MORE CHAOS AT THE PRESIDIO

Events are occurring so fast in the environmental review process for a huge art museum and a 140 room hotel on Main Post that even we who spend half our lives fighting for a true historical park cannot keep up. Here's a guess as to what's happening:

1. The historic preservation authorities at Park Service, state, and national level have finally convinced the Trust that Fisher's museum cannot be built at the chosen bowling alley site and that it cannot be built elsewhere as a massive monument. Public opposition made it possible for these authorities to do their job in a difficult political situation. What government agency wants to buck the Speaker of the House? Public opposition paid off in this step toward preserving the historical Presidio- but we are a long way from having succeeded.

2. NPS and Trust got together to work out what MIGHT be acceptable for the art museum in the area of the Day Care Center across Moraga Street. Those ideas are now the subject of review. IMPORTANT: This does not say the art museum should be at that location: it only studies what it would have to look like if it were located there. I argue that there are very strong objections to having 100,000 square feet of two story construction within 160 yards of El Presidio and located at an elevation 26 feet above the objectionable bowling alley site and Main Parade.

3. This idea of relocating and redesigning does nothing to answer fundamental policy objections concerning the legality or appropriateness of a contemporary art museum in ANY national park.

4. The ideas do nothing to justify ANY construction in a national historic landmark when there is no clear statement of purpose and need. The Trust's propaganda "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update is meaningless with such phrases as "revitalization" and "making the Presidio a great urban park." This is marketing. These are not clear expressions of need that can be analyzed throughout the EIS. The public should be able to understand a convincing need that is expressed in clear terms such that when the project is done, the results can be measured, Objective analysis based on a purpose and need that is understandable should be able to guide the public in its analysis and support for one of the alternatives in the EIS. That is required by the National Environmental Policy Act.

5. There are many rumors that the schedule will be changed yet again, but that was denied by the Trust attorney at the recent meeting when the new design concepts were introduced. These concepts are posted on the Trust website presidiotrust.gov.

STAY TUNED. There is a key historic preservation consultation scheduled for preservation organizations and neighborhood groups on December 2. The situation should be clearer then.

I suggest waiting to write your comments due December 15 until after the December 2 meeting when I will update you. Meanwhile, look at the new concepts on the website. Review "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update, also available on the Trust website. If you think they don't make sense, then please write a letter saying that and mail it to the Trust. Overwhelming public objection or lack of understanding of the "purpose and need" would require the Trust to rewrite the Main Post Update and repeat most of the review process. PresidioPal

TRUST FEELING THE HEAT: CHANGES DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING

For the second time, the Trust has changed the date of the big public meeting. Could it be that they do not want 700 more angry citizens objecting in front of the press to the wild plans to fit a huge contemporary art museum into the heart of a 230 year old National Historic Site and a National Park? The new date is December 9, but keep checking- a lot is happening behind the scenes.The Trust staff and Board of Directors are feeling heat from you, the public, and from national official preservation authorities.

Please keep e-mails and letters to the Trust flowing in. You may write more than once if you have a new idea or another specific objection. Go to the Trust website presidiotrust.gov and look at the documents. The Main Post Update has screwy statements of need: what really is the need for a contemporary art museum and hotel? It has design guidelines to control building that are specific to Fisher's art museum. Do you object to those guidelines, and why? Pick an item or two that really bugs you from the Main Post Update and then write your concerns. Be specific and cite the page number that you are objecting to.

The tide is turning!

NEW LOCATION FOR NOVEMBER 13 PUBLIC HEARING

I guess that the Trust either expects a humongous crowd of angry people, or it hopes that parking will discourage some of us from attending, but the last chance for the public to sound off is November 13, 6:30 P.M., at Saint Mary's Conference Center, 1111 Gough Street. Some parking in the Cathedral lot off Gough and more at the Japanese Cultural Center. Be there with a very short statement to the point of what you want to happen or, better, what bad information or lack of information bothers you, or how the whole process may be illegal or at least procedurally hard to understand.

It Gets Curiouser and Curiouser

We expected an authoritative analysis of the damage a large art museum would do to the Presidio as a National Historic Landmark. That may still happen, but what we did get was a series of presentations by the Trust to the people working on behalf of the public who are concerned about keeping the Presidio protected as a National Historic Landmark. The Trust, after consultation with the Park Service experts (Why didn't that happen two years ago and save us all this grief?) is proposing a large structure or structures for Fisher's contemporary art museum uphill from the site of the bowling alley and across Moraga Street. The details of what that structure or structures might look like are up in the air. My first reaction is, "Oops, that area is 28 feet higher than Main Parade!" "Wouldn't a large art museum there tower over the heart of the historic Presidio even more than it would at the earlier proposed site at the head if the parade ground?" We don't know enough to sound the alarm, but we do know that the suggested site for CAMP is the only possible site on Main Post for a major history center. CAMP at this new location would crowd out the possibility of a first class history center on the Presidio. Stay tuned.

New Article on the Presidio

Everyone should read this article that explains the current battle for the historic soul of the Presidio:  See the article at www.coastandocean.org.

Strong Opposition to CAMP Grows: NEW SCHEDULE

First, the new schedule is for a public hearing to be held by the Trust Board on Nov 13. This replaces the meeting that was scheduled for Oct. 10 because the official report on the damage that CAMP would do to the Presidio's historic integrity is not due until October 18.  The Trust will need time to adjust to what we expect will be a damning indictment. It is very important that this meeting be crowded with friends of the Presidio as a historical park, The Fisher people are organizing art students and collecting IOU's from organizations which have benefitted from Fisher's donations  to pack the crowd. Be there to represent the people.

Second, the final date for submitting comments was changed to Nov. 17. Numbers and the quality of letters count.

This Turkey Won't Fly

Folks, You are doing wonders by your comments and participation. I believe that the momentum has turned strongly against the sponsors of the 100,000 square foot art museum in an historic national park, despite rigged "guided" tours led by Trust employees, not National Park Service Rangers.

The tide has turned also in the battle being fought in the background concerning technical historic preservation standards that are being violated and the National Environmental Protection Act that would be completely ignored if the Trust approved building its pet projects. An all day "consultation" held Tuesday, September 14, brought the top people from state and federal agencies, several from Washington, as well as local preservation groups and representatives for thousands of neighbors around the Presidio. It was bare knuckle time.

The Trust officials  present included Craig Middleton, the hired executive for the Trust Board (and a former Pelosi staff member), the Trust's lawyer, and even the highly paid lawyer for Donald Fisher, sponsor of the contemporary art museum. They got an earful of six hours of direct, factual and expert objections not only to the proposals, but also concerning the irregular, confusing procedures that the Trust has applied to get us into this time wasting and expensive situation. 

 (Speaking of expensive, did you know that it is illegal for a government agency to spend funds to advocate for its favored alternative in the review processes? How much has all those marketing brochures and tour guides cost, I wonder? Do you think that they might have been biased in favor of the Trust's desired outcome? Send a comment to let us know.)

People who treasure the Presidio as what the State Historic Preservation Officer called, " A precious site unlike any other on the West Coast," left the meeting knowing that they were solid in their opposition to the Trust's reckless plans.  The feeling was that the unified position of authorities and the public in the review process finally has the Trust considering its options how to wind down this mess without too much egg on its face. But, we will be jerked around in this mess by the Trust for months more. I think that the Trust staff does not have the guts to tell the governing board of the Trust that "the Emperor wears no clothes," or (mixing metaphors,) "This turkey won't fly!" 

Participate! Continue your letters or e-mails to the Trust and Pelosi. Attend the workshops and meeting announced at www.presidoassociation.org or www. savethepresidio.org. We are succeeding, but do not pullback your support now.