Portage Theatre
4050 N. Milwaukee Avenue,
Chicago,
IL
60641
4050 N. Milwaukee Avenue,
Chicago,
IL
60641
38 people
favorited this theater
Showing 26 - 50 of 215 comments
My partner and I worked very hard to help both Dennis Wolkowicz and his management team, along with Alderman John Arena (45th)in Chicago as they attempted to save the management team and Portage Theater.
Having said that, please know that I do not speak for either the Alderman, Mr Wolkowicz, or Mr Carranza, but as someone who loves motion pictures and is saddened by the fact that this situation was allowed to spiral out of control.
As you read this, please keep in mind that I am fully in favor of getting the Portage re-opened, but that re-opening must be done with a management team who understands Cinema; is willing to respect the Portage Theater’s rich history; is willing to respect the neighborhood; and is willing, and capable, of making a proper investment of time, work, and commitment.
The Portage now sits there: silent and shuttered. The projectors, sound system and Organ have been removed. The Silent Film Society has moved to the Des Plaines, and the building, which has been granted landmarked status, [http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130508/portage-park/portage-theater-granted-landmark-status] now sits shuttered – without the ability to provide entertainment
Here is the statement from Ald. John Arena (45th) regarding the unnecessary closing of the Portage Theatre in Chicago:
“I was as shocked as you to learn late Friday that Erineo Carranza, owner of the Portage Theater, decided to abruptly close. There was nothing I did that forced Mr. Carranza to close the venue.
It was solely his choice. He made that choice hours after the city’s liquor commissioner revoked his license at the Congress Theater. Later that same day, his attorney had assured me that the venue would remain open.
By way of background, Mr. Carranza purchased the company that managed the theater on May 14, and my understanding from conversations with city officials was that he had 30 days from that date to apply for a liquor license or transfer his ownership to another operator, as anyone who’s liquor license is revoked cannot obtain another.
It was my understanding from Mr. Carranza’s attorney that Mr. Carranza was engaged in discussions to sell the management company. My office received a letter May 16 from Mr. Carranza’s attorney acknowledging that reality and setting forth that plan to move forward.
On May 16, I had a meeting scheduled with Mr. Carranza and Dennis Wolkowicz (part of the previous management team) to discuss their future plans. Only Mr. Wolkowicz attended, however. I’m not sure why Mr. Carranza decided not to show up.
At that meeting, it was reiterated to me that Mr. Wolkowicz would continue managing the venue in the interim period, and a transaction was in the works that would transfer the management company to individuals able to responsibly manage the venue.
I was comfortable with this; Mr. Wolkowicz has managed the day-to-day operation of the theater since it reopened, and he has poured his heart and soul into the building. He is the reason that theater has been a community asset for the last eight years.
I also indicated that I looked forward to meeting the potential partners and expressed my support for a mixture of film programming and live entertainment at the venue, as long as it creates no deleterious impact in our community and is run by a responsible operator.
On Friday, I was informed by Mr. Carranza’s attorney that they intended to honor their contracts for the events booked at the theater for the foreseeable future as they proceeded through the sale of the management company. I expressed no objection.
Hours later, Mr. Carranza decided to shut the theater’s doors and change the locks.
It is important for me to stress three things:
First, Mr. Carranza never filed any paperwork with my office or the city applying for a transfer of the license. Contrary to what Mr. Carranza and his representatives have said in the media, there was literally nothing for me to formally object to.
Now, it is no secret that I have deep concerns stemming from Mr. Carranza’s management of another venue, the Congress Theater. I do not want that style of management coming to Portage Park. However, I never rejected any bona fide application for a transfer, and the city did not order Mr. Carranza to close the Portage Theater.
I have said that I will not support any application by Mr. Carranza until he can prove that he can be a responsible liquor license holder and venue operator. That stance continues in light of Mr. Carranza’s recent erratic behavior.
Second, even if I was supportive, Mr. Carranza is now ineligible for a liquor license. Section 4-60-030(h) of the Chicago Municipal Code states that no person may obtain a liquor license when they have had another liquor license revoked.
Mr. Carranza lost his liquor license at the Congress Theater Friday, pending appeals. The license was revoked because the Chicago Liquor Commissioner found that, while managing the Congress, he allowed drug use in the venue at least five times and failed to call police promptly when a near riot broke out between rival gang factions during a concert. (Incidentally, the fight was witnessed by an undercover Chicago Police vice officer who was investigating allegations that theater security confiscated drugs off patrons at the door and resold the drugs in the venue.)
At this point, the fact that Mr. Carranza cannot obtain a liquor license has nothing to do with me. It has to do with his inability to adhere to the Chicago Liquor Control Ordinance.
Third, the failure to obtain a liquor license is no reason to close the venue entirely with no notice. This weekend, a monster film festival was scheduled for Saturday, and a film presented by the Northwest Chicago Film Society was planned for Monday. These were not rock concerts where a patron would expect to be able to get a beer.
The Portage Theater is not a bar; it is a theater. Alcohol is incidental to the other activity happening at the venue.
In short, it was Mr. Carranza’s decision to close the venue when he did and how he did. He didn’t have to. Nothing forced him to. He made that choice to breach his existing contracts and shut his doors.
I am disappointed and saddened that Mr. Carranza has decided to use a fog of misdirection to avoid confronting the truth; he alone is the cause of his problems.
My door has always been open to Mr. Carranza, or any bona fide potential operator of the theater. That will continue. I will work with whomever has the commitment, character, and capital to successfully and responsibly operate that venue.
In the mean time, I want you to know that my staff and I continue to work to revitalize Six Corners, despite Mr. Carranza. We continue to guide multiple restaurants and attractions through the city’s permitting process, and you should see the results in the months to come."
correction, not Sun-Times but DNAinfo (Heather Cherone)
hi! this very recent sun-times article says a lot IMO about where things are w/ Portage (& Congress) and Carranza’s desired next step:
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130717/portage-park/wanted-new-operators-for-portage-congress-theaters
Mr. Carranza booted out the ‘little guys’ Northwest Film Society after they’d done so much work to fix up the Portage (for film use at least) over the years, and his latest tactic’s to enlist the ‘big guys’ realtors Paine/Wetzel to better deal with the liquor license denial problem.
(Do you smell anything?)
We know who our friends are and aren’t.
Carranza seems like the type of guy who thinks he can do what he wants and always smooth it over when opposition arises. The world doesn’t really work that way however. There is always a day of reckoning and it seems like his may now have arrived.
(previous) management and the Northwest Film Society had printed up a screening schedule that in fact went beyond mid-April which proved optimistic because the owner pulled their plug friday 5/24, and hasty relocation for 2 weekend films was arranged at music box theatre plus the patio theater.
my impression is the (new) owner threw a fit resulting from denial of liquor license. if he gets it rest assured the portage will become like the congress theatre he also owns (perhaps not coincidently now suffering a liquor license suspension itself), and ultimately the locals may wish they hadn’t voiced their opposition to the religious organization that wanted to use the portage as a church.
Theater closed indefinitely; alderman won’t approve Carranza’s takeover of the liquor license. DNAInfo story here.
Good article, sums up the whole rotten mess really well, I would'nt want that guy living next door to me!
Thanks Life’s Too Short for link. I hope the Portage makes it. Wonderful programing!
Carranza sounds just plain crazy:
http://chicagoist.com/2012/11/29/congress_theater_owner_defaults_on.php
With respect, I disagree Trolleyguy. For years I’ve been hearing that Portage Park wants to bring life back to Six Corners. Having a concert venue would do that. But it doesn’t seem to be an acceptable option. To me it seems that they want to have their cake and eat it too. Or specifically, it seems that they want to bring back the mid-20th Century glory days which isn’t going to happen.
Security, underage drinking and such are problems that come along with the business. People live near each one of the venues I mentioned above and neighbors have not raised concerns about these things.
My main complaint with this situation is that Dennis and his associates seem to have been treated with disrespect.
My secondary complaint involves building maintenance. I haven’t been to the Congress in a long time. But if Carranza is running it into ground and the Portage is next that is certainly not a good situation.
I wouldn’t pay my rent either if I had to shell out to repair the landlord’s building.
This whole situation strikes me as ridiculous five different ways. When all the dust settles I hope the Portage is still being used.
Wow. I haven’t been following the details. But it sounds like Carranza is handing the situation in a very poor, most undiplomatic, manner.
Apparently, though he is no fan of the current management as he is moving to have them evicted; View article
Update: The new owner of the building is Eddie Carranza, who currently operates the Congress Theater. His statement states that he is a fan of movie programming but is also interested using the theater for diversified entertainment options. Read article
The Portage Theater and the surrounding building has been sold to new but undisclosed owners (who may or may not be the same as the ones who operate the Congress Theater). The theater’s future remains unclear. View article
The above referenced article in the Chicagoist lists some very good reasons why a concert venue managed by the Congress folks would not be a good fit for Six Corners.
“Portage Theater supporters (rightly) fear the Congress Theater’s problems with loud concerts, crowd control, underage drinking and security would follow to the Far Northwest side. The rumblings on Everyblock claim Congress management would tear out seats in order to fill more people in the space.”
The Congress cannot be compared to the 4 other concert venues mentioned here.
Hopefully Dennis can pull of the financing. But, at the same time, having concerts there doesn’t seem like it would be the worst thing in the world. The obvious issues are there of course. But the Riviera, the Copernicus Center, the Park West, the Vic and others have been successfully dealing with it for years. Certainly the places I mentioned bring people to their respective neighborhoods and certainly those people spend money in nearby businesses while they are there. I can’t really see how it would hurt Six Corners.
If the church is looking at the former Belpark, they have the issue of a large liquor store and flophouse (transient hotel) directly across the street from the bingo hall. Maybe they can do outreach in the area.
The effort by a church group to buy and convert the Portage has been abandoned: View article
I think the terra cotta was removed in the 50s or 60s, maybe when the marquee and doors were replaced by those from the Tivoli, because it’s not in a photo from the 70s
“There MUST be separation between church and cinema!!!”
Absolutely Tim. Another storefront church will NOT benefit Chicago.
Nor will it benefit the redevelopment of the Six Corners area. I was hoping that with the revival of the Portage Theatre, some new restauarants would open. There’s still no good place to eat around this theatre and the presence of a church would hinder restaurants from opening. You can’t get a liquor license within a certain distance of a church in Chicago.
Henry L. Newhouse should be removed as architect. Lindley Phelps Rowe was architect and firm was Fridstein & Co.
Preliminary landmark status means that any permit filed in the preliminary period is subject to review by Landmarks. Generally it means nothing can be altered in the period of consideration, which can last up to a year. This does not mean that final designation will protect the facade, lobby, and auditorium. Indeed, the Village Art (Germania) and Biograph both are landmarked but nothing past the facade is protected.
DEFG it is too late for the Church to move in Landmark status is going to the Portage theatre so alterations of the theatre space cannot be altered nore the lobby or facade can be touched.
There MUST be separation between church and cinema!!!