Bill Overview
Title: Pullman National Historical Park Act
Description: This bill redesignates the Pullman National Monument in Illinois as the Pullman National Historical Park. The Department of the Interior may enter into cooperative agreements with interested parties to support collaborative interpretive and educational programs at nonfederal historic properties within the boundaries of the historical park, and identify, interpret, and provide assistance for the preservation of nonfederal land within the boundaries of the historical park and at sites in close proximity to the historical park. Interior may acquire any land (including interests in land), buildings, or structures by donation, transfer, exchange, or purchase from a willing seller for inclusion in the historical park. Interior must complete a management plan for the historical park.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals affected by the Pullman National Historical Park designation
Estimated Size: 50000
- The Pullman National Historical Park is located in Illinois, USA.
- Residents of Illinois, especially those near the historical park, will have increased exposure to educational and interpretive programs.
- The park's designation may lead to increased tourism, affecting local businesses and economies.
- The park's preservation efforts may impact local property owners and community stakeholders.
- The Department of the Interior's activities may create opportunities and challenges for local governance and planning.
- There may be job creation related to the operation and management of the park and its programs.
Reasoning
- The Pullman National Historical Park is located in an urban area with a diverse population, meaning any change could have mixed effects based on socio-economic factors.
- Budgetary considerations restrict how far reaching the improvements and management plans can be. Limited immediate impact on larger populations due to distance from the site for non-locals.
- Economic benefits potentially accrue through tourism, which can be beneficial for local businesses and the job market.
- Historical preservation and educational benefits could enhance community pride and educational outcomes, particularly in schools.
- Some local residents might object to increased tourism due to concerns about noise or crowding.
- Despite being a national-level initiative, impacts will be felt strongest at the local level, especially in neighborhoods surrounding the park.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excited about potential for educational resources in the community.
- Believes it will benefit her students with more field trip opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Joliet, Illinois)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful for increase in business due to more visitors.
- Concerns about parking availability for customers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Real Estate Agent (Pullman, Illinois)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Property values might increase due to designation.
- Worries about over-development and maintaining community character.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired (Gary, Indiana)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Interested in visiting the new historical park.
- Not sure if the changes will directly affect him in Indiana.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cultural Program Coordinator (Downtown Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sees opportunities for expanded cultural programs.
- Wants more inclusive representation in park activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Student (South Bend, Indiana)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Thinks it will be a great case study for his courses.
- Not directly impacted but finds the policy interesting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Pullman, Illinois)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Supports the initiative but wary of gentrification risks.
- Sees potential for job growth but unsure about long-term impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Factory Worker (Naperville, Illinois)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Unlikely to benefit personally, prefers practical policies.
- Wonders if funds could be used for direct community aid.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
City Planner (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Thinks the park can improve urban landscapes.
- Worried about transportation overload in local area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Tour guide (Springfield, Illinois)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Aims to expand her tour routes to include the new park.
- Sees potential for more business in peak seasons.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $4000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $6000000)
Year 3: $4000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $6000000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $5000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $4000000)
Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $800000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- Overall economic impacts hinge on the park's ability to draw additional tourists and the cooperation of local businesses.
- The federal cost might be offset by increased local economic activity and federal tax receipts.
- Potential acquisition of lands could vary significantly based on real estate market conditions and available willing sellers.