By Tim Kowols
The Door County Maritime Museum is nearly halfway towards their goal of $5.5 million to build their Maritime Lighthouse Tower. The museum raised $2.5 million in its first stage of fundraising for the Maritime Lighthouse Tower, which includes ten stories of new exhibit space and an 11th floor outdoor observation deck. Executive Director Amy Paul says she is thankful for the support the community has given.
Some of the tower’s exhibits will focus on the evolution of commercial ships, shipwrecks of the Great Lakes, and other regional highlights. The Door County Maritime Museum hopes to break ground on the project in the near future.
Only the final slide in this video advertisement shows the latest version of where the fake lighthouse is to be located. And notice that there isn’t a single mention of the grain elevator and the agricultural history of the city and the county that brought about the demand for the maritime business that evolved around the transportation needs before railroads.
Why isn’t the DC Maritime Museum unequivocally, vocally and financially supporting retention and restoration of the Teweles & Brandeis Grain Elevator? The historical basis for everything they claim to represent in the maritime history of the County
Sorry, Don. The focus on a creating a lighthouse tower at the DCMM has NOTHING to do with grain elevators. Please keep the two issues separate. The Maritime Museum is a non-profit institution, and consequently cannot financially support projects outside its own agenda.
You missed the point, or I failed to state it clearly enough for you Jeraldene. You are wrong in what you’ve stated. History is history and isn’t that what the DCMM is supposed to be all about?
———
The proposed 11 story tower has nothing to do with city or county history. It is a vision to stroke somebody’s ego and a pretentious proposed tourist attraction, an eyesore on the shore. If you want a view, mother nature provided them all over the county. However, the grain elevator has plenty to recommend as an essential part of maritime shipping history, needed during a period of the county agricultural history that went hand in hand together over several decades.
———
So why doesn’t the DCMM seem actively interested in preservation of that crucial part of our local history? Agricultural goods transported by water isn’t glamorous enough? As an educational/teaching non-profit, the DCMM should be at the top of the list in supporting preservation of the grain elevator and fund-raising for it.
Congratulations to the Maritime Museum for plugging away at this goal. They are nearly halfway there. Just a few more millions (and years?) to go. I wonder if anybody in the Men’s Majority of the council, or the Mayor, is struck by the irony that the SB Historical Society has raised nearly one and a half million dollars in a few weeks for their pet project? I remember sitting through a lengthy, formal presentation by the museum board and planning committee this past summer at a city council meeting in which they shared what they hope to someday have the resources to accomplish. Funny, the same courtesy hasn’t been extended to the SBHS for what they can realistically do because they HAVE the resources! Does that strike anybody else as odd? I guess it’s just a little quirk of our quaint and rustic council, who do things the “good ol’ boys” way. #I’veThadEnough
I agree Mike. They want the Granary property for private development. And personally, I think a 10 story fake lighthouse on the Waterfront is too Disneyland-ish for me. I don’t think it will attract the number of people they think it will. People that come to DC come for the “real” lighthouses. And there is not that much to see. PBI is gone, PJs is gone. That kind of $$ should be put toward maintaining the historic lighthouses that people come to see! And the granary has just as much, if not more, historical significance.
Mike: I am sorry, but your amount of $’s raises in not correct .I refer you to the letter released which clearly states UP TO $1.25 Million, which means for every dollar raised from other sources, the pledge will be reduced by that amount.
Robert, I was operating under figures released in the news media: prior to the announcement of the 1.25 million donation, the SBHS had announced that they had raised about $150,000 to save the granary. Subsequent to the huge endowment, I attended a council meeting in which Chris Kellum wrote a check for $10,000 for preservation of the granary. That would put the total, not counting other incidental donations, at just under 1.4 million dollars. I am guessin that the SBHS has continued raising funds, especially since the fate of the granary has become a high profile story. So saying the SBHS has raised nearly 1.5 million dollars is, I think, generally accurate and a testament to the fund raising ability of Ms. Weber and the society, which is what I wanted to communicate. It seems to me safe to conclude that, monetarily, people are as concerned with the granary as they are the light house attraction that the museum wants to build.
Robert I do not think you are right about that. I have not read anything about a match donation. Don’t put out negative informatio just to support your opinion. Lets stick with the facts. I am sure someone can clarify this for us.
They are not completely separate. Both have historical significance.
If any of you ever get the chance, please visit the Tower of History in Sault Ste.. Marie. The 210 foot tower offers a breathtaking view of the locks and working water front.
Charles, etal:
Please read letter from DC Foundation which is posted on this discussion site dated 10/25/2017 which states:
“Regardless of the amount ultimately raised, the family is prepared to contribute whatever amount necessary to bring the campaign total to $1.25 million”
Makes it clear to reasonable people
As long as you keep refusing to address the topic of the story, let’s hear your thoughts about how the Firs Chief doesn’t have statutory authority to order razing of this granary, a vital piece of the maritime history and how the money question you keep obsessing about could be ordered to be entirely covered by the City of Sturgeon Bay, should they continue to refuse to respond to the order to meet with the State Historical Society. Current events have moved forward and you’re still stuck on one question that is quickly becoming moot.
To the topic, the restored granary could be a financial compliment to ultimately supporting longer term educational non-profit goals of the DCMM.
Oh and providing a, “spectacular view” in exchange for tourist dollars isn’t essential in any respect to providing for educational goals. We’ve regularly been provided with the, “view,” from remotely piloted unmanned aircraft carrying cameras. I’m guessing an elevator ride isn’t that thrilling for anyone to want to be charged a fee to do these days either.
With all the talk of High Water Mark why can the Museum assume they can build a tower. I have heard from some wanting the tower because it’s for the good of the people. What people? The people that want it? Seems like a big double standard going on. Before anything is built the High Water Mark issue should be addressed completely.