STYLE Weekly: About Paul Goldman’s style

In a STYLE Weekly Back Page piece, Bill Farrar writes about Paul Goldman, the human quote machine who withdrew from the mayoral race last week.

This is a piece that some of the bloggers who fell in love with Goldman’s avalanche of ideas and rock-the-boat style should read. Then those well-meaning bloggers, who know who they are, ought to consider the possibility they were so against certain elements in town that they unwittingly bought into a campaign that was mostly a publicity stunt all along.

Still, if there is one person who epitomizes the failure of City Hall over the last four years, it is Goldman. Oh, sure, Mayor Doug Wilder has been the man in charge. But he never knew how to run the city, and the voters should have known better than to elect him.

Goldman, however, was the self-proclaimed architect of a flawed populist movement, standing on Carytown street corners in his ball cap asking passersby to sign petitions supporting the change to an at-large, elected mayor.

He presented himself as an altruist, just a regular guy trying to fix what seemed broken, but Goldman actually was well-paid for his efforts. He received tens of thousands of dollars in consulting fees while serving as executive director of the Mayor At-Large Referendum Campaign, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.

The lion’s share of those funds — including additional pay he pocketed managing Wilder’s inevitable power grab — came in donations from the same corporate leaders he hypocritically derided for supporting his mayoral opponents this year, saying their kind of influence is damaging City Hall.

Click here to read the entire piece.

Posted in Hub's Blurbs, RVANews-politics

32 Comments.

  1. Goldman no doubt worked it, worked the people. My guess it was a game all along. He spent months bombarding us with email press releases (I was on his email list) giving negative reports and scathing criticisms of Pantele and Grey and touting himself as “the only one to…” everything under the sun. Some days I received two or more emails which I stopped reading for the most part. I bet it was the emails that brought John Murden to the conclusion the man was “weird” http://chpn.net/news/2008/10/08/so-there-is-an-election-coming-up/ .

    Goldman was just looking for a job -someone to pay him for his ideas. But I’m wondering, was Goldman fashioning himself as a Karl Rove type for the democratic party? Something about those emails is reminiscent of the flyers Rove stuck under windshield wipers in church parking lots when Bush was running for Governor.

    In any case, I’m not following Goldman to Dwight because I don’t like games. All along I was actually on the fence between Goldman and Grey then leaning more towards the latter as the emails poured in.

    gray @ October 29th, 2008 at 9:05 pm

  2. Gray,

    Not that I’m trying to promote such a movement, but I sense that a lot of people are giving Grey a second look. Maybe it’s too late. Or, maybe the RT-D poll’s undecideds are more likely to break toward him than any other way.

    Late movement may be significant this time.

    FTRea @ October 29th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

  3. A lot of people have told me they are voting for Grey. I’m glad the Goldman propaganda machine dropped out. Pantele is too tied with developers and Dwight Jones is a product of a political mill. Grey has made his way around town, he genuinely likes the local arts and culture, his mother was a principal and one of the pioneers in transforming publics schools into something good, and he held a meet and greet at Mamma Zu’s. I’ll need to pick up a Grey yard sign by the weekend.

    gray @ October 29th, 2008 at 11:41 pm

  4. I don’t have time or the inclination to respond to this in full, but here goes…

    I don’t think ‘well-meaning bloggers’ were excited about Goldman’s style (whatever that dig means) so much as they were in agreement with many of his statements and he did in fact, LISTEN to us. He is still miles ahead on economic and environmental policies.
    The other candidates left us wanting, while Goldman delivered.

    The fact is that the Mayor-at-Large campaign was SUCCESSFUL. Yeah, most people were disappointed with some of Wilder’s tenure, but there is still a lot of new energy and interest in the City government now that did not exist under the old City Council regime. Deal with it.

    I know and like Bill Farrar, but his article strikes me as a bunch of sour grapes over losing his City gig. I also read his earlier piece in Richmond Magazine. Bill, didn’t you also tell me that Brad Armstrong is a liar?

    Vote for Grey if you want, but understand both he and Pantele are the same ol’ “business community” ’s thumb, and they are not interested in making the Center Stage/art center deal transparent as long as their backers want them to bail it out. Go ahead, ask them about it.

    I will take my chances with Jones, and if that makes me ‘unwitting’, then so be it. I know he wants CHANGE, and we all know that it will not come easy.

    Scott Burger @ October 30th, 2008 at 11:33 am

  5. Scott,

    My support for the strong/elected mayor concept goes back to the early 1990s. I was advocating that change in print (in SLANT and other periodicals), when nobody else was doing it. John Moeser will tell you that’s true.

    So, when you say, “deal with it,” what the hell does that mean? Are you defending Wilder? Goldman? The change itself?

    You say you like Farrar, but it’s sour grapes if he disagrees with you.

    Well, I say Goldman courted and used bloggers in this race in the same cynical way lots of political operators have used members of the traditional press over the years.

    There’s no CHANGE in that. It’s politics as usual.

    If you want to follow Goldman to supporting Jones that’s fine. If Jones wins and hires Goldman that won’t bother me much. But on the face of it, electing Henry Marsh’s protégé to follow Wilder, hardly represents change.

    FTRea @ October 30th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

  6. Re: Performing Arts Center Questions

    Jones has been sued by his own congregation for failing to turn over financial documents. What do you think a guy like that could do with access to our tax dollars?

    Pantele was in a position to demand greater transparency concerning whole Performing Arts Center mess and did everything he could to squelch transparency and discussion.

    Grey actually regrets the lack of greater transparency and IS THE ONLY Mayoral candidate who has vowed to ensure transparency in city finances should he be elected Mayor.

    Carol A.O. Wolf @ October 30th, 2008 at 2:04 pm

  7. “vowed to ensure transparency in city finances should he be elected Mayor.”

    City finances, but what about the “private” VaPAF?

    This is very simple, Grey could send out a press release that spells out his position on Center Stage- this is what Goldman did.

    Scott Burger @ October 30th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

  8. I agree with Scott, the Farrar hit piece on Goldman was sour grapes. I was hoping from the title of the piece Farrar would have some juicy criminal accusations against Goldman but instead it was really pedestrian stuff. Paul got paid money to chair a campaign to change the city charter, Paul came in late to work, Paul didn’t really think Blackberries were a waste of money, etc.

    C’mon, it’s not like he was named over two dozen times in a federal bribery/extortion indictment like Bill Pantele was when his friends got busted bribing Gwen Hedgepeth to vote Pantele for mayor. Which by the way, was one big reason we wanted to change to the popularly elected mayor government that Paul Goldman successfully orchestrated. (I would enjoy reading “The Pantele I Knew” by H. Louis Salomonsky.)

    But just like Goldman said, giving the appearance of something is more important than that actual something. In this case, Farrar gives Goldman the appearance of committing improprieties, when his alleged indiscretions are much ado about nothing.

    Oh also by the way, all campaigns are publicity stunts, that is the point of them.

    Stuart @ October 30th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

  9. Terry, then give Goldman his due. He did not just write about it, he went out and got Mayor at Large DONE. Sure, he might have been paid for it. But he did it, not you or me (though I did sign his petition for Mayor at Large, did you?).

    Deal with it means just that. Here we are in the current situation. The fact is that Goldman did bring Mayor at Large to the City and he did, for better AND worse, get Wilder elected Mayor and later both Goldman and Farrar left the administration. Goldman has already left the race, why attack him now?

    Sure, Goldman “courted” the bloggers. Like I said, he actually listened and spoke with us. In my opinion, having the bloggers recognized as a form of media relations (and in Pantele’s case, reviled) is change in itself. Maybe he did tell us what we wanted to hear, but at least he did that (in his own words, no less), and if elected we could hold him to it.

    Now Jones told me that he will make the art center deal more transparent. So he is squeaking by my litmus test. Now maybe I am wrong to have hope in that, but what are Grey and Pantele telling us, the Richmond voters, about the arts center deal? In Pantele’s case, we are told we are wrong to even ask questions.

    There’s still the weekend before Election Day. Its not too late for some real accountability and substance.

    Scott Burger @ October 30th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

  10. Is the idea of a Unity Council bad?

    Is fiscal responsibility and a fair city budget wrong?

    Is it shameful to tell the truth about where taxpayer dollars are going?

    I don’t find these notions a “publicity stunt” and I’m disappointed in those who do.

    I like Bill Farrar too, but if the best he can come up with is to say that Goldman didn’t wear the proper clothes to work, and didn’t clock in on time, and disagreed with the use of Blackberrys… that just isn’t good enough.

    I’ll be the first to admit that Goldman was an imperfect candidate — and I have listed many of the reasons why at Save Richmond. So the idea that certain bloggers have been “taken in” is nonsense. I could say the same thing about people who claim that running closed-door committees and shielding the final resting place of taxpayer dollars — and then issuing press releases about “accountability and transparency” — shows sound leadership ability. It does not.

    LIke it or not, Goldman actually listened to people when he was at City Hall. Like it or not, Goldman ran the most inclusive and grass-roots campaign. Like it or not, Goldman was the only candidate to warn about Richmond’s future financial situation (which is dire). I’m sorry if those seem wacky and crazy reasons to pick a candidate — inclusion and common sense. In this place, maybe it is.

    Don Harrison @ October 30th, 2008 at 5:41 pm

  11. Scott,

    Great question on VaPAF!

    And, I agree with you on Goldman. The Farrar piece in Style was unfair. I wish it would have been possible for Grey and Goldman to unite. Perhaps Style will afford Paul an opportunity for rebuttal. (?)

    Grey has told me that he will work to make the art center deal more transparent as well. I supposed the proverbial devil will be in the details and the definition of transparent.

    One of the things that really bites about the secrecy that permeates not only VaPAF, but City Hall and the School Boardl, is the implicit idea that “We the People” are only on a “Need-to-Know” basis with regards to what these various entities do with our tax dollars.

    This needs to change. And, despite our mutual efforts to drag the inner-workings of our government and how it spends our money into the Sunshine, there is still plenty of work to be done.

    I think Robert Grey is serious about wanting transparency in all matters involving public dollars, wherever those dollars end up.

    If you have time on Saturday, please drop for a “meet-and-greet” with Robert Grey from 4 to 5:30 pm., 3810 Seminary Avenue.

    My husband and I are co-hosting the “meet-and-greet” with our friends Oliver and Renee Hill, Rob Jones and Whitney Tymas, Matthew and Edith Ott.

    It will be a perfect time to ask as many questions as you like.

    Carol A.O. Wolf @ October 30th, 2008 at 9:23 pm

  12. Don,

    Evidently, your post was not yet up when I commented at 9:23 pm, otherwise I would have noted my agreement with you.

    I was sorry to see Paul abandon the Mayoral campaign. The Paul I got to know after he left Wilder’s City Hall is clearly a very different man than the one Farrar knew when they worked for Hizzoner.

    I only wish that Farrar could have been able to experience the smart, generous, funny and genuinely kind and decent man that Paul Goldman really is.

    To be sure, we didn’t not always agree. But, I do know that we always listened to one another and respected our differences, which is far more than I can say about most politicians.

    Carol A.O. Wolf @ October 30th, 2008 at 11:59 pm

  13. Hey everyone, I just read this last night. I’m Grey’s campaign manger. Be assured that a Grey Admin in City Hall will be open and transparent. Just because the word “private”is in public-private partnerships doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be accountable to citizens — the word “public” is not negated. Public-private partnerships are required by law to be open, and as Mayor Grey will put the info up on the web for all to see. This is in line with his policy proposal of making Richmond a CitiStat city. CitiStat has transformed local government and created accessibility and accountability in 11 other cities around the country, and Richmond needs it. (Now-Gov Martin O’Malley of MD started it in Baltimore when he was Mayor there.) All the data from all the departments in city government would be on the web — and it would be the data, not spin or someone’s interpretation of the data. It’s actually very cool (Google “Baltimore Citistat”, look at what Center for American Progress says about it, and visit our website for more info.) Carol issued the invitation to talk to Robert about it tomorrow (Saturday) but if you can’t make it, holler at me and ask away.

    Lisa @ October 31st, 2008 at 9:36 am

  14. thanks for censoring my comment, f.t. rea, i guess you only promote weak ass liberal puke, which is exactly what you are, just like farrar, liberal fascist losers!

    Liberty @ October 31st, 2008 at 12:05 pm

  15. Don, you make good points and like I said above, Goldman was one of my picks but along with his excellent (the reason I did like him) ideas, he pulled what appeared to be publicity stunts, for example, going to the press with his Carytown Mall suggestion before forming a consensus among the merchants. My personal favorite -Goldman standing infront of my children’s school with West, who had never stepped foot into our school, to state that we “badly” needed uniforms (http://chpn.net/news/2008/06/30/goldman-and-west-to-propose-school-uniform-policy/).

    Goldman needed an advisor/editor when running for public office. He is a think out loud type guy -he exhaled ideas instead of air -however, it can come off as crazy, arrogant and abrasive, disheveled or ADD, and commedic (the type person I like hanging out with). Unfortunately to be in a leadership position, you must convey a calm strength and an ability to organize. Showing up on time and working overtime is also very important -compare school principals to see how punctuality and hard work makes a difference. A good example of an excellent leader is David Hudson of Holton elementary.

    It’s not a bad idea to have Goldman on the mayoral staff, however, his pay should be significantly less. Carol Wolf has exhibited amazing feats with our slack ass RPS government -she should also be hired.

    Don, I looked through your Save Richmond blogs because I was pretty sure you had written a piece on Jones but I couldn’t find it. Was there one? If so, what happened to it?

    gray @ October 31st, 2008 at 12:25 pm

  16. Liberty,

    Well, I’ve been called a lot of things over the years. As far as I know this is the first time for “liberal fascist loser.” Not sure what that means, either.

    As far as censoring your comment goes, again, I’m not sure what you’re driving at.

    However, if I deleted one of your comments, it was not intentional. Please try to understand this: I get about 500 comments a day to look through and moderate. Sometimes, it’s closer to 1,000! And, 98-to-99 percent of them are spam.

    So, I’m not surprised that a legitimate comment might get deleted in that process. I have never deleted a comment simply because it clashed with my opinion.

    FTRea @ October 31st, 2008 at 12:47 pm

  17. Gray: I haven’t written anything specific about Dwight Jones on Save Richmond. Not yet, anyway. I largely agree with your assessment of Goldman’s abrasive nature — he does not suffer fools gladly — but I still maintain that having a mayor who listens to the people and not just the business community would really be a “change” for Richmond. And Goldman did actually listen to people — say what you want.

    If Carol Wolf were pledging to join Robert Grey’s staff, that would be a big, big, BIG plus for Grey.

    Lisa: Thanks for your response. Here’s the problem: The reason VAPAF tanked the last time was not because there was no public money, it was because the overseers of the project did not come clean about the PRIVATE money it had. This fact is a matter of record.

    So for Mr. Grey or Mr. Pantele to argue that private dollars (which affect the amount of taxpayer dollars) should be shielded from FOIA and taxpayer scrutiny is not only non-sensical in light of past history, it even contradicts the findings and recommendations of the City Auditor who, in 2005, found that the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation had improperly stated their private donation dollars and also had been billing the city improperly for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mr. Dalal the auditor even recommended that the Foundation post its financial information on a regular updated basis for all to see.

    So I guess my question is: Who does Mr. Grey agree with on this — Bill Pantele (who has helped to shield the project’s details from taxpayers) or the City Auditor? If it’s the former, should we brace for yet another Mayor vs. City Auditor battle about what is and isn’t “transparency” if Mr. Grey is elected?

    For the record, I like Mr. Grey personally and if he were running for ambassador of Richmond or the head of the Chamber of Commerce, he’d have my vote. But for a mayoral candidate to come out and promote VAPAF and similar closed-door public-private partnerships as models for Richmond’s future — folks, that is very scary and the very opposite of the kind of accountability we expected when we chose to directly-elect our mayor.

    Carol: You know I think you are the bees knees and if I make it back from Tidewater on time, I’ll definitely swing by on Saturday. Thanks for the invite.

    Liberty: Terry Rea is a great guy, an avowed fan of hot debate and one of the least likely people to censor anyone that I know. You should apologize.

    Don Harrison @ October 31st, 2008 at 2:28 pm

  18. Don,

    Thanks.

    Lisa,

    The ball is in Grey’s court.

    There are people who see Grey’s role to do with the VAPAF — having been appointed by Wilder, rubbing up against the Fat Cats, etc. — as a reason to look elsewhere for a candidate. Some of them are probably undecided voters.

    If Grey now is ready to follow the spirit of Don’s advice, and say so in a clear voice — even at this late date — there are some votes that could fall his way on Tuesday. So, it wouldn’t just be smart, it would be the right thing. It seems to me that you’re almost always righteous to side with free speech and sunlight.

    FTRea @ October 31st, 2008 at 3:03 pm

  19. Hey Don — thanks for that. (I enjoy reading what you write.) Let me be clear — in a Grey Admin, if it’s not public now, it will be. That is not only the right thing to do, it’s in line with the CitiStat proposal he’s made which will be all about transparency, and everything else he’s talked about on the campaign trail.

    You know Don that in tough budget times there are things that Richmond needs that can’t and shouldn’t be paid for with tax dollars alone — there has to be private investment. If it is indeed public/private it needs to be open and transparent. We can’t be any more clear than that (see my post from yesterday.)

    Thanks everyone for all you do to stay informed and engaged — we all really enjoy the blogs here at the Grey campaign.

    Lisa @ November 1st, 2008 at 9:25 am

  20. Mr. Rea, Farrar’s article was such a twisted character attak on Mr. Goldman that i compared him to a teachers pet tattling on someone who was late for class, basically sour grapes. Pauls a friend so it irked me. When my response disappeared i assumed it was pulled because of my opinion. I appreciate you explaining what happended and apologize for my remark.

    Liberty @ November 1st, 2008 at 11:12 am

  21. Liberty,

    Apology accepted.

    Don’t know Farrar. Don’t know how accurate his piece in STYLE was. Don’t know why Farrar would have a grudge against Goldman, either.

    Can you explain why it was a “sour grapes” attack? Can you offer some insight as to why Farrar would distort the truth? Or, is it that you simply disagreed with what Farrar wrote and wanted to stick up for a guy you like?

    FTRea @ November 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am

  22. So, Lisa, under a Grey administration, the City AND the VaPAF will be in CitiStats program and that will make them both transparent?

    Sorry, but this really needs to be spelled out, because, frankly, the accountability and transparency has not been there, despite millions and millions of taxpayer dollars spent.

    And I have real concerns about the sustainability of Center Stage. I don’t think Richmond’s citizens have a full appreciation of what’s at stake here.

    Thanks,
    Scott

    Scott Burger @ November 1st, 2008 at 7:22 pm

  23. Lisa: Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it.

    Scott makes a very good point, so I hope we are all talking about the same thing here. VAPAF/CenterStage/RPAC is currently designated as a “private” entity because of the Comprehensive Agreement — in other words, thanks to the mayor and city council, working together for the first and last time (lucky us), CitiStat would not currently apply to this project. Or it would only partially apply.

    So would a Mayor Grey actually go back and try to change this closed-door deal for the good of the taxpayers… and institute the common sense public accountability that the City Auditor recommended back in 2005?

    In tough financial times, Lisa, I think you would agree that it will be in the city’s best advantage not to repeat such howling farces as spending $10 million to dig a big hole in the ground. I do agree that, in a perfect world, the idea of public-private partnerships helping the city would be more than reasonable. But we have some terrible past examples of how the idea hasn’t worked for THIS city. That is what is troubling about Mr. Grey’s position — this inability to acknowledge the past failures of such enterprises.

    Sidenote: VAPAF/CenterStage Foundation is currently the area’s lowest-rated, least-trusted charity, according to Charity Navigator. So any future effort by our mayor to make it wholly transparent and trustworthy could actually HELP the organization gain respectability and private dollars.
    As stated, the private money that goes into this project will greatly affect the public money that will need to be expended.

    So making this project transparent and accountable would do more than just make a bunch of longhaired, sunlight-loving bloggers happy — it could actually make the project more attractive to donors and help city finances. Sounds like a win-win to me…

    Don Harrison @ November 1st, 2008 at 10:35 pm

  24. Lisa,

    I think the points Don, Scott, Terry [and others] make about the need for true transparency of the VaPAF/Center Stage Foundation are of critical importance. Secrecy in government has never inspired trust. In fact, it instills quite the opposite response.

    Given the success that Robert Grey and consultant John Gerner achieved when they managed to get all parties to table and ultimately found $25 million for the VaPAF/Center Stage project, I am confident that with true transparency and wise fiscal oversight, we would find money not only for the VaPAF/Center Stage, but for the ADA and other much needed projects in our city.

    I applaud Grey’s promise of accountability for all and I have high praise for the “CitiStat.” I wish that a ledger sheet showing the amount of monies contributed to the VaPAF “public/private” partnership could simply be posted online.

    Grey remains the only candidate who has promised to help our schools and other city buildings comply with the ADA.

    As soldiers return from Iraq missing limbs and as boomers continue to age and need increased accessibility, our society will need to be able to accommodate more than just children in our public school buildings and other facilities.

    If we ever hope to fill the Convention Center and the various hotels, we need to be able to market Richmond as a “destination” city and show that our city is ADA friendly on multiple levels.

    Interestingly, the $25 million the City kicked in for the VaPAF is roughly the same amount RPS estimates is needed to improve our buildings to meet the requirements of ADA law.

    Carol A.O. Wolf @ November 2nd, 2008 at 11:00 am

  25. FYI:

    We had a great turn-out for the “meet-and-greet” yesterday and I remain convinced that Grey is the best man for the job.

    Grey is the consummate professional and is truly concerned for the well-being of the city and region.

    We don’t need another four years of drama and histrionics that are the hallmark of career politicians.

    Unfortunately, Pantele and Jones (good men) are to the City of Richmond what George Bush and John McCain are to our nation.

    Grey’s message is similar to Obama’s — we need a fresh start and the hope that if we all work together we can make real the vision of a nation (and city) that is “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

    Carol A.O. Wolf @ November 2nd, 2008 at 11:20 am

  26. FTRea, The things Farrar wrote about Goldman were-no one knew where he was, and he used hotmail e-mail, he said this…etc. i mean are these facts or truths? I’m sure keeping an eye on Goldman wasnt the guys job but he knows and remembers these petty things from years ago. I’m amazed such tripe was published by Style, bad journalism in my opinion, but thats politics. I believe Paul wants and works for the betterment of our community, and has significant achievements, and then some lapdog(farrar), who has done nothing that i know of, (well he was a tax-payer paid city employee for 8 years) trashes the guy. I hope Paul responds somewhere but what motivation is there for Goldman to comment about some nobody. As Paul might say “Farrar? whos that?”

    Liberty @ November 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 am

  27. Here are some questions, a few that have been answered before but have gotten lost in the mess of the media and blogosphere.

    Regarding center stage:

    How much public money has been spent so far and how much are we expected to pay yearly?

    How much private money has been spent?

    Exactly what role did Robert Grey have in the center stage project? Was he in charge or overseeing the budget/books? Is he still involved with center stage?

    Given that all the mayoral candidates have stated there will be complete transparency of the budget -private and public -how will they differ in how they handle the center stage project as mayor?

    How will the average Richmond citizen benefit from this project? What programs are being formed to offer RPS students free of charge?

    The Virginia Museum of Fine Art is open daily to the rich and poor, students and seniors -all residents of the city benefit greatly from this institution. How will Center Stage go about forming a diverse group of patrons?

    Will the big CEOs interfere with programs, ie censorship, if a performance goes against their beliefs or products or the way inwhich they conduct business?

    gray @ November 2nd, 2008 at 11:27 am

  28. How much public money has been wasted? $25m in City funds plus $8m(hole in ground plus concert hall design) in City funds before Wilder+$5m in State+$5m(Arts Educ plan in Landmark which was scrapped too) in Federal=$48m plus cost of financing.

    And let’s not forget the $500k of annual subsidy the City has pledged and will have to finance too.

    Given the lack of transparency, the private funds spent/wasted cannot be calculated. Easily tens of millions on the concert hall design, administrative expense, consultants (mostly wasted for for ticket system study, arts education, branding, board development, food & drink plan,
    comparative arts center study, landscaping plan, etc, etc., etc.)

    Robert Grey is a noble man who spent hours with me trying to gain an understanding of my ten years of involvement. He is on the RPAC Board. John Gerner is a very smart man and he also quizzed me for many hours and was Wilder’s volunteer consultant tasked with brokering a deal (which he did whether we like the outcome or not). He should have been placed on the RPAC Board but was not.

    We assume the construction project is on time & on budget but no reports are public. We assume SMG will run the facilities professionally but no plan or contract is public.

    I fear the deep recession will still be in full bloom come next fall when this opens. I fear small audiences and the standard brand of programming from the opera, ballet & symphony. No disrespect but these are not barn burners at the box office. No Broadway shows are on this year’s schedule and, given the economy, none may show up next year. The profits that high quality popular programming brought in during my tenure may not be realized so more pressure to keep, or increase, the City subsidy is possible. Or, SMG can raise rates for the local not-for-profits and increase their need for subsidy.

    Folks, my glass has been 1/2 empty for many years but this is not a pretty picture.

    Joel Katz @ November 2nd, 2008 at 1:56 pm

  29. Thanks, Joel.

    I think one of the biggest injustices connected to the VAPAF debacle was that a great professional, Joel Katz, was fired from his position as head of the Carpenter Center for simply stating the truth. The fact that VAPAF/CenterStage still refuses to put arts professionals in positions of real authority says it all.

    The best overview article on VAPAF — the one that will really open your eyes about how business was done — is this excellent piece by Scott Bass in Style Weekly. It’s worth reading in order to understand all aspects of the story, and it debunks quite a few myths surrounding the project. Please note how the Foundation refused to show Style the data that they claimed existed that justified their project. Reading this, you can make up your own mind about whether or not this project should represent the future of Richmond:

    http://www.styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=9E32C97D1FFB4985B06DFBC8AAA0E86E

    Don @ November 2nd, 2008 at 10:48 pm

  30. And this, my friends, is yet another reason (the main reason in my book) why Bill Pantele must NOT become Mayor:

    “Interestingly, the $25 million the City kicked in for the VaPAF is roughly the same amount RPS estimates is needed to improve our buildings to meet the requirements of ADA law.”

    Yeah, I understand with school closings and other school admin wrangling, maybe the full $25 million should not have been spent on school buildings, and I also understand the need for SOME dowtnown investment. But the overall picture is that schools keep getting left behind while wasteful downtown projects get pushed ahead. It goes back to previous discussions on this blog and elsewhere about City priorities.

    Scott Burger @ November 3rd, 2008 at 11:37 am

  31. What a fiasco! Not a penny more should go towards the Center Stage until all records, plans, and finances (public and private) are made public. The city tossed millions to a crew of incompetent clowns.

    And once the Performance Center is finished, the facilities should be used as a day performance school for high school students since we were unable to use the money towards building new schools. This is a complete shame -wealthy folk flushing money down the toilet while kids fear for their lives everyday they enter places like Armstrong or schools making do with substitute teachers because of budget cuts, or siblings going to different schools because the neighborhood school doesn’t have a ramp for wheelchairs. Good grief people!!!!!

    People move to the suburbs because of great schools not because they love plaza after plaza of shitty architecture housing chain restaurants and stores. They miss the arts and culture of Richmond and the sidewalks and their fellow democrats. Great schools more so than Center Stages, River views, and stadiums will attract people to settle in the city.

    gray @ November 3rd, 2008 at 5:21 pm

  32. And just think — THIS is the one thing that Doug Wilder and this city council chose to come together on.

    Don @ November 3rd, 2008 at 9:05 pm

3rd Column

RVABlogs »

Once Upon a Vine