June 2014

A Doe, A Deer, a wrecked Pavilion Mini-Van & the story of the missing development director

l3wis June 11, 2014 7Comments

This is something I have been working on for awhile, and with the assistance of a very ‘investigative’ South DaCola foot soldier, I finally got to the bottom of it. Well, almost.

Let’s start at the end. Supposedly last October (2013) there was a vehicle/deer collision near Wall, SD. No worries, the passenger and the driver are OK, no one got hurt, I can’t say that much about the deer (I am assuming deceased) and the van they were driving–Toast. But fortunately, ‘the package’ they were carrying also survived with no damages.

See the Pavilion, in all of their wisdom decided that they would transport paintings on loan from the Sioux Indian Art museum (a division of the Journey museum) in Rapid City to Sioux Falls, according to an official at the Journey. Nothing wrong with this practice. Many museums do this, usually not across an entire state though. So what’s the story here? First off, I just want to say that I am glad the two ladies are okay that were involved.

Secondly, why didn’t the Pavilion do what most professional art museums do? Hire a transport company that is insured and bonded in this kind of shipping. Were the paintings insured while they were transported by the Pavilion employees? And more importantly, what if they weren’t and they got damaged? Or employees got seriously injured while on the clock? They can kiss that $10,000 admission fee good bye.

What I can’t figure out is if they were on the ‘Up and Up’ with all of their insurance and transporting detail (which they may have been) why not tell the public about this accident? What’s the harm? The ladies are fine, the art is okay, wouldn’t the public like to know about this? I guess they only like to get the public involved when they have a mis-bid on window replacement or a leaking Cinedome roof. The Pavilion only speaks to the ‘have-nots’ when they need money from us.

Now onto a little story in the SFBJ today.

The Pavilion finally decides to hire a development director;

The Pavilion did not have a development director for the year.

The position was filled recently by Ann Parker, the former head of corporate communications and investor relations for Sonifi, formerly LodgeNet Interactive Corp.

The position will help build development and sponsorships, Toll said.

So first off, we have a co-president who was managing LodgeNet when they were going through bankruptcy and he hires a person from that former bankrupt company?

Nice. They must be bonding well.

The Pavilion is consistently talking about raising money, yet they don’t fill the very position that is responsible for fundraising for a full year? And yes, they have yet to say why the other development director left. Maybe those secrets died somewhere by Wall Drug? I bet they are hoping so.

Why charging admission at the Wash Pav’s Visual Art Center was a ‘bad idea’

l3wis June 10, 2014 7Comments

As I suspected, this year long experiment isn’t going well;

In the year since the Washington Pavilion’s Visual Arts Center began charging admission, attendance has been lower than previous years’ estimates.

But Pavilion administrators think the lower numbers reflect more accurate counting of visitors rather than an actual decline in attendance.

Toll said getting better information about the art center’s patrons is part of why it started charging admission last July.

“The big reason we did this was not the money. By just letting people walk in, we had no idea who was coming to our different art shows,” Toll said.

Previously, the Pavilion estimated annual attendance to the arts center about 40,000. Since it started charging admission, the center has seen about 14,000 visits.

Toll said the 40,000 guess probably was an overestimate, and that the Pavilion now has much better data on visitors and their demographics.

Baloney! When the VAC was free I do recall the receptionist clicking a head counter when going in the place. And how is charging admission helping the Pavilion’s bottom line?

In the first six months, admission fees brought in about $10,000 — not enough to cover the cost of a typical show, Toll said.

The goal is to move the city-subsidized Visual Arts Center closer to a break-even operation, Toll said. The visual art board set the rates.

I see that is working out wonderfully. NOT. A more effective way to cover expenses is through successful fundraisers, charging ONLY for major exhibits and using grant money. One of the reasons I donated to Arts Night for several years is because I found great value in having a FREE arts center in our community. The Pavilion went back on their promise to the voters and community by NOT keeping the VAC free;

Visitors still have the opportunity to see exhibits free. Every first Friday of the month from 5 to 8 p.m., both the Visual Arts and the Kirby Science Discovery Centers are free. Tuesdays also are free admission.

Almost 7 in 10 visitors attended free of charge during the fee’s first six months, Toll said.

So almost 75% of the attendance occurred within a 5-day period each month? Doesn’t this tell the Pavilion something? People want to see the exhibits for FREE, and are entitled to IMO because of the enormous subsidy we give them, not just from the entertainment tax and CIP money for maintenance, but also Federal and State grants the Pavilion receives. So while we are already paying to attend the Pavilion before we even walk in the doors, we still have to pay when we get there. It’s called separating the ‘Haves’ from the ‘Have Nots’, who can only afford to use the place 5 days out of the month.

Nan Baker, executive director for the Sioux Falls Arts Council, said she and her family take advantage of free days. Even on free days, visitors are given tickets to keep track of how many there are and where they come from.

Baker said tracking the number of people who enter free is important for the local economy. She said trends show that when people visit the arts center for free, they often spend money on other areas, such as baby sitters and local restaurants and bars.

Nan, the Pavilion doesn’t care about the economic impact a FREE admission may have on our community, they only care about what they can rake in. It’s time there is an external audit and review of the Washington Pavilion Management Company, and I am not talking about the city auditor or a local gun for hire. I’m talking about an out of state company that specializes in these kinds of audits and reviews. Not just some one page report prepared by the financial officer that has been there since day one with the operations manager. It’s time the taxpayers of this community found out what was going on in the Big Purple Building, it’s time for a new management company that is interested in making money from the entities it can make money from (Cinedome, Catering, Gift shop, education programs & Great Hall) and passing those profits on to the VAC so it can go back to being FREE while bringing in World class exhibits. But I am afraid our council doesn’t have the backbone to ask for this. Maybe it is time for a petition drive to revoke the Pavilion’s Management contract? Seems that is the only way we have progress anymore in this community.