Mention the Colorado History Museum and I picture Scarlett O'Hara in Gone With the Wind, standing at the window of Tara, forlorn and forgotten. Times are tough.

She asks: "Where will I go, what will I do?"

No one really had to worry about Scarlett; she always found a way to raise money. But the museum is on a short leash financially, running a multi-building operation on a $10 million budget - half of which comes from much-coveted gambling revenue tax.

And now its neighbor, the Colorado Judicial Branch, wants to expand. So that means the history museum must find a new location, somewhere beyond the modernist structure it has filled to bursting since the 1970s.

This is not a plea for preserving either building, though both have their good points. (What should be preserved is the 1977 mural depicting the history of justice by Angelo DiBenedetto, under the arch of the judicial building. It is just too good to lose.)

The stone structures on Broadway at 13th and 14th avenues long ago picked up the nicknames "the toaster" (the judicial center) and "the typewriter" (the slant-roofed history museum).

I always figure that conferring a nickname on a building meant a public fondness for it. But here I'm not so sure: Besides their historical importance and striking appearance, the buildings do not work well together or for their tenants.

Colorado's judicial system now has employees in various buildings, so it would save money by building new and consolidating. It wants more security, while the history museum wants a more welcoming facade, desires that sort of cancel each other out. There is also the issue of more exhibition space and a location closer (i.e. not across the Broadway minefield) from the rest of the cultural complex.

But the museum has no money. And as for support from the legislature? Don't bet on that.

Yet a complicated deal is in the works to fold the history museum into a proposal that involves building a new Center of Justice and a new history museum through the sale of certificates of participation. (The judicial branch also would raise court fees and save rent.) This proposal is not supposed to tap into the general fund, while covering the cost of a $273 million justice center and a $112 million museum.

Several sites have been identified for the museum and architect David Owen Tryba has been creating drawings to assure that programming needs would work on the various sites.

Yet the legislature basically told promoters, according to a recent story in the Rocky Mountain News, that there is no state money for this project. Even using certificates of participation isn't a sure way to raise money, since that also would require some state input. And other preservation groups have warned the museum away from attempting to siphon off any more gambling money than it already receives.

While these funding issues raise red flags for me, though, those running the place seem sanguine about the situation. The judicial branch may be steering the ship, but "we're the rudder," outgoing president and CEO Georgianna Contiguglia said recently.

"They're the initiator. They have more clout. We have a very small budget. They're moving forward in our partnership. They're carrying the budget request through."

Besides: "It's an opportunity to get a whole new building out of this."

As of June, Contiguglia's gone after 27 years at the museum, 10 as head. The society has retained a search firm to identify her replacement, said board president W. Bart Berger.

"There's the perception that we're a victim, but this is a rare window of opportunity for the society to link arms with judicial," Berger said. "There is a compelling reason for what we need to do. We would not be able to initiate it at this point."

The museum board passed a resolution in December, he said, saying "it is not appropriate to look to the State Historical Fund as a source to finance this project."

So don't worry, they both said.

The focus for many people earlier this month was on preservation, as Colorado Preservation Inc.'s popular conference met a couple of blocks away.

I have a sense I am not the only person who is at least a little concerned about what will happen to the history museum. At the conference luncheon where a new litany of endangered places was announced, someone brought up the museum as a sidelight.

"I am committed to keeping (the museum) adjacent to the park (Civic Center)," said Denver City Councilwoman Jeanne Robb, as a coda to her assurances that the endangered Civic Center would be addressed in a way that would "enlighten its history."

After all, both are at the heart of the state's heritage. And the museum provides tangible evidence of preserving the state's legacy, heritage, archives, and, yes, stuff.

The historical society has been trying desperately to get people's attention, from new colored lights on the side of the building to a new entry way a few years ago to a big bronze bison on the front plaza.

But what will it do to get their support? As the plot unfolds here over the next few months, I hope museum officials don't find that frankly, no one really gives a damn about them after all.

By the numbers

A statistical look at the Colorado Historical Society:

• Established: 1879

• Properties include the Byers-Evans House and Grant-Humphreys Mansion in Denver, Fort Garland Museum, El Pueblo History Museum in Pueblo, Georgetown Loop Historic Mining and Railroad Park in Georgetown, Trinidad History Museum and Ute Indian Museum in Montrose

• Fiscal 2005-2006 budget: $10.6 million

• Members: 7,004

• Visitors: 149,020 at the history museum; 325,279 system-wide

Mary Voelz Chandler is the art and architecture critic. Chandlerm@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2677.

Back to Top