Children's Hospital buys more land in Streeterville

[chicago]

What’s the value of closing your minor seminary to move the administrative big wigs and bean counters into an old glorious building… 18 mil! (Not to mention the millions which remained of the Quigley endowment.) How much of the money from this sale of the old chancery office building (155 E. Superior) will vocational development in the Archdiocese receive? How much is being wasted on the interior wrecking of an historic building and national treasure? What waste!

And what a bargain Children’s Memorial is getting on a 99 year lease of prime property. (Roughly $182,000/year… not bad at all for rights on that “squatter’s” land.) One wonders what of the transfers’ economic proceeds will benefit the children of this Archdiocese or even be left for the children of our childrens’ age and their children over this coming century.

Children’s Hospital buys more land in Streeterville
5/21/2008 10:48:00 PM
By Chicago Tribune -Bruce Japsen

Preparing for growth beyond its proposed new hospital in Chicago’s Streeterville neighborhood, Children’s Memorial Hospital said it paid $18 million Tuesday for a 99-year lease on a building from the Archdiocese of Chicago at 155 E. Superior St.
The six-story building is less than one block from the future site of the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. That facility, which is scheduled open in 2012 and cost $1 billion, will replace Children’s Memorial’s Lincon Park hospital.

Specifics of the deal were not disclosed but Children’s Memorial said the $18 million is a “prepayment of a substantial portion of the rent for the term of the lease,” said Children’s Memorial spokeswoman Julie Pesch.

catholiccitizens.org/press/contentview.asp?c=46488

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

You’re surprised Tim, or just disgusted?

I vote for disgusted, for me. I am sorry you City dwellers have this happening.

 

[chicago]

You’re surprised Tim, or just disgusted?

I vote for disgusted, for me.

No, not surprised. I’ve known about the expected sale price for 18 months. It’s just now finalized and public knowledge.

The larger situation is, indeed, frustrating. Close an important institution. Raid it’s endowment. Move some administrative offices to its facility (while gutting the glorious interior which was made of worthy materials and built to last centuries - I wonder where all the expensive materials and items went.) But, of course, that space is too small for all of the pastoral headquarter facilities. So rehab an old south side convent into offices for that purpose at even more expense. Thus separating the centralized facilities which needed to be expanded and strengthened, not torn apart. Of course, that convent isn’t big enough, either. So build an addition. Make a measely 18 mil on the long term lease of property which is worth gold. All the while, the Archdiocese could have easily built a new facility (combined with parking lot, condos, office space, and retail) across the street from the cathedral and MADE money on the overall endeavor.

But, then, one of the signs of ours being the “one true, Church” is its ability to survive the utter incompetence (or worse) of it’s members, and especially it’s leaders and administrators.

I am sorry you City dwellers have this happening.

Remember (as you well know, but others might not) that the Archdiocese isn’t just the City of Chicago. It’s the entirely of Cook and Lake counties. And what happens in the city in some way stretches out, affecting everyone in stretches far surrounding. So craziness like this ultimately influences many more people and apostolates than just those within the walls of zip codes starting “606”.

 

[stbruno]

Maybe they are reserving the space across the street of the present cathedral for a new cathedral, since the present one has a rotting away ceiling???

 

[consumedconvert]

I’m not in the Archdiocese in Chicago, but I am downstate in the Diocese of Peoria, so your Cardinal Archbishop is my Cardinal Metropolitan.

It does seem that if indeed the “gem” of property was sold for much less than it was worth, then the Archdiocese is to be praised for selling it undervalued as a charitable act to help sick children by helping the Memorial Hospital.

Children’s has outgrown its more than 50-year-old Lincoln Park facilities, forcing hospital staff to turn away more than 200 children a year.

 

[John_Higgins]

Ah, consumed, your bishop in Peoria was a year ahead of me in my high school.

Interesting (and germane to the topic) the bishop went to an ordinary (well, I don’t think so) Catholic high school. When I was attending high school (a good number of years before Tim) there were two Quigleys (North and South). South, exactly 4 miles east of my high school was a totally forgettable edifice. As a minor seminary, it had already failed by then. As a Catholic boys’ high school, it was a fine school among many.

Really I think when they closed South, the handwriting was on the wall for North as well.

I wonder if the archdiocese gets any money from the Augustinians who moved St. Rita to South?

Apologies to those who are not interested in Chicago stuff.

John

 

[chicago]

It does seem that if indeed the “gem” of property was sold for much less than it was worth, then the Archdiocese is to be praised for selling it undervalued as a charitable act to help sick children by helping the Memorial Hospital.

It was sold for what it was expected to sell for. So I suppose that could be called “Market Rate.”

But the question is whether “market rate” on that property is really worth selling at the contemporary value, considering that what the Archdiocese gets in return is essentially a “short term fix” of monetary influx while sacrificing long term holdings.

It will be interesting to see what happens when similar properties which the Archdiocese has given up on with 99 year leases come up in contracts over coming decades. Will they be able to take the leasees for what they are now really worth, will they get stuck with properties that they don’t want to have to deal with or will they need to renegotiate for under value new leases? Most likely, once the Church sacrifices their rights by subletting to builders, it’s essentially been lost for all intents and purposes.

As far as a “Charitible Act”, I’m guessing that a hospital which has its new facility being named after a property and building management magnate isn’t ultimately going to be hurting for funds to underpay anyone. This isn’t exactly the olden days of religious sisters offering free care to the poor that we are talking about, but big business not for profit. That isn’t to underestimate their good work, but the reality is that Children’s Memorial is a major and strong institution, not some fly by night charity. If they can afford to relocate next to Northwestern Memorial in Chicago’s highest rent district, they obviously don’t need charity assistance from the Church.

 

[chicago]

Maybe they are reserving the space across the street of the present cathedral for a new cathedral, since the present one has a rotting away ceiling???

The decision to sell off the old chancery office building (nothing more than a converted old warehouse, really, that the administrators just don’t like having to be in) was made before those problems at the cathedral were known. They are repairing what is problematic, rather than thinking about scrapping the old, historic cathedral building. Also, if there were any plans to build a new cathedral, there would not have been a recent capital campaign for work on the present building and rectory.

The Archdiocese has previously floated the idea of leasing off the parking lot property (which is here in question) for development, but apparently wants to sell the entire block off whole. Yet they don’t control a couple of (comparatively small) parcels. (A former Alderman owner of one understands the real value of it and isn’t as willing to give it away as easily as the Archdiocese is with its high profile property.) So they’ve been sitting on it waiting things out for some time. This would have been the proper opportunity to develop it for their own uses and needs. Despite what isn’t held, the Church controls so much of the land it that it wouldn’t have mattered much and could easily have just built around the obstacle, squeezing him and, ironically, likely lessening the isolated property value, thus.

The larger problem here is the combined farce of engaging in an ultra expensive and inefficient endeavor to move the administrative offices to other Archdiocesan owned facilities, while not valuing that which has been sacrificed, especially, in the old Quigley Seminary building (and school) or, conversely, taking advantage of the real opportunity for genuine growth by developing held resources more positively. Plainly, they are looking for a lot of “quick fixes” which will be long term liabilities, failing to truly address the genuine needs or issues which ultimately shall have to be fixed “again” by “somebody else” ten to twenty years down the road. But such is the typical nature of average backward Church administration.

 

[chicago]

South, exactly 4 miles east of my high school was a totally forgettable edifice. As a minor seminary, it had already failed by then. As a Catholic boys’ high school, it was a fine school among many.

Insightful. And, while I don’t entirely agree, admittedly largely true.

Really I think when they closed South, the handwriting was on the wall for North as well.

Actually, remember that North and South BOTH closed. They were reorganized into the historic facility (which, of course, IS Architecturally notable to the point that it has been listen on the National Register of Historic Places) under a sort of meshed administration, faculty, and student body with mixed (some might say mixed up) direction and vision. THAT backwards situation is what failed (and is significantly responsible for the lack of ordinations over recent years, that was so well noted when the institution closed.)

That said, the reality (of course) is that there has been a desire among certain factions to see Quigley close for at least the last four decades. It could be argued that these forces were, indeed, setting things up for failure with how such matters set up. Whether that was the intent of some or the failed genuine and sincere vision of others (or most likely a combination of both) it was certainly executed as a “perfect storm.”

What the best future of Quigley as an institution was is certainly debateable. The fact that the Church of Chicago did much harm in the way of going about what they did, and has essentially raided an endowment fund and destroyed the historic character of a beautiful building intended to last is nothing short of a “damn shame.”

I wonder if the archdiocese gets any money from the Augustinians who moved St. Rita to South?

And, more importantly, what came or comes of it?

Interestingly, this was a quickly put together deal, also. Quigley South alumni wanted one of the other schools to get the facility, instead. But the bargain had already been made. Ah, the back room dealing of ecclesiasticals! (Secular politicos have NOTHING over them.)

Apologies to those who are not interested in Chicago stuff.

John

Why apologize? Can we help it that their dioceses just aren’t as interesting or important as ours?

Still, what affects a major Archdiocese such as ours in some sense certainly does affect the rest of the Body.

Good to cross paths with you, again, John!

 

[John_Higgins]

Good to cross paths with you again too. I read your blog from time to time.

I was searching the Tribune archives for old Father Pfleger stories and found the articles when he was protesting the closing of South in 1990 and the quick sale to St. Rita’s. Kinda wonder what got Cardinal Bernardin going so fast.

John

 

[chicago]

Good to cross paths with you again too. I read your blog from time to time.

I should post on it more often. But it takes a lot of work to write something worthwhile. Better to focus my efforts on legitimate press publications that I’ve been freelancing for, I figure. But when I have something to offer which won’t be readily published elsewhere, it’s still a viable outlet.

I was searching the Tribune archives for old Father Pfleger stories and found the articles when he was protesting the closing of South in 1990 and the quick sale to St. Rita’s. Kinda wonder what got Cardinal Bernardin going so fast.

The irony is that the closing of South truly came up as an option awful fast. It was clearly not something that had been planned out well in advance (like North’s closing was long rumored to be.) Which is why it was so shocking. The various protests, demonstrations, and outrage about closing South were significant in the city. And the Archdiocese misestimated what the future of the minor seminary would be. They truly expected a large part of the South population would just transfer into the reorganized institution at 103 E. Chestnut. That didn’t happen. In fact, many students from North also left the system. Had they better appreciated what they had uniquely with EACH school, I think that it would have been better to just tell South they needed to become more independent as an independent South Side Catholic School which was no longer part of the seminary system and would not receive the same sort of subsidy. I think it could have survived as such with the opportunity to reorganize over a couple of years or so. Simultaneously, strengthening the identity of the historic downtown campus as a seminary school could have enabled those serious about discernment to have a place with its own clear identity. Certainly, such a solution would have been much more acceptable to the Quigley South family of students, parents, and alumni. And it wouldn’t have made many of the people associated with Quigley North feeling, likewise, disenfranchised as a large part of Quigley’s outreach now had to center upon building bridges with those with attachments to South. Making people truly feel and be a part of the solution allows you to build up genuine partnerships which allows them to have a sense of commitment and pride in what they are a part of. Yet such is precisely what was lacking both in the closing of South AND the reorganization of the system at the old downtown facility of North. That truly hurt this Archdiocese and its seminary system significantly. Those who want to accuse Quigley of failing to produce priests in recent times ought to take a serious look at that reality. You don’t build up vocations or strong Catholic parochial relations by ostracizing the people whose support you need, selling them out, and telling them to “get with the program”.