Posted by
Dan Sebby on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 4:19:05 PM
From presidioassocation.org:
2009. What lies ahead? A large hotel and a contemporary art museum in
the center of a national park and a national historic landmark? The
path open for more wealthy donors to build their personal dreams in a
park that belongs to all of the people? The present proposals and the
revisions we are told to expect in January will continue to endanger
the Presidio's status as a national park. If it to continue as a
national park, it must be managed to the standards of a national park.
Every action that the Presidio Trust Board takes that impairs the
historic resources of the Presidio is one step closer to the Presidio's
losing its status as a national park and national historic landmark.
There are people in San Francisco and in Washington who would be
delighted to see that happen. Some don't want the Presidio to be
governed by national park rules, but to be a gorgeous vacant lot upon
which they can build their fantasy of the moment. Others probably think
that they could profit from such a development. Still others think that
they can manage the park functions of a national park better than the
men and women of a Park Service that has nearly 100 years of experience
and proud tradition as custodian of America's national parks.
All
the public - even those who admire Mr. Fisher's art collection- cannot
find a single reason why the Fisher Museum has to be in a national park
rather than in the thriving, arts-loving city nearby. That is because a
contemporary art museum is alien to the values of the Presidio. It
expresses the values of a modern city. It makes the Presidio someplace
that is fundamentally different than when it was designated a national
historic landmark.
So, how can we continue to keep the
pressure on to save the Presidio? Write now to Congresswoman Pelosi to
express your outrage that this struggle is still going on. Ask on what
authority the Presidio would be a part of the only national park in the
nation with a newly built contemporary art museum, when no other
national park would have such an alien activity forced upon it. Ask her
why the Presidio believes that it is not required to follow the laws
concerning the protection of national park resources that guide all
other other national parks. Does she support that position? Was the
intent of Congress in the Presidio Trust Act for the Presidio to be in
the parks system, but not follow the rules that define what a national
park is? Is or is not the Presidio a national park? Send a copy of your
letter to mainpost@presidiotrust.gov .
Write! Continue to monitor this blog and presidioassociation.org.