Dear Mayor and City Council: Please don’t surrender Alamo Plaza

It’s hard to send a letter to you, because I don’t yet know who will be occupying those offices at City Hall. But, whoever you are, your first week in office, you will be pressured to approve a plan to wall off a major public plaza, the historical heart of so many of San Antonio’s cherished celebrations.

Please do not vote unconditionally to support the Reimagining the Alamo Master Plan in a rush to meet the budgetary cycle of the State Legislature.

There is much merit to parts of the proposal. The Alamo building itself is crumbling, and the plan targets its restoration and preservation. That is urgent.

The Phil Collins Collection is waiting for a home in San Antonio, and the State has acquired several historic structures on the westside of Alamo Plaza to display the valuable artifacts. (Adaptive reuse is wonderful, but please urge the State to reconsider gutting the entire interior of the landmark Crockett Block, designed by Alfred Giles.)

So the east and west parts of the plan on the state’s existing turf seem on somewhat sound ground. But then we get to the plaza.

As we approach San Antonio’s Tricentennial, we should be particularly attuned to the city’s early history. But, at least in the Executive Summary,* the Master Plan ignores the history of Mission San Antonio de Valero – a site not dubbed the Alamo until years later.

In the aftermath of the Battle, General Santa Anna ordered his troops to destroy as much of the site as possible. This was the beginning of the decline of the historic Alamo compound. Restoring the reverence and dignity of the Alamo is the obligation of our generation and the mission of our efforts.

The decline of the compound that originally was Mission San Antonio de Valero began earlier, before the mission was secularized. Where is that layer of history of the mission days? Not on page 1. Mission San Antonio de Valero is not even recognized by name in the summary until page 24. In the appendices.

Reimagining apparently calls for walling in the plaza and locking it up every night. The planners evidently believe members of the public incapable of envisioning the original walls of the compound. To do so, they must be restricted from entering the plaza aside from as a herd entering through a southern portal.

If returning the Alamo compound to its appearance at the time of the battle truly was a principal adhered to by the Master Plan, the “bold” plan would call for the removal of the iconic parapet added later by the United States Army.

Vehicular movement north and south through downtown currently is impaired. Removing another street from the existing clogged pattern is impractical. Yet, even so, it is difficult to argue that closure would not enhance the experience for pedestrians on the plaza.

But ceding the rights of pedestrians to cross through the plaza makes absolutely no sense. Public parks should be porous, easily accessible from all sides. Yet access to this civic space will be reserved to one entryway on its southern side.

Behind glass, this current pedestrian crossroad will become a dead-end. An Alamo cul-de-sac.

Thanks so much, John Branch, http://comicskingdom.com/john-branch

The city of San Antonio has struggled for years to revive Houston Street, and it finally provides a healthier retail environment. Houston Street merchants will again disappear if they lose the pedestrian traffic they need. Pedestrians will all be funneled in and out by way of Rivercenter.

Trees will be removed from the center of the plaza between the Alamo and the Crockett Block to create an open space, a space too hot under the Texas sun for anyone to linger.

A sizzling comal for tourists. A playground for reenactors. A place locals will avoid.

Paraphrasing W.S. Merwin, there is no recipe for “unchopping a tree.” Walk the Mission Reach of the San Antonio River Improvements Project and envision how many years, or generations, of growth it will take for the new saplings to recreate the groves of trees Spanish missionaries originally found along the river’s banks.

In exchange for placing much of the city’s space in a fishbowl with restricted access, the plan offers San Antonio “a new civic space – Plaza de Valero,” a tiny sliver of the plaza in front of the Menger Hotel. This is billed as: “an opportunity for visitors to have a quiet moment, in the shade of mature trees, enjoying food and refreshments, as they experience the reimagined Alamo.” This “new” space already exists.

The very definition of civic is “relating of or to a city or town or the people who live there.” We have a great civic space, the entire plaza, now. A place for exuberant celebrations and the exercise of first-amendment rights, rights championed by those who died at the Alamo. A spot for gathering in the shade of trees.

There is no reason City Council cannot approve the Alamo restoration on the east and the Museum concept on the west side of the plaza as envisioned in the Master Plan on May 11.

Obviously, improvements can be made to enhance historical interpretation in the plaza, but eliminating Alamo Plaza as a pedestrian passageway or civic gathering place for your citizens need not be a requisite to forward a portion of the plan. Judgment on the disposition of the roadway and plaza should be withheld pending refinement and public release of the full plan.

The many volunteers and professionals tackling this project should be commended for their efforts. But that does not mean this initial plan merits a rubber stamp. The streets and plaza belong to the City of San Antonio.

Please request a reexamination and rethinking of this portion of the plan. Don’t consent to turning a beautiful urban park into a walled-off wasteland of a plaza. A place completely isolated from the fabric of San Antonio.

Thank you for your consideration of this request from a concerned citizen.

P.S.  If one haunts the place of one’s death, would it not seem a Sisyphean hell if the only thing you got to witness was men reenacting your painful death over and over? Would you want the site of your bloody end preserved in the desolate state it was in in the aftermath of your death?

Or would you want to witness people actively enjoying the freedom for which you fought on a daily basis?

One resembles a horror film, the other a fulfillment of your dreams.

*As of this time, the only portion of the plan available to the public online is the sketchy Executive Summary. The public comments you receive prior to voting are based solely upon that and what can be pried out of presenters during hearings. The publicly funded Master Plan appears a closely guarded secret.

Thanks for Correcting Those False Allegations Put Forth by the Liberal Media

Once again, “The liberal media has put the Texas educational system under a great deal of scrutiny lately….”  This opinion is offered by Texas GOP Vote Blog.   

That blog is not anywhere I normally hang out.  In FACT, I truly try to keep politics out of my blog, but…

I was trying to find the text somewhere, anywhere online with the exact wording of the new social studies guidelines approved by the Texas State Education Agency.  If we are once again the laughing-stock (although it really is not funny) of the nation, I wanted the FACTS.  I could not find the approved guidelines in writing so tried listening to some of the actual debates online.  Took about two minutes, perhaps less, to decide I’d wait for the transcripts.

But then I found this GOP blogger ready to straighten out the biased news reports:

To help sort out fact from fiction, Jonathan Saenz from Texas Legislative Update has sent in a fact versus fiction summary….

One of Jonathan’s FACTS follows:

FALSE ALLEGATION: The State Board of Education has eliminated Tejanos who fought at the Alamo.

FACT: The Social Studies TEKS include Tejano leaders who fought at the Alamo.

In Grade 4 Texas history, Tejanos Juan Seguin, Placido Benavides and Francisco Ruiz are required to be studied as important participants in the Texas Revolution.

Benavides and Ruiz were not participants in the Battle of the Alamo (so are unrelated to the discussion of the allegation), but we’ll let this part slide because the sentence above only identifies the three as participants in the Texas Revolution.  Maybe Jonathan should have stopped (or never started) his argument there.

Lorenzo de Zavala and Jose Antonio Navarro, Tejano leaders who died at the Alamo, also are required figures in Grade 4.

Hold everything.  The GOP factoid provider needs a FACT checker before he kills off de Zavala and Navarro at the Alamo. 

I always place great trust in the Handbook of Texas Online, an incredible resource offered by the Texas State Historical Association.  Here is the Handbook’s view of history:

FACT:   Manuel Lorenzo Justiniano de Zavala y Sáenz, first vice president of the Republic of Texas:

Zavala returned to his home in poor health and relinquished his part in the affairs of state.  He resigned the vice presidency on October 17, 1836.  Less than a month later, soaked and half-frozen by a norther after his rowboat overturned in Buffalo Bayou, he developed pneumonia, to which he succumbed on November 15, 1836.

FACT:  José Antonio Navarro was one of three Tejanos signing the Texas Declaration of Independence, along with his uncle, José Francisco Ruiz and Lorenzo de Zavala.  “He died on January 13, 1871.”

I was taught seventh-grade Virginia history from a book emphasizing most masters were kind to their slaves, treating them like family members.  I do not think anyone in my class fell for it.   (FACT:  Relationships were so close that many slaves bore the children of their masters.)

Fortunately, children do not always believe what is taught them.  They are not stupid.  But what’s these two GOP bloggers’ excuse for their ignorance of Texas history?  Happy Jonathan did not tackle too many FACTS past what is taught at Grade 4.

Oh well.  Thanks, guys, for keeping us posted with well-informed FACTS.  Did not even need to reference any of the liberal media stories online to debunk your version of history.

Guess I’ll keep looking for FACTS elsewhere.

Texas, Our Texas! so wonderful so great!
Boldest and grandest, withstanding ev’ry test….

Except maybe fourth-grade history.

Note Added on May 25:  My apologies to Jonathan.  He merely attributed incorrect roles to real people.  In this morning’s San Antonio Express-News, columnist Cary Clack pointed out the hero praised most by one member of the State Board of Education is fictitious: 

Then there’s Don McLeroy of Bryan, the board’s wizard who — among many dubious proposals — wanted to evaluate the impact of reform leaders such as Upton Sinclair, Susan B. Anthony, Ida B. Wells and W.E.B. DuBois.  Instead of citing these men and women as people who loved their country so much they devoted their lives to changing it for the better, McLeroy was concerned that their tone wasn’t as optimistic as the Belgian immigrant Jean Pierre Godet who said, “I love America for giving so many of us the right to dream a new dream.”

….  Godet is a fictional character in the 1998 book, “The Spirit of America” by the painter Thomas Kinkade.

McLeroy is so afraid of the nation’s past he’d prefer to elevate a fictional character at the expense of genuine American reformers.  Maybe he’s right and we can eliminate from our textbooks more of those insufficiently patriotic do-gooders and replace them with true American heroes like the Legion of Superheroes, led by Superman, who made no mistakes and made everyone happy except for the bad guys.

Students can learn about justice and interracial cooperation through The Lone Ranger and Tonto and be taught examples of loyalty, friendship, hard work and ingenuity through the stories of Lassie…. 

That’s what we need, the “painter of light” to illuminate Texas history.  Maybe we can incorporate his work in the math curriculum as well.  Students can be challenged to figure out how many times Tinker Bell appears in Kinkade’s eight Disney images.

Note No. 2 Added on May 25:  From David McLemore’s blog

After wrestling Santa Ana to the ground, Davy Crockett parted the San Antonio River and said, “Let my people go!”

Note Added on May 30:  Jonathan, read about three Tejanos who actually were at The Alamo.

Note Added on September 19:  Great John Branch cartoon in today’s San Antonio Express-News:

February 20, 2011, Update: The conservative Fordham Institute condemns revisionist history in Texas, and someone recently sent me a link to a great 2010 cartoon from The Washington Post.

Note added on March 3, 2011: Veronica Flores-Paniagua weighs in on the current state of the State Education Board.

Note added on May 27, 2011: Senate Democrats refused to rubber-stamp the governor’s nomination to lead the SBOE….