Architectural Policy, Historic Preservation, and ACRA with Andrew Goldberg

Welcome back to Environmental Professionals Radio, Connecting the Environmental Professionals Community Through Conversation, with your hosts Laura Thorne and Nic Frederick! 

On today’s episode, we talk with Andrew Goldberg, ACRA's head of government relations about Architectural Policy, Historic Preservation, and ACRA.   Read his full bio below.

Help us continue to create great content! If you’d like to sponsor a future episode hit the support podcast button or visit www.environmentalprofessionalsradio.com/sponsor-form 

Showtimes: 
2:04 - Science Communication Evolution 
7:02 - Interview with Andrew Goldberg begins
10:51 - Goldberg's multiple roles
29:20 - NEPA & Section 106 Challenges
37:47 - Andrew Goldberg's Field Notes Story

Please be sure to ✔️subscribe, ⭐rate and ✍review. 

This podcast is produced by the National Association of Environmental Professions (NAEP). Check out all the NAEP has to offer at NAEP.org.

Connect with Andrew Goldberg at https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewgoldbergdc/

Guest Bio:
Andrew Goldberg has spent more than three decades leading winning advocacy programs. After serving as a top legislative aide to key members of Congress, he led a press and lobbying program for a British healthcare association in London. As managing director of government relations and advocacy for the American Institute of Architects, Andrew transformed its advocacy program and pushed several landmark bills to enactment. In 2018, Andrew formed Agora, a government relations consulting firm whose clients include the American Cultural Resources Association. Andrew has been quoted in Politico, Roll Call, the Hill, the Washington Post, and others.

Music Credits
Intro: Givin Me Eyes by Grace Mesa
Outro: Never Ending Soul Groove by Mattijs Muller

Transcript

We interview Andrew Goldberg about architectural policy, historic preservation, and ACRA. And finally, in honor of the 50th anniversary of Jaws, here are some great white shark facts. Uh, I'll say my favorite for the end, but they do have toxic blood and they actually have high levels of mercury. And arsenic in their blood. So even if we did fish them, they're not really good for us to eat. They actually pee through their skin, which also further toxifies their, their, their meat. It's gross, yep, and there you go. That's uh. That's, that's, that's a wild thing. They are very curious, you know, and I, I love to describe it. It's like most of the attacks on sharks are kind of like us going up to something we've never seen before and being like, what's that? And instead of using your hands, they use their mouth. The problem is their mouth is full of 300 teeth. So. They're like, what's that? Oh, gross nasty, and you're, you know, bleeding to death. That's kind of. But my favorite thing, my favorite thing is, they called the shark Bruce, right? They called him Bruce in the movie, but female great white sharks are much larger than males. So the largest great white shark ever was female. So there you go. That is interesting, fun fact for the day. 

Large and in charge, hit that music. 

NAEP just completed a pop-up webinar titled Quick Reactions to the Supreme Court's rulings and the seven County infrastructure case in front of the Supreme Court. Uh, if you missed it live, you can listen to it for free. If you are an NAEP member. There are also many trainings that we are doing, many additional webinars we're doing this year, so please do check out the webinar page. It's gonna be updated throughout the year as we do. 

We have another NEPA and more Essentials and advanced networking workshop. So please do check those out at www.naep.org. 

Let's get to our segment. 

So I was just curious, like, over your career, what has science communication looked like for you and how has it changed and is changing? That's a great question. I would say, I think when I started, I think science communication, I wouldn't say it's in its infancy, I think people were starting to have better conversations about it, but a lot of what science communication historically was, especially for professionals. was very focused on detail, right? So it would be, let's explain this as intensely and as densely as possible. And, you know, there's always been people like uh Carl Sagan, um who are able to take really complicated topics and make Really accessible to everyone and truly are the joys of the world and you know, Neil deGrasse Tyson, there are plenty of others that have been arbiters of good science communication, but there's also people who have a hard time understanding the concept, you know, I used to joke that, you know, I have a psychology undergrad degree, a biology master's, and so I'm a biologist that knows how to talk to people. And that's what I would say when I started my career I realized that not everybody is good at that, not everybody is capable of doing that, and sometimes it can be to your detriment. So I think, but over time, and I'm sure you've seen this too, but over time, the need for it to be less of an I told you so, and why are you doing this? This is not the right thing to do, you know, you should be doing that instead. I think there's been a shift to just providing information and trying to do that well without sounding condescending, without sounding rude, and Sometimes it can be frustrating because you want people to understand where you're coming from, but you have to understand where they are. 

And I think there's, that's what I've seen more, especially, you know, I think it's very important, it's very relevant to where we are now. I think it's really important for us to be able to communicate well and do that without judgment, which is really, really hard sometimes. So I don't know, that's my first take at it, but what do you think of that? Well, yeah, I agree. It's been a topic for a while now. There was, I can't remember the name of it, even when I worked. At the EPC I could never remember the name of this tool online organization that had resources for science communication. So they had like a data bank of graphics that you could use that included like watersheds and different definitions for terms, climate change, so you could, it was sort of like a, it was sort of maybe like a canva for climate for science, but not really. It wasn't like a slick thing you could just grab and pick things, but it did have graphics and stuff that you could pull out specifically for, which you would go and can now and just search like, well and see what it gives you, right? But I think, you know, that was one part of it was giving people visuals, you know, and understanding that everybody learns and hears communication different. So not only am I saying this but let me provide you visuals to understand. Where just water flow and things like that. So, but I think you're right that now there seems to be a lot more to it than just creating a graphic that makes sense. 

But, but also educating people on, I think people are ready now, they weren't ready, I don't think before to know the whys and hows. I think people now. Maybe it's TikTok, maybe it's whatever, but people are like, wanting more information on why you are telling me I can't or can't do this, whereas before it was more just like, no, I don't want to hear it. So I hope that people are looking for more of the source of the information. Yeah, and I think, you know, it's hard to tell like what sources are good, it's harder than ever to tell. I mean, it's funny we have access to more information than we've ever had, but that not all the information is good, and I think that's the part that's like tough for people. So, I remember there was a study about the sun actually going through a cooling phase, so there isn't gonna be temperature rise, but the study itself didn't take To account anything other than the sun. Like there are other factors as to why the earth is going to be the way it is. And NASA actually sent out a note about that study in particular and talked about the nuances to the study, like, hey, you know, this is what they're saying, this is part of it's accurate, and this is what's missing. And it was a really simple, I think you can look it up. I think it's like a maybe a 12 page explanation. Of the study, and it's really well said and it's really well, it's very thoughtful. There's no tone to it. There's no agenda behind it other than saying, well, that's, this is an interesting theory. Here's what we think of it, not you're wrong, but this is what we think. And so I think that's kind of where we are now. Yeah, I would agree. I don't know where I was going with that question. I was just curious. I think that was good. I like that. I enjoyed that. That was fun. Awesome, let's get to our interview. Perfect. 

Hello and welcome to EPR. 

Today we are joined by Andrew Goldberg. Andrew is the American Cultural Resource Association's head of government relations and brings decades of experience in advocacy and environmental policy. Andrew, great to have you. Great to be here. Thanks so much. Of course, of course. Now, so you studied architecture but then got into campaigns and politics right out of college. Was that always the plan or did that kind of come up randomly? That was definitely not the plan. Uh, my plan was to be an archi, I plan to be an architect, but I had the, uh, kind of really poor planning to graduate from college in the middle of a recession. Uh this was in the early 90s. I'm from New York. He went back home, thought I'd worked for architecture firms in New York City for a few years and go to school, but I was calling up firms. This is back in the day, we had these things called telephones, where you call people, I'm not sure if you want. That is, um, but it, it called firms up to say, do you have any openings? And they said, uh, we just laid off 10 people yesterday. So in addition to not having openings, I was competing against folks in there, ended up doing some odd jobs for a while, but then it was always a political junkie, loved politics, and this was the start of the 1992 presidential campaign that was Bush Senior and Bill Clinton. Got involved in campaigns just to fill the time really, but fell in love with it, fell in love with the, uh, the excitement and the, the activism and the engagement and just kind of, kind of went from there, really. So it was not planned at all. It was just kind of where things took me. Yeah, so what kind of campaigns were you working on and how did that get you onto a path with policy? 

My first campaign was actually for a presidential primary. campaign, uh, in New York for a candidate named Paulsonga, who remember who was a senator from Massachusetts and ran for president. And it was great because, you know, I came into the kind of their, the group the first day, and they basically made me head of all volunteers for Long Island, which sounds wonderful. It just really didn't mean a lot, but it was like, I was, I was doing stuff. I was running around and getting people to campaign and volunteer. Here and then eventually was hired on to run a state Senate race in New York in '92 and then after that, decided to move down to Washington DC where I ended up on, on Capitol Hill, which is where, you know, working on all kinds of policies, uh everything, foreign policy, education, healthcare, environment, of course, you name it. Uh, so it was kind of just, you know, following the opportunity and just following that passion, kind of where it took me. And so how did environmental and cultural kind of pop up into becoming a key part of what you do? I mean, part of it was my background, because even though I didn't become an architect, I think those kinds of issues about the built environment, certainly designing the built environment in a sustainable way, city planning, things like that were always something that I was Very passionate about and even when I was on Capitol Hill, if you work there, you, you have to cover again, a whole range of issues. But it was always those kinds of issues that really resonated with me. And then after a few years, I basically ended up working for the American Institute of Architects, AIA, uh, you know, the National Association, and so of course, they, you know, sustainable green building was and is a major topic, historic preservation, all those pieces were there and it was great because I got to kind of take that initial passion. 

And I had an interest in architecture and the built environment, but apply it towards policy and how government programs and government laws and funding and things could really impact and shape the built environment. So it's kind of a, a weird sort of way, it was a kind of a natural progression, although it didn't always feel that way at the time. Yeah, but you look back 5 years and you're like, wow, how did I get here? It's truly funny how that happens. But you know, we wanna know, like, you know, we've had some folks on from ACRA before. What do you do with ACRA? Who is ACRA? And is that your full-time job? Do you have another job as well on top of that? Yeah, great question. So first, AR, AR is an awesome organization, if I can just say that. I am, I'm biased, but uh I believe that is true. Uh, so it is a trade association for we call CRM firms, Cultural Resources Management, and these are the firms that do a number of things, but largely a lot of it is the kind of cultural resources reviews of projects under the National Historic Preservation Act. There is Section 106, your listeners may be familiar with, kind of work. Similarly, or kind of in parallel in some ways to Nipah, but on the cultural preservation side. And so, the members of ACRA are the firms that that do that work. So they're made up of archaeologists and anthropologists, ethnographers, historic architects, and things like that, working within that process. And so, you know, ACRA's mission really is to help elevate the profession, provide support, resources, and, and yes, advocate, especially at the Level for laws and policies that really promote the ability for the country to build and build great infrastructure that we need, but balance that with the need to take care of and protect and recognize the impact on our historic, you know, our heritage. So, you know, it's a great organization. It's young in some ways, 30 years old, but a great group of members and it's, it's growing and it's really, truly exciting. That's just one part of what I do. I am I have my own consulting firm, so I work with a number of different clients, other associations primarily on doing kind of federal policy and lobbying and things like that. Gotcha, gotcha. Well, I mean, you know, well, it's good to have you here then because, you know, there's absolutely nothing going on in terms of. Yeah, I mean, I am so bored these days. 

Oh no, it's so funny. We keep having this conversation. It's like, how are you doing? I'm like, I'm the busiest I've ever been in my life. Like, I don't know how it's just so much is going on right now. We've talked a little bit about like, you know, what's going on with Nepo. We've talked about the ven County case and that decisions, you know. Come out and the way we expected it to. But in terms of like historic preservation and environmental review, what are some of those big conversations that you're having with ACRA and with other organizations as well? So, really, I mean, there's a lot going on and so there are a number of different kind of ways that it's popping out. You know, one thing early on that happened is, I'm sure your listeners know, is the president, I think on inauguration Day, put out an executive order calling for an energy emergency. Uh, which called for sort of emergency procedures under NEPA, endangered species, start preservation, which dramatically kind of accelerates the review process. And so tracking that and making sure that agencies follow the law has been a really big piece of it. So that's one piece. Then there's the staff piece and, and as we know, and I'm sure you all know, there's been enormous cuts in personnel across the government, Department of Interior, where a lot of these programs are, is No exception, and that's, that does cause a lot of concern because you're losing a lot of knowledge, a lot of capability. I don't think anybody would argue that the government was perfectly right-sized in terms of staff, but I think the way they kind of gone in it with a with a hatchet, not a scalpel, has really, I think, raised a lot of concerns. And then there's the funding piece. The main way that the federal government provides funding for star preservation is through something called the historic Preservation Fund. Which Congress appropriates every year. 

And if money goes to state, uh, and tribal historic preservation offices, and other grant programs, that money has not gone out the door yet for this fiscal year. And so we've already seen in the case of Ohio, Ohio's state preservation office already had to lay off a third of their staff because the money from Washington hasn't. And so, you know, we're very concerned about that and working very hard to make sure that money goes out the door. It was provided by Congress and the administration, it needs to put it out. They say it's in the works, but it's causing some real issues on the grounds, and that's just part of it. There's a lot of other pieces, but really, all of these pieces together really make it harder for us. To make sure that we are protecting, preserving, acknowledging, interpreting kind of our, our history. So yeah, there's a lot of like I think short term chaos, I think is a good way to put it, and of like trying to sort out what are the long term implications. And so what would you say from what you've seen, where do you expect things to be going? I mean, that's a great question, and you know, I wish I had kind of that crystal ball that could really say how things play out. Uh, you know, I don't know, but I, I think, but my real concern is, particularly in the case of cultural resources, is cultural resources are not a renewable resource, right? Uh, you have sites that are important to history, something like Checo Chaco Canyon in New Mexico or African American burial grounds throughout kind of the east and the southeast. If we lose these treasures, they're gone forever. And while I think we all agree that, yes, we need to build, we can't say we can't build anything. We need to be in a position to really be able to tell the full American story. 

You know, next year is a pretty important year for the country, the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. There's going to be a big celebration for that. And so, one of the points that we've made all along is that at any point, it is important to make sure we're telling our full American story, but especially now as we go into this anniversary. Here, we want to make sure we can because if we lose those assets and we lose the expertise and federal agencies to be able to work with the process to make sure that we are monitoring and assessing the impacts of projects, we can't get those back. And so it's really important in the long term that we work right now to make sure that, yes, reform, make the process work better, faster, everything like that, but let's not lose the fundamental goal of principle that we need to take care of our history. Yeah, that's a great, great point. Yeah, and it's super important work, so I'm curious, you know, you co-founded Building Action, and I'd love to know a little bit more about how it works and how you work with ACRA and kind of the projects are and what your mission is basically. Sure, so Building action, it's kind of a separate project, but it's all kind of related. So this is something that came out of work I did when I was at AIA and the architects have been and are kind of leaders in uh kind of sustainable building. 

So when I worked for AIA there was a member of Congress, Russ Carney. Han from uh Saint Louis, who founded, while he was there, first of all, he was chair of the historic Preservation caucus and he's still very active in preservation. He also founded the Congressional High Performance Building Caucus. It's a mouthful, but it's a caucus of members of Congress designed to really look at issues about how we can make our building stock better. I mean, uh, buildings account for about 70% of electricity use in the country, almost half of the carbon output, so they're very important to the discussion about the environment and sustainability. He left Congress, I left the AIA, and we just kind of kept talking, and we kind of realized that there was, despite the importance of the built environment, there was no real coalition that was sort of across the board that took, got together the folks who build buildings and finance them and designed them, etc. and those who use buildings, you know, homeowners, real estate, hotels, everything. And so we decided to put together kind of a coalition to try to bring Folks together with the main purpose of really raising awareness in Washington, you know, for policymakers that say if you really want to make a difference on climate, if you want to make a difference on energy use and energy independence, look to buildings as an opportunity. And so we founded this actually our first, um, our kickoff event was going to be in March of 2020. We had all events planned all out, yeah, great timing. 

That that event did not take place, um, I can't unfortunately. Yeah, I don't know, just something that happened that month. I don't remember we were virtual for the first, you know, year, year and a half or so, but certainly going into the next few years, built up our membership, talked, engaged with a lot of folks on the hill in the administration, and, and certainly when Congress passed the bipartisan infrastructure law back in, I think, 2021 and the inflation Reduction Act in 2022. You know, there were a lot of parts of that or things that we have been advocating for and that our coalition partners have been advocating for, to really to make the case that buildings are infrastructure. And if you really want to have a better infrastructure and yes, a more sustainable infrastructure, buildings have to be part of that solution. So it's, it's been a lot of fun, you know, working on that. Yeah, so diving deeper into that, what are some of the overarching themes or things that every building implements and then some of those other nuanced parts of it? So, uh, yeah, it's a good question. One of the biggest challenges is that if you're starting from scratch, if you have an empty, you know, pad, and you're building a building to making it extra super sustainable is, is not as hard because the way you design it, the way you mass it, I'm getting back into my architecture for a little bit, you know, to make it, you know, south facing and, and using the sunlight, that's straightforward. But most of the buildings are already here and so we're talking about retrofitting existing buildings. That's a little trickier. And so certainly looking at ways to do that. I think the best folks who do, the couple of things that happen that folks do. One, of course, is looking at the whole building, right? So an example is you could put a new HVAC system on the roof that is more efficient. But if you don't say, make the windows more, more efficient, you're double glazing, that that keep sunlight out or or keep the heat out, you're gonna have uh an HVAC that's gonna work harder. In some cases, fixing the windows may make you able to put on a smaller HVAC system, and so looking at the whole building is really important. The other piece of that is designing a building that is sustainable on day one is fairly easy. Making sure that it's sustainable on day 100, day 200, day 500. Let's face it. Who among us is keeping our house fully up to date with its, uh, I mean, I don't, I can't change the filter on my, my air conditioning. 

So I really pushing the idea of, of making sure that operations and maintenance O1M is invested in is really important so the building performs well over a longer period of time. And there are a lot of other things that that we can do, and I think there's a great industry out there that's looking at this from all angles and all. Perspectives, so it's not just the technology, but it's how you use it and how you think holistically about buildings that can make them much more energy efficient and resource efficient and better. Yeah. Is this all the same or same and yes, different than like lead and ISSP? Oh yeah, it's all. So yeah, I mean, there are, you have your building codes which are kind of the base, right? Then you have, you know, rating systems like you have the lead, which is, I think at this 0.25 years old or so, and it's really developed a lot over the years. It's voluntary, but it's something that that really helps to identify ways to make the building more efficient. They have various standards, other pieces like that. So yeah, it's all kind of related into that. But, you know, it's, it's interesting because a lot of times I talked to architects about, you know, green buildings, there's some architects would say, well, I don't do green buildings, and I'd say, well, that's not great. Uh, and they said, but what I mean is, yeah, like, OK, well, what do you mean? And they said, we don't talk about green buildings because every building should be as energy efficient as possible. Like we shouldn't just be celebrating the, the exceptions. But it should be just baked into what we do, and I think more and more over, you know, over the years, I think that idea is, is gonna hold more that it has to become not just the exception, that awesome building that's doing great, but that every building really is as sustainable as possible. That's not easy, of course, it does have some upfront costs, but it is something that, again, is gonna save money in the long run, better for the environment, better for productivity, just better. So that's, that's kind of what we kind of advocate for. 

Yeah, and it's funny you say all that too, and I'm trying to think of it even from like a term in terms of like cultural buildings, right? So we talk about historic buildings that need to maintain a certain level of authenticity to what they were, and it's like, well the age old adage where like if you replace a plank on a ship, when does it become a new ship? Which or do you change where it's now no longer. The original. Does that pose a unique challenge to some of the work that you do or you're trying to, you have a culture, let's say, a historic building that you want to preserve, but you also want to make sure that it is meeting industry standards. Like how do you balance that kind of, I mean, I would I assume that's, that's a pretty challenging thing to do. So how do you kind of marry the old with the new in that sense? No, it's a great question. I, I mean, the first thing I'd say is, you know, there's a saying in preservation that the most sustainable building is the one that you don't build, that if you're able to reuse buildings for new purposes or whatever, you're not tearing down and you're not, you know, bringing in more materials and everything, that that in itself is a strategy for sustainability. The more we can reuse. What we already have, but you're right, I think that is always a bit of a challenge when you're looking at a building is how you take a building that was designed in some cases, maybe 200 years ago or 100 years ago, in a very different kind of environment and doing that. And there are all sorts of laws and rules that you have to follow. There are a lot of sort of guides and standards. The Secretary of the Interior has kind of standards for that. is kind of that balancing act. I don't want to sound like I'm, I'm shilling for architects here or anything, but I think that's certainly, you know, one of the things you look at is kind of how all those things work together. And so you can create a building that has maintained its character, but also is up to date in terms of, and it's not just it's sustainability, it's also accessibility, it's fire codes, safety, things like that. There are all these different pieces that go into that, and, and so, but it, it is possible to do. You can do that. And there are a number of, you know, federal tax programs, incentives that really try to get to that to say how can we kind of marry the two together to make them an environment that protects the past, reuses buildings, but in a way that makes them even more, you know, efficient, uh, you know, more sustainable. 

That's a great answer. I mean, that's a great, great answer. I think it's very cool stuff because it's never just one thing. Uh, yeah, that's about buildings. Yeah, I mean, it's my first week did AIA, for example, uh, you know, as I worked with a GSA on a project. This was after Oklahoma City, after 9/11, and how you make buildings also more secure, but do it in a way that's not creating kind of a fortress. And, you know, you think about all these things. So for example, if you're looking at kind of space, you'd say, well, the best thing for space sustainability is to put the. lot or a parking garage under a building, right? That that saves space, you know, having surface parking lots. Well, the security folks say that's, that's a risk for security measures. So, you know, finding ways to kind of balance all these different goals in a building, that's kind of we say a high performing building. That's really what it means that it manages to be accessible, safe, functional, everything else at the same time. Yeah. Yeah, it's really interesting because it makes the building more than just a structure. So you've worked in so many different sort of nuances and areas and policy and in uh different associations in your own firm. So what are some advice that you would give to early career seekers on how to get started? I mean, the best thing really is to just put yourself out there, volunteer, especially. I mean, the thing that drives us all nuts is we have campaigns every 2 years or more in some cases. And so I think becoming engaged in campaigns is a great way to do it. And to find the issues that are your passion, um, you know, I chose the route to go work kind of on the federal side, but, you know, there is work engaged in, in policy and promoting. Sustainability and cultural preservation happens in every state, every community, and so I think it's really, it's being open to trying new things and trying new Places and remembering, especially now, whatever you do when you're 23, 24, it's probably not what you're gonna be doing, you know, when you're 30, 40, 50. 

Uh, you know, we change careers so much and so I think it's being open to new ideas is the way to do that. I mean, if I kind of stuck to and was really staunch on saying I'm gonna stay with architecture no matter what. Yeah, that may have worked out, but I would have missed the opportunity to have to do so many really interesting and fun things that I've been able to do over the years. Yeah, and so how does working in policy when you were in your twenties versus now sort of compare? Well, I'm a lot more tired now, I think that's definitely one thing that uh I feel like it's really well, I mean, it's and it's I'm not entirely, it's not entirely joking because like when I was in the 20s, I worked on Capitol Hill, which was a great experience, but you're working 12 hour days, 6 days a week, constantly. You're there, you know, till midnight, uh, many nights and things like that. And so you have that kind of that er that youthful energy and that passion to do it, whereas as you get older, I think you become a little smarter about the work where you choose roles that enable you to have more of a reasonable lifestyle. But also, I mean, I think things have changed. I worked on Capitol Hill back in the 90s and that was a time with Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, contract with America, all that kind of stuff, and it was definitely a very partisan. Time, but, you know, things have become even more partisan since then, and more, it becomes harder and harder to, to kind of advance good policy through the process. And so I think that's a challenge, not so much something that's easily fixed, but certainly something I've seen happen over the last 30 or so years. Right, right. 

Well, um, ACR's annual conference is coming up this fall, and do you have involvement in that? Absolutely, yeah. So one of the big pieces we do there is really work to help discuss and kind of educate members about what's happening at the federal level. Because, you know, a lot of the, the firms that that are members of ACRA work either on contracts with the federal government or state, but rely upon federal funding and federal laws. It's a really big piece to talk about what's happening in Washington and what we see coming down the line. We also normally will have speakers from federal agencies like the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation or Park Service. I'll be honest, this year, I don't know if that will happen because a lot of federal agencies have really restricted. Travel by staff, so we're not sure, but it's a really great opportunity, so I'm involved in that. Plus there are sessions and discussions about business, about the practice of cultural resources, maybe just things that are straight up business related topics. And so it's a really good opportunity for anybody who touches upon cultural resources to really network, engage. Learn and share knowledge with each other. Uh, we're gonna be in Raleigh, North Carolina. Uh, so what we're excited about. It's a, it's a small city, but it's a great city. It's good barbecue. I know that. Um, uh, and so, you know, it should be really a lot of fun, a lot of important things to talk about, certainly, but also a really good opportunity for folks to, to network and kind of get that energy. You get from meeting with other people who are kind of doing the same thing you are. Yeah, and it's, it's interesting. So, you know, we talked a little bit like, you know, NEA and section 106 are, are, they're similar, they're tied to each other in some ways, and they're very much not tied to each other in other ways. And I think sometimes a lot of our practitioners think, oh, if you do Nipah, then you're good. You don't have to do 10 or that is 106. Sometimes I have kind of challenge and so. The 106 process is a little different, and I know that maybe we don't necessarily have to get into exactly how they're different, but NACPRA is another one that is a kind of a different law that doesn't really fit in the same realm as like a natural resource law as well. 

So I don't know if you talk to those specifically about like how those are a little different than your standard policy would be. Yeah, I mean, it's, it's a big discussion among the CRM firms, certainly, uh, and many of them work very closely hand in hand with environmental, you know, resource firms, things like that. And certainly there are, you know, provisions, for example, in the, the Section 106 regulations that enable you to sort of incorporate it into the NEPA process. There are ways to do that and certainly from a practical standpoint, if you're able to really coordinate those together early in the process. There definitely are benefits to that. But right, it is a different process, and, you know, there are times we hear from folks, you know, on our side that some agencies or some folks at the state level sometimes think of 106 as an afterthought because a lot of attention, understandably goes to the NEPA process, but really what we try to do is really convey to, uh, you know, the government stakeholders, as well as private developers, you know, the more that you can really kind of bring Everybody together early in that process and really go through a process, uh, the better. They're gonna be different. Obviously, they're different roles. There are no EIS's or EAs under Section 106. It's different and you're sort of exercising different kinds of skills or looking at somewhat different things. NEEPA, of course, is a whole lot broader than that. But certainly, the more that there can be that kind of coordination, the better off you're gonna be. So, yeah, I, I, I think, I think that's what we discussed that, and you mentioned NARA is another really good example that is kind of, yeah, it's on a different track, in a sense from that process, but something that is very important and certainly, you know, ACRA member firms wanna make sure that they are doing the right thing, that they are really respecting assets and certainly remain sacred sites. 

And things like that, something that I think the profession, the industry has come a very long way. It probably has more to go and really making sure that the engagement, that that engagement with tribal communities is done in a way that is truly collaborative and is really respects that tribal eco, you know, that tribal ecological knowledge in a way that really demonstrates like the kind of the way it should work. And so I think it's always a process of making that work better, but you're right, having to know how all these interact can be a little bit complicated. But something that our members really do and work with a lot. Yeah, and it's interesting you mentioned tribes too, and I think sometimes people make the mistake of treating a tribe like an agency, and they're very, very different. They're extremely different. So I don't know if you wanna talk maybe specifically like working with tribes, uh, working with, you know, they're different all across the country, obviously, but I know like that's one stereotype where people will, will act like, oh, this is just another consulting body. It's like, no, it's not quite right. So I don't know if you want to talk a little bit more about what that process is like. Yeah, I, I, I mean, the key thing to remember is that this is not, you're not just working with another agency, not another community or a county or a state. This is, it's a nation to nation engagement, and there is that really sacred inviolable trust responsibility that the federal government has. And so I think really understanding and understanding, you know, the, the, the tribal knowledge and their understanding. 

And having that kind of respect and understanding for the traditions, the process, the knowledge that they bring and the approach becomes really important. It's not something that I think affirm, if they haven't done it before, just kind of walk in and do it and think, oh yeah, it's the same thing as any other kind of section 106 process. You really have to do it with a very, really deep understanding of the history, the culture, the traditions. And so we have, you know, firms, and this happens, this is something certainly that we see more, more out west but not by no means. Only, only out west, but there is certainly is a kind of almost a subspecialty, I would say, in some ways, and really understanding kind of how to work through that process in a way that really puts the tribe and their, their history and their viewpoints, their perspective center at least centers it around. Around them. It's not just coming in and saying this is important, this isn't. And that's why, you know, it's like we always work very passionately to make sure that we're engaged on the policy side with groups like um NATO, which is the Association for Tribal Star Preservation Offices and others to make sure that what we are doing. And what our members are able to do is really understand kind of how those interactions work and how you can actually even just accessing the land to do the kinds of investigations is a different process, when you can, what time of year, and how you kind of help, not even tell that story because you shouldn't be telling. story, they tell the story and how you kind of relay the information is a very different pro it's different and it's something you have to be very careful about with good reason. And so, I think it's something that I think our members also increasingly recognize and really want to make sure that it's done in an appropriate way. 

Yeah, I think we finally got to the passion part. Andrew, you're really sped up on that one. sorry about that. Yeah, also a lot of I, I do the same thing. You hit me on the right topic and I'll just speed up and, uh, yeah, keep up with me. But that makes me think though, you've mentioned the word passion a couple of times in here, and I feel like so as environmental professionals, there's a lot of different things that connect us, the type of work we do, the passion for the work and the impacts that we make, but I think even within ACRA and culture resources, there's a different specific type of passion and policy for that work. Like I don't want to do policy. I don't care what it's not. I don't care that I'm what's happening in the news. I, I don't have the energy to care. I'm a very emotional person. It would take a toll on me. So what do you find is what drives your passion? A lot of people, I think younger people now too, are struggling with this quote unquote find your passion term, like, how do you see it? Yeah, I, I mean, it's a great question, and I, I wish I had a really nice easy answer for that. I don't think I do. I mean, I'll say, you know, from my standpoint, I think it's, you know, it's probably taken me 30 years to kind of figure out what really kind of wants, gets me to want to get up in the morning and do work. And, and honestly, I'll say for me at least, it's part of it is kind of the policy, the issues, but a lot of it is really it's sort of helping. Other people who are not in Washington, understand the process, the way it really works, and understand that they have a voice in the process. And so a lot of the work they do with ACRA and with other organizations is helping, what we often call the grassroots, but kind of helping the members of the organizations understand how they can get engaged, how they can connect in to advocate for their passion, whatever it is, and demystify the process and give them the training and the tools to become effective advocates. And you know, I think it's, it's in in some ways, I think it's, it's a, it's a process of elimination.

Over time you kind of really figure out what it is that's like that, that core thing that really gets you going, and there's other stuff you have to do, we gotta pay the bills, I gotta Do my taxes. I'm not passionate about filling out my tax stuff, but I do it because it's, you know, kind of legal, um, but, you know, the things you have to do, but then really thinking about is how you can really bring yourself back to those kinds of activities that really kind of I was watching one of the, your previous podcasts and you're talking about this idea of meaningful work, I think, and the idea of, you know, what is meaningful to you, and I think that's Everybody defines that differently, what is meaningful, and I think being able to find that is so important. And I'd say for, you mentioned, you know, people who are young and I have kids who are just kind of in their early twenties now, and I'd say, you know, you better not figure out what's meaningful to you for a while, and that's OK. Like I said, sometimes it's a matter of, you know, scraping away what isn't important to you kind of find out that core activity, pursuit, whatever it is that really gets you going. But, you know, when you get there, it's a good feeling. Yeah, I think that's a great answer. I find that a passion will find you before you find it. That's also true. Or that's part of being open to different things, right? I mean, you never, it's, you never know what's gonna come your way that all sudden you're like, oh my God, this is, this is what I want to do. 

Right, right. Well, uh, along these lines of connecting each other on, um, shared values and things, we have a segment called Field Notes. That's our part of the show where we talk to our guests about memorable moments doing the work in the field, and, uh, we ask our listeners to share your funny, scary, awkward field stories with us, not they don't have to be all of those in one. And you can read them on a future episode and you can send them there's a form now on www.environmentalprofessionalsradio.com or shoot us an email. 

And Andrew, anything come to mind? I have a hint for you if, if not. Yeah, I guess, well, one thing I'll mention is, you know, I'll say my very first job out of college was a tremendous failure. It means like a like a really spectacular failure. So I uh I got out of college and again, I was looking for work as an architect, couldn't really find it and I ended up getting a job uh with an environmental organization. And a very good one. It's all, they're all standing and wonderful, and, but the job was to basically go door to door, uh, and knock on people's doors and ask for money, you know, to, to raise money for it. Again, a great cause, uh, you know, it was about the state some state level environmental issues, great cause, good people. I was terrible at it. Uh, the idea of knocking on a stranger's door and asking them for money. I mean, I noticed, like I, I wasn't cut out for it when I'd knock on people's doors and just pray they weren't home. Or I'd be or I hear like a dog bark, like, oh, the, the big dog somewhere. I gotta, I can't go here. I mean, and it wasn't even so much the asking of money. It was also like, I felt guilty if I took their money. Like somebody actually gave me $50 and I felt like, God, I, I feel like I, I, I feel guilty about this. Like, they don't know me. I'm some 22 year old kid who just showed up at their door. So that didn't last very long, obviously. Again, it's kind of like that thing is like, I also, I learned what I don't like, like asks for money. Some people are very good at that. But again, it, it, it's sort of, I guess the lesson is sometimes try things that may be out of your comfort zone and maybe they really are, and they're just not gonna do well, uh, but you may find something you like. It's funny because I do, I mean, lobbying is part of what I do going up to Capitol Hill and asking for things, but it's, it's different because it's, it's, you're building a relationship and you're kind of building that connection and showing it. The idea of walking up to somebody cold and saying, hey, I'm supporting some issue here. Can you give me some money to Didn't it didn't work for me, so never asked me to do that again. I didn't even like doing it for like marching band where you're trying to sell candy know what I mean, you go to your neighbors, people you actually kind of know, and you're like me a dollar, you know, right? And they're getting candy. I mean, should be a win win for everybody, right? Exactly. And it's still no fun. Yeah, that's funny you say that too. It's like, find out what you don't like. It's sometimes you are too far out of your comfort zone. It's a great, great point. Yeah, I mean, and again, it's always good to try new things, absolutely. But you know, also be honest with yourself, if you really stink at something or it makes you miserable, yeah, yeah. OK, it's OK to say I can do that, right? But, uh, you know, like I said, I know we're getting close to time here, but we always love ending our shows on things that, uh, our guests are passionate about, uh, outside of the environmental profession, and you are an awful and adult fan of Lego, um. And you even better than awful, yeah, yeah, I just wanted to say that to me is always such an awful person. 

I know joke was there. I couldn't, I couldn't get away from it, um, but you even bottle, built a bottle of falling water, so is that like a. hobby, is that something that you kind of had? Wait, what is the model of Fallingwater? What's Fallingwater a building? It's a building, right? So it's the Frank Lloyd Wright. It's, it's the house that hangs over the waterfalls. It's literally shout out to my mom, her favorite building in the world. So just I have to say that there you go. Excellent. All right. Yeah. Yeah, so I mean, I guess I love Lego as a kid, like many kids, and then, of course, when I got to be a teenager and young person. You know, that was a kid's toy, don't wanna play with that, but I think secretly always harbored that love of that. And then I had kids and, you know, we would buy them Lego for their birthday, and I'd always be the one to say, Oh, here, let me help you build that. And my wife would have to tell me that, no, it's their toy. Uh, so eventually she started buying me Lego for, for my birthday. And I guess I just decided. That's about a couple of years ago, you know, I, I love Fallingwater. It's a great, uh, piece of American architecture. It's so unique, such a great interplay between nature and, and kind of the built environment. And I decided, yeah, why not? So I took over our kitchen table. I went online, I found there are all these stores like in Europe, where you can like buy pieces of Lego for less than the official, uh, we'd get these packages from like Slovenia and Poland, uh, filled with uh Lego pieces, and yeah, I built it on our kitchen table. Uh, put lights into it and stuff, and, uh, yeah, it was a lot of fun. But I'm finding, uh, you know, there are lots and lots of people, and maybe it's a Gen X thing, I don't know, it's our age or something that, you know, a lot of adults really enjoy playing with it. And yeah, it's partly it's creative, it's building related, of course, but it's also a lot of fun because if you mess up, you just pull them apart and start over again, which is always, always makes it very easy. 

That's very cool. I love that so much. That's awesome. And yes, I have stepped on many, many pieces of that. It really hurts. Son of a, yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah, I remember that from my childhood for sure. I feel like I remember my parents having a couple of wins on that. Well, we are running out of time. Is there anything else you'd want to talk about before we let you go? No, I said, just really thank you so much. I mean, I know this is a challenging time with a lot of things happening in Washington, and it, it feels very chaotic, confusing, you know, I think we're, we're gonna get through this, OK? Uh, and I, I really think that the more that folks, uh, whether you're part of NAEP, ACRA, other organizations, being engaged, paying attention as uncomfortable as an AP sometimes. really helps to make sure that we can advance good policy. It may take a while, but look, I'm an optimist and I think that we are going to get through some of these challenges and address them in a way that we be able to really do more for the environment, do more for cultural preservation, and yeah, make the world a better place. I just, you know, it may take a little while, but we're gonna get there. Thank you. I think those are excellent words to leave on, so at that, um, where can people get in touch with you? 

So I guess the best way is my, my email address, by email, I guess, uh which is Andrew at Agoragov.com. It's uh A G O R A GOV.com. Uh, this is my, in my firm's, uh, you know, email, and yeah, and I'm always love, I love to talk to folks about politics, you know, advocacy, the environment, baseball, whatever you want. Lego, of course, Lego, but happy to, happy to do that. Awesome, thank you. Thanks for being here. Thank you so much. That's our show. Thanks Andrew for joining us today. Please be sure to check us out each and every Friday. Don't forget to subscribe, rate, and review. See you, everybody. Bye