Park board votes no on museum development agreement

A consideration to approve the Naval Air Station Glenview Museum and Ingenuity Center Development Agreement was denied in a 4-3 vote during last week's Glenview Park District board meeting.

If the development agreement had been approved, the Glenview Hangar One Foundation would have been able to begin fundraising for the proposed museum and STEM center near the Park Center, which is now part of The Glen development at the former site of Naval Air Station Glenview, which closed in 1995. Instead, the foundation will have to find an alternate site for the museum.

The development agreement required the foundation to raise all funding for the entire project and an endowment to cover 20 years plus operational shortfall without any funding from the park district or community taxpayers, according to the Glenview Hangar One Foundation website. If complete funding was not achieved in five years, the project would have been canceled with no further obligation to the park district.

During the treasurer's report near the beginning of the meeting, the park board was informed that the Glenview Park District had experienced a $64 million, or 57%, loss in revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Salaries and wages have accounted for a majority of cost savings that have been implemented to account for the revenue shortfall, and a staff of 506 part-time employees has been reduced to 293.

In light of the revenue shortfall during the pandemic, some park board commissioners expressed reluctance to move forward with the development agreement even though it would not involve the use of taxpayer money.

"The fact that we might not have a financial commitment to something doesn't mean it's not a huge investment on the part of the park district to build something like a museum," said Commissioner Joseph Sullivan, who voted against the development agreement. "I just don't think this is the right time to take on a commitment like this."

Board President William Casey, who also voted against the agreement, was leery about the foundation's ability to raise funds for the project and maintain itself. He also expressed concerns about proposed size of the museum, either 7,000 or 15,000 square feet, and suggested the foundation purchase land nearby and go forward with its mission excluding the park district.

"I don't know how much more we can put on the plates of our staff when we're going to have to be cutting back," Casey said.

Vice President Daniel Peterson said the foundation would have a "hard slog ahead" in regard to fundraising, but he stated he was in favor of the development agreement, particularly because it did not involve the use of taxpayer money. In comparison, the purchases of The Grove and Wagner Farm with taxpayer money were accomplished through a referendum, he said.

"I'm willing to give them a try and I hope they'll succeed. It will be a great asset to the community," Peterson said.

William Marquardt, president of the Glenview Hangar One Foundation, said members of the organization were hoping for a positive vote so they could have the opportunity to raise money for the project. He said the project was designed to mitigate the financial risk to the park district and to taxpayers, since there would be no tax dollars involved.

Marquardt said the foundation will continue to look for a facility that is larger and more permanent, since the current location on Lehigh Avenue has turned into a repository for artifacts, old photos and other information. A new facility would include an exhibit with a historical timeline and three aircraft on display, including a Coast Guard helicopter that was stationed at Naval Air Station Glenview, a recovered World War II plane that crashed into Lake Michigan during a training exercise, and a third that would be added on a rotating basis.

It made sense to use part of the land from the air station for a museum, and the concept seemed popular with the community, Marquardt said. Purchasing land for the project would add substantial cost to the project, he said.

"We've seen the interest and the desire to have the facility, we're just disappointed that we couldn't get the vote to do this," Marquardt said.