Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landmark Marker Lindbergh topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission explores interpretive sign for Royal Airport/Charles Lindbergh site; funding and property questions remain
Summary
The commission discussed contextual, interpretive signage for the former Royal Airport/Charles Lindbergh landmark, reviewed examples from Minnesota and other cities, and agreed to verify property ownership and potential funding sources before proceeding.
The Monona Historic Preservation Commission on March 18 discussed options for an interpretive marker at the Royal Airport/Charles Lindbergh site and plans to seek community input, landowner permission and funding before moving forward.
Staff reported contact with Kayla Stylo, museum manager at the Lindbergh childhood home (an employee of the Minnesota Historical Society), who provided materials and examples of how other communities have contextualized Lindbergh’s legacy and controversial aspects of his history. Members reviewed examples of renaming and reinterpretation efforts in Minnetonka, Milwaukee, Dallas and San Diego and noted that contextual, interpretive signs can acknowledge both technological or aviation significance and aspects of Lindbergh’s public positions that later drew criticism.
Commissioners agreed the interpretive, educational style of signage is preferable to a single‑line bronze plaque. They discussed the need to determine property ownership and whether the existing historic marker can remain in place with an additional interpretive sign nearby; staff said the site may lie in a state Department of Transportation right-of-way and that property‑owner permission and easement limits must be verified.
Funding options mentioned included the commission’s own funds, Wisconsin Humanities grants (currently not accepting applications for 2025), and potential Certified Local Government (CLG) grant eligibility; commissioners also estimated interpretive sign costs could be on the order of several thousand dollars based on prior sign projects. Members proposed engaging groups involved with the city’s DEIB (diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging) plan and local anti‑racist groups for input in drafting interpretive text when funding and property access are confirmed.
No final action was taken; commissioners asked staff to (1) verify property ownership and easement constraints, (2) seek quotes from sign vendors so a funding plan is ready when grant opportunities open, and (3) reach out to local DEIB/anti‑racism stakeholders for eventual text review.
