also add mechanisms for the funding to be removed and, in the case of tribes, allows the federal government to take over tribal programs in certain cases.
• Procedural Restrictions: Provisions that tighten constraints on judicial reviews and limit court remedies, potentially allowing infrastructure projects to proceed while agencies correct administrative deficiencies that would deny stakeholders of one of their core rights pursuant to NEPA. Public accountability in NEPA is a core mechanism that forces federal agencies to evaluate, disclose, and take responsibility for the environmental consequences of their actions before projects move forward.

What Can You Do?
If you wish to voice your professional perspective on how these reforms will impact environmental review and cultural heritage in California, consider the following actions ahead of the November 9 vote:
• Contact California’s U.S. Senators: Reach out to Senator Alex Padilla and Senator Adam Schiff to share your perspective on federal review participation and resource safeguards. You can also contact the Senate switchboard directly at (202) 224-3121.
• Coordinate with Tribal Elders and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices: Share with Tribal Elders and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers the potential for accelerated loss of significant cultural resources that would result from the proposed “streamlining.”
• Talk with Local Officials and Partners: Brief your city or county councils, planning staff, and community leaders about how compressed federal timelines or review exemptions might impact environmental compliance and regional heritage management.
• Engage Your Networks: Share this joint update with colleagues, professional networks, and community groups to foster informed dialogue regarding these proposed regulatory adjustments.

Update Regarding the SCA’s Ongoing Response to the Proposed Section 106 Regulatory Changes Dear SCA members,The Society ...
10/27/2026

Update Regarding the SCA’s Ongoing Response to the Proposed Section 106 Regulatory Changes

Dear SCA members,

The Society for California Archaeology (SCA) met with and submitted comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in a meeting held on September 2, 2026. Those in attendance representing the SCA included Brendon Greenaway, Government Affairs Committee Co-Chair; Shelly Davis King, Government Affairs Committee Co-Chair; Monica Strauss, Immediate Past SCA President; and Heather McDaniel McDevitt, SCA President.

The SCA representatives began the meeting by expressing concern regarding the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) proposed revisions to the Section 106 regulations. It was explained further that while SCA recognizes the value of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of historic preservation review, the SCA opposes changes that exceed the ACHP’s authority or weakens the protections established by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The SCA representatives stressed that any revisions must be consistent with the NHPA and reflect the intent of Congress, not diminish statutory protections through regulatory changes beyond the ACHP’s delegated authority. The SCA representatives provided targeted examples to demonstrate how the revisions presented by the ACHP will result in diminishing legal protection of cultural resources that will lead to costly financial burdens as well as conflicting regulatory statutes (two primary review responsibilities of OIRA).

Regarding the SCA’s interest in the proposed rewrite of Section 106 regulations by the ACHP, it was emphasized that cultural resource professionals practicing in California bring a unique and valuable perspective to evaluating these proposed changes. Working within one of the nation’s most complex regulatory environments, California practitioners have firsthand experience navigating state and federal requirements and understand how regulatory processes function in practice, including the consequences of ambiguous requirements, compressed timelines, and inconsistent implementation.

During the meeting with OIRA, the SCA representatives acknowledged that the intent to streamline reviews and improve efficiency is a worthy goal. They also stated that the proposed revisions, as currently written, are likely to undermine these very same goals by increasing uncertainty in the regulatory review process as well as administrative and financial burdens for cultural resource management firms, project proponents, state, local, and tribal governments. The importance of clear, predictable review processes, meaningful consultation, and qualified cultural resource expertise were strongly expressed; not only to ensure the effective identification and protection of historic properties, but also to prevent avoidable project delays, litigation, and unanticipated expenses. The SCA representatives requested additional regulatory review and analysis to better assess the potential for impacts resulting from the proposed changes, particularly on small businesses; the cultural resources management industry; state, local, and tribal governments; and project proponents.

Finally, the SCA representatives stressed the importance of incorporating the knowledge of experienced cultural resource professionals into regulatory decision-making to ensure that efforts to improve efficiency do not come at the expense of historic preservation, regulatory certainty, or successful and efficient project delivery.

Thank you all for your support and the good work you do every day in the protection and understanding of California’s heritage. Please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] regarding your ideas on how the Executive Board and I can serve you, the SCA membership.

Warms Regards,
Heather
SCA President

For more information regarding the role of OIRA and the SCA’s meeting with them, please see “Facts for Consideration” following the statement provided in the SCA News Flash sent via email and posted on the front page of the SCA website.

10/23/2026

Position Statement : VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 45!

Society for California Archaeology Executive Board of Directors

Government Affairs Committee

October 2026

The stated intention of Proposition 45 is to amend the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to expedite environmental review for certain projects including most housing, clean energy, transportation, water, wildfire risk reductions, and others as well as reduce the scope of what courts can consider when reviewing legal challenges. However, if passed on November 3rd, Proposition 45 will have negative consequences, some predictable and some unintended or unknown.

It is important to note that Proposition 45 incorporates several approaches addressed in the June 11, 2026, amended version of Senate Bill (SB) 1326, including tribal participation in developing mitigation, consideration of avoidance and preservation in place, culturally appropriate mitigation, and requirements for lead agencies to explain certain mitigation decisions. These approaches were strongly supported by some tribes. However, unlike SB 1326, Proposition 45 would exclude non-federally recognized tribes from consultation, eliminating consideration of their traditional knowledge related to the potential impact of eligible projects on tribal cultural resources.

Proposition 45 would derail the fundamental purpose of CEQA. Important considerations include:

The measure is a preemptive statute in that it expressly states that if there is conflict with any other laws, this statute supersedes/takes precedence.

The measure has the potential to introduce confusion when different portions of a project proceed under Prop 45 and traditional CEQA, including differences in review requirements, timelines, and documentation.

The measure reduces public agency requirements to consider public comments.
The measure compresses the scope and duration of CEQA review.

The measure limits legal challenges and judicial review, specifically those based on insufficient meaningful consultation.

The measure continues to reduce consulting party involvement already diminished by recent CEQA exemptions including Assembly Bill 130 (housing infill developments) and Senate Bill 131 (housing, rezoning, and other projects).

The measure allows project proponents to develop single proposed alternatives for consideration by the lead agency, thereby constraining the ability of the agency to find project alternatives to avoid or reduce harm to cultural resources.

The measure would fast-track the approval of data center development with little public input because Prop 45 would apply to “essential broadband Internet access projects that provide capabilities that are incidental to and enable the operation of internet communications service” which will limit consideration of cultural resources and tribal consultation.

The SCA encourages you to exercise your right to be an informed voter by reviewing the language of proposition 45 available here: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/45/index.htm. We are confident that upon review you will agree that a vote of NO on Prop. 45 aligns with the Society’s mission. Please share this message with your colleagues, your staff and employees, and your fellow students and encourage them to carefully consider the potential negative impacts Proposition 45 is likely to have on cultural resources!

The SCA seeks submissions of symposia, forums, papers, and posters for the 2027 Annual Meeting. The submission portal is...
10/21/2026

The SCA seeks submissions of symposia, forums, papers, and posters for the 2027 Annual Meeting. The submission portal is open now and the deadline is Monday, November 30th, 2026 at 11pm. https://scahome.org/ANNUAL-MEETING/

We are excited to boost a new effort brought to you by WCA - the Gear Closet! Come see it at the upcoming October Datash...
09/30/2026

We are excited to boost a new effort brought to you by WCA - the Gear Closet!
Come see it at the upcoming October Datashares or check out your SCA News Flash email for more details 🦺🕶
The WCA is also looking for companies/individuals who would like to volunteer as gear drop-off locations throughout the year or coordinate pick-ups. Could it be you? đź‘€

Southern Datashare is coming up! Don't forget to sign-up online, we want to see YOU next month at Cal State LA ⏳🗓🕶•••   ...
09/10/2026

Southern Datashare is coming up! Don't forget to sign-up online, we want to see YOU next month at Cal State LA ⏳🗓🕶
•••

02/13/2026

Yesterday, President Anne Raines represented NCSHPO at the ACHP - Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's February Business Meeting in Washington, DC.

Weighing in on two critical agenda items, Raines underscored the meaningful role of State Historic Preservation Offices in Section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act.

Focus areas:

*the ACHPs review of the current Section 106 regulations and consideration of updates

*discussion on the Army’s recently proposed Program Comment

Notably, the Council voted in favor of the ACHP requesting a 45 day extension so that stakeholders have an opportunity to review the Army's recent revisions to the proposed PC.

Read the full recap at link in comments.

Maryland Historical Trust

Address

P. O. Box 2582
Granite Bay, CA
95926

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Society for California Archaeology posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Organization

Send a message to Society for California Archaeology:

Shortcuts

Share

Nearby non profit organizations