Eisenhower Family
Raises Questions Regarding Process, Design of Proposed Dwight D.
Eisenhower Memorial
March 20, 2012
Today, the House
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands held an
oversight hearing on “The Proposed Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial.” The
hearing focused on recent questions regarding the development and
controversial design of the proposed Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial.
“I remain concerned that efforts are underway to usher through a
memorial to Dwight D. Eisenhower that we cannot afford to get wrong. The
law requires consensus on this project, which has not yet been achieved.
Specifically, as a memorial to Eisenhower’s profound contributions and
legacy, his family should have significant input on the final outcome of
the project. As evidenced during the hearing, the Eisenhower family has
concerns with the proposed design. In addition to concerns regarding
design, I am concerned that the Department of Interior does not yet have
an estimate for the maintenance costs that will be required by this
design. Maintenance costs are something that must be considered and
evaluated before this project can proceed. Given the concerns shared by
so many and unanswered questions that remain, it would be my hope that
this project be placed on hold until further discussions can be had
about the most appropriate and responsible path forward,” said Chairman
Bishop (UT-01).
Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of President Eisenhower, testified on
behalf of the Eisenhower family. She expressed their concerns about the
development of the Eisenhower Memorial, both in the selection process
and the resulting design and concept. “Eisenhower’s professional
assignments carried none of the romantic notion that is embodied in the
current memorial concept and design. He was the person tapped to end the
horrors of a Nazi-occupied Europe and later to lead the United States
and her allies to halt communist aggression and avoid nuclear
Armageddon. The man we celebrate is not a dreamy boy, but a real man who
faced unthinkable choices, took personal responsibility and did his
duty--with modesty and humanity.”
The
process by which the architect was selected has been a major point of
controversy. Rather than holding an open design competition, which would
allow anyone to submit a proposal, the Commission opted to use the U.S.
General Services Administration’s (GSA) Design Excellence Program.
Howard Segermark, Chairman Emeritus and Director of the National Civic
Art Society, outlined why this was an unusual choice. “[T]he American
way has been to choose designers for memorials not just according to
actual design proposals but according to entries submitted blindly. But
as just noted, the Design Excellence Program reverses this by making the
designer’s identity and record of paramount importance. Furthermore,
competitions for national memorials have tended to be open, not closed,
competitions, unlike in the case here.”
Another controversy surrounding the proposed Eisenhower Memorial is the
amount of federal funding appropriated for the project. According to
Brig. Gen. Carl W. Reddel, USAF (Ret.), Executive Director of the Dwight
D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission, “The estimated cost for the
construction phase of the memorial, including operating the Commission,
site preparation, construction of the memorial, GSA fees, and a
construction management firm, is $112.5 [million]. The Commission has
requested 80 percent federal funding…” These estimates do not include
maintenance costs after construction. In comparison to the Millennium
Gate park in Atlanta, Georgia, which cost $21 million to construct and
$312,000 annually to maintain, President of the National Monument
Foundation Rodney Mims Cook Jr. predicts, “that it [maintenance] would
be in the millions, per year, for the Gehry memorial.” Congress has
already determined that President Eisenhower is deserving of a memorial,
but the taxpayer’s interest must be protected in the implementation of
this federally funded project.