Dear editor,
As a longtime supporter of Monk Botanical Gardens, I am writing to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding the proposed changes and renaming to Wausau Botanic Garden. This decision not only disregards the legacy and generosity of Robert Monk but also poses significant implications for the future direction of the organization and its relationship to individuals in the community. It appears that the concerns and opinions of the very individuals who have supported the gardens are being disregarded in favor of decisions made behind closed doors.
Monk Botanical Gardens owe their existence to the gracious donation of land by Robert Monk. His contribution laid the foundation for the beautiful sanctuary that has become a cherished part of our community. By erasing his name from the title, the board of directors risks dishonoring his memory and devaluing his remarkable gift. The claim that using Wausau in the name honors its volunteers and supporters seems disingenuous and serves to exclude individuals from other municipalities who donate their precious time, treasure and talent as well.
The gardens’ responses to the community have been disheartening and callous, going so far as to insinuate that the gardens doesn’t owe the Monk family anything and that they feel a sense of duty to the late Robert Monk alone because he donated his land to them instead of his kids. Wausau Botanic Gardens replied to a personal message from a community member, “They did not donate anything. He did. He is who we serve … . He chose to donate the land to a nonprofit not his kids … .” It’s astonishing that this is how they chose to speak to a community member about the Monk family.
As a nonprofit entity, the leadership of the gardens should understand the importance of fostering a strong and supportive relationship with the community it serves – meaning the people, not just chasing corporate sponsorships! Changing the name of the gardens without consulting the community demonstrates a lack of transparency and good faith engagement with the community.
I have personally witnessed the positive impact Monk Botanical Gardens has on individuals and families in our community. Having enrolled my child in the nature-based preschool program for two years and actively participating in various programs myself, I have experienced firsthand the value that these gardens provide in promoting environmental education, fostering a love for nature, and creating a sense of community.
However, the decision to transition from “always free” admission to paid admission is deeply troubling. By implementing a fee-based model, the organization risks excluding individuals and families who may not have the means to afford entry, limiting access to the transformative experiences that the gardens offer. As many others have noted, implementing low-income applications only adds more red tape and hoops to jump through for struggling families to access the gardens. I have had personal experience in the past as a single working parent and can attest to the struggles of not making enough money to make ends meet, yet being just above arbitrarily set poverty income guidelines that are commonly used in these types of financial aid applications. A membership to the gardens would have absolutely been out of reach for me, and it will be for others in our community as well under this model. Such barriers run counter to the values of inclusivity and accessibility that the organization has historically championed. Because I had a relationship with the gardens during my financial hardship, it was an easy decision to support the gardens financially when my circumstances allowed. It would be shortsighted of the board to overlook the value of personal stories of connection to the gardens and word of mouth recommendations from regular people in favor of capital donors.
Lastly, the master plans which include a complete overhaul and commercialization of the gardens is concerning to say the least. Under this plan, the land will be overdeveloped with multiple buildings and parking lots, turning the gardens into a capitalization endeavor. The gardens should remain first and foremost a nature sanctuary, not another cafe and beer garden promoting overconsumption. In this economy? In this state of environmental disaster? How does this align with the gardens’ values of sustainability and stewardship? How does a beer garden align with the purpose of this space or with the fact that there is a preschool on the grounds?
In light of these concerns, I urge the board of directors and the executive director to reconsider the proposed changes and restore Robert Monk’s name to prominent signage and marketing materials. It is imperative that Monk Botanical Gardens remain true to its founding principles, honor its benefactors, and prioritize the well-being and involvement of the community it serves. I remain hopeful that the gardens will uphold its commitment to inclusivity, accessibility, and sustainability and stewardship over the land to promote true community – and earn its tagline as “Wausau’s Happy Place.”
Jen Leber of Kronenwetter
Editor’s note: Wausau Pilot & Review gladly publishes commentary from readers, residents and candidates for local offices. The views of readers and columnists are independent of this newspaper and do not necessarily reflect the views of Wausau Pilot & Review. To submit, email [email protected] or mail to 500 N. Third St., Suite 208-8, Wausau, Wis. 54403.
