Berl Schwartz
Dear readers,
The Lansing State Journal published a misleading, inaccurate and largely one-sided story about the old Eastern High School last night. As a member of an ad hoc committee hoping to save the landmark building from demolition by the University of Michigan Health-Sparrow so a mental health hospital can be built there, I want to set the record straight.
The story states that the alumni “hope to save the exterior facade of the building, now planned as a doctor’s office.” The source of this conclusion is not given, however. This is certainly not the goal of the ad hoc committee of Eastern alumni, Eastside residents and historic preservationists that Councilmember Ryan Kost and I organized. The Committee to Preserve Eastern and Promote Mental Health rejects facade thinking and wants to preserve the nearly 100-year-old architectural gem and put it to a meaningful use.
The LSJ article focuses on the idea proposed by the University of Michigan-Sparrow to restore the building and use it as a psychiatric hospital: “But the hospital system – now the University of Michigan-Sparrow – said the former high school was too dilapidated to be converted into a functioning psychiatric facility.”
The article does not address whether U M-Sparrow could build the proposed hospital elsewhere on its East Campus, where we have identified 20 acres of vacant land. Our committee is not arguing that the old Eastern must, or even should, become the new one.
Not a single preservationist is cited in the story. Our committee includes Mary Olds Toshach, president of Preservation Lansing, who has a master’s degree in historic preservation and urban planning, and Dale Schrader, the group’s former president. They are nowhere to be found in the story, nor are any other preservationists.
Had the Journal asked for comments, the article would have given readers an important perspective on what can be done with historic buildings if the desire and funds are there. One need only read the Journal’s recent article on the currently ongoing restoration of the old Walter W. French Junior High School into apartments and a daycare center. That building opened two years earlier than Eastern, was closed much longer than Eastern, and had a fire to boot.
Perhaps the best example of local historic preservation is the old power plant on Ottawa Street in downtown Lansing, which didn’t even have any floors when work began to transform it into the internationally famous building we see today.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal about the preservation and reuse of Detroit’s Michigan Central Station, which was in far worse condition than Eastern Station, architecture writer Michael Lewis said, “No building is too destroyed, as long as the means and the will to use it are there.”
Sadly, the Lansing State Journal has failed in its fundamental responsibility to cover the story from all perspectives, including the arguments for preserving the book.
The Journal article states that taking photos or videos was a condition of the tour. However, the article does not mention whether U M-Sparrow officials were asked the reason for the ban and what they said. This is an important question because it relates to the motives for granting the Journal a tour.
Certain costs are mentioned (for example, replacing boilers would cost $3-4 million), but the article does not provide a cost in comparison to the cost in a new building. Let’s assume it would be less. How much less?
Nor is the story addressed by anyone who opposes demolition of the building in favor of preservation, such as an architect who puts the cost into a broader context. Once again, the story ignores the most important argument for preserving the building: it is a landmark worth preserving. How much would that cost?
In contrast, the article reports M-Sparrow’s claim that the psychiatric facility could only be built on Eastern’s site:
“The former Eastern High School is the only site in Lansing that meets UM Health-Sparrow’s criteria. The building is adjacent to Sparrow’s emergency department and has a lot that could be used for a ‘calming outdoor clinical environment,’ the health system said in a news release.”
The article does not attempt to capture the demolition opponents’ response to this important point. Again, Eastern preservation, conservation, and reuse advocates have identified about 20 acres of empty space on the UM-Sparrow campus – some of it even closer to the emergency room.
The next paragraph suggests that Sparrow originally purchased Eastern to build a mental health facility: “These features were one of the reasons the then Edward W. Sparrow Hospital Association wanted to purchase the 18-acre property. In 2016, the Lansing School District sold the building to the association for $2.4 million.”
This is important news – if it is true. But it is completely devoid of any sources, which creates the almost certainly misleading impression that Eastern was intended to be replaced by a psychiatric hospital from the start.
The article then inaccurately reports why a tour for members of our committee has “stalled.” Referring to Jim Lynch, president of the Eastern High School Alumni Association, the article states:
“Lynch said they were supposed to do a walkthrough with UM Health-Sparrow, but after the health system told them that photos and videos were not allowed to be taken inside the premises, those talks stalled.”
That is simply wrong. I know this because I was the contact person on our committee for organizing the tour.
Margaret Dimond, president of UM-Sparrow, promised the tour at Joan Nelson’s request. Nelson is the retired executive director of the Allen Neighborhood Center and one of six members of our group who met with UM-Sparrow leaders last month.
Dimond agreed to schedule the tour for last Monday, but with conditions. She declined our request to bring a photographer and a leading preservationist, Brenda Rigdon, executive director of the Michigan Historic Preservation Network and a preservation architect. I objected, saying it was important to have a professional preservationist’s opinion of the building and photographs to document “the good, the bad and the ugly,” as I put it. UM-Sparrow stuck to its guns, and we reluctantly went along because it was important to see the interior with our own eyes.
Then Council Member Kost posted a report on Facebook detailing UM-Sparrow’s conditions. UM-Sparrow took offense to his post and canceled the tour.
Once again, we wish the Journal had asked UM-Sparrow why it doesn’t allow photos. Dimond told us in an email that “individual photos could create false perceptions and impressions” (even though I gave my word that we would show “the good, the bad and the ugly”). If I, as a reporter, had been told that no photos could be taken when touring a building to see the building’s condition, I would have at least asked for a response to that argument from those opposed to demolition. I expect the reporter would have gotten a very different answer. However, the Journal reporter failed to ask that basic question, or if she did, she failed to report on it.
In the rest of the article, various problems with the interior are mentioned. But here too, a perspective from the point of view of monument preservation is missing.
The story ends with UM-Sparrow’s intention to “save those parts of the building that are in good enough condition to donate to alumni or other community members. The auditorium’s light fixtures, wooden chairs and wooden wall decorations are examples of things the health system plans to make available,” said O’Malley (Connie O’Malley, UM Health-Sparrow’s regional COO). As a reporter, I would have asked how sincere UM-Sparrow’s interest is in preserving Eastern’s “legacy,” as it has repeatedly stated.
I do not claim to be unbiased on this issue. I believe Eastern should be preserved, that UM-Sparrow should build a mental health facility elsewhere on its campus, and that our group hopes that UM-Sparrow will seriously consider preserving a landmark building for one or more other uses. Or, if not, it could offer to sell it for residential or other uses. It is especially important to me that the auditorium be preserved because there is nothing like it in our community that is not already being put to some use. It would make an excellent home for the Lansing Symphony Orchestra.
I realize that some readers may think this is just resentment from the owner of the Journal’s only serious print competition. Of course, I wish City Pulse had gotten the tour first. And I may be wrong on one or two counts.
Despite my bias, I have tried to address the shortcomings of the Journal article in a fair manner, based on my five and a half decades of experience as a journalist.
I leave it to you to judge for yourself whether the Lansing State Journal article is credible.
(Berl Schwartz is editor, publisher and founding owner of City Pulse.)
