A major problem with the SCCA is that it grossly fails in its "culture" mission for Suffolk. Look in any Sunday paper, and the reader will find hundreds of show, concerts, programs, plays, etc. throughout Tidewater EXCEPT in Suffolk. Rather than become part of the "culture" scene and including many of programs shared throughout Tidewater, the somewhat limited intellect of the SCCA top two or three has caused Suffolk to be 100% excluded from the annual Virginia Art Festival shows favored every year by young children up to senior citizens.
Instead, The SCCA attemps to hide its almost 100% lack of acceptance in the Suffolk community by (1) blaming the local "hicks" who don't know what is best for themselves, (2) dropping most popular programs and relying on local talent productions and church shows that have failed to be popular at the SCCA and are best continued in the community through churches and schools, whose track record in this arena (including local Little Theater productions) make the SCCA look pathetic and quite properly should demand to know why the SCCA staff continues to seek a $450,000 annual subsidy from the City over and above the many incomes (annual memberships, rents, classes, sponsorships, major donations, restaurant profits, gift shop) that are also mysteriously included in a bottomless hole and never really accounted for, especially if its true as your other comments have recently said that many tickets sales and much sponsorship publicity is given away to hype up the dwindling lack of interest. Anyone with a computer can check the ticket sales and spot the obvious "blocking out" of sections to try to hype up the appearance.
The problem here is the failure of an arrogant few to be supported by our citizens who are being forced to be accused of "anti-culture" lifestyles when they actually just simply resenr the secrecy, mismanagement, and arrogance of a few hand-picked board members and highly paid staff with little accountability other than as as "gofers" for misplaced elitism.
The SCCA can be saved at about a small percentage of the subsidy it now demands (and then brags to call its budget "almost even") by just getting a big old broom (some would say "mop").
What is there to lose by correcting this albatross. We presently have no symphony, no opera. no modern dance, no full ballet, no plays, second rate bands that our young people don't want even though they spend millions on concerts in nearby communities every year, a restaurant that has flopped and yet is arrogantly defended by the SCCA to avoid the animosity created in the community by making this "restaurant" (and some say one florist and one wine vendor) exclusively required for use by any groups seeking to rent the SCCA.
Suffolk doesn't hate "culture" but it does hate what a few divas and primadonnas are doing to conceal poor judgment here and to nitpick the activities of now its second executive director.
We need the "culture" of all of the program areas noted above, but a bowling alley or a movie theater should hardly be treated as a threat to anyone's perverse definition of "culture" that we should be required to like to the exclusion of what is popular and prevalent in virtually every local Tidewater area than ours.
Instead, The SCCA attemps to hide its almost 100% lack of acceptance in the Suffolk community by (1) blaming the local "hicks" who don't know what is best for themselves, (2) dropping most popular programs and relying on local talent productions and church shows that have failed to be popular at the SCCA and are best continued in the community through churches and schools, whose track record in this arena (including local Little Theater productions) make the SCCA look pathetic and quite properly should demand to know why the SCCA staff continues to seek a $450,000 annual subsidy from the City over and above the many incomes (annual memberships, rents, classes, sponsorships, major donations, restaurant profits, gift shop) that are also mysteriously included in a bottomless hole and never really accounted for, especially if its true as your other comments have recently said that many tickets sales and much sponsorship publicity is given away to hype up the dwindling lack of interest. Anyone with a computer can check the ticket sales and spot the obvious "blocking out" of sections to try to hype up the appearance.
The problem here is the failure of an arrogant few to be supported by our citizens who are being forced to be accused of "anti-culture" lifestyles when they actually just simply resenr the secrecy, mismanagement, and arrogance of a few hand-picked board members and highly paid staff with little accountability other than as as "gofers" for misplaced elitism.
The SCCA can be saved at about a small percentage of the subsidy it now demands (and then brags to call its budget "almost even") by just getting a big old broom (some would say "mop").
What is there to lose by correcting this albatross. We presently have no symphony, no opera. no modern dance, no full ballet, no plays, second rate bands that our young people don't want even though they spend millions on concerts in nearby communities every year, a restaurant that has flopped and yet is arrogantly defended by the SCCA to avoid the animosity created in the community by making this "restaurant" (and some say one florist and one wine vendor) exclusively required for use by any groups seeking to rent the SCCA.
Suffolk doesn't hate "culture" but it does hate what a few divas and primadonnas are doing to conceal poor judgment here and to nitpick the activities of now its second executive director.
We need the "culture" of all of the program areas noted above, but a bowling alley or a movie theater should hardly be treated as a threat to anyone's perverse definition of "culture" that we should be required to like to the exclusion of what is popular and prevalent in virtually every local Tidewater area than ours.
6 comments:
Previous post is excellent but fails to mention the dozens of proven local charities and how they could benefit the community with the $450m annual subsidy to the SCCA and even a small portion of the other revenues generated by the SCCA by repeated solicitations to the public now wearing thin on those who watch the SCCA decline that could be avoided with more open and transparent finances made public.
Also, the Historical Society gets almost no annual City subsidy, and its annual programs and Christmas tour are better received than all of the SCCA multi-million dollar "culture infusions" as the elite board sees them.
Additionally, the Suffolk Museum, Riddick's Folly and perhaps several other organizations receive public funds and leverage them without the need for repeated greedy demands for the mysterious "more" that seems in explicable with the SCCA.
I say give Lasakow authority to run the show and place it under City monitored control. A win-win situation for all but the "queens" of culture who, while dying out, continue to hold on to their last thread of self-importance in spite of virtually unanimous disagreement as to where the SCCA now finds itself.
The SCCA Web says as of today 47 of 500 tickets for the juggler show have been blocked. Based on the spacing and even rows blocked, it is obvious many blocked tickets weren't sold on the market to random purchasers.
If the City subsidy per year is $450,000 or over $20,000 per show, it would be much cheaper to fly these 47 people to New York for a Broadway play and save the other half of the subsidy to help the needy in our community. Even more money could be saved if any free staff/board cocktail party for this juggler "performance" is changed to a "cash bar" or even eliminated.
Linda and her boyz are about to drop a cool $40 million on another monument to stupidity in the form of a new city hall. What's $450K? Like a typical member of congress they don't care how much they waste as long as they get re-elected. Follow the campaign money from last two local elections and you'll know who's getting the contract.
Anon @ 6:04 p.m.*
Have you ever been inside city hall? Have you seen how more and more areas are becomming dilapidated? Perhaps if you have ever seen the inside of the building, you would realize we need a new one.
The current city hall is about 50 years old - it has had a good run. The next one, which will be more modern and able to serve the city into the future, will be able to last longer than that. If the building is $40 Million, and lasts for 50 years, that is a use of less than $1 Million annually.
When that building was first built (before the merger), it served only the city of Suffolk - not Nansemond County. Since then, the city population and government have both grown significantly - thus the need for a new city hall.
You wouldn't have your family live in the same house for 50 years if it doubled in size and could afford to buy a new one would you?
Here it is in a peanut shell...
You wouldn't have your family live in the same house for 50 years if it doubled in size and could afford to buy a new one would you?
Question asked and answered. AFFORD??? I dont think so..I dont care how long it takes, but there should be no ground breaking shovel ready dollar spent until the verdict is in on the JFMCO
The city is actually in good economic shape right now - thanks to Linda Johnson and the pragmatic council we have leading us.
The new municipal building doesn't have to be paid for in cash - it can be paid for with bonds if necessary. The city has a good bond rating, and the time has come.
In order to stay competitive, the city has to be proactive. In order to do that, the city needs to make improvements where necessary. Have you gone down to city hall? When I drive past the building and see an entrance blocked off for safety reasons, I know that something needs to be done.
Why is it that there is a faction of the citizenry that wants no progress made? I'm sure these folks voted against the merger. This mindset that there should never be any progress or improvements baffles me. This way of thinking, proposed by certain failed candidates in recent city elections has been rejected by the voters time and time again.
If this mindset was popular, Caroline Martin and Roger Leonard would be on the dias.
Post a Comment