Shoemaker had envisioned a grand campus for geologic research on McMillan Mesa. However, his move to California interfered with his ability to execute his grand vision. While Shoemaker was away (he later returned to Flagstaff), USGS buildings began to spring up haphazardly, hurriedly built to keep pace with the changing needs of the USGS. Today there are five buildings on the campus. Together they house more than 200 USGS employees, most of whom work in fields other than Astrogeology.

On Sept. 9, 1997, less than two months after Shoemaker died, Flagstaff voters went to the polls for a special election. On the ballot: Should the City of Flagstaff authorize the sale of municipal property bonds to pay for a new $4.7 million building on the USGS campus to replace Building One? The actual design and placement of the new building was not put before the voters. The Chamber of Commerce, the Greater Flagstaff Economic Council and the Daily Sun supported the proposed bonding.  

Richard Kozak was one of the few people to speak out against the proposal, arguing in a letter to the editor that it would be much cheaper to repair the leaky roof of the old building than to build a new building. He also expressed doubts about rumors that the USGS would leave Flagstaff if its building plans were not approved. He questioned the need for such a large replacement building, noting that Congress seemed to be downsizing the USGS. Kozak's letter did not mention the history of the old building, nor make any mention of a possible museum.

Kozak also did not mention that he was a longtime USGS employee. For 18 years, he had worked for the Astrogeology branch. Until about 1991, he had had his own office in Building One, before moving to another USGS building.

Only 1,927 votes were cast. Of these, 1,345 were found to be in favor of bonding. 

Though voters approved the USGS proposal by a 2-to-1 margin, Kozak believed voters would have voted differently had they known everything he knew about the history of Building One and the details of the USGS proposal.  He soon began to meet with a few other local residents who had an interest in saving Building One. The group seriously discussed the possibility of turning Building One into a museum. The group also discussed their idea with USGS representatives, hoping to find some mutually satisfactory arrangement that did not necessitate the destruction of Building One.

The museum group believed that an astrogeology museum would be an asset to Flagstaff's economy, perhaps drawing as many as 17,000 tourists to Flagstaff in its first year. The group contended that Building One was historic not only because of its association with Shoemaker and David Levy, but also because it was where the planets of the solar system were first mapped. In addition it was where Harrison (Jack) Schmitt,  the first geologist to walk on the moon, once worked. And it was in Building One that the danger to Earth from asteroids and comets was first recognized. The museum group was endorsed by the Arizona Historical Society and Friends of Flagstaff's Future. 

In the winter of 1998-99, the USGS approached the City of Flagstaff with three design options that specified not only various placements for the new building, but also various placements for other proposed buildings planned for the USGS campus over the next 10 years. These master plans were the result of extended brainstorming sessions involving numerous USGS employees.

Option one called for putting the new building just a foot north of Building One and then tearing down Building One.  The other two options called for putting the new building at some distance from Building One. Only option one called for Building One to be torn down. All three plans indicated the new building would be called the Shoemaker building.

The USGS and its architects strongly favored option one. By putting the Shoemaker building in the spot with the best view of the San Francisco Peaks, the USGS would have an advantage in attracting the best scientists. Option one also did the best job of creating a more aesthetically pleasing campus, maximizing the number of landscaped lawns at the center of campus, while moving parking areas to the perimeter. In addition, option one called for the eventual construction of a library and visitor center near the main entrance. Finally, option one did a good job of reorienting the campus and improving its relationship to Cedar Avenue. Ever since Cedar Avenue was rerouted in the late 80s, visitors to the USGS campus have been greeted by the dull back sides of campus buildings. Option one would help to remedy this problem.

One problem with option one was that it put the Shoemaker building relatively close to a popular trail leading to Buffalo Park. The problem is compounded because the final design of the Shoemaker building is bigger than originally proposed - covering 26,000 square feet instead of 18,000. Kozak estimates that the new building, if placed as illustrated in option one, will be about 75 feet from the trail at its closest point.

In December of 1998, shortly before option one was presented to the Flagstaff City Council, Mayor Chris Bavasi received a letter explaining why the USGS was opposed to retaining Building One, "... as we are looking at a build-out for the campus over the next two decades, we have no desire to have that design focussed around the oldest (and least attractive) element of our campus. ... We cannot use Building One, we have no interest in retaining it in our master plan, and we do not consider it of enough historic interest to warrant it as the centerpiece of our new campus." The letter went on to explain that USGS had no intention of partnering with the Flagstaff Astrogeology Museum, as Richard Kozak's group eventually came to be called.

The letter was signed by L. Sue Beard, scientist-in-charge; as well as A. Wesley Ward, Jr., chief of the astrogeology program; and Carolyn Shoemaker, Gene's widow, who continues to work as a volunteer comet hunter, using her husband's office in Building One.

On Dec. 15, 1998, the Flagstaff City Council voted 6 to 1 in favor of approving option one.

While all of this was going on, Richard Kozak was still working for USGS, though after his letter to the editor appeared in the Daily Sun, he found himself under intense scrutiny.

"My job at that point was threatened and shortly thereafter my staff was taken away," recalled Kozak. "I couldn't go to the bathroom without having some sort of complaint. I couldn't do anything right. ... I finally had to get lawyers involved and (we) were talking about retaliation lawsuits."

In the end, Kozak decided against filing suit. Instead, in the summer of 1999, at age 42, Kozak quit his job.  "I had to leave at the recommendation of - under professional advice I had to leave for my health," said Kozak.

Since then, Kozak has continued working as the president of the Flagstaff Astrogeology Museum, which is now a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization. Also serving on the board is Kozak's wife, Kate; Jonathan Raye; Michael Baudat; and Collin Pierce. All but Pierce have worked at USGS in the past.

Wes Ward remains highly critical of the museum group's efforts, repeatedly pointing out that Carolyn Shoemaker, Jack Schmitt, and David Levy have all come out against the museum proposal.

Levy, a Shoemaker colleague and the author of a recently published Shoemaker biography, wrote in a letter to Ward, "I know that if Gene were alive today, he would probably be appalled at the efforts to preserve an old building, even for a museum, when a new one would serve the needs of astrogeology so much better."

Ward said, "There is nothing historic about what took place in Building One. ... The real work as far as the Apollo program was concerned took place either down at the bank building (currently the downtown Bank of America building) or off at the Museum of Northern Arizona. Those are the two critical places here. This was just the administrative headquarters."

But it seems clear from surviving records that a good deal of important scientific work took place in Building One over the years.  The museum group has assembled several thick notebooks filled with newspaper clippings, photographs, letters, and other items that point to the historic significance of Building One.

However, much of this material relates specifically to the career of the Gene Shoemaker, who clearly worked in all sorts of places in addition to Building One. Some other documents collected relate to astrogeology activities that took place in and around Flagstaff  - though not necessarily at Building One.

Ward has little confidence in the museum group. "These people have come up with no money, no business plan, no expertise or program, and no endorsements," said Ward.

Kozak admits that his group has not spent a lot of time raising funds, but contends that it would make no sense to do so under the circumstances. "If you were to ask me, 'Do you have enough money to operate that building for a year right now,' I'd say, 'No we don't.' But the reason is, we couldn't go to people and say we want you to donate money to make this thing happen, you know, say, to repair the roof on that building when we don't have ownership of the building or even an agreement with the owner of the building, the City of Flagstaff, to occupy that building and do that work."

Instead of fund raising, Richard Kozak and his small band of museum enthusiasts have been working this year to establish the historic significance of Building One. They have made presentations to the Flagstaff Historic Preservation Commission, the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and finally, to the keeper of the National Register of Historic Places. USGS has countered with presentations of its own at each step along the way. When the Flagstaff Historic Preservation Commission recommended to the City that Building One be considered historic, pending a subsequent decision by the State Historic Preservation Office, plans for an April, 2000, groundbreaking were put on hold.

In June, after reviewing documents submitted by those on both sides of the Building One debate, the keeper of the National Register of Historic Places determined that the building had some historic significance and was eligible to be listed on the register. The keeper concluded that Building One met two criteria used to determine the historic significance of a place. The first had to do with "events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history." The second criteria had to do with "association with the lives of persons significant in our past." Though the building was deemed eligible, the building has yet to be formally placed on the register.

"What register-eligible means is that the keeper of the register has determined that it could be placed on the National Register and it therefore is entitled to all - whatever legal protections, rights, etc.," explained Kozak. "We can get federal funding and so forth - historic grants and such. ... The difference between (being eligible) and actually being listed on the National Register is the formal paperwork hasn't been (filed)."

"The reason we haven't pushed that yet is that ... we were advised that it would be more useful to spend time trying to work on alternatives to the USGS plan so that they get what they want and we can have the property preserved for the city," said Kozak.

Because the keeper deemed Building One Register-Eligible, explained Kozak, the USGS and the General Services Administration (which acts on behalf of the USGS to secure facilities and property) "have to go through what's called Section 106 process in reference to a section of the National Historic Preservation Act. It says, if you're a federal agency and you are going to do anything that's going to impact the historic property ... according to the law they need to find or they need to consider other alternatives to whatever this damage to the building would be and in this case it would be demolition."

A meeting to gather public comment was held in early November at the Museum of Northern Arizona. According to Scientist-in-Charge Sue Beard, only a few people showed up representing the two sides of the debate. "When there's a public hearing, the public's not there," said Beard. "It's always the same few people."

Under Section 106 guidelines, both sides must come up with a plan to mitigate harm to Building One. While the Flagstaff Astrogeology Museum group proposes preserving Building One intact, and asking that the new Shoemaker building be built well away from Building One, the USGS has a mitigation plan that involves preserving Building One by taking pictures of the building, making videotapes of activities in the building, and writing down things that have happened in Building One, before tearing the building down.

In addition, the USGS has its own plans for museum-like displays on a much smaller scale in the lobby of the new Shoemaker building. "In here, we'll have display cabinets of every mission that we worked on," said Ward, pointing to a section of a floorplan of the Shoemaker building. "We'll have a wall just about Gene himself. We'll have another wall about the program. We'll have some big globes. ... We'll bring back the sort of dune buggy that was the lunar rover trainer for the astronauts here. ... But our halls will just be lined with work, both past, present and future."

As this story was going to press, in late November, representatives from both sides were just a few days away from a private meeting at which competing mitigation plans would be discussed. If possible, a mitigation plan that satisfies both the State Historic Preservation Office and the General Services Administration will be approved in a "Memorandum of Agreement." At the Nov. 29 meeting, the GSA will be acting on behalf of the USGS. If an agreement is not reached, the matter will go the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, a panel created by Congress to help settle disputes of this sort.

Both sides believe their proposals will ultimately prevail.

"What I'm told is that (the Advisory Council) generally will side on the side of preservation if reasonable," said Kozak.

Ward said, "Now that we are faced with senior adjudicating officials, they support our position completely, so this should be the last hurdle. We get the paperwork signed off on this year, we turn around and break ground on this building on Gene's birthday, which is April 28th of next year, and within a year the building is up and running."

Dan Frazier has lived in Flagstaff for eight years. For six of those years, he lived in a tent in the woods. He is the husband of Tea Party Publisher Lisa Rayner.