Lucas threatens to walk
Wednesday, May 4, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Press release…
STATEMENT: We are now seriously pursuing locations outside of Chicago.
CHICAGO - The following statement is by Mellody Hobson on behalf of the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art following Friends of the Parks announcement rejecting a compromise location for the museum:
“My husband and I have worked in earnest for two years, side-by-side with every relevant city agency, community leader, and policy maker, to give what would be the largest philanthropic gift to an American city in the 21st century. From the beginning, this process has been co-opted and hijacked by a small special interest group. When the Friends of the Parks sued the city in order to preserve a parking lot, we were offered a different and feasible solution—the replacement of an underutilized and outdated convention space that would also add more than 12 acres of new parkland. Yet, even with this additional park space, an organization that claims to ‘preserve, protect, improve and promote the use of parks and open space’ now opposes this as well. While they claim to be a ‘strong steward of Chicago and a partner to its progress,’ their actions and decision rob our state of more than $2 billion in economic benefits, thousands of jobs and countless educational opportunities for children and adults alike.
As an African American who has spent my entire life in this city I love, it saddens me that young black and brown children will be denied the chance to benefit from what this museum will offer. As Chair of the Board of After School Matters, which serves 15,000 public high school students in Chicago and has more demand than can ever be met, I have seen firsthand what art can do to spur imagination and creativity, heal the soul and advance society—something so needed right now. This is a city of big shoulders and a metropolis that is second to none. In refusing to accept the extraordinary public benefits of the museum, the Friends of the Parks has proven itself to be no friend of Chicago. We are now seriously pursuing locations outside of Chicago. If the museum is forced to leave, it will be because of the Friends of the Parks and that is no victory for anyone.”
Maybe, but Lucas was also shown the door by San Francisco. He’s been trying to give this thing away since 2010, for crying out loud.
* Sun-Times…
“Mr. Lucas and the city only wanted a lakefront site, and we do not believe that is acceptable. We don’t think it’s appropriate to exchange building on lakefront land for other things — even if it’s park land. It’s inappropriate to build on public trust land,” said Juanita Irizarry, executive director of Friends of the Parks.
“Mr. Lucas may leave. That is ultimately his decision. But there are many other viable sites. Chicagoans should not be held hostage to one man’s desires. The public trust must be protected and we will continue to fight for our lakefront to remain open, free and clear.” […]
“The vision to put the Lucas Museum on the lakefront in the first place is what ultimately killed this deal. They should have fought for a legal site to begin with. It’s ultimately Mr. Lucas who wanted it his way or the highway,” Irizarry said. […]
“It would be too bad for Chicago to lose the Lucas museum, but that would demonstrate it’s not a commitment of George Lucas and [wife] Mellody Hobson to stay in Chicago. . . . It ultimately lies in the lap of Mr. Lucas as to whether he’s willing to cooperate with the broader needs of Chicago and put it on another site,” she said. “If he’s not, folks should ask Mr. Lucas, `Why not?’” […]
“There are many folks throughout the city who would love to see McCormick Place [East] gone. It’s something we expect will happen one way or the other in the not too distant future. It has become obsolete. There have been conversations about other uses for that site because it is obsolete. We expect it will eventually come down. We don’t think an excuse is necessary,” she said.
The whole idea of keeping the lakeshore clear and free of obstruction was to stop just these sorts of billionaire “gifts.” So, yeah, they make a good point.
* Neil Steinberg is not so polite…
Lucas wants a monument to himself, and Rahm wants to dilute his own general failure as mayor to solve substantive problems by hanging shiny prizes off his belt to dazzle the citizenry. […]
I’ve been saying this from the beginning. The “Star Wars” franchise was an enormous hit. But so was Cabbage Patch Kids, and they don’t deserve a lakefront museum either. Draping the “narrative arts” smokescreen over the museum fools no one. We could put it anywhere. […]
The Norman Rockwell Museum — Lucas owns dozens of Rockwells, and they are to be part of the collection — is in remote Stockbridge, Massachusetts, and plenty of Rockwell fans make the trek there to see it. I did. If the mayor actually cared about the whole city, as he pretends to, he’d be leaning on Lucas to put his new museum in Pullman, and not using the lakefront downtown to draw people to it instead of using the museum to draw people elsewhere. Maybe because it can’t, and they know it. Who’s going to fly to Chicago to see a museum that Chicagoans won’t get on a bus for 15 minutes to visit? […]
Evoking McCormick Place should be a clarifying moment. Longtime Chicagoans might remember that the reason McCormick Place is on the lakefront to begin with is because the Tribune bullied the city into putting it there in 1960. Six years after opening, it burned to the ground, thanks to the wrath of an angry God, only to be rebuilt again by Richard J. Daley.
Here’s a thought: Tear down McCormick Place and don’t build anything there. Let Lucas fob his museum off on Cleveland or Phoenix or one of those cities that will be genuinely delighted to have it. When that happens, how many of you would make plans to go to Cleveland or Phoenix or wherever the heck it ends up to see a mock-up of R2D2 and some framed comic strips? A show of hands. Anybody? I didn’t think so.
- D.P.Gumby - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:28 am:
Where were the so-called “Friends of the Parks” when the beyond ugly toilet bowl was dropped on top of Soldier Field?
- Fusion - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:28 am:
That this is happening on Star Wars Day is sacrilege. May the Fourth Be With You.
- Let Him Go - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:30 am:
There are lots of alternative spots for the museum which are not on the lakefront. Let him take his museum and go.
On a related note: I am offended by Ms. Hobson’s statement “As an African American who has spent my entire life in this city I love, it saddens me that young black and brown children.” What does her race have to do with a museum? Also, why isn’t anyone calling her out as a racist? In her world, can’t white children by denied?
- pizza rat - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:31 am:
May the fourth be…elsewhere.
Seriously, PLEASE drop the “this is for the city/this is for the kids” charade. If that’s the case, then why does this absolutely NEED to be on the lakefront? Why not put it in one of the many Chicago neighborhoods that would truly benefit from the economic investment?
Because this isn’t about “young black and brown children.” This is about George Lucas, and his ego, and his legacy. Any pretense otherwise is, frankly, insulting (honestly, painting Friends of the Park as the enemies of “black and brown children” is BEYOND insulting, and a reminder that these modern day robber barons will say and do anything to get their way).
Send these ego-monsters elsewhere…if Disney couldn’t trust George Lucas with the next film in a movie franchise, why should we trust him with one of the most prized pieces of property in our entire city? I mean, this is the guy who (some would argue) nearly single-handedly ruined the Star Wars franchise. Why does the writer/director/producer of The Phantom Menace get to drop a space-dome-shaped turd on our lakefront?
And on top of all of this, shouldn’t the Mayor and his team be paying attention to more pressing issues right now?
SHEESH
/rant
- lake county democrat - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:32 am:
It’s bad enough for Chicago residents who are “Friends of the Park” to be so unyielding, it’s another when comfortably off white suburbanites (Neil Steinberg) are. If the taxes in the revised proposal make this a bad deal, fine, but otherwise it boggles the mind that people would be against a proposal that *reduces* the footprint of buildings on the lakefront while providing at least –some– jobs. What’s the unemployment rate for young African-Americans in Chicago again? Something you usually see in the third world, right? How can you so breezily write off any new jobs given the state the city is in? Especially when the most likely alternative is McCormick Place east stays put. Ugh. And though this museum probably isn’t that much of a magnet to draw tourists to Chicago in and of itself (though SciFi fans can be intense - maybe if you through a ComicCon there or something…), it would add to the “critical mass” that does bring tourists here.
- Groucho - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:33 am:
I am sooooo glad we get to keep McCormick Place. S genuine Chicago Landmark!!!!
- Jose Abreu's next homer - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:34 am:
So the kids can only attend museums that are on the lakefront? Kids lose again. I’m glad Mellody thought of the kids.
- Not It - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am:
I don’t understand why it must be on the Lakefront. Developers have been drooling at lakefront development for two centuries and we have always told them no. Why does George Lucas get a yes?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am:
–STATEMENT: We are now seriously pursuing locations outside of Chicago.–
I’m guessing Alderaan is out.
Tatooine, perhaps?
- OneMan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:38 am:
wordslinger for the win…
I heard Hoth is willing to over major incentives.
- Abe the Babe - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:39 am:
These are not the politicians you are looking for.
- pizza rat - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:40 am:
I think my comment may have been deleted? Can only imagine it was because of some very light profanity. Edits made, see below.
May the fourth be…elsewhere.
Seriously, PLEASE drop the “this is for the city/this is for the kids” charade. If that’s the case, then why does this absolutely NEED to be on the lakefront? Why not put it in one of the many Chicago neighborhoods that would truly benefit from the economic investment?
Because this isn’t about “young black and brown children.” This is about George Lucas, and his ego, and his legacy. Any pretense otherwise is, frankly, insulting (honestly, painting Friends of the Park as the enemies of “black and brown children” is BEYOND insulting, and a reminder that these modern day robber barons will say and do anything to get their way).
Send these ego-monsters elsewhere…if Disney couldn’t trust George Lucas with the next film in a movie franchise, why should we trust him with one of the most prized pieces of property in our entire city? I mean, this is the guy who (some would argue) nearly single-handedly ruined the Star Wars franchise. Why does the writer/director/producer of The Phantom Menace get to drop a space-dome-shaped boondoggle on our lakefront?
And on top of all of this, shouldn’t the Mayor and his team be paying attention to more pressing issues right now?
SHEESH
/rant
- The Man on 6 - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:40 am:
==[I]t saddens me that young black and brown children will be denied the chance to benefit from what this museum will offer.==
I had no idea that a proposed Star Wars museum was really about racial politics. Shows you what I know. /snark
- Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:43 am:
- Not It - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am:
I don’t understand why it must be on the Lakefront. Developers have been drooling at lakefront development for two centuries and we have always told them no. Why does George Lucas get a yes?
In case you haven’t noticed there are three other museums, a stadium and a marina next to the asphalt parking lot in question.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:44 am:
–I don’t understand why it must be on the Lakefront. Developers have been drooling at lakefront development for two centuries and we have always told them no. Why does George Lucas get a yes?–
5.1 billion reasons, according to Forbes.
He couldn’t sell getting a piece of The Presidio in his hometown. We’re not a bunch of yokels, here.
Below is a link to the Lucas crew’s pitch, in their own words. Ask yourself if it rates prime Chicago lakefront.
The people of San Francisco didn’t think it was worthy of Pacific Ocean parkland.
http://lucasmuseum.org/
- Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:44 am:
Chicago is getting exactly what it deserves. Nothing but a surface parking lot.
- Chicago PR Guy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:44 am:
When Daley tried to move the Children’s Museum into Grant Park he pulled out the race card which failed. I don’t understand why Hobson saw fit to mention black and brown children. All children will be equally affected however this turns out.
I think Friends of the Parks are a bunch of knuckleheads. In recent years the IC tracks have been topped off with a park. Meigs Field was converted into a park. The shooting range up on Diversey was returned to the park. The City just added acres of parkland surrounding the theater on Fullerton. All of these projects save the IC tracks sit on the Lake.
With that said, if Hobson really cares about access for black and brown children, perhaps Washington Park near the Obama Library, Oriental Institute and MSI would be a better place.
- Formerly Known as Frenchie M - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:46 am:
Not sure why he just doesn’t use the Thompson Center. It’s got a Star Wars-y look, a great location, and plenty of space.
Some renovations — and boom! Good to go.
- Jake From Elwood - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:48 am:
Put the Lucas museum in Chicago if you want, but don’t put it on the lakefront and don’t divert tax dollars that need to go into the massively underfunded pension system.
If these two conditions cannot be met, walk away. Let Lucas store his knickknacks elsewhere.
Think Portland or Austin.
- TinyDancer(FKA Sue) - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:54 am:
“…it saddens me that young black and brown children will be denied the chance to benefit from what this museum will offer. … I have seen firsthand what art can do to spur imagination and creativity, heal the soul and advance society—something so needed right now.” ?????????????????
Uh, so why don’t you use your influence with the mayor to reinstate all the art and music teachers he fired?
Rahm closed Lafayette School - a neighborhood school with an amazing orchestra, so don’t cry to us about young black and brown children needing the arts.
And what about the amazing stained glass museum (free) they evicted from Navy Pier? The mayor is one-man art destroying machine.
- A guy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:55 am:
If this museum truly qualifies as a museum, as many people think it does, a location on a well-planned “museum campus” would seem appropriate. I like the idea of replacing the old McCormick space with this and adding more park land. I don’t love her whining or rationale using black and brown children, but I do agree with her premise that she’s negotiating with people who are beyond “nuts”. They are. I hope they keep this thing here. I’m not a Star Wars freak, but recognize how impactful that has been on a majority of people who love it. It’s unique. It’d be nice to have. And, it is economic development with sustenance. For heaven’s sake, work something out.
For the record, SF doesn’t have an ounce of land left anywhere there.
- Ms. SHEESH - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:55 am:
Let’s kill two birds with one stone. The Governor would love to have it over at the State of Illinois Building. He’d turn a profit for sure. Keep the Lucas collection downtown and everybody happy? Sheesh.
- God's Country - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:56 am:
“- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am:
–STATEMENT: We are now seriously pursuing locations outside of Chicago.–
I’m guessing Alderaan is out.”
Too soon, man. Too soon.
- Montrose - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:57 am:
“Where were the so-called “Friends of the Parks” when the beyond ugly toilet bowl was dropped on top of Soldier Field?”
They sued. They lost.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-11-16/news/0111160222_1_park-district-stadium-project-foreman
- NoGifts - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:11 am:
Kind of like losing the olympics if you ask me. Close call.
- lake county democrat - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:11 am:
The people against the museum haven’t answered why they favor leaving McCormick Place East up instead of replacing it with a smaller building. That’s a critical distinction from things like the Children’s Museum. I’m not saying the Lucas family would never bluff, but I really don’t think they’re going to go for Michael Reece or one of the other suggested locations.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:12 am:
We support this museum.
– Friends of the Porkins (RIP)
- Not It - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:12 am:
Tone - In case you hadn’t noticed all those museums and marinas are PUBLICLY owned. In fact; they are governed by the Illinois Park District Museum and Acquarium Act.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:15 am:
– don’t love her whining or rationale using black and brown children, but I do agree with her premise that she’s negotiating with people who are beyond “nuts”. They are.–
Why are they “beyond nuts?”
In your world, there are no rational or compelling reasons to fight to keep the lakefront “forever open, clear and free?” A collection of Star Wars tchotchkes and Norman Rockwell prints is the reasonable, obvious best usage for that real estate?
The fight to keep the lakefront clear has been going on since 1836. Was Daniel Burnham “nuts?” Was Montgomery Ward “nuts?”
Even Richard M. Daley said his old-man’s clouting of Lakeside Center was a terrible mistake. He said the site should be a park. Is he “nuts,” too.
- Grimm - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:17 am:
He is altering the deal, pray he doesn’t alter it any further…
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:21 am:
“Even Richard M. Daley said his old-man’s clouting of Lakeside Center was a terrible mistake. He said the site should be a park. Is he “nuts,” too.”
He sure parked the heck out of Meigs Field, even disingenuously citing terrorism to do it.
- HangingOn - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:23 am:
They should put it in Peoria. They’re more than willing to fill up the riverfront with buildings.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:25 am:
Good
- Harry - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:29 am:
So Rahm and his hedge fund buddies and celebrity pals won’t be able to hold events and fundraisers at the new Lucas Museum. Boo hoo.
It’s not often that I agree with Neil Steinberg, but this is one time I do. This is Lucas cleaning out his attic, and while it would get some visitors, they will be people already here for other reasons so the economic impact will be minute.
- Amalia - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:34 am:
idiocy. the museum would be awesome and we could use a new addition to the old school museums that are there. I imagine that there is a whole tech angle that would be attached to the new museum, not just a “look at the costumes” approach since that is what museums are, educational institutions. why doesn’t friends of the parks sue to get rid of the parking lot?
- LizPhairTax - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:34 am:
In my latest “it saddens me that young black and brown children will be denied the chance to benefit from…” mock draft “what this museum will offer” is grading out as a day 3 pick/undrafted free agent.
Then again, I’m not as impartial as Mellody Hobson.
- Earnest - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:36 am:
>We are now seriously pursuing locations outside of Chicago.
Quick tip: you might find some good incentives by talking to Indiana or Wisconsin.
- BigDoggie - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:42 am:
Somewhere, Billy Dee Williams is sobbing for all of the black and brown children. May the race card be with you!
- Ghost - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:45 am:
star wars draws about 2 billion in annual rev, and disney is teleasing a movie every year and building two dedicated theme parks.
yeah i guess chicago deserves the business saavy people it has …. instead of brining in new tevenue streams we could just raise property taxes and increase parking fees…. thats working well right? good plan cashs trapped chicago…. turn away money
- Skeptic - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:46 am:
“They should put it in Peoria.” Better yet, put it in Springfield. There’s already plenty of surface lots that are available /snark. Or perhaps a disused Wal*Mart in Harrisburg…
- TinyDancer(FKA Sue) - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:49 am:
Dear George and Mellody:
Here’s your hat.
What’s your hurry?
Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out.
Love,
The Chicago Art Community
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:50 am:
If Friends of the Parks’ absurd legal argument were valid, much of Chicago’s lakefront development, including Lakeshore East and Navy Pier, is illegal, because it is built on recovered lakebed or “public trust” land. Ironically, several of FOP’s board members live in luxury condos in Lakeshore East. Under FOP’s view of the public trust doctrine, all citizens of Illinois have an irrevocable ownership interest in those condos (and in Navy Pier). I wonder when FOP is going to sue to evict all of those wrongful private uses?
- A guy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:51 am:
==In your world, there are no rational or compelling reasons to fight to keep the lakefront “forever open, clear and free?==
No Sling. In my world I’ve enjoyed going to the museums and all the attractions on the lakefront. I believe they have nicely co-existed with open space there. I went to see the Pope in Grant park years ago along with a million other people. I’m frequently in the city and enjoy the open land there. Getting rid of McCormick east would provide some more open land, even with a museum added. We’ve been reclaiming park land for public use and I’m very enthusiastic about this.
The Friends of the Parks are nuts. Go sit in a meeting. You might just love them, I don’t know. I’m a big believer in the Burnham plan and I think it’s been pretty well applied over a long period of time. Are we short on park property and open land at the lake front? Does it look like Coney Island to you?
We have a chance at something interesting and unique. I believe it’s an economic driver. Maybe we just disagree. The lakefront is a wonderful attraction with all of it’s features. Does this fit? My opinion is that more than a handful of droolcases should decide. These people are completely unhinged. Like I stated before, you may love them.
- Keyser Soze - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:54 am:
………..not to mention the hideous architecture.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:54 am:
Setting aside Hobson’s unfortunate remarks, anyone who followed the discussion on the McCormick Place site should know the numbers would never work. They actually proposed tearing down the Lakeside Center and rebuilding a similar amount of convention space over MLK Drive. IIRC, the guesstimate was in the ballpark of $1.5 billion with a b. So in exchange, we get some more park land, plus a museum that is likely to charge $20 or more for parking/admission, and a hulking new convention space.
And people howled because MPEA is spending $80 million on an events center? Are you kidding me?
I’d rank this dumb idea right up there with Frank Kruesi’s express blue line service to O’Hare. Calling it half-baked would be kind.
- Gone, but not forgotten - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:55 am:
Chicago - there’s a reason why it can’t have nice things. And it isn’t because of the Friends of the Parks.
- A guy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:03 pm:
===………..not to mention the hideous architecture.===
I remember people saying that about Cloudgate, better known as the Bean. It became sorta popular globally anyway. Go figure.
- Annonin' - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:12 pm:
If the Lucases are interested in the lake then check Waukegan ..same lake and more need.
- Carhartt Representative - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:14 pm:
More than half of Star Wars movies have taken place in the desert. Why should the museum be on the lake? It sets a bad precedent for future development.
- IllinoisBoi - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:16 pm:
There’s padlocked museum next to the Statehouse here in Springfield. Put Lucas’s Jar-Jar Binks Museum there.
- Yoda - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:23 pm:
In Chicago the museum will not be, move it he will.
- Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:47 pm:
Right, no need for new museums in Chicago. Just keep everything the same. Lakefront parking lots are fantastic.
- Not It - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:00 pm:
Anonymous at 11:50 - unfortunately the courts don’t agree with your opinion that the FOP’s argument is silly.
- From the 'Dale to HP - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:02 pm:
Why is Rahm yelling at Chicagoans about this? Why is he playing Lucas’ zero sum game? If he wants it so bad, why not broker a deal to put it somewhere else other than the Lakefront… it really shouldn’t that hard to find a great place to build this.
- Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:19 pm:
I haven’t seen Rahm yelling. Where did you see that?
- IrishPirate - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:21 pm:
Much of the celebration about the Lucas potentially not coming to Chicago is more about Rahmfreude and hating Mare 9.5 than policy. It’s a friggin parking lot cross from a friggin stadium which is across from a friggin Marina. That’s “free and open”.
Yes I agree there are other locations in Chicago that would work, but the man with the bucks and the ego wants it on the lake. Assuming the museum would not cost taxpayer $$$ or be as butt ugly as the first conception it should be built.
Friends of the Parks are wrong as is the Federal Judge who is encouraging their silly argument.
- Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:21 pm:
We lost the Museum. The only site Lucas found worthwhile here is the Museum Campus. I can’t say that I blame him. Who would have thought that this cow town likes parking lots so much?
- Stones - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:34 pm:
Personally, the Star Wars museum is a big meh. I certainly wouldn’t support it on the lakefront.
- wordslnger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:37 pm:
–I don’t know. I’m a big believer in the Burnham plan and I think it’s been pretty well applied over a long period of time.–
LOL, well, as a “big fan” you must know that very little of it has been applied, ever.
But, who am I to disagree with a guy whose most compelling argument revolves around calling people “droolcases,” “nuts” and “unhinged.”
So insightful and informative.
- From the 'Dale to HP - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:38 pm:
If you’re argument is “it’s a parking lot!” then you don’t have an argument. The law is the law is the law.
If people are that eager to have a dreadful, non-green lakefront, might I suggest Toronto.
Of course, the irony is Toronto is doing everything it can to reclaim their lakefront.
- Amalia - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:55 pm:
“Tear down McCormick Place and don’t build anything there” is a statement that shows how clueless Steinberg is. the convention and tourism industry is vital to the health of the Chicago region and the State of Illinois. we need that space or similar kind of space connected to the planned museum. people will not simply venture to Chicago to pick up a newspaper and read your column, Mr. Steinberg.
- a drop in - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:56 pm:
No Star Wars museum. No problem. Now if it was the Game of Thrones museum……
- JoanP - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:00 pm:
If Ms. Hobson is so concerned about the “black and brown children”, then rather than taking her (and her husband’s) ball and going home, build the museum in Austin or Englewood, where they need jobs, where they need people coming.
It doesn’t need to be on the lakefront to help the community.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:25 pm:
So they knowingly tried to clout their way into an illegal arrangement and when it didn’t fly in the courts, they whine about the Friends of the Park. The Lucas couple is about as tacky as their concept of a “Museum of Narrative Art” for those too stupid to understand literature, theater and cinema.
- MasterPiece - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:42 pm:
Earnest - You are suggesting that small-government Indiana would be happy to subsidize a museum of a billionaire’s tschotzke collection. That’s sort of hypocritical, doncha think? And where will it go? I hear Gary has some open space. No? Valpo?
- James - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:50 pm:
Ari instructed Rahm to build the museum wherever George wants it: “Rahm, forget that judge, he’s not with George, just go around him–have Patton go directly to the 7th Circuit!”
Mellody, I had to laugh. Your desperation is showing.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:15 pm:
I guess when George and Mellody used their clout with Rahm to get special treatment from the Park District and taxpayer-funded improvements for their reception on Promontory Point, they figured they were also entitled to a museum. Go figure.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-06-27/news/ct-met-george-lucas-wedding-party-20130628_1_wedding-reception-promontory-point-chicago-park-district
- over it - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:16 pm:
Hobson’s remarks are not “unfortunate” — they are RACIST.
- ChicagoVinny - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:00 pm:
I’ve been ‘meh’ on this museum since the beginning and Lucas’ “lakefront or bust” stance has tipped me over to ‘no’. Let’s take a page from SF and show him the door.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:25 pm:
The Lakeside Center real estate has never been on the charts for private development.
But now, because some billionaire Friends of Emanuel want to build a monument to themselves, it’s a necessity for the “black and brown children of Chicago.”
Such egomania.
- Precinct Captain - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 5:18 pm:
- Let Him Go - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:30 am:
Might want to learn something about racial segregation and geogrpahic isolation in Chicago. A little Alex Kotlowitz will go a lolng way for you.
- Enviro - Thursday, May 5, 16 @ 4:53 pm:
There might be a place somewhere in Chicago for the Lucas Museum if it had a better design.
But in any case please don’t put it on the lakefront.