Sorry, I wasn’t insinuating anything, Dupe neighbor. Just wondering how you got that feeling about the November demolition is all.
The Foundation and the Friends both support saving the theatre. The Foundation was instituted by the Village. The Friends are Lombard citizens who support theatre restoration. That is the difference.
Honestly, I don’t know what plan is more compelling—-or speculative as you put it—-the RSC plan or a potential library plan. I’d love to let the voters decide. Again, we’ve never been opposed to referendum, you just think we’ve been. The previous question on the table was ILLEGAL pure and simple. If it weren’t, it wouldn’t have gotten thrown off the ballot, would you agree? If your side and mine got together to pose a LEGAL question, we would support the effort 100%.
Again, I have as much right to speak as anyone. I have a right to question my elected official. He’s been telling untruths, quite frankly, and holding the office he does gives him credibility he is using to perpetuate the untruths. I’ve only questioned the figures he’s spouted out to the media. And he won’t give me an answer as to where his figures came from. That’s all I’m asking from him. Sorry you’re upset about that, but you seem quite upset about all sorts of financial figures pertaining to this project. Don’t you want to know why he’s saying $15 million instead of $8.5 million? That’s a huge difference—-and he is NOT an expert in restoration.
It’s your right to stay in the shadows and take snipes at people. It’s my right to stand up and ask that my elected official be held accountable for all he says and does in his position from the dais.
One more thing…parking garages burn more money than they take in. Usually municipalities have to raise taxes (usually business-related & local sales taxes) to pay for them, i.e. Naperville. Look it up!
The condo project was presented to the Village Board by the DuPage Theatre Foundation—-as requested by the Village. The Friends did not bring the plan forward, but we do support it. Dupe neighbor, if the library goes on that corner, there will be no TIF dollars to be had. The only way to get TIF is to have a tax generating building there. That’s not the definition of a library.
The Friends are not self-destructing. We’re as committed as ever to save the theatre. Again, if you hold up a library project against the RSC plan (which only has a height variance necessary at this point), let the community decide which would be better—-and go from there. The RSC plan, no matter how you may try to twist it, will NOT raise property taxes. The library will—-no matter where it is built. That’s a fact. TIF money used on the theatre could only be used there because of how the TIF works. That’s a fact. Do you want your property taxes to go up even more than they are now?
Yes, life is a gamble. But the the odds are completely against us with regards to a property tax increase for a new library at that corner. With the RSC plan, the risk to this town is little to none—-with HUGE returns on investment.
Demolition before November. Interesting that you have that feeling…
I’m not a zealot. Give me a break. It would seem that both you and fiscal insanity are living a fantasy. The library is going to cost tens of millions to build. Do you really think it will pass referendum? That’s a pretty big gamble. Which means, if it doesn’t pass, what do you think will go in it’s place on that corner? As residents, shouldn’t we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan? Shouldn’t everything be laid to bare so that we know exactly what we’re looking at? What you’re proposing is pretty far fetched…have you asked the park district what they want to do with the library building once they own it? I’ve heard they want a “fitness center” there. That would mean, no outdoor concert venue or arts center. Actually, I think public hearings on the matter would do the town good. That way, even the ideas you bring to this board would have the proper forum to be heard—-the right all of us have. I personally am not against any project that would save the theatre…
But really, in the end, the only people that can be blamed for the demise of the DuPage Theatre are the Lombard Village Board members who voted that way.
I agree. Raise the Dupe! Raise her to the prominent level she deserves. Raise her up as a pinnicle of vision and historical significance for our town. Raise her as the personification of what cultural arts truly means.
DuPage Dude. Not tap dancing at all. I’ve answered your question regarding petitions. Unless they’re binding, they won’t hold water. A trustee can vote any way he chooses and doesn’t have to give reasons. He’s protected that way by law. I’m sorry you don’t approve of the things I’ve said to my trustee. He has made many misstatements in the press and no one has asked him why he made such statements. As my elected trustee, he needs to be accountable for the statements he makes. If we made claims that were untrue, no doubt you would take us to task…
Wow, I was gone over the weekend and came back to a very active site.
Here’s the article I co-wrote. You be the judge of my intentions instead of having a line taken out of context…
To Restore or to Regret? That Is the question.
It’s hard to imagine why the DuPage Theatre has become one of the most
contentious issues Lombard has ever known. For many of us, the theatre
represents a bridge from the past to the future. It represents an
opportunity for economic growth in an unique setting that we can be
proud to call our own. It’s a place people can use and enjoy through
the aesthetics of the wonderful atmospheric features built into the
building, and the many different art forms that can be exhibited there.
Of course, that’s not how everyone in town views the issue.
That’s because the stakes are high. For the very reason the theatre can
be a catalyst for economic growth in the downtown areaâ€"locationâ€"others
are eyeing it for more “profitable†endeavors. But who stands to
profit? Some individuals, maybe, but not necessarily the community as a
whole. If the theatre is removed, the next building to go on that
corner will forever throw off balance the structure our forefathers
built this village around. When people pass the spot, it will be a
reminder of a failure in vision and a lack of willingness to work
together for the good of all.
To supporters, the vote to raze DuPage Theatre represents the
continuing struggle of defining the Village of Lombard’s identity. We
are the Lilac Village, but we have so much more to offer. The loss of
this historic building would be an irreplaceable loss for Lombardâ€"now
and in the future. It would signal the loss of heritage and culture,
leave a gaping hole at Main and Parkside and wounds in the community
that may never heal.
We have a choice. We can have a restored theatre that demonstrates the
things which we hold dear and provides a legacy for future generations
or a village filled with deep regret.
Over the years, the Friends of the DuPage Theatre have received letters
and e-mails from people who understand this type of regret. One
individual said, “Don’t let it die. MANY, MANY communities across
America remain bitter and filled with regret for having torn their
theaters down.†Another reiterated these sentiments and wrote, “We too
in England have lost many unique theatres…There are many shop and
apartment complexes but NOTHING can replace a theatre once it is torn
down.†And yet another said, “Once the theater is demolishedâ€"it will be
gone forever, just like many of the other downtown Lombard icons…We
know in retrospect that loosing those historic structures is a shame,
and has hurt us socially and economically in the long run.â€
On the other hand, letters regarding the success of historic theaters
have served to inspire and encourage supporters. One woman wrote,
“…if the theatre in Oak Park wasn’t there, the rejuvenation of the
downtown would not be where it is today.†Many cited examples around
the country. For instance: “Look at the Orinda Theater east of Oakland,
California. Years ago a developer had it slated for destruction to
build a shopping center. That community lobbied and fought to have the
theater restored and it not only survived, it is now the distinctive
centerpiece and star attraction for the shopping center that surrounds
it!â€
Many villages have considered the restoration of their historic
downtown theaters a “no brainer.†Others have chosen to sever those
roots. What type of place do we want Lombard to be? Do we want to be a
community that honors its heritage and appreciates the gift our
predecessors have left us, or a community that is indifferent to those
values? Do we want a downtown which offers year-round incentives to
visit, or only seasonal activities? Do we want to retain one of the
most unique features of our village, or do we want
“nothing-much-special†downtown? Will we restore or will we regret?
To make an informed decision about the loss that Lombard faces, please
visit www.dupagetheatre.net View photos of the theatre interior, read
about the history that surrounds it and learn how you can help make a
difference. Then attend the August 18th Village Board Meeting, 7:30
p.m. at Lombard Village Hall, and let the Trustees know where you stand
on this important Lombard issue.
DuPageDude,
Sorry I didn’t comment right away. Doing a non-binding referendum won’t change the minds of the four trustees who voted to demolish. Why do you think it would when 4,500+ signatures certainly didn’t? When time and time again, the citizens of Lombard have stood before them to state their support of the theatre? All the public outcry has evidently fallen on deaf ears. Have you stood up to voice your support for the theatre in their presence? Have you called and/or emailed your wishes for a preserved theatre to each of them? The Friends are trying to find the solution that will save the theatre. Other citizens are as well. What are some of your feelings regarding the situation? I understand your wish for referendum, and we can pursue that course as long as it is binding. Then, whatever way the vote goes, we will all have to accept the consequences based on the outcome. I certainly would appreciate reading any ideas you have to save the theatre.
See what I mean about signatures and BINDING referendums? You say 4500 signatures don’t mean squat—-the same thing the board could say if we initiated a referendum. And, really, if 100 out of 4500+ signatures makes something skewed in your logic, there’s nothing I can do about it. I’ve been truthful. It doesn’t matter to you. So move on, Challenger. That other site needs you more than we do here.
Glad you came to the rally. What sign were you holding?
Marissa came to the meeting we had at the Library regarding the RSC plan. Dupe Neighbor, you just happen to sound a lot like her. Forgive me if I’m wrong about that.
Challenger, really, you missed everything else I said and focused on 100 signatures from a sister theatre, the Wheaton Grand. You well know where we collected our signatures—-mostly Taste of Lombard and Cruise Nights. It started with a bit over 200 at our rally. Friends asked their neighbors to sign petitions. I’m not talking out both sides of my mouth, I just thought that 100 out of 4500 was a drop in the bucket. Obviously, you feel differently, but I forgot you like to make mountains out of molehills.
Of course the TIF money will go into the theatre. It can’t go anywhere else. TIF district money must be used on the parcel it is designated for. Surprised you didn’t know that!
No smokescreens, Challenger. Just trying to determine why you and Marissa are so against this theatre plan because it uses “tax money” when you don’t seem concerned about any other use of TIF. Marissa, don’t forget that a library will raise property taxes—that’s a hard sell to the residents of this town. That’s why it would have to go to referendum.
Challenger, were you throwing eggs? None made it on my face. You must have bad aim…
Currently, there is a vote to raze the theatre. That means any referendum we would initiate would be advisory only. We need a BINDING referendum, otherwise, what’s the point? The board can just say it doesn’t mean anything—-no matter what the outcome.
I believe, Challenger, that you don’t really care how much money we raised. You’d prefer to keep to your erroneous $1200 figure, and that’s fine, because it further shows how obtuse you and yours are. You know we had more fundraisers than a “lemonade stand” or a “pot-luck dinner,” yet you don’t care to acknowledge that fact. Many thousands of dollars from our fundraisers went into the effort to save the theatre. Evidently, your contribution from a glass of lemonade was part of that. So thanks!
The TIF district on the site doesn’t expire until 2007. I believe Senator Cronin will get us the extension. Yes, the “T” means tax, but not property tax. Why don’t you care that the Park District spends millions in TIF? Why don’t you care how any of the other TIF district money is spent? I think the village is currently prepared to spend in excess of $700,000 in TIF money to redo our “streetscapes” along Main and St. Charles. Does that bother you? Do you know where all the other TIF money in this town goes? Or how much of it is being used on the “Conference Center?”
The library will raise property taxes and has a snowball’s chance down below to pass referendum. I’m glad to know we agree on that one.
The petition drive was meant to include all that would benefit from the theatre. That includes kids. I see nothing wrong with giving the young people in our town a voice. Again, this was an advisory petition. As far as the Wheaton Grand, they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause—-interestingly enough, some of those people were Lombardians! Maybe even you, since your timing was right!
The risks involved to the taxpayers of this town with regards to the RSC plan are slim to none. Let’s face it, you can always find something wrong with anything if you try hard enough. Buying a house is full of risks. Buying a car is full of risks. Having kids is full of risks. Life is full of risks, but look at the odds. In this case, with RSC and Daniel P. Coffey’s track record, I feel pretty good about taking a risk. Because the outcome would be well worth the choice to save the DuPage Theatre.
A follow up. The Friends of the DuPage Theatre did a petition drive which collected more than 4,500 signatures in 3 weeks. They were presented to the Board at their July 21st meeting. The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard. We did not go door-to-door, as this was an advisory petition, not binding, and we didn’t have much time from one board meeting to the next to accomplish it.
We would also be happy to participate in a LEGALLY WORDED and BINDING referendum to save the DuPage Theatre. If the opportunity came forth, we would gladly to go door-to-door to get the necessary signatures in a legal and binding manner. We have never worried that we would not have public support for a fair, legal and binding referendum. In fact, our experience gathering signatures in early July made clear that the majority of people we encountered were theatre supporters.
Again, Challenger, the Friends and the Foundation are two different entities with two different bank accounts. I will not divulge to you the amount the Friends has in our bank account, because truthfully it doesn’t concern you. The Foundation is inactive, so whatever they had left in their accounts went to the village (since they were established by the village).
I also find it amusing that you think we haven’t been “working our butts off” these last years. How wrong your assessment of the situation is and how egocentric you must be to think you personally have anything to do with our actions to save the DuPage Theatre. Who are you anyway, really? Some guy who parks in the theatre lot everyday who thinks he knows all the answers? Again, you’ve offered no expertise. You hide behind your screen name. And you’ve offered nothing constructive to the dialog—-just accusations and “questions” you demand answered. Why don’t you go to a real source—-not Sebby or Biddle or Lentsch—-to find answers. Or come meet with me, off the record. And make it lemonade, if that’s your preference.
Your library post makes me giggle because your buddy Biddle keeps touting it. He obviously has higher hopes than we do! :) No, I don’t think you’re a “bad guy,” but I don’t think you know the first thing about fundraising, TIF or anything else regarding financing the restoration of the theatre. If you did, you’d realize what a great plan the RSC proposal is, and join our ranks as supporters. Until then….all my best.
Challenger, Challenger, Challenger. I wish you’d find a new number to hold on to. $1,200? We made ten times that at the “Light It Up” concert alone. I’m not sure who’s feeding you your data, but I sure wouldn’t bet the farm on their statistics.
And as for speaking for the “majority of taxpayers,” I doubt it. Again, your scare tactics are not working and don’t hold up to scrutiny. “Taxpayers” only care if this project will raise their property taxes. The RSC plan to restore the DuPage Theatre DOES NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. Building a library there will—-and I know that’s what you and your buddy Biddle want built on the theatre property. But it will never pass referendum. “Taxpayers” don’t want the added tax burden. Of course, you and Biddle can always help the library board out and start “fundraising” on your own. I’d like to see how well you do.
Challenger, many organizations/groups have “committed” to using the DuPage Theatre once it reopens. We have a whole list of them. It’s more like, “We’re here, so build it.”
By the way, if we were allowed to move forward with the project, the falling bricks would be nicely restored to their original purpose, and the fence would be permanently removed…think about it.
It would be interesting to “sit down and discuss it over a tall glass of lemonade.” Unfortunately, I don’t know who you are! :) If you think the money invested in the theatre was wasted, that’s only because of the demolition proclamation currently on the table. Our trustees chose to “waste” the money—-not the Friends. Shouldn’t they be held accountable to the “taxpayers?” Why did they “waste” that money if demolition was what was intended? I would be upset with them, if I were you, not with the Friends who want the investment SAVED and put to good use!
The village offered $1 million in TIF dollars and only released $100,000. The “village” has not spent $500,000 over the last 6 years. That’s the trustee’s claim which he cannot backup with real data…which I asked him to please do. Talk about ducking the “tough questions,” this is the “trustee” who happens to be the one to ask for the demolition based on falsehoods he purpetuates.
Challenger, I’m sorry you think the Friends “don’t like you.” Not true. You exhibit exactly the type of behavior that reveals what our group has been up against—-misinformed, narrow-minded and mean-spirited people who favor making their nasty comments from the cover of anonymity. Challenger, your questions have been answered. You’re just trying to make mountains out of molehills.
And to hdtv267, I don’t want this page of this site to be of fond memories of the theatre. I want this page to exhibit that old theatres still have a place in our “modern” society and can be an important part to town revitalization projects across the country. I want this page to showcase the DuPage Theatre as a success story along those lines, and to inspire others to save the theatres that are important to them. Otherwise, this site simply becomes a “graveyard” to memories…When the theatre is restored, please come to Lombard to really appreciate the grandeur of the DuPage!
Challenger, your thirst is for something beyond what a glass of lemonade can quench. If the plan was allowed to proceed today, it would be fully funded. The reason the plan was “changed twice” is that it was presented and the Village asked for changes. Those changes actually made the plan agreeable to the Village which acknowledged the numbers added up (therefore making it “in balance” or “fully funded.”) No propaganda here. The numbers are in the public record. You can’t dispute any of them.
The Save America’s Treasures grant is in the bank. That’s $300,000, again NOT $1200. (Oh, by the way Challenger, do you think it’s easy to get federal grant money? It’s a lot of hard work and dedicated people—-Lombard citizens—-brought it to town for all our benefit, and only because of the theatre!) The Illinois First money is not a dead issue—-it’s been promised by the state. All the village needs to do is show support for the project. Once they do that, all sorts of money will become available—-including all the pledges. Pledges are promises people make. No one forced them to pledge, they wanted to—-and still want to. They just need the green light.
Thanks for acknowledging through your silence that you are NOT more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey at ascertaining the viability of restoring the DuPage Theatre.
You’re a funny guy, though. That glass of lemonade surely made an impression on you. Maybe if you helped to creatively find ways to save the theatre instead of making up reasons to demolish, you would find that it is much more pleasant making lemonade than being a lemon.
Who cares WHY people came to see the Ides of March. The Ides put on a show to BENEFIT the theatre. That’s why they were in town. Of course, people liked the band, but I’m sure many people also liked knowing the proceeds were going to help save the DuPage Theatre, in particular, the marquee. I will again ask the question: What makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey to ascertain the ability to restore the theatre? Have you done restoration work? Have you personally performed tests on the building? Have you had the confidence of the city of Chicago to restore all the theatres in their North Loop Theatre District? I suspect the answer is NO.
Propaganda? Yes. No Friend is asking for the taxpayers, or the park district, to foot the bill for this project. You like to spread the propaganda of fear amongst residents that this will “cost too much.” You have no proof of that either. You would just like to see the building gone. Again, I’m not sure why you bother coming here when preservation is the last thing on your mind.
Paul, I like your logic, and with regards to the DuPage Theatre, all the “IFs” can be reconciled in a positive manner. No can of worms here, it’s just that if we could get past the nastiness some choose to spew, then we could get to the real issue saving this particular theatre in a meaningful way. That’s the conversation I’m looking forward to.
Our last fundraiser was last October, the Light It Up concert, which was very successful. I just question why you wonder why we haven’t had a recent fundraiser…especially with a demolition order on the way? I don’t know the “Friend” you refer to either asking the taxpayers to foot the bill or the park district. It might be more of your “propaganda.” The RSC plan for restoration is fully funded without a property tax increase.
You didn’t answer my question on what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey…
BTW: We have collected $5.5 million in pledges, corporate donations and hard cash over the last few years. I’m just not sure that a guy who only wants the marquee and ticket booth to be saved can be pursuaded at this point. I’d ask that you go back to your own “demolition” site and let the preservationists have this one.
Who’s trying to fool who, Challenger? I think you can stop using your $1,200 figure you keep spouting out. That’s the Foundation’s money—-not the Friends'. The potluck dinner you like to refer to was a mixer between our group and First Church of Lombard, a building which is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places. NEVER had a pancake breakfast. Our bigger fundraisers were gala events that raked in thousands of dollars, including our 75th anniversary at the Carlisle and the Light It Up concert with Ides of March last October. We’ve also hosted many smaller events that have raised significant funds. All the proceeds were used for the theatre.
Now, I’d like to know Challenger, what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey, who has done many significant studies on the quality of the building, who has deemed it fit for restoration, and who has done award-winning restorations on historic theatres before, to say that the restoration is unfeasable? It is your opinion, sure. But beyond that, there is no documentation to back your claims up. Of course, if there are, I’d be happy to review them with you.
As far as the business plan. You haven’t seen it. Many notable people have, and believe that this theatre will operate a balanced budget based on the figures—-and yes, including the lower seat count—-that were provided.
The DuPage Theatre will have many community uses and will showcase a steady stream of activity throughout the year. It will be affordable and convenient. And fully funded without raising property taxes. Please admit that putting a library in its place WILL RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. The other thing that you should admit is that there is NO GUARANTEE that a library referendum will pass—-we’re talking about $20 million to build a new one at that location.
Can’t we please come to an agreement about saving the DuPage Theatre? What sort of vision would you have for it, were it left standing? I’m willing to be creative and visionary—-can you?
Challenger,
Your source continues to be one of bad info. We didn’t have it removed.
Sorry, I wasn’t insinuating anything, Dupe neighbor. Just wondering how you got that feeling about the November demolition is all.
The Foundation and the Friends both support saving the theatre. The Foundation was instituted by the Village. The Friends are Lombard citizens who support theatre restoration. That is the difference.
Honestly, I don’t know what plan is more compelling—-or speculative as you put it—-the RSC plan or a potential library plan. I’d love to let the voters decide. Again, we’ve never been opposed to referendum, you just think we’ve been. The previous question on the table was ILLEGAL pure and simple. If it weren’t, it wouldn’t have gotten thrown off the ballot, would you agree? If your side and mine got together to pose a LEGAL question, we would support the effort 100%.
Again, I have as much right to speak as anyone. I have a right to question my elected official. He’s been telling untruths, quite frankly, and holding the office he does gives him credibility he is using to perpetuate the untruths. I’ve only questioned the figures he’s spouted out to the media. And he won’t give me an answer as to where his figures came from. That’s all I’m asking from him. Sorry you’re upset about that, but you seem quite upset about all sorts of financial figures pertaining to this project. Don’t you want to know why he’s saying $15 million instead of $8.5 million? That’s a huge difference—-and he is NOT an expert in restoration.
It’s your right to stay in the shadows and take snipes at people. It’s my right to stand up and ask that my elected official be held accountable for all he says and does in his position from the dais.
One more thing…parking garages burn more money than they take in. Usually municipalities have to raise taxes (usually business-related & local sales taxes) to pay for them, i.e. Naperville. Look it up!
The condo project was presented to the Village Board by the DuPage Theatre Foundation—-as requested by the Village. The Friends did not bring the plan forward, but we do support it. Dupe neighbor, if the library goes on that corner, there will be no TIF dollars to be had. The only way to get TIF is to have a tax generating building there. That’s not the definition of a library.
The Friends are not self-destructing. We’re as committed as ever to save the theatre. Again, if you hold up a library project against the RSC plan (which only has a height variance necessary at this point), let the community decide which would be better—-and go from there. The RSC plan, no matter how you may try to twist it, will NOT raise property taxes. The library will—-no matter where it is built. That’s a fact. TIF money used on the theatre could only be used there because of how the TIF works. That’s a fact. Do you want your property taxes to go up even more than they are now?
Yes, life is a gamble. But the the odds are completely against us with regards to a property tax increase for a new library at that corner. With the RSC plan, the risk to this town is little to none—-with HUGE returns on investment.
Demolition before November. Interesting that you have that feeling…
I’m not a zealot. Give me a break. It would seem that both you and fiscal insanity are living a fantasy. The library is going to cost tens of millions to build. Do you really think it will pass referendum? That’s a pretty big gamble. Which means, if it doesn’t pass, what do you think will go in it’s place on that corner? As residents, shouldn’t we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan? Shouldn’t everything be laid to bare so that we know exactly what we’re looking at? What you’re proposing is pretty far fetched…have you asked the park district what they want to do with the library building once they own it? I’ve heard they want a “fitness center” there. That would mean, no outdoor concert venue or arts center. Actually, I think public hearings on the matter would do the town good. That way, even the ideas you bring to this board would have the proper forum to be heard—-the right all of us have. I personally am not against any project that would save the theatre…
But really, in the end, the only people that can be blamed for the demise of the DuPage Theatre are the Lombard Village Board members who voted that way.
I agree. Raise the Dupe! Raise her to the prominent level she deserves. Raise her up as a pinnicle of vision and historical significance for our town. Raise her as the personification of what cultural arts truly means.
Just don’t RAZE her.
DuPage Dude. Not tap dancing at all. I’ve answered your question regarding petitions. Unless they’re binding, they won’t hold water. A trustee can vote any way he chooses and doesn’t have to give reasons. He’s protected that way by law. I’m sorry you don’t approve of the things I’ve said to my trustee. He has made many misstatements in the press and no one has asked him why he made such statements. As my elected trustee, he needs to be accountable for the statements he makes. If we made claims that were untrue, no doubt you would take us to task…
Wow, I was gone over the weekend and came back to a very active site.
Here’s the article I co-wrote. You be the judge of my intentions instead of having a line taken out of context…
To Restore or to Regret? That Is the question.
It’s hard to imagine why the DuPage Theatre has become one of the most
contentious issues Lombard has ever known. For many of us, the theatre
represents a bridge from the past to the future. It represents an
opportunity for economic growth in an unique setting that we can be
proud to call our own. It’s a place people can use and enjoy through
the aesthetics of the wonderful atmospheric features built into the
building, and the many different art forms that can be exhibited there.
Of course, that’s not how everyone in town views the issue.
That’s because the stakes are high. For the very reason the theatre can
be a catalyst for economic growth in the downtown areaâ€"locationâ€"others
are eyeing it for more “profitable†endeavors. But who stands to
profit? Some individuals, maybe, but not necessarily the community as a
whole. If the theatre is removed, the next building to go on that
corner will forever throw off balance the structure our forefathers
built this village around. When people pass the spot, it will be a
reminder of a failure in vision and a lack of willingness to work
together for the good of all.
To supporters, the vote to raze DuPage Theatre represents the
continuing struggle of defining the Village of Lombard’s identity. We
are the Lilac Village, but we have so much more to offer. The loss of
this historic building would be an irreplaceable loss for Lombardâ€"now
and in the future. It would signal the loss of heritage and culture,
leave a gaping hole at Main and Parkside and wounds in the community
that may never heal.
We have a choice. We can have a restored theatre that demonstrates the
things which we hold dear and provides a legacy for future generations
or a village filled with deep regret.
Over the years, the Friends of the DuPage Theatre have received letters
and e-mails from people who understand this type of regret. One
individual said, “Don’t let it die. MANY, MANY communities across
America remain bitter and filled with regret for having torn their
theaters down.†Another reiterated these sentiments and wrote, “We too
in England have lost many unique theatres…There are many shop and
apartment complexes but NOTHING can replace a theatre once it is torn
down.†And yet another said, “Once the theater is demolishedâ€"it will be
gone forever, just like many of the other downtown Lombard icons…We
know in retrospect that loosing those historic structures is a shame,
and has hurt us socially and economically in the long run.â€
On the other hand, letters regarding the success of historic theaters
have served to inspire and encourage supporters. One woman wrote,
“…if the theatre in Oak Park wasn’t there, the rejuvenation of the
downtown would not be where it is today.†Many cited examples around
the country. For instance: “Look at the Orinda Theater east of Oakland,
California. Years ago a developer had it slated for destruction to
build a shopping center. That community lobbied and fought to have the
theater restored and it not only survived, it is now the distinctive
centerpiece and star attraction for the shopping center that surrounds
it!â€
Many villages have considered the restoration of their historic
downtown theaters a “no brainer.†Others have chosen to sever those
roots. What type of place do we want Lombard to be? Do we want to be a
community that honors its heritage and appreciates the gift our
predecessors have left us, or a community that is indifferent to those
values? Do we want a downtown which offers year-round incentives to
visit, or only seasonal activities? Do we want to retain one of the
most unique features of our village, or do we want
“nothing-much-special†downtown? Will we restore or will we regret?
To make an informed decision about the loss that Lombard faces, please
visit www.dupagetheatre.net View photos of the theatre interior, read
about the history that surrounds it and learn how you can help make a
difference. Then attend the August 18th Village Board Meeting, 7:30
p.m. at Lombard Village Hall, and let the Trustees know where you stand
on this important Lombard issue.
DuPageDude,
Sorry I didn’t comment right away. Doing a non-binding referendum won’t change the minds of the four trustees who voted to demolish. Why do you think it would when 4,500+ signatures certainly didn’t? When time and time again, the citizens of Lombard have stood before them to state their support of the theatre? All the public outcry has evidently fallen on deaf ears. Have you stood up to voice your support for the theatre in their presence? Have you called and/or emailed your wishes for a preserved theatre to each of them? The Friends are trying to find the solution that will save the theatre. Other citizens are as well. What are some of your feelings regarding the situation? I understand your wish for referendum, and we can pursue that course as long as it is binding. Then, whatever way the vote goes, we will all have to accept the consequences based on the outcome. I certainly would appreciate reading any ideas you have to save the theatre.
Challenger, your blood is up! :)
See what I mean about signatures and BINDING referendums? You say 4500 signatures don’t mean squat—-the same thing the board could say if we initiated a referendum. And, really, if 100 out of 4500+ signatures makes something skewed in your logic, there’s nothing I can do about it. I’ve been truthful. It doesn’t matter to you. So move on, Challenger. That other site needs you more than we do here.
Glad you came to the rally. What sign were you holding?
Cheers!
Marissa came to the meeting we had at the Library regarding the RSC plan. Dupe Neighbor, you just happen to sound a lot like her. Forgive me if I’m wrong about that.
Challenger, really, you missed everything else I said and focused on 100 signatures from a sister theatre, the Wheaton Grand. You well know where we collected our signatures—-mostly Taste of Lombard and Cruise Nights. It started with a bit over 200 at our rally. Friends asked their neighbors to sign petitions. I’m not talking out both sides of my mouth, I just thought that 100 out of 4500 was a drop in the bucket. Obviously, you feel differently, but I forgot you like to make mountains out of molehills.
Of course the TIF money will go into the theatre. It can’t go anywhere else. TIF district money must be used on the parcel it is designated for. Surprised you didn’t know that!
No smokescreens, Challenger. Just trying to determine why you and Marissa are so against this theatre plan because it uses “tax money” when you don’t seem concerned about any other use of TIF. Marissa, don’t forget that a library will raise property taxes—that’s a hard sell to the residents of this town. That’s why it would have to go to referendum.
Challenger, were you throwing eggs? None made it on my face. You must have bad aim…
Currently, there is a vote to raze the theatre. That means any referendum we would initiate would be advisory only. We need a BINDING referendum, otherwise, what’s the point? The board can just say it doesn’t mean anything—-no matter what the outcome.
I believe, Challenger, that you don’t really care how much money we raised. You’d prefer to keep to your erroneous $1200 figure, and that’s fine, because it further shows how obtuse you and yours are. You know we had more fundraisers than a “lemonade stand” or a “pot-luck dinner,” yet you don’t care to acknowledge that fact. Many thousands of dollars from our fundraisers went into the effort to save the theatre. Evidently, your contribution from a glass of lemonade was part of that. So thanks!
The TIF district on the site doesn’t expire until 2007. I believe Senator Cronin will get us the extension. Yes, the “T” means tax, but not property tax. Why don’t you care that the Park District spends millions in TIF? Why don’t you care how any of the other TIF district money is spent? I think the village is currently prepared to spend in excess of $700,000 in TIF money to redo our “streetscapes” along Main and St. Charles. Does that bother you? Do you know where all the other TIF money in this town goes? Or how much of it is being used on the “Conference Center?”
The library will raise property taxes and has a snowball’s chance down below to pass referendum. I’m glad to know we agree on that one.
The petition drive was meant to include all that would benefit from the theatre. That includes kids. I see nothing wrong with giving the young people in our town a voice. Again, this was an advisory petition. As far as the Wheaton Grand, they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause—-interestingly enough, some of those people were Lombardians! Maybe even you, since your timing was right!
The risks involved to the taxpayers of this town with regards to the RSC plan are slim to none. Let’s face it, you can always find something wrong with anything if you try hard enough. Buying a house is full of risks. Buying a car is full of risks. Having kids is full of risks. Life is full of risks, but look at the odds. In this case, with RSC and Daniel P. Coffey’s track record, I feel pretty good about taking a risk. Because the outcome would be well worth the choice to save the DuPage Theatre.
A follow up. The Friends of the DuPage Theatre did a petition drive which collected more than 4,500 signatures in 3 weeks. They were presented to the Board at their July 21st meeting. The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard. We did not go door-to-door, as this was an advisory petition, not binding, and we didn’t have much time from one board meeting to the next to accomplish it.
We would also be happy to participate in a LEGALLY WORDED and BINDING referendum to save the DuPage Theatre. If the opportunity came forth, we would gladly to go door-to-door to get the necessary signatures in a legal and binding manner. We have never worried that we would not have public support for a fair, legal and binding referendum. In fact, our experience gathering signatures in early July made clear that the majority of people we encountered were theatre supporters.
Again, Challenger, the Friends and the Foundation are two different entities with two different bank accounts. I will not divulge to you the amount the Friends has in our bank account, because truthfully it doesn’t concern you. The Foundation is inactive, so whatever they had left in their accounts went to the village (since they were established by the village).
I also find it amusing that you think we haven’t been “working our butts off” these last years. How wrong your assessment of the situation is and how egocentric you must be to think you personally have anything to do with our actions to save the DuPage Theatre. Who are you anyway, really? Some guy who parks in the theatre lot everyday who thinks he knows all the answers? Again, you’ve offered no expertise. You hide behind your screen name. And you’ve offered nothing constructive to the dialog—-just accusations and “questions” you demand answered. Why don’t you go to a real source—-not Sebby or Biddle or Lentsch—-to find answers. Or come meet with me, off the record. And make it lemonade, if that’s your preference.
Your library post makes me giggle because your buddy Biddle keeps touting it. He obviously has higher hopes than we do! :) No, I don’t think you’re a “bad guy,” but I don’t think you know the first thing about fundraising, TIF or anything else regarding financing the restoration of the theatre. If you did, you’d realize what a great plan the RSC proposal is, and join our ranks as supporters. Until then….all my best.
Challenger, again, please refrain from using your $1200. It just doesn’t add up and misrepresents all the hard work our group has put forth.
Challenger, Challenger, Challenger. I wish you’d find a new number to hold on to. $1,200? We made ten times that at the “Light It Up” concert alone. I’m not sure who’s feeding you your data, but I sure wouldn’t bet the farm on their statistics.
And as for speaking for the “majority of taxpayers,” I doubt it. Again, your scare tactics are not working and don’t hold up to scrutiny. “Taxpayers” only care if this project will raise their property taxes. The RSC plan to restore the DuPage Theatre DOES NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. Building a library there will—-and I know that’s what you and your buddy Biddle want built on the theatre property. But it will never pass referendum. “Taxpayers” don’t want the added tax burden. Of course, you and Biddle can always help the library board out and start “fundraising” on your own. I’d like to see how well you do.
Challenger, many organizations/groups have “committed” to using the DuPage Theatre once it reopens. We have a whole list of them. It’s more like, “We’re here, so build it.”
By the way, if we were allowed to move forward with the project, the falling bricks would be nicely restored to their original purpose, and the fence would be permanently removed…think about it.
It would be interesting to “sit down and discuss it over a tall glass of lemonade.” Unfortunately, I don’t know who you are! :) If you think the money invested in the theatre was wasted, that’s only because of the demolition proclamation currently on the table. Our trustees chose to “waste” the money—-not the Friends. Shouldn’t they be held accountable to the “taxpayers?” Why did they “waste” that money if demolition was what was intended? I would be upset with them, if I were you, not with the Friends who want the investment SAVED and put to good use!
The village offered $1 million in TIF dollars and only released $100,000. The “village” has not spent $500,000 over the last 6 years. That’s the trustee’s claim which he cannot backup with real data…which I asked him to please do. Talk about ducking the “tough questions,” this is the “trustee” who happens to be the one to ask for the demolition based on falsehoods he purpetuates.
Challenger, I’m sorry you think the Friends “don’t like you.” Not true. You exhibit exactly the type of behavior that reveals what our group has been up against—-misinformed, narrow-minded and mean-spirited people who favor making their nasty comments from the cover of anonymity. Challenger, your questions have been answered. You’re just trying to make mountains out of molehills.
And to hdtv267, I don’t want this page of this site to be of fond memories of the theatre. I want this page to exhibit that old theatres still have a place in our “modern” society and can be an important part to town revitalization projects across the country. I want this page to showcase the DuPage Theatre as a success story along those lines, and to inspire others to save the theatres that are important to them. Otherwise, this site simply becomes a “graveyard” to memories…When the theatre is restored, please come to Lombard to really appreciate the grandeur of the DuPage!
Challenger, your thirst is for something beyond what a glass of lemonade can quench. If the plan was allowed to proceed today, it would be fully funded. The reason the plan was “changed twice” is that it was presented and the Village asked for changes. Those changes actually made the plan agreeable to the Village which acknowledged the numbers added up (therefore making it “in balance” or “fully funded.”) No propaganda here. The numbers are in the public record. You can’t dispute any of them.
The Save America’s Treasures grant is in the bank. That’s $300,000, again NOT $1200. (Oh, by the way Challenger, do you think it’s easy to get federal grant money? It’s a lot of hard work and dedicated people—-Lombard citizens—-brought it to town for all our benefit, and only because of the theatre!) The Illinois First money is not a dead issue—-it’s been promised by the state. All the village needs to do is show support for the project. Once they do that, all sorts of money will become available—-including all the pledges. Pledges are promises people make. No one forced them to pledge, they wanted to—-and still want to. They just need the green light.
Thanks for acknowledging through your silence that you are NOT more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey at ascertaining the viability of restoring the DuPage Theatre.
You’re a funny guy, though. That glass of lemonade surely made an impression on you. Maybe if you helped to creatively find ways to save the theatre instead of making up reasons to demolish, you would find that it is much more pleasant making lemonade than being a lemon.
Challenger,
Who cares WHY people came to see the Ides of March. The Ides put on a show to BENEFIT the theatre. That’s why they were in town. Of course, people liked the band, but I’m sure many people also liked knowing the proceeds were going to help save the DuPage Theatre, in particular, the marquee. I will again ask the question: What makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey to ascertain the ability to restore the theatre? Have you done restoration work? Have you personally performed tests on the building? Have you had the confidence of the city of Chicago to restore all the theatres in their North Loop Theatre District? I suspect the answer is NO.
Propaganda? Yes. No Friend is asking for the taxpayers, or the park district, to foot the bill for this project. You like to spread the propaganda of fear amongst residents that this will “cost too much.” You have no proof of that either. You would just like to see the building gone. Again, I’m not sure why you bother coming here when preservation is the last thing on your mind.
Paul, I like your logic, and with regards to the DuPage Theatre, all the “IFs” can be reconciled in a positive manner. No can of worms here, it’s just that if we could get past the nastiness some choose to spew, then we could get to the real issue saving this particular theatre in a meaningful way. That’s the conversation I’m looking forward to.
Our last fundraiser was last October, the Light It Up concert, which was very successful. I just question why you wonder why we haven’t had a recent fundraiser…especially with a demolition order on the way? I don’t know the “Friend” you refer to either asking the taxpayers to foot the bill or the park district. It might be more of your “propaganda.” The RSC plan for restoration is fully funded without a property tax increase.
You didn’t answer my question on what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey…
BTW: We have collected $5.5 million in pledges, corporate donations and hard cash over the last few years. I’m just not sure that a guy who only wants the marquee and ticket booth to be saved can be pursuaded at this point. I’d ask that you go back to your own “demolition” site and let the preservationists have this one.
Who’s trying to fool who, Challenger? I think you can stop using your $1,200 figure you keep spouting out. That’s the Foundation’s money—-not the Friends'. The potluck dinner you like to refer to was a mixer between our group and First Church of Lombard, a building which is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places. NEVER had a pancake breakfast. Our bigger fundraisers were gala events that raked in thousands of dollars, including our 75th anniversary at the Carlisle and the Light It Up concert with Ides of March last October. We’ve also hosted many smaller events that have raised significant funds. All the proceeds were used for the theatre.
Now, I’d like to know Challenger, what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey, who has done many significant studies on the quality of the building, who has deemed it fit for restoration, and who has done award-winning restorations on historic theatres before, to say that the restoration is unfeasable? It is your opinion, sure. But beyond that, there is no documentation to back your claims up. Of course, if there are, I’d be happy to review them with you.
As far as the business plan. You haven’t seen it. Many notable people have, and believe that this theatre will operate a balanced budget based on the figures—-and yes, including the lower seat count—-that were provided.
The DuPage Theatre will have many community uses and will showcase a steady stream of activity throughout the year. It will be affordable and convenient. And fully funded without raising property taxes. Please admit that putting a library in its place WILL RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. The other thing that you should admit is that there is NO GUARANTEE that a library referendum will pass—-we’re talking about $20 million to build a new one at that location.
Can’t we please come to an agreement about saving the DuPage Theatre? What sort of vision would you have for it, were it left standing? I’m willing to be creative and visionary—-can you?