To the Journal editor:

Would it make sense to question every 10 years whether Fort Michilimackinac, for example, was still historic?

No.

What is historic is, by definition, going to remain historic as time passes.

The notion that historic-ness should be subject to a legislative “sunset” policy is laughable – not to mention ironic – on its face.

But that is just one of many flaws in legislation being proposed to change the way Michigan’s Local Historic Districts Act works: House Bill 5232 and Senate Bill 720.

My colleagues and I who make up the board of trustees of the Historical Society of Michigan want what is best for the preservation of our state’s history in each of its communities and these bills would move us in the opposite direction, diluting local control.

To make matters worse, it is a solution that lacks a serious problem to solve. Our historic districts law has been an unqualified success story since being implemented in the 1970s, adding value to communities across the state.

Our board strongly believes the proposed changes are unnecessary and would be damaging to the cause of preserving key parts of our past. We unanimously approved a resolution to that effect on Feb. 12.

Once a historic area is lost, it can never be recreated. That is why we believe it is so important that these bills be rejected.

Paul M. Keep, president

Historical Society of Michigan Board of Trustees

Grand Rapids