Statement On
Senate Bills S. 268, 296, 470 and 1076
Before the Senate Subcommittee on National Parks
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
By The
National Coalition to Save Our Mall
June 3, 2003
Chairman Thomas and members of the Senate Subcommittee on National Parks, the National Coalition to Save Our Mall (NCSOM), founded in 2000, is very pleased to be invited to testify on the several memorial bills before the Committee today. My name is George H. F. Oberlander, a board member and Treasurer of NCSOM.
I am accompanied by Judy Scott Feldman, Ph.D., a professor of history and the Chairman of NCSOM, a national, not-for-profit education and research organization working to preserve the National Mall as the Monument to Democracy it is intended to be.
My professional background is in City and Regional Planning. I retired in 1996 from the staff of the National Capital Planning Commission, after 31 years serving mostly as the Associate Executive Director for D.C. Affairs. (Dr. Feldman`s and my resumes attached).
Last October the Coalition published its "First Annual State of the Mall Report" (attached Exhibit 1) in which we stated:
"The National Mall -- the unique National Park in the heart of our nation`s capital --
is under physical assault. The threats come from Congress, through well-intended
interest groups and otherwise well-meaning citizens who wish to see more memorials or museums located on the Mall`s dwindling historic planned public
open space. In addition, in face of post 9/11 security concerns, government agencies rush to erect walls and other barriers around our monuments, install security cameras, and erect check points to screen citizens at large public gatherings. These assaults on the Mall`s open space character threaten to change and undermine the historic symbolism that makes the Mall the premier democratic public space in the nation, and indeed the world."
(Emphasis added)
On Memorial Day, two weeks ago, NBC Nightly News had a TV story about this assault called "How Many Memorials Are Enough?" A month before that, the Sunday April 20, edition of the Los Angeles Times devoted a full two pages to what it called "America`s Maul" (M-a-u-l). I would like to offer both the videotape and news commentary for the record.
Bill S. 268, to authorize the construction of a Pyramid of Remembrance, if proposed to be located on the National Mall, and Bill S. 1076, authorizing the construction of an education center next to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, continue this physical assault.
We are not opposed to the concept of the Remembrance or the Education Center. We oppose additional man made structures on the open space of the National Mall, which is a one-of-a-kind natural resource over which this Committee has oversight.
We have three main points regarding these bills, and due to the time limit, we will focus on S. 268 and S. 1076.
1. The Commemorative Works Act (CWA) should be upheld with no exceptions in any authorizing legislation. As you know Congress passed and then-President Reagan signed the CWA in 1986 in response to this problem of overbuilding on the Mall. The purpose was and is to protect the historic L`Enfant and McMillan plans for the Mall, preserve the open space, and prevent new construction from encroaching on existing memorials.
- Regarding S. 268, Section 1(b)(2)(B) provides for exception from the CWA provisions dealing with military commemoratives and commemorating events. We are opposed to these exceptions. If the concept of the pyramid does not fit the standards in the CWA, then the structure might be better located in Arlington National Cemetery.
- Concerning S. 1076, the Vietnam Education Center, Section 6(b) would except the Center from requiring approval by law for the location in Area 1. This provision is completely unacceptable to the Coalition. (Attached Exhibit 2 is our May 20, 2003 News Advisory on the Education Center). A Center at this site would interfere with the serenity of the Memorial as well as encroach on the Lincoln Memorial and its site.
- Any exceptions will set bad precedent. If you authorize this education/visitor center for one memorial, there will be requests for each of the other memorials recently built and in the pipeline. We wonder why the National Park Service`s proposal for a Visitor/Education/Security Screening Center under the grounds of the Washington Monument is not also being considered by this Committee since it calls for a 60-foot addition to the historic Lodge on 15th Street and security walls on the open space. Has the Committee recently authorized this undertaking on National Park land?
2. We support the current planning policies of the National capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and the Joint Task Force on Memorials and its "Memorials and Museum Master Plan (December 2001), which establishes the Mall as a "Reserve" for which no new memorials or museums should be allowed. We have reproduced and attached graphics from the NCPC Master Plan showing both the 1986 CWA boundaries for the so called Area I and Area II, and a map showing the adopted Commemorative Zone. (Attached Map A and Map B), as well as sites off-the-Mall to accommodate future proposals.
- Both Bills S. 268 and S. 1076 are in direct conflict with these planning policies. Instead of seeking Mall sites, sponsors should choose from the numerous off-Mall sites identified in the NCPC Plan.
The current public planning policies on the location of commemorative works, agreed to by a Joint Task Force on Memorials, provide for:
- Preserving the integrity of the Monumental Core and its open space, recreation lands, and scenic qualities by limiting memorials in the close-in portions of the Core;
- Encouraging memorials to locate in all quadrants of the city as a way of enhancing neighborhoods and supporting local revitalization efforts; and
- Supporting Comprehensive Plan proposals which call for increasing the public`s use of the National Capital waterfronts.
The NCPC Master Plan also contains specific policies which suggest "No new memorials or museums within the designated reserve" or central portion of the Mall and "no museums or education centers may be located in East Potomac Park or on other park land in Area I". (Emphasis added)
3. The Coalition is opposed to visitor facilities at each of our monuments and memorials. We are not opposed to a singular or maybe (if need requires) two centers one possibly located in the Castle building of The Smithsonian and the other at Union Station. Such locations would help visitors find their way around the National Mall and obtain information and knowledge about the unifying sense of freedom that underscores the entire two mile open space stretch of the Mall from the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial.
Furthermore, if the Congress believes there is a need to educate our children about America`s involvement in war and conflict, beyond the level of our public educational systems, then the Coalition would urge the Congress to authorize one comprehensive Museum of U.S. Military History or Education Center, located in accordance with the NCPC Memorial And Museum Master Plan. The document designates 20 Prime Candidate Sites and 32 Candidate Sites. (Maps C)
Above and beyond the memorials you are considering today, the Congress has authorized the Black Patriots Memorial, the John Adams Memorial, and the African American History and Culture Museum. In addition, there are 17 proposals pending which either specify a Mall site or could request a Mall site. Examples (The Ronald Reagan Memorial Act of 2001 (HR 452), The Native American Memorial (HR 2918), Memorials to Terrorist Victims in the United States (HR 2982), and the Slavery Memorial (HR 4964).)
According to the NCPC December 2001 "Memorials And Museum Master Plan" there are, as of June 2001, 155 memorials and 74 museums on public land in the District of Columbia and its environs. The location of each of the existing 229 sites can be found in the inside cover of the Plan.
If the Congress continues to exempt memorials from existing laws why have the Commemorative Works Act, or the Memorial Commission, or the Joint Task Force on Memorials or the memorial and museum planning work of NCPC?
We have no comments about S. 296, which requires the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress regarding possible inscriptions of veterans` names on the Memorial Wall. We would have serious concerns if the number of names that might be added would require additional construction or alteration to the Wall or other commemorative additions to the site. The Wall and its setting are a complete work of Art. The sculpture additions to the site have already
cluttered this portion of this National Park.
With respect to S. 268, which would authorize the Pyramid of Remembrance in Area II, we would feel more comfortable if Section 1 (b) (2) (A) would also make reference to the NCPC Memorials and Museums Master Plan Prime Candidate Sites. There are several Prime Candidate sites identified (depending on size and height) that would be good locations for this commemorative work.
Regarding S. 470, we have no comments. As we understand this change in the authorizing legislation for the construction of a memorial to Martin Luther King, Jr., it extends the termination of the construction authorization to November 12, 2006.
The Coalition`s primary concern is the preservation of the entire Mall and we would like to make two final comments:
1. Maintenance of existing memorials, grass, pathways and restrooms facilities. A greater maintenance effort is needed. We provide a photo of the condition of the D.C. WW I Memorial. (Exhibit 3)
2. Regarding the CWA process, we have heard that the NCMC recently voted to exempt its meetings from FACA and public open meetings. Since NCMC is where site considerations occur, we think that is a mistake. We ask this Committee to confirm this and, if true, an explanation for the exclusion of the public from what is clearly the public`s business.
We do not understand why this Committee is not also considering S. 1157, a Bill to establish within The Smithsonian Institution, the National Museum of African American History and Culture. Section 8 of that Bill mentions two possible locations on the Mall for this proposed museum.
In summary we support:
- the Commemorative Works Act with no exceptions in any authorizing legislation;
- the Memorials and Museum Master Plan and the current planning policies on the location of commemorative works;
- a comprehensive Museum of U.S. Military History, (similar to the London Imperial War Museum) instead of individual visitor/education facilities at each of the war memorials); and
- One or two visitor centers providing information, tickets and knowledge about all attractions of the National Capital Region.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee.
We would be pleased to answer any questions
________________________________________________
G.H.F. Oberlander AICP, Board Member & Treasurer,
National Coalition To Save Our Mall
Back to the top
|
