Forty-second Ward alderman Brendan Reilly says he didn't get very far when he sat down with officials from the Chicago Children's Museum earlier this week to talk about potential sites for their new facility. They're only interested in one: Grant Park.
"They've refused to consider any other locations, and they've defined their parameters so narrowly that it will be practically impossible to find a place for them anywhere but Grant Park," he says.
Reilly opposes the museum's plan to build a new facility in the park because he believes it would violate a century-old city commitment to keeping the space clear and open to the public. Last month he wrote museum CEO Peter England and board president Gigi Pritzker-Pucker a letter asking them to consider other sites proposed by people from across Chicago, including downtown locations like Northerly Island, the old post office, the Riverwalk, and the South Loop. "I am writing to ask the Museum to review this list of suggested alternative locations and provide me with your evaluation of these potential sites," he wrote.
The alderman says the alternatives were rejected out of hand. "They didn't really offer specifics," he says. "They just said, 'No, those aren't suitable.'"
Spokeswoman Natalie Kreiger says the museum took the time to look into alternatives months ago. "Before we even focused on Grant Park, we did our due diligence and looked at a number of sites, and we found that Grant Park was the only one that met our criteria," she says. Those specifications include a central location, access to public transportation, and room for parking.
The museum doesn't see any reason to compromise. "We're going to pursue this site," Kreiger says. She adds that it's "fair to say" the museum is prepared for a political or legal showdown.
Reilly says he's been spending a couple of hours each day trying to build and retain support among other aldermen, who would have to defy the mayor to back Reilly. Meanwhile, the museum just hired a big public relations firm to help drum up support and has been busy doing its own lobbying in the City Council. "We have a lot of people and consultants working for us in a wide variety of ways," Kreiger says.




List of Registered Lobbyists
as of 3/14/08
http://egov.cityofchicago.org/webportal/COCWebPort...
client Chicago Children's Museum
Theodore J. Novak
Partner
DLA Piper
http://www.dlapiper.com/theodore_novak/
Jesse W. Dodson
Associate
DLA Piper
Marilyn Katz
MK Communications
http://www.mkcpr.com
Meredith O'Connor
Jones Lang LaSalle
http://www.joneslanglasalle.com
Piper will be handling the aldermanic envelope drops, but we won't see them on the disclosures until July
Essentially, the Children's Museum says "Go to hell" with the Majority...yes, the MAJORITY that is AGAINST this farce of a museum in Grant Park.
So, the will of the majority means nothing compared to the will of the few...with fist fulls of money, and therefore power to do whatever they damn well please, all others be damned!!!
The very fact that the asinine museum has to hire a PR firm should SCREAM that they know full well the majority are against it, but they want to try to "convince" the majority that the move to Grant Park is a "good thing."
Daley is a sycophant to Pritzker and and anyone else who gives him money.
The hell with them all.
still bs though
tell all GIGI to go to hell
Bring on the Museum and diversity. This area needs it.
Quite a generalization you make...much like Daley...that to be against a Children's Museum move to Grant Park equates being racially intolerant. Where is your evidence?
There is PLENTY fo diversity throughout Grant & Millenium Park...what needs to remain is PARK space unfettered by more development, especially in the guise of "a museum for the children."
This museum is NOT for the children...how many kids enjoy a day at a museum, children's or otherwise?
This is a financial boondoggle for the museum to get their greedy bastard hands on the federal funds that come with being placed in the park, vs. no funding from feds at the MUCH better situated location at Navy Pier.
Give those kids a great museum if Daley really is concerned about minority kids
I don't think Danny means "give the minority kids a separate museum in Pilsen, Little Village, or Englewood." I think he means "if you really care about minority kids, put the Children's Museum within easy reach and make the rich white kids go there."
No, fiend of the Daley Crime Family, there are no nimby's, only 'where's mine' motherfuckers.
Karl and Danny both have the Right Idea, IF the Children's Museum owners really cared about 'diversity'.
And I bet it isn't the 'rich white kids' who wouldn't want to 'visit' the Pilsen, Englewood or Little Village neighborhoods, but rather it's their 'rich, white parents' who prefer to avoid diversity.
This bullshit from the 'rich, white snobs' who control the supposedly not-for-profit Children's Museum is a new low for the mayor, though Daley achieving new lows has become a regular occurrence lately.
And the comment "...The Children's museum is nothing more than a foundation used to clean up money for wealthy types. The Chicago mob, and the Pritzker hotel chain, want to bring gambling, the kids are in the way...." hits the nail on the head.
If there were any truth to the claim of wanting a diverse clientele, the Children's Museum would be expanding it's locations, via multiple museums, within the neighborhoods from which they claim they want their visitors to come from.
After all, just how much space does the present location utilize and at what cost?
With the monies projected to be used to construct this proposed new museum, couldn't they develop multiple museum locations within the very neighborhoods they claim to want to offer their services to?
Seems like they (PR firm, CCM, etc.) are being kind of selfish. Grant Park is public, and I agree with the satellite museums idea.... why one big museum to hold them all?? Small, neighborhood museums similar to library branches would be convenient, and a better education in real diversity than trying to create a gathering place downtown.
Also, there is the Nature Museum (kid friendly), the Barn petting zoo at LPZ, the American Girl Place (which many white suburbanites treat like a museum), Navy Pier, and other spots for kids to go.
Why doesn't CCM hold a kid-friendly Kidapalooza in Grant Park, and park its permanent walls elsewhere?
They're trying very hard to change the subject because they know Grant Park is illegal and there's no public support for it. Heck, if there was public support for it, they wouldn't have hired Hill & Knowlton, which reportedly made $80,000 a month working for ComEd to convince us the lower electric rates were a bad idea.
Let's remember that Hill & Knowlton's former clients include not just ComEd, but the government of Uganda (under fire for torture and human rights violations), and the selling of the Iraq invasion.
Not to mention pioneering under-handed, "astroturf" campaigning for big tobacco.
Go read what SourceWatch.com has to say about Hill & Knowlton. They're a frightening, do-anything-for-money, say-whatever-we-have-to bunch.
Fine, Bob. You want to play hardball? We'll play hardball.
He wants the "image" of things it seems to me. Let's plant flowers everywhere but we don't recycle worth a damn. Let's have a Kid's Museum to show how tolerant we are of diversity, but do nothing to help with a housing crisis or help the same kids get a decent education. It's really pathetic.
A similar threat took the air out of potential lawsuits regarding Meigs Field and Soldier Field renovations. The loser is liable to the winner for costs associated with the delay due to a court case.
Something for the tree huggers to think about.
re 'Friends of Grant Park':
First, it's play the (PHONY) race card, said card played, not by the 'race' in question, but by the exploiters of that race, (and the exploiters of every other race that they can profit from exploiting), then, it's the 'threat' of, 'Oh My God', financial liabilities for the losers of any contemplated civil suit opposing the criminal misuse of PUBLIC LANDS, said losers presumably being those who would dare to oppose the will of the wealthy.
What is the phrase, something like "...remain free and open forever...." concerning our city's Parks?
Here's a thought:
If the CCM really wants to serve the public, let them commit to providing FREE access to their contemplated new museum, TOTALLY FREE FOREVER, 7 days a week, open to the public from, say, 9am until 9pm, rain or shine, winter, summer, spring and fall, accessible to any and all, just like Grant Park is now.
NO ADMISSION charge, ever.
And no parking fees, since those kids that the mayor's knuckleheads are claiming to be being discriminated against, and their parents/guardians, are supposed to be from neighborhoods some distance away from the lakefront.
Let's see if this so-called charitable organization is truly a charity.
If they don't like the previously suggested idea of multiple smaller museums, located within every neighborhood of this city, (especially those neighborhoods where the kids that they claim to want to serve actually live), being a better way to serve their intended clientele, let them bring some 'skin' to this game and offer a proposal that ensures that their 'public service' will truly be public, as in ABSOLUTELY FREE ADMISSION, AT ALL TIMES, FOR ALL CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS or GUARDIANS.
That would be an authentic act of charity.