Planning a look back
Public asked for input for Union BuildingBy KURT HAUGLIE, DMG Writer
Article Photos
CALUMET - It would seem developing an exhibit about the copper-mining era in the Keweenaw would be a pretty straightforward process, but the choice of items may cause negative feelings in some viewers.
Understanding what those negative reactions might be was one of the purposes of a public meeting Wednesday concerning the planned exhibit in the Keweenaw National Historical Park's Union Building.
At the meeting on the exhibit in the park's headquarters building on Red Jacket Road in Calumet, a model of the planned renovations and drawings of the exhibit were shown, and those in attendance were asked to fill out a form and give their comments about the exhibit.
Dan Johnson, KNHP interpretive specialist, said when the park purchased the Union Building in 1999, it hadn't been maintained for a while.
"It was privately owned and it was in a very deteriorated condition," he said. "There was concern it would be torn down."
In 2005, Johnson said the park received funding to repair the roof and do other exterior work. Since then, a new heating system was put in and the windows are currently being repaired or replaced. Some funding for the interior renovation and construction of the exhibit was received last year, and another $1.4 million was received from the recently enacted 2010 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations.
The purpose of the exhibit is to show what life was like for all the people involved with the copper mining process, including miners, mine owners and managers, and those who supported those people, such as shopkeepers and even saloon owners.
"It's interesting when you try to tell those stories," he said.
The renovation of the building will include a visitor center on the first floor.
"It's one thing we've been missing in the park," Johnson said.
Facilitating the meeting was consultant Marcella Wells of Fort Collins, Colo., who acted as an evaluator of the responses to the presentation of the building renovation and exhibit plan.
Wells showed a model of the first and second floors of the building and explained the purpose of the layout. The first floor will have the visitor center and some exhibits, including a room for rotating exhibits. The second floor will have the permanent exhibit.
Wells said the exhibit won't be linear, so a visitor can start at any point and move through it as he or she wishes.
Although the exhibit will be permanent, Wells said some features within it may change to give different perspectives of a particular topic.
Attending the presentation was Mary Lewis, who told Wells she lived in Calumet most of her life, and one of the strongest memories of growing up for her was hearing many languages and accents.
"It was charming," Lewis said.
Wells said park officials are trying to determine if there is some way to incorporate some of the oral history recordings the park has archived into the exhibit.
"(Hearing different languages and accents) was part of the experience," she said.
Lewis said the last time she was in the Union Building was for a wedding reception in 1948, but she expected she would visit the building when it's completed.
"It looks good on paper," she said. "I would visit it and correct it."
Also attending was Christina Hermann, who asked if the exhibit would include the dispute over the use of the two- and one-man drills, which led to much friction between mine owners and miners.
"It will be perceived as provocative," Hermann said.
Mine owners saw the one-man drill as an important technological innovation that would save money by requiring less labor. Miners saw it as an attack on their livelihood.
Although she understood the importance of the drill issues, Hermann said if it isn't addressed properly, it could be a problem.
"It's a matter of presentment," she said.
Wells said the final design for the exhibits hasn't been made, and the comments received about the plan, including about the drill issue, would be part of her report.
"Our final decision will be made by the end of the year," she said.
Kurt Hauglie can be reached at khauglie @mininggazette.com.
|
Snowman
|
|
|---|---|
|
11-09-09 2:09 PM
|
You profess to sieze private property rights because you know best. I could call you a socialist and all that kind of stuff, but I missed the name calling in the previous post. Heaven forbid anybody do anything for utilitarian reasons. You mean like, practical purposes. My business is not your eye candy and you have no right to tell anybody what it must look like. There are reasons things are torn down and new things emerge. It's called progress. The focus should be on economic redevelopment. Preserve what you can within that context. Anything else is just burning money in an eternal flame. I'm sure we could go on for days on this. See you at the next story on this Historian. BTW you did not address any of the questions I've raised in previous posts.
|
|
historian80
|
|
|
11-09-09 1:38 PM
|
Well, the fact that you’ve resorted to name-calling pretty much indicates that you aren’t willing to be open-minded and no point discussing when you’re going to be so defensive. Long story short, small Midwestern towns with historic downtowns that have been altered and modified for utilitarian reasons with no regard for preservation or appearance are a dime a dozen. However, tourists (and their money) gravitate to places that are aesthetically pleasing. It determines if you have a drive-thru or a stop-and-look-and-spend-money community. And there is a difference between apathy and opposition. Those opposed actually say something and stand up for what they think to make sure it’s clear. The apathetic say nothing.
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-09-09 10:01 AM
|
"they are the minority of change in a sea of apathy." It has nothing to do with APATHY....It is TOTAL DISAGREEMENT! You are playing a word game! Because you have so little support has NOTHING to do with APATHY and portraying it as that is just a divisive remark! It is indicative of the belief that it's up to you becuase us little people just don't know no better. "It's about a desire to preserve something that can't be rebought or easily put back." This comment rationalizes the idea that what you are preserving is "priceless", therefore must be saved "at any cost"! What you miss is preservation of infrastructure for a practical, cash flow producing purpose. What is the income stream to keep the Union building operating? Is there ANY meaningful income feature to this entire NPS model? Or is just private propety owners and tax payers on the hook purpetually.
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-09-09 9:50 AM
|
Historian, summing up your last post, basically you're saying there is a*****worse than ours. I have owned a business and commercial property in cities where zoning has become a nemesis for small business and small property owners. I know exactly what you're talking about. That's excatly why I don't want to see it happen here. A persons property is not somebody elses eye candy! Buy it. Buy the whole town. Then you can do what ever you want to every building in Calumet!
|
|
historian80
|
|
|
11-09-09 8:28 AM
|
Also, I am a born, bred, and raised Yooper--from the Keweenaw, no less, but I current work in a large city. And all I can say is that you have not seen strict standards until you own a business in the city and a property that is historic and, heaven help you, in a historic district. There are preservation commissions here that will get the city to shut you down if they don't like the paint color you're using. You have neighborhood groups that will raise heck against you, and people are very litigious. A totally different story from what you have to deal with in Calumet.
|
|
historian80
|
|
|
11-09-09 8:24 AM
|
You're right, Snowman. I truly believe that people have endless amounts of money to spend on things like historically accurate paint schemes and removal of inappropriate modern in-fill. Historic preservation has to do with more than just being forced to spend money. If people see this work and this initiative as nothing more than a burden, then what's the point? It's about a desire to preserve something that can't be rebought or easily put back. I know the people that work at the NPS in Calumet, and they aren't completely removed to what the business- and home-owner are dealing with, but come on, they ARE the minority of change in a sea of apathy. I've been involved in trying to get people interested in hist. pres. in the Keweenaw. It is REALLY hard.
|
|
CussinJack
|
|
|
11-08-09 10:28 AM
|
Snowman -- That was a thoughtful post. Most of it is correct and I even agree with much of it. What I take issue with is the concept that everything must always come down to immediate economic justification. Some things go beyond economic justification. The arts (theater, visual, music) is one of those things. National Parks are also one of those things. Yellowstone, Yosemite ... do those parks justify themselves economically. I seriously doubt it. Yet they are important to society and important to humanity. I think.
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-07-09 4:58 PM
|
Historian and Jim are both right. The reason the Union bldg costs millions to restore is because it is required to be done at an excessively high standard. Private business has to justify spending money based on what's called "return on investment" and that HAS TO mean cash flow. Anything else is financial suicide. Jim recognizes that the requirements put on small business owners EXCEED ANY reasonable return on investment but could be forced to make them anyway. There is no economic sense to any of this. Historian, that's why you don't get it. You've only been taught how to properly SPEND money in the preservation process, not how to do something that HAS TO MAKE money or fail! If current property owners fail are there new ones waiting in the wings to swoop in and buy up Calumet? And if so, what's the incentive?
|
|
CussinJack
|
|
|
11-06-09 5:48 PM
|
Jim ... you wouldn't be callin' the plastic back-lit awning at the pizza place an attempt at "historic preservation" now would ya?
|
|
Jimhughes
|
|
|
11-06-09 10:56 AM
|
Dan with a statement like this “Seeing as how I actually work in the field of historic preservation” I presume this makes me a average hamburger flipper. In Calumet we have to comply with what you call “ Standards, which is extremely rigorous” we do too, it’s now the law. I do practice historic preservation. I Preserved a 100 year old home in Laurium making it one of the most beautiful in the area. When we owed the Michigan House we tried to save everything. I was the person that drew up the blue prints to make the Michigan House a restaurant convention hall that would preserve the history. The current restaurant we preserved everything the ceiling, walls, and the original floor it all there it‘s only been covered. People of Calumet try, we just cannot keep up with your standards.
|
|
historian80
|
|
|
11-06-09 10:03 AM
|
Seeing as how I actually work in the field of historic preservation and am often involved in the 106 process, I can tell you that the NPS just doesn't get money forked over from the government. Unlike projects with private sources of money, this project has to comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, which is extremely rigorous. 106 The Union Bldg makes this process even more difficult because of the unique Masonic/Oddfellows materials left in it.
|
|
Jimhughes
|
|
|
11-06-09 8:48 AM
|
If Thats was the case the building on 6th and Scott with the roof on the first floor should be torn down. The Evergreen restaurant should be torn down the building between 6th & 7th on Oak should be torn down and the one on 5th down by the water company should have been torn downall of these buildings roofs are in very bad shape My point is we as bussiness owners do not have the money like the park has to spend.
|
|
historian80
|
|
|
11-06-09 8:33 AM
|
Jim--I was in the building shortly after the NPS' acquisition. It was in very rough shape. Somehow the guy living there had no issue with the fact that the roof was literally falling in on his head. There were points where I had to duck to avoid hitting my head on materials hanging down from the 15-20 foot ceiling. And the usual protocol in the Keweenaw is to tear down buildings with problems. So I find that comment accurate.
|
|
osceola
|
|
|
11-06-09 8:06 AM
|
warm and fuzzy is the mantra for many museums (i know, i've worked in one for 20 years) and not offending anyone is high on the list, even more so, it is the mindset of consultants. presenting the story, with all it's edge, presenting the story that makes people reflect, will gain a greater respect of those who view it. the area is rife with local history buffs, form your own "consultant" board and present YOUR version of what and how the story should be; the deal may not yet be "done". private individuals and historic groups can be an amazing source of information, and if the current NPS head has any smarts at all, will listen to what you have to say.
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-06-09 6:55 AM
|
Quincyfan, you're right, I mixed her up with the consultant. It is still an interesting comment when considering historic preservation. It's fact or fiction. News accounts of the day would be a good start.
|
|
QuincyFan
|
|
|
11-05-09 11:19 PM
|
I may be wrong here, but my read of the article is that Mary Lewis and Christina Hermann are members of the public who were there providing input - "keeping the NPS's feet to the fire." I don't know the context of Hermann's comments, but she certainly has the right to provide her opinion on how provocative (or not) she thinks the exhibit should be. As Snowman notes, events happened that drastically impacted the community. That also means that there are lots of opinions out there about what the facts are, as well as opinions on how to present them. It'll be interesting to hear what the collection of inputs reveal. Buckskin: Get your input to the people at the park. Your first hand experience can only make this exhibit better.
|
|
Jimhughes
|
|
|
11-05-09 11:04 PM
|
The former owner put alot of time and money into this building for the park service to say it was at the point of being torn down is bull. I'm sure if Ray had 1.4 million he could have done better.
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-05-09 9:18 PM
|
Hi Cuz, I give her a "bad choice of words" out on that. It isn't the spin as much as to shy from controversial issues. I wouldn't even begin to pretend to know more than the experts but I know a line of BS when I read it. She uttered one. As for the big issues, a few rants is the best I can offer. The herd is in control. They stampede for each fill of the feed bag and I can't stop it. Unfortunately Im not sure anybody can. I just hope the rest of Calumet doesn't fall down in the process of burning enough money to seed 60 businesses when the Union Hall is finally done. Think about that! The smelter project...probably enough money will be spent there to seed 100 new businesses. Put it into context man! Return on investment anybody?
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-05-09 9:02 PM
|
TechGrad, Did it ever occur to you that the negative posts may in fact reflect the general concensus? I pesonally see nothing to gain by showing up to complain about a done deal. Or to suggest the park service develop a new conceptual model of what the Park should be. You kidding me? But to suggest we just go away, well, sorry, not gonna happen! I was commenting on how Hermann characterized the issue of the drilling equipment. You read it again and tell me what she meant! "It will be perceived as provocative," Hermann said..... What does that mean, exhibits with less provocation? She demonstrates in that one sentence a propencity to lean toward the warm and fuzzy and away from the "provocative"! These issues tore the community apart, not just workers against company. It deeply effected social life, it just wasn't very pretty! To off handed label something as too "provocative" is just a little amazing for a group bent on historical correctness. But, the mo
|
|
CussinJack
|
|
|
11-05-09 8:43 PM
|
Let's hold the NPS's feet to the fire on the labor issue to make sure it's accurate.
|
|
CussinJack
|
|
|
11-05-09 8:42 PM
|
Snowman -- I have some faith in the high quality of work the NPS is known for. I wouldn't give them a free pass, but they have no reason that I can think of to present the labor strife with a spin. And there will be plenty of public input available all along the way to make sure it's accurate. We're all responsible to make sure it's an accurate story. The labor story in the Copper Country is rich and dark and full of nuance. Read "Death's Door". Great view of one side of the story.
|
|
lakertaker
|
|
|
11-05-09 6:10 PM
|
Techgrad07, the negative coments come from people that are sick and tired of watching our Government putting us deeper and deeper into debt! We are in a recession and our country is broke, when does the maddness end? When are all of you people who like to spend, spend, spend going to realize that someone is going to have to pick up the tab? Please enlighten me on this, I would like to know who you expect to pay for all of these sensless projects nationwide, not just here in the Copper Country.
|
|
Techgrad07
|
|
|
11-05-09 4:51 PM
|
It's too bad a few people seem to complain about anything and everything around here (check the smelter story from yesterday...87! posts, mostly negative). Those of you who think the exhibit will be unbalanced, did you bother to attend any of the half-dozen public meetings and focus groups? I did, and I don't think I saw any of you there. If you could take the effort to get involved in your community for once you would have seen that while the strike is NOT the focus of the exhibit (the story says that pretty clearly; this exhibit is about social life in Calument, not mining or corporate history or labor history or technology), it will be handled in a fair and balanced manner. Kudos to everyone who DID come out and provided some very thought-provoking constructive criticism. It's your help that will make this exhibit great!
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-05-09 4:30 PM
|
Cus Jack, By the lady's comment, I dont think labor strife will be told honestly. So how will they handle one of labor's most monumental clashes of the 20th Century. What we will likely be looking at is embelished BS with a little bit of sugar on top! Sweet!
|
|
Snowman
|
|
|
11-05-09 4:26 PM
|
Although she understood the importance of the drill issues, Hermann said if it isn't addressed properly, it could be a problem. "It's a matter of presentment," she said. What she is really saying here is that things will be told in a context that may be less than honest. Wonderful. This isn't about truth it's about impressions! And they want to preserve "history"? Good one!
|