Sunday, November 25, 2018

Chicago defends location of Obama library in federal court (500 Million Dollars could sure feed a lot of poor people in Chicago)


The city of Chicago has offered its first full-throated response to a lawsuit seeking to stop construction of former President Barack Obama's museum and library.
It came in a federal court motion this week to dismiss a lawsuit by the Protect Our Parks group opposed to the Jackson Park project.
Among the city's arguments is that the site is on land never submerged under Lake Michigan and therefore not subject to restrictive public-trust laws that began developing over a century ago. The motion says the lawsuit's contention that the land was once submerged is wrong.
The official announcement that the Barack Obama Presidential Library and Museum will be located in Chicago has raised a number of questions about cost, tax dollars, how many people will come and what the heck is in those museums, anyway?
Who's paying for the library?
The Obama library, expected to cost over $500 million, is being paid for so far by private donations, though the city is giving the project 20 acres of land in either Washington or Jackson parks.
An effort by the state legislature to contribute $100 million in state funds has been shelved with Illinois facing serious debt and some Republicans objecting. However, the idea could come back, some say.
Among the private donors so far are Chicago investment banker Michael Sacks and Fred Eychaner, a local media mogul who is a frequent contributor to Democratic candidates and liberal causes. Both have donated between $501,000 and $1 million.
Once the libraries are built, they are handed over to the National Archives, which pays for operations with federal money. The facilities are staffed by federal employees and the cost is about $70 million per year for all 13 libraries, according to the Economist.

The Obama organization must, however, come up with an endowment equal to about 60 percent of the cost of constructing the library to cover operating shortfalls in the future.



No comments:

Post a Comment

CartoonDems