DuPage Theater

The Dupage was triplexed in the late 80's. I worked on this triplexing with the owner(who bought the theatre at tax auction) at the time. He tried to make a go of it as a single screen first but it was pretty futile. Triplexing it mad it a bit more cost effective to run but it still just could not quite make it. Fortunately he was quite gentle when he triplexed it and it could easily be restored. Except for some holes in the ceiling and some missing plasterwork that could easily be duplicated the Dupage is still in great shape. The entire front end is also completely intact as is the stage. The apartments were always a disaster but the little corner restaurant, Art and Almas Blue Plate always had great food. Now owned by the city of Lombard hopefully they will find a way to bring this place back to life again

I would like to encourage anyone visiting this site to write to us at: dupagefriends@ameritech.net. We are the The Friends of the Dupage Theatre, and are a not for profit entity that has recently been formed to take on the task of educating the public about our little theatre. To update everyone interested, the theatre is still in limbo as of today, but a vote from the Village Board is expected within the month to go forward with restoration. Current estimates are in the neighborhood of $6.1 million for the theatre and shops. The plan is to leave the theatre in its original 1928 form with a few modern conveniences (the bathrooms were non existant!), and turn the theatre into a performing arts venue for live programs, weddings, conferences, movies, art shows and just about anything else you could imagine. Another minor addition would be a thrust stage to increase the ability for live performances. Seating capacity from 500-800 total. We currently have several theater groups who are in desperate need of space waiting in the wings to use the Theatre. We are always looking for donations, so if you would like to help out, or are interested in knowing more about our group, please e-mail us.

A DuPage Theatre Foundation Board has been appointed and Fundraising efforts are in full swing. Please visit our website at www.dupagetheatre.net OR for more information call 630-932-5320.

The address for the DuPage Theatre is 109 South Main Street, Lombard, Il.

Next event: JUMP, JUNK, & JAVA - Saturday, March 27th

The Friends of the DuPage Theatre are sponsoring an evening of acoustic rock and visual art. Local band, "The 4th Phase" will be performing from 7-10pm. "Junk Drawer," an exhibit of assemblages in old drawers by Laura Fitzpatrick, will be on display through 4/17/04. Free admission.

The Funky Java Coffee House is where the event will be held, which is located at 40 S. Villa Ave. (corner of St. Charles Rd. & Villa Ave.) in Villa Park, IL. For information, call 630.426.0621 or visit our website at: http://www.dupagetheatre.net

The DuPage Theatre is now the Dupage Theatre and Arts Centre. May 16th the arts centre will join the village of Lombard in celebrating the Lilac Parade and Festival with the Lilac Family Fun Fest. Popcorn, cotton candy, hot dogs, moon walk, and games for the kids will be among some of the activities hosted by The Friends of the DuPage Theatre. Visit the theatre before of after the parade and join in on hosted tours discussing the past, present, and future of this "theatre treasure" that has achieved the status on the National Register of Historic Places.

i was raised in Lombard and have a lot of fond memories of the Dupage Theater. currently i am local business owner, Oak Brook, please have someone contact me if there anything i can help with the cause of restoration. my time is limited, but what i can do, i will.
thank you!
john a dixon
(630)871-1516 h / (630)684-0477 w

John-
Cinema Treasures is not affiliated with the DuPage Theatre--you might want to contact Friends of the DuPage Theatre at the website above or call (630) 426-0621.

The Friends of the DuPage Theatre's Oral History program has begun! We are currently videotaping interviews with people who have fond memories of the DuPage Theatre. Photographs, programs, or other theatre momentos are also being sought for our archives. If you would like to participate in our Oral History program or have any items related to the theatre, we would love to hear from you! Contact Pam "Mimi" Pulice at 630-627-6464. Friends of the DuPage Theatre Video Chair

The restoration of the DuPage Theatre has been attempted before and the residents did not support it. The only significant financial support has been through tax dollars, not private funding. If you have a spare $10 million that you want to throw away, buy the property and restore the theatre and write off the losses. Better yet, a majority of the residents support tearing the theatre down and developing a tax generating facility on that property to benefit all the residents of Lombard, not an exclusive few.

To Lombard Resident:

I won't argue with you over the proper use of tax dollars, but I disagree that a restored movie palace will only benefit an exclusive few. Successful theatres tend to enhance downtown areas. Just look at the impact that the Chicago, Oriental, and Palace theatres have had for downtown Chicago. There are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of examples of this across America. But I do generally agree that governments shouldn't be in the theatre business.

Here's some news that's fit to be printed for all to know.....
Did you know that nearly 90% ($4,737,103.00) of the restoration of the the DuPage Theatre will be funded using tax dollars (whether it be TIF or tax credits..it's still tax dollars). Less than 3% ($93,886.00) of the funds "raised" to date are private individual donations. And most of that private money is "pledged" and not "real money" in the bank.

Did you know that to date nearly $270,000.00* of money raised, both private and public, has been spent on the DuPage Theatre. Yet a "safety fence" has recently been installed around the building, on the recommendation of the Lombard building department, to protect the public from loose bricks, mortar, etc. and to avoid potential injury and lawsuits

*$125,000.00 Illinois First Grant, $79,369.20 Lombard Restoration Fund Hard & Soft Donations, $19,000.00 Friends of DuPage Theatre, Ltd Donation, $25,114.00 Individual Cash Donations to the Foundation and $20,086.90 in parking revenue. Source: DuPage Theatre Foundation, Inc. Pledge Report – August 31, 2004, DuPage Theatre Foundation, Inc. Treasurer’s Report – August 31, 2004

Did you know you can learn even more when you visit www.dupagetheatre.com for the real story and for more detailed information. You can also see comments from DuPage supporters, opponents, and most importantly the taxpayers and citizens of Lombard.

You do have a good point town goverments have no bsns being in the theater bsns. I love old theaters but do not support govrment take overs of the buildings.

Longisland, to some extent I agree with you but then again there would be by far fewer of the theatres of yester year that are still open today if the local governments had not stepped in to preserve our heritage.

That is true i have one that is redone in my town very nice but the goverment has no bsns saving private bsns. Just my opinion and as you know i love old theaters.

To Set the Record Straight --
The Village of Lombard did not take over the DuPage Theatre. It received the theatre as a gift for its citizens from Big Idea Corporation when it outgrew the location. The Village is not in the theatre business; they have signed an agreement with the DuPage Theatre Foundation to manage and oversee its restoration and operation. The Village of Lombard provides TIF funds to businesses within a TIF district to enhance and strengthen that district. TIF funds would be provided to any elegible business on that corner, not specifically the theatre building. Tax dollars used for the DuPage Theatre are monies set aside for these kinds of projects in towns across America. If Lombard does not get the money another town will. People working to save the historic DuPage Theatre are wisely seeking out available grants, just as students do. For the latest information visit www.dupagetheatre.net

To REALLY Set the Record Straight.....
Big Idea did not outgrow the location...they never did anything with the theatre after purchasing it....other than board it up. They never got their "big idea" going at this site. Yes, the "white elephant" was given to the village. And yes, the village has an agreement with the DuPage Foundation...but the village is still the owner and responsible for the building. And TIF funds are TAX DOLLARS....just as the Save The Treasure grants and other moneys they are seeking are all TAX DOLLARS. If it was a sensible project you would not need federal tax credits, TIF funding, and grant money to make it work...free enterprise would make it a success. The people working to save the theatre are down to the wire....and that hum we hear in the distance is not cheers of support from vilage residents but instead the bulldozers warming up to finally tear it down. For the real story visit www.dupagetheatre.com

To the negitive DuPage Theatre posters,
In Cinema Treasures own words "Cinema Treasures is a groundbreaking website devoted to movie theater preservation and awareness. Utilizing the community-building capabilities of the Internet, Cinema Treasures unites movie theater owners and enthusiasts in a common cause—to save the last remaining movie palaces across the country." It doesn't seem in the sprit of the websites concept to have negitive opinion posted just to misinform the people who the website was meant to service, movie theater owners and enthusiast interested in theater preservation. This is a place for people who love movie palaces to come together and share stories, experiences, and information, not a place to argue with people who don't appreciate "Cinema Treasures".

Could it be that the truth hurts?
I am certainly not against restoration of historic treasures by private enterprise. There are many wonderful examples like the spectacular Tivoli in Downers Grove.
And to misinform? Not at all. Just presenting the facts here...no matter how painful they may be to the DuPage supporters. Cinema Treasures is free to remove the comments they deem argumentative or against restoration. But is it really wrong to present the facts on the restoration scene? Maybe it is to the supporters since the truth is so painful.

Each side should say as they wish......

There was a news story about the DuPage in today's Chicago Tribune (I have copied the full story since you can't view it without registering):

Theater rehab plan shifts into high gear
Firm hired to start Lombard project

By Lynn Van Matre
Tribune staff reporter
Published October 21, 2004

The long-running campaign to raise the curtain at the shuttered DuPage Theatre in Lombard has taken a giant step forward with the awarding of a contract to renovate the vintage venue's exterior and create restaurant and retail space on the first floor.

"Our agreement with the Village of Lombard called for us to award construction contracts for the first two phases of the project by December of 2004, so we're ahead of schedule," said Martin Carroll, chairman of the DuPage Theatre Foundation, the non-profit group formed last year to oversee what is expected to be a $6.5 million renovation.

Carroll said Skokie-based Alter Group has been hired to handle the initial phases of the renovation for approximately $1.9 million. Final contract terms are being negotiated and are scheduled to be presented to the Village Board on Thursday evening, he said. No vote is expected.

Plans call for the 1920s movie house, which is owned by the village and is on the National Register of Historic Places, to be turned into a non-profit film and cultural arts center with meeting rooms and retail space.

The first stages of the project are expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2005, Carroll said. The theater auditorium and the building's second floor will be renovated later, with the entire venue scheduled to be operating and self-sustaining by the end of 2007.

"Once the theater marquee has been restored, there will be a tremendous push to get the theater itself done," Carroll said. "It will just depend on how fast we can raise the money."

Carroll said the foundation plans to hire an executive director and launch a major fundraising campaign early next year after construction has begun.

"The building has been vacant for so long that people don't want to contribute until they can see progress," he said.

Carroll said the foundation has a letter of intent from a retailer, which he declined to name, to rent the first-floor retail space. Several restaurateurs have shown interest, but none has made a commitment, he said.

The foundation has raised about $5.5 million for the project, most of it in the form of pledges and grants, Carroll said. Just over $100,000 is available in cash.

Funding includes a $1 million state grant that has been frozen, historic site tax credits of $1 million, and $1 million in tax-increment financing funds from the Village of Lombard that will be disbursed as construction proceeds. It also includes about $1 million that would be generated by the village selling a parcel of land just south of the theater for a mixed-use development.

The deal, which would involve selling the property for approximately $600,000 and receiving an additional $400,000 donation from the developer, would require trustees' approval, according to Village Manager William T. Lichter.

"Our village Finance Committee recommended that no action be taken on things like selling property until the contracts for the first two phases had been signed," Lichter said.

The project has received the support of Village Board members in the past with the exception of Trustee Steven Dale Sebby, who questions the foundation's funding plans.

"I don't oppose the project, but the bottom line is that they only have $110,000 in the bank," Sebby said. "These people are very sincere in their cause, but the village needs to take a hard and fast look at the money on their balance sheet, not at pledges."

DuPage Theatre supporters have only about $125,000 in the bank....and it certainly is not enough to enter into contracts or agreements for the phase 1 and phase 2 work to the tune of $1.9 million.

Said the DuPage Theatre Foundation spokesperson in an article recenlty published in the Daily Herald: "Because it's complicated doesn't mean it's iffy". Do the supporters not see that it is complicated and iffy only by one simple fact...there is not enough money in the bank to restore this theatre? At least three Village Trustees have seemed to realize this fact from their comments at the October 21st village board meeting.

How can the DuPage Theatre Foundation continue to state that they are moving forward on awarding a contract or hiring a firm to manage construction when there is no money to pay for it?

the village board members agreed to the
release of tif funds for phase1 of restoration
when the theater foundation submitted
a signed contract for phase 1 construction.
a year later some board members changed the
agreement stating that they will not approve
release of tif funds until the foundation
shows proof of funding for phase 1
this a a complete about facefor the board.
not what was agreed upon
tif dollars.
sometimes in the eyes of the beholder
sometimes the squeaky wheel get the oil
"ie"
33k of tif money to pay for facad work
on 33 north main
paint job
i could never figure that deal
maybe it had something to do with votes
duper supporter

DuPage Theatre
1928-2004

After a seventy six year run at Main and Parkside in downtown Lombard, the final curtain dropped today, December 1st, on the DuPage Theatre (affectionately known to many simply as the "Dupe")as restoration contracts were not in place by the deadline. The Dupe had a good run for his first 60 or so years...featuring live radio productions such as the National Barn Dance, live performances by Gene Autry, Pat Butram, and George Goebel, classic films, and later in life divided up into a budget multiplex. The last several years were tough on this old friend. Despite big ideas for redevelopment by Big Ideas in the mid 1990's and a valiant effort for restoration by many Friends in 2004, the Dupe never recovered fully.

All is not lost in Lombard though as the Dupe is survived by many old buildings in town including the Sheldon Peck House, the restored chapel at Main and Maple, the Historical Society house, and many other significant residential structures including the much adored "Orphan Annie House" right up Main Street. Creative reuse/redevelopment of the site of this historic structure is anticipated and all in town will benefit from his legacy.

A later date with the wrecking ball is planned.

As always "Concerned Taxpayer" is misleading people who might not be involved with the daily happenings of the DuPage Theatre. The final curtain has not dropped and in fact there is a village board meeting later in the week to discuss the progress the DuPage Theatre foundation board has made. Sure "Concerned Taxpayer" will respond saying there is no progress, this and that, and post more misinformation about the restoration efforts. "Concerned Taxpayer" along with a small group of other village residents have taken to posting their misinformation along with real news to try to validate there cause. The cause is to tear down the DuPage Theatre. They don't care about the Arts, and they don't care about restoration efforts. I hope visiters to this site are not fooled into thinking that these negative DuPage Theatre posters are just against this project, but interested in the causes this website supports, their not. The creative reuse/redevelopment that they talk about are one of three things. 1. Condo's 2. CVS pharmacy 3. Parking Lot. I will admit that the restoration efforts have been long hard work, and for this project to succeed there is a lot more long hard work to do. This is a crucial time for the DuPage Theatre, and a small group of village residents with some influential pull have thrown roadblocks one after the other in our way and will say anything they can to have you believe this project is a bad idea . Lombard residents are in support of the restoration of the DuPage Theatre. In additon to that support, we have had good feedback from other DuPage County residents. I hoped this forum troll would just go away since this is a site where people come together because they care about classic cinemas and restoration efforts, not to argue. But they seem to like throwing mud around and I thought would clean up behind them.

Talk about a need for cleaning up after those that throw mud...simply look at theatre restoration financing, their claims that it will work, and take a peak at the crass comments put forth by theatre foundation supporters on other forums. They can do nothing but attack since the FACTS speak for themselves. Doesn't the theatre plan call for more condos on the "south parcel"? The only misinformation continuing to be posted and published comes from suppporters themselves. And creative reuses have been put out for open discussion many times..and it certainly never included condos, parking lots or a CVS. In fact it includes restoration of key components of the theatre, thus the appropriateness of open discussion in this "restoration forum". And how can you generalize that people against the DuPage don't care about the arts? So far from the truth....most just don't care for a village owned and taxpayer supported effort to restore the DuPage. One only needs to dig into the Genesee Theatre in Waukegan to see what could happen ($10 million over budget, $500,000 operating deficit)on Main Street.

You know...I'm not familiar with the entire story. But, I'll say this: the time for these buildings has passed. If creative reuse can be achieved using all or part of the building, fabulous. But it must be realistic in the modern world. Otherwise, tear the place down and build something else...and this is coming from a guy who's related to people that designed these theaters left & right back in the twenties. Chicago has fared well, as cities with restored theaters go. We should save some...but, we can't save them all...it's like trying to make a guy drive a Model T down the Kennedy to his job every day.

Why would a person who thinks "the time for these buildings has passed" be visiting this website. I can understand that you might be against the restoration of the Theatre but I can't understand what brought you here? This is a place where people come to talk about restoring classic cinemas. If your not intersted in this cause maybe this is not the website for you, unless you just enjoy posting comments to argue with others.

I don't know... but I certainly agree that we should save some! After all, so many are gone already that we should try to save the few that are left. I wouldn't say it's so much like trying to drive a Model T down the Kennedy as it is to say, driving a Dusenberg down the Kennedy instead of a Honda- certainly not the most modern way, nor the most economical, but overall a vastly superior experience.

They would visit this site to protect taxpaying citizens from debacles like the DuPage Theatre that depend almost entirely on tax dollars to make it happen. The Village Board has spoken....Village President Mueuller did the right thing in finding theatre supporters in default of their restoration agreement. Supporters claimed retractors were "poisoning the well"....gee, maybe only with the truth. So I guess we can say three trustees and the Village President must have taken a drink from the well of truth (as only the supporters would see the truth and financial reality as poison).

Because certainly, all this negativity and lack of imagination could in no way affect their chances of success. Look. You go on and on about how the DuPage supporters didn't have the money, and couldn't do what they were trying to do. But with constant detractors like you, how can they possibly expect to raise money? It's this kind of negative NIMBYism that keeps people from taking action in the first place. If people start thinking there's no reason for them to contribute, that their effort will be hopeless, they're not going to try to make something of it. Projects like this can only succeed if people approach the situation optimistically. It's hard enough trying to preserve a building in the first place without an entire organization working against you. Let's not even go into the practice of registering a similar domain name to the real website, or the way TIFs are actually used (hmm... Chicago used a TIF for its Theatre district, didn't it? Somehow I don't think that ticket sales bring all that much cash flow into city hall... but they couldn't possibly know what they're talking about) Don't go around hailing yourself as some sort of heroic protector of the helpless taxpayer. There's already enough people unwilling to pay a cent more that won't directly help them- why don't you take up the cause of the elderly paying for schools as part of their taxes? They certainly don't go to school; why should they have to pay?

This is a web site for people who love and cherish old theaters. To come in here and cheerlead for demolition just seems wrong.

Bravo to Brian Wolf! Boos and hisses to Concerned Taxpayer and Life's too Short! Take it from someone whose hometown has lost all but one of its magnificent downtown theatres. If you let the DuPage go you will be kicking yourselves over and over in the years to come. Buffalo saved the Buffalo Theatre (using taxpayer funds, oh horror!) and it has become one of downtown's major assets. Syracuse saved the Loew's and the citizens are, as a rule, very happy about that. Huntington is working to save the Keith-Albee because they know that it's one of their city's defining structures. The Ohio in Columbus is one of their major attractions. Every city has parking lots and condos, but there's only one DuPage theatre. Brian, I'll offer you any help I can give you from a distance. Just let me know.

As a quick aside, doesn't it occur to anyone that one of the reasons we have money is so that we can afford luxuries like the DuPage Theatre?

Not only that, but a truly progressive town realizes the importance of saving places like this? Only towns stuck in the past still think that the "slash and burn" method of renewing a downtown actually works. People don't come downtown to look at the latest parking lot or condo.

One last comment. "Concerned Taxpayer" is so zealous to have this place demolished. In my hometown when someone is so very anxious to have a building pulled down it's usually because some shady deal has been made. Hmmmm.

Be it known that a plan that restores the facade, retains key historic components of the theatre, and keeps away "more condos" has been put forth on many occassions. So "slash and burn" is not the solution..never was presented as the solution. The solution is creative reuse of the structure...not as a theatre but as a small scale commercial development and even a library. And don't forget if the theatre supporters had gotten their way, their plan included more condos and retail on the "south parcel".

Sorry, but "creative reuse"is a practical demolition. It takes something unique that belongs solely to your village, and turns it into something ordinary, that most people won't even drive down the block to see.

And by your own admission, "a date with the wrecking ball is planned", sounds more like destructive reuse.

Ziggy, maybe concerned taxpayer should read the article on the home page of Cinema Treasures, look what is being done to restore the Keith-Albee. Once an old treasure is gone its gone, we cannot bring it back. Looke throughout the Cinema Treasure site and see all the old palaces we have so recklessly let go by the wayside and be demolished, whether it be in a small town or a large city. Also look at the small towns that have restored their local movie palace and the flux of people it has brought back into the main part of the town. Saving just a facade is not going to put the people back in the a venue for entertainment. All in all this site is for the preservation of the Cinema Treasures which from most the comments on the DuPage we are getting away from. My home is between two large cities and I have seen the palaces destroyed one by one, sad to say. I wish those involved in preserving the DuPage the best of luck.

Thank you C van B! The people in Lombard need to have a vision that extends beyond tomorrow's bottom line. A truly forward looking community could recognize what a long term asset a restored theatre is, and how it gives a sense of place, such as some "creative reuse" can never do. I can only wonder again at who's pocket is being lined by this deal.

A great example of restoration is the Palace Theatre, Waterbury, Ct. Pull it up on Cinema Treasures and connect with one of the links. It is amazing what restoration can do for a theatre and its community.

Or the Wang Center in Boston, or the Opera House in Boston, or the Somerville Theatre in Somerville MA, or the Ohio, Palace, and Southern theaters in Columbus OH ....

And if you need to build condos and retail (or, better yet, additional movie screens) on an adjacent parcel to make the development financially successful, what's so bad about that?

Now, before you go back to pointing at the Gennessee as a warning sign, which seems to be one of your main arguments, why not consider wheter what you are saying is true? Is it in fact true that because one somewhat nearby theatre has gone over budget and hasn't yet found its programming niche, that all theatres of all sizes in all communities must therefore be failures, if city-owned? Before jumping to any further conclusions, I suggest you investigate more than one example. Here, I even spent a couple minutes actually using the valuable resources of this site to find a few for you to look at. These are just a few examples of city-owned theatres.
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/21/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/235/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/710/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/2957/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/3085/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/7560/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/327/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/4729/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/2395/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/1224/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/8765/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/2513/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/6927/
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/4498/

Your arguments may be able to sway public opinion, but if you think that you can come to a community of people who care about and have knowledge about theatres and decieve us, you're sorely mistaken.

If "public opinion" was strongly in favor of this theatre restoration, supporters would have had more than $67,000 in private pledges for a $6 million public project and more than 2400 names on their mailing list given this is a suburb of 42,000+ and part of a MAJOR metropolitan area (Chicago). And thanks for the examples (it's the Genesee by the way and the supporters are the ones that first used it as an example, not me)...most are larger than the 500-600 seat theatre project here in Lombard. And be it known that I was strongly in favor of this restoration project until doing some digging on the finances...and discovering that this would fast become a civic owned tax draining enterprise. If the "market" could fully support the theatre, then supporters should have floated "municipal or PFC bonds" or better yet had put it out to referendum to gauge public opinion. The truth of the matter is that it would not have worked as the risks were too great for the bonds to be underwritten and the referendum would have likely sent an even stronger and resounding NO GO on this project. Yes it will be a sad day to see it possibly go down but sometimes there is pain with progress.

Concerned Taxpayer really needs to find another place to air his negative comments. Thank-you for all your positive feedback Brian, Ron, Charles and Ziggy. Shouldn't this site be reserved for people to share their love of cinema treasures?
Pam Pulice

Yes, and the truth of the matter is that 40 years ago in San Francisco, a bond issue to save the Fox failed, and San Franciscans (not to mention theatre fans everywhere) have been tearing their hair over how stupid they were not to vote in favor of it. If public opinion is against saving the DuPage, then the public has not been fully informed on how a restored Dupage Theatre would benefit their community. A classic example is the Loew's in Jersey City. Nobody wanted it, but the Friends of the Loew's talked the city into buying it, and there isn't a person in Jersey City today who would say they're sorry it happened. Face facts "Concerned Taxpayer", you're wrong, and if public opinion is the deciding factor in what is right for a community then Hitler was the best thing for Germany (after all, he was voted in). You have a unique architectural gem sitting right in your lap and all you can think to do is gut it and "creatively reuse it". Fine, but the preservation community won't know whether to laugh at your stupidity or marvel at your tunnel vision.

In fact, the fact that you can't see what a benefit this theatre would be, and how important it could become to your community shows how provincial and backwards you are.

You've got me wrong guys. I hope you save the place...and I don't care if tax dollars are used or not. But you need a solid plan from start to finish...how to fund the project, intelligent management plan after the job is done. These places don't thrive nowadays without a lot of effort. If proper reuse does not materialize, these buildings decay. Teenagers and homeless people break into them. The owners barely maintain them, because they aren't money-makers. They become a burden to the community...and a lively mall is better than having a building like that dropping terra cotta chunks on people. There were once hundreds of old-time theaters in the Chicago area. We have some great show places...the Palace, Chicago, Oriental, Auditorium, and others. But, there isn't a place for hundreds of them in today's entertainment business...and, it's better to save the front of one...like the Belmont, or half of one...like the Gateway...than to tear the whole place down.

Furthermore...I think you guys could find better things to do than rip eachother on this web site. The concerned tax payer likes to aggravate you, and you play along.

Very well put "Life's too short". Thank you for sensible ending to this discussion. "Concerned Taxpayer" and others just presented key financial facts...not meant to aggravate or point fingers and never resorted to personal attacks like the "advocates" seemed to do. The supporters tried endlessly and are thanked for their efforts.

Today all we have is a village owned fenced in decaying shell of a building in the heart of downtown that has been "abandoned" for years. Creative reuse is the only financially viable solution at this point since the village has essentially pulled the plug on their funding. And shouldn't we all agree that reuse is a better fate than a date with the wrecking ball?

Concerned Taxpayer is lying through his teeth!! He was NEVER in favor of the restoration, in fact., the anti-theatre website he speaks of bought its domain name BEFORE the Theatre obtained theirs, and from the very beginning talked about a "bulldozer parade". That DOES NOT sound like support to me! He also illegally used pictures of the Theatre, as well as posting a private e-mail to him in order to try to sway support.
Life's too short, THERE IS A PLAN for the project, and it is a good one and is available to be looked at. In fact, they polled other local theatres and will charge rent substantially less in order to make it economically feasible to book more nights. The theatre group will not put on events, but merely rent the facility out, placing ALL risk on the renter.

To again set the record straight, Concerned Taxpayer does not own any web domains, never used any pictures illegally, and never posted any private emails. Concerned Taxpayer is obviously not who you think it is so please, once again, stop the personal attacks, slander, and pointing fingers. But face "TheTruth"...the plan for the theatre unfortunately failed. Face reality as it's partial restoration or a "bulldozer parade" as you so affectionately called it. Which do you want?

And your posting has been forwarded to the webmaster since it is in violation of terms of use of this site as you are prohibited from posting or transmitting to or from this Site any libelous or deflamatory materials that would violate any civil rights of others. Violation of these restrictions may result in limitations on your access to this Site.

To "concerned taxpayer". Your whole story does not ring true. You come across as someone who wants to appear concerned, but has an unrevealed motive for wanting this place gone. Beats me what it could be, but you lack sincerity. Why are you even on this site? I notice the DuPage is the only theatre where you make comments. This isn't the place to encourage theatre demolition, and no matter how you crunch the numbers you will never convince anyone, because there are a lot of theatre restoration groups who have taken on the number crunchers and won. Do you really want Lombard to be known as the community that can't support a theatre, when even places like Schenectady and Utica can do it? That's not a great motivation for moving to town.

Most towns and cities that have destroyed there last movie theatre has lived to regret it. Its a black eye on the historical downtown core. I have never been to any small town where the citizens of that town weren't proud of the restoration of there theatre. Most small towns are trying desperately to return to the main street of the early and mid 20th Century. These movie palaces is where are countries greatest generartion and there children gathered and have many fond memories.Hundreds of cities and towns accross this country have restored there movie palaces for a variety of functions so I guess there time has not passed.Some of our large restored movie palaces such as the Wang in Boston, Fox in Atlanta,Fox in Detroit,Fox in St Louis,Paramount in Seattle,Pantages in Hollywood,and others are more successful now than in Hollywoods Golden Era.brucec

And your comments comparing to the Genesee simply don't ring true- a 600 seat theatre is inevitably going to stay much closer to budget than one four times its size. It also is inevitably going to draw a completely different type of use than a 2400 seat venue; it would in fact be much easier to keep booked because there are many more events and types of events that can draw a few hundred people than events large enough to fill 2400 seats in the suburbs. Restoration arguments are likewise unfair- the Genesee went over budget because of the scope of the project. The DuPage doesn't have all that much to be repaired, and there's certainly no demolition and expansion to include in restoration.

I promise you that if the DuPage falls, Lombard will regret it. Clearly, if the problem is "the money isn't there", the logical next step is to wait for it to come. Money can come, but once the building is gone, it's not coming back. And, looking at the opponent's own finances page, only $1.7 million of the $4.6 million in public funds comes from TIFs; the rest is money earmarked for projects precisely like this.

"if the DuPage falls, Lombard will regret it" I agree. Go to any community where they managed to save one or two of their old theatres, and you'll find the public is proud of it. You never hear them say "Gee, I wish we had 'creatively used' this place instead of restoring it. It would have made such a great office building". On the other hand, communities that allow these places to get demolished regret it for literally decades. My hometown still regrets the loss of the Loew's and the Palace that were torn down 40 years ago. Don't be stupid you folks in Lombard.

Concerned Taxpayer is shifty. That much is certain. What is your deal, Concerned Taxpayer? I figure you are either a real estate developer...or someone who simply gains pleasure from bothering others...maybe both.

All I am saying is, keep it real guys. I have seen preservationists fail because they had great ideas, but no grounding in fundamental business principals. I would guess you have collectively spent ten hours arguing with this Taxpayer guy...even going so far as to invoke the memory of Adolf Hitler while doing it. That's not a good use of time, nor does it make the larger community take you seriously. What if you had spent ten hours cold-calling suburban Chicago companies to solicit donations? You would have gotten some good leads out of it, and maybe a check.

I hope you succeed...but you will only succeed with a lot of intelligent action and some luck...because this place is part of a corporate business venture from the 20's that has gone through growth, maturity and decline. There's no arguing that. You are trying to find an intelligent place for it in today's society.

And if you fight the good fight, and do not win...I hope the community at least sees fit to save a section of the building.

I don't know all the details of this situation, nor do I have time to learn them. But, that's my whole point...not that the place must be torn down.

Forget about this Concerned Taxpayer...fight intelligently...and good luck!

I think that Concerned Taxpayer probably has just about the same amount of intellect as George W. Bush does. I agree Mr. Life's too short. We should ignore him. Understand that this theatre will transport residents into the old world charm of a movie palace. It will culturally enhance the community and be an inspiration for the youth of today and tomorrow. With good public programming, interactive educational activities, gala evenings, exhibitions and the employment that it will provide area residents with, this theatre can become an irreplaceable asset to Lombard. When we leave the elegance and beauty of our homes behind, we want to be surrounded by even more of it in public spaces. Without it we have nothing but stale spaces with dropped ceilings, plasterboard and of course, multiplexes. This is a minimal amount of your tax dollar that is being used for a good cause. You should worry about the billions that are being spent by the fool I mentioned above on the oil war!

Dont give up on your beloved theatre Lombard!

This was my neighborhood movie house when I was a kid in the late 50's and early 60's. When I was about five I saw SNOW WHITE from a little bench in the projection booth because a friend's father was either the manager or the projectionist -- can't remember which. At the local Dairy Queen, if you bought a Dilly Bar and got lucky, you found a free pass to the DuPage imprinted on your Dilly Bar stick. I remember "watching" HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL in terror from under my seat while my sister narrated the action. I also seem to recall one of those glowing radium clocks down to the left of the screen.

I just went by the DuPage today on the train, and noticed that the entire theater property is now surrounded by fencing, including the front entrance area. Does anyone know when this went up, and what's going on? I didn't see any mention of this on the Friends of the DuPage Theatre website or in any of the local papers.

Go here: http://www.dupagetheatre.net

I did like Bryan did and went from top to bottom on the website but there is no mention of the fence.

Concered Taxpayer's comments on October 9th and December 4th on this page make reference to the theater being fenced in, for what it's worth. I do not know if this is the same fence Bryan refers to, however.

Thanks Brian, I hadn't noticed Concerned Taxpayer's making reference to the safety fence around the building in those two comments.

It's funny that so many Are against tax dollars to restore a landmark that would brighten an otherwise dead part of downtown, but think nothing when the tax payers of Chicago had to subsidize Soldier Field and its' ugly renovation, along with the new Sox Park. Remember when Arlington Park Racetrack burned down in the 70's or 80's and Springfield gave poor little rich boy Richard Duchoiss a handout to rebuild? At least with a theater, it can be a multi-purpose building. Can't we think of a plan to play all, or MOST sports in the same arena and save some bucks?

Good point Dave. I would be happy to have a raise in tax dollars to redevelop the theatre. The good thing is the tax dollars the Dupage Theatre are going after are not going to raise my taxes as a Lombard resident. Some of those tax dollars if not used for the theatre will be used for other projects, some not even in Lombard or Dupage County. The public library that some are pushing to be moved to the theatre location asked for a tax increase last year to rebuild on it's current location and was denied by a vote of the Lombard residents. "Tax Dollars" has become a dirty word but when you look at all the other things tax dollars are used for these project look like a good investment into the community.

Thanks Artspeak. I just cannot fathom why we are in such a hurry to tear down our landmarks which make our cities and towns unique. I mean, if this keeps up, why bother travelling at all, when after a few more years, we will all look the same, with strip malls and such coast to coast! How BORING....

I found an opening day ad for this theater. I couldn't link to it because it is a PDF file. I'm going to retype it here, word for word.

Ad in the Lombard Spectator-1928

"Lynch Theatres announce the opening of the magnificent new DuPage Theatre at Lombard. Thursday July 26, 1928 at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. Grand opening attraction, 2 big days. Beautiful Billie Dove in her latest and greatest feature triumph, "The Yellow Lily" with Clive Brook and a great supporting cast. Attend the opening Thursday".

Very good. You have correctly identified the movie that was shown on opening day. The DuPage theatre website has that data incorrect as they have The Yellow Lady as the name of the movie. See for yourself.

http://www.dupagetheatre.net/restoration.htm?*

The original owner of the DuPage Theatre was O.J. Roath. DuPage was not the initial name chosen for this theatre. During construction in 1926-1927 two other names were considered. The first was Paramount Deluxe Movie Palace which was just too long and the other name considered was Lombard because of Lombard Village. The Lombard name was rejected because Roath wanted the theatre to appeal to people outside of Lombard.
I don't believe you will find this data on the Dupage history page.

It shows you that even the theatre web page could make mistakes nobody is perfect.

Would you have any other details about the Dupage and Roath that isn't mentioned on the Dupage website?

On the DuPage Theatre history site the following line is written; "The Dupage was also home to a variety of local shops, including a delicatessen, candy shop, shoe store, hat shop, radio store, and realty company." The realty company as mentioned was Roath Realty. I will post more on the Dupage and O.J. Roath when time permits.

In reply to Bert Kimball and Tom Scott's query about O.J. Roath, here is part of an article I wrote as part of the 75th anniversary celebration of the DuPage Theatre. I had the pleasure of interviewing one of Mr. Roath's grandsons for the article.
Cindy Ward
One Mans Dream:
The Theatre Review / Summer 2003 edition

Seventy-five years ago the dream of OJ Roath was fulfilled with the opening of a Paramount Deluxe Movie Palace on Main Street in downtown Lombard. In 1926 his Realty Company purchased the Elkins property on Main at Parkside, which had been zoned for commercial use after a fire destroyed the landmark home. Mrs. Ekins was the noted film critic for the Chicago Tribune whose pen name was Mae Tinee (get it—matinee?). Roath moved a bronze deer from the property to Lilacia Park so everyone could enjoy the deer now known as Rastus. He expanded his concept of a theater by adding shops and apartment space, thus creating a commercial focal point for the village.

The shops filled rapidly. The Ida Lee Sweet shop opened March of 1928.
Mrs. J F Crintenden and Mrs. Ann Lee McCorkel made their own candies on the premises. Butler’s Delicatessen opened in June of ’28 and Roath Realty moved to the corner store. By July of 1929 an ad in the local paper for “Lombard’s Bright Spot” advertised The Nora Hat Shoppe, Lombard Shoe Store, Theatre Service Station, Ray C Allen Linoleum-Tapestries, Glenbard Radio Sales, in addition to the deli, sweet shop and of course, O J Roath Realty. The anchor of the commercial corner would be the Fisher Paramount Deluxe Theatre, since it was a Paramount affiliate. As the concept progressed it became known as the Lombard Theater. Ultimately, as it took on more the form of a deluxe movie palace, Roath changed the property name to the DuPage Theatre and Shoppes, because its appeal reached beyond the Lombard village limits. The $300,000 theater opened on July 26, 1928 with a showing The Yellow Lily, a silent film accompanied by Travis (Tommy) Nesbit on the Barton organ. As part of the festivities, Mr. Nesbit led a community sing. There were vaudeville acts and a live orchestra.


Building Boom
The burgeoning popularity of movies during the 20’s stimulated the construction of palatial cinemas in cities and towns throughout North America. By the end of the decade Paramount Pictures controlled 1,600 movie theaters. There were four other industry leaders who owned and operated theaters. They then contracted with independently owned theaters, such as the DuPage and by 1930 there were 20,000 movie theaters in the U.S.

In the spirit of ‘excess’ two other movie complexes were also proposed for the Lombard area. J A Cruger, the published of the Lombard Spectator, laid the foundation for a theater on St Charles across from the old downtown hotel. Roath moved so quickly, that Cruger did not complete the project. In August of 1928 the Chicago Tribune announced that an third, even larger theater complex was proposed for the Westmore area. It would consist of a 1000 seat theater, 8 stores, 64 offices and 124 apartments. Although the developer had obtained $900,000 in loans the project never broke ground. This is all in addition to a small theater that had opened before any of the others were considered.

The Depression Hits Hard
The euphoria of the business boom came to a sudden halt when events on ‘Black Thursday’ October 24, 1929, signaled the start of the Great Depression. It took more than a year for movie theaters to feel the impact. In 1930 national attendance of theaters hit a peak of 80 million a week. However, by 1931 with 28% of the population unemployed and 85,000 businesses failed, movie attendance fell rapidly. Ticket prices dropped from $.30 to $.20, and attendance continued to decline. Movie houses were rapidly closing. Paramount Corporation struggled financially. It closed one of its major studios, laid off workers and cut salaries. The film distribution and operating company servicing the DuPage went bankrupt. Roath kept the theater going by mortgaging real estate holdings, so determined was he to keep the theater open. However, on July 4, 1931 Roath finally closed his theater and it went into foreclosure.

Resurgence

The DuPage Theatre was reopened four months later by A. C. Hoy who purchased the Theatre and Shoppes. Roath’s real estate business remained in the building as a renter. Hoy was among those who were able to take advantage of the times, and bought several other properties in foreclosure, including two other theaters in the area. Hoy upgraded the facility by installing the “Grandeur screen” claimed to be the world’s largest and finest talking screen. At the time the DuPage was the only theater in the country to have this feature. He did what many other theater operators did to keep their theaters open. He offered incentives such as ‘dish night’, double features, vaudeville acts. Some theaters even gave away cars. In 1935 Gene Autry and his Round Up gang appeared on the stage. The movie industry as a whole began recovery in 1934, when 1000 theaters reopened. Box office receipts rose steadily from then on. However, OJ Roath did not return to the theater business. He, in fact did not recover from the loss. Upon his death in the late 30’s, his son Leroy assumed considerable debt. Although he ran a real estate business, he was unable to purchase a home until 1945.

What is this condo plan mentioned in the news article? I am not clear on what parts of the Dupage Theater will continue to exist.

Life's too short,
From my reading of the newspaper article, I don't believe any of the theater itself proper will be destroyed in the condo project, the restoration of the DuPage Theatre itself is a project to be concurrent with the condos project. I believe the condos will be carved out of the apartment space on the upper floor of the theater building (see to the left of the marquee in the photo above), and new structures will be built adjacent to the existing structure. That's what I get from reading the article. I go by this building on the train all the time and there is a small vacant lot right behind the theater, next to the stagehouse. There's also a vacant lot just next to the theater, to the right of the former theater parking lot. I believe that's where they want to build the new condo buildings.

The plan is to renovate/restore the theatre, add a new aesthetically pleasing arched roof, add new space to the rear of the building, and then build a new multi-story condo/retail structure directly south of the theatre building. The old building will be renovated to convert old aparments into new condos and the old retail space into truly leasable space. The cost is estimated at well over $30 million for the entire project with over 80 new condo units and 20,000 square feet of new retail space. It will require village approval for site variances and TIF extensions. Time will tell what happens next..but it is an impressive and aggresive plan

It't crazy! 30 million? Come on. This theatre could be saved WITH the proper programming... call us! We did it: Wheaton Grand Theatre, (630) 221-0667.

Well, the sum includes all the new development. I would imagine proper programming is included.

The theater restoration itself is supposed to run $8 to $8.5 million according to the article in the Herald. The $30 million refers to the entire project, which includes the condos and commercial spaces (retail and restaurants).

Programming for thirty million? My jaw is still dropped! Has the condo deal been approved by the city or county? Who actually owns the theatre?

The village of Lombard currently owns the theatre. A development proposal for $30+ million was received by the village that incorporates a restored theatre (for over $8 million) and condos, retail space, and parking for about $25 million. The deal has not been approved by the village at any level and will face an uphill battle given density, zoning, and TIF issues. The deal is supposed to be formally presented to the village board in a few weeks. Time will tell what happens next. And you are so right, the Wheaton Grand is an excellent example of what could happen with the Dupe...only problem is the Dupe is not habitable at this point and will take more than a little elbow grease to get it to a usable condition again. Read and paricipate in lively discussion of the DuPage Theatre issues at www.lombardvilagevoice.com and get updates on the latest efforts at www.dupagetheatre.net

Concerned tax payer and his team of coperatives have been on a quest for several years now to discredit those who have seeked to restore the DUPAGE THEATRE.The latest scheme that they have devised is a last ditch effort, by bring in the TIF issue as it relates to school funding.There was a new TIF district created and approved by the Village board.Not one of these dennisons of doom for the Dupage Theatre objected to the new TIF DISTRICT.The new proposal for the Theatre is great.
It features condos,parking, shops and restoration funds for the Theatre restoration
I suggest that readers visit concerned taxpayers web link.
They will seee for themselves the motivation behind why it was created.

Ray...this plan seems to satisfy all interested parties. What axe is left to grind at this point?

Paul...as I understand it the building has been stripped of all systems...wiring, ventiliation, etc. If this is the case, it would be difficult to stage community rock concerts and the like.

The building is simply a shell of what it once was. And it is over $8 million to fix it up. All but about $20,000 is TAX DOLLARS. The supporters have tried for years to raise money. Should TIF funds that are "earmarked to spearhead private development in blighted areas" be used to restore the theatre? Should the TIF district be extended to 2024 to accomodate the theatre? Find PRIVATE investment to take the lead and go for it! Let the village give away the building, the land (worth well over a million), and the remaining $900,0000 in TIF to a private investor and all will support the plan. The issue is that 99 percent of the restoration is coming from TAX sources one way or another. The village simply cannnot afford to be in the theatre business. But they sure can afford to to give away the gift if some private venture is willing to take on all the risks. That has been our mantra for years now. Not one of us are out to discredit the theatre or to bring on the bulldozers. All we want to see is PRIVATE INVESTMENT take the lead and if that is not going to happen then it is time for something else to happen on one of the largest under-developed sites in Lombard

So, as one of the largest under-developed sites in Lombard, how is it NOT blighted? It looks to me like this particular TIF is being used precisely as intended.

Why doesn't concerned taxpayer take his spin where it belongs?
It doesn't belong on this website.Concerned taxpayer and his little league of bulldozer buddies only motivation is to destroy the theatre. Concerned tax payer say's --quote-- "not one of us are out to discredit the theatre or to bring on the bulldozers.That makes me laugh!
Their previous website had on the homepage 3 bulldozers with the caption 2006. What a joke.Again I suggest that the readers of this websites who want to protect theatres read concerned taxpayers website.The motivation for that website is crystal clear.
Read concerned taxpayers website. www.lombardvillagevoice.com
Concerned taxpayers spin doesn't belong on this website!

TIF is designated to entice continued PRIVATE investment...not public. Give the TIF funds to PRIVATE development initiatives and go to town. Reread the post to undersatnd that we support TIF investment in the theatre but want PRIVATE ENTERPRISE to take the lead...not the "foundation":
Let the village give away the building, the land (worth well over a million), and the remaining $900,0000 in TIF to a private investor and all will support the plan. The issue is that 99 percent of the restoration is coming from TAX sources one way or another. The village simply cannnot afford to be in the theatre business. But they sure can afford to give away the gift if some private venture is willing to take on all the risks. That has been our mantra for years now.

And if you visit the other website, you will see for yourself the nonsense the so called "friends" drag into this. Enjoy!

Concerned taxpayer should spread his propaganda of deceit and hate to his own shillsite.It doesn't belong on this website.
www.dupagetheatre.net is devoted to restoring the Dupage Theatre.
Cinema TREASURES.COM is devoted to movie preservation and awareness and to save the last remaining movie palaces across the country.This website is not about politics.

Well, I somehow doubt the foundation will be building the condos themselves. It would require a PRIVATE condo developer to build condos for PRIVATE citizens and owned by a PRIVATE landlord, and additionally need PRIVATE businesses to make PRIVATE investments in their PRIVATE ventures to operate their PRIVATE retail.

Seriously, concerned taxpayer, you're wasting your time here. Maybe you don't have an ulterior motive. Maybe you are just concerned with not paying a cent more on your taxes, damn the consequences. Maybe your rhetoric can convince some people to support you and your cause, but the people here have seen enough destruction and redevelopment that we can spot your fallacies a mile away.

Also, this article in the satirical paper "The Onion" reminded me of you. Perhaps you'll enjoy it. http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4111&n=2

The Onion article is PERFECT! Send that article to all who oppose progress in the arts...wait...the problem is will they get it?

I see there is still an axe to grind.

An article appeared in today's Chicago Tribune regarding the DuPage Theatre project.

I certainly hope that the community of Lombard votes to restore this theatre as it was a theatre associated with the famous names of Rapp and Rapp and it is atmospheric!

Why is there so much drama and fighting over this theatre. It's 2005 and we have lost so many old theatres. We should know by now that they are an asset to the rest of the area. If they do insist on demolition, they'll regret it in 10 years. It's a shame that it seems to boil down to a few dollars in taxes.

Travis: The answer to your question is easy. Why is there so much fighting and drama? Ego, money, a love of the arts, power, and a genuine interest in preserving the past... all of these elements converge when discussing old theatre restoration. Many have strong memories of the old places they used to go when they were kids. Now business, tax credits, development, and programming must play a part. Reality seldom enters into the theatre other than those who look at it from a financial point of view. Sadly the arts are not on the top of everyone's list. It is our job to try and keep the discussions alive in forums like this.

Here is an article from today's Chicago Tribune:
(There was a black & white photo accompanying the story of the seatless auditorium with its walls mostly down to the bare bricks with this caption below "The interior of the DuPage Theatre is nearly bare and gives an idea of the work needed for restoration. Lombard Trustee Steven Sebby says it's time to demolish the 1920s-era theater.)


Lombard urged to raze old theater
Trustee wants board to throw in the towel

By William Grady
Tribune staff reporter
Published June 1, 2005


A Lombard Village Board member is seeking to end a long-running drama to save the landmark DuPage Theatre.

Trustee Steven D. Sebby will ask the board at a meeting Thursday night to consider a resolution calling for demolition of the theater at Main Street and Parkside Avenue in downtown Lombard.

Sebby also wants the village to stop spending public funds on the theater and to prepare the site for redevelopment.

"We've done everything that we possibly could to make this property work," he said. "We've spent quite a bit of time and money. It's time for us to move forward."

Supporters of the theater say they are confused and disappointed by the timing of the resolution, which was placed on the agenda before village staffers had completed their evaluation of the latest plan to save the building.

In April, the not-for-profit DuPage Theatre Foundation pitched a $33 million project that it said would preserve the theater by surrounding it with a mix of stores, restaurants and luxury condominiums.

The plan, prepared by Chicago developer RSC & Associates, would add two five-story buildings to the 2 1/2-acre theater property, with ground-floor retail space and 80 condos. The second floor of the theater building would be renovated into six luxury lofts.

Included in the plan was about $9 million to restore the boarded-up theater itself, which was built in 1928 and added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1987.

"To introduce the resolution before the process is finished shows that at least some trustees don't have an open mind," said Martin B. Carroll, foundation president.

In the past, some Village Board members have suggested theater supporters needed to raise more private donations for the project. But supporters say they cannot begin a fundraising campaign until trustees approve the plans.

"It's always easy to tear down," said Deborah Dynako, a spokeswoman for Friends of the DuPage Theatre, which also is seeking to preserve the theater. "It takes more guts and more vision to restore."

A controversy over other restorations has played out in recent years in other Chicago suburbs. The Genesee Theatre in downtown Waukegan, for example, reopened late last year after a $24 million renovation that cost $10 million more than initial estimates.

The DuPage Theatre property has been owned by Lombard since 2000, after the collapse of an ambitious redevelopment plan by Big Idea Productions Inc., creator of the popular VeggieTales series of children's videos, books and music. In 2003, the village entered into an agreement with the theater foundation, which was to raise enough money to begin restoration work by last Dec. 1. The foundation missed the deadline but offered the plans by RSC & Associates as an alternative.

A preliminary staff report in April raised some concerns about how the theater restoration would be funded. For the financing to work, Lombard needs the approval of the state legislature to extend its downtown tax-increment financing district through 2024. In May, trustees voted 4-3 to pay $15,000 to a lobbyist in an attempt to win approval in the spring session.

But state Sen. Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst) said Tuesday that the village had failed to provide needed information in time for the legislature to act.

"There needs to be a good consensus in the community, and there has to be one strong voice," said Cronin, whose district includes Lombard. He said legislators were willing to help Lombard, but the matter now likely could not be taken up until the spring session next year.

Here, In Boston MA..we just lost the last original vaudeville theatre to the wrecking ball..The Gaiety Theater...Friends of the Gaiety had a plan to build condos over the exsisting theatre...Unfortunately, the actual owner...with the help of a corrupt mayor..breaking zoning and landmark preservation laws for the citys "theatre district", now the theatre is a memory, the wrecking ball now is swinging...My city, Brockton, had 3 great old theatres in the downtown area....In the 60's, a mall was built, as with a "new" cinema...6 BIG screens!!!
the old theaters got torn down, with the death of our downtown...2 out of 3 theaters were quite elaborate...And NOW, by the way,the so called "new" cinema just closed down...at one time there was 6 movie theaters...now there is none...
The DuPage theatre SHOULD be restored, it is part of the citys history...arguing where the money will come from, solves nothing...with the way the government CAN and daily misspend our tax dollars, restoration of magnificent buildings, theaters, is a blessing in the end...no one but the heartless and the greedy will be disappointed in the end

The Lombard village board voted 4 to 2 to demolish the DuPage Theatre. All but two people spoke in support of the theatre during the community discussion, but the Lombard board decided not to take the opportunity to restore this "Cinema Treasure".

The village board listened to the residents and not the passionate pleas of a few dozen supporters. As one resident said it best..this project is on life support and it is time to pull the plug. As much as this could be looked at as a loss of a cinema treasure (as run down as it is), it should instead be looked at as an opportunity to clear downtown of an unfunded eyesore that has plaqued that corner in its current sorry state for over five years. The supporters failed again with the the current plan even after last minute changes to close the $3.5 million funding gap (but it was still dependent on $8 million in TIF!). The private financial support is simply non-existent for this project...find a deep pocketed white knight to save the day without taking the village to the cleaners and the theatre is yours. Better hurry though......time is not on your side.

To Mr. Concerned Taxpayer:

I understand your concern regarding use of taxpayer funds. However, it takes a lot of nerve to come on a web site devoted to the study of historic theaters and gloat about the potential demolition of a nice old theater. The sad part of the story is that there apparently is no "deep pocketed white knight" (as you call it) to save the theatre. Shame on the town of Lombard, of which you are apparently a member. In case you're not aware, many other towns have used the renovation of an old theater as an economic anchor to bring life back to their downtown. So this is a case where taxpayer funds might actually provide impetus for increased economic investment from the private sector.

Here is the grim news from today's edition of the Daily Herald.

Bryan: This is sad sad news because "The DuPage is one of the rare atmospheric theaters first concieved by famed architect John Eberson." Once it's gone, it's gone forever!

It ain't over 'til it's over. The Village of Lombard has a few more hoops before the wrecking ball truly hits the building. The Village said that it will still "sell" the land to a developer BEFORE demolition. It saves everyone tax dollars. Hang in there, y'all. www.grandevenues.com

It's a pretty sad state of affairs. Even podunk little places in upstate New York have enough sense to preserve their old theatres. Places like Gloversville, Rome, Utica, and Gowanda have all elected to save and restore their last remaining theatres and movie palaces. Well, if the Dupage goes I can at least cross Lombard off my list of places to go.

By the way, how does Concerned Taxpayer manage to be so rude, and yet so boring. I gues the lack of imagination that keeps him from seeing this theatre's potential must affect his writing ability as well.

I can't help wondering if 'Concerned Taxpayer' is the an AKA of village trustee Steven D. Sebby who vigorously opposed saving the DuPage. Mere coincidence perhaps, but nevertheless to paraphrase Yul Brynner's line in 'The King and I', "It's a puzzlement!"

I can't help but wonder if this site is run by the same group that FAILED at restoring the Dupage? Better grab a brick before they are all hauled away to the dump.

And how interesting that comments "against" the theatre get removed within minutes. Typical of the entitlist thinking of preservationists of rundown dumps. One only needs to see that a whopping 60 people showed up at a rally to save the theatre...from a town of 40,000+ people. The usual ranters with the usual sad message. It's over. And Sebby is the new superhero for most Lombard residents..except for maybe the 60 theatre supporters (if that) left.

Hold on... some theatres must be razed. Not all theatre can be saved. I think the Dupage has a chance if everyone stops using the MILLIONS needed to save it at once. Why not have a more conservative approach. Here's a strategy: buy the building and parking lot from the city...open the lobby first...raise awareness then some cash and grants. That seems reasonable. No one will give money to a building unless they know what is going to happen inside later. Stay tuned.

"One only needs to see that a whopping 60 people showed up at a rally to save the theatre...from a town of 40,000+ people."

Okay, Mr. Concerned Taxpayer. Let's see how big of a rally you can get together in one week. We'll see how many people you can contact, how many are willing to simply stand around in support. It's not easy, and it has nothing to do with the size of the town. It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that there are 60 supporters because that's how many showed up. Let's say this were some popular 20-screen megaplex that suddenly decided it would close. Out of the thousand or so patrons daily, how many do you think would feel motivated to come to a rally for it? Not many. It's about publicity. This theatre has been closed for years. There is probably a huge chunk of the population unaware of its existence.

I have a challenge for you, Concerned Taxpayer. Let's see you get a rally organized for NEXT Saturday, same place, to celebrate the decision to destroy the theatre. Let's see how many people YOU turn out. Then we can see which side really has more support, at least by your reasoning.

Mr. Concerned Taxpayer, your comments are so pathetic that they are actually funny! I still have to wonder (as I have in previous posts) what your motive is in destroying this place. You really should come to work for my hometown. They have the same short sightedness and desire to destroy anything unique and interesting that you seem to have.

Just to let people know the facts about the rally held at the DuPage Theatre on June 11th. 2005, we had more than 200 people thru out the event stop by and join us to show support for the DuPage Theatre.

Also I would like to note that we had hundreds of cars pass by honking their horns and giving use the thumbs up, showing support for the theatre.

Wow, 200 people, that is great. Did you find anyone to buy the Theatre from the Village and do a private restoration? Did you raise any private funds?

Didn't find a private party to purchase the theatre but we had plenty of support from Lombard residents for the fully funded restoration plan that was brought to the Village trustees before they decided to ignore the majority of vocal residents on this issue and vote for demolishion.

Have you documented these majority of the residents? Did you put a referendum on the ballot? This would prove your case and provide you the proof to show you have the resident's support, something that is difficult to prove without a formal referendum. Just like the schools and libraries must have the formal approval of the residents. How about putting a referendum on the November ballot?

Well, for one thing, there is no November election. For another, if there were, petitions would be due the first week of July. And even if there were, it would likely be too late. But, you, know, other than that, capital plan! Where's your documentation? Where's your referendum? Schools and Libraries occasionally appear in a position on the ballots because they are entirely funded by the taxpayers, although they do not always and do not require approval by the electorate. Are you proposing that every single project funded by a municipality come to public vote? Good luck with that!

Yes, The Friends of the DuPage Theatre have documented public support in the form of petitions, rallys, and public participation at village board meetings which our village trustees have chosen to ignore. There is now over 2800 people who signed up on the mailing list. I know that one of you will come back with the "44000 residents argument", but not every resident invovles themselves with every project. Just under 7500 people voted for our village president. (For those reading who may not live in Lombard, he is in support of the Theatre.) The Village trustee that has been spearheading the opposition, who's district the Theatre is in, received about 400 votes receiving just over 50 precent of the vote. Schools and libraries must have the formal approval of the residents because they ask for property tax increases, which is not the case involving the theatre. If Lombard is going to start putting referendums on the ballot for projects they are involved with why not start with the 80 million dollar convention center funded by Lombard bonds and TIF dollars.

Sorry, I didn't realize. I propose a referendum would document the will of the people and provide the proof of support that appears to be lacking in this restoration effort.

Sorry, I didn't realize. I propose a referendum would document the will of the people and provide the proof of support that appears to be lacking in this restoration effort.

It's a sad state of affairs that Lombard can think of a $80 million convention center (like we really need another one in this state) and not give a few million for this theater. Most downtown suburbs are BORING, and saving this gem would be an asset to yours. A late night vibrant downtown with a live theater sure beats a dead one after 6pm!

From today's (7/1/05) edition of the Wheaton Sun:


Illinois lawmakers meet to save DuPage Theatre

Friends of the DuPage Theatre president Virginia Lippig met June 22 with state Sen. Dan Cronin and former Illinois Senate President Pate Phillip along with representatives from the Landmarks Preservation Council to discuss ways to save the Historic DuPage Theatre, according to a press release from the theater.

"It is my hope and dream that this beautiful theater can be restored," Lippig said after the meeting. "Both Sen. Cronin and former Sen. Phillip are planning on working to help us realize the tremendous restoration plan that the village staff found so agreeable."

Despite having a viable plan with no funding gap for theater restoration and redevelopment under review by village staff, on June 2 the village of Lombard's board of trustees voted 4-2 to raze the DuPage Theatre, which was built in 1928 and listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1987. It is the only theater in DuPage County listed on the National Register.

The village board has no alternative plan in place to develop the property at Main Street and Parkside in downtown Lombard.

HELLO???? A B.O.R.I.N.G SUBURBAN DOWNTOWN DEAD AFTER 6PM VERSUS KICKING IN A FEW BUCKS PER CITIZEN THAT WILL LAST A GENERATION (and more) FOR RESTORING A LANDMARK??? YOU NUMBSKULLS!!!!
I guess the other aspect is all of you staying home watching TV/Cable, playing video games till you ROT...getting FAT, NO CULTURE.....THANK GOD I LIVE IN CHICAGO WITH ALL THE CULTURAL AMENITIES....YOU have a chance to create one, and you BLOW IT....GUESS you need a Chuckie Cheese more than a venue for the ARTS.....PHILISTINES.....

A few bucks per citizen? You lost all credibility with one sentence.

Yes, thank God you live in Chicago.

Here's a brilliant idea. Have a little vision. Why does everyone insist on rehashing what Lombard WAS? Wow, I really long for the Hammerschmitt silos. Let's bring 'em back because they were so UNIQUE to the Western Suburbs.

Try this on for size - if it's really about "culture", let's compromise:

Tear down the library, tear down the Dupe. Build a centerpiece, outdoor classical theatre on the site of the current library, where there will be no conflict with Lilacia. Make deals with local theatre troupes - and maybe even Drury Lane - to produce Shakespeare in the Park, classical Greek and Roman tragedies and comedies, and have classical music concerts. Free during the day to expose children to the arts, paid at night to draw lovers of the arts. Obviously there would be no winter peformances, but spring, summer, and fall would be operable.


Next step, build a new library with subterranean parking on the site of the Dupe. Add retail, condos, on the next door lot to generate tax revenue on prime property.

Everyone wins. If our civic leaders used a little imagination, everyone's wants and desires could be satisfied.

So you're saying a library, drawing no tax dollars whatsoever, with the same retail/condo mix as the theatre plan, which would generate revenue on the full property, would somehow generate more revenue? That's what you're all about, right? Makes no sense.

Fiscal Insanity you are on to something. How about keeping the theatre AND add your library concept? On the lot to the south build a three level parking garage/library with retail on the first floor. Perhaps build a a few "market rate" townhomes on top of the parking garage. No tax dollars spent, city sells property to developer, "as is," get library grants...more? Call (630) 480-3345.

It seems to me that Fiscal Insanity (or whatever the name he choses to use today) is the insane one. If the city is not willing to put up the money, why don't they just leave the theater alone. If it is structurally sound, it will still be there in a few years. After all, the theater most likey contains asbestos so demolition will be costly. A renovated old theater shows that a city has some sort of civic pride and that they repect there past. Just because the city restores an old theater does not mean they are holding onto their past, they are also investing in the future.

Thank You melders for your wise words. Everybody should just STOP and THINK about this whole issue calmly and with an unbiased mind.
An investment for the future and a respect for its' past says it right.Once it's gone it's gone. Another part of Lombard's past that could have been saved!

This article was in today's Chicago Tribune. Suppoters are now acknowledging they have no futher legal recourse to stop the village from razing the theater. A review by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, which preservationists hoped would put off the DuPage's demolition for a while has been deemed "not required" by the village's attorney and that the agency has no jurisdiction because Lombard didn't accept state funding. The article states the theater will be demolished by winter.

Regarding the Tribune article. We never acknowledged that we had no *legal* recourse. We acknowledged that if the Village Board rejects the state and federal grants of $1.3 million, that the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency can only act as an advocate for the DuPage Theatre. My own quote, clearly taken out of context, meant to convey that.

Don't give up hope. We're fighting the good fight. And we'd like to thank all on this site for your words of support.

Here is a more positive article from the Daily Herald:

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/searchstory.asp?id=75617

Here's another article from today's Daily Herald regarding the DuPage. Supporters of the theater will be making their case for saving the DuPage before the village board next month.

Melders - thank you for that note of genius. I'm going to park a beat-up car up on blocks in front of your house and leave it there for a few years.

And no, the theatre is not structurally sound, hence the high price of renovation.

A renovated old theatre is great when people who can make money on it are willing to put their investment dollars in it. One would think some sort of Chicago-based foundation for the Arts would be leading the way on this, raising money to protect the DuPage Theatre since it's so indispensible according to everyone. No one who would have a vested interest in this project wants to do it except for the developers who can turn a quick profit on the development and leave us holding the bag in a few years when they suddenly stop putting $100,000 into the kitty.

Come on - are you that naive?

I've come to realize that "fiscal insanity" is ONE BIG JERK.....he has GOT to have a financial/investment connection to that part of town to be so enthused in tearing it down for another strip mall in the boring burbs. How much $$$ he has on spec is known only to him and his cohorts who delight in demolishing key structures of our past. I'd like to know just how he knows that it's not structurally sound. Is he (or she) an expert? A building inspector? He sounds like a bully and an interloper who I wonder WHY wants to be heard on a website that encourages saving/rstoring/and adaptive reuse of historic buildings all over the USA? This "person" won't even use their real name. A SAD and anonymous AND frightened bully at that
too. Maybe a live debate would smoke him/her out of hiding?

My name is Jim Fields and I'm an independent filmmaker from Omaha, Nebraska. Currently, I'm making a documentary called, "Preserve Me a Seat," which is about historic movie theaters and the people who try to save them from getting torn down. I'm coming to Lombard next Friday/Saturday to film interviews and footage of the Dupage Theater and the controversy over whether or not it should be saved. If anyone here would like to be interviewed for the movie, please contact me at: jwomaha@msn.com or call me at (402) 212-3424. You can also contact Deb Dynako who is helping me put together people to interview. Finally, I've been calling the Village of Lombard city offices to get permission to film inside the theatre, but only get recording machines and no return calls. If anyone can help me get inside the theatre, then that would be great. I look forward to meeting/interviewing regular readers of this site who want their opinions on historic preservation/saving the Dupage to be a part of my movie. Thanks!
Jim

Yes Dave I must agree with you. Here I go trying to add some words of wisdom and he goes off trying to threaten me. Well I am not scared of an old abandoned car. It seems to me that Fiscal must have some sort of investment riding on the destruction of this theater. I just hope that someone with some sense has read my words, since fiscal is obviously insane.

And yes fiscal I might be that naive. And if you ever saw my lawn you would see why I am not scared of an old abondoned car, it would fit right in. I just wish where I live I had something as majestic as the DuPage.

I would like to add one more comment. I do not live in Lombard, and I do not blame the city for not wanting to spend that much money. I just do not see the need to rush into tearing down the theater.

Melders- The theatre has been sitting vacant for 13 years. The last 6 years it has been owned by the village and they agreed to give those years to the preservation society to raise private funds. The only interested party was this current developer who has proposed not only using millions of our towns TIF dollars but attaching a huge condo building (5 stories) that would have needed to exceed many local building codes that are in place to protect neighboring homeowners. There are many in my town that are against this development plan. The developer won't reduce the size (from 5 stories to 4 that are legal)because he won't make enough money with 4 stories. We have nothing against the theatre being privately redeveloped per say but we won't sacrifice our neighborhoods and downtown to save it either. Meanwhile all these years the village is losing tax revenue from this prime piece of property. Money that our schools desperately need. The village governement has been more than fair and they are supported by a number of residents.

Incidentally Mr. Fields - you should definitely speak to those who are NOT in favor of preserving the theater unless it can be with mostly private funds and within village building codes. I'll be in touch. As far as gaining access to the building for your documentary, I wouldn't count on it. The structure is in pretty bad shape. The preservation group's own developer said it needed to be "stabilized". The village even needed to remove a whole row of public parking spaces in the adjacent lot because of falling bricks and debris. I'm not sure they would let you in due to liability issues but you can try. It's a shame that the previous owner neglected it for so many years and let it get that bad.

Neighbor, which will hurt this neighborhood more, one more stories of condos or the destruction of this theater? Chances are this theater will be replaced with a big box store, and one of those won't fit in with the neighborhood either. Perhaps at least the facade of the theater will be saved.

Melders- For a lot of residents it's more than the height, there are other code variances that will be detrimental to neighbors but also the financing is a huge issue, more than the TIF dollars. Instead of renovating the theater for a fixed price, their plan says if restoration goes over budget by more than 12%, we the taxpayers will have to cover it. To a lot of folks that's unacceptable, TIF is one thing but we don't want to be left opened to overruns as well. It's a bad plan - the building is giant and will encroah on neighbors, the financing is very shaky. The village board's job is to protect it's residents and that's exactly what they're doing. If there was a better way to develop this property, it would have surfaced in 6 years of waiting. The only way to cover massive restoration costs is to attach a massive structure as they had planned to. There are so many other problems, I could go on and on. Will these "luxury" condos sell? If you knew Lombard you'd know many of our new condos are empty and 2 new buildings are in construction in close proximity. Phase 2 of their restoration of the theatre relies on their new condos being sold. What if they don't? Will the proposed use of the theatre as a cultural arts venue be booked regularly? I did some research on neighboring towns with these types of arts centers and they often sit empty for a month or 2 at a time. The way this plan is drawn up, that too will end up being a burden to the village. There are a lot of risks for our residents, the question is how much is too much? You must look at the bigger picture and what is best for our entire town. I've always felt that any use of this property should also be on a referendum for voters to decide. The preservation group never initiated that and did fight an effort to put a theatre issue on a ballot years ago. They claim they didn't like the way it was worded, my answer is why, since then , have they not initiated another one? Even this plan? Then the majority could decide? I think the only answer must be that they don't feel they have the votes. Now it's too late because it won't be on a ballot until a year from November and that will be too late for this particular plan.

Finally, you mentioned we may get a "big box store" or something similar. That is a scare tactic often used by the theatre supporters in our town. My answer is this. The board has proven they are not going to put anything too big for the parcel there. Also - we are desperately in need of a new library in our town. There is a group of residents who will lobby for that site to be used as such, perhaps with some retail attached. Now the library itself will not be a tax generating entity but the costs of construction will go down millions because we already own the land. Also - unlike the theatre, it will definitely go to a referendum and the people will decide. The library tried years ago to devise a way in which they could renovate the theatre and incorporate it into their new library - unfortunately, the theatre costs too many millions to restore, not feasible. The theatre group will say that the voters already voted down a multi million dollar renovation of our current library why would they support this? Well the library polled voters after their referendum failed. Most answered they didn't like the fact that millions would have to be spent on a temporary facilty while renovation took place. That would be alleviated by building a new library at a different site.

It comes down to this - if supporters think this plan will be so beneficial to Lombard why didn't they put it on a ballot? I think even naysayers like me would have been happy just knowing that it was the majority of residents that made the decision, not just preservation group and their developer. Fair enough?

Another reason for putting the use of this property on a ballot is because it was "gifted" to the village 6 years ago. Not to the Friends of the theatre but the entire village. That's a good enough reason for a referendum in my opinion. Then we would all have to live with what the majority decides and move on.

FYI - I don't support the before mentioned convention center either. All these things put our over-taxed residents at risk.

If the library is built on this site, will they attempt to save at least the facade?

Also, I am not in any way connected to the "Friends" group, I am not even from the area. I just mentioned the big box store, because I have seen other towns and cities destroy landmarks for those stores.

Not only am I in favor of them restoring and reusing the marquee/facade on whatever goes there but also salvaging the other items inside that may still be intact i.e. the ticket booth, light fixtures etc. The town of Geneva, IL did that and you still walk in the old theatre entrance but inside is retail not a theater and they use the marquee for community events. I think it was a great idea.

What you are saying Dupe sounds like a good alternative plan. While I am allways in favor of saving EVERY old theater you can, especially at least one in every downtown suburb, keeping the facade and marquee intact is something. It's sad that deferred mantinence has caused this problem. If it was just a matter of a few coats of paint and a good cleaning that would be a no-brainer to keep it running. But it appears that is not the case. Unfortunately, Lombard does not have an Oprah-like millionaire to drop a wad of bucks on a whim. It WOULD be nice, but most self-made millionaires are busy building 20 room mansions these days!
I won't lose hope till the end, as I witnessed the senseless destruction of the Granada Theater in Chicago in 1989 due to the "machinations" of Loyola University that systematically caused its' end. Ask around. The spokeman for the Theater Historical Society said that it was "the most intact theater". Looking at demolition videos shows that. The Granada had the last laugh though. During demolition, the workers underestimated their work, and the side wall collapse wrong and bricks cascaded on to the Red Line tracks causing a MAJOR delay. I smiled at the last word on that GRAND LADY of Rogers Park.

Thanks for your kind words Dave - I feel the same way. Any time we lose a historical building it's sad. I remember hot summer nights when we walked to see so many movies there but the past owner really let it go. He hated the village board and never kept it up to code. The structure is literally crumbling before our eyes. These theaters really fell victim to the modern multi-plexes. It's so hard when these things happen. I too wish we had a multimillion dollar benefactor. I don't think their would have been a single soul in Lombard that wouldn't have jumped for joy.

Thanks Dupe. Whatever they can save, if only the facade. Might be a lesson to those who are trying in their own small towns to save their theaters to keep them in working order and NOT let them stay dormant for too long.

I also agree that interior fittings should be saved and reused on this site, especially if the facade and marquee is saved. While it is sad that time and neglect has caught up with this theater, hopefully at least some of it can remain intact.

I'm sorry, Dupe Neighbor, but I need to respectfully disagree with your scenario of the situation. The only code variances currently on this plan deal with five stories instead of four on the condo height. The biggest problem is that the demolition vote came before the rest of the negotiations could be completed. The developer worked with the Village to accomodate all of their requests to that point---including the setback, which is now 30-ft. off the back of the property line. Talks ended with Village staff stating that there was no funding gap to the plan, meaning it would pay for the restoration in total. And the plan DOES NOT say that the taxpayers will pay for any cost overruns over 12%. The contingency fund has an provision that will cover any unforeseen problems. The developer knows the extent of the needs of restoring the theatre. He has done his homework thoroughly on the property.

People against this plan keep worrying about cost overruns. As I too live in Lombard, cost overruns concern me as well. But let's look at who came up with the figures---Daniel P. Coffey, the preeminent architect in theatre restoration. Coffey has done extensive testing on the building. I myself am confident that he knows what he's talking about, having listened to his presentation twice and asking the questions I needed answered. The problem we face with concerned people like Dupe Neighbor is that they don't have all the facts (although it's not their fault, either). It just continually leads to misunderstanding. But I have challenged others to have an expert of Coffey's caliber dispute his claims. Recently, Coffey restored the Oriental Theatre in Chicago. That theatre is the "big sister" to the DuPage, as it was also built by Rapp & Rapp in the same time period. I just went to the Oriental to see "Wicked" and thought, wow---we could have this in our town.

This has obviously been 6 years of bad feelings between two groups of people with different mindsets. It is true that if the referendum had been worded legally, we would have supported it. We would even welcome a referendum now, if we thought it would do any good---but a referendum is advisory, and the Village Board could ignore any effort put toward one, anyway. We've never been worried about letting the people of Lombard decide. In fact, that's the way it should be.

I, for one, will not stop fighting to save this theatre.

Deb- Five stories instead if four is a VERY big deal to the neighboring residents of that plan and shouldn't be treated lightly by the developer or your group. If it was in your backyard - you may have a slightly different perspective (no pun intended). I realize you all feel the vote to demolish was premature. I don't agree. The funding for the whole plan was reliant on the state extending the TIF period. The board even authorized a lobbbyist to go to Springfield to help push it through before the end of session. That never happened. Our senator didn't sign off since "their wasn't a solid voice behind the plan" Now he is making statements saying he will work to get the extension signed by next spring. That's a long time and this plan is not funded without that extension signed. That's another year of lost tax revenue and deterioration of the building. The plan had a lot of problems, but that extension was crucial to even getting started and it didn't get done. I think the board has been more than patient with restoration efforts. If not, that theatre may have been down 5 years ago.

I do have concerns about the cost overruns. You didn't mention who pays for this "contingency" fund maybe you can enlighten us? I don't believe I am misinformed about anything. I heard Mr. Coffey speak about his entire plan and I don't feel my concerns were addressed about financing at all. I still want to know why he won't renovate for a fixed price instead of having a "contingency plan" if he's so sure he will come in at budget?

The referendum was your best shot. I don't think it would have passed though and I think that is why it was never initiated. This plan should have been on a ballot long before June 2 and then you would have been sitting pretty.

I don't know how long you've lived in Lombard but I've lived here since 1972 and I can assure you I've been to the Dupe more times than I can count. I remember good times there, but I also remember bad ones. The years it was closed off and on because the owner could never make ends meet. The horrible condition it got into because the same owner couldn't keep it up to code. It makes me sad now to see bricks crumbling off of it and braces holding up the walls. I don't believe it's worth the millions to restore it for cultural arts but if the voters decided it was, I would have supported it.

I know there have been bad feelings between certain people and I believe both sides have conducted themselves poorly at times. There are some people against renovation because the theatre has been a thorn in their side for so many years they just want it gone and then there are those that want to keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town. I have always said that the Friends of the Dupe have worked hard and their hearts are in the right place. Do I think a majority of voters would have seen this theatre as beneficial enough to spend that many millions of TIF dollars? No.

We'll have to agree to disagree and see what the future holds. It sure has been a long road for those of us who have lived here awhile and I will be happy when it isn't the main topic of conversation around here anymore. I wonder what we will do?

It has been a long road, one filled with broken promises and fantasy visions of "build it and they will come." Well has anybody on this site offered and $$ to the friends...NO. They have $1200 in the bank because there are only 60 or so people who want to save the theatre. Time to move on Deb Dynako, the friends fought hard but the end is near.

Challenger, glad to see you're off your site and on one that believes in historic preservation. You like to perpetuate untruths on your site, two in particular: that there are only 60 friends, and that we only have $1200 in the bank. Both claims are false. The Friends are not the Foundation. The Foundation has $1200 in the bank. The Friends are more than 60 people. And even if there were only 60, I bet there are more Friends than people in your group---21 that we know of for sure, that signed a "petition" to the board sanctioning demolition. Why bother coming to this site, Challenger? You're not adding anything constructive to the debate as far as I can see. But thank you for your interest.

And actually, I just broke my own rule and engaged Challenger. What I really wanted to do was let Dupe Neighbor know that we do care about the 5/4 story issue. It's just that the plan was never allowed to progress that far. The TIF is not dead, and the TIF district as it now stands won't expire until 2007, which gives us plenty of time to get it through Springfield. And I believe Senator Cronin will get it done as he's said numerous times he would. At the end of the day, I'm probably not going to convince Dupe Neighbor or anyone else opposed to the plan at hand that the DuPage Theatre is worth saving. But as far as wanting to "keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town," remember that there is no "publicly-revealed" plan for the site once the theatre is gone. To me, that's much more dangerous to this town than adaptively reusing this theatre.

I don't understand people coming here and lobbying against preservation. If preserving the theatre means putting up a 50-story skyscraper next to it, then put up the skyscraper. Don't destory a theatre.

Good for you Deb! Keep fighting the good fight!
I find it curious that fiscal insanity has stopped responding since I questioned his background/motives/anonymity, and now we have challenger...Just another alias from fiscal?

Deb- Your answer is what has troubled me about your group for awhile now. Why would you hint that the board has a plan that is not "publicly revealed". Just because the vote didn't go your way doesn't mean our elected officials are on the take! These veiled threats about the dangers the town faces if we don't restore the theatre hold no water. That's another scare tactic that aggravates people like me. I'm not sure I would call this "fighting the good fight".

As far as the TIF - you know that this project won't proceed without that extension. 2007 will not help you get that building restored. To assume that anything is "in the bag" when it comes to State of Illinois legislature is not realistic.

I have nothing to say about Challenger's response - we know there are more than 60 friends and you know there are more than 21 that are questioning your plan! That petition was mostly neighboring residents. They have a right to be heard just as you were at the podium last week.

I agree on one issue - we'll never change each other's mind necessarily. I only wish the voters could have decided - then we wouldn't be arguing over who has more supporters, we would know...

Dupe Neighbor,

If you would like to discuss this one-on-one, I'd be happy to. Just email me at deb.dynako@earthlink.net Again, this site is for those who wish to find solutions for preservation, not excuses for demolition.

Regards,

Deb

Deb, so as a taxpayer, lifelong area resident, and someone who was actually a patron of the theatre in to 70's and 80's I am NOT allowed to comment about the theatre? How long have you lived here yourself? What movies did you see there?

Fine, I'll admit there are more than 60 'friends' if you'll admit that there are less than 5000 as you have claimed in the past. You also talk about this "grand plan" that is 'fully funded', well we heard about plans from your group in the past. The original plan over 6 years ago was supposed to be the one, and that failed, and then the next 4 or 5 plans failed, and this current one has even been altered. Quite frankly, are we supposed to believe that, finally, after 6 years you got it right. Sorry, I don't.

Plus I don't think your approach of bashing the Trustees for their lack of support is a good idea.

As for the rest of you "theatre-preservationist" don't start bashing me until you have all the facts. As far as preservation goes, if this can be done with no TIF's or taxpayer money than I would support it 100%, but we all know that won't happen. IF the building gets torn down than I do support saving the marquee for other uses.

Deb, Finding "solutions for preservation" sometimes includes answering the tough questions. Mine haven't been answered. I logged on to this website because I feel some key facts about the theatre and the many years of preservation efforts have been left out. I want these readers to know that there are good arguments to be made on both sides of this issue and the village board had reasons for it's actions. I think you want to paint a much different picture. I know you want to portray me as someone looking for an "excuse to demolish". I think my prior posts will prove that is not true.

Unfortunately, we'll never agree, but I will continue to post when I feel the whole story is not being told.

Regards, DN

It seems to me that the "Freinds" organization has not made much of an effort to save this theater. After 6 years, why has nothing at all been done. They could have had cleanup days and clean out the interior. Or tried to get local contractors to donate time to get the theater stable. I have stated on this site many times that I would love to see this theater saved, but it seems that the organization that was supposed to do that was not organized good enough to accomplish this task. If I am wrong about this, please correct me.

I don't understand this mania that Dupage residents have against using taxpayer funds to save this theatre. There isn't a building project that ever takes place without the use of taxpayer funds. Whether it's the purchase price, or tax breaks, or some incentive to get a developer moving, they all do it. So what's the problem here? As far as the efforts on the parts of the "Friends", there's not a whole lot they can do unless they own the theatre or have the owner's permission.

When Buffalo (a city that is basically bankrupt, by the way) decided to purchase and renovate the Shea's Buffalo Theatre they not only saved a beautiful and irreplacable building, it turned out that Shea's became a focal point for downtown. Even though it's still not a moneymaker the benefits to the businesses surrounding it, and the benefit to the city's image have been enough that no one ever says saving it was a mistake. On the contrary, whenever someone walks into the building the comment that always comes up sooner or later is "I can't believe they wanted to tear this down".

When San Francisco (a city that has a large tourist base, and plenty of tourist attractions) declined to purchase the Fox Theatre and allow its demolition they created a loss that is still talked about in that city today, even though it happened 40 years ago!

If Dupage puts a new structure up on this site, they will have something that they can be proud of for about 10 years, at which point the building will become dated, then unkempt, then within one generation the new building will either be empty or demolished. It's just the way it is with modern development. They're not built to last, no matter what they are. Take it from someone who lives in a city that still thinks demolition and redevelopment is a good idea, it doesn't work. You should save the best of what you already have, and only allow the best to be built when the opportunity arises.

Ziggy, how much have you donated to the theatre? You obviously don't live in Lombard. My property taxes have gone up over 40% in 5 years. We are still shell-shocked from the last tax increase and our high school district is trying to pass a referendum. What we don't need is a publicly financed theatre. All one has to do is scroll up to the top of this message board and look at the about the 3rd comment..the one telling us about fundraising efforts. That was over 2 years ago and all they have is $1200 in the bank. The reason for that is because there is a lack of support. The theatre is an eyesore and is crumbling as we speak.

The 'friends' fail to mention the the Village is already out over $500,000 on upkeep and maintanance. Also for safety reasons their is a construction fence that we are renting each month, agian more taxpayer dollars wasted. The fence is there because the building has become a safety hazard.

Your comment about demolition and redevelopment is quite inaccurate. There are many new successful buildings in our area.

There may be new successful buildings, but Ziggy is right, modern buildings are not built to last. Most of them are built with 30-50 year projected lifespans. The older building from the 1920s and before are practically built to last forever, when properly maintained.

I can't really understand the opposition to a 5 story condo. That's quite small as far as condos go, and the effect on neighbors is really pretty minimal. I should know, I live on a block of single family homes next to a block of condos.

People opposed to the DuPage Theatre's restoration like to hide behind their aliases. They like to throw out arbitrary numbers that they don't followup with proof. $500,000? We'd all like to see those receipts and documents. People like Challenger like to perpetuate misleading information. Taxes scare people, that's why he likes to talk about them. The truth is the funding on this project balances out. Why have a TIF district---and the DuPage Theatre is in an existing TIF district---if you don't want to benefit from it? The DuPage Theatre project is a great example of how to use TIF---it's a private/public venture to benefit the community. Because of this correct use of TIF, this project will not raise property taxes. The RSC plan has been put together in the light of day for all to see.

The Friends have worked hard over the years to save the theatre. Money has been raised---lots of it. Many more pledges have been promised. People have volunteered to take care of the property---as melders inquired. People have volunteered their labor and other efforts toward restoration. But that momentum has ground to a halt because of the resolution to destroy this historic landmark. From the beginning, we've only wanted to do one thing---SAVE THE DUPAGE THEATRE! That meant we did everything our Village asked us to do in our role of grassroots citizen's group. It hasn't been easy, but nothing important is. And we still believe we have a chance to save this beautiful building for the future.

And just another quick note. If I look at the above posts it's clear, the Friends have only been together TWO (3 in October) years---not six. That's an important part of the story...

But let's not forget the ad hoc committee and all the games played by the supporters for all these years that have amounted to nothing. Your odds of saving this decaying relic are next to none. You'd have a better chance winning the lotto than seeing this place restored before it is too late.

And TIF is to jumpstart development not fund nearly the entire project! And now "over the years" is only two going on three years?
The only misleading information comes from the local tabloid and the theatre supporters. The real story has been reported by the respectable local papers in their editorials that clearly stated it is time to move on. The real story has been heard by our village board and they have acted on behalf of the majority of residents and not the few remaining theatre zealots. It is a sad commentary that they continue this fight when it is so clearly over. Take this energy on to a real cause.

Deb, when was the 'friends' last fundraiser? A long time ago? Why fundraise when the taxpayers will fund the project...I heard a friend once say.

The $500,000 figure was from the Village board, I am just repeating what they told the taxpayers.

I am NOT hiding behind my alias..many people know who I am. The only one have who have reported misleading information is the friends. 5000 friends, 1000 sign..Please, both figures highly inflated.

Come on Deb answer my questions. Quit hiding and changing subjects.
Deb, so as a taxpayer, lifelong area resident, and someone who was actually a patron of the theatre in to 70's and 80's I am NOT allowed to comment about the theatre? How long have you lived here yourself? What movies did you see there?

There's a nice article by John McCarron in the Editorial section of today's Chicago Tribune:

Save `The Dupe' ...
... and save those memories of Main Street


John McCarron, who teaches
consults and writes on urban affairs
Published July 29, 2005


Remember?

Remember the scary sword fight between Sinbad the Sailor and the skeleton man? Or Sinbad's face-off with the cyclops on the island of Colossa, where he had to go to break the spell cast over his beloved princess Parisa, who had been reduced to the size of a pocket knife by the evil sorcerer Sokurah?

I didn't think so. Neither did I before I tweaked my memory on the Internet. What I do remember, like it was yesterday, is that sweet feeling of independence, walking down Main Street, Lombard, with my 12-year-old buddies, chores finished, fancy-free on a Saturday afternoon, off to see "The 7th Voyage of Sinbad" at the DuPage Theatre.

As always, the 1959 action movie was only part of the show at "The Dupe." Some of my older classmates had begun to hang out with (groan) girls, so first we'd cruise the balcony to see who was necking with whom. Next we'd go down to the long, glassy candy counter for an obligatory box of Milk Duds, maybe even a roll of caramel bull's-eyes--if the lawn-mowing money held up. Then it was time to settle into the red velour seats, under a fake black sky with twinkling stars, and trip away with Sinbad, or Hercules or Jason and the Argonauts. Loved those sandal flicks.

Ah, The Dupe. Say it ain't so. Say they're not going to tear her down.

They can't tear her down. Not after more than a decade of civic efforts to save her. Not after those efforts secured charitable contributions, plus federal and state pledges, worth $5.5 million. Not after one of the nation's top restoration architects--Daniel P. Coffey, the guy who helped restore the Chicago and the Oriental and the Palace theaters in the North Loop--has drawn up a sensational plan, not just to save the old theater as a performing arts center, but to infuse Lombard's anemic downtown with a $30 million wrap-around development of luxury condos and lively storefronts.

Most curious of all, how can they knock down The Dupe when powerful DuPage County politicians are pleading with the Lombard Village Board to give preservation one last chance? U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), state Sen. Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst) and former Illinois Senate President James "Pate" Philip (R-Wood Dale)--none previously known as gargoyle-hugging preservationists--are urging the Village Board to reconsider its June vote authorizing demolition.

In some ways you can't blame the Village Board for losing patience with the project. Ten years ago the volunteer Friends of the DuPage Theatre said a developer was lined up to convert the building into offices and a studio for making educational videos. When that deal fell through the village took title to the 77-year-old theater and its attached offices and storefronts. In 2001 the board appointed a blue-ribbon committee to come up with a plan, but it was slow going.

Seems the "new urbanism" that has inspired towns like Elmhurst, Downers Grove and Arlington Heights to rejuvenate downtowns around restored train stations and theaters has been, well, slow to catch on in the lilac village. It's still tough to compete there with the big-box discounters on Roosevelt Road and the 18-screen cinema at the Yorktown mall. And public-private partnerships of the kind needed to save The Dupe remain a tough sell politically. It's still a tax-a-phobic town, even if the John Birch Society long ago closed its anti-communist "library" off St. Charles Road.

Still, there was excitement earlier this year with the unveiling of Coffey's plan for preservation and redevelopment. His client, developer Richard Curto of RSC & Associates, would restore the theater's "Spanish courtyard" interior a la the 1928 design by Rapp & Rapp, including those twinkling stars of my youth. In the parking lot south of the theater would rise a four-story condo-over-stores structure of compatible design. Behind the stores, out of sight under the condos, would be two levels of parking for 237 cars, including spaces set aside on weekdays for commuters using the Metra station across the street.

In short, the project would catapult Lombard into the forefront of new urbanism and transit-oriented design. Who knows, the town might even snag a Starbucks. Best of all, contends Coffey, the property and sales taxes from the development, plus the state and federal grants already pledged, would cover the $8.5 million cost of restoring the theater.

But it may not happen. There is bad blood between preservationists and certain members of the Village Board. Deadlines have been missed. Harsh words have been exchanged in public. Other condo developers likely are standing by to pay Lombard serious money for the site--so long as they don't have to save the theater. Why take a chance on preservation?

"It seems to have come down to plain old personality problems," said Coffey.

That may be. But for this son of Lombard, this long-ago marcher in the Lilac Parade, it's also about memories. And the faint hope that some Saturday afternoon in the not too distant future, a 12-year-old and his buddies will be able to walk, not ride, down Main Street, buy some Milk Duds and slip into another world--to the island of Colossa, perhaps--under the stars at the good old Dupe.

I wouldn't be suprised that when this theater is destroyed the village board approves a 5 story condo building to replace it! From all the things I have heard from the people wanting to save the theater and those wanting to destroy it, it seems no one knows what is really going on. I believe that the restoration of this theater could help the downtown. Theater restorations have helped many downtowns. Marion, Il replaced there old theater after it burned down, and I believe it cost about 10 million.

Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always uncertainty. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), thre is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans---that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and materials assistance, which no man could have dreamt would come his way. ---Scottish expedition, Mt. Everest

I have lived in Lombard all my life (all except 6 years spent in Chicago). My family lives here, my friends live here. I bought a home here almost 6 years ago. I am raising my children here. The first movie at the DuPage Theatre that I remember was ET because we had to wait in a line that wrapped around the building. Santa came there every Christmas. There were many other free shows for kids that my parents took me to as well. My friends and I went there almost every weekend during our high school years. It was cheap, and somewhere we could walk to where our parents knew we would be. I remember seeing the Star Wars, Nightmare on Elm Street and Purple Rain, among many others. My husband and I had our first date there---Basic Instinct (not the best first date movie, but the smooching seats in the back row were great!) I could go on, but I hope this "qualifies" me as someone who has the right to speak out in favor of theatre restoration.

But you better get your "spin" right...cause we certainly don't remember a balcony in the theatre as your Tribune nonsense talks of today. How they could print such garbage puts them in the leagues of that Lombard tabloid. Glad to see too that RSC has reduced the building to four stories and that all the parking is now below grade. Wow..the spin, the rhetoric, the games you people play to save this wreck of a building. Tear it down...sooner the better.

'DebDupe', do you even know what an editorial is?

Deb Dynako, I thought I read somewhere you have been in Lombard for ONLY 6 years, not ALL BUT 6 years. I will admit that I am wrong. Your Basic Instict story is a classic, I got quite a chuckle. You are qualified, as you stated.

However, we can agree to disagree. I am quite troubled by the claims of the 'friends'. 5000 supporters, 1000 signs, 4500 signatures, 200 at the rally...all inaccurate numbers. That is the whole problem...inaccurate numbers. And now you want us to believe that this is fully funded? I don't.

Plus I find your strategy of trashing the trustees quite troubling and a bad precedent to set.

By the way I saw Jaws and Star Wars (original episode IV) there. And along the lines of your story, at age 13 my friends and I tricked my mother into taking us to see Animal House. She sat a couple of rows behind us and was quite embarrassed when she discovered that there was profanity/nudity in the movie, she just assumed it was a comedy. So I too spent many a night there growing up, and our paths probably crossed....BUT I also see what condition it is in now...Horrible. I don't need to get into the rest.

This has been one of the most interesting forums on ANY theater so far!!! I liked the editorial with Daniel Coffey's renderings in the Tribune today, and really think this thing could work. I have seen theaters in WORSE shape, particularlly the Toronto Pantages Theater, which was split into a sixplex that destroyed a good percentage of it's interior. AND was replicated and reopened into a beauty. Of course, Toronto is NOT Lombard, and might not have enough residents who would venture out to live theater like downtown Chicago. We have so many more options for entertainment, and staying home these days seems cheaper and safer. Most venues like this thrive on a certain age bracket, usually 20-30 years of age. BUT.....keep arguing!!! Who knows? Someone might listen, and WHATEVER your views, one way or another, this will SOON draw to a close. I have to acknowledge the fact that soon Chicago will lose the Gateway Theater/Copernicus Center in the Jefferson Park neighborhood to a very tempting condo developer that's a convenient spot just a few blocks away from the blue line and Metra. Progress SUCKS!!!

Hey DebDupe, seems that you have finally revealed your true feelings. In your previous postings you stated you would love to see the theater saved. Now you have changed to "Tear it down, the sooner the better". Doesn't seem like you want to see it saved at all!

I believe that this theater could be saved but the city council must support it. By supporting it, I don't mean finacially. They must say that they are willing to coorporate with someone willing to save it. No developer will take on this project without city council support, nor can any non-profit group raise funds for restoration.

I realize that the "Freinds" group has problems. It is unfortunate that the group could not get its act together to save this theater. But the council played dirty by giving no warning about demolishion. The could have told the "Freinds" they had to have X amount of dollars in the bank by the end of this year or the theater is demolished.

Melders- They did just that. The Friends ran out of time at the end of 2004 when the deadline that had been set had passed them by - way short of the funds they had agreed to raise.

No warning? The clock was ticking for years. The village board took away the keys only after years of false starts and unfunded dreams. Then out of the blue comes this so called white knight proposal from RSC. This coming from the same group that only months before was "anti-condo" then decides to add 86 units around the theatre as it is the only salvation. Only problem is the so called new plan includes only $110,000 in so called "private" funds (pledges, not money in the bank) for the well over $8.5 million dollar project that they continually claim is fully funded. Fully funded via tax dollars when one realizes that $4 million is coming from the non-existent TIF extension, $2 million from the developer in exchange for the sale of the land and a so called donation, and tax credits and federal funds. Not one penny in private dollars to build what will become a village owned money pit. The trustees have been more than patient. One needs to take a ride down Main Street to truly appreciate what an eyesore this really is. Check out the photos at www.dupagetheatre.com
Read the enlightening discusssion and chat about all that is going on in the village's fascinating public forum at www.lombardvillagevoice.com

I've been following the posts on the DuPage Theatre for quite some time now. I firmly believe that the comments section should be for memories, insights, corrections, etc. It amazes me how much sniping has gone on among the people posting comments on the DuPage. And that's exactly how many restoration projects stall: bickering, the inability to agree.

I've never been to the DuPage, having only seen it from the outside. So I can remain neutral on the issue of the DuPage. I believe that we should be on this website because we love movies and movie theatres, new and old. We all have some favorite memory of movie theatres. Even the mall multi-plex can have a special place for us.

But, in a larger sense, we must remember that not everything can or should be saved. A theatre like the DuPage can be saved IF the following "IFs" are met:

1) IF the building isn't in such disrepair that restoring it becomes unfeasible.
2) IF the project can gain enough finanical support, be it public, private, or some combination thereof.
3) IF the theatre, once restored, can generate enough bookings (be they concerts, plays, films) so that the place doesn't sit empty most of the time.
4) IF the theatre can generate enough revenue from these various events that it isn't swimming in red ink (a friend of mine, who once worked for a museum said "The funny thing about non-profits is that they still have to earn a profit!"

I'm sure I'm missing many more. But the point is that it is very difficult to run a single-screen small theatre these days. I always loved the Patio Theatre (which I lived near). But the sad reality is that that theatre has been closed since 2001 and I've accepted that it may never show movies again. The same is true for the DuPage. I certainly would not wish demolition on the DuPage, or any other old theare. And I certainly don't want to see more condos. But if it can't be renovated and placed on solid economic footing,
or put into a clever adaptive re-use (a theatre in Quincy, IL was converted into a banquet hall that was sympathetic to the building and has been a rousing success), then what is the reality here?

So true Paul...the big "IF's" are the downfall of this project. The building is in disrepair, private financial support is nearly non-existent, the bookings are a crap-shoot for a now only 499 seat theatre (reduced the seating to address parking issues)that is NOT going to be a movie theatre again but instead "rented" for the arts like ballet and dance recitals, live theatre, and other events. It's not like one would have been able to pull up on Saturday to see what movie or event is playing that evening.

It is very difficult...and the supporters have tried for years. The reality of the game is that the game is over. And more condos is the fix they came up with...86 more condos literally wrapped all around the theatre from top to bottom. I for one can't see a "luxury condo" owner all too pleased with living right above the theatre marquee!

This DuPage situation has gone on for too long. The big "IF's" have done her in.

By the way, I am not anti-preservation. I am very much for preservation if it is viable and if it makes sense. Even the great Chicago Theatre sits empty most of the time. Whereas the Tivoli in Downers Grove seems to have been successful (and has an owner with deep pockets).

And the owner of the Tivoli and other "Classic" cinemas has passed on the opportunity of the Dupe many times it seems...if they can make a go of it with their others it only makes sense for the old DuPage to come into their fold. Gee, could there really be a reason why this theatre has been passed over?

DebDupe,

I'm reminded of two fine examples of preservation and re-use, although they are not cinemas. The Chicago Transit Authority sold two of its "L" stations which were obsolete. The Skokie/Dempster Station was moved 100 feet east and made into a Starbucks. Yes, a Starbucks! So now people can grab their coffee before they get on the "L"! The other was the Linden Station, which was converted into a branch bank. So people could do their banking before or after they rode the "L".

Both are fine examples of "Prairie School" archeitecture. Both met all of the "IFs" I mentioned above. Both are examples of preservation and "adatpive re-use" where it makes sense!

Paul to answer your four "IF" points

1) The building is in such disrepair that restoring it is unfeasible.
2) The project has very little finanical support.
3) The theatre will have trouble generating bookings and the place will sit empty most of the time.
4) The theatre won't generate enough revenue, and we have asked who or how the cost overruns will be covered and never get an answer.

Paul F., Deb & Challenger:
There are no right or wrong answers. Governments do not destroy theatres; People save or let them go. If the public bands together and stops staking out individual "turfs" then the DuPage could be saved. Whoever quoted the four IFs: They are not scientific. Smaller theatres in smaller towns have been saved: Look at the Princess Theatre in Rushville, IL. They used an old business model, sold stock and did not get emotionally attached to the building. Other structures have started in far worse condition: Look at the New Amsterdam Theatre in New York. It had no roof, pigeons, vandals & rain. The DuPage can be saved if a few smart people get rid of old ideas and notions and use modern marketing and finance tools. Parking, small retail and a FEW residential units. Also a dose of common sense would help. My company offered to help create a viable business plan and a five year pro forma which included significant children's programming. The Friends or Foundation never called us back. C'est la vie.

Paul,
The DuPage Theatre which was given to Lombard by Big Idea Corporation 6 years ago is not in the kind of disrepair that "Challenger" reports. I suspect "Challenger" has not even stepped foot into the theatre since Big Idea handed over the building. Big Idea actually started renovation on the building before they determined the property was too small for their quickly growing company. They completed an estimated $1.5 million in demolition, and then "gave" the property to the Village. The theatre is ready and waiting for restoration. In fact, the Friends took great pride in caring for the building. Several clean up days were organized and proved successful in keeping the building safe from further damage. It is only now that the Friends do not have control over the building, that the fear that damage to architectural masterpieces such as the perfect condition terrazzo floor or the rare and ornate ticket booth in the promenade will get damaged due to neglect.

There is financial support, and a lot of it. But, because the Village of Lombard has repeatedly put road blocks in the way of progress, such as the current vote to demolish, public corporations as well as private citizens find it very hard to open their wallets. It is somewhat a chicken before the egg scenario. The Village wants the money before they support the project, and the support for the project needs to be there before the money comes.

A business report developed with the second Ad Hoc Committee in 2002 determined that the need for a cultural arts center is indeed needed in the area. The report estimated an annual visitor number conservatively at 86,000. The financial portion of the report was equally as positive. With the theatre dark for half of the year, and a rental fee of less than $1000 a night, the theatre would turn a profit. Because of Foundation not-for-profit status, this scenario was more than exceptable. By the way, this was based on 600 seats. The current proposal on the table originally placed close to 800 seats in the theatre, which was corrected to 500 to allow for Village parking requirements.

Cost overruns are the new scare tactic. This project is fully funded WITHOUT ANY FUNDRAISING. Fundraising would begin the day the ink dries on the contracts. It is currently estimated that there is over $5 million in donations ready to be given. The proposal also includes an overrun contingency of 12%.

Paul, the Foundation and the Friends have done EVERYTHING the Village has asked them to do. They have given them a proposal that with the proper care could bring the life back to this Main Street. All the Village needs to do is approve the project to continue to Zoning. Yet, they have stopped it once again.

The city should just support the project, but offer no financial support. How hard would that be? If no money if promised, no has to be given. If the theater is not fixed, the city can demolish it. I have watched this exact thing happen in a town next to me. A man wanted to restore a theater, but the city wanted it demolished. The took the man to court so much, he had no time to restore it. No one was willing to give money to a project the city clearly didn't want to support. It is sad this is happening here.

Rita, You are wrong on so many counts:

I was in the theatre 2 years ago...took a tour. Had to leave early because the mold smell was too much. I did like the gaping hole in the ceiling and the fact that you can see sunshine through the bricks. I like how you failed to mention the safety fence around the building because bricks are falling off.

There is financial support? How much do you have in the bank..$1200 for six years work. How much have you brought in this year?

So if the business report was run for an estimated 800 or 600, how much $$ for 499 seats. Far less I would guess.

"Cost overruns are the new scare tactic" Sorry Rita, cost overruns are a reality. Nobody with a clue can argue that.

Don't let Rita fool you. This has been going on for over 6 years, 20 if you count the other ordeals. Now it has become a joke. Like Paul posted up above "The DuPage can be saved if a few smart people get rid of old ideas and notions and use modern marketing and finance tools." They have failed miserably at this. Instead they had pot-luck dinners and pancake breakfast's all attended by the same 200 people. Their fundraising efforts stopped years ago. Why? Because it is easier for the taxpayers to pay for it.

Who's trying to fool who, Challenger? I think you can stop using your $1,200 figure you keep spouting out. That's the Foundation's money---not the Friends'. The potluck dinner you like to refer to was a mixer between our group and First Church of Lombard, a building which is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places. NEVER had a pancake breakfast. Our bigger fundraisers were gala events that raked in thousands of dollars, including our 75th anniversary at the Carlisle and the Light It Up concert with Ides of March last October. We've also hosted many smaller events that have raised significant funds. All the proceeds were used for the theatre.

Now, I'd like to know Challenger, what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey, who has done many significant studies on the quality of the building, who has deemed it fit for restoration, and who has done award-winning restorations on historic theatres before, to say that the restoration is unfeasable? It is your opinion, sure. But beyond that, there is no documentation to back your claims up. Of course, if there are, I'd be happy to review them with you.

As far as the business plan. You haven't seen it. Many notable people have, and believe that this theatre will operate a balanced budget based on the figures---and yes, including the lower seat count---that were provided.

The DuPage Theatre will have many community uses and will showcase a steady stream of activity throughout the year. It will be affordable and convenient. And fully funded without raising property taxes. Please admit that putting a library in its place WILL RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. The other thing that you should admit is that there is NO GUARANTEE that a library referendum will pass---we're talking about $20 million to build a new one at that location.

Can't we please come to an agreement about saving the DuPage Theatre? What sort of vision would you have for it, were it left standing? I'm willing to be creative and visionary---can you?

Deb, there was a pancake breakfast back on 2000 or 2001. The pot-luck dinner netted $1000. I also bought a lemonade from your group at a cruise night.

Gala events!!! The 75th party had 195 people at it. Big Deal, the same 195 people at your rally (as you say, really 60), or at the pot-luck dinner, or who have signs. That's what you need to get a clue about. We are a town of 44,000. There is no support except just you few. You need millions and you are collecting thousands.

Answer my question from before. When was your last fundraiser?

I also have a direct quote from another 'friend' who wants taxpayer $$ to pay for it. Now another 'friend' is attacking the park district...hmm could you guys want money from them??

I do agree with you 100% about the library referendum.

You guys had 6 years. This current plan stinks. 86 condo's in a too small area.

My vision for saving it. Remove the marquee, ticket booth, etc. Develop the block (Library or other)only if the stuff removed is incorporated into it.

Our last fundraiser was last October, the Light It Up concert, which was very successful. I just question why you wonder why we haven't had a recent fundraiser...especially with a demolition order on the way? I don't know the "Friend" you refer to either asking the taxpayers to foot the bill or the park district. It might be more of your "propaganda." The RSC plan for restoration is fully funded without a property tax increase.

You didn't answer my question on what makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey...

BTW: We have collected $5.5 million in pledges, corporate donations and hard cash over the last few years. I'm just not sure that a guy who only wants the marquee and ticket booth to be saved can be pursuaded at this point. I'd ask that you go back to your own "demolition" site and let the preservationists have this one.

There you go folks. Last fundraiser was 10 months ago. Does this sound like a hard fought restoration battle? Like I said before your attitude is "why fundraise when the taxpayers could foot the bill". Many people went to see that band (Ides of March?), NOT to save the theatre.

I don't know what 'propaganda' you are talking about. Seriously.
Am I more qualified than Daniel Coffey at what?

$5.5 million in pledges...where in the bank? SHOW ME THE MONEY! That's paper money and the Village shouldn't gamble on paper money.

Give me a break, Challenger. Nobody's going to give huge chunks of cash until they're sure it will go into the building. Why would they? If the Friends had ownership of the building, sure. You act as though the only potential audience is those who are so dedicated that they will turn out to a rally. That's a ludicrous assertion. And 5 stories of condos is in fact rather small. It's clear that you won't listen to reason.

Well, I really think I opened up a whole 'nuther can-o-worms here! It is funny how I and some others have mentioned the petty bickering that has gone on the DuPage's page here. Yet here we see more of it.

As I said above, I've never been to the DuPage. So I can remain neutral on the issue. But the reason I mentioned all of the "ifs" above is because there have been many instances where millions have been spent, there are huge cost-overruns, a building gets restored (this is not just limited to theatres), and soon falls into financial distress for many reasons. And it ends up being a white elephant.

I wouldn't want to see the DuPage demolished either, but the "ifs" I preseneted above are the tough questions which must be asked before taking on such a task, no matter what the size of the property is being restored. And if I lived in Lombard, I certainly wouldn't mind public/private or public money being used IF the "ifs" are met.

I think LIFE'S TOO SHORT said it best on his December 4, 2004 post above. LIFE'S TOO SHORT, may I quote you here? "But you need a solid plan from start to finish...how to fund the project, intelligent management plan after the job is done. These places don't thrive nowadays without a lot of effort. If proper reuse does not materialize, these buildings decay."

Challenger,

Who cares WHY people came to see the Ides of March. The Ides put on a show to BENEFIT the theatre. That's why they were in town. Of course, people liked the band, but I'm sure many people also liked knowing the proceeds were going to help save the DuPage Theatre, in particular, the marquee. I will again ask the question: What makes you more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey to ascertain the ability to restore the theatre? Have you done restoration work? Have you personally performed tests on the building? Have you had the confidence of the city of Chicago to restore all the theatres in their North Loop Theatre District? I suspect the answer is NO.

Propaganda? Yes. No Friend is asking for the taxpayers, or the park district, to foot the bill for this project. You like to spread the propaganda of fear amongst residents that this will "cost too much." You have no proof of that either. You would just like to see the building gone. Again, I'm not sure why you bother coming here when preservation is the last thing on your mind.

Paul, I like your logic, and with regards to the DuPage Theatre, all the "IFs" can be reconciled in a positive manner. No can of worms here, it's just that if we could get past the nastiness some choose to spew, then we could get to the real issue saving this particular theatre in a meaningful way. That's the conversation I'm looking forward to.

Deb, like you said we will agree to disagree.

My only argument is that this plan was 'fully funded' six years ago, then 5 years , then 4,3,2 years ago...your current plan was altered twice this year. I, for one, am not buying it. There are too many "if's" as paul said. The Illinois first money is questionable at best, plus the rest of money is NOT guaranteed. My fear is that restoration will begin, funding will fall short, and we (taxpayers) will be left footing the bill.

For the rest of the people on this site...I am NOT an anti-preservationist (is that a word?). If private development stepped in, or somebody (or some company) cut a check for $8 million, then get me a broom, or a hammer, or whatever, and I would be happy to help.

As for her conspiracy theory of propaganda let the record show that I purchased a lemonade from their lemonade stand therefore I donated a portion of the $1200 in the bank. If my goal was to tear it down, why would I make a donation towards saving it?

Challenger, your thirst is for something beyond what a glass of lemonade can quench. If the plan was allowed to proceed today, it would be fully funded. The reason the plan was "changed twice" is that it was presented and the Village asked for changes. Those changes actually made the plan agreeable to the Village which acknowledged the numbers added up (therefore making it "in balance" or "fully funded.") No propaganda here. The numbers are in the public record. You can't dispute any of them.

The Save America's Treasures grant is in the bank. That's $300,000, again NOT $1200. (Oh, by the way Challenger, do you think it's easy to get federal grant money? It's a lot of hard work and dedicated people---Lombard citizens---brought it to town for all our benefit, and only because of the theatre!) The Illinois First money is not a dead issue---it's been promised by the state. All the village needs to do is show support for the project. Once they do that, all sorts of money will become available---including all the pledges. Pledges are promises people make. No one forced them to pledge, they wanted to---and still want to. They just need the green light.

Thanks for acknowledging through your silence that you are NOT more qualified than Daniel P. Coffey at ascertaining the viability of restoring the DuPage Theatre.

You're a funny guy, though. That glass of lemonade surely made an impression on you. Maybe if you helped to creatively find ways to save the theatre instead of making up reasons to demolish, you would find that it is much more pleasant making lemonade than being a lemon.

Let me ask a few questions. If this is a restoration website, why do people (Deb Dynako, etc.) engage this Challenger person? He is less than friendly, and ovbiously against the theater all together.

My other question is have the Friends tried to do a petition drive to get Lombard residents (only) to give to the Board?

Challenger, give up on that $1200 thing. It is clear to me that there are two different groups that have tried and you seem stuck on one of these groups. How do you know how much money they have? Do you run the bank the money is in? Also, why do you keep saying that if restoration fails, the city is stuck paying? If restoration fails, the city can go ahead and demolish this theater. They would have no reason to finish restoration. Also, while I agree promised money is no certainty, it is better than nothing. No one is going to donate money to this project with the demolishion order from the council.

My question is how did this rememberance page turn into a hissing contest for residents of the area to go off on either sides. Either way of how you feel, you're keeping people from realizing and appreciating the grandeur of this theatre.

Is there a way you can all take this privately?

Dear HDTV: The "Hissing" that you refer to is what keeps the Cinema Treasure site alive! I love to read the comments written with such passion shared by all about theatre restoration! Some theatres need to go away...others need to stay...still others need to engage in "adaptive reuse." You can tell that the DuPage is one theatre generates enough enthusiasm for the hundreds of other ones that still sit neglected. One thing is for sure: The DuPage will not be torn down anytime soon. I can guarantee it.

DuPagedude, I am NOT less than friendly or against the theatre all together, read my previous posts. I am a taxpayer in this town (Lombard) and all I am doing is asking some hard questions. They are so hard that the friends of the theatre don't like me. Does that mean I should stop asking these questions? NO, and I will continue to ask them.

All I have done is question their financing and fundraising. IF every single thing goes their way then they can pull this thing off, but there are hundreds of things they need to go there way. WE all know that their chances are slim to none that everything will go their way.

Melders when I said "if restoration fails, the city is stuck paying" what I meant to say is that if (hypothetically) restoration was to begin, and let's say they get 75% done and the funding comes up short, who finances the rest? The Village would, because it would be a public relations nightmare not to. Certainly demolition would not be an option at that point.

This theatre has sat vacant for 6 years and most people are tired of looking at it. Bricks are falling off as we speak, and there is no end in sight. At some point when is enough is enough.

Challenger, do you realy think that if the resto was 75% and they money was to run out, another buyer would not JUMP at the chance to com in and finish the project? I think the reason it has been so difficult for the Friends is that the Village, by constantly throwing up roadblocks, is saying they are not in favor of the project.

By the way, I went to the anti-theatre web site, and you bash anyone who does not sgree with you-you call them idiots, frauds and a bevy of other names. If that does not constitute less then friendly to you, I'm sure glad I'm not living next to you! By the way, how close do YOU live to the theatre?

Challenger, I'm sorry you think the Friends "don't like you." Not true. You exhibit exactly the type of behavior that reveals what our group has been up against---misinformed, narrow-minded and mean-spirited people who favor making their nasty comments from the cover of anonymity. Challenger, your questions have been answered. You're just trying to make mountains out of molehills.

And to hdtv267, I don't want this page of this site to be of fond memories of the theatre. I want this page to exhibit that old theatres still have a place in our "modern" society and can be an important part to town revitalization projects across the country. I want this page to showcase the DuPage Theatre as a success story along those lines, and to inspire others to save the theatres that are important to them. Otherwise, this site simply becomes a "graveyard" to memories...When the theatre is restored, please come to Lombard to really appreciate the grandeur of the DuPage!

dupagedude, I live 2 miles away, not that it's important, but I park next to it at the Metra station so I see it up close every day...can you say the same? Everyday for the last 5 years! If it's in such great shape why did the Village put a safety fence around it? Because the falling bricks became a hazard!

Regarding the other website, perhaps before you pass judgment you should read who I am responding too. There have been 2 to 4 friends that attack me every day for speaking out about this project. Funny thing is I get lots of email of support from many people who feel the same way as me. They have called me names too, but I guess that's OK with you then.

The Village throwing up roadblocks??? Didn't the Village offer $1 million fro restoration? Does that sound like a roadblock? Plus the Village has already spent $500,000 over the last 6 years, money we can not recoup.

The village offered $1 million in TIF dollars and only released $100,000. The "village" has not spent $500,000 over the last 6 years. That's the trustee's claim which he cannot backup with real data...which I asked him to please do. Talk about ducking the "tough questions," this is the "trustee" who happens to be the one to ask for the demolition based on falsehoods he purpetuates.

How was that $100,000 spent? Now that the place has been scheduled for demolition that $100,000 was wasted.

We were told $500,000 so that's what I will believe. Whether or not that figure is accurate, we have still wasted money. Any problems you have with that Trustee is between you two and not me.

I said it before and will say it again..I support restoration if it is done with private financial support. If that can't be done save what you can.

Regarding my claims of falling brick check out the photos at www.dupagetheatre.com

Listen Deb, We both made our points and are getting nowhere. Perhaps, some day, we can sit down and discuss it over a tall glass of lemonade. On me :)

It would be interesting to "sit down and discuss it over a tall glass of lemonade." Unfortunately, I don't know who you are! :) If you think the money invested in the theatre was wasted, that's only because of the demolition proclamation currently on the table. Our trustees chose to "waste" the money---not the Friends. Shouldn't they be held accountable to the "taxpayers?" Why did they "waste" that money if demolition was what was intended? I would be upset with them, if I were you, not with the Friends who want the investment SAVED and put to good use!

By the way, if we were allowed to move forward with the project, the falling bricks would be nicely restored to their original purpose, and the fence would be permanently removed...think about it.

Dave -

Thanks for the mature response. I really appreciate your demonstration of why those who are supporting the Dupe have a problem dealing with reality.

Let the adults in Lombard make the decision. Oh wait - that would be facilitated with a REFERENDUM, which is fair and democratic, but only when it ensures a victory for the Dupe supporters.

So why has there been no petition drive to see how many Lombardians actually do support the project?

Referendum
Referendum
Referendum


What are you people afraid of? We have enough special interest groups throwing their weight around this "democracy", deciding where my tax dollars go. Put it to a vote. Otherwise, tear it down NOW.

Someone needs to demonstrate how saving the Dupe will be fiscally viable. We have a joke for a high school, a joke for a library, and a joke for a police department. Tell me again why we're focused on the DuPage Theatre.

Show me the reason why people will attend this theatre when the facts show that the trend has moved decidedly away from movie theatres to home theatres. Instead of moving forward and employing a little ingenuity, we're desperately clinging to a past that went to its shallow grave ten years ago.

If cinemas can't stay solvent, how will a Lombard playhouse?

Explain this without all the wistful nostalgia about starry nights and Spanish patios and I'll change my mind.

Cultural center does not equal movie theatre! You cannot put your child's ballet recital, or your sons drama club in your living room. The touring cast of "Rent" will not do a couple numbers in your den.

How's that for no "wistful nosatlgia about starry nights"?

I really like the idea of a petition drive of Lombard residents. I wonder why no one on the Friends has come up it. Especially circulating petitions in the districts where their representatives have spoken so outwardly about no support in their districts. Didn't one of the trustees say that he personally supported the restoration, but found no support for it in his district? I bet if the Friends got out there and walked door to door to get signatures from people in his district, he would have to eat his words.

The referendum failed because the question was misleading. It actually had three questions wrapped into one. It confused a lot of people in Lombard, and some ended up signing it thinking it was in support of the theater. The referendum was stopped for several reasons. All valid legal ones.

"The DuPage Theatre and Cultural Arts Centre" will contain a 500 seat auditorium to be rented out for such occasions as symphonies, concerts, vocal groups, acting groups, dance recitals, business conferences, weddings, dances, art openings, poetry slams and just about any other "cultural" or "social" event one could possibly imagine. We as a society are beginning to spend far too much time in front of our computers and not enough time with other human beings. This theater will give Lombardians a chance, a reason, to do just that. Only then will the wounds of this bitter war begin to heal. These wounds will never heal if the theater is torn down. It will cause a rift in this town that I am afraid will rip it to its core.

Challenger, I think that that is what worries you. You are afraid that once restoration starts, the citizens of the city will want it finished, and the city will pay some of the costs. Nothing says the city has to finish, but once the theater gets close to finished, citizens won't want to see it destroyed. Work must take place in order for more money to come in.

Fiscal, what good would it do to tear it down now? Why don't you support a referendum to demolish the theater, since that would take tax dollars too. Or better yet, but the site up for sale and let a private business tear it down, since the anti-theater supports don't want to spend the city's money.

DuPage dude states "The touring cast of "Rent" will not do a couple numbers in your den."

Has the touring cast of "Rent" committed to coming to the Dupe or is this more of a "Build it and they will come" comment.

Challenger, many organizations/groups have "committed" to using the DuPage Theatre once it reopens. We have a whole list of them. It's more like, "We're here, so build it."

OK...I'll put on a show there also when it opens. Please add me to your list of many organizations/groups have "committed". How much have these many organizations/groups "committed" in $$ of the $1200 you have in the bank?

HERE'S what I think. You people NEED to get ahold of the politicians to help you to either DESTROY THE PLACE FOREVER.....OR....RESTORE IT LIKE IT LOOKED WHEN IT OPENED IN THE 1920'S......See what pull you have and who you might be able to schmooze. GET THEM ON RECORD. I heard one sector say that James "Pate" (hate stupid nicknames) Philip wants to keep it standing, but...BEING A POLITICIAN...GET IT ON RECORD!!!..YOU KNOW THAT MOST OF THEM LIE.....See who is on your side. Thay way, how EVER this thing goes....vote accordingly next election. You'd be surprised. It took a snowstorm to oust Bilandic and elect Byrne.....Chicago's first woman mayor...(and probably the last for awhile).....and a disenfranchised voting population to be bold and elect Harold Washington our first black mayor.....
Just remember...ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN WITH POLITICIANS...THEY SWOON AND SWAY WITH THE PUBLIC'S INPUT....GET ENOUGH IN YOUR CORNER AND YOU ARE SET.....
There was a great article in the Trib last week on the VIBRANT Downtown Arlington Heights nightlife with the Metropolis Centre, bars, people having fun downtown, etc...Lombard probably can't BE THAT, maybe they don't WANT TO, maybe the kids yearn to leave when they are old enough and the elders are complacent to let that happen. BUT....if Lombard wants a vibrant downtown open till at LEAST 10pm and later on the weekends, a theater is a catalyst for that. Maybe a brand new venue built from the ground up (with some architectural remnants saved from the Dupage)would be nice.
By the WAY....Are "fiscal insanity" and "challenger" the same person? I think we should have a meeting at MY place. ALL OF US...bet those two wussies wouldn't even show....You KNOW my name....WHY THE ALIAS????...SCARED????

HERE'S what I think. You people NEED to get ahold of the politicians to help you to either DESTROY THE PLACE FOREVER.....OR....RESTORE IT LIKE IT LOOKED WHEN IT OPENED IN THE 1920'S......See what pull you have and who you might be able to schmooze. GET THEM ON RECORD. I heard one sector say that James "Pate" (hate stupid nicknames) Philip wants to keep it standing, but...BEING A POLITICIAN...GET IT ON RECORD!!!..YOU KNOW THAT MOST OF THEM LIE.....See who is on your side. Thay way, how EVER this thing goes....vote accordingly next election. You'd be surprised. It took a snowstorm to oust Bilandic and elect Byrne.....Chicago's first woman mayor...(and probably the last for awhile).....and a disenfranchised voting population to be bold and elect Harold Washington our first black mayor.....
Just remember...ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN WITH POLITICIANS...THEY SWOON AND SWAY WITH THE PUBLIC'S INPUT....GET ENOUGH IN YOUR CORNER AND YOU ARE SET.....
There was a great article in the Trib last week on the VIBRANT Downtown Arlington Heights nightlife with the Metropolis Centre, bars, people having fun downtown, etc...Lombard probably can't BE THAT, maybe they don't WANT TO, maybe the kids yearn to leave when they are old enough and the elders are complacent to let that happen. BUT....if Lombard wants a vibrant downtown open till at LEAST 10pm and later on the weekends, a theater is a catalyst for that. Maybe a brand new venue built from the ground up (with some architectural remnants saved from the Dupage)would be nice.
By the WAY....Are "fiscal insanity" and "challenger" the same person? I think we should have a meeting at MY place. ALL OF US...bet those two wussies wouldn't even show....You KNOW my name....WHY THE ALIAS????...SCARED????

Let the record show I am NOT fiscal insanity. Why am I a wussie? Because I speak my opinion, the same opinion as a majority of taxpayers think.

Your comment sums up what I have said all along...unprofessional!

Many small towns across this country have restored there main street theatres. Many cities have regrets that they tore down there only historic theatre. Most of these restored theatres are multi purpose theatres with concerts,plays,weddings,graduations and yes movies. It is good to ask tough questions but it is helpful to be constructive. I associate these historic theatres with our countries greatest generation and there parents. These historic theatres along with churches,train stations,museums and other civic buildings are the heart and soul of the community. My Mom comes from a small town of about 19,000 and they tore down there historic mainstreet and built this ugly cement box mall that is an embarrassment to the town. They would give anything to have there historic mainstreet back. They can't restore what is no longer there. These old mainstreets, tourists love to visit and have helped revitalize many small towns which looked like they were dying.brucec

Challenger, Challenger, Challenger. I wish you'd find a new number to hold on to. $1,200? We made ten times that at the "Light It Up" concert alone. I'm not sure who's feeding you your data, but I sure wouldn't bet the farm on their statistics.

And as for speaking for the "majority of taxpayers," I doubt it. Again, your scare tactics are not working and don't hold up to scrutiny. "Taxpayers" only care if this project will raise their property taxes. The RSC plan to restore the DuPage Theatre DOES NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. Building a library there will---and I know that's what you and your buddy Biddle want built on the theatre property. But it will never pass referendum. "Taxpayers" don't want the added tax burden. Of course, you and Biddle can always help the library board out and start "fundraising" on your own. I'd like to see how well you do.

DEb, Deb, Deb, don't put words in my mouth. I have NOT touted the library issue. Its sounds good on paper, but I agree with you about the referendum..it probably won'r pass.

Get your facts straight please.

Challenger, again, please refrain from using your $1200. It just doesn't add up and misrepresents all the hard work our group has put forth.

That's funny, I saw a snapshot of the books on the other website and that's what it said. I am going by what I have seen. If it is a different number tell me what it is. It's not a number I am making up.

OK how much does the foundation have in the bank? Actually cash not promises, or pledges, or brick & mortar, etc.

I do like how you skated around my last post about the library. I am being reasonable here..I totally agree with your library comment, but we disagree about the Dupe. So that makes me a bad guy? No not really.

Let's just say something good happens, and the theatre is restored, however it happens it doesn't matter... BUT in the end you may realize that having people like us (so called anti-theatre) around pushed you people (so called pro-theatre) to work even harder.

We hardly heard from you guys from 2002 to 2004, now you seem to be working you butts off.

Again, Challenger, the Friends and the Foundation are two different entities with two different bank accounts. I will not divulge to you the amount the Friends has in our bank account, because truthfully it doesn't concern you. The Foundation is inactive, so whatever they had left in their accounts went to the village (since they were established by the village).

I also find it amusing that you think we haven't been "working our butts off" these last years. How wrong your assessment of the situation is and how egocentric you must be to think you personally have anything to do with our actions to save the DuPage Theatre. Who are you anyway, really? Some guy who parks in the theatre lot everyday who thinks he knows all the answers? Again, you've offered no expertise. You hide behind your screen name. And you've offered nothing constructive to the dialog---just accusations and "questions" you demand answered. Why don't you go to a real source---not Sebby or Biddle or Lentsch---to find answers. Or come meet with me, off the record. And make it lemonade, if that's your preference.

Your library post makes me giggle because your buddy Biddle keeps touting it. He obviously has higher hopes than we do! :) No, I don't think you're a "bad guy," but I don't think you know the first thing about fundraising, TIF or anything else regarding financing the restoration of the theatre. If you did, you'd realize what a great plan the RSC proposal is, and join our ranks as supporters. Until then....all my best.

A follow up. The Friends of the DuPage Theatre did a petition drive which collected more than 4,500 signatures in 3 weeks. They were presented to the Board at their July 21st meeting. The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard. We did not go door-to-door, as this was an advisory petition, not binding, and we didn't have much time from one board meeting to the next to accomplish it.

We would also be happy to participate in a LEGALLY WORDED and BINDING referendum to save the DuPage Theatre. If the opportunity came forth, we would gladly to go door-to-door to get the necessary signatures in a legal and binding manner. We have never worried that we would not have public support for a fair, legal and binding referendum. In fact, our experience gathering signatures in early July made clear that the majority of people we encountered were theatre supporters.

What are you waiting for? The "opportunity" will not "come forth", you needed to initiate it! You should have done that months ago. That property belongs to the village (ALL of us) and any use of the land, especially a use that requires millions of our TIF dollars and a code exceeding condo building should have put to the people long ago.

If the details of this particular redevelopment plan are spelled out for voters - I don't think it will pass. There is a big difference between signing a petition to save the theatre and authorizing the use of millions of our TIF dollars to restore it. Not to mention the risks involved to the taxpayers of this town if the restoration goes over budget or if the theatre does not financially succeed.

There is really only one way to know for sure - referendum!

Deb, again thanks for supporting my theory of the 'friends". I DO know a lot about fundraising, having done some myself. I collected far more money for NEDSRA than you did at your pot-luck dinner or your lemonade stand. Now wipe the egg off your face and read on.

You say that the money doesn't concern me. Who does it concern then? Only the members of your special interest group. As a resident and taxpayer of this town the Theatre is as much mine as is it yours. You simply won't divulge how much is in the bank because it is embarrassing. Therefore I will stick with the number I was told $1200 for 6 years of work.

Your comment "you personally have anything to do with our actions to save the DuPage Theatre". Well I have contributed money so that comment was wrong. Now wipe the egg off your face and read on.

Funny about your library post. Did you read the Daily Herald today? Library interested in Dupe site.

I know enough about TIF to know that your group doesn't have it, and are not guaranteed to get it. I also know that the "T" in TIF means TAX.

Regarding your petition drive…do you deny that some of those signatures were acquired from outside the Wheaton theatre? I also saw children signing your drive so your numbers are somewhat skewed.

A great comment was just made " the risks involved to the taxpayers of this town if the restoration goes over budget or if the theatre does not financially succeed " Now wipe the egg off your face.

Challenger, were you throwing eggs? None made it on my face. You must have bad aim...

Currently, there is a vote to raze the theatre. That means any referendum we would initiate would be advisory only. We need a BINDING referendum, otherwise, what's the point? The board can just say it doesn't mean anything---no matter what the outcome.

I believe, Challenger, that you don't really care how much money we raised. You'd prefer to keep to your erroneous $1200 figure, and that's fine, because it further shows how obtuse you and yours are. You know we had more fundraisers than a "lemonade stand" or a "pot-luck dinner," yet you don't care to acknowledge that fact. Many thousands of dollars from our fundraisers went into the effort to save the theatre. Evidently, your contribution from a glass of lemonade was part of that. So thanks!

The TIF district on the site doesn't expire until 2007. I believe Senator Cronin will get us the extension. Yes, the "T" means tax, but not property tax. Why don't you care that the Park District spends millions in TIF? Why don't you care how any of the other TIF district money is spent? I think the village is currently prepared to spend in excess of $700,000 in TIF money to redo our "streetscapes" along Main and St. Charles. Does that bother you? Do you know where all the other TIF money in this town goes? Or how much of it is being used on the "Conference Center?"

The library will raise property taxes and has a snowball's chance down below to pass referendum. I'm glad to know we agree on that one.

The petition drive was meant to include all that would benefit from the theatre. That includes kids. I see nothing wrong with giving the young people in our town a voice. Again, this was an advisory petition. As far as the Wheaton Grand, they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause---interestingly enough, some of those people were Lombardians! Maybe even you, since your timing was right!

The risks involved to the taxpayers of this town with regards to the RSC plan are slim to none. Let's face it, you can always find something wrong with anything if you try hard enough. Buying a house is full of risks. Buying a car is full of risks. Having kids is full of risks. Life is full of risks, but look at the odds. In this case, with RSC and Daniel P. Coffey's track record, I feel pretty good about taking a risk. Because the outcome would be well worth the choice to save the DuPage Theatre.

We're glad YOU feel it's worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what's best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?

You still don't get it and you never will.

Don't be too sure about the library - I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way - the voters will decide... which is the way it should be!

We're glad YOU feel it's worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what's best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?

You still don't get it and you never will.

Don't be too sure about the library - I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way - the voters will decide... which is the way it should be!

We're glad YOU feel it's worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what's best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?

You still don't get it and you never will.

Don't be too sure about the library - I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way - the voters will decide... which is the way it should be!

First Deb says "The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard." Now she says 100 were from Wheaton. Now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. I wonder how many other signatures were gathered from outside Lombard???

So you being a TIF expert, where will the property tax from the 86 condo's go? Back into the Dupe and not into our schools or our Village coffers. Again, you twist the facts.

Quit jamming the referendum comment down my throat...scroll up I never commented on the referendum. That is not my cause. Neither is the library which I have stated here several times already. Get your facts straight please.

Funny you should bring up the Park District and conference center...smells like a smokescreen to me.

First Deb says "The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard." Now she says 100 were from Wheaton. Now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. I wonder how many other signatures were gathered from outside Lombard???

So you being a TIF expert, where will the property tax from the 86 condo's go? Back into the Dupe and not into our schools or our Village coffers. Again, you twist the facts.

Quit jamming the referendum comment down my throat...scroll up I never commented on the referendum. That is not my cause. Neither is the library which I have stated here several times already. Get your facts straight please.

Funny you should bring up the Park District and conference center...smells like a smokescreen to me.

Challenger, really, you missed everything else I said and focused on 100 signatures from a sister theatre, the Wheaton Grand. You well know where we collected our signatures---mostly Taste of Lombard and Cruise Nights. It started with a bit over 200 at our rally. Friends asked their neighbors to sign petitions. I'm not talking out both sides of my mouth, I just thought that 100 out of 4500 was a drop in the bucket. Obviously, you feel differently, but I forgot you like to make mountains out of molehills.

Of course the TIF money will go into the theatre. It can't go anywhere else. TIF district money must be used on the parcel it is designated for. Surprised you didn't know that!

No smokescreens, Challenger. Just trying to determine why you and Marissa are so against this theatre plan because it uses "tax money" when you don't seem concerned about any other use of TIF. Marissa, don't forget that a library will raise property taxes--that's a hard sell to the residents of this town. That's why it would have to go to referendum.

Who's Marissa? Methinks someone's been reading the village voice..eh Jules?

Yes, the library will raise property taxes and it may be a hard sell - but unlike your plan, Lombardians will collectively decide and I'm ready to live with the outcome.

If you read up on the library's website about why the last referendum failed you may see things differently. I think it can and will pass. If not, I won't be sour grapes but I will still fight to see that we all get a say on how the "gift" is used. Especially if it is to exceed codes.

What about my comment about keeping the library and the theater or a portion of it? Can you see past this RSC plan or not?

Marissa came to the meeting we had at the Library regarding the RSC plan. Dupe Neighbor, you just happen to sound a lot like her. Forgive me if I'm wrong about that.

Challenger, your blood is up! :)

See what I mean about signatures and BINDING referendums? You say 4500 signatures don't mean squat---the same thing the board could say if we initiated a referendum. And, really, if 100 out of 4500+ signatures makes something skewed in your logic, there's nothing I can do about it. I've been truthful. It doesn't matter to you. So move on, Challenger. That other site needs you more than we do here.

Glad you came to the rally. What sign were you holding?

Cheers!

Well Deb, you see it right there. Even an advisory referendum would force the Trustees to rethink their vote on the razing of the Theatre, but yet the Friends come up with excuses NOT to do one--why is that? Certainly a group with as many members as you have would have NO PROBLEM doing a grassroots referendum to present to the Board, the State and the media, wouldn't you? Like the old saying goes, "IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION, YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM" Which one is the Friends going to be?

I would also advise you to stop engaging Theatre detractors on this web site. Let them stay on their own site. This site is for PRESERVATIONS, not PROPAGANDA. Engaging them, much like wild animals, only encourages them...

Article from today's Daily Herald.

Will the Friends have the sense to abandon this condo plan and start lobbying for a way to save the theater and incorporate it into a much needed new library on the site? They better hurry..

http://www.dailyherald.com/news/dupagestory.asp?id=81880

I thought this was a site for those who were interested in movie theaters. The negative trolls who have posted above not only lack manners, it is also obvious that they are either developers or others with a financial interest in seeing the theater demolished. Fine, if that's their interest, then let them find another discussion board to promote their ideas.

DuPage Dude is right, Deb. Don't encourage themn. It's like waving a piece of raw meat at a dog.

An old adage puts it well: "If you lie down with dogs, you get up
with fleas."

Peace.

I hope you are not referring to me - but frankly you have just thrown a rock from a glass house.

Did you know the Dupe wasn't going to be a movie theatre? Does that mean the discussion of it's fate belongs somewhere else?

As I've said before, just because this condo plan has failed, it may not be too late to save the theatre and incorporate into something else i.e. a new library.

What's your plan? To wait around for the preservation fairy to sprinkle magic dust on the Dupe while you talk of movie theaters? It's time for action, not words - before time runs out!

Woof woof and good night!

Challenger, what is wrong with the children of town signing the petition. These children will grow up in town and if the theater is demolished, they will probably look back and regret what their city has done. Also, you said that the "Friends have raised only $1200 in six years. If I remeber the "Freinds" is only about 3 years old, so you must have them confused with another group.

Also I still cannot understand the rush to demolision. If this is such a desirable site, let a private developer demolish the theater and save the taxpayers money. But it seems to me that the people for demolision have no problems spending money on demolision. I just hope they realize that this theater is probably full of asbestos and would be very costly to demolish.

Melders, you are right. This theatre property is like any other "surplus property" in the inventory of a municipality. There are several alternatives. One must show the Village a reasonable development plan where cash is paid for the property to remove it from the NO TAX pile. Then demonstrate a reasonable chance of success for theatre restoration and operation in phases. They will listen. Remember, the Village is NOT in the theatre business. Look at how much time they have spent on this property while other matters in the Village go unattended. To attack them is wrong. They have been more than patient. Now the time for action is here. This type of development deal has happened elsewhere all over the country. Tempers and emotions are hot right now. I know that calmer heads can prevail.

Melders "rush to demolish"...WHAT?!?!? What rush, this thing has sat vacant for almost 7 years, and it was hardly used for 10 years before that. If they would have rushed they would have torn it down 7 years ago. But since nothing has been done and the building is falling down as we speak they chose to to demolish the building now.

I'm STILL waiting for a response from the "Friends" to my questions. I guess I'll have to change my name to "Challenger" and get mean and spiteful to get any response... Even an advisory referendum would force the Trustees to rethink their vote on the razing of the Theatre, but yet the Friends come up with excuses NOT to do one--why is that? Certainly a group with as many members as you have would have NO PROBLEM doing a grassroots referendum to present to the Board, the State and the media, wouldn't you? Like the old saying goes, "IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION, YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM" Which one is the Friends going to be? I STRONGLY encourage the Friends to do one before it's too late!!!

DuPageDude,
Sorry I didn't comment right away. Doing a non-binding referendum won't change the minds of the four trustees who voted to demolish. Why do you think it would when 4,500+ signatures certainly didn't? When time and time again, the citizens of Lombard have stood before them to state their support of the theatre? All the public outcry has evidently fallen on deaf ears. Have you stood up to voice your support for the theatre in their presence? Have you called and/or emailed your wishes for a preserved theatre to each of them? The Friends are trying to find the solution that will save the theatre. Other citizens are as well. What are some of your feelings regarding the situation? I understand your wish for referendum, and we can pursue that course as long as it is binding. Then, whatever way the vote goes, we will all have to accept the consequences based on the outcome. I certainly would appreciate reading any ideas you have to save the theatre.

Challenger, I'm sorry. Maybe the village isn't rushing. But why the big push for the city to demolish it? Why not let a private developer and save the city the money?

Deb, you are right. A non-binding referendum won't do any good. The city will just ignore it and go on with there plan. I have seen places use non-binding referendums and they have little effect on what a government decides.

DuPage Dude -

They simply know the votes are not there. There is a distinct difference in the actions of people when they are confronted in person on an issue, and when they can punch a vote privately in a referendum. Any referendum to save the Dupe would be roundly and soundly defeated and they know it.

Even a non-binding referendum would give the Friends an enormous amount of momentum behind their efforts at the state level, so I'm not sure why they're not clamoring for ANY kind of vote.

The writing is on the wall. If the theatre were supportable, it would not have come to this in the first place.

Ms. Dynako-if the overwhelming majority of a Trustee's district signs a petition in favor of restoration, even a non-binding one, won't that put them in a position where they would have to vote in favor of restoration? They would have a LOT of explaining to do if they still voted no, wouldn't they. Ovbiously, veiled threats against Trustees did no good, in fact, I think it hurt your cause!
Look at what even anti-theatre people say " Even a non-binding referendum would give the Friends an enormous amount of momentum behind their efforts at the state level, so I'm not sure why they're not clamoring for ANY kind of vote." Yet the Friends think they know better. It's their arrogance that will be their downfall.
Of course I have let me voice be heard, but actions by the "Friends" are snuffing them out!!!

I have to agree Dupage Dude. It seems to me that the "Friends" seem badly managed. Calling the council memebers names will only turn them against you and make them unwilling to ever listen to you. A referendum should be held, to prove to those that say the theater has no support wrong. I don't believe that the people of the city want to see the theater fall, as some on this site have said.

I would still like someone to answer my question. Why the push for the city to demolish the theater and not a private developer?

Because by the Village destroying it, promises made to individuals will be kept. Plus, that way same said individuals will save money for their redevelopment plan. Why should a developer pay for demolition when their buddies at the Village will do it ofr them? "Political contributions" cost less than bulldozers,,,,

DD - Remember, in all these years, there has been little or no interest in that property. What developer in their right mind would want to come into a town, tear down a theatre that has been a point of contention and then ask residents to shop at his stores or buy his condos? I believe most Lombardians don't care enough to boycott - but the developer doesn't know that. The only way to make the parcel marketable is for the village to take the step and demolish the building themselves. The building, as it stands now, looks very bad and neighboring residents are sick and tired of that. We don't want to wait 6 more years for a plan that is reasonable.

These trustees are not on the take - did you know that one of the four that voted for demolition has been on the board for over a decade and had been a supporter of the theatre for years? He even attended benefits to save it. At the June meeting he and another trustee were very clear about their reasons for voting the way they did. It was not an easy decision for them but they had to consider the bigger picture.

Everything you and Melders said about the Friends is so right. When Ms. Dynako and some of the Friends took the podium at the July meeting, they were brutal to the board. It was really embarassing. They were so bad that even our village president, who has been a longtime supporter of the theatre, reprimanded them at the end. I would think any chance for overturning the vote ended that night. It's too bad because I'm still hoping that they try to incorporate just the theatre but not the apartment building into the new library. Did you notice how they never respond to that? It's their way (condo plan) or no way.

Sure, that Trustee has been on the Board for over 10 years but; he has not had an opponent for how long now (resident's are afraid to run against the good ol boys), and what has been his full time job ? Suspicious to me... Clear in their reasons? That same Trustee said "The fantasy is over..." How is that clear? There was a fully-funded plan on the table that answered ALL the Trustees questions, yet they ignored it and voted for demolition to "proceed with redevelopment" as what? They didn't give a plan, how is that an answer? Schaumburg is now building their SECOND cultural center, and Lombard is turning their pack on their first. We will become the laughing stock of northern Illinois!

Ms. Dynako-if the overwhelming majority of a Trustee's district signs a petition in favor of restoration, even a non-binding one, won't that put them in a position where they would have to vote in favor of restoration? They would have a LOT of explaining to do if they still voted no, wouldn't they. Ovbiously, veiled threats against Trustees did no good, in fact, I think it hurt your cause!
Look at what even anti-theatre people say " Even a non-binding referendum would give the Friends an enormous amount of momentum behind their efforts at the state level, so I'm not sure why they're not clamoring for ANY kind of vote." Yet the Friends think they know better. It's their arrogance that will be their downfall.
Of course I have let me voice be heard, but actions by the "Friends" are snuffing them out!!!

What about Trustee Soderstrom? Was he not perfectly clear? don't remember only what you want to.

Let's not start on the "fully funded" plan. You know where I stand, it was too big and required too many TIF dollars.

Why won't you address the new info released about the library board's interest in the property? If the voters decide to build a new library there - will you still be claiming the trustees were on the take? Why don't they try to save the theatre or part of it as part of the library? I think it would be a win win if only people can move past the condos.

I think that if it is possible the theater should be incorporated into a new library. Even if it is only the facade and marquee, that would still give the feel of the old building. And if anything can be saved from the interior, then those objects can be placed in the library.

Y'know, that's a great idea.

It is a great idea and may be the Friends last hope. The apartment building that is attached to the Dupe would have to go - but that is by all counts condemnable as it is anyway.

Take everything down except the actual theater & foyer and build the new library around it! Maybe where the old apt bldg was can be a parking deck so they can have more space to build the new library. Even if they use their pledged private $$ to restore the marquee and facade while the library was built around it, then the interior restoration could be done at a slower pace while more funds are raised privately.

I'm not sure how the voters would feel but if the majority of the interior restoration money was raised privately, I would support it. If others did not, I think at the very very least, the marquee and facade should stay as well as some of the architectural features of the interior (ticket booth etc.)

Maybe the Friends could meet with the library board and the village and find out if this is possible. They have this architect who is supposedly an expert in restoring these theatres. Get him involved.

I'll tell you one thing - the village has a board meeting again this week. If the Friends go up there and rip on the trustees again or start ripping on the suggestion of a library at the site, they can kiss that theatre goodbye and that will be a shame!

You know what? After I left this site, I read the latest press article from the Friends on their website and I have to say, I think it's over.

The latest column in our local newspaper by Ms. Dynako and another Friend refers to the property being "eyed for profitable endeavors by a few individuals" and then went on to encourage people to attend the board meeting and speak.

I think they're done - that was another slap in the face to this board who is holding all the cards right now. The Friends won't learn from their mistakes, they'll just keep antagonizing until the bulldozers come. The library may have been a shot for them but I think this board is going to act and fast. Why should the trustees even try to accomodate a group who is consistently calling them thieves and swindlers. I'm pretty sure they blew it and it's too bad because even someone like me who isn't that passionate about saving the theatre liked the library/theatre idea.

Too bad.

I hope that someone in the community will bipass the "Freinds" and recommend that the library be allowed to restore the building. They could keep much of the interior intact. The auditorium could be restored and used as the main room, with bookshelfs and tables instead of rows of seats. I doubt that this theater will ever be used as a theater again. I hope the "Freinds" realize that the best chance this theater has is to be reused as the library. Considering how the "Freinds" have acted towards the council, though, it might be best for this theater's future if they just stay out of the debate.

Wow, I was gone over the weekend and came back to a very active site.

Here's the article I co-wrote. You be the judge of my intentions instead of having a line taken out of context...

------------

To Restore or to Regret? That Is the question.

It’s hard to imagine why the DuPage Theatre has become one of the most
contentious issues Lombard has ever known. For many of us, the theatre
represents a bridge from the past to the future. It represents an
opportunity for economic growth in an unique setting that we can be
proud to call our own. It’s a place people can use and enjoy through
the aesthetics of the wonderful atmospheric features built into the
building, and the many different art forms that can be exhibited there.
Of course, that’s not how everyone in town views the issue.

That’s because the stakes are high. For the very reason the theatre can
be a catalyst for economic growth in the downtown area—location—others
are eyeing it for more “profitable” endeavors. But who stands to
profit? Some individuals, maybe, but not necessarily the community as a
whole. If the theatre is removed, the next building to go on that
corner will forever throw off balance the structure our forefathers
built this village around. When people pass the spot, it will be a
reminder of a failure in vision and a lack of willingness to work
together for the good of all.

To supporters, the vote to raze DuPage Theatre represents the
continuing struggle of defining the Village of Lombard’s identity. We
are the Lilac Village, but we have so much more to offer. The loss of
this historic building would be an irreplaceable loss for Lombard—now
and in the future. It would signal the loss of heritage and culture,
leave a gaping hole at Main and Parkside and wounds in the community
that may never heal.

We have a choice. We can have a restored theatre that demonstrates the
things which we hold dear and provides a legacy for future generations
or a village filled with deep regret.

Over the years, the Friends of the DuPage Theatre have received letters
and e-mails from people who understand this type of regret. One
individual said, “Don’t let it die. MANY, MANY communities across
America remain bitter and filled with regret for having torn their
theaters down.” Another reiterated these sentiments and wrote, “We too
in England have lost many unique theatres...There are many shop and
apartment complexes but NOTHING can replace a theatre once it is torn
down.” And yet another said, “Once the theater is demolished—it will be
gone forever, just like many of the other downtown Lombard icons...We
know in retrospect that loosing those historic structures is a shame,
and has hurt us socially and economically in the long run.”

On the other hand, letters regarding the success of historic theaters
have served to inspire and encourage supporters. One woman wrote,
“...if the theatre in Oak Park wasn’t there, the rejuvenation of the
downtown would not be where it is today.” Many cited examples around
the country. For instance: “Look at the Orinda Theater east of Oakland,
California. Years ago a developer had it slated for destruction to
build a shopping center. That community lobbied and fought to have the
theater restored and it not only survived, it is now the distinctive
centerpiece and star attraction for the shopping center that surrounds
it!”

Many villages have considered the restoration of their historic
downtown theaters a “no brainer.” Others have chosen to sever those
roots. What type of place do we want Lombard to be? Do we want to be a
community that honors its heritage and appreciates the gift our
predecessors have left us, or a community that is indifferent to those
values? Do we want a downtown which offers year-round incentives to
visit, or only seasonal activities? Do we want to retain one of the
most unique features of our village, or do we want
“nothing-much-special” downtown? Will we restore or will we regret?

To make an informed decision about the loss that Lombard faces, please
visit www.dupagetheatre.net View photos of the theatre interior, read
about the history that surrounds it and learn how you can help make a
difference. Then attend the August 18th Village Board Meeting, 7:30
p.m. at Lombard Village Hall, and let the Trustees know where you stand
on this important Lombard issue.

I think the first show the Friends put on should be a dance recital, since they are tap dancing around my questions and spouting rhetoric. We can all read the web site and the press releases, but what about some answers?
Ms. Dynako-if the overwhelming majority of a Trustee's district signs a petition in favor of restoration, even a non-binding one, won't that put them in a position where they would have to vote in favor of restoration? They would have a LOT of explaining to do if they still voted no, wouldn't they. Ovbiously, veiled threats against Trustees did no good, in fact, I think it hurt your cause!
Look at what even anti-theatre people say " Even a non-binding referendum would give the Friends an enormous amount of momentum behind their efforts at the state level, so I'm not sure why they're not clamoring for ANY kind of vote." Yet the Friends think they know better. It's their arrogance that will be their downfall.
Of course I have let me voice be heard, but actions by the "Friends" are snuffing them out!!!

DuPage Dude. Not tap dancing at all. I've answered your question regarding petitions. Unless they're binding, they won't hold water. A trustee can vote any way he chooses and doesn't have to give reasons. He's protected that way by law. I'm sorry you don't approve of the things I've said to my trustee. He has made many misstatements in the press and no one has asked him why he made such statements. As my elected trustee, he needs to be accountable for the statements he makes. If we made claims that were untrue, no doubt you would take us to task...

Tap dancing AND selective hearing.

Library Library Library.

They refuse to respond because instead of saving the structure at all costs, they want it their way (it's not Burger King, you know!)
They want their condo plan and will settle for nothing less.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking down towards demolition...

Thursday night should be interesting

>>>>We will become the laughing stock of northern Illinois!


Spare me. The lack of creative thinking by the "Friends of the Dupe" doesn't bode well for a building designed for creativity.

I offered a great alternative that would create a cultural oasis in Lombard and get us a new library while we're at it. I'll repeat it:

1. Raise the Dupe.
2. Build a new library on that site.
3. Raise the old library
4. Build a REAL Spanish patio/outdoor theatre at the
current library site, where patrons can REALLY enjoy
the arts under the stars, and give Lombard a first-
class facility for the arts.

Why is this not an agreeable alternative? We've got a beautiful park setting with Lilacia as a backdrop. Be a little creative! That's how good towns become great. The DuPage is past. Let it go. Do something better.

I agree. Raise the Dupe! Raise her to the prominent level she deserves. Raise her up as a pinnicle of vision and historical significance for our town. Raise her as the personification of what cultural arts truly means.

Just don't RAZE her.

Nice catch on the spelling.

Right now your political credit card is maxed out and the Village Council is going to start collecting interest on Thursday.

Instead of clinging to this fantasy - if you're really all about "culture" and "the arts", then you should be ready to present an alternative site in order to have a fine arts presence in Lombard.

I've given one alternative more than the Friends of the DuPage. What's your contingency? Do you have one? When the wrecking ball comes down, are you going to move on to another town, or stay and CREATE (not just build) something spectacular?

Raze her except for the facade...and build a library.

Our new library indeed will be the pinnacle of vision and historic significance in our town. She will rise as the personification of what a library truly should be...a library for all the residents of our community and not simply some unfunded cultural dream for a few theatre zealots. A library that embraces the facade of what once was. A library that preserves historic elements of the theatre but in a facilty that will be embraced by all the residents. A library that will become a true showplace and example of creative reuse of a historic structure. The friends better jump on this wagon before it is too late.....too late for all the residents. If they fail to hitch on this ride, the theatre's fate has only one group that can be blamed for its demise: The Friends of the DuPage Theatre.

I'm not a zealot. Give me a break. It would seem that both you and fiscal insanity are living a fantasy. The library is going to cost tens of millions to build. Do you really think it will pass referendum? That's a pretty big gamble. Which means, if it doesn't pass, what do you think will go in it's place on that corner? As residents, shouldn't we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan? Shouldn't everything be laid to bare so that we know exactly what we're looking at? What you're proposing is pretty far fetched...have you asked the park district what they want to do with the library building once they own it? I've heard they want a "fitness center" there. That would mean, no outdoor concert venue or arts center. Actually, I think public hearings on the matter would do the town good. That way, even the ideas you bring to this board would have the proper forum to be heard---the right all of us have. I personally am not against any project that would save the theatre...

But really, in the end, the only people that can be blamed for the demise of the DuPage Theatre are the Lombard Village Board members who voted that way.

Did she really just say that "as residents, shouldn't we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan" and "public hearings on the matter would do the town good"

Boy Deb, you are starting to sound like the rest of us.. How come you didn't feel that way about the condo building you wanted to build that was higher and bigger than codes would allow and would have required millions of OUR allotted TIF dollars?

You also refer to the library as a "pretty big gamble". This from someone who spent a paragraph telling us about how life is full of risks and even though we thought the theatre was risky we should support it! C'mon Deb - move on and start thinking library. I think the theatre, or part of it, may be able to be saved as part of the library. How creative and useful is that? Either as a theatre or as part of the library itself? Can you imagine sitting in the audiotorium with the starry sky ceiling above us choosing or reading a good book? How about the old ticket booth used to sell tickets to the childrens shows and reading programs the library has?

I don't think the Friends are at fault for the theatres demise. I think Lombardians apathy was a huge factor BUT since the June 2 vote, I think the Friends have been self-destructing, especially the board meeting antics.

Either way - I have a feeling that demolition will take place before November and that is going to come fast. Time to get serious.

Did she really just say that "as residents, shouldn't we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan" and "public hearings on the matter would do the town good"

Boy Deb, you are starting to sound like the rest of us.. How come you didn't feel that way about the condo building you wanted to build that was higher and bigger than codes would allow and would have required millions of OUR allotted TIF dollars?

You also refer to the library as a "pretty big gamble". This from someone who spent a paragraph telling us about how life is full of risks and even though we thought the theatre was risky we should support it! C'mon Deb - move on and start thinking library. I think the theatre, or part of it, may be able to be saved as part of the library. How creative and useful is that? Either as a theatre or as part of the library itself? Can you imagine sitting in the audiotorium with the starry sky ceiling above us choosing or reading a good book? How about the old ticket booth used to sell tickets to the childrens shows and reading programs the library has?

I don't think the Friends are at fault for the theatres demise. I think Lombardians apathy was a huge factor BUT since the June 2 vote, I think the Friends have been self-destructing, especially the board meeting antics.

Either way - I have a feeling that demolition will take place before November and that is going to come fast. Time to get serious.

Did she really just say that "as residents, shouldn't we all be given a choice, with the price tags to go along with each plan" and "public hearings on the matter would do the town good"

Boy Deb, you are starting to sound like the rest of us.. How come you didn't feel that way about the condo building you wanted to build that was higher and bigger than codes would allow and would have required millions of OUR allotted TIF dollars?

You also refer to the library as a "pretty big gamble". This from someone who spent a paragraph telling us about how life is full of risks and even though we thought the theatre was risky we should support it! C'mon Deb - move on and start thinking library. I think the theatre, or part of it, may be able to be saved as part of the library. How creative and useful is that? Either as a theatre or as part of the library itself? Can you imagine sitting in the audiotorium with the starry sky ceiling above us choosing or reading a good book? How about the old ticket booth used to sell tickets to the childrens shows and reading programs the library has?

I don't think the Friends are at fault for the theatres demise. I think Lombardians apathy was a huge factor BUT since the June 2 vote, I think the Friends have been self-destructing, especially the board meeting antics.

Either way - I have a feeling that demolition will take place before November and that is going to come fast. Time to get serious.

The condo project was presented to the Village Board by the DuPage Theatre Foundation---as requested by the Village. The Friends did not bring the plan forward, but we do support it. Dupe neighbor, if the library goes on that corner, there will be no TIF dollars to be had. The only way to get TIF is to have a tax generating building there. That's not the definition of a library.

The Friends are not self-destructing. We're as committed as ever to save the theatre. Again, if you hold up a library project against the RSC plan (which only has a height variance necessary at this point), let the community decide which would be better---and go from there. The RSC plan, no matter how you may try to twist it, will NOT raise property taxes. The library will---no matter where it is built. That's a fact. TIF money used on the theatre could only be used there because of how the TIF works. That's a fact. Do you want your property taxes to go up even more than they are now?

Yes, life is a gamble. But the the odds are completely against us with regards to a property tax increase for a new library at that corner. With the RSC plan, the risk to this town is little to none---with HUGE returns on investment.

Demolition before November. Interesting that you have that feeling...

The foundation and the Friends are mostly the same people and you know it but it doesn't matter... As far as the library goes on that corner what's the big concern about TIF? TIF is not designated solely for renovating old theatres but all business. If the voters vote to pay for the library there and you can get the theatre incorporated into it, why wouldn't that be ideal? Besides, what if the library/theatre could incorporate some retail so TIF could be used but not at the unprecedented levels the RSC plan wanted to?

You mentioned how the public should decide between the library and the RSC plan - How? Could it be...referendum?

The library will cost money, the library will cost money. Here we go again. My answer? The voters will decide, the voters will decide. I'm happy with that - how bout you? I will vote to support a tax increase for the new library especially with some retail and a parking garage to generate taxes. I honestly feel that would be the best for our downtown, if the theatre or part of it can be saved too - more's the better.

Well folks, as you can see, the Friends will not pursue anything but their beloved condo/arts center plan. Their inability to see outside the box is apparent. What can you say?

"Interesting that I have that feeling"... what does that mean? Are you insinuating that I am part of some secret circle that knows something? Well, let's see one trustee already said it may be down by winter and the vote to demolish was 2 months ago. Why is November interesting? Sounds logical to me?

Honestly - I believe the RSC plan is dead. The HUGE returns on the investment you're expecting are speculative at best. If you want to keep arguing it and wasting time, go ahead. I believe it's counterproductive at this crucial time. As far as the Friends self-destructing, I'm sorry but after you and Barb A spoke, I couldn't believe the disrespect shown to the board. Even if you feel that way - how can you expect to convince them to change their minds by being rude?

What's next for the Dupe? Only time will tell, I hope someone tries the library idea. It would definitely be a win win if the voters went that way.

Sorry, I wasn't insinuating anything, Dupe neighbor. Just wondering how you got that feeling about the November demolition is all.

The Foundation and the Friends both support saving the theatre. The Foundation was instituted by the Village. The Friends are Lombard citizens who support theatre restoration. That is the difference.

Honestly, I don't know what plan is more compelling---or speculative as you put it---the RSC plan or a potential library plan. I'd love to let the voters decide. Again, we've never been opposed to referendum, you just think we've been. The previous question on the table was ILLEGAL pure and simple. If it weren't, it wouldn't have gotten thrown off the ballot, would you agree? If your side and mine got together to pose a LEGAL question, we would support the effort 100%.

Again, I have as much right to speak as anyone. I have a right to question my elected official. He's been telling untruths, quite frankly, and holding the office he does gives him credibility he is using to perpetuate the untruths. I've only questioned the figures he's spouted out to the media. And he won't give me an answer as to where his figures came from. That's all I'm asking from him. Sorry you're upset about that, but you seem quite upset about all sorts of financial figures pertaining to this project. Don't you want to know why he's saying $15 million instead of $8.5 million? That's a huge difference---and he is NOT an expert in restoration.

It's your right to stay in the shadows and take snipes at people. It's my right to stand up and ask that my elected official be held accountable for all he says and does in his position from the dais.

One more thing...parking garages burn more money than they take in. Usually municipalities have to raise taxes (usually business-related & local sales taxes) to pay for them, i.e. Naperville. Look it up!

You've never been opposed to referendum and yet you NEVER initiated one? Forget the last one you squashed...ancient history. I had nothing to do with that. What about since then? That was years ago!
I believe that was a tactical error and you're probably right, it probably is too late.

I never said you didn't have a right to speak and yes, it is our duty to question elected officials HOWEVER if you are hoping to change the minds of these same officials or appeal to the general public, I believe you went around it the wrong way. It doesn't matter if I'm upset - what about those on the fence? Do you think you helped?

For you to say I hid in the shadows and takes snipes at people shows you're a poor sport who is unable to listen to anyone with viewpoints that differ from their own. I have written 2 editorials to the newspaper with my name attached, walked door to door to talk to my neighbors about the RSC plan, signed 2 petitions and attended 2 board meetings. Two neighbors of mine spoke for the neighborhood to show our support for the defeat of the RSC plan. Does that sound like I'm in the shadows? You should be welcoming suggestions from people like me who are looking for alternatives to demolition that this town will support. Instead you imply I'm a sniping coward.

Readers of this site - you've heard my views, I would love a library/theatre. Will it happen? Who knows, but you've witnessed first hand why the problems of the Dupe here in Lombard are not getting solved. I'm not sure they ever will...

Have a great evening.

I have spent the last hour reading the posts on this page. I would suggest that those opposed to the theatre and the plan attached to it, should stay off of a restoration site. I live on the block adjacent to the theatre, which I believe qualifies me to oppose the variances requested in the RSC plan, but unless you are here to share ideas that would support the Dupage Theatre's restoration, this is not the place to rant. There is a board meeting this Thursday. Show up there and speak publicly if you have issue. Let the people registered on this site have their forum and exchange ideas. Maybe they can come up with some sound alternatives to demolition that we can all appreciate and enjoy.

And to think Ms. Dynako is the "official" communication director for the Friends of the DuPage Theatre...and as long as she continues to spout out her mistruths on the RSC plan, the "retractors" need to keep things in check. The friends and the foundation are for the most part the same. One need only look at their website to see they are tightly joined with the same message and, for the most part, the same so called leadership. The sad part is the local paper is on their side and fails to report anything other than "pro theatre" dialogue (and a few detractor Speak Outs and letters now and then). And Dupe Neighbor, you are so right. The problems of the theatre are right in the mirror of the supporters...and yet they continue to blame our Village Board.

And has been said time and time again, if egos could simply be checked at the door, the library effort is the best and last chance to make something happen. It can get it on the spring ballot for a referendum to preserve theatre components and bring a new library to the village. If this is not embraced today, the friends will soon be left with only a book of memories instead of a new place that has theatre components and a place to check out new books. Go for it friends...embrace this plan and make it work. It really is your only chance

Once again, posting against the theatre on this site does nothing to help the situation. The village board now needs to hear residents support for alternatives to the failed RSC plan. It sounds like most theatre/RSC detractors (myself included), are in support of the library at the theatre site. If we generate the same energy towards a LAMP (Library AT Main and Parkside) resolution, we can realize a complete and total victory over the RSC plan. Remember, most theatre supporters have claimed the board was acting foolishly to vote against the RSC plan by alleging the property would sit vacant for years if their plan wasn't passed.So if you are against the RSC plan, this should only be a halftime break. Get off this message board and contact your elected officials and support them on their decision and also offer your vision of what's best for Lombard in a post RSC plan.

Rumor has it the 'friends' of the theatre had their sump pump removed from the building. This building has a history of flooding. Why would they put the theatre in harm's way?

Challenger,
Your source continues to be one of bad info. We didn't have it removed.

If the city owns it, shouldn't they be the ones responsible for maintaining it until they decide what to do?

Deb, thanks for dispelling the rumor. Good luck at the August 18 meeting. How many friends are expected to talk about the same thing this time around?

Challenger,
Your source continues to be one of bad info. We didn't have it removed.

Not that you could since you don't even have access anymore....just so sad that you friends don't embrace the idea of partial restoration with the library. This weeks Lombardian was actually a little more balanced. Thank goodness the "detractor faction" is growing.

Challenger,

We know one thing is for sure...YOU won't be speaking publicly! :)

Why should I speak publicly. I have voiced my opinion to my Trustee, and an overwhelming majority agree with me.

Besides it better to watch you and your theatrics. I especially like how you ask a question and answer it with your own opinion. Keep it up though it seems to be working.

See you at the meeting :)

For months I have watched the seemingly endless bickering about this theatre. I agree with the post by Robert above. Would all you bickering anti-theatre folks get off this site. This is CinemaTreasures and not some whiney little Lomard taxpayer site. Have any of you folks in Lombard actually talked to each other, or do you just spread heresay on this site?

The question(s) that have to be asked of the friends are 1.Have the Friends done EVERY possible thing to prove the support is ther (petitions signed by LOMBARD TAXPAYERS ONLY showing support in the community for the project? 2. Have the Friends tried to work with all entities of the Vilage in a polite, rational manner? 3. Has the voice for the Friends been, honest, non-controversial and non-cofrontational towards public officals? 4. Has the voice of the Friends been a TRUE and ACCURATE representation of it's members?

When a statement such as this one "Besides it better to watch you and your theatrics. I especially like how you ask a question and answer it with your own opinion. Keep it up though it seems to be working." Is made repeatedly by people, it may be time for a change...

DupageDude I'll answer your 4 questions No, No, No, and No.
They have lied about support for 6 years now. First they said it was 5000 people. Now they say there are 1000 signs in our town showing support. Everybody knows that is a lie. That's like 1 in 10 houses or two sign per block. All one has to do is drive around town and see that the signs are scattered sporadically at best..maybe 200 total.

All one had to do is watch the August 18th Board meeting and watch one supporter who was asked to leave the podium and then chastised for being 'silly' because of his endless ramblings.

Challenger -

What was the outcome of the meeting?

Again, Deb Dynako - No plan B.

Exactly how committed to the arts are you?

You have an opportunity at compromise you and your group would prefer to flush down the toilet.

If you begin to accept reality and focus your energy on building a unique, outdoor facility on the site of the current library, you will be pleasantly surprised by how much political currency you have to spend. Instead, you're screaming for the projectionist to show the movie one more time while the ushers sweep the aisles.

Make lemonade out of lemons while you still have time.

DuPage Dude, contact me at deb.dynako@earthlink.net and we can talk off board if you'd like.

Challenger, nothing you've ever said has been truthful as far as I can tell. You have no credibility on this board. It's easy to throw mud all day long when you're standing in the shadows.

Fiscal Insanity; It was just a normal Board meeting, nothing about the theatre was on the agenda seeing that they already voted on the theatre in June. But the 'friends' paraded another group of people up to the podium during public participation to talk about the same old stuff. One friend suggested we tear everything down and sell-out...the Village President cut his ramblings short and called him 'silly'.

Deb nothing I say has been truthful?!?!? Please wasn't it you who stretched the truth about the 4500 signatures? List what I haven't been truthful about.

Here's a news article from today's local paper about the Dupe

http://www.libertysuburban.com/story.php?sid=15841&pub=4

Says Ms. Lippig of the Friends..."There is something we're working on -- that looks tremendously promising," she said, noting it is not a financial solution but one that both Cronin and former Senate President James "Pate" Philip are helping restoration activists craft behind the scenes. "We are working on a strategy, and it's a very good one. I think it's going to happen, but I couldn't get him to see or understand that."

The only strategy the friends should be working on now is to build public support for a library at Main & Parkside that incorporates components of the theatre lobby and facade. Otherwise all their denial and attacks will simply lead to demolition...then they have no one to blame but themselves when the bulldozers come.

DebDupe,

As I noted above, the idea of constructing a library and using the facade of the old theatre is an intriguing one. The marquee could be retained and used for community announcements. A small auditorium, which could be used for showing classic films (yes "films" not "videos"), could be incorporated into the design of the new library. Another room could have historical exhibits and photographs of other movie palaces. If one "thinks outside the box", the possibilities are endless.

I finally saw this theatre from the METRA Union Pacific West Line yesterday. I saw how run down it looks and I saw the safety fencing around it. I always wondered why someone like Classic Cinemas never jumped at the chance to own the DuPage. Other cities along the same METRA line have cinemas that are doing well (The York in Elmhurst; the Glen Art in Glen Ellyn; the Lake in Oak Park). Why hasn't Lombard made a go of the DuPage (before it became too rundown?

From what I have been told; Classic Cinemas said the building was in too much disrepair and they said it was not fiscally viable. Apparently other private ventures felt the same way.

I have contacted the Friends of the Dupage Theatre about working with them to preserve a good portion, or even all of the theatre as part of a new library plan. They are unwilling to make any concessions at this time. The promenade lobby which is arguably the most impressive and least deteriorated section of the building would make an awesome entrance into a new public library. It could also serve as an excellent place to showcase historical items, photos and paintings. On a united front, current theatre supporters and detractors to the restoration plan could accomplish almost any objective. The taxpayers are ready for anything that is different and forward moving. I would ask those that frequent this site because they have lost a theatre in their home town, to encourage the Lombard Friends to put their pride aside and compromise. Wouldn't a compromise set a great example for the children of Lombard?

Presumably, the proximity of the Rice cinemas at the same time would also have to do with that decision, but I can see why you'd convieniently ignore that.

To be more specific, the Friends are unwilling to forgo restoration of the adjacent shoppes in a library/theatre plan. For those of you that are not familiar with the property, the shoppes are the biggest contributor to the "eyesore" issues that most detractors have. They are not historical by any means and most people wouldn't live there as a dog. If the shoppes were peeled off, there may be some realistic options of saving some or all of the theatre in the new and inevitable library plan. I'll never understand why people consumed with such great passion for the theatre can't consider compromise. Nobody from my side of the issue will push a combo theatre library plan unless the Friends jump on board. It's the only chance they have. Somebody from this site needs to talk sense into them.

Indeed it would set a great example but don't count on it anytime too soon....that would make too much sense. Given the shenanagins of late with false accusations of back room deals and other nonsense, the "friends" will likely create a human chain to block the bulldozers come demolition day. It truly is sad that when the olive branch of community wide cooperation gets immediately snipped by the narrow minded theatre supporters. Blame the detractors and website creators all you want but the only ones to blame in the end are the Friends themselves.

For starters, it would help if we stopped antogonizing them with phony handles like DebDupe. Go ahead and post your real name. It will only help the issue. I believe those that are truly advocates of the theatre will eventually face reality and jump on board. Let's help them make working with us somewhat palatable.

Ms. Lippig needs to back away from the Kool Aid. It sounds like Trustee Sebby made it perfectly clear that the matter is closed. He called a meeting to give her an opportunity to have some say regarding what ends up at the site once demolition takes place. She thought it was a chance to talk about another grand fantasy that does nothing to resolve the financial issues. According to the article, Sebby says the "Friends" cooked their goose during the Board meeting by lashing out at individuals.

Time is running out. Will the Friends of the DuPage come back to earth and accept a compromise? That's about the only hope they have, barring a bailout from Springfield.

Of course, the ONE thing left the Friends have't done that might work, they REFUSE to do, and that is a petition dive of REGISTERED LOMBARD voters! If the Trustees are sworn to represent their citizens, and the citizens vote FOR the Theatre project, how could they vote no? Would a overwhelming majority in favor send a strong message to the Board, as well as the State and the detractors? Alas, like all good things, this too must come to an end, and that's where, to me, it looks like this is going unless some BIG changes happen...AND SOON!!!
Let's face it, the library referendum didn't pass last time, and if you add in the theatre costs, the price tag goes up again. The detractors want people to think they want to save "parts" or the entire theatre--read how they change their tune, showing no TRUE interest in the theatre. WHat the forsee is knocking down the theatre "for the new and improved library" they will say. But here comes the referendum to pay for the library. It fails...AGAIN and the Village is left with an empty lot. Their next move will be to sell it to a convienent developer who just happens to have a development plan ready and waiting. True karma would be for a high-rise apartment building on the site-oops, sorry Charlotte residents, the Village just improved all their variances AND extended the TIF for them...NOW WHO WINS, LOMBARD???

The library at the theatre site has been discussed for the past few years. Only now has the library board "officially" thrown it's hat into the theatre game. The residents want a new library. The last referendum failed not on the basis of need for a library but based on the flawed plan that was presented to the voters. The library survey of residents proves that an overwhelming majority of residents support a new downtown library. The scenario as presented by "DuPage Dude" is so full of holes...typical of "friend-like think". If the Dupe site was so coveted by some "convenient developer" why would the village waste yet another year or more going round and round with the library board and placing the issue on the spring ballot? If this site was so coveted it would have been SOLD years ago and a new development already done or at least forthcoming (without the theatre). Lombard WINS with a library/theatre plan more than they ever would with the Friends/RSC plan. The Friends better jump on the "library train" today before the last car leaves....or it could really derail their theatre dreams.

Mr.Difino's statements on this website are very strange and puzzling.Mr.Difino states "I would suggest that those opposed to the theatre and the plan attached to it, should stay off a restoration site." Yet Mr.Difino had made 4 additional statements and has made 4 additional posts.Strange.
Mr.Difino states " I have contacted the friends of the dupage theatre about working with them to preserve a good portion or even all of the theatre as part of a new library plan."
Strange.
Lombard has oficially stated that it will reject ALL federal and state grants issued to restore the theatre.
Does Mr.Difino expect the voters of Lombard to vote for the restoration of the Dupage Theatre as part of a library referendum?
Especially after refusing all grants.
I believe that Mr.Difino has pubilicy stated that he is against using TAX dollars for the restoration of the Dupage Theatre.
A referendum to restore the theatre as part of the library would surely be using TAX dollars.
Very strange.
Maybe Mr.Difino could clarify his statements.

Duper Supporter, Why don't you give me a call? I'm in the book. Perhaps I can help you understand because you sound very confused. Although you failed to post your name, I have a feeling I know who you are. I find it "strange" that you don't have the testicular virility to use your name. Maybe that's why your plan failed.

It's sad that you folks have to use this board to attack each other.

As some one who has read Robert DiFino's posts on this and other sites, I would have to recomend that people not attempt to reason/debate with him. I suspect that this guy isn't all there upsatairs. He has made comments almost threatening theatre supporters, wanting to meet the "out on a street corner" to "talk" out differences, then complains about how the Friends treat people. He has put up posts aranting about he can't work with people who "lie and stretch the truth" thenhe changes the post to simply read "Strange"...Yeas he is! One minute he is ranting and raving, the next minute he is wanting to sit down with the Friends to "work out differences" and "see if a compromise can be reached". Doesn't sound too balanced to me...

Street corner? I won't waste my time responding to that. You people make it very hard for anyone opposed to your viewpoint to even consider working with you. By the way, I live about 250 yards from the theatre property. I believe I'm fully vested in this issue and have a right to vent my frustration when lies are told publicly that could impact my neighborhood. Much like the last post by Dupage Dude (a Friend of the Dupage Theatre) they don't always do that.

By the way, I continued to post on this board because I thought I could work with the Friends to preserve some or all of the theatre under a different plan. The last couple of posts made by their leadership (Duper Supporter and Dupage Dude) tell me I'm wasting my time. So, I guess there is no reason to visit this board anymore. Bye all.

There you go preservationists - you get a first hand look at why the "grand lady" is comin down. A neighbor of the Dupe posts about urging the Friends to embrace the library/theatre idea before it's too late and he gets attacked by 2 of the Friends - Duper dork and DuPage Dud. They call him a thug and say he's "strange". Way to go guys! You serve your cause well. Keep up the excellent PR - embrace the neighbors, building that excellent "grass roots" movement. NOT!

There is one group to blame for the downfall of the Dupe..."friends" like these. "With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"

By the way - Sept. 1 village board meeting is going to authorize demolition contract bids to be taken. I hope you're having fun with your verbal volleyball games on this website when you should be working to save the structure for use in the library plan. You won't and that's too bad - the old Dupe deserved better than the likes of you to save her.

I didn't see the names "dupersupporter" or "dupage dude" anywhere on the Friends website, www.dupagetheatre.net so how could we be "leadership"? See, you just proved my point! This is the second or third time you siad you weren't posting on here anymore. Take your bat and ball and go home! "I thought I could work with the Friends to preserve some or all of the theatre under a different plan" When did you become the Village of Lombard? why should the Friends want to even be considered in a plan that MIGHT save "parts" of the Theatre. That's pointless!

I'm STILL waiting to see a referendum from the Friends, or even any positive movement besides accusing VOL of things. I DO NOT want to talk off-board to any one, I want to see the responses on here for all the world to see!!!

I still want to know where the Friends referendum is? It looks like NOTHING is going on!!!

What is with you people and your hang-up on referendums? I posted back in mid-June, "Well, for one thing, there IS NO November election. For another, if there were, petitions would be due the first week of July. And even if there were, it would likely be too late." Petitions for the next filing period cannot even be circulated until a month from now! So, please, enough of your red herrings. There's no reason why you should expect to be seeing a referendum NOW, and one minute of research would tell you that. You want to see a referendum? What's stopping you from making one?

Dude-

I NEVER said I wasn't going to post anymore - that was Mr. Difino.

Also - give me a break, like you would find the screen names "duper supporter" or "dupage dude" on the Friends website! You could be anyone of the leadership - maybe not.

We agree on 2 fronts - referendum was essential for the Friends and they have not done it. They have only antagonized the board. Also, those of us who want to save the theatre as part of the library may have to go to the village ourselves. Then the Friends can declare a total and complete failure in their efforts to save the theatre. What a shame.

Perhaps those of you outside of Lombard can persuade them to swallow their pride and move on to talks of the library. It is their ONLY hope!

Someone explain this to me: I was recently told that this building has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 1987. If that's the case, isn't it afforded some sort of protection?

Only from State or Federal projects.

It is on the National Register of Historic Places since 1987. Somebody needs to explain how a 59 year old (in 1987)building got put on the list in the first place.

The minimum age for a building on the National Register is 50 (and even that can be waived in extraordinary cases). Criteria here.

What??? No bickering today ,or for a couple days?I was starting to get used to it.

The bickering will be back big time come Thursday September 1st. The board agenda includes formal rejection of the Save Our Treasures grant and the unfunded Illinois FIRST funding (which is state dollars from a broke state program that has not paid out a penny to any group in years despite political promises of the "pork").

The fact of the matter is the game is over..the supporters can bicker back all they want but the truth is it is over and done. Sad turn of events give the compromises put forth in the past several weeks but then it always was the "egos" of the friends that pushed them into this corner of demolition looming within days.

Challenger, as Rick has said, the minimum age for a building being listed is 50. I know of several buildings that have had the age limit waived. The Fox Theatre in St. Louis was listed in 1976, when it was 47. I even know of one building that was only 30 when listed. As to Life's too short's question, listing on the National Register means nothing. There is no form of protection.

Back on August 17 I asked this question:

"Rumor has it the 'friends' of the theatre had their sump pump removed from the building. This building has a history of flooding. Why would they put the theatre in harm's way?"

We were told this was a rumor, but it turns out that this is true. A VOL employee confirmed it. Apparently it was their so-called preservation leader of the group. Strange tactics they have used.

Jez, can't this stop. This site is for preservation of theatres. If you want to continue your personal attacks on each other take it some where else. There are over 300 comments on the DuPage theatre on this site and better than half have nothing to do with preservation. One person just keeps egging the other person on. i think that both sides have made their point, let it go at that.

Just goes to show how far these "preservationists" will go to save the old lady...but with their lack of organization, class, and business smarts they have instead taken her to the black hole of eminent destruction. This despite the repeated extension of an olive branch to make good on a common goal of partial restoration (instead of total demolition). But egos and fanatical ranting and false accusations have done them in...a lesson to all that are interesting in preservation. One would quickly learn what NOT to do when trying to restore a grand old theatre...to ensure demolition follow "The DuPage Friends Guide to Theatre Restoration".

Regarding CVB comment of 8/29: I think this sort of debate is part of the preservation landscape. If it bothers an individual, I think it is the responsibility of that individual to stay off a page where such conversation takes place. There are some 11,000 theatres listed after all. Perhaps some comments get a little emotional and/or silly (I have probably offended in this manner). But I don't think this sort of debate should be discouraged.

Again I don't think its much of a debate slamming each other with the same thing over and over again. How much preservation is being accomplished with all the bickering back and forth. All has been said, move on. Take time and read all the comments there seems little left to be said, has anything been accomplished by the bickering, has any preservation taken place to save the DuPage. Was the site really created to have three fourths of the comments on this theatre bickering?

Well CVB you simply need to see the "preservationists" (aka Friends of the DuPage Theatre) website to see the real bickering. One only need to read their weekly column in the local paper to see how they continue to rant with their "fully funded plan" and "won't cost taxpayers a dime" routine. No progress on fundraising or building awareness...just continued attacks of the local politicians that fail to agree with them. Read through their so called "news" at www.dupagetheatre.net to see for yourself where the real bickering starts. You will learn lots....that is for sure.

All and well but that is not on this site and that is my point. Enough has been said from both sides so if they feel they have more bickering then let them move to another site and leave this move on to what it was created for. I think that artspeak said it very clearly what this site was created for on Oct. 18, 2004. Of the three hundred plus posts very few have kept with the tune that this site was created for.

Sometimes it takes debates such as these to come up with solutions for preservation.

This Thursday Sept 1 will be a pivotal night for the fate of the DuPage Theatre. The village board meeting has on it's agenda an item that will take them one step closer to demolition.

Will the Friends of the Theatre behave themselves and hopefully leave the door open for using part of the structure in a new library or will it be the same old song?

One comment I have to make is that a lot of the stuff we have read on this website (and other websites) posted by friends has not been 100% accurate. Their amount of support, amount of money they have, etc. have been blown out of proportion.

All one has to do is go to the top of this page and scroll down to about the 18th post from a Tribune article from 10 months ago. How about "$6.5 million" or "The first stages of the project are expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2005,...with the entire venue scheduled to be operating and self-sustaining by the end of 2007." Both statements are inaccurate as the cost has ballooned to over $8.5 million and the only to be completed by December 31 will be demolition.

All we have heard was broken promises from a group of people (the 'friends') who somebody quoted as "egos and fanatical ranting and false accusations have done them in."

Then a group of citizen's, including myself, started questioning their tactics and we are branded "anti-theatre" or even "anti-preservationist" which both are ridiculous statements. Speaking on behalf of a large group I can say we are FOR preservation, but against a taxpayer funded theatre.

CVB tell us to get off this website, why so the friends can fill your heads with more mistruths and invalid propaganda?? I am sure the creators of this website are aware of what is going on with the Dupe. I am also sure that they don't support "preservation at any costs" like the 'friends' do.

As long as this group keeps their ranting and raving, their threats, their crying, their false accusations, etc...we the majority will keep fighting against them.

One last statement, their last fundraiser was last October...11 months ago!

I really can't believe that you people continually fill this page with your fighting back and forth.

It makes both sides look amazingly childish.

Challenger --

Maybe the Friends have had to turn their focus from raising funds to saving a building the funds are supposed to be for.

Let me ask this question. Would you attend a fund raiser for a project that the Village has decided is not worth their time or effort? Would you write a check?

The facts stated by the Friends have always been truthful and in the open. They have had to be. They have been held accountable for every little thing that has happened over the last six years. Why would they "lie?" They didn't need to. This building has been worth every effort from the very beginning. You should be blaming your Village Government for constantly putting road blocks in front the volunteers efforts to save her. The latest? A demolition order. How dare you blame the Friends for the building standing vacant for six years. There are forces in the Village that I am certain NEVER wanted this project to succeed, and with the election of one trustee in May, these forces are closer than ever to achieving their goal. Had the Village gotten behind the project and supported the efforts of the volunteers, who you have continuosly spit in the faces of, we wouldn't be here at this moment squabbling about this. We may be on our way out the door to see our children performing in what one of your collegues so passionately stated on the other website as a "root canal." (That would be a dance recital to those of you who are not privy to the most talked about website on the internet.)

Give it up Challenger. It is not only getting old, but boring at the same time. Oh yeah, if you don't know it yet, your puppet strings are getting more and more visible with each of your rantings.

And, what you may not realize, is that by trying to "compromise" on a partial restoration of the theatre as part of the library, you ARE asking the taxpayers of Lombard to pay PROPERTY TAXES for restoration. Something the Friends have continuously denied doing. In fact, the RSC plan will bring funds into the Village, not burden the taxpayers. Good Luck Challenger. I hope you realize the people who you should be fighting with are the very people you are supporting...

Looks to me like Restoration Rita's been drinkin' a few too many margaritas if she believes the friends are NOT the problem. Who would support a project run by such an arrogant and self serving group? Obviously not enough people in town since support has NEVER been strong. The only thing on the side of the friends is the local paper...that has proven time and time again that the only news is the "friends" side of the theatre saga.

September 1st will go down as the day the old Dupe is finally done...no more nonsense, no more discussion, no more theatre. Period. Best thing yet for Lombard given how things have turned so sour in past few weeks. Best viewing on cable will be the theatrics the supporters pull on the board during public comment...sure hope the board members all have earplugs so they don't have to listen.

Ahhh...The bickering! I knew you still had it in you,thanks for re affirming it!

To be honest I don't believe either side in this debate. I think the people to save the theater don't have as much support or money as they claim. I defenetly don't believe the people against saving the theater. They have used the same old claims over and over and over. Then they tell us that we shouldn't believe what the "Freinds" tell us.

Here's the latest update for all:

http://www.dailyherald.com/news/dupagestory.asp?id=89217

"Backstage at the DuPage" in the local paper this week was the closest to the real truth that has ever been printed or even posted by their leaders...you are so right that the village board will finally go through with the plans to demolish the theatre and adjacent shoppes. What took so long for the reality to sink in? They are going to do it anyway...they're going to knock the DuPage Theatre down. And there is not any money being thrown away...that state money is all smoke and mirrors and the federal grant is so full of stipulations that it would hold the theatre in the grasps of the federal governnment for 50 years! And don't try to blame the village for lack of upkeep...the village should have torn it down five years ago or more. It's a good thing that the sump pump is gone for good...guess the water in the basement will help contain the dust when she goes down in one big pile of terra cottta and bricks. And the cover shots with the state senator...did you hear what he had to say? A referendum is needed...too bad it is too late for that as you already blew your chance at that a few years back.

Come one, come all! Watch the village finally do the right thing tonight...they are finally going to end this once and for all.

DebDupe
Maybe they will build a Wal*Mart for you to enjoy on the site.

DebDupe, why don't you go on a site for people that want to here that crap?

Oh and by the way, won't the demolishion literally be throwing money away?

Oh and by the way, won't the demolision literally be throwing money away?

Melders, please explain what 'money' we are throwing away.

Wow Melders...so now the "friends" words is "here that crap" (sic) as well. Glad to see you have come to your senses. And you are right, a referendum to supporters is a bunch of "crap" since that will truly prove once and for all that the "sh*t has hit the fan" once and for alll. And demolition is throwing money away? No, it is saving the village from spending millions more on a foolish and wasteful plan that is based on a false sense of reality. Dance recitals and community theatre certainly don't make for a successful venue except at taxpayers expense.

The money for demolision. Who do you think is going to pay for it? The very taxpapers you are trying to protect. And to DebDupe, I was talking about the crap you are saying, not what the "Freinds" are saying.

It's over...the trusteees voted to authorize the DEMOLITION. Sad day really since the library board member that spoke chose to read some nonsensical letter from some preservation group rather than plead her case on behalf of the library board she is supposed to represent. I think the residents deserved better...but at least there will finally be some action.

September 1, 2005, The board, which has already voted to end preservation efforts, voted on rejecting a $296,000 federal grant and a $1 million state grant that’s been frozen.

As for the Demolition, (that's with a "T" melders) the Village has $900,000 from the TIF already in the bank to pay for it. Seeing that more bricks fell off the building just days ago demolition should come easy.

So spending TIF dollars for demolision is ok, but not to save the theater. You guys make absolutly no sense!

ok, so mean demolition with a "T". Wish you had corrected me earlier.

Well the only good thing coming from this is we won't have to hear all this nonsense. Enjoy your Wal*Mart or whatever other thing you will get and live in your mediocrity of malls and multiplexes. Someday your children will regret such ignorant parents for tearing down history. Your always welcome to visit historic places in more civilized towns then Lombard.

Robert R, you are correct, there are 4 other restored theatres in a 6 mile radius we can go to, all 5 minutes away. So we won't have to hear about it anymore.

Trust me the site is not big enough for a Walmart. As far as my children are concerned, explain to me how an old crumbling building is/was "history". Nobody under the age of 10 has ever been inside this place and hardly anybody under 20 will ever remember it.

Melders, it probably won't cost more than $100K to tear down. Better to be out $100K, than $8.5 Million. Besides the Village will profit by the sale of the property.

How pathetic you so called "arm chair preservationists" are...

As has been stated time and time again if it was a VIABLE plan it would have gone somewhere other than down this path of destruction. Unless you have seen the condition of this mess on Main Street with your own eyes, you have no business commenting on the "civility" of our quaint village.

We have all kinds of crass commercialization options readily available for the children in the "Lilac Village"....the McMaple Street Chapel (with new drive up service for Big Macs), the Sheldon Peck "Holiday Inn" House(w/ free internet access), the Lowe's Lilacia Park (take your pick of any trees from our Jens Jensen designed garden center), the Little Orphan "Auntie Annies" Pretzel Shoppe right in heart of town, and of course the new Milton Bradley's "CLUE...Colonel Plum in the parlor with a candlestick" Memorial Library.

I hate to interrupt this pity party for a great theatre property but it has not been bulldozed yet. Do you realize that this property can be developed WITH a theatre, retail and some residential? Have you all given up or does anyone else choose to use the law to stop demolition? Those who know of our lawsuit against the Wheaton Grand Theatre (two suburbs away) might give Grande Venues a second look after all. We have great lawyers and a solid philosophy to not give up on lost causes. E-mail us as next week we will hold a public meeting to roll out our plans anyway! info@grandevenues.com

From today's Daily Herald:

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/searchstory.asp?id=90612

Lombard draws curtain on DuPage Theatre
Trustees reject new 11th-hour pleas to save landmark building

By Kathryn Grondin
Daily Herald Staff Writer
Posted Saturday, September 03, 2005

ADVERTISEMENT


The landmark DuPage Theatre in downtown Lombard has been denied a stay of execution, despite new pleas from a powerful former politician, preservation officials, residents and a concert promoter.

Trustees voted 4-2 late Thursday against putting the issue to voters, denied a requested six-month review period for the local historical commission and formally rejected $1.3 million in grants to restore the theater.

“As a village, we have spent five years and $560,000 … to see if this was doable,” Trustee Steve Sebby said. “After (that), what we have right now is a crumbling demolition site.”

Trustee Rick Soderstrom asked why the offers and suggestions weren’t made sooner.

“Whatever we do with this issue … it’s always at the 11th hour,” he said.

James "Pate" Philip


The votes followed two hours of public comments, both for and against the restoration.

Former state Sen. James “Pate” Philip of Wood Dale urged trustees to take another look at their options and give restoration efforts more time.

“I wouldn’t be in favor of it if I didn’t think it was a good thing for the downtown,” said Philip, whose grandfather lived on Main Street. “Put it on the ballot … and let the citizens decide. It’s a simple thing to do. It would be fair to everybody.”

Some residents echoed Philip’s comments, as did trustees Ken Florey and Greg Gron. Florey said a proposed 2002 ballot question was unfair because it was offered without a specific redevelopment plan.

“Once the building is down, there’s no turning back,” resident Tracy Humphrey said. “Let the people speak. Put a fairly written referendum on the ballot.”

Ed Durham, attorney for the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois, also asked trustees to hold off on rejecting the grants and take another look at a redevelopment proposal for the theater and surrounding property.

“It’s a viable plan. It’s not speculation. Why would you want to give up the funding … when you don’t know what you’re giving it up for?” he said.

In a Thursday letter, council President David Bahlman offered financial aid to secure the building for six months.

An Wednesday letter from Anne Haaker of the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency said the National Park Service would negotiate a shorter covenant than the required 50 years if the village pursued renovations.

Some trustees have expressed concerns with the federal grant requiring the village ensure the building is maintained for 50 years. Village President William Mueller noted the offer was made over the phone and the village had nothing official in writing from the park service, which disburses the grant.

In an Aug. 26 letter, Chicago-based concert promoters Jam Productions expressed interest in a restored DuPage Theatre.

“Jam is aware of the void in live event programming in Lombard and is extremely interested in presenting (it) and hosting private functions at the DuPage Theatre,” Jam’s Jerry Mickelson wrote.

Some residents spoke in favor of the demolition.

“I represent the silent majority who support your decision (to raze the theater),” Robert Difino said. “Just because their cause is noble doesn’t mean it is in the best interest of the village.”

“Enough is enough,” resident Jeff Mills said. “We all have fond memories of the theater. I also have fond memories of the Dog ’N Suds. The time has come for the last curtain to fall at the DuPage Theatre.”

I don't live in lombard ,but am a classic theatre devotee.Go ahead yuppies,tear it down if you wish.Make your money off of the deal.But remember,when you tear down and close down places that kids ,and young people frequent,you kind of limit their ability to stay out of trouble.Mabye they can find something else to do instead.Like drugs,sex at parents houses that aren't home,vandalism,gang banging,mabye even robbing people in the neighborhood,mabye people that have the most,like the rich or yuppies.Be careful what you wish for!,that's how it started for us in Melrose,and our neighbors in Bellwood.

Corvetteguy,

your comments are assumptions (or just stupid opinions), nobody under the age of twenty has ever been to this place. Yet we have no gang activity, very little vandalism, etc.... That has been the problem with this project from the beginning. "Build it and they will come" worked in the movie 'field of dreams' but it doesn't fly in a town where property taxes have skyrocketed, schools are running out of money, and I don't have to even mention the impending gas crisis.

Ouch!! I surrender to your vast knowledge and crystal ball.

Corvetteguy

Congrats, two straight bad comments...never claimed to have a crystal ball. You were the one who said all our children will become criminals because the theatre is coming down. If that comment had any validity our town would be one of the worst towns in the state seeing that not a single teenager alive has ever been there. The place has been closed for the last several years.

I surrender to your vast knowledge of sociologic behavior.

Corvette Guy, here's your proof, which, as the saying goes "Shall set you(Challenger) free!! From the most recent Lombardian, the local Lombard paper...

OFFICERS RESPONDED to Westmore/Meyers Road and the Prairie Path at about 2:47 p.m. after receiving a call that two subjects were drinking on the path. Officers located two subjects, who reportedly said they had been drinking earlier, but neither had alcohol on them.

A VILLA PARK TEEN was charged with unlawful possession of cannabis and a juvenile was charged with possession of tobacco by a minor at Old Grove park. Halley Kenyon, 19, was charged and released. The juvenile was charged and released to a parent.

CRIMINAL DAMAGE BY GRAFFITI was reported in the 900 block of South Main Street after spray-painted graffiti was observed on a fence.

TWO TEENS were charged with criminal damage to motor vehicle after an incident in the first block of West St. Charles Road. According to police reports, the two allegedly damaged the door and rear window of a 1997 Chevy Lumina with a baseball bat during an altercation. Jardell Woods, 17, of Chicago, and Javon Boone, 19, of Lombard, were charged and released.

FOUR LOMBARD TEENAGERS were charged with unlawful possession of cannabis at Main and Wilson. Marko Dukic, 18; Adam Valgiusti, 18; Jason Thomas, 18; and Rogelo Perez, 19, were charged and released.

A VILLA PARK TEEN was charged with unlawful possession of cannabis and possession of alcohol by a minor when officers investigated a suspicious vehicle at Westmore Woods. Phillip Brankin, 19, was charged and released.

This explains why Challenger is so confused, some one stole his ball!!!!
A SILVER GAZING BALL was stolen from the back yard of a residence in the 300 block of East Taylor. A bird bath was broken in the incident.


I apologize for having to take up all this space folks, but someone had to show Challenger for the true person he really is. These were just the first few enteries in the police blotter. Lombard also has a HUGE proplem with groups of youths (dare I say GANGS) along the Great Western Trail

Debdupe
Don't call me an "arm chair preservationist," I have been working for five years on two projects in my community to save the Forest Hills Tennis Stadium and the New York State Pavilion from the 64 Worlds Fair. The difference is I am willing to have my taxes raised to restore a historic 1920s Tudor stadium where the US Open was originally held. On the other hand you have small town mentality and worry about a few pennies of your tax dollars. Enjoy the bliss of ignorance, I guess you done know any better. You could never replace a historic theatre like the Dupage even with an unlimited amount of money. Enjoy your mediocrity.

DuPageDude, I see in my crystal ball a bulldozer plowing the building down...soon.

Every town has crime...genius...Naperville was voted the 3rd best town to live in the U.S. and look at their Police Blotter. Way bigger than ours.

Do any of those crimes sound like felonies?

I see in my crystal ball the city one day regretting their decision. This could be many years from now, but I promise you, it will happen.

Melders- I disagree. If the few historic parts of the Dupe are removed before demolition and used in the new library or retail that goes there. It will be a happy medium. These items include the ticket booth, light fixtures and some items for the historical museum (old projectors etc) I don't think there will be many regrets. Remember the Dupe was not going to be a movie theatre like the old days and believe me when I say it was in REALLY bad shape. Gaping holes in the ceilings, rot, mold, no seats. The old owner turned off the heat and the pipes exploded inside all the walls and he painted over the old mural that was on the wall. The attached apt building was completely condemnable and unsafe. I think the village was right but it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

Corvette guy - THE DUPE WAS NOT GOING TO BE A MOVIE THEATRE! If you think the dance recitals and small theater productions planned at the Dupe were going to draw teenagers, that were otherwise going to vandalize the town, then I don't think you know many teenagers. The police blotter you quoted could have come from any local paper in the country, theatre or not. The rise in drugs, sex and crime in teens comes from the breakdown of the family NOT the breakdown of old theaters. Please get a grip on reality and stop breathing in the fumes when you are restoring old theatres.

I know that the Dupe was not to be a movie theater, but it seemed to me that it was going to still be a theater. Why incorporate pieces of the theater if you do not save the facade? It also seems to me that the city is not interested in the site for the library either. What bothers me about this is it seems that there is some kind of deal going on behind the scenes. If someone was going to give the money to seal the theater for six months, why not take it? And I want someone to tell me what kind of plan had to be developed in order to save it. It seemed that every plan from various groups and developers was rejected because "it might raise taxes". It seems to me that this is not really a anti-tax issue, but an anti-theater issue.

Melders, That's the problem here, you comment "this is not really a anti-tax issue, but an anti-theater issue" is not true for most people I know.

This theatre debacle started in 1987. Then we all thought it would be saved in 1997 or 1998 with Big Ideas and everybody supported that plan, but it fell through. The rest has been like a snowball rolling downhill. First there was an ad-hoc committee and talk of $4 million, then the 'friends' came along and then the 'foundation', which one was which? Then the cost ballooned to $6 million, and then $8.5 million, which means that $10 or $12 million were not that far off.

I am not "anti-theatre"!!! All I have done was question the motives of the people in charge of fundraising. Lies, threats, name-calling, finger-pointing, just to name a few. Their last fundraiser was 11 months ago. Their other fundraisers were bringing hundreds of $$ when they needed millions of $$.

It was pure insanity, plain and simple. The Village gave then extension after extension, as one trustee put it, "this is the 11th hour, but it seems like everything about this theatre is the 11th hour." Well times up, like it or not, and unless somebody cuts a check for $8 million in the next couple of weeks, the fat lady will be performing for the last time.

It still seems that if someone was willing to cut a check, the anti-theater side would still question if they could pay for it all. I still firmly believe this is an anti-theater issue.

Melders, you are so correct! On an anti-theatre website, they are now mentioning putting condos on the site, despite their claims that the latest plan's condos are not needed nor will they sell. They have also pretty much given up on putting the library there, so what's next for the property? Despite several different groups, including the ILPA as well as JAM Productions, the largest concert/entertainment group in the area, trying to convince the Village Board that they are willing to contribute large sums of money towards the project, they still voted for demolition without telling the very people who elected them what plan they have for the site. Very suspicious to me and a lot of other people.

They have a plan, but don't want the citizens to know. I saw this same thing where I live. The mayor wanted to tear down the old city hall, because it was dangerous. In reality he just wanted a parking lot for the business he owned next door. Fortunely the council changed their demolition order and sold the building.

From today's Chicago Tribune:


Allies lose battle for DuPage Theatre

By Lyn Niemann
Special to the Tribune
Published September 6, 2005


For the historic DuPage Theatre, it seems all that's left to do is wait for the wrecking ball.

Stunning a standing-room only crowd Thursday night, the Lombard Village Board voted 4-2 to reject $1.3 million in committed federal and state funds. They'll now accept bids to demolish the theater.

Edwin Durham, who spoke on behalf of the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois, called the move "one of the most blatant acts of fiscal irresponsibility that the LPCI has ever seen."

According to many, the issue has taken a heavy toll on relationships.

"It's unfortunate that friends can't be friends," said board President William Mueller. "[This issue] seems so minor in light of everything that's going on [as a result of Hurricane Katrina.]"

Built in 1928 and designed by Rapp & Rapp, the same architectural firm that produced the Oriental Theatre in Chicago, the Spanish-themed structure in Lombard had been added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1987.

Durham was one of several representatives from various preservation agencies that begged the village to respect that designation and reconsider its decision. Eleventh-hour appeals for a six-month "cooling off period" came with offers to cover building maintenance expenses in the interim, along with an offer to revisit some of the terms of the grant, and to put the issue before voters with a referendum proposal.

However, Trustee Steven Sebby held up a stack of signed petitions and said that the village already tried to do that in 2002 and was taken to court over it. He said what the board was really rejecting was not grant money, but grant applications and that the money has never been released for its use.

"I do not like giving away money," Sebby said. "These funds were available, they couldn't even be used for any kind of mixed use ... we do not have the money. [The village] has spent $560,000 and five years to see if this was doable. And after that, what we have is an unsafe, crumbling demolition site."

However, others view this as a case of clashing egos.

"I think it's reached the level of public rancor where people have dug in and it's not reasonable," said David Bahlman, president of the landmarks council.

"Legislators, the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency and, to a certain extent, the LCPI, all of the advocates from outside of the community are trying to tell them what to do," Bahlman said. "And I think they're reacting with kind of an `it's our town. It's our property. We don't want anyone telling us what to do.'"

And in the end, an issue that has divided neighbors and board members, strained friendships and became one of those issues you don't talk about at the dinner table, appears to be drawing its final breath.

Trustee Richard Tross, whose vote paved the way for the end of an era, said he would save his big comments for the day of demolition.

"Let the healing begin," Tross said.

Again Melders, you are correct I fear! It's funny how an "outsider" can look at a situation and see right away what is going on, but these theatre detractors are being used like mindless pawns! The property owned next to the theatre is a member of the "good 'ol boys club" and with the theatre gone and the Vilage buying the property next to his, his asking price just shot up! It's very difficult to fight greed, and that's ovbiously what is going on here-they just want the theatre down. I wonder how they are going to split their spoils....

You guys talk of conspiracy theories when the real truth is quoted above; "[The village] has spent $560,000 and five years to see if this was doable. And after that, what we have is an unsafe, crumbling demolition site."

They forgot to mention that only a couple hundred people support this thing. Of that bricks are falling off a wall as recently as last week.

You sure like the falling bricks example. If the village held on to the property for 5 years, wasn't it their responsibility to secure the building and spend the few thousand basic tuckpointing would cost?

They did, the building was tuckpointed a couple years back.

Well they must not have done a good job if bricks are falling off.

not to interrupt the sniping, but people need to pay more attention to the main entry at the top of the page.

You spelt Mr Haney's name wrong

its Pat Buttram, not Butram as stated above.

Back to the sniping.

Thank you Drive Through.

Beware of DuPage Dude - he is a former friend of the DuPage Theatre who was asked to leave the organization due to bad behavior that damaged their cause. His incoherent ramblings of under the table deals and conspiracy theories are as ridiculous as he is.

The library on the property will go before the voters and many of us that support it believe it will pass. Then all the readers on this site who believe the foolish delusions of such pro-theatre people can eat a big dish of crow.

A quick e-mail to the Friends of the DuPage will show that NO member has been asked to leave the organization. This is yet another attempt to divide the organization and to provide disinformation. Apparently when people give their opinions, it upsets them greatly, as show by their last post...

I heard it from the VP himself so call him a liar if you want.

Who cares about dividing their organization at this stage?

The only thing that "upsets me greatly" are not opinions but the lies you have continually posted on this well-intentioned message board. The only MISinformation on this site comes from you.

It's inflammatory people like you who fired up a lot of anger in the neighborhood surrounding the Dupe and hurt your cause. That turned out to be one of the keys to your demise. Too bad.

I think both sides are telling lies. Both sides are so intent on their side being the side that wins that they will say anything to get attention. Take for instance the "Friends" calling council memebers names! And the other side seems stuck on the theater raising taxes no matter who renovates. I think both sides have lost site of what is at stake. It is sad that neither side is willing to corporate and save the theater.

Well Melders, here's a perfect example of the lies. If some one were kicked out of the Friends, don't you think a few thing would have happened; 1.That person's name would no longer appear on their roster? 2.The Friends would issue some sort of press release stating that fact, as well as why? 3.Some one from the Friends would come on here to announce that said person was asked to leave the group?

I am entitled to my OPINION of what is going to happen, some people get upset because they know deep down it will probably really happen. They have created a monster that is now out of control and going after the Village.

By the way, the person in question here was once nominated "Man of the Year" in Lombard...So much for inflammatory.

Here you go people, DuPageDude is a rogue member with his own agenda. He could care less about the theatre, he is just out to get a Trustee, and he uses the theatre a pawn. As far as his three points above; 1. the Friends don't update their "roster" unless they are adding people, and considering their numbers are dwindling they certainly aren't taking him off. 2. The only press releases they have are about the theatre, not some guy they do not include anymore. 3. Any Lombard resident can be nominated for "MOTY", all you have to do is fill out a form, winning is another thing though.

As a supporter of the efforts to preserve the Dupage Theatre,I read the messages that have been posted on this website.There are a lot of statements about the friends lying about their finances.I will tell you that the friends and the foundation members don't lie.
The foundation is,was and always has been under the watchfull eyes of the village board.
With the latest developments about the fate of the theatre,it is becoming apparent that the theatre restoration FOES are just GLOATING on this website.
The village board approved demolition of the structures without a plan for redevelopment.The village board approved rejecting all federal and state grants for the restoration of the theatre.There isn't much more to be done before the bulldozers come.It is a done deal for the EXECUTION of the theatre.
So what is the POINT of the anti- theatre group posting more hate on this website.
Could it be that the anti-theatre group is looking for assurances that in the big scheme of things,bringing down the theatre was the right thing to do? Are the anti-theatre group afraid that maybe later they will be be lamenting their actions?
It serves no purpose for the anti-theatre group to post messages on this website,other than to pacify their own insecurities or to spread their vengence toward those who wanted to preserve the theatre.
IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE.
They should at least respect the last days of the theatre and respect those who vigoursly kept the restoration efforts alive.

duper supporter,

respect is a two-way street, all one has to do is check yesterday's local newpaper. The people you say "who vigoursly kept the restoration efforts alive" keep bashing our local Trustees, and seem hell-bent on dividing the town.

They did not not keep the "restoration efforts alive" they just prolonged them.

It also seems to me that the anti-preservation people are hell-bent on dividing the town. After all, it takes two sides in order to divide something!

SNIPE
SNIPE
SNIPE
SNIPE

"The DuPage will not be torn down anytime soon. I can guarantee it."
posted by Paul Warshauer on Aug 4, 2005 at 7:49am

How exactly do you plan on doing that Paul?

Melder,

who are these "anti-preservation people" you speak of? Are they an organized group? Do they meet? You seem to know so much about them.

Melders are you from Lombard? Have you followed this situation for 7 years? Did you attend their last fundraiser 11 month's ago? How much $$ did you contribute?

You are one of these anti-preservation people Challenger. No they are not an organized group. As to them meeting, I don't really know. I find it funny that you seem to think I know so much about the "anti-preservation" people, when you claim to know every little detail about the "Freinds".

I have stated several times that I am not from Lombard. I am a lover of old theater and also am very interested in historic preservation. The only reason I even started posting comments was that the details of this theater's demolition where similiar to some events that are happening around my hometown.

Melders,

You don't know anything about me. I supported this project in the beginning, and I would support it again if somebody cut a check for about $9 million.

If you are such a "lover of old theater and also am very interested in historic preservation" please tell the rest of us how much you have donated to the DuPage. I have donated which makes me more of a "preservationist" than you are apparently.

Talk is cheap melders, and unless you are a Lombard taxpayer I suggest that you get your facts straight before you make assumptions.

I have donated nothing. I live about 6 hours away. I felt that since this website is a NATIONAL website for theater FANS, that I could make comments that I felt where positive. I only planned on making one comment, but after Fiscal Insanity decided to attack what I said, I made more. I can't get my facts straight because no one on this site is willing to give credible facts. I might not be a "preservationist" in your terms, and you are definenly not one in my terms. I have also stated many times that I have no problem with the city not paying for the renovation. Maybe YOU should get the facts straight as to what I have said.

I agree Melders - you have had some reasonable points about how the village should not be in the business of running the theatre and that saving portions of the theater and marquee would be better than nothing. Unfortunately, here in Lombard, none of the "Friends" group share your views. I have stated time and time again, the Friends should support saving ANY part of the building possible for future use and they refuse. A neighbor of mine who fought against the condo plan contacted a member of the Friends and offered to go before the village board together to show support for that very thing. By joining forces, they could see there was a united front about saving a portion of the building for the new library or other development. They flatly refused. They really wanted preservation their way and were unwilling to go about it any other way. Personally, I believe it was about pride for them. That's too bad. I am continuing to support preservation of those items and have written the board about it. Only time will tell.

Melders,

I have your facts straight on what you have said. I never questioned you on your opinion of the city not paying for it. But why do you attack me all the time? Your opinions of me are all wrong. There are thousands of people who support my same opinions and only a couple dozen who don't.

All one has to do is scroll up and read Deb Dynako's comments. I questioned quite a few of her comments and statements, discovered that her statements were incorrect or inaccurate, and now she soesn't even post here anymore.

I could list all the 'friends' inaccuracies, but I already have. This group in charge of preservation has dropped the ball. Demolition of this building can be (and will be) squarely blamed on them. All they have done for the last 4 months is point the finger at everybody else. They know it is coming down and they want to save face.

Melders do you think a group that has NOT had a fundraiser in 11 months, and has turned to name-calling, threats, lies, and bashing our local politicians should be defended by you? Or should local citizens and taxpayers, who in their very right to do so, be able to question their tactics?

They "Friends" should take part of the blame, as should the city. While I do not agree with the "Friends" tactics I still must support there goal. As for their inaccuracies, I'm sure there are some, but I don't believe I can trust you to tell me every one of them. As to not having a fundraiser, how can you have one when the city is going to tear the building down anyway? No one wants to donate to a project that isn't going to happen.

I STILL (and always will) believe that had the Friends done a petition drive door-to-door of taxpayers in the Districts where the Trustees voted against the theatre proposal, the outcome would have been different. Even with the fact that it would not be binding, it would show that support IS there for the project and some Trustees would have sum 'splaining to do!!! I think even the Board was surprised that they didn't. The petition drive they did do was open to anyone, and was difused with a single question...How many live in Lombard that signed? The Friends thinking was that people from all over will comee to the Theatre, but in actuality, it's some of the ones in Lombard that would count.
Speaking of counting, I think that by voting NOT to save ANYTHING from the Theatre, Trustees are counting on voters to NOT remember the DuPage come election time. I think they will be very surprised when "Remember the DuPage" becomes a rally crime similar to "Remember the Alamo". I hope that they aren't depending on that big Trustee salary to support themselves!!!

Melders, the Theatre was voted down in June, there was plenty of time between October 2004 and June 2005 to have fundraisers, but as someone tied to their group was once quoted "why have fundraisers when the taxpayers will foot the bill." We can agree to disagree.

Dupagedude, there is no way to get a referendum for November and April 2006 is the only chance to do that. The friends will find some way to extend it and get it thrown off the ballot while they search for ways to get $$$. 2005 turns into 2006..then 2007. Now we are talking ten years (really 20), The building won't hold out that long.

As far as the voters are concerned, two just got voted in and have 3 years to go. Last election 2 of 3 Trustees and Village President ran unopposed. My guess is that their political careers won't be effected too much. Besides only 5% or 6% of registered voters signed their petition.

Instead of quoting something out of context on this websute too, why don't you post the ENTIRE quote? I believe what was said was something along the lines of "IF THE VILAGE IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE ENTIRE CONVENTION CENTER WITH TAX DOLLARS, MAYBE IT'S TIME SOMEBODY SAID WHY HAVE FUNDRAISERS WHEN..." that's pretty close, if you have part of it, why not print all of it, otherwise IT HAS NO VALIDITY (that means it's not true).
See, you people miss my point!!! I'm not talking about a referendum!!! I DIDN'T EVEN USE THAT WORD. I SAID PETITION DRIVE!!!!All I'm saying is that if an overwhelming majority signs that they are in favor of the theatre project (and they would), how can the Trustee that took an oath to represent them vote no?
If a Trustee just got voted into office, how could they vote on such an important issue right away, especialy one with no alternative? Seems like they don't have all the facts, unless that is, they listen to their people the way Sebby listens to his. As usual, you underestimate the people of Lombard. Once there is a oversized towering office building or condo there, or some faceless generic cookie-cutter building just like every other town, people will realize what they lost, and will not be happy about it. As well as there will be a large group of people out there to remind them what they could have had! Melders knows, he's unconected to the situation and he's warning Lombard about what they are doing, and a lot of other politicans and restoration experts are doing the same thing, so just wait...

By the way, it's AFFECTED, not EFFECTED. Read more grammar books on break at Mickey D's instead of comic books!!!

DuPageDude...By the way it's 'website' not 'websute'...what a genius you are!!!

Oh and it's 'Village' not 'Vilage'
Oh and it's 'especially' not 'especialy'
Oh and it's 'unconnected' not 'unconected'
oh and it's 'politicians' not 'politicans'
Who need the grammar books now?

An "overwhelming majority"...what are you smoking? 60 people showed up for their rally and there are only about 100 signs up in a town of 44,000. How could you say an overwhelming majority? Grasping for straws aren't we.

By the way, DuPagedude is our local Village Idiot...even though he moved out of our Village in a bit of shame...after his political career went down the toilet. Now he has a agenda, and it's not really the theatre. He just uses it as a pawn.

As quoted above:

"Beware of DuPage Dude - he is a former friend of the DuPage Theatre who was asked to leave the organization due to bad behavior that damaged their cause. His incoherent ramblings of under the table deals and conspiracy theories are as ridiculous as he is."

My Dear Challenger,

Been too busy to squak at you, but see you're still enjoying yourself on this site. Melders has been holding to my position quite well, thank you. As are all the other preservationists on this site. But just as it doesn't pay to speak to the four trustees---using nice words or calling them out on the mistruths they've spun for public consumption---it wastes my time jousting with you. If a public official gets a bit hot for hearing the truth from one of his constituents, yes me, then he shouldn't hold the seat. The decision these four trustees have made is one that they should be ashamed of. But they're not. They threw a lot of money away, but they don't care. They blacklisted the town of Lombard, and made many residents angry. Wait until they see what a bulldozer does to their political careers...

Now Challenger, you may have to fill your day with negative postings. But I don't. Got more important stuff to do right now.

Thanks for your concern on this issue.

Sincerely, Deb Dynako

My Dear Challenger,

Been too busy to squak at you, but see you're still enjoying yourself on this site. Melders has been holding to my position quite well, thank you. As are all the other preservationists on this site. But just as it doesn't pay to speak to the four trustees---using nice words or calling them out on the mistruths they've spun for public consumption---it wastes my time jousting with you. If a public official gets a bit hot for hearing the truth from one of his constituents, yes me, then he shouldn't hold the seat. The decision these four trustees have made is one that they should be ashamed of. But they're not. They threw a lot of money away, but they don't care. They blacklisted the town of Lombard, and made many residents angry. Wait until they see what a bulldozer does to their political careers...

Now Challenger, you may have to fill your day with negative postings. But I don't. Got more important stuff to do right now.

Thanks for your concern on this issue.

Sincerely, Deb Dynako

My good buddy Deb,

Welcome back! You must have been out fundraising!

You say you agree with Melders, like when he said the 'friends' should be partly held responsible AND that he didn't agree with your current tactics (Scroll up 9 posts please).

Perhaps you should attempt this strategy: Because your group has burned way too many bridges, restoration of the theatre has a slim-to-none chance, and slim has walked out the door. The "friends" should step down, let Florey and Gron (pro-theatre trustees) appoint a new panel made up of new Lombard taxpaying residents, mix it up with people on both sides of the fence. No ex-friends! Put engineers, lawyers, Charlotte St. residents, construction people, artist, singers, whatever else, a mix of people.

Lay their simple agenda out for them, give them 30, 60, 90 (whatever) days to come up with a new plan, one that doesn't rely so much on tax dollars. A plan that meets current code. If they come up with a solution, the theatre gets saved, if not then the inevitable happens. This strategy works. It gives the theatre one last chance, which it will not have with the current regime in place.

Face it, your group stinks. Six years of Egans dreadfully boring speeches, your unprofessional theatrics (asking and answering you own questions...please!), Alvarado's threats of lawsuits, and Kramer's silence speech. You 'friends' make me and everybody else in town chuckle. You have lost respect and now the theatre is doomed. You failed miserably, that's a fact.

Drop your giant ego's, quit blaming other people, and stop with the political threats. All one has to do is read your latest post and see what the 'friends' current agenda is....cover your own a*s, and find a fall guy.

Deb Dynako,
If you read the response to you from the post above you should get the picture.All of his remarks just give him away.
Beware.He talks like the same trustee who has fought for the last 7 years for the destruction of the theatre.He talks about giant ego's.
Look who is calling the kettle black.
Read his words.No respect for an elder(Mr.John Egan)who has given so much to historical preservation.
Now he wants to give another 30,60,or 90 days to come up with a new plan.WHY THE CHANGE OF HEART?
The reality is that there is no change of heart towards the theatre.
There is only gloating.There is also a foreboding about the vote to execute the theatre.
Beware of who you respond to on this website.

No gloating here duper supporter, the theatre is on life support and the plug is about to be pulled. The Village is taking demolition bids and the bulldozers are weeks away.

I am giving you an alternative, the 'friends' failed. Look around the business world, or the sports world, if the leaders in charge fails then it's time for new leaders. All the 'friends' have done the past couple months is:
1. Tout useless statistics about signatures and signs, and then lie about their numbers.
2. Attack anybody who is against it.
3. Resort to name-calling.
4. Threaten local politicians and their careers.
5. Fill the local newspaper with opinions and mistruths.
6. and bring the same 18 people to each Board meeting to ramble, cry, and whine about the same issue over and over again.

If this were a football team they would have finished the season 2-14...a couple small victories but a failed season. After 7 years with the same regime in charge maybe it's time for fresh ideas.

I will wait until the next village board meeting and listen to your presentation on how you are going to give the theatre people another chance at the preservation and restoration.Should make for interesting listening.Maybe you can explain away the formal refusal of all federal and state grants.Maybe you can explain THE CHANGE OF HEART.
Since your resolution to demolish was passed,you will have to formally rescind that resolution.
Good luck.I will support you.You have the ball now.

I don't go to the Board meetings. Out of fear from getting trashed by you and your 'friends' group. All one has to do is read other post here by 'friends' such as yourself.

I am not talking about giving the 'friends' another chance, I am talking about giving the Theatre another chance. That's the funny thing about your group, you think it is YOUR theatre, even though it belongs to the Village, and its residents. That is the problem with your egotistical group, you want all the glory, but won't take any of the blame.

The resolution to demolish the Theatre was not MINE, it belonged to the Trustees and was voted on by them. I think you have me mistaken for somebody else.

What is this "CHANGE OF HEART" you keep talking about? I, for one, have questioned the 'friends' from the beginning. The 'friends' should disband, and let another group of residents give it one last crack. You failed miserably. Accept it, but you won't. Instead you will whine and cry at this week's Board meeting, and then there will be some stupid last attempt by your group to save it, perhaps chaining yourselves to the Theatre to stop the bulldozers. That is your only alternative at this point.

Challenger,

You still make me giggle with your "knowledge" of the "facts."

Why don't you head the new team to save the DuPage. You and your buddy Biddle! He has Sebby's ear. Maybe he can reason with him. There are four other historic buildings in this town slated to be demolished, maybe you can help him have a change of heart on those, too.

You say you don't want to show yourself in public for "fear" of getting "trashed." Look at all the nefarious things you've said about people who have in good faith, tried to save this building? The Friends took the direction the Village prescribed and did what they were asked. And when those criteria were met, the goalposts were moved back. It's not that we're a bad team, it's just that we've been playing on unlevel ground. I take your words against our efforts as an affront to preservation of this building. And, your donation of buying a glass of lemonade so long ago does NOT make you a supporter.

Egotists? Not me nor mine. Again, it's so easy to snipe at people from behind aliases. At least Bob DiFino stood up (although I don't agree with his statistics---using 44,000 as a population number but saying kids didn't have the right to sign the petition!) Be a man and make your recommendations to the board this Thursday for all to see!

BTW, I haven't made any threats against anyone. Or name called---although, you HAVE! :) If your political representative is not doing the job you'd like him to do, you find a replacement (we just saw this happen with the FEMA director). People in politics know that if they don't do the people's will, there will be repercussions. That's a political reality, not a threat. If the trustees that made the demolition vote think that that was a good move politically, then I guess we'll just have to see what happens in the next election.

Please Challenger, you're not really involved in this process, so since you've "won" why don't you stop haunting this site and go back to your own.

Best wishes on new "challenges", Challenger.

~Deb

Well then,since you (Challenger )don't go to village board metings
and you are not a village trustee,please explain just how you are going to "give the theatre another chance."
Please explain just how you could rescind the vote to demolish the theatre.
Please explain just how you could rescind the vote to reject all federal and state grants that the village was awarded for the restoration of the theatre.
You (Challenger) said "I am talking about giving the theatre another chance".How are you going to rescind the vote to demolish?Please answer that,because that is what is going to have to happen.
Maybe you should go to the village board meetings and express your desires to give the theatre another "chance".I am sure it would make excellent listening.
Just go before the village board and ask the board to rescind the vote to demolish the theatre and give the the theatre "another chance".

Best wishes on debut performance before the village board.

Deb, "nafarious" nice choice of words :)

You comment about the goalpost was good too. I'll give you credit that perhaps hard work and long hours were put in. But your battle was an uphill battle from the beginning. I just did not agree with the direction your group took. Disagree with me all you want, but what do the 'friends' have to show for it??? A date with the wrecking ball?

You also say I am "not involved with the process," I say you are very wrong. The Theatre is as much mine as it is yours. The theatre does not belong to the 'friends', it belongs to all of Lombard. Which means we all get a say in it. In my book that is an egotistical comment.

I offered an alternative solution, to form a new panel. I just thought of the idea the other day. If it stinks, then so be it, but your group has not had any alternatives. Quit wasting time because the clock is ticking.

And Deb, I have not "won" anything, and that is not my goal. I am not gloating. I offered an opinion.

( p.s duper supporter I do not respond to your whining.)

The date with the wrecking ball had nothing to do with the work of the Friends and everything to do with Steve Sebby's resolution to demolish, followed by Dick Tross, "Jack" O'Brien and Rick Soderstrom's vote to carry out the travesity.

Challenger, I've just read your other site, and there you're not the guy you're portraying yourself to be on this site. You ARE gloating. My impression of you now is that you're the type of guy who loves blood sport, but then shows a tinge of remorse when someone actually dies. "Oh, that's too bad. He should have blocked that sucker punch..."

Deb, again you are dead wrong. On the other site all we do is snipe with you buddy, devitt. He has been posting under alias' stirring the bees nest for all of 2005. He seems to be the only 'friend' who posts on that site, and has a 100% inaccuracy rate.

Nice to know you visit that site often.

I will miss the theatre, but I won't miss you and your crew crying and whining at every Board meeting.

Who's "crying and whining?" We want the theatre. We get up and speak on the theatre's behalf every meeting. We've shown that we are dedicated to the cause of preserving this building. It takes a lot of time, effort and character to stand up for what you believe in. What have you done besides hide behind your alias and snipe on this and your own website?

If the theatre is yours, and I agree that it is, then you should want it saved, for anything else that goes in its place will not be yours---unless the library referendum passes, a snowballs chance in the down-below.

I don't go to your other site "often." I don't have that kind of time to waste. I just wanted to know if anything you say here reflects what you say there. And it doesn't. It would be interesting if you proposed your new "plan" on that site and see the reaction you got from your fellow "bloodlusters." Nothing said on that site has ever been nice with regards to the theatre. And so my dear, Challenger, hang up your half-witted prose on this site, and go back to the folks who are so proud of you.

:)

Think it is high time for Ms. Dynako to get off her high horse...and come to her senses. The theatre demolition is the will of the people and not just four trustees. If the will of the people was to indeed save it an any cost you would see support all over town. That is simply not the case. Game over, friends lost.

And don't go doubting the library efforts...just because you and your failed crew (and lone library "friend") will do anything to curtail the library plan, the residents will at least be given a chance to vote via referendum. That never happened with the theatre games. Your so called widespread support to save the theatre is not there...unless you count the couple dozen of you that continue with the same "fully funded plan" spin and the "we turned down $1.3 million in funding" (funding that was NOT real)nonsense and the berating of the board by continually questioning their integrity. And then of course the one sided "reporting" by the local tabloid..can't even call it a newspaper anymore since it fails to report the real story time after time.

The majority of residents applaud the efforts of the trustees to finally move forward...even if it is a step backwards by demolishing the historic building. Progress is what it is.

What is very intriguing is that if you do a profile on this challenger identity by clicking on his post name,he lists his favorite theatres as #1Dupage Theatre.#2Glen Art Theatre.#3 Tivoli Theatre.#4Wheaton Grand Theatre.
Wouldn't you think that a person (challenger)who lists his #1 favorite theatre (that has a date with the wrecking ball and is on the national registery of historical places and is in his own home town) would be upset with the decision to demolish it.One would think that he would be working as hard as he could to save his #1 favorite theatre.
I offer an alternate solution to this challenger person.
Since you claim the dupage theatre your favorite,then get involved in an alternate solution to save it.
If your alternate stinks,then so be it.

A quote from the last post.
"The majority of residents applaud the efforts of the trustees to finally move forward....even if it is a step backwards by demolishing the historic building.Progress is what it is."
No,it is just an OXYMORON!!!!What it is is a mistake.
How can taking a step backwards by demolishing be moving forward?
Seems like that type of thing is prevelant by 4 of the village trustees.Government by OXYMORON

duper supporter I only use the 'favorite' sites like a bookmark so I can keep up to date on those four theatre's, they are not necessarily my favorites. You friends like to make a lot of assumptions.

Funny also is how you friends refer to me as an "anti-preservationist" yet, I have been to the other 3 theatre's numerous times. Again more name-calling and bashing.

Well challenger there you go again.You just wrote that "more name calling and bashing."
There has been no name calling by me.There has been no bashing by me.
The only thing that I have done was to pose questions to you.
I have not called you names or bashed you.
You have on the other hand replied to the questions that I have asked with( "ps duper supporter I don't respond to your whining")
I will repeat.I have not called you names or bashed you.
I have questioned your posts,but you have not responded to those qusetions other than say" (" ps duper supporter I do not respond to your whining")
If that isn't a bashing statement by you then there is no such thing as bashing.

It's too bad that the NHL is no longer locked out. Because we really need their referees and linesmen to separate both parties from all the fighting going on here! (And, by the way, BOTH sides should sit 5 minutes in the penalty box). It truly amazes me that both sides think they're right and neither one is willing to see the other's point of view.

This "all-or-nothing" approach is actually hurting your cause. When you go "all-or-nothing", "nothing" is what you usually get! Would you not be willing to see the theatre put into adaptive re-use? Don't you think that using the facade and marquee for a libary (or something else) is at least better than total demolition?

BOTH SIDES should have stopped the bickering and name calling a long time ago and met with your city council and tried working out an amicable solution.

Blah blah blah...Sorry duper I get you and that other friend dupagedude mixed up...he is the basher you are the whiner. Ask a question and I will answer if I can.

DebDupe, I think you finally outed yourself. You sound just like Marisa Schoff who got her letter to the editor printed in our local "tabloid." You spout nothing but angry loathing. Name calling? You guys are the best at it. And it actually sounds like you want the building saved, you just don't like the people trying to save it.

I am not on a high horse. And I repeat that the only people to be blamed for the wrecking ball are the four trustees---Sebby, Tross, O'Brien and Soderstrom who voted in favor of it. Tross wants absolutely nothing saved. Now that's a HIGH HORSE!

Challenger,maybe you should drop the remark "whiner".Sounds like bashing!
Just answer 1 question for me.
You said" I am talking about giving the theatre another chance."
How can you possibly have said that in light of the passed resolution to demolish and prepare for re-development.

duper, I already answered that so I will again fro the hard of reading:

I sad that a new group of residents given a very short specific time period give it one last go...No 'friends' involvement whatsoever. You guys have burned way too many bridges, so maybe a new group with some logical, professional, and mature people might be able to do in 30 days what you guys failed to do in 7 years.

I answered your question, and as I stated this is just an idea I had, so I tossed it out there. BUT as with the big ego's you guys have if an idea did not come from you then you don't want to hear it.

It's better than sitting around waiting for the bulldozers which is all you seem to be doing. All the while you stick with your failed plan.

Challenger I am amazed that you could possibly think that the village board would even entertain any thoughts of reversing the ordinance to demolish the theratre and prepare for redevelopment.
Do you think that you could influence the trustees to reverse their decision? It would take a new resolution and the change of 1 trustee vote.Do you really think that it is possible?

duper...there you go..more assumptions. I never said they would reverse their decision.

What I said (again) is that your group has burned too many bridges. Perhaps another group of individuals could do a better job. They could stand before the Trustees and present their ideas with professionalism, something you group has lacked from the beginning. Maybe they could work WITH the Village and the Trustee instead of against them. Maybe they could bring harmony to the Village.

All I have seen your group do lately is flood the local paper with your threats and name-calling.

Perhaps another group, one void of any friends, could get the trust of people and the Trustee's, and maybe get that vote.

Now I answered your question, please answer one from me; Do you think your constant threats, bashing, name-calling, and parade of mindless drones at each Board meeting will get you one vote?

Whose plan sound better now?

Challanger I have assumed nothing.
Let me rephase.Do you think that an entirely new group completely void of any old group members would be able to influence the village board to reverse their decision to demolish the theatre and prepare for development?
I find it ironic that when you say that the "friends have burned to many bridges" you don't mention the BRIDGES that the Village of Lombard burned when they formally refused $1.3 million in federal and state grants awarded to Lombard for the restoration of the theatre.If there is even the slightest possibility of saving the theatre,Lombard blew $1.3 million .
Talk about "BURNING BRIDGES"
That money is gone.Won't come back.That money won't even go to another municipiality.That is the bridge that the village trustees burned.Not the "friends".

Please! duper the $1 million was NEVER coming anyway, and the other 300K had so many stipulations it was not even worth it.

I have already answered you question, but I will answer it again. Yes! I think another group would at least stand a chance. Face it your group is done, so let somebody else try.

Again I am waiting for your answer! I will ask again.

Do you think your constant threats, bashing, name-calling, and parade of mindless drones at each Board meeting will get you one vote?

I will answer the question this way.I have heard bashing the actions of the trustees who voted for the demolition of the theatre when there was a plan for development of the south property that included the theatre restoration.I have heard of no plan for the demolition site once it is demolished.I have heard that some developers may be interested in the site but no specifics.
That is what is wrong.Demolish without an alternative.Demolish a historical site without any plans for the site.Once it is demolished
who knows what could be considered for the site
Another thing that puzzles me.If the majority of the village board were dissatisfied with the friends or the foundation,the village board could have come to a consenses and requested that a entrely new foundation group of members be installed ,if they really wanted to save the theatre.
To say that the friends were unhappy and would do their best to defeat those who voted to demolish is politics.I defend their actions to work for and support new candidates.
As far as the $1million grant.One should never say never.
It is quite evident that the vote was decided 2x2.
There are 2 ways to count to four.

Excuse me, Mrs Dynako but I would appreciate if you would kindly leave my name out of the childish accusations that take place on this website. This is the second time you have assumed a poster here was me so I felt the need to finally speak out. I have never posted under the name DebDupe and I don't appreciate you throwing my name into your mudslinging game.

You don't like my editorial? That's fine because I don't like the way you and Ms. A have treated the village board and I certainly take offenses to the lies printed in our yellow local paper.

For those of you who haven't read my editorial, let me clue you in. I am petitioning the board to SAVE the historical elements of the theatre INCLUDING the marquee and facade for use at a future time and I challenged the editor of our paper because she lied and told the readers that this was no longer a possibility. Boy - you'd think "preservationists" would follow suit and do the same but they haven't and who knows what will happen next? You see Mr. Fortini, this is more about pride now. No one wants to lose.

The theatre is being torn down and yes, I fought vehemently against the condo plan developed by the Friends. I also support and will lobby for a new library on the site. I would love to see if the marquee and facade could be saved for use on that or on another development. There is no middle ground on this issue for either side and I personally think they are all acting like children.

We'll have to see what happens next - the board meets again tomorrow. In the meantime if Mrs. Dynako or any other of the Friends would like to make accusations about me - make sure you have the right target next time and anytime you want to talk about joining forces to save portions of the theater, send me an e-mail dmznls1993@comcast.net Otherwise - please leave me out of this pettiness.

Marisa, that was a great editorial. Very well written and 100% accurate.

Deb, please wipe the egg off your face (again). The friends sure have trouble getting their facts straight. That was very unprofessional to call somebody out by name and then be wrong.

Let's face it, the 'friends' attitude is "My way or the Highway". They ONLY want their plan, all 20 people of their special interest group.

If the trustees were going to save any part of the main building, then they shouldn't have rejected the Save America's Treasures grant. Because if they kept any part of the building standing, they could have used it to restore whatever they decided to keep. But since they cut out the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency and were too obtuse to allow them to negotiate out of the normal terms of the grant, the grant is now gone. If you ask me that is egotistical and petty.

Challenger, you've got a strange fascination with numbers---and so far all of them are wrong.

Now, I'll be signing off for a few days. But I'll miss ya when I'm gone...

Trustee Sebby stated at the meeting that he looked into using the SAT grant for a portion of the building and he was told that it was not possible, that it was very specific on how it could be used. That's why it was rejected.

By the way, I accept your apology for making false accusations against me - oh wait, you didn't give one...

Is this Lombard or Peyton Place? I never was a big fan of saving a few historical elements of a theatre or a marquee or facade unless the place is structurally unsound or unsaveable. It's sad in 2005 a good 45 years after the Roxy was demolished we are still letting this happen. In Europe they preserve treasures thousands of years old and here people want to tear down a great old theatre to build a Walmart or condos.

Robert I must agree. It is sad that this theater will now meet with the wrecking ball. I just hope that they do keep something from the theater so future citizens can see what a big mistake they are making. It is too bad that both sides couldn't agree and where so set on seeing there side win that this theater will be destroyed. And a question for Ms. Schoff, Why did you opposed the condo plan?

I should have written "their side winning" in my previous comment.

Melders, I will not speak directly for Marissa, but many people opposed the condo plan for many reasons, here are just a few:

1. 5-story building does not meet code(s).
2. Too close to Charlotte St. residents (8 feet off lot-line, I believe).
3. Too many condo's (86) in too small a place.
4. Too many condo's already downtown, many unsold.
5. Traffic congestion.
6. Parking problems.

I understand the reasons people opposed the condos, and I don't have a problem with that. It seemed to me though, that she opposed the condos because she wanted the building for the library. If that is the case, then I have a problem with that. Those that wanted the building for a library should have stayed out of the debate until the "Friends" lost. Then they should have gone after the building. I think that since both sides tried to sabatoge the others plans, they both have now lost.

You are wrong there Melders..the theatre plan was dependent on the saturation of condos to provide the TIF dollars that would pay to restore the theatre. It would have taken nearly every penny of property taxes from these proposed 86 condos until 2024 to pay off the bonds needed to get enough funding to "restore" the theatre....and that's if it did not go ever budget! The theatre would have been operating as a not for profit and, for the most part, village owned in the end. It was a losing proposition from the beginning and not a fully funded plan as they continually stated. The sad thing now is that the wrecking ball is coming and no plans for creative reuse are even being discussed. Once the supporters realized the game was up they should have jumped in on the adaptive re-use bandwagon but instead they jumped on the "accusations and name calling" bandwagon and caused all kinds of grief. We can count this one as a loss for preservation causes and as a tough lesson learned....something saved would have been better than nothing (which is what Lombard has ended up with)

I don't think anybody wanted the current building for the Library. I think the plan was to incorporate the facade/marquee. 90% of the outside of the building is just plain old ugly brick, only the 30, or so, feet pictured above is worth saving. It would be cheaper to build a new building that try to fit the library into the old one.

A library is a long shot, at best. Referendums are 4-letter words around here, and that is what will be needed to be passed for a library. BUT the location makes sense, AND we need a new library.

Please note that I am NOT speaking for Marisa, but I think you are making more assumptions melders. I believe she was against their 'plan', for the same reasons as the rest of us. She was NOT out to destroy the theatre just for the library (correct me if I am wrong Marisa).

Melders, just scroll up a few and read, where is deb dynako's apology? She attacked somebody, called them out by name, got caught being wrong, and then signed off.

It's a funny thing about all of those statements being presented about taking 18 years to pay off the bonds to restore the theatre.Quite mis-leading at best.
What was needed was an extension of the exising T.I.F. for 18 years on the Theatre properties ONLY. Just the Theatre properties ONLY.The rest of the properties in the T.I.F. DISTRICT
would NOT be included in the T.I.F. EXTENSION.
The same people who objected to this latest T.I.F. extension for just the theatre property only said nothing when the last main street TIF was extended for the WHOLE downtown T.I.F.district.
Adaptive reuse of history was supposed to happen when condos were built
on Lombard's OLD village hall and the OLD Lincoln School properties.
Adaptive reuse never happened.But it what was supposed to happen.
About the over abundance of condos.I may have a tendancy to agree because I have seen an explosion of condos in Lombard
However condos, with a mixed use retail,and restaurants and a FULLY FUNDED restored historical theatre on Main St. downtown Lombard.What
can be be wrong with that kind of development?
Time will tell what FINALLY gets developed on the theatre properties.As of right now,for the record,Lombard has said PUBLICLY that there are no plans for the property.Time will tell us if more condos go there and if T.I.F.funds are used to entice developers.
As the theatre foundation and the Village of Lombard has stated "There is no funding gap in the current proposal".The restoration of the dupage theatre will NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES.
There has been no support for a library on the theatre site by any of the village trustees as far as I am aware of.
However none of this makes any difference because as the law now states "to demolish and prepare the site for development."

It's hard to believe that the Village Board DOESN'T have alterior motives considering the latest news in the Village...
DebDupe says "...The theatre would have been operating as a not for profit and, for the most part, village owned in the end". A $195 million dollare convention center is being planned, that the Village is issueing bonds for, that will be run by a Public Facilities Corp (for tax reasons) that will run it and get ALL tax dollars rebated to it. At the point the bonds will be paid off, the Village will then (supposedly) own it. One of the Trustees was once quoted that "The Village doesn't belong in the entertainment business" well, what's a convention center? Mr. Tross also voted against a additional sales tax that would be rebated to the Yorktown Mall, a private development, to pay for infrastructure improvements, "Trustee Richard Tross opposed the measure because he felt it tantamount to the village subsidizing private enterprise, with no benefit to residents. He was not convinced the area qualified as “blighted” given the fact that redevelopment plans are in the works and at least one new restaurant has already spent substantial money toward constructing an eatery in the proposed area.

“I really think more thought should go into this,” Tross said. “This money is not for public good. It is not a partnership. It is a handout.”
All that hot air and yet he basically said there is no public good in a restored theatre and shops in the downtown. That does not seem to make sense to me...

The theatre properties include the 86 condos that would have had their property tax dollars diverted for 18 years...that is clearly what it said but then you "friends" always miscontrue the truth. "To demolish and prepare the site for redevelopment" is the village direction at this point. And bringing the totally irrelevent Yorktown development into this theatre discussion is so typical of the Dupe supporters...they simply want their share and continually bring up any and every tax supported action in town claiming "it's not fair they got tax dollars and we didn't".

Believe me Melders - I was not trying to sabotage the Dupe plan to put the library there. I was never a fan of the plan for all the reasons that have been mentioned time and time again on this board. The bottom line is this plan was the last resort for saving the structure as a whole and I and many of my neighbors thought it would be a disaster for our neighborhood and our town. My only stance on the library is that it should go before the voters to possibly use the site for the new library. If it doesn't pass, so be it, but the residents should have a say. Unlike the condo plan where no referendum was ever put forth. The developer and the Friends DIDN'T want one. They KNEW it would fail.

I have always felt that if the theater could be sold and developed with mostly private dollars (and perhaps a reasonable percentage of TIF dollars) and could stay within current codes, I would have been all for it. This was FAR from that. The best chance the theatre had was when Classic Cinemas (York, Tivoli) came to take a look. It would have been a cinema again and would have been privately owned but they weren't interested due to the severe neglect and damage to the building.

Also - the marquee and facade are not being destroyed but are being removed for a railway museum in a nearby city. That is, unless another group formally comes forward to pay for the removal and storage. Also, all items of value inside will be removed before demolition as well. This information came to me in an e-mail reply from the Village board. Perhaps, the Friends or the Historical society could throw their hat in the ring and acquire these items for future use. I would gladly make a donation if they made the effort.

Also - trying to compare the new convention center to the former theatre plan is ridiculous and not worth debating.

Have a great night all.

In response to Deb Dupe about property taxes being diverted for 18 years:the statement is mis-leading because what is being diverted is just the tax increment increase NOT ALL OF the property taxes.This same procedure was granted to a condo/retail developer just west of the theatre.
T.I.F.fund rebates and retail sales tax rebates and restaurant tax rebates were given to the developer for the life of the T.I.F. district.Again the issue is the same:T.I.F.increment funds from the condo and retail to pay a developer to develope the property.The increase in the property tax (increment only)that will be paid by the condo owners and the retail owners will go to the the developer.
I wish that Deb dupe would explain the difference (if any )between "DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT" and
"DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR REDEVELOPMENT."
Deb Dupe say's "you" friends always miscontrue the truth.
I challenge Deb Dupe to show me where and when I have miscontrued the TRUTH.
For the record, I have not mentioned one word about a convention center or any Yorktown development or any Yorktown redevelopment.

As you all know, I support this theater. Though I would love to see this theater saved, I hope that if they are tearing it down that it happens soon. I want to see what happens to the site. Most likely, a big box store will move in. I am not saying this as a "scare tactic" I am saying this as the truth. Those companies wait for something like this to happen and pounce as soon as the lot is clear. I have seen it happen.

When the current property is generating ZERO tax dollars, the incremental increase is ALL the property taxes that would have been diverted...nice try "Duper". Development or redevelopment..it's all the same really. "Redevelopment" could have included components of the theatre but we all know that is not going to happen since the "all or nothing" mentality persevered. There is also a huge difference in $400,000 in TIF for an 80 unit development and $6-8 million in TIF for a theatre with 86 units.

And "Melders"...you certainly won't see a big box store take the Dupe site. It is less than three acres so certainly not big enough for a Wal-Mart or other large retailer. You will see a transit oriented mixed use development with retail and, yikes, maybe even more condos given that the Metra rail station is just steps away.

Melders, it seems like I have to correct you a lot. Lot is too small for a wal-mart. Most likely a 3-story building with first floor retail and a more manageable numbers of condo's (25 or 30), with some space saved for commuter parking.

You should come to Lombard and see for yourself before making assumptions. As you can see, you were dead wrong about your assumptions about Marisa.

The theatre WAS NOT being compared to the convention center, THE LOGIC (or lack thereof) WAS. FOr example, you complain about how long the TIF will be used on the theatre, less than 20 years, look at what is stated anout the convention center..."The village is backing the project by pumping all food and beverage and hotel and motel taxes generated by the center into retiring the bonds taken out on the project.
The debt means the village will not own the hotel and restaurants outright until possibly 30 years down the road. " 30 YEARS of taxes going into that project. That means things that use those TAX dollars like the Taste of Lombard, the Lilac Parade, all will suffer! Mean while, while he says the theatre, which would involve a private condo/retail development as well as a public use theatre is not a good use (remember "The fantasy is over" speech), he then says about the convention center..."“I really think more thought should go into this,” Tross said. “This money is not for public good. It is not a partnership. It is a handout.” What does he want then?
**Here's what's going to happen folks. The theatre is going to be torn down with claims of a "new library", which will go to referendum and FAIL miserably like most tax increase referendums do. After that, suddenly a developer will come in with plans to build a high-rise condo or office development, claiming a high-rise is the only way to get enough density out of it to make money, will have the bare minimum of parking spaces, claiming people will take the train as well. They will also ask for various variances which will be granted in the spirit of "it's good for the Village", citing the variances given to the Elmhurst Hospital building across the street. The developer will also ask for TIF funds to help with the project, maybe even extending it, since the condos at Grace and St. Charles did so to. I doubt I'm wrong on this one, folks.
I do find it funny that the folks that worked so hard to destroy the project are now talking about condos at that location. How ironic! While they claim less density, etc. how do they know what is too much? They mislead by talking about no taxes coming from the theatre, (and again mislead regarding TIF by claiming the condos won't pay taxes either) but then they want a library there, which will be tax-free forever. I have even heard mention from a vengeful Trustee about wanting a park there-tell me how much sense THAT makes.
DebDupe, let me explain TIF so it makes sense. If you have a building that pays $100 a year in taxes and a TIF district is formed, the Village still gets the $100, then if the taxes go up $20 a year, the $20 goes to pay back the TIF. So in the theatre example, the condos will still pay taxes, which is more than what the property currently is doing or a library would...Get it? Besides, the theatre would not (until the Village turned down free money) have been all TIF, there was a big chunk of State and Federal money in there too!
Melders, you won't see a BIG box there, probably a little one, since during the first RFP CVS Pharmacies submitted a proposal to put a store there. The ad-hoc committee had said they want to see the theatre reused, but CVS ignored the request and just wanted to level the buildings and build a store, possibly testing the waters for what is now happening...

Dude..you are wrong on TIF. The increment is the total amount in this case. The theatre TIF area pays ZERO today...the increment is every penny over ZERO. A BIG chunk of state and federal money? Really? A million from the nearly broke state of Illinois where a Democratic governor would NEVER release funds to Republican DuPage County. That million is such a long shot and you all know it...the funds are NOT sitting in the bank waiting to be wasted on the theatre dreams. And the federal funds...what a joke. $296,000 in so called Save Our Treasures grants that leave the village tied to a sorry theatre for 50 long years. The BIGGEST chunk came from the millions and millions and millions in TIF! That's right folks...TAX INCREMENT FINANCING from an incremental tax base of ZERO.

And to compare the Elmhurst Hospital project and the variances is wrong. That facility does NOT back up to residential. The upper space is "architectural" only and not occupied space above the fourth floor.

Folks worked so hard to destroy the project? Not the case Dude..the only ones that destroyed it were the friends themselves. The only work was clearly showing the mistruths and mis-steps of their theatre plan. Quite simple and stress free really according to the sources in the game. But victory sure is bittersweet....at least the marquee and other salvagable treasures will be going to better use than the scrapyard.

Challenger and DebDupe, I never mentioned a Wal-Mart. I know that Wal-Mart requires a large site, and they prefer to build on the outskirts of town. I was think that most likely a pharmacy like CVS or Walgreens would move on the site. I would have considered visiting Lombard, but what would be there for me to visit without the Dupage?

Melders,

"Enjoy your Wal*Mart or whatever other thing you will get.." posted by RobertR on Sep 2, 2005 at 9:11am

When I hear "Big Box Store" I think wal-mart, Sears, etc. You said "Big Box Store" RobertR mentioned Wal-Mart.

Whatever the case, do you support "preservation at any cost"?

If the building is in good condition, I believe it should be preserved, in some form or another. I don't think that the preservation of this building must be as a theater, it could be a library, store, etc. If the interior is destroyed, then keep the facade and marquee. It just seems to me that people in this town has something against this theater.

I also do not support the "Freinds" idea of "all or nothing". I believe that they have helped to destroy the theater by not pushing for adaptive reuse when their plan failed. I hate to see a piece of history lost, and yes this is a historic theater. It was designed by the firm of Rapp and Rapp in an atmospheric style, a style the rarely used.

Again Deb Dup makes statements that are at the very least very mis-leading.
As the R.S.C.development proposal was presented , R.S.C.(the developer)
would PURCHASE the south properties and the retail property for development.Once this land is purchased it then ceases to be municipal property and becomes REAL PROPERTY and is put on the tax rolls as assessed real property.The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.Then the yearly tax incremented increases of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration.The original assessed fair market value of the REAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE STILL COLLECTED AND DISTRIBUTED.
As the village of Lombard and R.S.C. have stated,the estimated total
T.I.F. increment funds that will be generated by the condo and retail development from tax year 2007 through 2023 would be $9,588,734.00. The T.I.F. district extension has to have occured and the condo and retail completed by year 2007.
As I have previously stated the condo and retail development to the west of the theatre in the downtown T.I.F.was funded with T.I.F. INCREMENTED REBATES,sales tax and restaurant tax rebates to the developer for the total length of the T.I.F. district.Also the development was on MUNICIPAL PROPERTY as is the theatre property.
Unfortunately,NO PRO FORMA ANALYSIS of the development was brought forth or made public [UNLIKE all of the theatre proposals which have been PUBICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED, DEBATED and OPINIONATED.]
As far as the $400,000.00 amount of T.I.F.funding rebated to a developer.That T.I.F.rebate of $400,000.00 is to a developer of property in an entirely different T.I.F. district.(St.Charles Rd. East)

But weren't we told (and assured) numerous times that NO TAX DOLLARS WOULD BE USED? I have dozens of articles saved where you guys have quoted that, so don't deny that it has been ssaid.

Not that it matters, because the TIF district didn't get extended. So it's all a moot point.

I believe what was said (or meant) was that no PROPERTY TAX dollars from current residents would be used. Which is more than I could say about the library suggestion...

WRONG!! What was said was NO TAX DOLLARS would be used. At least the voters have a say in the library proposal.

It's funny that the friends have taken a stance "since we don't get the theatre you won't get the library".

Not that any of this matters at this point since demolition is days away (maybe in middle of the night...quietly so as to not allow the supporters time to chain themselves to front door) but your analysis on the TIF scene is flawed.

When $9.5 million is the supposed tax collection and nearly all of it was being diverted to the theatre TIF until 2024, there was no victory for any other taxing body with the theatre plan. The only "winner" would have been the theatre. There is a huge difference in assessed and fair market value for a vacant parcel versus 86 condos, parking garage, and retail space.

And the Lincoln Square development and TIF/tax agreement was certainly part of the public discussion and the numbers were readily available for public scrutiny. As any action by our village board it is all public record. They were not cutting an under the table type deal as you have implied. When the deal makes sense and does not involved MILLIONS and MILLIONS in TIF and tax rebates like the RSC proposal, it goes through. Where was your outrage when the other TIF districts were discussed and ultimately approved?

TIF is not a bad thing...applied correctly it truly drives development for the public good in our downtown area. Applied incorrectly and it gets "PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED, DEBATED and OPINIONATED" just as it did in the case of the theatre TIF.

But given that this site is dedicated to "Cinema Treasures" and NOT tax funding kindly take the TIF and tax discussions elsewhere.

Deb Dupe again states mis-information.For the record I will repeat a portion of what I have previously said.Duper Supporter said
"The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.THEN the YEARLY INCREMENTED INCREASES of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration".
Deb Dupe stated that when a 9.5 million in TIF is diverted to the theatre T.I.F.until 2024,there is no victory for any other taxing body.The only winner is the theatre.
The only T.I.F. increment that will be used for the theatre restoration are from the theatre properties only.
The obvious WINNER would be the cause of HISTORICAL PRESERVATION.
The obvious winner would be Lombard for taking a positive stand for
Historical preservation.
Deb dupe said "T.I.F. is not a bad thing.Applied correctly it drives development for the public good in our downtown area."
I AGREE 100% with that statement.As a supporter of the theatre I feel that restoring the theatre and using it as a cultural arts center combined with the mixed use (condo and retail)adjacent would certainly be for the public good in our downtown area.
Deb Dupe stated that the Lincoln Square development and T.I.F. AGREEMENT was certainly part of the public discussion and the numbers are there for public scrutiny.
I will have to DISAGREE with that statement because attended board meetings and reviewed village board minutes and all legislative files on the proposed and agreed T.I.F. REBATES ,SALES TAX AND RESTAURANT TAX REBATES to the developer .There was NOT even a mention of a PRO FORMA for discussion.UNLIKE all of the theatre plans that have been PUBLICLY ANALYZED,SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED
and OPINIONATED.
Deb dupe stated "kindly take the T.I.F and tax discussions elsewhere.
Nothing would please me more than not to have any discussions about T.I.F. and taxes on this website.If the mis information
and the mis representation of the facts about the ENTIRE R.S.C.
PROPOSAL on the T.I.F.would stop.
I certainly hope that Deb Dupe extends the statement "kindly take the T.I. F. and tax discussions elsewhere"to the following POST NAMES.
#1 CONCERNED TAXPAYER
#2 DEB DUPE
#3 CHALLENGER
#4 MARISA SCHOFF
#5 DUPE NEIGHBOR
#6 LOMBARD RESIDENT
All of the above are against the theatre and the R.S.C. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.All of the above have posted statements against T.I.F.
increment financing for the theatre but not any other development
or grants that use T.I.F.INCREMENTED FUNDS.
Deb Dupe ,I have NOT implied that the village cut any "undertable deal" as you have said.AlL that I said is that no other development proposal that required the use of T.I.F. FUNDS has been PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED and OPINIONATED as ALL OF THE THEATRE PROPOSALS. If I am WRONG then please correct me with the proper related facts.

duper, you are wrong again, I am NOT against the theatre. I never said that. I have only questioned the friends tactics and strategies from day 1. They were headed in the wrong direction.

AND I am against tax $$ being used.

Duper..you are wrong. Those six Lombard residents are not against the theatre..they are simply against the tax dollar funded RSC plan that so fails the village of Lombard's residents despite the repeated claims of it being a "fully funded plan". But all that really matters at this point is that four of our trustees have seen the reality of the RSC plan and put an end to it. The fantasy is over. Historical preservation at any cost (taxpayer cost that is) was not going to be tolerated in Lombard...and the board has spoken loud and clear. As has been said time and time and time again, private dollars should drive historical preservation, not our TAX dollars.

WHat amazes me is how people like "DebDupe" who is really Challenger can stand there and say they are not against the Theatre, when their track record shows different. They said they were against condos as part of RSC's plan, yet they now say condo's would be okay there--what? They say "As has been said time and time and time again, private dollars should drive historical preservation, not our TAX dollars." yet they have no problem with the Village spending just under $200 MILLION TAX DOLLARS to build a PRIVATELY DFEVELOPED convention center. In addition, ALL tax dollars are going to be rebated to the facility for close to 30 years. That's TAX MONEY taken out of the Village coffers! Why did the Village have to give a handout to private developers? Surely they could have offered low-interest loans, breaks on permit fees and variances and the like, but instead, they bankroll the Westin, helping to make them rich! This is all public information posted on many sites, including www.lombardtaxwatch.com which breaks it all down. WHen people try to suggest the Village apply the same logic they claimed to use for the Theatre for the convention center, they are personally attacked by those against the theatre project, and why is that? Because they know it pokes holes in their sketcjy reasoning!!!h

"My vision for saving it. Remove the marquee, ticket booth, etc. Develop the block (Library or other)only if the stuff removed is incorporated into it.
posted by Challenger on Aug 3, 2005 at 1:56pm"

Boy, that really sounds like someone who's not against the theatre allright!!!

Notice how very, very similar Deb and Challengers posts are, notice how you wil NEVER see them on here at the same time...

Oh joy...LombardTaxWatch.com should really be WeDidNotGetOur$8MillionSoNoOneElseGetsTaxDollars.com

Give it up...your flawed logic does you in every time. And this latest historical commission threat is the icing on the cake. Why is it at the 11th hour they suddenly come forth? Where have these so called "historians" been all these years? The friends are grasping for anything at this point in the game...go take your final picture in front of the chain link fence and let it end.

Deb Dupe I have to agree with you on one statement that you made.
"It really doesn't matter anymore since the 4 trustees voted yes to demolish the theatre and prepare the site for development."
Please make no mistake.I know fully well that the EXECUTION of the theatre is near.
However I find it amusing when you say "those six Lombard residents are not against the theatre.They are simply against the tax funded R.S.C. plan that so fails the village of Lombard residents despite the claims of it being a " fully "funded plan"
The revisions to the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT proposal have made the Theatre restoration FULLY FUNDED.This is what the village of Lombard has Publicly stated.Lombard village president Mueller has publicly stated and is on the record as being in favor of using T.I.F. increment funds for the theatre restoraion.
I find it puzzling that those six residents that you suggest are not against the theatre would at least have spoken up and let the trustees know that they would not want the theatre demolished WITHOUT AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT IN PLACE.
That is if they were really interested in saving the theatre.
Any talk of "adaptive reuse "was never mentioned at the meeting BEFORE the vote was taken to demolish the theatre.Any talk about adaptive reuse would be moot after the demolish order was passed.
My belief is that adaptive reuse wouldn't happen anyway,based on past actions (or lack thereof ) by the village in regards to the old village hall and Lincoln School buildings.It was talked about but it NEVER happened.

About dupagedude (aka JD), read from a previous post:

"By the way, DuPagedude is our local Village Idiot...even though he moved out of our Village in a bit of shame...after his political career went down the toilet. Now he has a agenda, and it's not really the theatre. He just uses it as a pawn....His incoherent ramblings of under the table deals and conspiracy theories are as ridiculous as he is."

Now for the hard of reading people (duper), I NEVER said I was against condo's, just against a 5-story 86 unit one. Read my previous post, I said a more manageable 25-30 condo's.

And for the 4th or 5th time I do not post under any other alias', unlike dupagedude who jumps on the "other" website all the time as numerous different people. I suggest that you contact the administrators of this site to verify this fact. Until you do that quit making things up.

All you preservationist out there just read their posts, they lie, they make up stories, they bash, they assume, etc.. This has been their game plan the whole time.

Now they are against saving a part of it as I have suggested...hmm does that sound like preservation to you??? No really it's their "My way or the highway" attitude.

Now they have resorted to threats of lawsuits, how pathetic, and how unoriginal...I predicted they would do that on June 1. That's been their problem all along...rally's, pancake breakfast's, sign.

So they spew out garbage about TIF's and conspiracy theories, yet we are fast approaching their 1 year anniversary of their last fundraiser. That's what I call real hard work (that's a sarcastic remark, not a compliment). Now all they are doing, instead of trying to save the theatre, is look for a fall guy, somebody else to take the blame.

"As long as the theatre is standing, the property most likely can't sell... Time is of the essence. Once the building is leveled, the property will become hot and sell quickly."

This is a quote from Robert DiFino, someone who is claiming he's not against the theatre and wants to work with restoration groups to see if a solution can be reached...Sure seems that way to me, how about you?

For the 3rd time:

"By the way, DuPagedude is our local Village Idiot...even though he moved out of our Village in a bit of shame...after his political career went down the toilet. Now he has a agenda, and it's not really the theatre. He just uses it as a pawn....His incoherent ramblings of under the table deals and conspiracy theories are as ridiculous as he is."

Don't listen to this guy, he has an agenda and it's not the theatre. All he wants to do is bring down a trustee.

Challenger I never said that you (challenger) were against condos.
Let me repeat (SIR) for the hard of reading (challenger)
I said that you were against the theatre and against the R.S.C.
proposed development.
Please (SIR) READ first.Don't let your anger and hatred for the friends get the best of what little good judgement that you have remaining.
You made charges that one of the posters has an agenda.
Please tell us just "WHAT " is your agenda.It certainly can't be saving the theatre because from reading all of your posts,all you do is criticize.What positive statements or suggestions have you ever made to those who wanted to save and restore the theatre?

I made a suggestion, get another group to take charge, but seeing you are a 'friend' you would never hear of that plan.

I also suggested saving a portion of the theatre, like the marquee, etc. Instead of destroying the whole building. Again if your group didn't think of it then you won't agree to it.

My agenda was to keep the residents informed of what your group was doing, because it is our right to know. In case you forgot the theatre is ours, not the friends. So several years ago I questioned your fundraising tactics and how much $$ the group had. I also spend a lot of time questioning your facts and figures. For instance:

you said 5000 supporters when actually it is more like 200.
you said 1000 supporters signs when actually it is more like 100.
you said 200 people at the rally when actually it was 60.
you said 4500 signatures all from Lombard but some were not.

I can go on, but why bother. You lied, I told the truth. My agenda was to get the truth out there for all to see.

So I told you my agenda, what is you agenda duper? I think your agenda is not to take the blame for your group's failure(s). You have not had a fundraiser in 11 months so we know that's not your agenda.

Challenger stated that the Friends said "4500" signatuers all from Lombard but some were not." Forgive me (SIR)but you are WRONG.What was publicly said by the Friends was that NO, not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.That point was made clear from the begining.
What was said was that those signatures came from people who wanted to save an historical building that was on the National register of historical buildings and was voted to be demolished.Be those signatures be from Lombard residents or not. What was also said was that those signatures were gathered in Lombard at the cruise night events and at the taste of Lombard event.That is what was publicly said when those signatures were presented to the board.
Let me repeat (SIR) The friends NEVER said that those signatures were all from Lombard residents.

WRONG duper stuper, scroll up to August 10 and see what the friends said:

"The signatures gathered were from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard."

I was discovered that at least 100 were gathered from outside the wheaton theatre,....not in Lombard or by people spending money in Lombard.

So there you go preservationists, another mistruth uncovered.

Did anybody else notice how he did NOT answer my question...Duper what is your agenda?

The signatures mean absolutely nothing if they are not registered voters in the Village of Lombard! And signatures coerced at Cruise Nights (oh my God..an event that draws people to the downtown and is NOT a theatre)and Taste of Lombard (one of the most successful suburban fests and is NOT a theatre)are not the droves of supporters you claim it to be. Most likely signed not even realizing what they were signing...because most people could care less about saving the eyesore on Main & Parkside. And no one cares if it is on the national register or not when it looks like a long abandoned ready to fall down fenced in mess of a once was theatre.

And there is no hatred to the friends themselves.just their sorry tactics in trying to save this mess. They tried, they failed. It's over unless somebody shows up in the next few weeks with a truly FULLY FUNDED plan not dependent on the taxpayers getting taken to the cleaners.

Challenger/DebDupe (ever notice how thwy always seem to post one right after another, just minutes apart, like they are running to a different computer) to say virtually the same thing?

A "fully funded plan not dependant on the taxpayers getting taken to the cleaners." Please elaborate on that. What does that mean? How would taxpayers be taken to the cleaners? They're property taxes would not go up with the theatre project (unlike the library plan, which is dependant on property taxe increases). There will be no additional sales taxes charged to pay for the project (unlike the Yorktown Mall area and it's use of tax dollars to pay for private development). There would be no property tax increases to pay for infrastructure (as will be required by the convention center/hotel). Not to mention the business plan that shows the theatre easily making money every year (unlike the convention center) and also the fact that there is a steady stream of events that could be held there (unlike the convention center. There is also very little competition in this are for performing arts venues of this sort (unlike the convention center).

An agenda? You bet! Against a Trustee? Not a chance, but against a system!!!

Duper/dupage dude (ever notice how they always seem to post one right after another, just minutes apart, like they are running to a different computer) I noticed you did not answer my question, nor did you deny my other FACTS about support, signs, etc.

Would you like to bet some money that me and debdupe are different people. We can prove that fact, but you can't prove your conspiracy theories, so drop them.

Also, quit the talk about the convention center, apples and oranges.

Challenger (SIR) Maybe you should scroll up to August 10 and read (for the hard of reading)(Challenger) what Ms.Dynako(A FRIEND)REALLY said.
"The petition(signature)drive WAS MEANT TO INCLUDE ALL THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE THEATRE.THAT INCLUDED KIDS."As far as the Wheaton Grand they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause.Some of those people were Lomardians."
Challenger (SIR )Wasn't Ms.DYNAKO (A FRIEND )telling you that NOT ALL of those signatures were from Lombard residents?
Challenger, what the friends said PUBLICLY at the board meeting
was that those signatures were gathered at cruise nights and the taste of Lombard.They also said that not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.The signatures were gathered from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard.
So there you go anti-preservationist,another one of your mis-truths uncovered.
Challenger (SIR)If the 100 signatures gathered at the Wheaton Grand Theatre trouble you then just change your tally to 4400 signatures.I don't think that the friends would object.

What troubles me is that you guys lie. 100 here, 100 there, you could have 10,000, what good is it doing you. We were told "ALL from Lombard", now it's "Not quite all". How many were your co-workers, or family? We will never know. How much cash did those 4400 contribute. If somebody from another town asks me to sign a petition for something i believe in without it costing any tax dollars I would sign it too. But I like your 4400 number, exactly 10% of our total of 44,000 people. BUT only about 1000 were registered voters, out of over 20,000 registered voters or less than 5%.

Let's talk about the 100 signs, or the 60 people at the rally. You fail to mention those, liar.

Why don't you get a spine and take my bet about me and debdupe, before you make any more accusations. Is that all you have left in your bag, accusations???

Challenger why don't you just find out for yourself what was PUBICLY said by the friends at the board meeting when those petition signatures were presented.I will stand on what I said.
Challenger asks "how much cash did those 4400 contribute."
When those signatures were taken ABSOLUTLY no money was asked.
Only names and addresses and if they lived in Lombard their voting district. Since the question asked to those who signed those petitions was "would you sign a petition to help save the dupage theatre.A building that is on the National register of horistorical buiildings That was voted to be DEMOLISHED." The 4400 who signed that petition only wanted the theatre to be saved.That is all that was asked of the people who signed.
Again no donations were asked for.
As for the total amout of people that attended the rally, the count of 200 is accurate based on the number of petition signatues collected since, the petition drive was launched at the rally.
About the number of yard signs. I can tell you that I personally put in place 75 signs.
I do believe at a board meeting one trustee said the count was 750
or so.This was the same trustee who initated the vote to demolish.So if you call the friends liars about the 1000 signs and insist that there were only 100 then I guess that you are callling that trustee a liar also.
3 of your mis-truths uncovered.However you will probably keep on calling the friends "liars."
Please Challenger don't confuse my post name [dupe supporter]
with the post name [dupage dude]and I {dupe supporter ) never said that you were deb dupe,and I never accused you of that.
So it looks like you are left holding the bag of accusations.

The signs mean nothing if the sign holders were not financial supporters of the theatre effort...putting a sign in the yard shows your support but a show of REAL support is a financial pledge to the cause. That simply did not happen...and many today chuckle every time they see 2-3 or more signs in a single yard because what the signs tell us now is that they support the new plan (which, according to the village, is to demolish the "horistorical" building). You may have put in 75 signs but I bet most included 2 or more in the yards they were put in!

As for the signatures, again unless these "armchair" supporters made a financial commitment to the cause then who cares how many or where they came from. At that point in the game it was a day late and millions of dollars short! Where was this same drive for support a year or two ago? Where was the drive to get your "friends" on the village board or even village president to sway the board decisions and direction? It certainly has not done the supporters much good to have a "friend" on the library board given they have voted against her sorry wishes of not pursuing the theatre site for a new library. But just think if that one vote had been on the village board...the RSC plan could have been moving forward by now and the only activity you would see is restoration and renovation instead of demolition. (oh but wait, it couldn't have started yet because Springfield has yet to approve the TIF extension to fund the theatre so it would still be sitting in its vacant run down sorry state until the next legislative session decides what to do)

As for the rally count, one would contemplate only for a split second what papers count to believe....200+ from the local one sided "theatre coverage no matter what else is going on" paper or 65 from the highly respected and balanced Daily Herald.

Duper, you are right about one thing, I mixed you and your buddy dupagedude up again. My apologies. At least I can admit when I am wrong.

Somebody told me there were between 8500-9500 homes in town. I will be generous and give you credit for 500 signs. Still only about 5%.

As for the rally I walked right through it so they must have counted me too. 60 or 200, it was an embarrassing sight to see. And your prople were gathering signatures throughout the whole cruise nights by walking up the streets, most of the people who signed it did not walk to the rally.

Almost as bad as your recent threats of a lawsuit. The only thing left for you to do is chain yourself to the safety fence come bulldozer day.

This is absolutely absurd. Everyone is disregarding prior, unaddressed criticisms and just repeating the same arguments ad nauseam with no regard to accuracy nor truth. It's like an incredibly obnoxious broken record. It's clear that you're all full of spin. There is no sensible reason to continue this bickering. Go do something productive.

What is absurd is that they keep sticking to their stories.
What is absurd is that they keep sticking to their same failed plan.
What is absurd is that they keep using their same failed strategy.
What is absurd is that they keep looking for a 'fall' guy other than themselves.

Childish.

Brain, don't read it, very simple solution.

Challenger, the signs are there to show support. Maybe those people where planning to give money once renovation started. Ask any group that has done a renovation and they will tell you that they got more money once the renovation started than they had managed to collect before.

Why does it matter if some of the signatures collected are not from Lombard? If they where collected in the city, don't you think that that means these people would be willing to come see a show or something in the theater? And why do those people need to be registered voters? Those people that aren't still pay taxes.

melders you are missing my point, they say there is overwhelming support, when actually support is weak. People have grown tired of watching the theatre deteriorate, and are growing real tired of listening to the group bashing, name-calling, threatening, etc...The support is there, but it is weak.

Their strategy is "convince people that the support is there, stick with our last plan, give us the tax money, and this thing will work".

They need to drop their flawed strategy. "My way or the highway"

Hello, Challenger. I'm back, I told you I had been busy...

Let's set the record straight about the signs since they keep being brought up. The Friends printed 1000 signs. The 1000 signs were mostly distributed prior to the April 27th Board Meeting. That was the 750 figure that was originally spoken of. After that meeting, more people called or email to get signs. Those were distributed. The rest of the signs were given out at the rally. We were left with empty boxes that used to hold 1000 signs. That's one way we knew 1000 signs were delivered. The other way was that we kept a list of who wanted signs. We still have that list. End of story. If there aren't 1000 signs still on lawns, I'm not surprised. They've been out since APRIL!!! There have also been stolen and vandalized signs. My own included. Some of those stolen signs turned up in a field, were collected and were redistributed. The current sign in front of my home is one of those.

Another thing. It took only 20 people at a rally in Chicago to save Cook County hospital. Since you love percentages, do the math on that one. I planned the rally. We did it in 5 days---a feat we were told had never been pulled off. The fact that 200 people came on a hot Saturday night without much notice was INCREDIBLE! Many of the historic agencies said that our turnout was excellent, that people rarely like to show up to rallies.

The Daily Herald photographer only came at the very beginning of the rally when we were still actually setting up! Call him---I actually spoke with him when he showed up. Not sure when you snaked through, but I personally bumped into a couple "spies" and they knew I knew who they were. One was even slyly taking pictures. I asked him who he was, and he claimed "photography student." But he wasn't and he knew I didn't believe him. What photography student would be taking photos from a digital camera hanging around his neck at chest level? But I didn't care about the fact that he was there, either! Were you one of these "undercover" operatives, Challenger? You guys were obviously worried about the turnout. And I'm sorry you feel otherwise about the signatures we gathered there. It was just over 200, and I still have them. On most of the pages we marked when and where the petitions were collected---just so we'd have the documentation if anyone ever wanted to know. We have never operated in the shadows, Challenger. That's what your side likes to do.

Brian, I'm sorry for the bickering. It's not right to do on this site, and I'm sorry to all who have been offended by it. We do not engage them on their site, and so they come here.

All we are trying to do is save the building at this point. I don't think anyone thought the Board would vote the way it has. It is sad to most people in our community. To me, this is not about a plan, personalities or who can win. This is about a building I love, that I grew up with, and that I want saved.

Welcome back Deb,

Thanks for the comment. Based on your response EVERYTHING you have done is a success. If your group is such a 'success' then why are bids being accepted on demolition?

That's your downfall Deb, sorry if you don't agree.

Challenger, I never said EVERYTHING we've ever done has been a success. I just mentioned two successes along the way, although we have had others. Obviously, we're dealing with four men on a Board that don't want this building standing. Look, a lot has happened since Memorial Day weekend when Sebby's resolution came to light. There was no warning. The RSC plan was under staff review, the $15,000 was just approved for a lobbyist---why would we suspect?

And so now, we're the ones being demonized by you? It doesn't make any sense. Challenger, if you've ever committed to anything you believed in, and you did it in good faith, how would you feel if you were, ultimately, betrayed? I feel betrayed, anyway. I know many others do as well...

The only downfall to all of this is losing a building I care about. That didn't happen because of my actions. The blame can only be placed on those four trustees. They are the ones who took the vote. They are the ones who will demolish the building. Not me.

Challenger, I never said EVERYTHING we've ever done has been a success. I just mentioned two successes along the way, although we have had others. Obviously, we're dealing with four men on a Board that don't want this building standing. Look, a lot has happened since Memorial Day weekend when Sebby's resolution came to light. There was no warning. The RSC plan was under staff review, the $15,000 was just approved for a lobbyist---why would we suspect?

And so now, we're the ones being demonized by you? It doesn't make any sense. Challenger, if you've ever committed to anything you believed in, and you did it in good faith, how would you feel if you were, ultimately, betrayed? I feel betrayed, anyway. I know many others do as well...

The only downfall to all of this is losing a building I care about. That didn't happen because of my actions. The blame can only be placed on those four trustees. They are the ones who took the vote. They are the ones who will demolish the building. Not me.

Challenger, have you personally talked to all 40,000 people in Lombard to find out there views on this theater? Have you even talked to 1000? If you haven't, how do you know that most people feel the way you do?

Melders,
If I were a 'friend' I could say I spoke to 44,000, and then attack anybody who disputes that number.

Have I spoke to 1,000? Indirectly, YES, if I get to count children. It would be easier to count the people I know who support it...ONE. A woman I take the train with, but she changed her mind when she found out it wasn't going to be a movie theatre. You see, not everybody who supports it really understands what it is going to be.

Sight seen on the train station which overlooks the theatre; one morning last summer some pro-theatre person is gathering signatures for support (They spend more time gathering signatures than gathering money). Anyway a resident tells him "no way I'm signing it", the pro-theatre starts arguing with him (they always do that), and then before you know it there are at least 75 people laughing this pro-theatre person right off the platform. Nobody rushed to his support.

So at soccer games, softball, church, PTA, parties, festivals, my neighbors houses, restaurants, bars, etc. nobody supports this place. In fact the only people we see supporting this place are the same 18 people that: go to every Board meeting, appear in the local tabloid newspaper, gather signatures, attend pancake breakfasts, attended the rally, etc.

Challenger said when he was asked if he(Challenger) spoke to 1,000
residents.His answer was " INDIRECTLY,YES,if I (Challenger )get to count children....One ,a woman I (challenger) take the train with,but she changed her mind when she found out it wasn't going to be a movie theatre."
There are three key words that will show just where Challenger
is on the issue of the restoration of the theatre.
#1. Challenger uses the words "INDIRECTLY , YES. "
#2 One, a woman I take to the train.
Challenger says "there is no support for the theatre".
How can Challenger say there is no suppotr for the theatre by his TOTALL UNSCIENTIFIC POLL?
Let the record show that the "friends" presented to the village board 45,000 names and addresses of support for saving the theatre.
Challenger has presented NO signatures in favor of the theatre demolition.

duper when did they submit 45,000??? I thought it was 4,500, or did you just run off ten copies and turn them in? Anybody notice how the number keeps growing miraculously?!?!

You said 3 (THREE) key words, yet listed only 2, what was the 3rd one?

I never said it was a scientific or unscientific poll. Tell me how your poll of asking random people, and their children, from all over if they support the theatre without telling them that tax money is involved is a 'scientific' poll? Please tell me how counting my 3 children (ages 5, 3, and 2) as part of your scientific poll counts?

All I was doing was answering Melders question(s).

Court petitions were filed this morning to prevent the demolition of the DuPage Theatre on behalf of the Friends of the DuPage Theatre and the Lombard Historical Commission.

Well Challenger I was wrong on the 45,000.It was a type error.I apologize for the type error.At least I can apologize when I am wrong.
Correction.The "friends" collected "4,500" signatures of people that did NOT want the theatre demolished.
Challenger #3 key words . "Nobody supports this place "
Challenger maybe you can tell us that by asking people at soccer games, restaurants ,bars,church,festivals,block parties,neighbors homes ect."that nobody supports the this place."
Challenger I have attended the same types public and private gatherings that you have for quite a number of years now and I can tell you that the people that I have talked to at these functions and events for the most part are VERY SUPPORTIVE of the theatre and the "friends" efforts to save and restore the theatre.
Challenger says it is the same 18 people who attend board meetings, appear in the local tabloid ,gather signatures ECT.[Challenger says "TABLOID" because the NEWSPAPER IS FOR PRESERVING the Theatre and donates space to the friends]
Challenger is correct.It is the same 18 people PLUS a WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE.There have been numerous village board meetings when there was standing room only ( even past midnight) when the village board was PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZING ,DISECTING ,ANALYZING,DEBATING AND OPINIONATING ON THE Dupage Theatre.

Melders, The Board meeting was standing room only because of the cell tower issue. When that issue was resolved there we about 25 people left. Board meetings are attended by residents whether or not the Dupe is on the agenda. Plus out of the remaining 25, at least 7 were so-called anti-preservationist, leaving you with about 18 friends. Get you facts straight please.

Answer my question: Please tell me how counting my 3 children (ages 5, 3, and 2) as part of your scientific poll counts?

Medlers, one the requirements of the petition [signature drive ] was that the signers MUST SIGN their own name and must put their address and if they are Lombard residents the VOTING DISTRICT that they are in.
Although NOT impossible, I seriously doubt that a 5 ,3 and 2 year old child would be able to meet those requirements.I would also add that they WOULD NOT IN ANY MANNER EVER HAVE BEEN ASKED to sign the petition (signature) drive.
It is a TOTALLY ridiculous statement by "Chalenger" and as far as I am concerned need not be persued as a topic of discussion on that
very basis.
The April 27 2005 board meeting lasted almost if not past midnight when the dupage theatre was discussed ,the follow up SPECIAL village board meeting about the dupage theatre only lasted till almost midnight.
All these plus more were full house standing room only.
Challenger seems to forget these.

WRONG, I was approached at the taste with my family and they said I could include all my children. The 4500 signatures included many children and even your communication director verified that fact. The meeting that went on until meeting was not standing room only. Only 1000 or so were registered voters.

Don't forget the meeting crowd had so-called anti-preservation people in it, besides room only hold 75. So basically you are saying that everybody who supports it was there.

duper you are a big liar, and I have caught you numerous times. You argue ridiculous facts (standing room only..please). If there was such great support why only $1200 in donations??? That is why I chose this name...challenger...because I felt it was necessary to challenge your statements, figures, and other mistruths.

I will make a deal with you, quit posting misinformation, lies, and other rhetoric, and I will quit posting on this website (unless melders asks me a question).

Challenger You are WRONG.If you want to call young adults [TEEN AGERS AGES 13THROUGH 19 little children then you are wrong.]
I will stand by on my statement and repeat that your claim is RIDICULOUS.
As far as the number of supporters at the board meetings I will also stand on my statements.I was present at those board meetings.
I {UNLIKE YOU ) am not AFRAID to attend village board meetings and risk possibly being trashed by your little group of ANTI-PRESERVATIONISTS
and FRIEND haters who hide in the shadows and won't speak publily and make their presence known.
Challenger says there is only 1200 dollars in donations.
Another RIDICULOUS STATEMENT.Funny how you say there is only 1200 dollars in donations when THE FRIENDS HAVE NEVER MADE THEIR FINANCES PUBLIC.
Isn't it amazing how the friends sure know how to stretch a dollar.Everything ,all of the signs all of the flyers and descriptions of the R.S.C. PROPOSAL from April till now.All of this on $1200.How ridiculous your statements are.
Challenger I will make a deal with you.You called me a BIG LIAR.
You say I post mis-information,lies and other rhetoric .
I say that YOU (CHALLENGER )post the mis-information,lies and other rhetoric.I CHALLENGE you to show me where I have LIED or POSTED MIS-INFORMATION.
Through the years I have attended many village board meetings
about the Dupage theatre,video taped the board meetings and reviewed
and logged the minutes of those board meetings.
So I know of what I speak.
I will wait your response.

Duper - you are hallucinating about those board meetings. I was there too. The April meeting was NOT packed and the June 2 meeting was NOT a special meeting but just a regular board meeting that included a vote for demolition. Most of the people in the audience that night were there to discuss the building expansion plans for the Lutheran church in town! There was also a group of my neighbors and myself who were OPPOSED to the RSC plan. After the church vote - more than half the room emptied out.

And the Sept 1 meeting was FULL of residents there about the cell tower issue.

Statements like yours that are so blatantly false, cause your credibility to take a serious nose dive.

C'mon pal - this schoolroom banter of "I have more friends than you do!" is SO STUPID it makes people sick.

If you thought you had such village wide support - you should have put your money where your oversized mouth is and PUT THIS ISSUE ON A BALLOT! But NO - you resisted until moment zero and by then it was too late. I still maintain that was a crucial error on your part because now you're reduced to inflating petition and rally numbers to prove support....BIG MISTAKE...when will you admit it?

Challenger I am waiting for your response . Will you please show us where I have posted lies,mis-information and other related rhetoric about the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT and theatre proposal,and the Friends of the Dupage Theatre?

duper you lied about the meetings, the petition, and the rally figures and dupe neighbor verified that fact. You are wrong about the $1200, that is what we were told back in March 2005. Wht don't you make your finances public? Because you are scared! Because that will prove that support is not there.

From today's Daily Daily Herald.

www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=98663

About the $1,000,000.00 state grant.One should never say never.

Unfortunately, the Lombard village board officially refused all grants.
$1,000,000.00 grant money from the State of Illinois that the Lombard village board refused.Some board members said that the 1,000,000.00 grant probably would NEVER COME.
They should learn to NEVER SAY NEVER.
I hope that the ANTI -PRESERVATIONISTS can wipe wipe the EGG off their faces.

Challenger will you give up on the $1200 thing? You have been proven wrong about that every time you say it. Another question, has the city ever put the theater up for sale?

Duper/Kevin-

I thought the "fully funded" plan didn't really even need the grant money so what do you care?

Let that million go the battered women's shelter or the transitional living place mentioned - those PEOPLE really need the states help. In the case of our BUILDING...it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

Is duper really fitzpatrick? No wonder his emails never make sense.

Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.

Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.

A few interesting points. The Morton Arboretum, just down the road from Lombard, recieved a MILLION DOLLARS from the State today. This is in addition to millions they have already recieved from similar sources. Was this the million that was destined for Lombard? Probably, since they both applied for the money at about the same time.

In a move of sheer hypocrisy, the Village of Lombard Board accepted several hundred thousand TAX DOLLARS for the Lombard Park District. Apparently Lombard know tells the State of Illinois what it's going to do. We'll see how long that lasts, before some people come down and start asking some hard questions...

Duper-

You, as usual, are talking out of both sides of your mouth. When you were trying to avoid the board's demolition vote - you claimed "We don't need the 1 Million, the plan is fully funded whether the money comes through or not!"... NOW you say "All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plan" Which is it? Do you even know?

I'm so glad that it no longer matters, I hated that RSC plan. It was a stinker and it is gone for good. I believe the only ones with egg on their face is you and your "friends" who thought you were going to waltz in and build that giant condo building in the name of preservation only to find out a group of your fellow residents, who have had enough of your double talk, pulled the rug right out from under you.

If there's a way to save the theatre without breaking codes that uses more private dollars - bring it on, otherwise quit debating the RSC plan. It is, in fact, a dead horse.

From today's Daily herald.

www.dailyherald.com/community/zone.asp?id=98958&zone=nap

I knew that it was a MISTAKE for Lombard to officailly reject the
Illinois grant of $1,000,000.00 .

My concern about the OFFICIAL rejection of the $1,000,000.00
GRANT money from the State of Illinois was ah the timing.

From today's Daily Herald.

www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=98958&zone=nap

From today's Daily Herald

www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=98964&zone=lom

From today's Daily Herald.

www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=99032&zone=lom

I just read that the National Park Service Save Our Treasure's grant is still going to the Theatre, they ignored the Village's request to deny the grant, since it was made out to the Foundation, NOT the Village. Now there is a lawsuit that, from what I hear, is SUPPORTED by the State and Federal goverments. Lombard's really, really, looking bad right now; here's it's own citizens and the 2 highest forms of goverment in the land that sees the much-needed value this project would bring to an underdeveloped area for it's residents, and the Village Board feels that it would rather see an empty lot. The Board is really mad because people outside their little sphere of influence have become involved, and they will have to do A LOT OF EXPLAINING. I can't wait!!

Forget Houston, LOMBARD, WE HAVE A PROBLEM!!!!

The National Park Service says the village of Lomard IS NOT AUTHORIZED to REJECT the $296,000.00 FEDERAL SAVE AMERICA TREASURES GRANT that was AWARDED to the village of Lombard and the Dupage Theatre Foundation.
Only the grantee {THE DUPAGE THEATRE FOUNDATION )can request cancellation of or refuse the grant.
This according to the acting chief of the Historic Preservation Grants Division of the National Park Service Mr. Hamilton Tucker.
This is an astonishing BLUNDER by the village legal dept.
The village board formally refused the $1,000,000.00 Illinois First grant money (some village board members said that money would never come) and then the State of Illinois releases $195 million of grant money.
Compound blunders."Haste makes waste"
Makes you wonder what is really going on.

There is absolutely NOTHING hasty about demolishing the theatre.

It's been shuttered and closed for over a decade.

The village has allowed the Friends to find a FAIR restoration plan for 6 LONG years while the rest of us had to stare at that neglected building that has been crumbling right before our eyes.

The SAT grant was a joke - it required a 50 year lease of the property for a measly $300K. That amount is a drop in the proverbial bucket and a 50 year lease - yeah right, that's going to happen...

There was no blunder - the village notified the Park Service they no longer needed the grant...news flash...THE BUILDING IS BEING DEMOLISHED! Let the foundation hang on to the grant - pretty soon, they will have to reject it as well.

The Illinois First million would not have helped all the other problems and deficiencies the RSC plan had, so it should and did go to another worthy cause.

Wasn't it the DEMOLITION trustee Steven D.Sebby who said that the grants were "just APPLICATIONS?APPLICATIONS.Nothing more than applications." Now it is exposed that NO they were REAL GRANTS.The residents of Lombard should know that those were GRANTS issued.
Not just applications.
The readers of this comment board should know that the village board INSTRUCTED the Dupage Theatre Foundation to persue as many grants as was possible.Then the village board votes to demolish the theatre and refuse all of those GRANTS (NOT APPLICATIONS.)
Makes you wonder what is really going on.

It's grant (singular) not grants. The Village paid out between $50,000 and $70,000 (or more) for a Professional grant writer and a lobbyist (back in 2001). In 7 years of work all they could muster was ONE grant for $300K. It was going to be a $8.5 million dollar project so $300K was hradly a dent.

Get your facts straight Fitzy

This place is like Freud's jungle gym. I've never seen so many adults in one place who can't accept reality.

I think the Village gov't should definitely accept the grants, and THEN demolish the theatre.

For the hard of reading(Challenger )I do believe that I have already said that the village of Lombard released T.I.F. FUNDS to be used by the Dupage Theatre Foundation for the purpose of seeking and getting grants.Grants. The Federal Save America's Treasures Grant.
I do believe that the year was 2003.March 20,2003 approval was given by the village board to seek the Federal Save Our Treasures
Grant.
The Save America's Treasures Grant.The Illinois First Grant.["GRANTS"] Challenger,your math along with everything that you say is fuzzy and distorted.
Challenger maybe you should get your facts straight.
Again for the hard of reading [challenger] I am not FITZY {KEVIN}
You just keep putting more EGG on your face.
The DEMOLITION trustee Steven D.Sebby said that there were no grants,just applications.Now it is EXPOSED that NO they were REAL Grants.
Makes you wonder what is really going on.

Smokescreen alert!!!

In 7 years of work all they could muster was ONE grant for $300K (actually $296K). Now they probably lost it and they are crying about it.

Bids coming in from 9 demolition contracters, contract to be awarded Oct. 6. Demolition could start immediately.

One million dolar Illinois First grant gone! Thanks to the Lombard
Village Board of Trustees.
296 THOUSAND dollar Federal grant that the Lombard Village Board TRIED unsuccessfully to REJECT.
Challenger says" smokescreen alert".
Looks like there is a maelstrom of smoke being generated by the powers to be on the village board.
Makes you wonder what is really going on.

Yes Fiscal, have the city accept the grants. Then demolish the theater. Do you want to see this get really ugly? Get the state and federal government invovled because the city used that grant money for a project it was not intended for. Fiscal, I must say that you are an idiot.

Yes Fiscal, have the city accept the grants. Then demolish the theater. Do you want to see this get really ugly? Get the state and federal government involved because the city used that grant money for a project it was not intended for. Fiscal, I must say that you are an idiot.

Sorry about the double posting, I tried to correct my spelling and accidentally sent it twice.

From today's Chicago Tribune:

$300,000 provides a plot twist
State grant restored for DuPage Theatre

By Lyn Niemann
Special to the Tribune
Published September 30, 2005

While a judge in DuPage Circuit Court reviews whether to grant a six-month stay for the DuPage Theatre, the theater foundation received word last week that a $300,000 state grant has been reinstated through a technicality.

But although it appeared the money would be available for another year, the funding may not be available because the village already rejected it.

The Lombard Village Board formally rejected the "Save America's Treasures" grant, along with a federal grant, on Sept. 1. But the DuPage Theatre Foundation, a non-profit group dedicated to saving the theatre, said the village never had the authority to reject the state grant.

"When the Village Board took a vote to reject the funds one of the things that struck me was that they didn't have the authority to do that since the DuPage Theatre Foundation applied for the grant," said Martin Carroll, chairman of the DuPage Theatre Foundation.

Carroll said a representative at the U.S. Department of the Interior confirmed that and sent a letter on Sept. 21 to Village Manager William Lichter.

Carroll said the letter read: "Only the grantee, the DuPage Theatre Foundation, can request cancellation of or refuse the grant."

"So, the money's been reinstated," Carroll said.

And with news this week that Gov. Rod Blagojevich is releasing $195 million in Illinois FIRST funds, of which $1 million was earmarked for the DuPage Theatre restoration, it seemed to supporters they had overcome the biggest hurdle in saving the theater.

However, the village is no longer on the list of Illinois FIRST recipients.

"All the projects on the list have executed grant agreements, and this project does not," Andrew Ross, spokesman for the governor, said when asked if the theater's absence on the list was because the village had previously rejected the funds.

"I think it's tragic," said Deb Dynako, communications director for the Friends of the DuPage Theatre, another non-profit group dedicated to saving the theater.

"It makes us infamous because no one's ever rejected the funds before. And the rush to demolish has been quite a travesty to this whole village. That's why pursuing the six-month stay is so important. Two weeks ago the village rejected the funds. And two weeks later, they became available."

Village Trustee Richard Tross, a former theater supporter, is one of several trustees who think there are issues involved other than money.

"I'm not going to rehash history," Tross said. "In five years' time, neither a viable development nor combined partnership could be found. It is tim
e that the final curtain be called."


Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune

Don't forget that the grants totaled $1.3 million... only a fraction of the $8.5 million MINIMUM estimated to restore the theatre.

A majority of the rest was to come from a TIF extension that was NOT passed by the end of session in Springfield and won't be passed until next spring most probably.

Don't act like all the money was waiting in the bank - that's far from the truth...besides I thought the grant $$ wasn't necessary for the "fully funded" plan to balance?

Additionally, the TIF extension getting passed at all is a long shot. Our senator said in May that one of the reasons it did not go through before session ended was "there wasn't a solid voice behind the plan"

Does it sound like there's been much solidarity since then?

Dupe neighbor.
Again you are mis-informing.All of the grant dollars were always part of the restoration of the theatre.The village of Lombard PRO FORMA
of the R.S.C. PROPOSAL and the theatre restortation funding would include those grants.Any restoration plans always did include GRANT MONEY.
Wasn't it the DEMOLITION trustee Steven D.Sebby who said PUBLICLY
at the village board meeting that the grants were not GRANTS.
Didn't he say that they were "JUST APPLICATIONS.JUST APPLICATIONS."
The qusetion is, was he lying, or does he not know the difference between an application and a GRANT?
Now it is EXPOSED.The GRANTS WERE AND ARE REAL GRANTS.
Makes you wonder what is really going on.

Why do you always evade the importent issues?

Where's the TIF extension that accounted for more than 70% of your financing?

Stop whining about Trustee Sebby with whom you have a personal hatred for because of past instances and tell the whole story.

Grants or no grants, this plan was a failure...

Dupage neighbor you are getting like challenger.T.I.F. FUNDS were always part of a restoration effort.The VILLAGE PRESIDENT, honorable
William Mueller is in favor of T.I.F. FUNDS for the theatre restoration.
For the hard of reading [dupe neighbor]just read what I have previously said about the T.I.F. FUNDS.
You have a problem using T.I.F.funds for the theatre restoration,but you don't seem to care if the village rebates T..I.F.FUNDS for the life of the T.I.F. and also sales,service and restaurant taxes to the developer of the condos and retail on the PARK DISTRICT PROPERTY.
The T.I.F. EXTENSION could occur in the spring session.That is if
the village does everything correctly.One never knows anymore.
Just a reminder to dupe neighbor.....The T.I.F. district extension
is only for the theatre property and adjacent South property.The WHOLE BLOCK IS NOT PART OF THE T.I.F. EXTENSION.
Why do you avoid the important issues.Why were the PEOPLE OF LOMBARD TOLD THAT THERE WERE NO GRANTS."JUST APPLICATIONS".JUST APPLICATIONS.
For the record I HAVE NO personal hatred toward trustee Steven D.SEBBY. I don't even know THE MAN.However I do know of what he says.
Dupe neighbor, you are getting like that challenger fellow.
You just keep putting MORE EGG ON YOUR FACE.
One more thing for dupe neighbor.I am not "Fitzy" [Kevin]

Again duper, I did not ask for a lecture on the history and background of TIF dollars - what I said, for those that lack reading comprehension(Duper), is that you FAILED to get that extension SIGNED and without it, you have no financing!!!

You said "The TIF extension could occur in the spring session.."

COULD??? This town has waited YEARS for ANYTHING to happen at that corner and now we're supposed to wait for another big maybe in the spring??? As soon as I heard that extension didn't go through, I knew that it would be lights out. You can keep telling yourself there's some grand conspiracy against your cause, I think you need to come back to reality and realize, that plan is dead and rightly so. As for the theatre, we'll see if it can be saved. I suggest that you stop posting about RSC and get to work with your fellow friends to try to save the structure. Oct 14 is coming quick...

Again, I hated the RSC plan, no egg on my face, just a big smile.

It seems you are so fixated on that plan that you are now incapable of looking for other options...do you love the theatre or the RSC plan?

Makes you wonder what's really going on...

Dupe neigbbor ,the T.I.F. EXTENSION didn't pass because Lombard DID NOT get approval from all of the taxing bodies in the T.I.F. DISTRICT,as is required by law.
The Illinois Senator from our district has said that there would be no trouble getting the T.I.F. EXTENSION passed in the spring session of Congress.
Dupe neighbor says "this town has waited YEARS for anything to happen at that corner and now we are to wait for another big maybe in spring."
This town has waited FIVE YEARS. FIVE YEARS since Lombard accepted the Dupage Theatre and adjacent properties free of charge from The Big Idea Corp.
In those FIVE YEARS, FIVE development proposals have come before the Lombard village board.All FIVE of those the development proposals WERE REJECTED by the Lombard village board of trustees.
Please don't blame the Dupage Theatre Foundation or the Friends of the Dupage Theatre for the LACK OF DEVELOPMENT on that corner.
Dupe neighbor says that I have a fixation on the R.S.C. PROPOSAL.
I think that the R.S.C.proposal is a good proposal because it combines retail along with with residental condos and provides T.I.F. FUNDING for the restoration of the theatre.I think it is good for Lombard.
However the ONLY FIXATION that I have is SAVING an historical building that is on the National register of h