Spring Break
University sued for plan to raze Kalman building
by Miranda Neubauer
Senior Writer
News | 5/19/09
Posted online at 12:52 AM EST on 5/19/09
/ Last updated at 3:29 PM EST on 5/19/09
University General Council Judith Sizer wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that the "Kalman Science Center is one of the oldest, most heavily used buildings on campus, and needs to be replaced." Sizer also wrote that "the Kalman family was assured, over a year ago, that the University has every intention of continuing its memorial to Julius Kalman, a generous early donor to Brandeis." Sizer wrote that the University received notice of the lawsuit May 11, 2009 and intends to work with the family to resolve the matter.
The motion for the injunction states that Brandeis gave its assurance of a future commemoration "without providing specifics."
Kalman said he began raising concerns about the building last year by getting in touch with Brandeis and the Massachusetts Attorney General's office when he heard about the plans on the Internet. According to the complaint, Kalman received a response letter from Reinharz about the matter.
Emily La Grassa, director of communications for the Massachusetts attorney general's office, wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that after receiving a complaint in May 2008, "after carefully reviewing the will of Julius Kalman, we determined that nothing contained in the will imposed on Brandeis an obligation to maintain a building, or a portion thereof, in the name of Julius Kalman beyond the building's useful life." She wrote, "Moreover, the University has pledged that when and if it elects to demolish and replace the building, it will commemorate, with a plaque and a ceremony in his honor, Kalman's contribution." She wrote that the attorney general's office saw no reason to take any action.
Kalman said that discussions about the case were underway but he could not comment on specifics as the case was ongoing. When asked how the University should respond to concerns that the building is technologically outdated, he said, "They've got to talk to the Kalman family, just like they're talking to the Rose family." He said he was not pleased with the University's reaction so far.
Kalman told the Justice last Friday that he was awaiting the scheduling of a hearing on the motion for the preliminary injunction. "If we're successful in the probate court, then that's as far as we need to go," he said. "Now how [the intent is] honored, whether it's by this building or some proposal that satisfies the terms of his will, that is a question."
The motion for the injunction states that Brandeis gave its assurance of a future commemoration "without providing specifics."
Kalman said he began raising concerns about the building last year by getting in touch with Brandeis and the Massachusetts Attorney General's office when he heard about the plans on the Internet. According to the complaint, Kalman received a response letter from Reinharz about the matter.
Emily La Grassa, director of communications for the Massachusetts attorney general's office, wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that after receiving a complaint in May 2008, "after carefully reviewing the will of Julius Kalman, we determined that nothing contained in the will imposed on Brandeis an obligation to maintain a building, or a portion thereof, in the name of Julius Kalman beyond the building's useful life." She wrote, "Moreover, the University has pledged that when and if it elects to demolish and replace the building, it will commemorate, with a plaque and a ceremony in his honor, Kalman's contribution." She wrote that the attorney general's office saw no reason to take any action.
Kalman said that discussions about the case were underway but he could not comment on specifics as the case was ongoing. When asked how the University should respond to concerns that the building is technologically outdated, he said, "They've got to talk to the Kalman family, just like they're talking to the Rose family." He said he was not pleased with the University's reaction so far.
Kalman told the Justice last Friday that he was awaiting the scheduling of a hearing on the motion for the preliminary injunction. "If we're successful in the probate court, then that's as far as we need to go," he said. "Now how [the intent is] honored, whether it's by this building or some proposal that satisfies the terms of his will, that is a question."
Be the first to comment on this story