Public Input Dies With Freedom Center by Barry Owens and Etta Sanders When Gov. George Pataki pulled the plug on the International Freedom Center at the World Trade Center site late last month, he brought an end to the tabloid sniping and angry protests by opponents of the institution. And, as it turned out, he shut the door on community input as well. Pataki's announcement, delivered at 5 p.m. on Sept. 28, came exactly an hour before a planned public meeting at P.S. 234 among the Freedom Center's organizers, Community Board 1 members, and interested local residents. The presentation by the International Freedom Center (IFC) would have been the first one for the public since the institution's concept was championed by Pataki in 2001. Luc Journe, 27, an urban planning student from Paris, arrived early. He read the sign that had been posted on the school's doors announcing the cancellation of the meeting, and shook his head. "They didn't want to discuss whether it was a good idea to build all that office space, either," he said, referring to the commercial buildings planned for the trade center site. For his post-graduate work Journe is studying the planning process for the site's redevelopment. "My thesis is that they are pretending to allow for participation, but they don't really want participation," he said. "I guess that is the messy part of democracy." When Harold Reed, chairman of the community board's Arts and Culture Committee, arrived, he, too, pronounced his disappointment. "I came with an open mind," he said. "I just wanted to hear both sides." The Freedom Center was originally discussed by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) as a living memorial where the story of Sept. 11 would be couched in the context of the global struggle for freedom. But critics of the IFC, notably some relatives of Sept. 11 victims, said that the six acres where the trade center towers had stood was no place for world politics, and that the only stories that should be told there are those of the day's victims and heroes. Earlier in the month, IFC executives presented a report detailing the programming they were planning for the museum. John Whitehead, the corporation's chairman, had warned in August that programs construed as offensive to family members would put the center's place at the site at risk. In his announcement evicting the IFC, Pataki said, "There remains too much opposition, too much controversy over the programming of the IFC and we must move forward with our first priority, the creation of an inspiring memorial to pay tribute to our lost loved ones and tell their stories to the world." He added that the LMDC would work with the IFC to find an alternate site. "We do not believe there is a viable alternative place for the IFC at the World Trade Center Site," the center's executives, Tom Bernstein, Peter Kunhardt and Richard Tofel, said in a statement released shortly after Pataki's announcement. During a public workshop on Sept. 19 on plans for a memorial museum separate from the cultural center, Diane Horning said her opposition to the IFC was not about content, but about its placement on the site. Calling the position "non negotiable," she expressed frustration that the LMDC had not acted sooner to nix the center or to solicit public views on the matter. "It's been very dictatorial," she said. "There hasn't been a good faith cooperative effort. They don't want our input." On the sidewalk outside P.S. 234 others expressed similar complaints, along with questions about the future of the cultural center, now that its two prospective tenants are out. The Drawing Center, a Soho-based art gallery, withdrew its plans to occupy the building in August. It, too, was forced out by suspicions that it may show work that is "anti-American." "If they decide not to build a cultural center on the site, we'd like it somewhere else in Lower Manhattan," said Paul Goldstein, Community Board 1's district manager, who chatted on the sidewalk with several board members in what on this day would have to pass for public discussion. "There's a ton of places Downtown, just not at the site," said board member Meyer Feig, who said he opposed the proposed content of the IFC. "I never thought it made sense for it to be there in the first place," said Paul Sipos, another board member. "It was the only sensible thing that Pataki could do." "A missed opportunity," said Reed, who pined for the New York City Opera on the site. The opera, with the 92nd Street Y, was originally favored by the board to be part of the site. "They really need to stop the politics on this thing and get it done," said Joel Kopel, arriving late. "Enough is enough, already."