“A civic center without a city building is not a civic center — it is a civic deformity that is emphasized with age. In Denver’s case it would be a perpetual advertisement that this city, like the hypothetical man of folly, had lost it purpose, its pride of achievement and its ideals.”
Strong words, written more than 100 years ago by the Municipal Art Society. Yet entirely relevant today in response to the Colorado’s Historical Society’s decision not to locate its museum in Civic Center.
It was not, as others suggest, a failure of transparency or community involvement or inadequate public process that doomed what might have been a catalytic revitalization of Civic Center. No, it was a failure of vision, leadership and tenacity on the part of our elected officials — most notably Mayor John Hickenlooper.
In a failed attempt to be all things to all interests, Hizzoner failed to take a strong position at the outset. He was stung by public backlash at Daniel Libeskind’s ridiculous scheme to transform Denver’s beautiful Beaux Arts public square into a deconstructionist’s folly. Thus, rather than taking a determined and very public position based on a thorough examination of Colorado Historical Society’s proposal, he enabled chaos by feigning neutrality and pausing to measure the public’s appetite.
If he truly supported siting the museum in Civic Center, he should have clearly articulated the strengths of the proposal at the outset:
• The unprecedented opportunity to partner with the state in transforming our shared front yard;
• State investment to refurbish the woefully abused and misused historic Carnegie Library; and
• A $100 million investment that would have inspired private investment, put amenities like restrooms and a restaurant in the park, and generated regular, daily activity in a grossly underused public square.
By remaining coyly ambivalent, he instead allowed a small but well-organized and influential minority to dominate the discussion. Mayoral staff, cabinet leaders and city councilors convened meeting after meeting — holding “civic conversations” lacking both framework and closure. Direction was lacking because the mayor was unwilling to be a strong advocate from the beginning.
Hickenlooper further complicated the issue by floating the idea of shoehorning Denver’s Office of Cultural Affairs (DOCA) into the mix. He decided that the agency’s ambitious (and not fully baked) program was a great fit for the park, regardless of the Historical Society’s desire to consolidate disparate locations and offices into one location.
Then — still refusing to take a strong stand in favor or against locating the museum in Civic Center — he offered a solution that made no sense for the Historical Society, DOCA or the public. He suggested a land acquisition cost to the Historical Society, an ambiguous proposal to incorporate the obsolete permit center in the program and erect a small glass pavilion south of the Carnegie to accommodate DOCA’s singularly undefined vision, program and budget.
There was no clarity about how this pavilion would be programmed, managed, financed or secured.
The mayor would have served the city much better if he had analyzed the proposal and taken a firm position from the beginning. He could have either championed the idea or nixed it, inviting the public to comment. True consensus building begins with a leader, an idea and resolve.
Quoting from the same 1904 document that the quotation at the beginning of this column came from, “You judge a man by his ability to complete the task he undertakes. Our visitors — and prospective residents — will judge Denver by that standard.”
Perhaps the project’s opponents should erect a proud sign in the southwest quadrant of Civic Center:
“Nothing happened here. John Hickenlooper, Mayor.”
Susan Barnes-Gelt (bs13@qwest.net) served eight years on the Denver City Council and was an aide to former Denver Mayor Federico Peña. Her column appears twice a month.
