Fort Nowhere
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
April 16, 1995, Sunday
FORT VANCOUVER: WHO CARES?
BYLINE: By SHERRI NEE The Columbian
SECTION: A section; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 2248 words
Like most visitors to Fort Vancouver, John Wulle walks in and asks, "Where is everything?"
Only seven of 24 buildings within the stockade have been reconstructed, so visitors to the 208-acre fort site must rely on their imaginations.
Once called the New York of the Pacific, Fort Vancouver was the West's commercial center for trappers, traders and American settlers between 1825 and 1845. Today, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site is a fairly lifeless reconstruction run by federal administrators who hope big crowds won't come.
Wulle, chief advocate of nearby Pearson Airpark, harbors no bitterness for the fort despite a decade of distrust between airfield promoters and the National Park Service, which administers the fort. Wulle's private plane might be called "Fort Duster," but he, like others, wants to see the fort finished, he says.
But no one is making an aggressive effort to do so not fort officials, not city of Vancouver leaders, not Clark County citizens.
In a time when a Republican Congress is talking about trimming the park service budget, unpopular attractions such as the fort are more likely to be cut than completed.
In a time when visitors at historical attractions elsewhere are multiplying, attendance at the old fort site has dropped more than 30 percent since 1991.
And in a time when the city of Vancouver has leveraged millions in state aid for waterfront trails and historical renovations at Officers Row, finishing the fort apparently has become an insurmountable task best left to someone else.
Shifting blame
Who cares?
The community, the park service and city officials don't.
More reconstruction at the fort likely would attract more tourists to Vancouver and boost the local economy, but there has been no cooperative effort between the city and the fort.
Observers say such a move would be out of the question given the bitter relationship between the park service and the city, which owns the airpark that uses some fort property.
If the fort is overlooked, Wulle, a Vancouver attorney, said, it's something the park service has brought upon itself.
Fort volunteers and Dave Herrera, fort superintendent, insist that's not the case. They say the fort is ignored because city officials have no regard for its significance.
"The city's interest in the fort in the past 15 years has been, How do we keep our airpark,' " Herrera said.
Particularly in the past five years, city officials and local pilots fought the fort's plans to halt airplane takeoffs and landings on park service land.
Fort advocates had hoped to establish a more historical, peaceful atmosphere at the site by removing the distractions of airplanes and by restoring grain fields along the perimeter of the fort.
But last year, the fort lost.
In November, city and park service officials signed a memorandum of agreement: All hangars will be removed from park service land by 2002, but airplanes will fly indefinitely with some limitations on non-historic aircraft after 2022.
A decade of bickering has overshadowed the national historic site and stalled reconstruction efforts, Herrera said.
Worse, he added, it has polarized the community.
Ted Brown, city parks and recreation director, and Mayor Bruce Hagensen argue that the fort might not be gathering public support because the historical site fails to market itself and has shown no interest in the community.
Hagensen called fort officials "an isolated group" restricted by park service policies.
"They have a book. If it isn't in the book, they don't do it," he said.
For example, fort superintendents refuse to allow weddings on the parade grounds or civilian bands in the picturesque bandstand near Officers Row.
A fire department request to have a group photographed inside the fort was denied. A popular playground along East Fifth Street was removed, and, following a public outcry, replaced with a smaller one tucked away by the fort's visitors center.
A proposed city gift of 100 cherry trees to provide a buffer from railroad tracks was rejected in 1989 as was a potential federal grant to build a pedestrian path from the waterfront to the fort.
In each case, fort officials argued such activities would intrude on the historical nature of the site.
Even though the city of Vancouver symbol on trucks and letterhead depicts the fort, the city shows little interest in the site.
In 1986, city and county officials weren't thinking of preserving a historical ambience when they offered land next to the fort as a potential site for a new Trail Blazers arena.
In 1991, a city-produced color brochure on Vancouver's history displayed several local historical places, but there was no photo of the fort.
One fort supporter said the city promotes its own projects and fears a reconstructed fort would detract from the history of Officers Row.
"People know more about (Vancouver's) Farmers Market than they know about Fort Vancouver," said Robert Chase, president of Friends of Fort Vancouver.
Parks Director Brown said, "History doesn't stop at the fort."
Vancouver is going to have plenty of attractions other than the fort, he said, mentioning plans for a new aviation museum at Pearson and pointing to the education center on wastewater treatment now under construction near the waterfront.
Few friends
Some 98,500 visitors passed through the tall stockade at Fort Vancouver in 1991. Last year, only 65,000 came.
Instead of aggressively pushing to build more of an attraction at the fort, the community seems to be yawning.
The non-profit Friends of Fort Vancouver is ineffective.
The group of history buffs and retirees lacks political power. It has 58 dues-paying members compared to Pearson Airpark Historical Society's 400 and its regular monthly lecture series recently was canceled due to lack of interest.
In five years, fort friends have raised a total of $ 33,000 toward construction, which came from one of its members and two anonymous donors.
By comparison, the Pearson historical society has raised $ 3 million for a museum.
Even with free newspaper advertising, the fort Friends' fund-raising campaign earlier this year gathered only $11.
The Friends group was formed in 1989 by fort volunteers who decided someone needed to counterbalance Pearson supporters who sought to extend the use of park service land.
Chase said the group really hasn't adapted to a fund-raising role now that the airpark-fort conflict is ending.
"I've been in this during the battle. I'm tired. I've lost my spark," he said.
He said the Friends have no influential attorneys or high-profile business executives. It needs more "go-getters," he said.
Karen Ciocia, executive director of the Downtown Vancouver Association, said fort advocates have failed to cultivate supporters on local boards and commissions.
In the past, Clark County residents and politicians have rallied around the fort, insisting that federal legislators push for reconstruction money.
The fort's federal-level supporters have included U.S. Rep. Russell V. Mack, who helped win its national monument designation in 1948, and U.S. Rep. Julia Butler Hansen, who fought to get federal funds for expansion, excavation and reconstruction between 1960 and 1974.
U.S. Rep. Donald Bonker saw Fort Vancouver as a "Williamsburg of the West" and in 1984 rejected the city's pleas to use the airpark beyond 2002.
Since then, federal interest in the fort has waned with U.S. Reps. Jolene Unsoeld and Linda Smith.
Unsoeld was instrumental in obtaining money for initial reconstruction of a fur store at the fort. But she sponsored legislation that favored the city's plans of extending airport land rights.
Smith said she supports the fort philosophically and favors the city proposal but will not help get any federal funds for its reconstruction.
Passive marketing
Fort Vancouver is ideally located at the gateway of Washington along Interstate 5. Yet, it remains strangely invisible.
The fort has only one sign in each direction on I-5 and a small sign posted below one for Pearson Airpark on state Highway 14.
Waddle's Restaurant on the Oregon side of the Columbia River and the Red Lion Inn at the Quay on the Washington side offer dozens of brochures on Portland's OMSI, the Seattle Space Needle and Vancouver, B.C., but nothing on Fort Vancouver.
In the Vancouver/Portland metro area, there are 1.7 million people within an easy drive of the fort. But with little promotion, few seek it out.
Superintendent Herrera said the fort's marketing strategy goes something like this: We don't need to promote ourselves, the public just needs to discover us.
Park service policies prohibit superintendents from fund-raising. Promotion is absent from the agency's mission and park service officials seem unfamiliar with the concept.
"I think the park service has never aggressively marketed itself because they assume everybody knows about them. Maybe that's a problem," said Stephanie Toothman, chief of cultural resources for the park service's regional office.
The fort makes little effort to draw people in. Its mission is to interpret fort history for anyone who happens to swing by.
Fort Vancouver National Historic Site has no 800 telephone number for information or directions. There's no consistent effort to get publicity in tourist or regional magazines such as Sunset, Pacific Northwest or National Geographic Traveler.
The fort has a quality color brochure, but it's only handed out to those who already have found the fort and enter the visitors center.
National tourist attraction studies have found visitors crave living history demonstrations with costumed interpreters.
The fort offers only a couple of guides in period clothing. Its popular candlelight tour occurs once a year, and re-enactments are rare.
Fort officials say there's no strong correlation between park attendance and federal funding, and they actually fear more visitors.
A large number of visitors would increase maintenance costs, Herrera said.
More visitors would mean steps and railings would wear out sooner, rest rooms would have to be cleaned more often, trash would have to be dumped more frequently and heating bills would increase as doors are opened more often, he said.
The fort brochures cost less than 12 cents each and the city or Visitors Bureau easily could buy a couple thousand to distribute, Herrera said. "The chamber, the Visitors and Convention Bureau and the city of Vancouver have to decide whether they'll promote the fort."
He said they haven't offered to help, and he hasn't asked.
"Who would presume to do that for a federal agency?" Hagensen asked. "We can't put our money into the fort. It's federal."
Far from completion
Further reconstruction of Fort Vancouver was recommended by a team of planners in a 1975 Regional Urban Design Assistance Team study.
But the new fur store is only the second building completed since that time.
A 1979 master plan for Central Park recommended a national festival based on the Fort Vancouver theme, such as "Fur Fest" or "Hudson's Bay Days." But groups that promote tourism didn't pick up on the idea.
When asked if he would have the fort participate in such a festival, Herrera said, "It depends on what we were asked to do. We could easily set up a booth."
With no federal or city support in sight, Herrera insists reconstruction is up to the community.
"There's no doubt there are some very wealthy people living in this area," he said.
"I can only hope that some day they will look kindly on the fort."
"History's a funny thing," he added, pointing to the renewed interest in the Civil War following Ken Burns's series on public television.
It could happen with Fort Vancouver, he said.
"Somebody may come along and write a book about it or do a TV series on Fort Vancouver, and we in the Northwest might wake up and realize how valuable it is.
"It's not so much the bickering between the city and the park service. It's not so much that we say no" to community requests, Herrera said.
The fort isn't attracting visitors because it's far from completion, he said.
"There's just not enough here yet to make it that big of an attraction."
Brett Oppegaard contributed to this story.
The fort:
WHAT: Fort Vancouver National Historic Site commemorates what many historians have called "the cradle of civilization" in the Pacific Northwest. The self-sufficient fort employed up to 1,000 people in its heyday.
WHERE: Fort Vancouver is just east of downtown Vancouver on Fifth Street, and the visitors center is north of the site, 1501 E. Evergreen Blvd.
HOURS: 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily. Seasonal entry fees are $ 2 per person or $ 4 per family/group.
WHO VISITS: Attendance at the reconstructed fort has dropped from 98,500 in 1991 to 65,000 last year. Of that number, 20,000 were school children and more than 5,000 came during the Fourth of July celebration and the candlelight tours.
BUDGET: The annual operating budget is about $ 1 million, which doesn't include any money for reconstruction. The park employs 21 full-time equivalents and has more than 160 volunteers.
FUTURE: A fur store and archaeology lab will open this year. The frame of the carpenter's shop, which was put together in 1993, might be moved inside the fort's stockade this fall.
by Brett Oppegaard / The Columbian
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
April 18, 1995, Tuesday
FORT, CITY MUST UNITE FOR THEIR MUTUAL BENEFIT MEGASTORE ZONE APPEAL TESTS GROWTH STRATEGY
BYLINE: The Columbian
SECTION: Opinion; Pg. A10
LENGTH: 777 words
A century ago, Fort Vancouver did not exist. Not a visible trace remained of the Hudson's Bay Company post that for many years had been the center of European activity in the frontier Pacific Northwest.
Abandoned in 1860, the fort was largely dismantled by the U.S. Army over the next few years, and what remained was consumed by fire in 1866. By the turn of the century, the fort's last above-ground traces had been pounded into dust by artillery practice and plowed under for crops to feed the troops at Vancouver Barracks.
Today Fort Vancouver stands once more. It does so only because of the foresight and hard work of many people over the years who recognized its importance to the region's history, culture and identity.
Yet the reconstructed outpost could very well suffer the same ignoble end that its long-lost predecessor did. As Columbian reporters SherriNee and Brett Oppegaard revealed in the three-part series that concludes today, Fort Vancouver is rapidly becoming Fort Nowhere.
Visitor counts at the national historic site have plummeted more than 30 percent in the last four years. Fewer than half of the nearly two dozen structures inside the original fort's wall have been rebuilt, and financing for additional restoration is doubtful at best. Even the dollars for simple operations and maintenance are getting tight, and that has the staff at the historic site actually fearing the wear and tear additional visitors might bring.
Perhaps worst of all, the long-running fight between Fort Vancouver and the city that adopted its name over the fate of neighboring Pearson Airpark left a barrier far more imposing than the fort's 15-foot-tall stockade. For too long, being for Pearson meant being against the fort. Now that the dispute has been resolved through an agreement between the city and the National Park Service, the continuing animosity is pointless and counterproductive.
For Vancouver, the fort represents an opportunity to enhance community identity, boost tourism and maintain links with its historic past. For Fort Vancouver, the city represents a necessary partner in the historic site's promotion and education efforts.
City Manager John Fischbach and historic site Superintendent Dave Herrera should sit down immediately and begin drafting a joint strategy for telling the Fort Vancouver story to the community and the world. Without such an effort, the fort risks a return to rubble.
The continuing battle about growth management gets its energy from the shared expectation that public authority can profoundly shape private endeavor.
People support planning and zoning because they expect the processes to result in better living conditions for all. Those who profit from unrestrained growth consider restraining measures bad because they might work.
As often as not, however, efforts to restrain and direct patterns of development appear impotent, particularly to those most hopeful that growth management will work.
The illustrative case at hand is the plan to build a large Fred Meyer store where Interstate 5 and Interstate 205 merge. The big rivers of traffic have brought the pressure of growth to that area in a considerable flood. The subsequent decision by Washington State University to build its branch campus northeast of the freeway confluence was part of the flood.
By way of building levees to contain the flood, the county's growth management process ordained that the size and intensity of commercial development in the neighborhood should be restrained. That effort included zoning the land north of Northeast 139th Street and west of I-5 for community commercial uses. The spirit of that zoning, at least, is that no commercial operation larger than 50,000 square feet should be approved.
Fred Meyer Inc. has for some years been shopping around the neighborhoods north of its aging facility at Highway 99 and 78th Street. The company has opted for a 17.8-acre field north of 139th and east of Tenney Road as the site for a 163,800-square-foot complex. The county has so far approved of such a megastore in a zone for community commercial on grounds that a Fred Meyer store is actually a whole lot of smaller stores sort of jammed together.
The neighbors who have appealed the county officials' reading of the ordinance and who will get a hearing Wednesday evening (7 in the council chamber at Vancouver City Hall) don't buy the notion. They fear the megastore will generate gawdawful traffic.
Fred Meyer people warn, in effect, that big commercial development in the area is inevitable and could be worse. If they are right, then growth may not be manageable.
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
April 16, 1995, Sunday
FORT MISSES OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE
BYLINE: By BRETT OPPEGAARD and SHERRI NEE The Columbian
SECTION: A section; Pg. A8
LENGTH: 657 words
Fort Vancouver National Historic Site doesn't need a vision: The detailed plans have been made and paid for.
Picture a trail from a park on the Columbia River waterfront to the huts, stables and gardens of Kanaka Village where common workers lived and labored outside the 15-foot-tall stockade. The path then meanders through a historic apple orchard to the front gate of the fort. Inside, people in period costume are acting out 19th-century life in a self-sufficient community. It's a lively community that included the Pacific Northwest's first Catholic church, rowdy bachelors' quarters and a jail.
That was the idea, anyway.
In the late 1970s, both the city of Vancouver and the National Park Service spent thousands on separate plans to turn Vancouver into a mecca for history-hungry tourists.
The city plans call for a "layered-history approach," in which Officers Row, Pearson Airpark, Vancouver Barracks and the fort receive equal billing. The fort plans focus solely on reconstruction and removal of modern-day distractions surrounding the site.
The city has made significant progress. It renovated Officers Row, helped raise $ 3 million for a new aviation museum and, with help from Congress, intends to make the combined area of historical attractions a "National Historic Reserve."
Fort Vancouver hasn't fared as well.
For a variety of reasons including lack of federal funding and boundary battles over Pearson the fort has missed some key opportunities.
Passing on improvements
Last year, when state funding became available for the envisioned walking bridge and trail that would pass over state Highway 14 and link the waterfront to historic reconstruction, the fort fumbled.
City and fort officials both have plans that call for a waterfront-fort link, but the fort backed out because it wanted to do more research and planning on the property (site of the Kanaka Village) the trail was to cross.
"They never brought up any questions before," said city Parks and Recreation Director Ted Brown.
He said the park service wanted to delay the project for a year.
"It got delayed to the point that the funds were no longer available," Brown said.
Superintendent Dave Herrera insists the funding is still available and the park service wouldn't lose anything by tying into the trail system at a later date.
"We're not prepared to say today if there should be a trail or where the trail should go," he said.
Herrera acknowledged that the fort didn't have the money then nor does it now to research the area, which was the site of the Kanaka Village.
Meanwhile, the city has redesigned its plans.
Instead of crossing state Highway 14 at the Old Apple Tree Park and connecting with the fort, the trail will run parallel to Interstate 5 along its east right-of-way to Fifth Street.
It will not touch National Park Service property at any point.
Walkers and joggers that might have been attracted to the fort effectively have been diverted.
"We were totally dismayed by their all-of-a-sudden objection to a plan that had been in the works for 20 years," Brown said.
This most recent falling out has cooled an already chilly relationship.
"Given our past experiences, we wouldn't be too excited about working with the fort in the future," Brown said.
Another chance to enhance the fort was a $2.3 million federal grant that Herrera said could have been stretched to pay for at least the framework of all the missing buildings inside the stockade.
Instead, the park service chose to build a single fur store/archeological lab, which is almost complete.
When Brown talks about management at Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, he cups his hands and places them on the side of each eye like blinders.
"They see their mission very narrowly," he said.
"If it doesn't fit into that mission which is to interpret the history of their era then it won't happen."
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
April 17, 1995, Monday
TRAILING OTHER SITES: A FORT FAR AFIELD
BYLINE: By BRETT OPPEGAARD and SHERRI NEE ; The Columbian
SECTION: A section; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 1117 words
Many Clark County history buffs can't help but look at Fort Vancouver and dream of Colonial Williamsburg the national icon of historical attractions.
The fully reconstructed 18th-century heritage site in Virginia employs 3,500 people, draws more than 2 million visitors per year and invests $ 139 million annually in research, education, publications, maintenance and restaurant operation.
Also each year, tourists spend $ 315 million in the city of Williamsburg, Va.
Reaching that level of success might seem unrealistic for Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. But some struggling regional towns such as Stevenson in the Columbia River Gorge, as well as Oregon's Baker City and Oregon City, are betting millions that marketing history will pay off.
As interpretations of history become the fastest growing facet of the tourism industry and ripe opportunities speed by, Fort Vancouver has merged onto the tourist superhighway in a covered wagon.
In the past 11 years, only one new building has been reconstructed at the federally funded fort, and attendance has been dropping more than 30 percent in the past few years.
Last year, Fort Vancouver cost taxpayers about $ 1 million to operate. It earned only $28,000 in admission fees.
With those numbers, a private corporation running the fort would file for bankruptcy.
A non-profit agency armed with grants might make it work without a federal subsidy. And city investment in the project, similar to the 1989 Officers Row renovation, could make it thrive, some say. "I don't think it's too hard to imagine," said Vancouver Mayor Bruce Hagensen.
The mayor said he isn't advocating a city takeover but acknowledged the idea had been talked about from time to time.
National, local success
While the federal fort makes no profit, many non-profit historical attractions are prospering.
Building a popular attraction often begins with a substantial grant or a wealthy contributor whose generosity moves a community to action.
In Williamsburg, millionaire John D. Rockefeller Jr. invested $68 million in 1926 to preserve or rebuild more than 130 structures.
The attraction now is home to nearly 200 buildings.
In the isolated town of Baker City, a $12 million investment in an Oregon Trail exhibit is bringing the community new life and jobs.
Almost 350,000 tourists, double the expected turnout, came to the center at Flagstaff Hill in 1993.
Before this project began, the town had the highest level of unemployment in Oregon. It is now a more reasonable 7 percent.
Baker City residents invested another $5 million to restore 30 downtown buildings to complement the tourist magnet. And the city is scheduled to restore another eight buildings next year.
In Oregon City, residents have spent the past several years pooling $3 million from federal, state, city and private sources. Their reward is an 8-acre campus with a multi-media center and an amphitheater that celebrates the end of the Oregon Trail.
"After the first two years, it should pay for itself," said the foundation's executive director David Porter. The interpretive center alone is expected to attract 120,000 people when it opens this summer.
The non-profit Oregon Trail Foundation Inc. isn't finished. It intends to hold nightly outdoor theater and weekly festivals to generate enough revenue for a 112-acre expansion.
Taking Baker City's lead, a handful of residents in Skamania County the county with the highest level of unemployment in Washington-pushed their area legislators to capture a $ 5.25 million matching grant to make up for declining employment their in vital timber industry.
Next month, the $10.5 million Columbia Gorge Interpretive Center will open near Skamania Lodge.
"We did a lot of begging for money," said former Skamania County Commissioner Ed Callahan. "Having doors closed in your face is kind of tough, but we persevered."
Oregon City's Porter added, "It takes a lot of people-with a vision of what could happen."
HISTORICAL ATTRACTIONS AROUND U.S.:
Here's how the federal government's Fort Vancouver compares to the nonprofit historical attractions nationwide in order of attendance:
Site Visitors in 1994 Admission revenue
Colonial Williamsburg 2 million $22.5 million
Williamsburg, Va.: A 173-acres reconstructed 18th-century town of costumed interpreters and nearly 200 buildings as they appeared on the eve of the Revolution.
Greenfield Village 1.1 million $6 million
Dearborn, Mich.: An 81-acre complex that celebrates innovative Americans from 1600 to 1930, includes Thomas Edison's lab, the Wright brothers cycle shop.
Mystic Seaport Museum 450,000 $4.1 million
Mystic, Conn.: A 17-acre maritime historic site displays the impact of maritime on economic, social and cultural life of the 19th century.
Old Sturbridge Village 440,000 $3.5 million
Sturbridge, Mass.: A 200-acre village that displays life in the 1830s with costumed interpreters, farmers and crafts people.
Plimoth Plantation 415,000 $4.2 million
Plymouth, Mass.: A 105-acre village that displays 17th-century pilgrim life with costumed interpreters and a full-scale reproduction of the Mayflower ship.
Jamestown Settlement 392,470 $2 million
Williamsburg, Va.: A 25-acre living-history museum of early American Indian life and 17th-century colonial Jamestown, America's first permanent English colony.
Conner Prairie 331,000 $1.6 million
Indianapolis, Ind.: A 240-acre 1836 settlement of the old northwest territory, includes a village of about 30 buildings, including the restored home of William Conner.
Old Salem 124,600 $894,400
Winston-Salem, N.C.: A restored German Moravian congregation town of 25 blocks where interpreters display household activities and trades of the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
Fort Vancouver 65,000 $28,000
Vancouver: A 208-acre site that includes a visitors center and a stockade that contains seven reconstructed buildings of the Hudson's Bay Co. trading post from 1825 to 1845.
Stawberry Banke Museum 63,850 $343,300
Portsmouth, N.H.: A 10-acre historic neighborhood displaying life from 1695 through 1955 with restored homes and costumed interpreters.
Vermilionville 61,000 $340,000
Lafayette, La.: A 23-acre living-history museum that displays the architecture, culture and crafts of a French Acadian community in the late 18th century.
The Columbian
April 18, 1995, Tuesday
FORT VANCOUVER: HISTORY AT STAKE
BYLINE: By BRETT OPPEGAARD and SHERRI NEE The Columbian
SECTION: A section; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 934 words
Before one stockade pole was erected, Northwest historian Bert Brown Barker urged Vancouver: "Never cease until you have Fort Vancouver restored."
He spoke these words to an inspired crowd more than 40 years ago. But the enthusiasm has faded.
Federal money for the project is drying up, attendance is dropping and more than two-thirds of the fort structures still are missing.
Instead of a symbol for community pride, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site has become nothing more than an unsatisfying field trip.
Some suggest a takeover by the city of Vancouver. Others think smaller steps would help.
Something needs to be done, say fort supporters.
John Marshall, a former assistant to the city manager, said the budget-slashing Congress should give the fort to the community where it will get the attention it needs.
"The National Park Service's resources are severely stretched," he said, and Fort Vancouver isn't recognized as one of the government's finest parks.
"It isn't even on the radar screen," he said.
The city could complete the fort in 10 years if it had control, Marshall added, basing his estimate on the Officers Row project.
When the city took over the federally owned strip of 21 dilapidated Victorians in 1984, it was able to find $10 million and complete restoration within five years.
City-run fort?
Recent suggestions of purging some sites from the national park system have made a city-run fort a possibility, said Richard Winters, associate regional director of the park service.
The first potential problem with a city takeover is that some archaeologists would question whether the city could maintain the historic site at National Park Service standards, he cautioned.
Ron Brentano, chief field representative for the Oregon Historical Society, said some historic sites have rushed to document and build an exhibit only to later spend millions undoing inaccuracies.
A second obstacle to a city-run fort is that the mayor doesn't like the idea.
City ownership of Fort Vancouver may have been talked about on and off for years, but Mayor Bruce Hagensen instead supports a "historic reserve" in Vancouver to celebrate the fort as part of a "One Place Across Time" exhibit that would include Officers Row, Pearson Airpark and Vancouver Barracks.
The first two goals of the joint effort have nothing to do with the fort. Building a $3 million aviation museum and restoring the O.O. Howard House are the top priorities.
But Hagensen said the fort's chances of getting any reconstruction dollars are better if it's part of the partnership.
Another suggestion involves renaming the city Fort Vancouver.
Proponents have said it would help avoid confusion with Vancouver, B.C.
Robert Chase, president of Friends of Fort Vancouver, said the name change would be an effective advertisement for the historic fort.
"That would be the biggest, single, easy thing we could do," he said.
Last year, Baker, Ore., did just that.
To be more historically correct, Baker became Baker City its name during the westward migration of the 1840s and 1850s. Baker City is reaping revenue from the newly opened Oregon Trail exhibit at nearby Flagstaff Hill.
A name change for Vancouver has been discussed for more than 35 years, but voters have rejected the idea three times.
If the community got behind a name change for the fort's sake, or if crowds again rally for further reconstruction, city officials might have difficulty shrugging off Barker's plea to finish the fort.
Then, success could be as simple as putting together an aggressive promotional campaign with new signs, a billboard here and there and plenty of brochures to pass around.
Renewed interest in the fort could be a catalyst for fund-raising and perpetual construction.
Outreach vital
In some respects, it might be unfair to compare the government-owned fort with successful nonprofit living-history museums, Brentano said. But today, every historic attraction and arts foundation is in the same position of going to the public for financial support.
Every organization is surveying its visitors and refocusing programs to attract more, Brentano said. History has to be exciting and interactive.
People go to historic sites because they want to see what life was like, he said. "They want to see the real thing."
They want to be educated, he added, and whether they want to admit it or not, they want to be entertained.
Brentano said he's impressed with Fort Vancouver when he visits but acknowledges more buildings, demonstrations and interpretations there would dazzle tourists.
Karen Ciocia, executive director of the Downtown Vancouver Association, suggests the fort build on its few popular activities.
More candlelight tours, brigade encampments and living-history exhibits could keep crowds captivated and coming back, she said.
In his speech, Barker said, "I don't expect to live long enough to see it, but I hope you people won't let go until you have completed the restoration of the fort and the Indian villages surrounding it."