[VAcourier] MOC Issue Devisive At Lexington Meetings

Wed Mar 21 23:05:59 EDT 2007

Rockbridge Weekly
MOC Issue Devisive At Lexington Meetings
President Waite Rawls Answers Questions
By Patte Wood
Staff Reporter
http://www.rockbridgeweekly.com/rw_article.php?ndx=6757

see the videos at:
http://www.eyeonvirginia.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ba1c09b3695e0cb6cde7
http://www.eyeonvirginia.com/view_video.php?viewkey=90ce0268229151c9bde1
http://www.eyeonvirginia.com/view_video.php?viewkey=0928b05a7e228a89c379
more videos at:  http://www.eyeonvirginia.com/

Lexington resident and merchant Al Hockaday expounds on his objections 
to the Museum of the Confederacy relocating to Lexington as MOC Board 
President Waite Rawls listens in the background. The presentation by 
Rawls on the Museum of the Confereracy and why it would want to relocate 
to Lexington was held at LDMS on Monday, March 19. (Photo by Patte Wood)

The hot issue before both the County and Lexington in the past two weeks 
has been the discussion about a proposal by the Tourism Board to look 
into the possibility of the Museum of the Confederacy locating from 
Richmond to Lexington and rehabilitating the Courthouse and Courthouse 
Square.

It was reported by The Rockbridge Weekly last week that the Board of 
Supervisors had agreed to the request by the Tourism Board to send a 
letter of intent to submit a proposal to the MOC. The deadline for the 
letter of intent to be received by the MOC was March 15 with the 
proposal to be submitted by April 15.

The Board of Supervisors and Lexington City Mayor John Knapp signed the 
letter of intent that was mailed on Wednesday, March 14. At Lexington 
City Council's meeting on Thursday, March 15, Tourism Board President 
Brian Shaw read essentially the same letter to Council as he did to the 
Supervisors with the exception that the request to Council was a waiver 
of property taxes on the property whereas the Board of Supervisors was 
asked to consider a gift of the property to the MOC.

Although the Supervisors unanimously agreed to send a letter of intent, 
a discussion of what incentives to include in a proposal was not decided 
on at their retreat on Tuesday, March 20th. The Supervisors did, 
however, discuss their feelings that Lexington should have to include 
some incentives as well and not get a free ride.

The discussion at City Council was preceded by remarks made by several 
residents who also spoke at Monday night's presentation by the MOC. On 
Thursday, W&L Professor Ted DeLaney told council that he was opposed to 
the museum locating in Lexington and felt it would be divisive. Resident 
and merchant Al Hockaday began his remarks by comparing the wish for 
localities to bring the MOC to Lexington to Clinton's treatment of 
Monika Lewinsky whereas Clinton was asked why he did what he did and he 
answered, "Because I could." On both Thursday and Monday, Hockaday said 
that the museum should be located somewhere but not in Lexington and 
said that economic gain was not a reason for them to locate here.

W&L History Professor Taylor Saunders disagreed pointing out that the 
quality of scholarship at the museum and the extent of their collection 
is unequaled. "You should visit the museum and see for yourself and read 
some of their publications," he said. "Lexington would be blessed to 
have this distinguished collection in conjunction with what we already 
have."

Council member Mimi Elrod expressed her doubts about the museum and the 
divisiveness it would bring to the community. She said she agreed with 
Ted Delaney and would vote no on submitting a letter of intent so that 
the conversation would stop and no more time would be wasted on the 
issue. Council member Jim Gianniny indicated he was not sure about the 
appropriateness of the museum locating at Courthouse Square and also was 
against the incentive request that Lexington waive taxes. When Mayor 
Knapp indicated the letter of intent had already been sent, Elrod was 
incensed and Knapp explained that he was only following Council 
instructions to continue the conversation. The vote was four to two in 
favor of moving forward but judging from the discussion, it could have 
just as easily been a negative vote. In general, Council agreed to hear 
Waite's presentation.

Waite gave an overview of the history of the museum and the collection, 
in particular the latest exhibits and publications, which have addressed 
issues not addressed before such as the impact of the war on women at 
home and also slavery from all perspectives, which he explained were 
groundbreaking.

County resident Mike Hunt asked what the museum would bring to the 
County in the way of jobs and benefits for the poorer people and said 
that he was against the museum coming to Lexington. Coming from the 
black community he said that he didn't want any reminder of the 
Confederacy. Later in conversation he said, "They tell you what may 
happen but it may go the right way but always goes the wrong way." 
Beatrice Johnson agreed with Hunt in a conversation after the meeting 
saying that the jobs it would bring are the poor peoples jobs - the 
service jobs. She also felt that having the institution in Lexington 
would bring trouble to her community attracting people like the Klan.

George Warren told Rawls that the exhibit on slavery at the museum in 
1991 and curated by Smithsonian curator Tucker Hall moved him as much as 
the Holocaust museum. "It was sensitive and moving," he said. "Lexington 
would be blessed to have such an institution. We don't need more 
monuments to dead white people. What we need is great scholarship and 
intelligent history made alive and all inclusive."

Peter Hansen expressed concern about the Confederate Battle Flag flying 
in front of the courthouse and also asked about their financial 
situation. Rawls replied that there were many flags used by the 
confederacy and the one that is currently displayed by many citizens is 
not what they would use. He suggested that the flags out front would be 
the US flag, the VA flag, and the first official Confederate flag. 
Several people, including college student Mallory Douglas said they 
would be embarrassed to have a confederate flag greeting them when they 
came downtown. She did say that she appreciated the history presented by 
the museum. Rawls remarked that the flags did belong IN the museum as 
part of the collection.

Rawls explained that the museum is experiencing tight finances but that 
relocating should alleviate accessibility to visitors. He said they have 
been given $400,000 by the General Assembly to tide them over and that 
they expect to break even once they relocate. He explained that interest 
in the Civil War is at an all time high and not likely to diminish.

Eleanor Wright explained her German background and how children there 
have grown up not knowing about events there during WWII. She said she 
felt that the issues of war should be open and examined and not shoved 
in a dark corner to fester.

Beatrice Johnson told Rawls that the museum would only make for 
animosity and that the community would not be able to get past it. "In 
1991 you put together an exhibit on slavery. That was far to late for me 
to accept. The exhibit was not for us blacks and it brings back memories 
we want to put behind us, not in front of us. I'd rather you put a dog 
shed in the middle of town than this."

Michael Hunt followed saying the museum would not be for the benefit of 
the black community. "It would only bring us stigmatism," he said.

Rawls told Hunt that the biggest impact the museum has had is on African 
American children. They remark "that is not how I heard it on the streets."

Anne Russek said she welcomed that museum and thought it would become 
part of the community and share its values. "History is a part of all of 
us. Personally I'm excited. It is a perfect fit."

Tom Kastner explained that he came from a union town and was impressed 
by the educational mission of the institution because it deals broadly 
and comprehensively with the Civil War.

A discussion was held on why the museum was relocating out of Richmond. 
Rawls explained that the available sites were near other museums and 
they were not able to obtain the land.

"Locating a museum is a tricky thing," he said. "We would prefer to stay 
in Richmond but relocating to a village like Lexington with the 
resources already here at W&L, VMI, and the Stonewall Jackson House 
would be terrific in terms of scholarship and research. Together our 
collections become complete and Lexington is a historically sensitive 
environment."

"There is risk on both are parts," said Rawls. "You have to put 
something in the space and looking at the alternatives, we look pretty 
good."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://scvva.org/pipermail/vacourier_scvva.org/attachments/20070321/e0d9540e/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: hockaday.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 93706 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://scvva.org/pipermail/vacourier_scvva.org/attachments/20070321/e0d9540e/attachment-0001.jpg 