Lobbyist Loophole Threatens Pullman National Monument
A loophole that makes it easier to alter or destroy historic features of Pullman’s architecture has been added to H.R. 2626, proposed legislation to convert Pullman from a national monument to a national historical park.
On December 20, 2022, National Parks Traveler reported that this legislation has been subsumed into a 4000-page “omnibus budget bill” for the current fiscal year and is poised for Congressional approval.
In February 2015, President Obama established the Pullman National Monument on Chicago’s far South Side. Its prevailing purpose: “to preserve the historic resources” of the Pullman National Historic Landmark District.
The Pullman National Monument commemorates the Model Town of Pullman (1880–1907) and its associated industrial, labor, and social history. One of the most unique features of Pullman is that all of its buildings were designed from the vision of a single architect, S. S. Beman. These buildings were sited and enhanced through the landscape architecture of Nathan F. Barrett. The infrastructure of the town, including its innovative “separate system of sewerage,” was designed by Benezette Williams. Constructed initially in 1880, the model town became a worldwide sensation before George Pullman’s utopian experiment unraveled in the wake of the Pullman Strike of 1894. The Pullman story continued into the twentieth century with A. Philip Randolph organizing the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters. The Brotherhood worked to secure better working conditions for Pullman porters and, along with Randolph, played an integral role in the modern Civil Rights Movement.
Today, Pullman is an urban neighborhood nestled on the southernmost limits of the City of Chicago. It is a remarkable place in that blocks and blocks of its historic housing are largely intact and remain true to Beman’s vision.
The integrity of Pullman’s architecture stands in stark contrast to almost every other neighborhood in the city. Throughout the city, real estate speculators alter and tear down historic properties for speculative infill buildings that absorb every available inch of marketable space.
The proposed Pullman National Historical Park legislation — marketed publicly as simply a “name change” — is instead a substantive and dangerous erosion of the legal protections and public oversight provided by Proclamation 9233, the establishing legislation of the Pullman National Monument.
Section 7. “Cooperative Agreements” of the November 17, 2022, draft bill gives expanded authority for the National Park Service to enter into agreements with “the State, other public and non-profit entities, and other interested parties” on both non-Federal historic properties within park boundaries and at “sites in close proximity” to the park.
Section 7(b)(2) has newly added language that reads: “no changes or alterations shall be made to the exterior of the properties except by mutual agreement of the other parties to the agreements” (emphasis added).
This plain language appears to permit the National Park Service and a property owner, “by a mutual agreement,” to unilaterally alter the “exterior” appearance of any property without any public oversight whatsoever.
In other words, the bill opens the door for clout-heavy or politically connected developers, or anyone for that matter, to “make a deal” with the National Park Service to permanently alter existing buildings or perhaps even tear down and infill new buildings within the District.
This would undo over a century of costly and dogged historic preservation work by the community. Likewise, it could grease the wheels for incompatible development to spring up on adjacent lands. “Death by a thousand cuts,” if you will.
But the National Park Service would never allow that, right? Wrong.
In 2018 the National Park Service signed off on a controversial construction project in Pullman. They permitted the developer constructing its national monument visitors center to obliterate a nearby archaeological site and infill a modern apartment building more than twice the size of what was originally there.
Ultimately, this developer did not accede to public demands to reduce the size of the building, respect the historic setback of the street, or honor the façade design of the original architecture. But, a public process did play out over years that allowed the community an avenue to express concerns and bring potential issues to light.
The proposed legislation would instead eliminate even this modicum of oversight, subverting the very public interest that led to the creation of the national monument in the first place. Worse, the loophole in this pending legislation opens the door for potential corruption and makes back room deals the norm.
Some claim that this Pullman National Historical Park legislation offers even greater protection for Pullman, but it does the opposite: it would permanently codify a lack of protection.
Congress must strike this dangerous language from the bill.
