captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2008 mr. chairman and members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the dwight d. eisenhower memorial. in 1999 congress authorized the memorial commission to consider a memorial to our 34th president. that commission is comprised of 12 commissioners including eight members of congress and previously a member of the eisenhower family. as a result of this commission's work in 2002, congress authorized the commission to establish the eisenhower memorial. since that time the national park service has worked closely with the commission to establish the memorial in accordance with both the authorizing legislation

and the commemorative works act. in our experience, the subjects of memorials can provoke strong emotional responses because while many may agree on the value of commemorating a particular person or event, they may not all agree on the form that commemoration should take. the direction provided by the congress in the come memive works has has been help in guiding decision making in determining both the location and the design of memorials. in the case of the eisenhower memorial, these federal agencies are the national park service on behalf of the department of the inte interior, the national capital planning commission and the commission on fine arts. the process is a rigorous and sometimes lengthy public process which can require multiple consultations on the selection of a site and on the design of a commemorative work as the design concept undergoes refinement as

well as extensive environmental and historic preservation compliance. the national park service works closely with sponsors to navigate this series of studies an reviews. ultimately a memorial will be constructed only if it is approved by these three entities and the memorial sponsor has met qualifications imposed by the xhemive works act for the issuance of a national park services permit to begin construction. in 20 of the commission was authorized to locate the memorial al memorial and independence avenue southwest between 4th and 6th streets. a national park service environmental assessment with public involvement was released in june of 2006, renewed by the national xhemive memorial advisory commission selection of the site was improved by the commission on fine arts and the national planning commission in september of 2006. the national park service continuously facilitated the

work of the commission to develop the design in response to input received during the public review a proc worked diligently on the environmental and historic preservation compliance documentation. the eisenhower memorial commission is responsible for the design and addressing any concerns regarding the design from all source which includes the public and members of the eisenhower family. in september 2011 the national capital memorial advisory commission was consulted on the design and the commission on fine arts granted conceptual approval pour the overall configuration of the memorial. also in september the national park service released a second environmental assessment for public review on the environmental effects of the design. the national park service executed a memorandum of agreement under the national historic preservation act

regarding the treatment of historic properties affected by the memorial with the eisenhower commission, the national capital planning commission, the general services administrations, the d.c. state historic preservation office and the advisory commission on historic preservation. on march 6 of 2012 the national park service issued its finding of no significant impact which is a determination that the memorial completed as of the current schematic design will not have a significant impact on the environment. the memorial was scheduled to go before the national capital planning commission on april 5th, 2012 at which time the national park service and the eisenhower memorial commission would seek preliminary design approval. on march 14th the eisenhower memorial commission asked that this review be deferred in response to recent concerns about the design.

the national park service is honored to play a role in the establishment of commemorative works in our nation's capitol. the process as directed by congress has worked very well. we expect the eisenhower memorial will ultimately be a source of pride for our entire nation. mr. chairman, this concludes my statements. i would be pleased to respond to any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have. >> thank you, i appreciate it. mr. whitesell -- you just spoke. thank you. mr. geren from the gs afrnlts. >> good morning, chairman bishop, ranking member gal va and members of the subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discussed the proposed dwight d. eisenhower memorial. gsa is honored to play a role many helping create a memorial to president dwight d. eisenhower. his long a rear of noble service is and should be a source of inspiration to the american

people. the commission was tasked with creating an appropriate permanent memorial to perpetuate his memory and contributions to the united states. human resource support, financial and accounting services, legal and contracting support and our role expanded z as the commission's vision became clear. given our experience and expertise, the commission asked gsa to help select both a design firm and construction contractor for the memorial. at the request of the commission we used our proven design excellence process to select the design firm. this competitive process seeks the most qualified designers. we seek to contract with the nation's most talented architects, landscape architects and engineers to design projects with outstanding quality and value. as part of this process, gs afrnlts utilizes the expertise of private sector peers to assist in the evaluation of

proposals and design firms ensuring we benefit from the knowledge of a wide variety of individuals. at their request gsa worked with a commission to develop a highly qualified ae evaluation board of 11 members from the commission, gsa, the eisenhower family as well as private sector peers in a variety of design and architectural areas. the board used a three-stage process to make its selection. this included evaluating the work officials submitting proposals and inviting a short list officials to be invited for interviews and reviewing proo pose als of details of the memorial. in 2008 gsa asked for firms to submit portfolios of their work. there were 44 responses. the panel convened, reviewed the submissions and selected seven highly qualified firms based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the rfq. the seven firms were

interviewed. from these interviews the panel chose four firms to submit designs. these four firms were grur ek and sexton, gary partners, roger marvels architects and pwp landscape architecture. all four firms were asked to provide a design vision for the eisenhower memorial. the vision was to be based on the site and urban context, the eisenhower memorial criteria and the philosophy and asaspiration. the written report of findings and recommendations were submitted by the jury to the ae evaluation board. the ae evaluation board reviewed the jury's findings as well as design vision concepts. they recommended the selection of gary partners as the architect for the eisenhower memorial. a contract with gehry partners was pursued and began in january

2010 and is currently in process. it is worth noting approval for a memorial of this importance is a deliberate project and engages a variety of consulting bodies. any proposed o monument must undergo a rigorous review process with ample opportunity for public input and involvement. as an agent of the emc, gsa's role was to administer the process that helped select a highly qualified design firm. the resulting design concept itself has gone through a series of review processes which included the opportunity for public review and comment. in addition to providing staff and support services on a reimbursable basis and administering the selection of a design firm for the memorial, gsa is involved in a few other on going activities of the commission. for example, the commission requested ace tans in administering the construction

contract. we are also working to provide a portion of the land that will eventually house the memorial itself. we have been and continue to stand by to assist with other issues as they may arrive and the project moves forward. in conclusion, gsa is proud of the efforts. whether through staff and support service, administering design and construction contracts or applying land on which to build, gsa looks forward to bringing this project to fruition. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. i welcome any questions you may have. >> thank you. we'll next turn to general rhettal, the executive director of the commission. once again for five minutes if possible. thank you. >> chairman bish hop, ranking member gre hall va, thank you for inviting me to be here today. before i begin my testimony, i'd like to point out the presence of three technical experts in the hearing room and wish to

draw on their expertise, co-ed tore of the eisenhower papers, professor richard steiner an and executive architect daniel file with regard to the commission's liaison which you just heard about on contract design and construction of the memorial. it is a privilege to be here for a number of reasons. formerly of the united states air force, now director of the memorial commission, i'd like to introduce three commissioners with us today, commissioner boswell who you recently heard of, members of the house, of course, commissioner alfred doll dig seated behind me and susan baines harris. senator inway, jack read, jerry moran, representative mack

thornberry, representative mike simpson and representative sanford bishop. our chairman is rocco sis sill an know. i understand the purpose of this meeting is to discuss the memorial. while some may be here to discuss a design point of view which may be legitimately different from the commission's standpoint, i'm here to answer the questions to the best of my ability and demonstrate what the p proposed memorial is and what it is not. in my extended statement for the record, you'll see how we worked with congress and numerous government agencies such as the national park service, gsa, ncpc, commission of fine arkts, the district of columbia and many others. since the passage of the collaboration, the memorial designer has been bound by law to memorialize both the 34th president of the united states and the supreme commander of the allied forces in world war ii. i'd like to direct your attention to four images that will appear on the screens in

front of you. central focal points of the memorial representative. monumental, historic size stone blocks with realistic bar relief images from two of the most famous photographs ever taken of eisenhower. the first image which you see here is a photo general d-day when he went to speak to the 101st airborne believing the division will incur heavy casualty the following day. the second image you see here comes from a portrait taken by use of cars called the elder statesman which shows president eisenhower with his hand on the globe. this represents his position as

the most international of all presidents and how he presided of the assent of the united states into becoming a cloebl power. these are the leading contenders, not necessarily the final selections which will be made by the congressional commission. in the center on our near a lower wall will stand the eisenhower sculpture which you see here. it's in a small circle. i'm not sure you can see that. we will attempt to point it it up. i apologize for that. this sculpture is yet to be determined in terms of eisenhower's depiction and age. fran gehry addresses this in his letter for the record to the chairman and the ranking member. it has never been a barefoot boy. that term comes from eisenhower's own words in his homecoming speech in abilene, kansas, in 1945 when he began his speech with this sentence

and i quote, because no man is really a man who has lost out of himself all of the boy. i want to speak first of the dreams of a barefoot boy. the design's vision is that eisenhower is looking out at what he is to become a great general and president. these images will be framed as you see here by three transparent 65-foot tall stainless steel tapestries depicting a great plains landscape of kansas, arctic tickly rendered as you see here. this will be the only national presidential memorial placed in a very difficult urban park setting. this is a superb site surrounded by institutions directly related to eisenhower's presidency and will be directly accessible to millions of visitors. how did we get here? as the former professor and head of the department of history at the unit states air force

academy i have come to believe that over the 11 years the commission has been working at this memorial at the public interest and support for the memorialization that the commission has enjoyed is based on the increasing public and professional knowledge of the depth, breadth and diversity of the eisenhower legacy. my personal interest and professional involvement with the eisenhower legacy go back to my service in the united states air force. from the beginning of the commission's wourk in 2001 we have been directly involved with the best possible expertise on eisenhower such as the scholars at johns hopkins university who carried out the publication of 21 volumes of the papers of eisenhower. of those editors is today. my colleagues and i are a small staff of eight people. we partner with general services administration to accomplish much of our work. from the beginning we've been transparent and legally bound by federal law. in the design process over the past two years, we've been the

subject of 23 public review meetings listed in my statement for the record open to all constituencies and members of the public as a result of which we've incorporated a wide range of design suggestions and input. this meeting today will be number 24 over the past two years, averaging once a month. this careful, deliberative process has been underway for each face of our work during the past 11 years, a matter you can judge for yourself by reading the online works of our 15 commission meeting that we've held. how are we funded? -- >> general, can i ask you to quickly sum up here? your red light is showing for a while. >> we have benefited from the eisenhower family participation in our 15 commission meetings over the years, especially from david eisen hour as a commissioner for more than ten, his family insights, scholarly historical knowledge and contributions to the evolving

design process were important. since david resigned his position as commissioner in december 2011, one of our commissioners from kansas, senator pat roberts as a member of the engaged in conversations with sue an and ann eisenhower to help ensure complete understanding of their views and positively to their concerns. we encourage and support senator roberts in his efforts and congressman boswell, also a member of the executive committee. may i close by come plichlting you to bringing attention to visit some of our most important roots. general eisenhower was of uft most importance from the 20th to the 21st century. at the ge oing of our 21st century we're asking how do we remain true to ourself and the promise of liberty and freedom

for all. the eisenhower memorial should be part of the answer for all chlt thank you. e old who will s >> next we'll turn to howard sigger mart, the director of the national arts society. >> thank you. my name is howard segger mark. i'm not an architect or artist. i worked on capitol hill here for a staffer -- as a staffer for both republican and democratic members. and i'm a founder and past chairman of the national civic arts society, ncas, a national non-profit organization dedicated to education about classical and traditional architecture and art, those traditions that the founding fathers believed 'em difficulted the principals of a democratic process mr. chairman, our monument ps are of central

importance to our national identity and historical memory. controversy is nothing new in the history of president memorials. it's embroiled every single one. to mention the most recent example it took three compositions to settle on a design on the roosevelt memorial. why is this particular memorial controversy occurring only now, relatively late in the planning process. the reason is simple. the entire process has flown under the radar with little public and as little congress attention as public. edward finer architect who was designed in the guidelines said, quote, it's amazing what you can do when no one is look. well, we began to look. the more we dug the more we unearthed several disturbing

fi findings. given the limitations of time i can mention just a few. i encourage the subcommittee to follow up on some of these matters. first, designer selection process. according to the minutes of the eisenhower memorial commission all the way back in 2001, chairman rocco sis sill an know specifically mentioned frank gehry as the sort of architect the commission should consider. minutes from the 2006 meeting q an know mentioned he had a discussion with architect frank gehry who indicated an interest in design ofemorl. p wi is sill an know also had a gehry on at least three prior occasions. it appears in 2008 the commission designated daniel file its executive architect, as its agent to oversee and direct the design competition. mr. file chose to run the competition under the guidelines of gsa's design excellence program, a program that was never intended to be used for

memorial competitions. it basically limits the candidates to only 44 hand picked firms. thus the use of the design excellence program made it impossible to see unknown and untested talent such as mya lynn who designed the vietnam veteran's memorial. in the 1990s the initial competition for the world war ii memorial was run according to the design excellence program. there was a public outcry about the design and it was changed. adding to our concerns, when the eisenhower commission recently released the minutes from its meetings, it didn't publish minutes from meetings in 2008 at which the competition was discussed. stranger still there does not appear to have been a quorum at those crucial meetings. what exactly is in those missing minutes and why has the commission not released material submitted by competition entrants. the commission's comive cost $2

million and it's now estimated to cost $119 million. that doesn't include the unusually expensive maintenance that the tangle steel screens will require forever, assuming the new technology actually lasts. indeed, projected maintenance costs have not been released if they have even been calculated. in the spring of 2011 there was an eisenhower memorial counter competition open to all to suggest what a traditional, dignified alternative might look like. with a budget of under $3,000 we received over 40 entries. we announced the astronomical first prize of $1,000 and $500 for the runner up. these are more comprehensible than mr. gehry's design, harmonious with the plan of the city and the estimated costs are far more reasonable. the gsa has a reputation of

protecting the taxpayer. the park service has a history of maintaining our national heritage. on occasion circumstances can conspire to produce a real mess. this seems to be one of those instances. congress can act to clean it up. eisenhower deserves it. one remedy is simple, a new competition, one that is open to an unknown architect from, say, abilene, as as it is to a stark text from los angeles. thank you. >> next, mr. cook, president of the national monuments foundation, once again for five minutes the timer is there. we're ready to hear your testimony. >> chairman bishop, i'm honored to be here to share with you my opinions based on 30 years of experience within the traditional architecture world. the amf creates has a strong focus on interactive technology

in order to teach younger americans in their language. we make history cool. we are among the few private organizations that design, build, own, operate and maintain civic assets. we are headquartered in the millennium gate georgia history museum. this $21 million ensemble is set in a four-acre park in atlanta equipped with a high tech interactive theater. you may have six millennium gates for the cost of one gehry memorial on similar-size sites. i was asked by the national civic arts soes associate to judge the alternative competition for the eisenhower memorial. i designed their indication feeling it was my patriotic duty to enter the competition and did so with mr. frank. having studied my design, it's my conclusion that he is afraid to leave something out and

succumbs to narrative literalism. great moments are simple, lucid and say only one thing. we honor, we endure, we celebrate, we grieve. i would like to disclose i'm an emeritus board member of architecture and art, a co-sponsor of the competition. michael frank and i were among the winners. as a result of this issue, should there be another competition,ly not enter it. in a city overflowing with green scrapes and parks, this site provides one of the most important urban circumstances to provide washington the square as called for by the mcmillen plan. a theater for the automobile which is how mr. gehry describes his design will continue the exodus of inhabitants as soon as they're allowed to leave their workplaces. a design must conform with the 1791 and 1901 mcmillen plans, the fundamental zoning codes for

the city and monumental code. no subsequent plan put forth by nps, ncpc or any other agency has ever replaced them. the gehry plan having gone through the design excellence program has attempted to compromise this rule. the memorial commission and gehry intend to redesign what it means to build a memorial, far exceeding the congressional mandate to build one. to me this new literalism is the most important part in this hearing. we have an accepted rule and either we stick to it or we throw it out. if you go this new direction, we might as well tear down the lincoln memorial and put a log cabin there. monuments should be built from materials that last for centuries. mr. gehry does not typically spec this type of material. it's my understanding the fence is promoted by the gehry team as larger than the hollywood sign. in urban environments, acid

rains bird droppings will disintegrate the feature and most likely cause security issues for pedestrians below. the only positive thing i can say about it is most likely very few people would go there so there is less chance that a piece of kansas would faum on someone's hand. trash collects in public spaces. e blows an visitors are careless. gust also blow standard city trash all over the 600-foot-long fence. we have to clean our millennium gate park every day and the cost to clean this simple place is expensive. the cost to clean the gehry enormous vuk tour every day will be more expensive. though eisenhower belongs to all of us, he truly belongs to the eisenhower family and their opposition must be honored. successive generations of this family have continued to zephyr our country and we owe them

respect as much for that service as we do for their heritage. i end with a paraphrase of the general's letter written in case operation over loord was unsuccessful. our landings have failed. the troops, the air and the navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. if any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone. this is the character of the man we are attempting to honor. we must get this right. the current design is magnificent anti-harrellism. please call for a new and open competition. >> thank you, mr. cook. our final testimony will be given by mr. cole, the past chairman of the neh. mr. cole, if you can pull the microphone right to you, that will make it easier to hear you. >> thank you very much chairman bishop and members of the committee. thank you for asking me to