Let us talk about the Dahl Shall we.
i have not talked to anyone in the theater about it since i spoke with Mikal right after they decided to split. but we have a client who was on the 2012 board and had some interesting comments. He stated that they gave the money to the theater rather than the dahl simply because the dollar amount was lower.
Another comment from our office landlady was that she was distapointed that the arts community had not stayed together to support each other.
I dont know the polotics inside the circle but i too agree that it is not calm.
Another comment from our office landlady was that she was distapointed that the arts community had not stayed together to support each other.
I dont know the polotics inside the circle but i too agree that it is not calm.
posted by Spinfly at 10:02 AM
12 Comments:
Here's what's been said so far
on the Mt. Blogmore blog.
4/8/2005
All Dahled up and nowhere to go
Filed under: General — Mount Blogmores @ 4:33 pm
By Bill Harlan
Did Mount Blogmore read city hall reporter Scott Aust’s story this morning about cutting 2012 funding for the Dahl Fine Arts Center? The 2012 committee has recommended a HUGE shift public money for the arts. The Dahl expansion, including the new theater, would in effect be killed in favor of building a new theater at the Journey Museum location.
Big bucks are at stake. Scott reported the disagreement, but I’ve been privy to back-channel, off-the-record discussions with people who are very, very angry — on both sides of this issue.
The Rapid City Council ultimately will decide the fate of the 2012 arts money. Meanwhile, surely Mount Blogmore has opinions.
5 Comments »
1.
Oh yeah.
There are opinions aplenty.
Many have to do with “Management.”
Anyone a fan of HBO’s Carnavale?
That’s where the action is.
Comment by 25 Cent — 4/8/2005 @ 5:31 pm
2.
Spectacular headline Mr. Harlan!
I have a lot to say about this issue, but first (as a marketing guy) I have a lot to hear from the community first.
My only interest is in advancing creativity in our community.
What’s the best way to do that?
Comment by Bill Fleming — 4/8/2005 @ 5:55 pm
3.
I go do the Dahl way more often than the Journey Center. I would vastly prefer the money going to the Dahl.
Comment by Patti Martinson — 4/8/2005 @ 7:05 pm
4.
A fight between the Journey and the Dahl over millions of dollars from the 2012 fund? I am sure the taxpayers are not going to enjoy this one. Get ready for another referendum on the 2012 fund. Supporting the arts is a vital part of the 2012 fund and I support it, but I think it would be a mistake to draw attention this amount since a taxpayer might get the impression that these two organizations seem addicted to 2012. With sewer and water rates going up again the idea that some money go to infrastructure will start looking a lot more attractive then watching a public fight on which artisian camp to fund.
Comment by Simon King — 4/8/2005 @ 7:34 pm
5.
All Dahled up and no where to go. Precisely! The lack of physical space for future expansion at a location that is already land locked is one of the reasons not to build a 500 seat Performing Arts Center at the Seventh Street location. The Dahl is an excellent facility and should be expanded, specifically for visual artist space. The Performing Arts Center proposal, which was accepted unanimously by the 2012 Civic Improvement Committee, does include money to expand the Dahl gallery space and administrative offices. Additionally, it is not proposed that the Journey be expanded with a theatre but that a Performing Arts Center will be constructed on the Journey-Civic Center campus in the north east corner of the parking lot. Activity will create more activity and the Civic Center, the Journey and the Performing Arts Center will increase traffic to this part of town. It will be a great marketing tool with synergies for economic development, conventions and tourism.
The presenters of the Journey-Civic Center campus option wanted to present the community with an option that included on site parking for a 500 seat Performing Arts Center and greater accessibility. Additionally, we believe this is a more efficient usage of the 2012 funds and provides a better product for the future generations of this community. Remember, the Dahl project wanted $5.5 million more, we wanted $2 million. It is quite possible that absent an alternative proposal, no money would have been given.
During the last round of 2012 funding, the Dahl expansion was given $3.9 million dollars. That was five years ago. There hasn’t been any adjustment for inflation or more importantly the cost of building materials. Of the original $3.9 million, $500,000 was spent on the acquisition of the MDU building and approximately 200,000 was spent on design fees. None of this money has been wasted. The design for the Performing Arts Center is portable and the MDU building certainly has a fair market value of $500,000 or more today. The important thing to remember is the fact that the City of Rapid City owns the money and locations, not the Rapid City Arts Council.
This project is too important to let anyone’s personal agenda get in the way. A new Performing Arts Center needs to be constructed at the best location for the future, for the future of Rapid City and future generations. Certainly no one can any longer imagine a Rapid City without the Civic Center. It has become that interwoven into our daily lives. The future Performing Arts Center is no less of a vision for this community’s future. Like the Civic Center it will become as integral part of our economy, enhancing the quality of life in Rapid City and reaffirming that this is the best place in the country to live. In order for a community to expand economically we need to be willing to expand our vision culturally and artistically. To do anything less is to fall far short of our responsibility to the future and our community’s fiscal responsibility today.
Comment by Mike Gould — 4/9/2005 @ 7:13 am
I will keep you posted on what develops there
if you like, but you can go there yourself
and see all the other topics as well, if you like.
www.rapidcityjournal.com
Then click on the Mt. Blogmore picture.
You will recognise some of the people on there.
Ok, here's what's been said on the Blognore site
since my last post
Mike Gould, Thank you for your post. I understand the issue much better now.
Comment by Patti Martinson — 4/9/2005 @ 10:14 am
7.
Does anybody know the whole story on the money?
I thought that the 2012 money was given to the Dahl
expansion project as matching funds. In other words
they had to raise as much as they were given. In this case,
wouldn’t the City’s cash outlay be about the same if the
City funds the whole new Journey /Covic Center location
project ($5-6 million) as it would to do the Dahl expansion
(one half of $10 million)?
Who knows the real math here?
Also, is the design really portable? What do the designers
say? I read in the paper that the Dahl folks think it’s not.
What do the designers think?
Is it important to do something that brings more people downtown?
Is the location really relevant either way?
If the Dahl remains a center for the visual arts, arts education
and a home for the Rapid City Arts Council is that somehow
not workable?
Who will manage the new theatre?
How much will it cost the City to maintain?
Why is this happening now? This project has been in the works
for years. What happened? Budget increases? Anything else?
I agree with Simon King that it would be bad if we Arts advocates
get into a feud over this issue. I just talked to a friend from Sioux Falls
who told me that there is no community theatre in Sioux Falls at all.
It’s great to see that Rapid City is progressive enough to support one.
Is it possible to get everyone on the same page about where
that theatre should be located?
Comment by bfleming — 4/9/2005 @ 10:46 am
8.
Bill,
Let me answer your questions in order.
Is this a matching funds project?
No. The first request for funding the proposed theatre and gallery space expansion from 2012 money was made and approved in 1999. The request was for 4 million of 2012 money for a project of 5.2 million. The ARTS were to raise 20 % or approx 1.2 million. It is important to note that both the ARTS expansion and the Library expansion were required to raise 20% while most other projects built during this funding, the new skating facility, swimming, gymnasium etc. were not required to raise 20%. Additionally, 2012 money funded projects with significant cost over runs effectively reducing funds available per example swimming reportedly went from 4 mil to 10 mil. It is important to also note that start date for the ARTS funding was kicked to the back of projects.
Is the design really portable?
Yes, the theatre design is portable. Although a representative of the Dahl has said the design is not portable, it is. The building committee hired a theatre design consultant who designed the interior of the theatre. That part of the design is portable to any location for a Performing Arts Center. We don’t anticipate using any other parts of the design for a Performing Arts Center.
Is it important to do something that brings more people downtown?
Absolutely, I am involved in three downtown business properties and have my office downtown. Will a new Performing Arts Center help downtown? Yes and no. I don’t see a new Performing Arts Center helping retail shopping. On the other hand, today we see a good food and beverage crowd before concerts and shows at the Civic Center. The biggest obstacle we face in the downtown business district is parking. The 2012 Infrastructure Committee made a recommendation for another downtown parking ramp and agreed to let the City Council pick the location. Business owners in the downtown area do not need more competition for parking, they need more parking for patrons.
Is the location really relevant either way?
Yes. We need to select a site that will provide room for expansion 10,15, 20 years from today. The Seventh Street location is already land locked. Additionally, we need to provide on site parking. The Seventh Street location for a Performing Arts Center of 500 seats could only be used after 5 PM Monday through Saturday, as this is when the downtown businesses are operating. Parking is at a premium during this time period. Additionally, Wednesday nights parking becomes an issue due to many functions at churches near to the Seventh Street location. We are already feeling this issue with our small audiences on Wednesday evening, imagine a 500 seat event on a Wednesday. It is also important to think of the location’s proximity to north Rapid. This provides ready access for our theatre out reach programs to disadvantaged youth and specifically for programming for native Americans. As one native American woman told me, “My people don’t go to the Dahl. We feel comfortable at the Journey and we will feel comfortable at the new Performing Arts Center.”
If the Dahl remains a center for the visual arts, arts education and a home for the Rapid City Arts Council is that somehow
not workable?
That is not only workable but indeed our hope. We want to see the Dahl gallery space expanded. Towards those ends we have included funds for the Dahl in our 2012 proposal.
Who will manage the new theatre? How much will it cost the City to maintain?
The Performing Arts Center will be operated by representatives from each organization, the Theatre, the Symphony and the Dakota Artist Guild. We now manage the Arts Resource Center and have done so successfully. It is anticipated that we will eventually sell the ARC property and the tenants will move into the new Performing Arts Center. We have budgeted 2 additional FTE over and above our current staffing budget to operate the new facility. This will most likely increase. The actual physical space will cost approximately $95,000 annually for maintenance and utilities. We arrived at this number using estimates from local utilities and our own experience operating the ARC.
Why is this happening now? This project has been in the works for years. What happened? Budget increases? Anything else?
The construction of a Performing Arts Center has been a discussion priority in the arts community for the past 30 years I have lived here. Finally, in 1999, we were approved for funding from 2012. Then the project was moved to the back of the pack. Accordingly, it has been only during the past 12 months or more that the actual design and early cost estimates starting coming in and problems arose. Trying to wedge a theatre between two existing buildings with ground floors that were six feet different in elevation presented problems. Putting in an elevator with extra stops due to elevation issues increased cost. Creating an access tunnel for utilities in the alley increased cost. The replacement of two aging HVAC plants increased costs. Elevating the cyclorama for the purpose of creating a lobby space increased costs, and the list went on. The issue of no parking was raised with the RCAC unsuccessfully. At the end of the day, we felt that an alternative needed to be presented if a Performing Arts Center had a chance.
Is it possible to get everyone on the same page about where that theatre should be located?
I think that a very significant majority of people support the construction of a Performing Arts Center at the Civic Center-Journey campus. This project found unanimous support in the 2012 Civic Improvements Committee and it has a broad base of support through out the community. Additionally, we have the support of the three groups that presented the project and numerous other performing arts groups from Sweet Adeline to Rapid City Children’s Chorus. I think that is about as good as it gets. This community loves the arts and has shown that they will support the arts. I am confident that this support will continue to grow both at the Dahl Fine Arts Center for the visual arts and at the new Performing Arts Center.
Comment by Mike Gould — 4/10/2005 @ 9:07 am
Here's the latest from the other blog.
Haven't seen anything from our own
group though, other than Spin's
original post.
Got any opinions yet folks?
______________________________
Thanks Mike.
I hope people from the Dahl group and other SD Arts organizations will
respond to these questions as well.
I think clear, open minded communication is the key to reducing friction over this issue.
One of my opinions is that the Arts are all about communication…
especially when other forms of communication are inadequate.
That’s when creativity becomes paramount. Certainly the creative community
can come up with a win-win-win solution here if we set our hearts and minds
to it.
Comment by bfleming — 4/10/2005 @ 1:43 pm
10.
I must admit that I was skeptical of the site next to the Journey since it always has the perception of being out of the way (even though it really is not). Mike you have sold me on the project. Should we start nudging our City Council on this one or is it too early for that? It is nice to see so much analysis was put into this plan, but I do wonder what the Dahl will do with the MDU building now. I guess on thing at a time.
Comment by Simon King — 4/10/2005 @ 6:49 pm
11.
If The Journey hadn’t been in A) a poor location and B) hadn’t shelved the IMAX theatre in the original plans, it might have been more palatable to the tourists and the locals.
Comment by Thomas Heald — 4/10/2005 @ 7:07 pm
12.
Question for Mike Gould
What is the projected square foot size of the Performing Arts Center? I assume this would include areas for the
theater, staging, prop storage, rehearsal space, theater lobby, box office, art gallery, wardrobe storage,
dressing rooms, corridors (usually 10% to 15% of overall), offices, maintenance and mechanical rooms.
Thanks
Comment by Patrick Wyss — 4/11/2005 @ 5:47 am
13.
I hope the Blogmasters wont mind if I simply repost
Linda Anderson’ letter here under the Dahl thread instead of
McCarthy. Thanks BF
Hi Bill: I tried to post the following on Mt. Blogmore but couldn’t get it to go through….any help you could give me would be appreciated. I sent it through but kept getting a “page could not be displayed” technical error message. Great issue to post on the blog. I’ll be interested in the responses. Thanks, Linda
I don’t want to simply rehash everything that has been in the press or the project proposal papers. To respond first to Simon–2012 was originally created to fund capital projects that increase the quality of life for citizens. Addicted to 2012 funds? No–just that municipal facilities (and parks, pools and other structures) need stable funding sources if they are to expand and be maintained responsibly on behalf of citizens. The subsidy from the general fund that goes to the Dahl annually is used 100% for building costs. 100% of facility income goes to offset costs of running the building. Program funds are raised by the groups that use the community resource. It is a great deal for the community–a public/private partnership that works very efficiently.
I would encourage people to ask more questions and compare the facts very carefully on the arts expansion issues. Designing, building and administering successful public facilities takes strong community input, planning, good design and skillful management.
There is a gross distortion of the facts when one compares a $5.7 million pricetag to 10.7 million one. 5.7 million refers only to the cost of the theatre–10.7 million refers to the cost of renovating the theatre, galleries and education areas of the Dahl.
Who are the contractors the PAC project is working with? Where are their designs, operational estimates, what experts are saying that construction of the project could begin in August? What experts are saying the design from the Dahl project is portable? (Not Thurston Design, the company that has worked on the Dahl Expansion). And what site exactly has been approved by the City for use? There has been no City approval for a site near the Journey, no geotechnical soil testing, no regulatory approvals, no infrastructure needs assessments and no utilities assessments. All of these things matter if one is to responsibly project a price of construction.
In reflecting on Bill Fleming’s question, what is the best way to advance creativity in the community—I can only give my opinion. The way I see it, it is about working together to share resources, making sure that those resources are responsibly managed and available to the broadest range of community users and being open to new ideas and diversity. The Black Hills region has incredible talent and creative energy–this talent and energy is just starting to be recognized as an economic force in this area and the potential is incredible. I feel very privileged to be able to work with the artists and the community that supports them in our area. The future is very bright. I welcome healthy debate on these issues!
Linda Anderson
Executive Director
Dahl Arts Center / Rapid City Arts Council
Comment by Linda Anderson — 4/11/2005 @ 7:01 am
Comment by Bill Fleming — 4/11/2005 @ 7:27 am
A poll in the rapid city journal said...
Should 2012 money go toward:
New performing arts center 10% Dahl Arts Center expansion 14% Both 16% Neither 59%
I put that info up on the RCJ blog Spin.
We'll se what becomes of it. Those kinds
of polls are usually not very accurate,
but the numbers are indeed pretty
disturbing.
I went and looked for myself.
Looks like only about 180
people voting. Still not a good
sign though.
So how do we train ourselves to log onto the rcjournal webpage often enough, with enough body-count to shed some liberal sunshine into these dark and stormy polls?
I go there every day.
I've just never noticed the polls.
I just go to the blog.
But....heh, heh, heh....
(he chuckeled fiendishly),
We could probably deliver at least
20 votes any time we wanted to.
If something important comes up
we should have an opt-in list we
can notify. An "RCJ Poll Alert."
I bet I know an Owlishly clever web shop
that could concoct such a useful
tribal tool. Send my notice to both
of my emails so I can vote twice.
Heh, heh, heh. Muuuuahahahaha.
WOW, I finally read though all that... I still can’t say for sure what I think should happen. I am drawn to a new location, only because I think that there is what everyone really wants in that plan. I think the Dahl is just scared because it means stepping back and making a new plan. I know that I don’t think that is really fair that the Theater doesn’t really have there own space. I know that during the current show, the Dahl scheduled a belly dancing event right before the show opened; this forced the director to re hang all of the black curtains to cover the set they had already loaded in. I can see how this would upset the BHCT and that they have no choice but to do what the Dahl wants because it is there space. I could also see that with a performing Arts center, there is the possibility for more than one stage, making it possible for more than one event to be planned at a time.
I am not one to get too wrapped up how much something costs, but I see an opportunity for both organizations to get what they want out of the deal. The thought of a larger gallery is very appealing. I don’t know what not having the theater as part of the expansion does to the Dahl. It seems that if the Dahl were to settle down a bit and rethink some things they might get a little excited. I don’t know… just a young persons opinion.
Gather up the emails at large. We will set up a group Journal alert.
As an aside, our landlady's husband (now deceased) was the architect who designed the Dahl. She said that he designed the theater for children's productions...so the kids could perform in a more intimate environment. He was concerned that the school gym/theater settings were too vast. As a consequence, the kids didn't actually get the true feeling of being performers. Because of its small size, there was also a greater chance for the kids to play to a near-full house. Interesting, huh?
Yeah, that's some of the reason why they
still want to have community access to the
stage beyond what BHCT wants to do.
Of course, there were fewer people in town
back then so the crows were smaller.
Even so, when our "kids" played there
they didn't fill the house. But the intimacy
of the setting is nice. The acoustics however
are horrible.
Post a Comment
<< Home