by Marty Schladen, West Virginia Watch
May 16, 2025

The Ohio History Connection last week laid off a third of the staff at the State Office of Historic Preservation. Even though many of its responsibilities are mandated by the federal government, the feds haven’t provided funding that was appropriated in October, a spokesman said.

The money is provided by the National Park Service, which has been hammered by staffing and funding cuts from Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

The historic preservation office handles Ohio listings on the National Register of Historic Places, historic preservation tax incentives, and maintains a permanent record of Ohio’s historic buildings and sites, in addition to many other responsibilities.

The Ohio History Connection, which oversees the preservation office, laid off 12 of its employees because it hasn’t received $1.448 million from the National Park Service despite the fact that the money was appropriated on Oct. 1, said Neil Thompson, the history connection’s manager of media and public relations.

In a note to history connection staff last week, Executive Director and CEO Megan Wood said the preservation office couldn’t maintain its staffing without the money.

“As a reminder, roughly 60% of (the preservation office’s) funding comes from the federal Historic Preservation Fund — administered by the National Park Service and supported by proceeds from offshore oil and gas leases,” Wood wrote. “Although these funds were appropriated for the current federal fiscal year beginning October 1, 2024, they have not yet been released.

“We have been working tirelessly with the Governor’s Office, our Board, and Ohio’s Congressional Delegation to advocate for the timely release of these funds. However, with the majority of our (historic preservation) budget allocated to personnel, we are unable to sustain our current staffing levels without this federal support.”

In 1966, Congress passed the National Historic Preservation Act after years of mass demolition of historic sites and buildings.

“By the mid-1960s, federally-funded infrastructure and urban renewal projects had resulted in the rapid destruction of places significant in the nation’s history,” the National Park Service says on its website. “Congress recognized that the federal government’s historic preservation program was inadequate to ensure that future generations could appreciate and enjoy the rich heritage of the nation. (The National Historic Preservation Act) was enacted in recognition that historic places were being lost or altered, and that preservation was in the public’s interest.”

Among the things created under the law was the National Register of Historic Places, on which Columbus’s German Village has been listed since 1974.

Workers in state preservation offices evaluate whether nominees make the register. Those decisions depend on how old they are, their historical significance, their architectural significance, and other factors, Thompson said.

“It’s a federal program — a federal list that is ultimately put out by the Department of the Interior — but the State Historic Preservation Office is responsible for reviewing nominations to ensure all these factors are met,” Thompson said.

A more complete description of the preservation office’s responsibilities can be found here.

Some developers and homeowners might balk at historic preservation requirements, but historic preservation is popular with the public. For example, a 2014 UCLA survey found that “88% of respondents believe that historic places should be treated as community assets… (and) 83% of respondents indicated that historic preservation is somewhat to very important.”

The agency has been buffeted with cuts and threats of more since Trump took office and put the world’s richest man in charge of cutting government services.

In February, 1,000 probationary employees were cut from the park service and another 700 took buyouts. Now the Trump administration is planning to cut 1,500 more. The cuts already are said to have sewn chaos at the agency.

“Pending financial assistance obligations, including grants, are under review for compliance with recent executive orders and memoranda,” the park service said Wednesday in an email. “We will be happy to provide you with an update when we have additional information to share.”

Despite the loss of personnel at Ohio’s State Historic Preservation Office, officials plan to continue doing what the law requires.

“Despite this setback, we remain responsible for fulfilling our federally mandated duties, including the administration of the National Register of Historic Places, the Federal Historic Tax Credit program, and compliance reviews under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,” Wood, CEO of the History Connection, told employees.

“We know the coming months will be challenging, and that extended processing times may occur as we adjust to these changes. Nonetheless, we remain committed to our mission and to serving the people and communities of Ohio through the preservation of our shared heritage.”

West Virginia Watch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. West Virginia Watch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Leann Ray for questions: info@westvirginiawatch.com.

The post Without funds from the feds, a third of Ohio’s historic preservation office let go appeared first on westvirginiawatch.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The content primarily focuses on the impact of federal budget cuts on Ohio’s historic preservation efforts, particularly the delay in funding from the National Park Service. The article frames the situation through the lens of government inefficiency, particularly criticizing the Trump administration’s cuts to the National Park Service. It highlights the consequences of these cuts on the preservation of historic sites and mentions public support for historic preservation programs. The tone is sympathetic to the preservation office and critical of the administration’s policies, which may suggest a left-leaning bias, particularly in its portrayal of the effects of the cuts. However, it mainly reports on the situation without advocating for a specific political agenda, maintaining a relatively neutral stance in its presentation of facts and public opinions.