More than 40 years ago, North Park chose to stay in the city, a decision that helped define its identity and mission.
By Ellen Almer BA 鈥�94
While the decades-old choice to keep North Park鈥檚 campus in Chicago rather than move to the far suburbs seems like a no-brainer today, the actual decision-making process, said those who remember it, was fraught with tension and drama.
The decision came in 1980, in North Park鈥檚 gym, at the Evangelical Covenant Church鈥檚 (ECC) annual meeting, where then-President Milton Engebretson MDiv 鈥�54 fretted behind the stage鈥檚 closed curtain.
G. Timothy Johnson AA 鈥�56, MDiv 鈥�63, who led the six-person task force charged with recommending whether or not to change the location of the school, remembered how nervous Engebretson was. 鈥淗e was pacing back and forth.鈥�
He needn鈥檛 have worried. Following Johnson鈥檚 presentation, the ECC delegates voted overwhelmingly to accept the panel鈥檚 recommendation to remain in Chicago.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 remember any debate or controversy,鈥� Johnson said, adding that members of the task force were mainly relieved because the decision, for them at least, had never been a foregone conclusion.
CONTEMPLATING CHANGE
Just a year before, Dean Robert Sandin recommended that North Park stop all capital improvements on its Chicago campus and consider moving to the suburbs.
鈥淲e happen to be located in the city of Chicago, and this location has some influence on our constituency, our programs and our lifestyle,鈥� he wrote at the time. 鈥淵et our location does not define our reason for being. On the contrary, for the last 20 years (if not longer), we have really done very little to effectively adapt our programs to the needs of the urban environment.鈥�
He argued the school鈥檚 mission was at odds with the location, and the buildings required by the year 2025 would not fit on North Park鈥檚 current 20-acre campus.
Arthur A.R. Nelson A 鈥�52, MDiv 鈥�60 interim president of North Park at the time, acknowledged that the school was struggling with lower enrollment and aging facilities.
鈥淲e were beginning to do better on admissions, but we were in a bad position,鈥� Nelson recalled. 鈥淪ome constituents were worried about investing in a college where crime was bad,鈥� Nelson added, a fear he believed was overblown.
In fact, the areas around North Park were beginning to be shored up by a new wave of Eastern European and Asian immigrant populations who brought economic stability to the area, especially in the Albany Park neigh- borhood that bordered the south end of campus.
But when A. Harold Anderson (Anderson Chapel鈥檚 namesake donor) graciously offered 100 acres in Grayslake for a new campus, North Park officials were intrigued.
“We really thought about our place in Chicago…we had to ask ourselves if we were doing this for some reason other than [our] mission.” 鈥擜rthur A. R. Nelson
STEEP COSTS, STUDENT OPPOSITION
The new campus would have to be built from scratch, officials deter- mined, with all-new facilities. The price was pegged at $37.5 million. Conversely, staying in Chicago would require a handful of new facilities and a badly needed renovation of Old Main for $11.5 million. Although the cost difference was stark, the Johnson-led task force persevered.
鈥淢any Chicago-area people were enthused about it for obvious reasons,鈥� Johnson said. 鈥淭he idea of a brand-new campus out in the suburbs. So, we felt the need to take the idea seriously.鈥�
As part of the process, the task force, which included North Park stalwarts Zenos Hawkinson A 鈥�41, AS 鈥�43 and Bill Fredrickson A 鈥�34, AA 鈥�36, surveyed students, faculty, staff, and students. The reactions were swift and strong. Hundreds of students signed a petition against relocating, saying: 鈥淲e can think of no academic discipline that would benefit leaving Chicago.鈥�
鈥淧ut the college anywhere else, and it would not be North Park,鈥� said the editorial board of the College News.
鈥淲e really thought about our place in Chicago,鈥� Nelson said. 鈥淭o leave this city is the biggest mistake we could make if we believed in our mission to expand peoples鈥� intellectual life and make it as expansive as their religious life. We had to ask ourselves if we were doing this for some reason other than that mission.鈥�
Donn Engebretson A 鈥�69, BA 鈥�73, MDiv 鈥�78, Milton鈥檚 son and a current resident of the North Park neighborhood, noted that North Park was one of the few small Christian schools to remain in a major metropolitan city during a period of widespread relocation.
鈥淏ack in the 70s and 80s, the Christian colleges that moved to the suburbs thought they were the prescient ones,鈥� Engebretson said. 鈥淭oday, with the enormous resources of Chicago, there鈥檚 no question North Park and its parent denomination were truly the ones with vision and an expansive understanding of mission.鈥�
Michelle Dodson BA 鈥�02, the sem- inary鈥檚 Milton B. Engebretson Chair in Evangelism and Justice, agreed, lauding North Park鈥檚 leaders for not succumbing to the 鈥渨hite flight鈥� trend.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 care how big your commit- ment is to diversity; an institution is marked by its physical space,鈥� Dodson said. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e going to move far from a big city, you know you鈥檒l lose the benefits of a diverse student body.鈥�
Staying in the city is a physical com- mitment to North Park鈥檚 intercultural distinctive, she said.
鈥淭he world is becoming more urban, and even if you鈥檙e not going to live in a city, having that perspective of being in a neighborhood where people don鈥檛 look like you, getting on a busy city bus, it significantly shapes you.鈥�
Nelson agreed.
鈥淚n the end, the task force realized you can鈥檛 just reestablish this school in a cornfield.鈥�
“Back in the 70s and 80s, the Christian colleges that moved to the suburbs thought they were the prescient ones. Today, with the enormous resources of Chicago, there鈥檚 no question North Park and its parent denomination were truly the ones with vision and an expansive understanding of mission.” 鈥擠ONN ENGEBRETSON
ENSURING NORTH PARK鈥橲 FUTURE
Many, including Johnson and Nelson, believe North Park would not exist today if the campus had moved to the suburbs.
鈥淲e decided we can stay here without trading our values,鈥� Nelson said. And if we hadn鈥檛 stayed? Nelson isn鈥檛 alone in his assessment: 鈥淲e would鈥檝e closed years ago.鈥�
The city of Chicago, and the North Park neighborhood, were certainly grateful the school remained.
When North Park announced its decision, Nelson received a supportive letter from then-Mayor Jane Byrne, and local newspapers lauded it.
鈥淣orth Park College bucks the trend toward suburbia,鈥� said a headline from the Chicago Tribune.
An editorial in the June 19, 1980, edition of the Chicago Sun-Times said: 鈥淭he decision of North Park College and Seminary to remain in Chicago is good news for the city, and not only because of its academic excellence and crack basketball team.鈥�
And then there鈥檚 the question of what the North Park neighborhood would look like if the school had left.
Johnson surmises the campus acreage would鈥檝e been sold to a housing developer, while others questioned whether businesses such as Tre Kronor restaurant, the Sweden Shop, and even Starbucks would be anchors of Foster Avenue.
鈥淎s a business owner in the area and a neighbor of the university, I was personally pleased when the university renewed its commitment to the neighborhood and the benefits of an in-city education,鈥� said Carmen Rodriguez of the North Park Chamber of Commerce Planning Commission.
Donn Engebretson credited an expansive understanding of mission by the ECC, which is inclusive of people from every race and ethnicity, for the decision to maintain a Chicago base.
鈥淭hat vision continues to animate North Park and, at its best, the Covenant Church today,鈥� he said.
“Put the college anywhere else, and it would not be North Park.”鈥擟OLLEGE颅 NEWS
