Brown v. Board of Education is one of the most famous court cases in U.S. history. Third-grader Linda Brown was denied admission at Sumner Elementary, a school with an all-white student body. Sumner was just seven blocks from the girl’s home, according to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, while the elementary school for black students, Monroe, was a one-mile walk through a dangerous railroad intersection or a one-hour bus ride away. Oliver L. Brown spearheaded the effort to gain black children admission into Sumner; in 1954, the Supreme Court heard the case and ruled against “separate but equal” educational facilities, thereby desegregating schools.

Both Sumner and Monroe became historical landmarks in 1987. Monroe is the official Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site, though. Sumner, which was constructed in 1936, fell into disrepair. In 2008, the National Trust for Historic Preservation added the school to its list of endangered sites, citing its biggest threats as “deterioration, neglect.” The city of Topeka had endeavored to spare the building from the wrecking ball, but the Art Deco-style structure needed nearly $3 million in repairs, according to The New York Times (that figure has skyrocketed today to an estimated $7 million).

Sumner’s savior came in April 2009. Rev. W.R. Portee bought the vandalized, rain-damaged building for $89,000. Portee seems delighted with his purchase: a relic of the Civil Rights era, of which he was an enthusiastic part. He intends to turn the school into a community center, an extension of his Los Angeles-based nondenominational Christian church.

Since I’ve been reading Margaret MacMillan’s “Dangerous Games,” as I know some of you are, I’m thinking about historic monuments from a new perspective. MacMillan is suspicious about efforts to preserve history, and she questions our motives for protecting the heritage (pardon my paraphrase) of such things as tenement buildings and chimney pots. Portee explained that Sumner’s heritage inspired him to bid on it — never mind the fact that he hasn’t yet secured loans for the costly renovations the structure needs. But Portee isn’t erecting another monument to Brown v. Board of Education; he’s building a (very expensive) community center. Why not build one of those from the ground up? Why work within the limitations of this ramshackle (albeit historical) building?

Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, told The New York Times, “Buildings like [the endangered sites] can be adaptively reused for new community purposes [...] It’s a mistake to allow structures to fall into disrepair or to be demolished.” To me, this sounds more like a concern about sustainability than historical preservation. But need these concerns be mutually exclusive?

More relevant reading:
How the Civil Rights Movement Worked
Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site
Top 10 Controversial Court Cases