Sacred sites bill could create a monster

SignOnSanDiego.com ^ | August 26, 2003

[hedgetrimmer]

Sacred sites bill could create a monster

August 26, 2003

Amid the chaos of the budget crisis and the recall election of Gov. Gray Davis, the Legislature is about to set up a powerful new regulatory agency in an effort to protect Indian sacred sites.

While the sacred places of Native Americans should be protected, the imperious method chosen by lawmakers and the haste with which this new bureaucracy is being formed would scare Californians – if they knew about it. By rushing the sacred sites bill through in the last days of the legislative session, lawmakers are severely restricting public debate on the measure. The law of unintended consequences is sure to broadside the people of California shortly after the bill goes into effect.

Senate Bill 18 would empower the Native American Heritage Commission to regulate development on any land that includes or is close to an Indian sacred site. This would add a new, lengthy and costly regulatory process onto the already complex California Environmental Quality Act. There's no distance limit between a project and a sacred site, so the Native American Heritage Commission could have power over projects that are quite removed from the sacred site itself.

What's more, the bill includes very questionable secrecy provisions. It would make it a crime for anybody engaged in identifying a sacred site and gauging its importance to divulge any information about it to the public. The Native American Heritage Commission could conduct its proceedings on sites, including proposed mitigation measures required of developers, in secret. This would violate the public's right to know about the process of government. And it could prevent property owners from learning if there are sacred sites on or near their land until the commission acted against a project on that property.

Gov. Gray Davis vetoed a very similar bill last year but supports this year's effort. The current bill is co-authored by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, and Sen. Denise Ducheny, D-San Diego.

There's so much about this new regulatory process that hasn't even been considered by the governor and lawmakers. For example, who is going to pay for it?

Complying with new sacred sites regulations on top of environmental regulations would add costs for both property owners and public agencies planning development and construction. Not only would building a new house possibly become more expensive, but so would building a new school or road. When revising a general plan for a region or specific plan for a development, cities and counties would have to consult with the commission first. Who will pay those public costs?

And just how far will the new commission expand its reach? Will it insinuate itself far afield from proposed developments, if it could argue that the developments would affect sacred sites? It certainly could.

There's a much better way to proceed. Instead of this heavy-handed approach, funding could be established, using tribal and public resources, to protect sacred sites identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. These sites could be set aside as preserves, administered by the commission. The answer to protecting sacred sites need not be a powerful new state regulatory commission whose costs will be borne by property owners and local governments.

[SierraWasp]

So's they can keep bought governors like Davis, or Boughtamonte, bought!!!

[flying Elvis]

Disgusting pandering to leftists. Only Native American sites can be considered sacred? This will be a great money making measure for the tribes, for they can extort anyone who wants to build in California. "You can't build a power plant here, it's sacred ground, but for a million dollar donation we'll turn our heads." Here's my solution, if the natives want to declare a site sacred, let their nations pay for it. If they want the U. S. taxpayer to protect the land, then let them disolve their tribal governments and join the rest of society.
I would like to know what makes Native American sites more worthy of preservation than let's say a Civil War battlefield or old graveyard. Oh, I know, it's only white people's blood on those grounds and not worth protecting. Let's pave over Manassas to put in a Disney Land, but lord forbid we build a parking lot over an abandoned Indian campsite along Doo Doo creek.

[hedgetrimmer]

Another grave concern is the fact that the Indian "nations" are considered soveriegn. That means, if you scroll pack up this post and check out the list of supporters, that foreign nations are making donations to the democratic party, gray davis and john burton to sway our politicians against the American people and in support of a foreign people. This is patently illegal. In return, they have been given powers greater than any American citizen, e.g. to build gambling casinos, to by land and declare it indian part of the indian nation and build casinos on it, and to condemn land and drive the rightful owner from it by any whim they see fit. All this to the detriment of a free, advanced society that requires water, power, the ability to mine, graze cattle, train our servicemen, do space research, etc. etc. etc.

[TatooChick]

Don't get me started on this. I am so angry. What a disgrace. Grrrr

[TatooChick]

Don't get me started on this. I am so angry. What a disgrace. Grrrr

[TatooChick]

Don't get me started on this. I am so angry. What a disgrace. Grrrr