Council Cranky about Overture

Wow. They weren’t very happy about voting for either of these items, the “comfort” resolution or the review committee. Actually, the council has been cranky about this from the beginning, here’s the discussion at the CCOC meeting (part I and II). I missed the Board of Estimates. Here’s the radio show that I did on this subject with guests Alder Mike Verveer and MCAD Treasurer Dana Chabot. I was waiting to post this part of the council meeting, hoping I would get information requested from the Overture, but I haven’t gotten it, so I’m posting this and when I get more info, I will create another post!

COMFORT RESOLUTION
Public Testimony
A teacher and former teacher testified about how great the Overture was for the students at their schools and their parents. They talked about the free and reduced price programming and educational opportunities. Asked them for support.

Several AFSME members registered in support.

Discussion
Sanborn thinks we should cut all ties with the Overture
Jed Sanborn says he pulled it so he could speak briefly, he says they are missing an opportunity to sever ties of city and Overture, he thinks that would be good, he says as long as there is a connection between the taxpayer and the center there will be ongoing pressure, maintenance and upkeep more than we think and inevitably there will be ongoing pressure on our budget and we could have had a private-private opportunity, nothing against Overture, its a beautiful facility – but is it really fair to ask someone, lower middle class or laid off with trouble paying property tax is it right to ask them to subsidize this thing that appeals to higher income people. This is extracurricular, its entertainment and art. For people who have never gone, they have no interest to subsidize the ballet, so this is a missed opportunity. For what its worth, I think he is right on the budgetary issues.

Compton says we were only supposed to support the Overture for 5 years, we don’t have expertise to run this facility.
Judy Compton say they approved this when they took Jerry Frautschi’s money and took possession, Sue Bauman was mayor and part of agreement was after 5 years we would cut that string and let it fly, she believed that was the right thing to do, I honestly believe that we in the city, we don’t hold the qualifications to run a fantastic venue, we should search for people successful in this area, and this isn’t an insult to staff, but . . . missed some/didn’t understand . . . we have a lack of talent running this, it should not not be run by politics, we need experienced people from McKindle? Center and others that run these facilities. She agrees with Sanborn, but this is difficult to vote against, but this body should be taking strong look at what doing here, 5 years is what we signed up for, we are jumping in to more than that.

Schumacher thinks they need more data, should look into privatization, this is going to cost us a lot in the future.
Michael Schumacher is supporting this only in the spirit of exploring possibilities the city can engage in with the Overture, he is not not persuaded by data, or lack of data and the honest sobering facts could be not just a drama, but epic drama and for years we will pay more, this will impact operating budget for many years, fact that people associated with Overture are not looking at private solutions is troublesome, they see us at the city as a target, how can we be against art and a great gift and a great building, but when the group of people look at it, we need to look at what is feasibility of it succeeding, the initial costs will climb up, its a large building. He support in spirit to discuss, hope not jumping the gun and thinks this is the direction we should be going.

Thuy
Thuy Pham Remmele was hoping to be convinced to support, she wasn’t convinced at Board of Estimates, even with substitute, when look at page 6, from a, b, c, and d and all the conditions set, we are kidding ourselves that we are trying our best, condition is that no employee there represented can be involuntarily laid off, she worked all her life and job security important but when she sees these conditions and then say we will study then try best to juggle it together, its like we are trying to fix a garment that doesn’t fit, we cut corners or patch it but we end up not fitting, much simpler to start with clean slate, when have all these conditions already set then have a study to fit with in and out, very difficult things to do and this is not a small task, it is a huge huge undertaking, very hard to come in, wants to be confined and is not, if pass for sake of discussion, if already have conditions we can’t cross over, this is a waste of time, like consent agenda, we just agree to a big thing, she agrees with Sanborn.

Verveer, there’s more info you should see
Verveer says they are about to vote on a resolution directing staff to negotiate with staff at facility, no specific just guidance, if Bruer was here, and he is grateful in some respects her is not, but he is glad he not here/not gone due to illness, but if Bruer was here, he would have heard the testimony form people tonight about side that many in community don’t realize about the Overture and his colleagues that have spoken so far have expressed his concerns in a nicer/friendlier way, but the point is, they are simply directing a course of how to proceed, no commitments, obviously there is a menu of option in the resolution about long term viability, may include any or all of them. It doesn’t say what we will do specifically. There is no denying the forbearance agreement does chart a course and city’s role therein, that is the direction by donors that helped settle dark cloud hanging over Overture, it is a tricky situation, if decide not to go the way the donors want, if we don’t the forbearance agreement will need to be renegotiated, instead of negativity we need to be reminded of the very critical nature and importance of the Overture to our community, he can’t overstate the impact of the arts, we don’t do enough as the city, the arts commission budget is meager at best, the money is at first the Civic Center and Overture, Sanborn and I agree to disagree, he thinks the mayor appointed us cuz we were polar opposites, in perfect world this would still a city agency, he’s been on MCAD board and Civic Center Commission and he realizes certain drawbacks one of them is lack of fundraising, donors won’t give to government. There are many issues to be discussed, the financial model, will it work? How will we treat the volunteers? We are joined by AFSCME tonight and them and unrepresented brothers and sisters are not overpaid, he doesn’t think they are and we need to take care of the employees. I missed some . . . A lot of info out there you haven’t seen the information, he and Sanborn have seen much of the information, a private consultant was retained, Steven Wolf?, if you haven’t seen it, and you wouldn’t unless you personally requested to see it. Mayor and MCAD have been privy to it, the sooner you see it the better, more work will be done and we will all see it, don’t want colleagues to think we are going into it blindly and don’t know what we are doing, we have thought long and hard, a lot of info out there you haven’t seen for whatever reasons, will be available, is available today. More information is called for, the discussion at committee levels is outstanding, amendments are great and he appreciates everyone staying actively involved, as we make one of most important decisions for years to come.  No blah, blah, blah today . . . .  🙂

Rummel concerned about Operating Subsidies and Committee
Marsha Rummel says she benefited from the discussion on at CCOC (Common Council Organizational Committee), she was at the two part meeting and supported it but still has concerns about two points, one is what Sanborn said, in section c, there is no guarantee that subsidies at any level yet, knows that we don’t know that yet and it will come up later. Also, item 16, the CCOC asked for an accountant, experts and arts people to be on that committee, lots of fine people on the committee, but those experts are not there.

Compton defends her negativity, like the arts but fiscally responsible
Compton says with respect to colleague from 4th, she has concerns for what he says is negativity from Sanborn and herself, she has changed over the years, when she was a rookie alder she learned a lot during Overture, she cut her teeth in cultural arts, she admires and enjoyed the arts, but negativity, don’t confuse that with fiscal responsibility, those are two different things, they are not negative about Overture, adore its presence and would like it to flourish, don’t think she said anything about over paying the staff that is not a question, her question is if city takes on responsibility to run something that we are unsuccessful in doing for years, or turn over to private sector, she will vote to move forward and do research, she signed on for 5 years, we need to cut it close, we need to cut the enterprise loose and let it be the major success sit can be.

Kerr skeptical too, and get us the information
Kerr says that appreciates CCOC work, but wants to be straightforward, she has an open mind about what can happen with Overture, but not an open mind about the requirements about the materials that we are requesting as part of due diligence and if questions are not answered, she will vote on that basis, so I know mayor and staff worked hard and are to be commended but she is really serious in saying she wants to see budgets and assumptions and that is the basis on which she will make her decision, generally very supportive of arts and Overture center, she thinks need to make best decision for people she represents and the only way to vote is with candor and info in the resolution.

Sanborn says look at the numbers, and why do progressives hate poor people?
Sanborn says that it would be good if everyone saw the financial statements and assumptions – the assumptions about making this work and fundraising in recession are a concern the the public perception that city has taken over and taking care of it is a problem for fundraising. That is why he thinks that we will have budgetary pressure, arts have value so do other things that government doesn’t do, it surprises him that progressive look at Overture and marble and grandeur and are willing to make lower income people subsidize it. Ha, good one. Unfortunately, I don’t think that is a generalization about “progressives” that holds up. Maybe for the liberals . . .

Verveer apologizes
Verveer, on the resolution, please don’t take personally earlier comments, maybe not well articulated, if alder Bruer were here, he would a rant about the white elephant for the hoity-toity, that is not the case, we hear this evening about how not just for hoity-toity for the opera or symphony, but there are many programs targeted to the less fortunate, we have done a lousy job touting what we do for community with free and reduced price offerings, check it out on a Saturday, the free Kids in Crossroads program, Overture After Work, and he could go on with reduced price and other programs, if ask constituents, most have been there, if they haven’t, if they have kids, ask if they have been there. He hears it all the time, I haven’t’ been there but my kids sure have, you can see rows of school buses where kids from all over region visit, they do a good job with programs, need to do better job at educating this chamber about what we do, its not just Broadway shows people can’t afford and opera and symphony. Also, think about the economic impact on downtown, please accept my apology, I am not maligning your characters, you are all doing taxpayers right when articulate the cancers, other colleagues trashed the facilities and that got his dander up.

Shiva wants openness, transparency, inclusiveness and information
Shiva thanks CCOC for their work, she echos Kerr. Think of four words, openness,, transparency, inclusiveness and information. We alders need to make decision with those four words, so we make a good decision, let’s remember those things, let’s make sure process is guided by that, we need to make an informed decision.

Mark Clear takes the chair.

Mayor speaks . . .
Mayor Dave Cieslewicz won’t repeat good arguments Verveer made, he wants to say something, maybe cuz we take it for granted it hasn’t been said but as we sit here tonight there is $28M debt attached to it and potentially taxpayer would have to pay $6M in a serious situation, that was put on the table by Overture groups and bank to resolve debt and remove obligation to pay it and that is a good opportunity, the best opportunity to resolve debt and ensure long term future, he agrees with need for due diligence and to ask questions and get information, you should do that, this is a big decision, but at same time, as approach questions and get information, he wants they to try to get to “yes”. It is an important decision to make and problem and he wants to resolve it, our intention is to give you all the info you want, answer every questions as honestly as possible, some are estimates, but we will do that and hopefully get to point where this is resolved ideally by end of year to move forward and resolve issues.

The motion passes on a voice vote, it sounds like Sanborn was the only no.

OVERTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE
Mark Clear stays in the chair so the Mayor can continue to speak.

Cnare moves approval some guy on right side of the room seconds.

There are no speakers from the public, but the Mayor wants to speak. Clear asks him to wait until Alders speak or ask a question.

Mayor says he knows there are concerns he can address.

Clear calls on Rummel

We need an accountant on the committee
Rummel says she has an issue, which she discussed with you (the Mayor), and that is that at CCOC they asked for an accountant to be on the committee, someone with ethical duty to be honest with information, there is not that person on the committee. She wants to find a way to get that person on there, some of the people on there can do budgets but we need someone to look at numbers and give dispassionate advice, she would either like to approve adding a position or refer it back to his office.

Mayor says he didn’t pick up on CCOC request. Cuz he doesn’t listen to anyone and was too busy talking to his staff so no one was paying attention to the alders, because I truly believe he thinks he doesn’t have to. He says he did get her email, and talked to her this morning, she raises a fair point, but expertise can be given by staff, Carto and others, but its no a bad idea to get that expertise, he wants to get the committee approved, he will commit to you to try to find at least one person with the expertise, nothing in the resolution would limit the number of members, he tried to keep it down, if gets too big too hard to get schedules together and get quorum, but its not unreasonable to honor that request, and find someone we both agree could do that work, in addition to that.

Bridget Maniaci says we have an alder who is an account, was Sanborn considered?

Mayor says that Verveer thinks they were appointed because they were polar opposites, is says he was hoping he could be co-opted, he is trying to limit alders, the resolution says citizens, but obviously to get the business plan supported by the council, to increase chances of aldermanic support he appointed them.

Committee too friendly, not critical
Schumacher says these are all fine people but he gets the impression that there are more people sympathetic, short of Bruer, he would have been more comfortable with some one critical and thoughtful and not someone who made up their mind, its more comforting for people to ask good questions there, more credibility, did you consider that and why these people?

Mayor says well balanced, thinks they will ask tough questions, only one person fully in support, Verveer and Cnare have questions, Bruer will have questions, Soglin will be skeptical and ask questions, Onken is respectedd for his expertise on finance issues, he disagrees that the committee is weighted in favor of the plan, he sees 1 strongly in support, 3 leaning in support and 2 strong skeptics and two in the middle.

Rhodes-Conway says committee is all wrong, Mayor should have listened at CCOC
Satya Rhodes-Conway says that with all due respect to mayor and colleagues to be appointed, she thinks this is exactly the wrong way to choose the appointments, she was looking for a citizen committee, expert advice on the issue, she is not at all interested in a balanced committee, they are picking people on basis of already formed opinion and that is not the right way to go, it is exactly the wrong way to go. People without opinions should be appointed to look at the facts anew and give good advice on professional experience. They also need arts management, someone who represents downtown, a funder or foundation community person who knows how to get to donor base, she thinks we should have a set of expertise that can actually advise us, alders will get to talk a lot, alder Bruer is not going to restrain himself and neither will Verveer, she doesn’t want to hear from you, you will get plenty of time, we need experts in the field to give us good advice.

Referral Motion because Mayor and staff weren’t listening
Rhodes-Conway moves a substitute to refer back, she thinks these are the wrong appointments. Two people second.

Rhodes-Conway says that she knows the mayor tried to come up with a good list, nothing wrong with them and respect them all, but its not the right set of expertise needed, she understands the time line, but that is the way it goes, perhaps if the mayor and staff were listening more closely at CCOC they wouldn’t be sitting here taking another month to do this. Appointing experience will save time and maybe even make up time – she urges to support referral, she thinks that this is what everyone wanted, good info and basis to make the decision and she heard a lot of alders say that support for number 35 was not on basis of how vote on underlying question but on basis of getting good information and appointing committee of experts, mayor did say staff could do this, but that is not good unbiased information, she wants people who do not already have their hands in this, outside people with fresh perspective, she really wants that, and they won’t get it from the committee and she hopes the mayor will reconsider.

Pham Remmele seconded it cuz have to say agree with that, almost like when choose jury, they are chosen because they have no special preconceived notions to influence decision, she says they need not only someone good with finance, arts and fundraising experience, also have to see something in city for decades an asking taxpayers to shoulder this, years ago when working for MMSD she was asked to be on Board of Advisors for Civic Center cuz she was a woman minority, not cuz of me but for diverse board and during discussion Verveer look at it like hoity-toity and people without access are paying. She wants to bring in black, green and purples kids ion Saturday, older people, but they couldn’t bring them in. . . . didnt’ understand . . . she doesn’t want to select a slate of people that already have something in the jar, should be looked at more seriously, runs into something, same pattern again, entire community asked what now, same thing again, talk about transparency, like ?????. She respect names, can give input but shouldn’t be core team to make the decision, suggest that opened up and mayor paying respect to xxxx, wants it back to mayor for reconsideration, know when make decision rushed cuz of time, .let’s do it right so not go back again and fix it again.

Maniaci asks Rhodes-Conway if she is concerned about the alder appointment or others as well.

Rhodes-Conway says “everyone”.

Kerr wants fundraising expertise
Kerr apologizes for talking so much tonight, but something Alder Rummel and Rhodes-Conway said struck her and she was disinclined to support at first, but one important piece, she may not necessarily agree with Rhodes-Conway, this is a good committee, but the main thing is ask tough questions, but one key part is the private fundraising part of it and I don’t see that, you can quantify ticket sales, put a price on boilers, but we don’t have enough in house expertise on the fundraising component, that is the biggest part, she is prepared to support and agrees independent accounting person or Brasser would be a smart move, in addition, the committee needs expertise in private fundraising for the arts.

Solomon thinks committee needs to get them what the Council needs or we’re sunk.
Brian Solomon says that planning on voting for it cuz great respect for everyone, Mayor did a great job, good group of people, but add what Rummel suggested and we need to make a commitment to do so and after Rhodes-Conway and Sanborn commentary earlier and to lesser extent Compton’s, most important thing here is limited time, we know that, we know what we need out of this, not a committee to ask tough questions, we need a plan with sufficient info so we can make decision and it has to have fundraising component and full business plan that we can feel confident if make a move this fall and completely agree with Rhodes-Conway this is not necessarily the right committee, not cuz not a good committee, but cuz have to move fast, but scared if approve committee and they don’t bring us what we need, we are sunk, we have to get what we need, we need the right people, would love to hear from the mayor, and hopes he’d support it for the same reason, not cuz of good people, it has to be exact right people with right skill sets so when come back in fall we have the info we need to make the decisions.

Cnare says arts expert community got us here in the first place
Cnare not speaking in defense of those chosen, but this group not responsible for business plan, there already are proposals by consultant working with overture (sure, but where the hell are they and why can’t we get them) – its their job to poke holes in it, the discussion with council leadership was this was extraordinarily difficultly, she won’t defend her name, but the arts expert community are sort of people who got us here in first place, she respected their expertise, but we need to go to the Bolz Center, she doesn’t mean to upset them, but many people in community look at it and say once again elites in the community are making the decisions, let us get in there and look at it, this is a delicate balance, alders represent community in different way, its ok to add more people, to add more expertise is important, the other part is important the everyone has some attachment to Overture to some way, we could find all kinds of experts, what will be pay for that, the expert already did that, doesn’t want us to be afraid of letting average person be a part of this, our citizens should see the business plan – but time is an issue, we have the forbearance agreement and we should come backing two weeks to vote on this issue, she says need special meeting to get it done.

Schmidt bitter about the timeline forced on us and doesn’t want fox in the hen house
Chris Schmidt thanks Cnare, stresses the language will be to “review and analyze” the business plan, not put fox back in charge of hen house, he had that concern with some of the members of the committee, we can work with this group and move forward, will not abide that sunk if this will or will not happen, this timeline forced on us by other entities, will do best to work through it, but if doesn’t work out, not our fault, we are not the ones to say December 31. Some people don’t like to hear it, but it still makes me mad.

Maniaci says arts, finance and fundraising should be added.

How many votes does this need?
Bidar-Sielaff says this is a 15 vote item cuz they vote on same night, so supports the motion to refer back.

Discussion breaks out among members about if there are 11 or 15 votes required, Clear says they voted to suspend the rules in the beginning of the meeting so only 11 votes. More discussion between Rummel and Clear and Clear prevails.

Mayor doesn’t want them to refer
Mayor asks them not to refer, he hopes they understand what this committee is asked to do, not resolve all the issues with Overture, but review a business plan for the nonprofit part of the whole idea, there is plenty of expertise, Jim Garner is a successful small businessman, he is Chair of the (Chamber of Commerce) Small Business Advisory Council and looks at lots of business plans, Mark Bugher is successful with University Research Park and also looks at lots of business plans, Warren Onken is successful in business and well respected on the council for fiscal and budget expertise. Dierdre Garton has experience with private fundraising in the arts in great quantity. He says they will do what resolution asks to be done, don’t refer, losing a month is significant, agrees with Schmidt hopes to get done by end of year, we have accomplished the spirit of what CCOC did ask for (that he didn’t hear) and doesn’t want it referred back.

Roll call on motion to refer
Aye: Pham-Remmele, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon
No: Eagon, Kerr, Maniaci, Palm, Sanborn, Schmidt, Schumacher, Skidmore, Bidar-Sielaff, Clausius, Clear, Cnare, Compton, King (Compton and King initially passed instead of voting)
Abstain: Verveer
Absent: Bruer

Main Motion and Procedural Squabbling of Interst
Rummel adds language to the resolution that the Mayor add at least two additional people including an accountant or finance person and another other at discretion of the Mayor and prefers it to be fundraising for arts person.

Rhodes-Conway says there is no resolution to amend.

Michael May, city attorney says that it can be part of the motion to approve. Oh, how very, very, interesting, because in the past we were told that on mayoral appointments it was up or down, nothing else we could do.

They clarify the motion is to approve appointments and direct mayor to appoint people with financial and fundraising experience.

Clear says “point of order” and says that there is no opportunity to approve til next meeting.

Kerr says that is ok, they can get started.

Mayor says that they will appoint in the usual fashion, at the next meeting you will see the names and it can be approved under suspension of the rules or the usual way.

Schumacher asks about quorum (oh, that’s precious).

May says they are not appointed, its an 8 member committee until the additional people are appointed.

Cnare says there is expertise in the room, they should forward names to mayor, find out if they are interested.

Compton asks if people could attend meetings.

Mayor says anyone can attend, they are open meetings. That will be a welcome treat since up til now, everything was done in closed session.

Rummel says person discussed is interested.

No objections to making the motion.

Motion passes on a voice vote, sounded unanimous.