Times Dispatch: Richmond breaks ground for long-awaited arts center
This is the now. This is the here. This is the possibility. This is the potential
Doug
So, have I swallowed the kool-aid after last night? Look, it was nice to see the suits (some looking nervous) and hipsters w tats (apparently, beards are in, Weezer look out) walking hand-in-hand being led by a boisterous brass jazz band. For one night every month, Broad St literally feels like Greenwich Village (ok, GV on a slow night with more vacants…ie, the Village in the good old days). All the restaurants (27, Tarrant’s, Chez Foushee) were jam packed, the art galleries were humming (must have been a madhouse at Gallery 5), and the vibe in the air was good. Christina Newton deserves sainthood (btw, support the Culture Vultures!). You imagine if we could re-create this scene every night?! or even just every Friday and Saturday. Could CenterStage with its pre/post-performance dinner crowd help make this vision happen? Lots of folks are starting to flip:
As he walked, Shockoe Bottom restaurateur Mike Byrne (Richbrau) said he never would have imagined himself at the groundbreaking. He vigorously opposed the city’s meals tax increase approved in 2003 that launched the arts-center project. He now supports the project because it’s smaller in scale and more control is ceded to the city. “Everything, to me, makes sense now,” he said.
Anyways, back to the kool-aid. I’m soo ready (got my black Nikes on and everything), but that damn SaveRichmond just won’t let me take a sip. Two back-to-back devastating critiques of the CenterStage project : You Might Still Have a Boondoggle… | The Sixth Street Marketplace of The Arts. Must-reads. Also, worthy of reading is Urban Richmond?: Groundbreaking Report & Discussion. The author makes a great point about corporate boards being the norm for not for profit groups (just check out the boards of directors of any nfp in town. You want bigwigs for their fundraising and overall influence):
***Update: So a friend who’s experienced in the non-profit world has told me that in non-profit governance, you actually want almost exclusive representation from corporate leaders. The theory is they’ll make sure that the program folks, who’re actually running the show, have someone with business sense to make sure their “hearts†don’t get ahead of their pocket-books. In other words, corporate types theoretically make sure that the money they and others are donating to the organization is well managed and spent wisely. The program folks, in this instance the arts community, should have oversight of the activities of the non-profit.
Since the dawn of man and the paintbrush, the arts have always had rich patrons (would there be a Shakespeare without a Wriothesley). These days the Medicis are the Ukrops of the world (damn, that’s my second Ukrops reference today). Like UrbanRichmond, the board of directors thing doesn’t bother me (many are representatives of companies that have already committed serious dollars to the project. For example, MeadWestvaco has pledged $1.5 million. Of course, those folks need to be at the table)…
In the end, it’s the taxes and mismanagement issue that is the basis for SaveRichmond’s most powerful arguments.
Thanks for the plug. Actually, when it comes to the arts in Central Virginia, having people on the fundraising and/or programming board who know what they are doing is the key to success.
The link below leads to an essay that recounts some recent successful performing arts and visual arts ventures. Check out how the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts fundraising campaign did with a mixture of arts AND business people on its board:
http://styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=13682
I have no doubt that many non-profits enjoy — as they should — corporate representatives on the board. But very few non-profits completely IGNORE people in the chosen field like VAPAF has. And now Mayor Wilder has.
And the problem with these Richmond all-corporate boards (as I understand it from friends intimately familiar with dealing with them): A lot of them rarely show up to the meetings, they are not versed in the field, they have no emotional (or artistic) interest in the project, some of them are very conservative and they end up doing what’s politically expedient or just going along with the crowd when decisions are made. Sounds great for a vibrant performing arts scene, doesn’t it?
Comment by Don Harrison — June 2, 2007 @ 11:48 pm
From the begining, my biggest concern with this project is the opportunity costs and the skewed priorities.
There are no new public schools built, the jail is still in shambles, and we still have the most regressive minimum water rate in the nation, but Richmond ‘leaders’ still think our most pressing need is a new arts center.
The meals tax raise is still in place despite the lack of referendum.
Comment by Scott Burger — June 3, 2007 @ 8:00 am