Readers: Remove/Change The Confederate Memorial

First, let me apologize for the lack of posts Monday & Tuesday, our new fiber optic internet in our building went out last Saturday night. Our building’s IT provider didn’t get it fixed until after 4pm yesterday.

Sunday the poll software didn’t automatically close the poll at 8pm like I had set it to do. As a result, the poll stayed open until I noticed it Monday morning — closing it via my smartphone. That said, the percentages are roughly the same as they were at 8pm the night before:

Q: What should St. Louis do about the confederate memorial & street name in Forest Park?

1. Change the street name & remove the memorial from Forest Park 20 [28.17%]
2. TIE: 14 [19.72%]
   1. Do nothing
   2. Change the street name & supplement the memorial with additional information
3. Change the street name, leave the memorial in Forest Park 11 [15.49%]
4. Leave the street name, supplement the memorial with additional information 10 [14.08%]
5. TIE: 1 [1.41%]
   1. Unsure/no answer
   2. Other: Change the street name and move the memorial History Museum grounds 
6. Leave the street name, remove the memorial from Forest Park 0 [0%]

The “do nothing” vote was less than 20%, conversely those who wanted change of some type was more than 78%. This is a great opportunity for a public process to brainstorm possible solutions that’ll help us reach a consensus. Last week I visited the confederate memorial to check it out, I’ve lived here almost 25 years and didn’t know about it until recently.

I also asked landscape architect Eären Hummel for her thoughts, which were:

• I think there should be a dialog, rather than a reactionary move. Further, I don’t think the monument should have been placed there to begin with.
• City parks are meant to be places for all people to have a respite away from their busy lives, I think a park is no place for a confederate memorial, especially without the balance of a union memorial. That may sound “politically correct”. A civil rights garden could be created of the area, if the process is inclusive of all the players that civil rights – or lack there of – has affected. Whatever is done, I think it is important that it is not just a bandage, but true dialog.
• As far as I can tell, there is no monument to the Union soldiers in St. Louis, nor a Civil Rights monument/memorial other than the “Naked Truth” sculpture at the Compton water tower. And that is really a monument to 3 German men, and not really for the cause of civil rights. Meaning there is not civil rights memorial significant to African-Americans.
• The lack of other memorials in St. Louis, I think speaks volumes about the attitudes of the people of StL. Reinforcing the notion of white supremacy, everyday racism… It is the ongoing issues that were raised in Ferguson last summer, but have since fallen silent. Personally, I think focusing on removing flags or memorials skirts around the true issues and are only platitudes to quiet the cries of racism.
• One thing that greatly bothers me about the monument, is the statement on it about the “battle to preserve the independence of the states…” The war was fought over slavery, as very clearly stated in the southern states on declarations. It was treason. The statement on the monument is revisionist history of the “lost cause”. That I find offensive and reprehensible. For that alone, I wish the monument was not there as it perpetuates erroneous “history”.
• I would leave the language as is, but definitely have a panel next to it explaining that it is wrong, and why many people wanted to rewrite the history of the war.
• It is a beautifully crafted monument by a notable sculptor.
• I believe a civil rights garden could be sensitively incorporated into the park. There have been numerous additions to the park over the years.

I agree the memorial represents revisionist history and shouldn’t have been built. Let’s take a look…

Renaming, or even removing, Confederate Dr is a given — relatively easy. The memorial is a much more complicated issue. The words are offensive, but it is a good reminder of St. Louis’ race problem. I think we should discuss the creation of a civil rights garden that would educate visitors on events from our history, for example:

• 1911: restrictive covenants enacted, see 1948 Shelley v Kraemer Supreme Court decision
• 1917: East St. Louis Race Riot
• 1963: Jefferson Bank sit-in
• 1969: Rent strike
• 1972: Unveiling of the Veiled Prophet
• 2014: Ferguson, court fees, etc

There are many more that could be included in a civil rights garden, these could all be told.

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: What Should St. Louis Do About The Confederate Memorial & Street In Forest Park?

Since nine people were shot & killed at a historically black church in Charleston S.C., the confederate flag has thankfully become politically toxic:

In South Carolina, the governor called for the Confederate flag to stop flying over the capitol. The governors of Virginia and North Carolina quickly declared that they would remove the flag from state license plates. Meanwhile, several of the country’s top retailers — from Walmart to eBay and Amazon — announced in quick succession that they would stop selling Confederate flag merchandise.

Not for the first time this year, the concerns of political leaders and business elites converged on a single issue — and swiftly forced dramatic change. (CNN: Why business fought the Confederate flag)

The confederate battle flag should’ve been banished decades ago, but what about other confederate symbols & memorials? Namely the confederate memorial in Forest Park…located on Confederate Drive:

Historians say don’t let the old artillery mislead you. Forest Park was never a civil war battle field. The only reason there a confederate statue here is because it is where the donor wanted it built back in 1914. But now, some want it gone.

For 100 years the statue has stood just east of the Missouri History museum and some would say on the southern side of the state’s Civil War history – a monument to Confederate “soldiers and sailors” built fifty years after the war. (KSDK: Confederate memorial debate in Forest Park)

Today’s poll question asks: “What should St. Louis do about the confederate memorial & street name in Forest Park?”

The poll, open until 8pm tonight, is at the top of the right sidebar. Mobile users will need to switch to the desktop view to vote.

— Steve Patterson

Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park Dedicated 10 Years Ago Today

Today is the 10th anniversary of one of my favorite parks in the region:

On June 7th, 2005, Gateway Center of Metropolitan St. Louis transferred title of the Gateway Geyser and the 34.1 acres of grounds, known as the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park, to Metro East Park and Recreation District (MEPRD). The Gateway Center had worked tirelessly for 40 years to protect the property from commercial development and with the transfer, was entrusting MEPRD with the task of bringing to life the dream of their founder and benefactor, Malcolm W. Martin, to transform the property into a true memorial park complementing the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial and Gateway Arch directly across the Mississippi River. On June 18th, 2005, the park was officially dedicated as the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park, in honor of the man whose passion, dedication and generosity made the project possible. (Metro East Parks & Recreation District)

The Gateway Geyser began operating a decade earlier, on May 27, 1995.

If you’ve never experienced this park I highly recommend a visit. Driving there isn’t the easiest, but there is parking once you arrive. The better way from downtown St. Louis wold be to walk or bike across the Eads Bridge. From Missouri or Illinois take MetroLink to the East Riverfront station then go south of the grain elevator.

If you can, try to catch the geyser:

April 15th through October 15th
Daily eruptions (each 10-minutes) at noon, 3PM, and 6PM
Each eruption is dependent on current wind and weather conditions.

Less than 5 years until the 25th anniversary of the geyser!

— Steve Patterson

Readers Opposed To Open/Concealed Carry In Public — Including At The STL Zoo

Not only are readers not having guns at the St. Louis Zoo, they really don’t like guns, concealed or openly carried, in public. Period.

Because the Zoo obtained a temporary restraining order, Jeffrey Smith, of Ohio, held his protest outside the Zoo.

He says that since the zoo is taxpayer funded he should have the right to carry his firearm on zoo property. But, the zoo says its ban is within Missouri law because it qualifies as a child care facility and educational institution. The zoo has a child care facility on site and hosts educational camps and field trips throughout the year.

Saturday, the group ‘Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America’ showed up to support the zoo’s firearm ban.

“This is no place for firearms. There are other places where I can understand they would be necessary. But in the zoo, for such a family friendly part of our community, it’s just really not necessary,” said Becky Morgan of Moms Demand Action. (KSDK)

Here are the results from the Sunday Poll:

Q: Yesterday a Ohio man wanted to enter the St. Louis Zoo openly carrying his gun, thoughts?

1. I’m opposed to open carry & concealed carry in public — including at the STL Zoo 27 [55.1%]
2. I’m opposed to open carry, but support concealed carry — but not at the STL Zoo 9 [18.37%]
3. I’m opposed to open carry, but support concealed carry — including at the STL Zoo 5 [10.2%]
4. I support concealed & open carry — including at the STL Zoo 3 [6.12%]
5. Other: 2 [4.08%]
   1. I’m opposed to the ownership of guns at all by loony right-wing fascists
   2. what is everyone so scared of?
6. TIE 1 [2.04%]
   1. I’m opposed to concealed carry, but support open carry — but not at the STL Zoo
   2. I support concealed & open carry — but not at the STL Zoo
   3. Unsure/ no answer
7. I’m opposed to concealed carry, but support open carry — including at the STL Zoo 0 [0%]

More than half those who support concealed &/or open carry do not support it at the zoo.

Not sure about the 2nd “other” Who is that reader thinking is scared? Could apply to those who think they need to carry a gun into a zoo patronized largely by families or could apply to those of us who fear the possibility of the presence of a gun(s) presenting a very real danger. The latter is very real considering the event on the day of the poll: Five injured after gun fires accidentally during wedding at Waldorf Astoria.

I suspect we’ve not heard the last of this.

— Steve Patterson

As St. Louis Builds A Small Park Over A Highway…A Look At Dallas’ Klyde Warren Park

As work continues on the “lid” over the highway, now called I-44,  that divides downtown St. Louis from the Arch grounds I thought we should take a look at another recent park-over-highway project — Dallas’ Klyde Warren Park:

Klyde Warren Park creates an urban green space constructed over a section of the below-grade Woodall Rodgers Freeway, for 3 blocks between Pearl Street and St. Paul Street. It provides connectivity to the city’s flourishing Arts District from other neighborhoods, brings together cultural events and experiences, and serves as a central public gathering space for Dallas residents and visitors to enjoy.

Designed by landscape architecture firm, The Office of James Burnett, the park features flexible, pedestrian-oriented design, offering a mix of active and passive spaces, which include a children’s park, reading room, great lawn, restaurant, performance pavilion, fountain plaza, games area, urban dog park, and botanical garden around a sweeping pedestrian promenade.. A 6,000-square-foot (560 m2) restaurant and performance stage, designed by Thomas Phifer and Partners, is in the center of the park. In addition it provides jogging trails, a dog park, a children’s playground, and an area for games. (Wikipedia)

The idea of building a park over the recessed highway had been discussed since the highway was built in the 1960s. As an architecture student in the late 80s I visited I.M. Pei’s then-new Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center in 1989, thinking the location, next to this wide ditch, was awful. Though I’d been to Dallas since then, I hadn’t seen the Meyerson again until last month.

The new trees are now mature, but unfortunately I didn’t have enough juice in my wheelchair to get closer. Besides, I was about to cross over the highway and in a block be at my destination.

Of course, a 5.2 acre park built over a highway didn’t come cheap:

The $110 million project was funded through a public-private partnership. Public support included $20 million in bond funds from the City of Dallas, $20 million in highway funds from the state and $16.7 million in stimulus funds. The balance of funding is through individual donors directly to the Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation.

Klyde Warren Park is owned by the City of Dallas and privately operated and managed by the private Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation. The Foundation studied great public parks across the country and plans to bring best practices to the park’s operations, programming and maintenance.

I’d say it’s worth every penny! Over the coming 25 years it’ll help mend areas long-separated because of the highway. I love that the foundation must also program the space, wish the Gateway Foundation had to do the same at Citygarden, and that 9th Street would remain open except for during events/weekends.

— Steve Patterson