View single post by Margaret B.
 Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 12:46 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Margaret B.

Joined: Wed Oct 28th, 2009
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 1

  back to top

I would respectfully disagree with the use of the term, "lie" in terms of the Foundation.  Certainly there were changes, particularly in terms of costs, over the life of the project. That's not exactly unknown at the start of a major construction or renovation project:  Decisions are made on scope, prices rise, a geothermal HVAC system was chosen (greener and believed to be less expensive in the long run but priciet at the outset.), the Foundation accepted on additional responsibilities.  I don't think there was any reasonable basis for anyone to accurately estimate  the costs of the painting restoration. 

The  Foundation and the costs are aspects of this that have been the most thoroughly vetted with the results published, including Congressional oversight subcommittee hearings and the recent OIG report.  Of course, not everyone will agree with the choices made or even agree with the explanations nor should they have to do so.  It's just, IMHO, using the term "lie" is inaccurate. 

Personally, I admire and respect the man and his work. Nothing has changed that since I don't expect perfection from people. However,  regardless of one's feelings about John Latschar the person, there is what has been accomplished at GNMP under his leadership. I started coming to Gettysburg at the very beginning of John Latschar's tenure and I will keep coming unless and until I can no longer physically do so, now that he's gone.  I'm financially stable enough but by no means wealthy and coming up on retirement,  but there is no amount of money in the world that I'd accept if it meant going back to the state of GNMP as it was when he came.  Generations of visitors will appreciate what his leadership has accomplished, long after he's become another past chapter in the park's history.

 Close Window