Supporters, foes of Children's Museum proposed move take trench...

[BARBARA]

Its all so very sad, Daley gets what Daley wants, how sad for Chicago,,,,,,,,The concrete and steel city, and that is not just figuratively speaking..........

[bug me not]

I thank all the readers who have written thoughtful comments regarding this issue. All city residents should oppose this development for the obvious reasons spelled out here and in other forums. If this goes forward, I too will be happy to contribute money towards a lawsuit that will fight this damaging precedent. Aldermen who vote in support of this measure - watch out for the wrath of the voters. Didn't you count how many bums got thrown out last election?

[Bob from Illinois]

It's not about the children, it's about the Olympics and how the mayor will look. Oh yes and the "POWER". Always the POWER with the Daley's!

Tears up the airport on the lake to create a park, but builds "temporary" structures and holds High Priced concerts.

Hows that park doing Daley?

Refuses to look at any other space for museum, and puts the museum underground to not obstruct views. Great way to allow the children of the future to enjoy the park.

Of course with all the deaths going on with the children being the innocent victims, maybe theirs a mixed message with the museum being under ground!

All hail the wise King Daley!
All hail the just King Daley!
King of the fools!

[JML]

bug me not wrote:

I thank all the readers who have written thoughtful comments regarding this issue. All city residents should oppose this development for the obvious reasons spelled out here and in other forums. If this goes forward, I too will be happy to contribute money towards a lawsuit that will fight this damaging precedent.

As will I, and hopefully many others who know right from wrong.

bug me not wrote:

Aldermen who vote in support of this measure - watch out for the wrath of the voters. Didn't you count how many bums got thrown out last election?

We can only hope that voters will get rid of Richie's zombies in the next election. Sadly, there's far too many people who either don't vote at all or don't care about an incumbent's track record.

[No building in Grant Park]

JML wrote:

<quoted text>
As will I, and hopefully many others who know right from wrong.
<quoted text>
We can only hope that voters will get rid of Richie's zombies in the next election. Sadly, there's far too many people who either don't vote at all or don't care about an incumbent's track record.

We need to keep track of how the alderman vote and hold them accountable at election time. Voting for the building of the CCM Museum is voting to break the law and spend tax dollars on legal fees when our taxes are ever increasing.

We need hard-working, thoughtful, and responsible people in government.

[What is Wrong With Mary]

my kind of town wrote:

<quoted text>
Also forget about:
Balcer
Mary Ann Smith
William Banks
ALL NEW Aldermen are important in this fight-including
Sandy Jackson
Bob Fioretti
Some veterans who may be swayed to vote no:
Joe Moore
Walter Burnett
Manny Flores
Vi Daley
Gene Schulter
Tom Tunney
Helen Schiller
Ed Smith
Virginia Rugai

Dear Town:
I agree with you on your other aldermanic evaluations, but I am having a hard time believing that Ald. Mary Ann Smith is going to support the Museum in the face of overwhelming community opposition. She touts herself as a strong community advocate. The following clips from her website (www.masmith48.org/economicdev elopment.html) bear this out:
Community Input Key to Decision-Making
The 48th Ward is a leader in community-directed development with a system that is unique in Chicago politics. Here decisions on zoning changes and variances; PPA licenses; public development funding, etc. are voted on by the community representatives who form the 48th Ward Zoning and Planning Committee. Alderman Smith has chosen to be bound by that vote.

[USOC]

Chicago Resident - JS wrote:

<quoted text>
EXCELLENT IDEA, since the mayor doesn't care what the majority of Chicago wants I am sure the Olympics committee will be very interested to hear how this city really works.

But we LOVE Chicago ... they just gave us millions for our 'help.' Bwah hah hah hah.

[Life of Reilly]

What is Wrong With Mary wrote:

<quoted text>
Dear Town:
The 48th Ward is a leader in community-directed development with a system that is unique in Chicago politics. Here decisions on zoning changes and variances; PPA licenses; public development funding, etc. are voted on by the community representatives who form the 48th Ward Zoning and Planning Committee. Alderman Smith has chosen to be bound by that vote.

In close votes on highly debated issues, the committee usually defers to the opinion of the block club closest to the business or development.

In some (not all) city wards this process is possible, and perhaps prefereable. The same principle does not pertain to all wards however, and the 42nd Ward is among those.

The City Council has a tradition of defering to the local Alderman on matters of zoning and development, but this is a tradition, and not a law or a rule.

Alderman Reilly may have been under the mis-guided notion that he had the same Aldermanic perrogative as most others with regard to zoning and development issues in the 42nd Ward, but I believe that this is about to be clarified for him, so that he will know better going forward.

As I posted previously, I feel sorry for him, as I think he is well intended.

[spanky]

We're winning against the Latin school in the fight for Lincoln park, we can win this too. If Vi Daley does not support Rielly in fighting this, we will abnd together and VOTE HER OUT

[JML]

spanky wrote:

We're winning against the Latin School in the fight for Lincoln Park, and we can win this too. If Vi Daley does not support Reilly in fighting this, we will band together and VOTE HER OUT.

http://www.wlsam.com/article.asp...

According to the above Website, Vi Daley of the 43rd Ward is currently against the museum moving to Grant Park. There are only EIGHT Aldermen who are firmly against the move and four Aldermen who are firmly for the move. All the rest, according to WLS-AM, are undecided or did not return the station's calls.

Look at the list to see how your Alderman may vote and call them to let them know how you feel.

If you're not sure which Alderman represents you, you can find out here:

http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/alder...

--OR HERE--

http://www.savegrantpark.org/

[my kind of town]

"What is Wrong With Mary"
Dear Town:
I agree with you on your other aldermanic evaluations, but I am having a hard time believing that Ald. Mary Ann Smith is going to support the Museum in the face of overwhelming community opposition.
----

We shall see. If she is your Alderperson I would lobby
her hard. Vi Daley reportedly is voting against the
Museum at the full Councl session. As for anyone
telling you "there are not enough votes" to defeat
this under "scenarios" they have worked out.....
LET'S JUST TRY TO GIVE THEM POLITICAL COVER
AND NOT GIVE UP BEFORE THE VOTE IS TAKEN. Ok?
Contact Aldermen...show up at the Zoning Committee
meeting on Tuesday. The problem with this town is
that no one thinks they have power. We do. Harold
Washington's election, the ouster of Ted Matlak,
the stand against Latin Schools Land Grab prove it.
We have power when we use it fully, forcefully and
intelligently. Use your power. And for anyone telling
you it's not use...well, you can stay at home with
your spreadsheets.

[spanky]

E-Mail your alderman. FYI,I was after Vi because although she's against the CM, she allowed the Latin School soccer field

[my kind of town]

spanky wrote:

E-Mail your alderman. FYI,I was after Vi because although she's against the CM, she allowed the Latin School soccer field

I say live and learn. Aldermen can distinguish
themselves in this moment and likely cement many
re-electon votes if they stand against clout and
for Grant Park. Let them know how you feel. This
fight is worth it.

[Kathie]

The zoning committee meets Tuesday, May 20, at 10 AM. Get there earlier, if you can go. This battle is definitely worth it, especially if we can win it now instead of in court later. We can fight city hall!

[The Grant Park 26]

26 Alderman can make a historic name for themselves: THE GRANT PARK 26.

These elected officials listened to the overwhelming majority of Chicagoans and SAVED GRANT PARK!

They avoided a looonnggggg law suit at tax payers (read: voters) expense and did the right thing!

Call your alderman NOW!!

[Julie]

The press and the overwhelming majority of Chicago citizens are paying attention and are furious at this latest attempt to divert public land for private interests.

We will remember and hold accountable all those who help this so-called museum steal our Grant Park! JUST SAY NO!

[Jim]

Added commission member Nancy Pacher: "It increases green space and makes the park more accessible to children and adults and replaces an old and dilapidated field house."

Dear Nancy,

You have no idea what green space is. Where do you live. So cutting down 200 20 Year old trees and planting a patch grass on a Ant Hill is creating green space.

Here is the definition of green space for your convineince

Greenspaces are the 'green lungs' of our towns and cities contributing to improving people's physical and mental health by providing places for informal recreation - walking, cycling, sitting, socialising and children's play - and 'breathing spaces' to take time out from the stresses of modern life. They bring the countryside into our towns and cities, and make it accessible from our 'backdoors'.

[Lemme Tellu]

They pulled my input on this before -- but this is the SAME thing that was said when they built that Peggy Notebaert Nature Museum in Lincoln Park -- that somehow by chopping down the trees and destroying the fishing lagoon out back and paving over the grassy field -- that this was CREATING GREEN SPACE.

SERIOUSLY, this was what they said. A lot of "them" were the same folks as this time.

These people do not realize that George Orwell created them as characters years and years ago.

[Jen]

Thank you for reminding us of Daley's hand picked commissioner Nancy Pacher's commet: "It increases green space and makes the park more accessible to children and adults and replaces an old and dilapidated field house."

How does constructing a new 100,000 building in open park space in Grant Park increase green space? The proposed building, much of it jutting as much as 50 ft above the ground level of the park, would displace an existing small underground field house, 1/15th its size. Creating earthen mounds up the sides of the proposed building does not qualify 80% of it as being underground.

Not only would this new building take up significant park space, it would also be private and accessible only to those who pay the admission fee. Furthermore, the CCM's proposal includes 1.74 acres of land and a liquor license, presumably so that the museum can host private events.

The CCM claims that their new structure would replace the existing field house and that they would build a new field house. They should be reminded that the existing field house renovation funds were already allocated when the Grant Park garage was sold by the city. The sale included that $35 million be set aside for renovation of the field house prior to 2012.

The CCM won't be "saving" the field house or adding open space, it will be commandeering PUBLIC park land in protected Grant Park for its own private use. This is wrong and future generations depend on us to preserve the park so it's still here for them to enjoy as it is for us today.

[Life of Reilly]

The hyperbole of these frenzied high pitched posts appear to be belching out of the Near East Side condomonium towers in such a frenetic torrent that I am beginning to become concerned that the collective citizenry is going to become over-heated, hyper-ventilate, and pass out.

The suggestion continually made here that the "overwhelming majority of Chicagoans stand with Alderman Reilly" is absurd just on its face.

Let's try to put some things into perspective. First, citywide turnout in the February 2007 municpal aldermanic elections was 33%, and yet despite having what was hyped as one of the most competitive anti-incumbent contests, the 42nd Ward lagged the citywide turnout with just 32% of registered voters casting a ballot.

In other words, a full 2/3 rd's of the registered voters in the 42nd Ward didn't even bother to vote at all!

Of the 32% of the registered voters that did show up to vote, Alderman Reilly garnered 54% of the vote, which initially might seem great, until you stop and realize that he was elected to office by less than 18% of the registered voters in the 42nd Ward, and the overhwelming majority of the registered voters in the ward did not vote for him, even though the press will airbrush his successful challenge to the long term incument as a major victory.

Mayor Daley on the other hand won re-election with 71% of the vote city-wide. ODrilling it down frther however he secured 86% of the vote in the 42nd Ward, against 2 challengers, where Alderman Reilly only had one opponent. Mayor Daley secured just almost 4,200 votes more than the anti-development challenger Alderman Reilly in the 42nd ward.

Even though one of the most contentious issues in the Aldermanic election was supposed to be related to development, and Mayor Daley himself announced rhat Chicago Children's Museum would be moving to the Daley B-Centennial Plaza location more than 5 months before the Aldermanic election, Alderman Reilly won the precinct immediately adjacent to Daley Bi-Centennial Plaza by just 6 votes; and Mayor Daley out-polled Alderman Reilly in this precinct by more than 2:1, with 2 opponents while Alderman Reilly had just one.

Bringing this back to the issue at hand here now, the painful reality is that the overhelming majority of people just don't care about this issue and do not view this as one of their priorities for local government, partly because such a small number of people are actually directly adversely impacted.

Both sides of this issue are being driven by such a small number of people, which shrinks even further into oblivion when factoring out suburbanites, non-registered citizens, and the 66% of those registered to vote but don't bother to do so, and you begin to realize how really few people are actually even paying attention to this issue at all, and even amongst the few that are supporters and opponents at forums and events have been reported as almost evenly divided.

For the overwhelming majority of Chicagoans, this isue it seems is much ado about nothing.

So I would hope that relative handful of people bantering back and forth on this topic don't completely overheat and cause the entire comment system to melt down.

In case you haven't noticed, there is a whole world of issues out there that people seem to want to post and comment about.