As leading members of a broad coalition that reflects deep public opposition to plans to build a children’s museum in Grant Park, we want to correct recent misstatements made by the museum’s board (“Museum’s park location fits city needs,” Voice of the People, April 29).
The museum’s claim that this area of Grant Park “did not exist when A. Montgomery Ward was alive” is simply untrue. The 1.75 acres of Grant Park they want to open to development did exist in 1897, and it is protected land. Numerous Supreme Court decisions and even recent legislation enacted under Gov. Jim Thompson recognize all of Grant Park between Michigan, Randolph and Roosevelt as protected space. The law prohibits any buildings in Grant Park, charging admission to exhibitions there, or transferring control over the park’s public lands to private hands, even a non-profit like the museum. There is a shortage of green space for Chicago’s children, but the solution proposed by the museum is all wrong. According to the Trust for Public Land, Chicago has less green space than any other major city in America, which makes our neighborhoods less healthy, increases neighborhood crime, and depresses local economic development. The smart approach, as the Trust points out, is to invest our resources in neighborhood parks that families can access every day, just as we invest in neighborhood schools and neighborhood libraries. Unfortunately, the museum has refused to consider neighborhoods like Logan Square, Garfield Park, Bronzeville or Uptown, and instead they continue to push for a big downtown tourist attraction that chips away at green space and that Chicago’s poorest families would not be able to afford.
The museum argues no other location suits their needs ‘as well as’ Grant Park. But given that Grant Park is specially protected open space, the museum has an obligation to tell the public what their second and third choices are if they want the massive taxpayer subsidy they are seeking for their $100 million project. We are just as eager to work with them to find an alternate location as we are vigilant about protecting Grant Park. But for now they refuse to offer alternatives, and the ball remains in their court.
