Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:44:55 EDT |
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7bit |
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 10/1/98 2:53:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:
> Here's the part that bothers me the most. "The Evanston visitor's
> bureau decided that it did not have the resources" to take over
> the building, at the news site, as a visitor's center.
> "'It would be something we would consider down the road, maybe in
> two years.'" (quotes from Sun-Times, quoting the bureau's
> exec.dir.) Two little and two late.
So for two years they could not wait? Is this a reflection of the short terms
& short term thinking of politicians? This may be taken as a snide comment but
I am serious in asking, is the exec. dir in this case Republican or Democrat?
I'm wondering if there is a corollary between progressive developers and
political affiliation. If there is a predominance of Republicans that like to
tear down old buildings then should we be considering that a downturn in
Democrats in congress would have a negative impact on HP? Considering the
problems the Dems are having with Clinton I'm concerned about the long-term
impact on the preservation industry. Who in government works the most to cut
the NPS budget for building maintenance? With the New Amsterdam Theater &
Disney deal in NYC there was a lull, a deep bulf of press silence, in the
switch from Cuomo (Democrat) to Pataki (Republican) for governor. I think
there were some people with deep pockets holding their breath to see which way
the Pataki administration would turn. I think redevelopment of 42nd Street &
jobs won out and that consideration of HP was a minor consideration.
][<en
|
|
|