Arts and Culture Institutions as Urban Anchors Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

August 2014

Arts and Culture Anchor Institutions as Urban Anchors

Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

Penn Institute for Urban Research University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA

Eugénie L. Birch, Cara Griffin, Amanda Johnson, Jonathon Stover

Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Case 1. The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, , : Creating a New Institution ...... 5

Case 2. , Washington, D.C.: Developing The Mead Center ...... 25

Case 3. The Art Institute of , Chicago, Illinois: Attracting Civic Support ...... 41

Case 4: The High Museum of Art, Atlanta, Georgia: Expanding the Museum ...... 55

Case 5: The Kimmel Center: Facing Challenges ...... 65

Case 6: The Martin Luther King, Jr. Library, San Jose, California: Developing a Joint Library ...... 87

Case 7: The Music Center: Taking on New Roles ...... 109

Case 8: The Woodruff Arts Center, Atlanta, Georgia: Adapting to a Changing City ...... 125

Introduction

Urban Anchors Additionally, Penn IUR convenes anchor institution leaders, their civic The appeal of many of the collaborators, and technical experts for country’s most successful cities comes intense, day-long roundtable discussions. from their anchor institutions, These Penn IUR Roundtable on Anchor geographically rooted entities that offer Institutions (PRAI) sessions offer an the jobs, services, entertainment options, opportunity to engage with peers, social centers, and other necessities and strategize solutions, compare notes from amenities that make urban life attractive. the field, and build a community of anchor These may be universities, hospitals, institutions. Prior to engaging in these sports facilities, performing or visual arts sessions, institution leaders work with and other cultural facilities, public Penn IUR to develop a case statement that utilities, and some large churches and outlines a compelling local challenge. local corporations. Many of the case studies presented Serving as engines of urban here originated with materials and renaissance – and sometimes even discussions at PRAI 2008 (Arena Stage, survival – in many places, anchor Woodruff Arts Center) and PRAI 2010 institutions are also magnets for (Art Institute of Chicago, High Museum) economic development. Their influence and reflect the challenges the institutions derives from their landholdings as well as were contending with at that time. These from their capacity as large employers, materials have been supplemented with revenue generators, and goods and additional interviews and research, and services purchasers. They contribute to addressed to a broader audience. Other urban reinvention and civic pride, and case studies (Arsht Center, Martin Luther attract knowledge-industry workers and King, Jr. Library) are included here to suburban spenders. They often fill illuminate lessons most useful to those in important vacuums when footloose public policy fields. industries leave a city. These case studies illuminate the Public policymakers and scholars issues with which organizations grapple, have taken note of the value of anchor whether they seek to build a new institutions: a growing body of knowledge institution, or expand an existing about their worth has developed over the institution, or simply find a place in an past ten years. Penn IUR is a leader in this ever-changing metropolitan environment. field. Penn IUR Co-Directors Eugenie We believe that sharing the processes Birch and Susan Wachter are among the that these institutions have gone through co-founders of the National Anchor will help students of public policy Institution Task Force, an organization understand the kinds of hurdles – both that develops and disseminates internal and external – that these knowledge that helps create mutually institutions face in engaging with their beneficial anchor institution/community cities. Our hope is that this improved partnerships. understanding will facilitate coordination

Introduction 1 among all parties involved in creating developing and implementing a mutually beneficial relationships between campus improvement plan and institutions and civic communities. considering how to better meet the plan’s objectives, in particular the animating of the new central piazza. Philadelphia’s Kimmel Center Arts and Culture Institutions • opened in 2001 to mixed reviews: its Much of the existing literature on design drew strong feelings, both anchor institutions focuses on positive and negative, and its educational and medical anchors (“eds acoustics were generally criticized. and meds”) and stadiums, which – while Over the next ten years it continued to important – are not the only urban anchor face public criticism and internal institutions in their communities. Penn challenges. This case illustrates the IUR’s roundtable series has gathered ongoing difficulties of creating an representatives of less publicized types of anchor institution from scratch. anchors. Here we share case studies of • The Martin Luther King, Jr. Library arts and culture institutions. serves as both the main library for the • The Adrienne Arsht Center for the city of San José and the only library for Performing Arts case study offers San José State University. This case insights into the conditions that explores the challenges of melding the empower public, private, and operations, missions, resources, and institutional entities to create users of two distinct entities in order successful anchor institutions. This to develop and operate a single case study explores the factors that institution. enabled the Arsht Center of Miami, • The Music Center case study Florida to mature as an organization examines the institution during a in ways that serve its constituents. decade of change – in the process of • The Arena Stage case study explores transforming its role within its the decisions that resulted in the community, which was itself development of the Mead Center, a undergoing a transformation. new complex completed in 2010. It • This case study describes how the examines the issues that arose as Woodruff Arts Center has adapted to Arena Stage weighed community Atlanta, Georgia’s growth, focusing on interests with financial and political the major changes the Woodruff considerations while striving to grow implemented between 2000 and 2010, as a nationally recognized theater in order to provide insight into the in Washington, D.C. relationship between the structure • The Art Institute of Chicago case and culture of a city and the study details the efforts the institute operations of an arts anchor undertook to attract civic support institution. during trying financial times. • The High Museum case study explores the institution’s experience expanding and renovating its campus, looking back on the process of

2 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

Acknowledgements Contributors This research would not have been Penn IUR Co-Director Eugénie L. possible without the generous financial Birch spearheads Penn IUR’s anchor support of Lawrence Nussdorf and John institution research; she convened PRAI, Livingston. led site visits to many of the institutions, Lawrence Nussdorf’s contributions moderated discussions at each convening, made possible Penn IUR’s Roundtable on and directed research and writing of Anchor Institutions (PRAI), which these case studies. Cara Griffin, Penn IUR convenes leaders of anchor institutions to Editor and Publications Manager, discuss common issues, including (among coordinated the development of these others) leaders of Arena Stage and the case studies and researched and wrote Woodruff Arts Center in 2008 and the the High Museum case study. Amanda High Museum and the Art Institute of Johnson, Assistant Professor in the Chicago in 2010. Department of City and Regional Planning John Livingston supported the at Boise State University, researched and research and development of these case wrote the Art Institute of Chicago case studies. study. Jonathon Stover, consultant at Jon Thanks also to the many people Stover & Associates, a company who generously shared their time to help specializing in partnerships between the develop these case studies, including public, private, and institutional sectors, Adrienne Arsht, John Richard, and Valerie researched and wrote the Adrienne Arsht Riles at the Adrienne Arsht Center; Center, Martin Luther King, Jr. Library, Desiree Urquhart, Susan Haas-Bralove, Woodruff Arts Center, and Arena Stage Edgar Dobie, Molly Smith, and Alison case studies. Irvin at Arena Stage; Erin Hogan, David Thurm, and James Cuno at the Art Institute of Chicago; Susan Clark and Michael Shapiro at the High Museum; Natalye Paquin and Anne Ewers at the Kimmel Center; Jane Light at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Library; Josephine Ramirez, Howard Sherman, and Stephen Rountreeand at the Music Center; and Joe Bankoff and Tara Perry at the Woodruff Arts Center.

Introduction 3

Case 1: Creating the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts Miami, Florida

The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Arsht Center to mature as an organization Performing Arts of Miami-Dade County in ways that serve its constituents. opened in October 2006 in a rundown neighborhood in downtown Miami. The $472-million, 570,000 square foot, glass- Case Summary encased complex came in $247 million Early History: Planning and Development over budget and years later than of the Adrienne Arsht Center scheduled. One of its five planned resident companies went bankrupt before The Miami area’s population grew the center’s completion, and a second tremendously over the twentieth century. filed for bankruptcy two years later. In its With fewer than 5,000 residents in 1900, first year, it ran a $2.4 million operating Miami-Dade County (known as “Dade deficit and drew only half the anticipated County” until 1997) now comprises over attendance. 2.5 million people (U.S. Census Bureau Remarkably, five years after 2010). Miami emerged as a major city in opening, the Arsht Center’s story became the 1950s and 1960s and, partly due to a a success story. Leadership had balanced wave of immigration from the Caribbean, its budget and covered its construction tripled in size from just under half a debt covered. The two failed resident million residents in 1950 to over 1.6 companies were replaced in ways that million in 1980. responded to Miami’s artistic needs and As the population ballooned, generated excitement about the center. artists, arts administrators, and patrons Attendance soared and the Arsht Center of the arts moved to Miami from all shared a strong relationship with its three around the world. In the 1970s, interest remaining resident companies – the in a city performing arts center began to Florida Grand Opera, the Miami City grow. The question of how to create one Ballet, and the New World Symphony. In became a frequent topic of conversation addition, a unique partnership with the among civic leaders and those in the arts put Miami on the community, especially among leaders and cultural map. patrons of the city’s five most prominent The first five years of the Arsht performing arts organizations, which Center’s history provide lessons not only would later become resident companies: on how to build, operate, and program a the Florida Grand Opera, the Miami City performing arts center, but also insights Ballet, the New World Symphony, the into the conditions that empower public, Concert Association of Florida, and the private, and institutional entities to create Florida Philharmonic (see side bar, below, successful anchor institutions. This case for more information on the resident will explore the factors that enabled the companies). These companies – which remained independent nonprofit organizations sharing the facilities of the Arsht Center – joined the Arsht for access Sherwood “Woody” Weiser – would raise to world-class facilities as well as for the private funds. The Performing Arts Center larger audiences and additional Trust Board of Directors (Trust) – fundraising resources that come with the consisting of political appointees from visibility of a prominent arts center (Bob Miami-Dade County, the City of Miami, Heuer 2010). and Miami Beach, and chaired by Over the 1980s, Miami-Dade Thompson – would manage and operate County – and specifically its County Arts the new center. Commission – commissioned studies to Miami-Dade County Department of explore the composition, location, and Cultural Affairs took on the role of project financing of a large-scale, state-of-the-art manager to oversee planning and design, performing arts center; by the end of the and soon took on the additional charge of decade, the County approved a plan to managing the center’s day-to-day acquire land and construct a complex that operations for the Trust. The Director of would bring world-class performances to the Department of Cultural Affairs, Miami. From the start, the county’s Michael Spring, led the planning process secondary objective was to use the center for the center throughout the 1990s and to promote economic development in became Acting Director until its first downtown Miami. The promised social President and CEO was hired in 2002. and economic benefits of the project According to Arsht Center Vice President helped garner widespread support, even of Board and Government Relations from those who were not passionate Valerie Riles, “as [the Arsht Center] grew about the arts. Originally called the Miami and got its own legs, [Spring] was a point Performing Arts Center, it would later be person for years. [His] office does a named the Carnival Center and, finally, phenomenal job of reaching into the the Adrienne Arsht Center for the cultural communities, so he helps bridge Performing Arts. us into the community” (Riles 2010). In early 1990, Miami-Dade County, An important design consideration in coordination with the City of Miami, was whether the center should have one appointed a task force of prominent multipurpose hall or a separate community members to initiate the performance space for orchestras and project. The task force, led by local operas or theater. Aiming high, Thompson attorney Parker Thompson, brought persuaded other leaders that the knowledge of institutional finance and performing arts center should have three operations and helped create the separate performance spaces that would organizational structure. Based on the optimize artistic presentations: a concert task force’s recommendations, the county hall for orchestral performances; a created two organizational bodies to theater for operatic and large theatrical develop the performing arts center: one productions; and a smaller theater space would raise money, the other would for incubator and experimental manage construction and, subsequently, productions. The team also incorporated operations. A joint Performing Arts arts education space and a restaurant into Center Foundation (Foundation) – led by the building program. representatives from the original five As the design concept for the performing arts organizations and performing arts center took shape, chaired by local real estate developer leadership began searching for sites that

6 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development would fit the building program and cost attempted unsuccessfully to sell the land criteria. For years, landowners had been for decades and eventually donated the in conversations with the county about land to Miami-Dade County. The other donating land for a performing arts parcel was across the street from the center. In 1993, Miami-Dade County Sears Roebuck building and owned by issued a request for for sites Knight Ridder, the parent company of the that landowners would be willing to . Knight Ridder donated the donate to the County. The selected site – site with the idea that the construction of where the center currently sits in the an arts center would increase the value of Omni neighborhood north of downtown the other land the company owned in the Miami – stood out due to its square immediate area. According to Michael footage and its centrality: its 5.9 acres Spring, both donations were not only covered two square blocks flanking “generous civic decisions, but also historic Biscayne Boulevard, a major business decisions” (Spring 2010). arterial road connecting to downtown. At Civic leaders selected world- that time, the neighborhood was run renowned Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects as down and had little activity, but had lead architects through a March 1996 already been targeted for a tax increment design competition. The staff of the financing district in the area five years resident companies worked closely with earlier. the design team and strongly influenced the facility design. “Often you hear people get into facilities after they’re built, and their needs weren’t taken into account,” said Spring. “But we were able to shape that inside agenda as well as outside agenda” (Spring 2010). In 1998-99, the Trust hired staff for the performing arts center, relieving the County Department of Cultural Affairs of its makeshift role as operator. While no longer involved in day-to-day operations, the Department of Cultural Affairs continued to assist the center’s staff in Construction of the Arsht Center with downtown both advisory and support roles. The Miami beyond. center’s first President and CEO, Michael Hardy, was hired in 2002. The The selected site consisted of two organization was on its third director by parcels, one on either side of Biscayne the time it opened its doors, both a cause Boulevard. On the first property stood an and a result of early organizational abandoned Sears Roebuck department instability. store building. Constructed in 1929, it While overseeing the center’s was the first example of Art Deco design, the Trust identified three primary architecture in Miami (in 1997 it was revenue sources to both build and added to the National Register of Historic operate it. The county’s “Tourist and Places, and its iconic seven-story tower Convention Development Tax,” commonly was preserved). Sears, Roebuck & Co. had referred to as a hotel tax or bed tax, was

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 7 the principal source of funding for Philharmonic Orchestra declared construction. While previously used to bankruptcy and suspended operations. fund sports facilities, convention centers, Like many other Miami arts and other large public projects, the hotel organizations, the Florida Philharmonic tax had never before funded a “cultural” served not only Miami-Dade County but project. also Broward County (which includes the The second funding source was city of Fort Lauderdale) and Palm Beach also a major factor leading to the Arsht County (which includes the city of West Center’s location: revenue from the Omni Palm Beach), both to the north. While the Tax Increment District. Created years orchestra had problems with union issues before the performing arts center concept and with general organizational had gained momentum, the district mismanagement, most area arts leaders needed a major redevelopment project believed its downfall stemmed from within its borders before its tax spreading its audience base too thin increment financing (TIF) could be (Thompson 2010). activated. The Trust worked with the In January 2006, the performing county to designate the performing arts arts center found a creative way to fill the center as a “catalytic project” and allocate void left by the Florida Philharmonic’s the resulting tax increment toward bankruptcy: it signed a three-week financing the center. The funds were residency agreement with the Cleveland conservatively projected because, at the Orchestra. This unique collaboration time, the district was generating little came to be a defining element of the property tax revenue. The TIF funds center. The Cleveland Orchestra would pay off the center’s construction committed to a residency during the debt as well as help fund its maintenance month of January each year and created a reserve and endowment (Burgess and full-time, three-person office in Miami Munoz 2010). responsible for marketing, sales, Private sector money, raised by community engagement and education, the Performing Arts Center Foundation, and fundraising in southern Florida. The constituted the third source of funding. In concept of creating an entirely new office the late 1990s, Ted Arison, the founder in another state was unheard of, but and chairman emeritus of Carnival succeeded not only in selling out seats – Corporation (of Carnival Cruise lines), benefitting both the orchestra and the donated $10 million, and the center was Arsht – but also in collecting additional named in his honor. Dr. Stanford Ziff, the fundraising revenue and expanding the founder of Sunglass Hut International, orchestra’s outreach programs into the contributed an additional $10 million and Miami community. the theater and opera stage became the This partnership, initiated by CEO Sanford and Dolores Ziff Ballet Opera Michael Hardy, brought a world-class House (Arsht Center Backgrounder n.d.). orchestra to Miami and a new source of In addition, the John S. and James L. income to the financially struggling Knight Foundation has donated over $10 Cleveland Orchestra. The Cleveland million to the Center since 2000 and Orchestra – plagued for years by deficits, continues to actively give. declining corporate and individual giving, In May 2003, a year and a half after and a shrinking metropolitan population construction had begun, the Florida – was looking for new sources of income

8 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development (Rosenberg 2006). The Cleveland Plain Dealer wrote: “Mindful that Miami is a growing international city where wealthy Arsht Center Resident Companies arts patrons live and frolic, including The Florida Grand Opera, founded in 1941, many transplanted Clevelanders for the performs in Miami at the Arsht Center’s Knight Concert Hall and in Fort Lauderdale; winter and longer, the orchestra is its administrative offices are housed ten readying aggressive efforts to make up for miles west of downtown Miami. Of the three what Northeast Ohio no longer seems resident companies, the Opera’s finances are capable of providing” (Rosenberg 2006). the least stable and largely as a result of its Most of the Miami arts community financial struggles, the opera has the closest working relationship with the Arsht Center. welcomed the Cleveland Orchestra, though the partnership did generate some The was founded in 1985 controversy at first. A Miami music critic, and, over the next ten years grew in writing in the Sun-Sentinel, experience and acclaim. The ballet changed reported that former members of the studio space multiple times, but has consistently been headquartered in Miami Florida Philharmonic perceived the Beach. In 2006, it debuted at what is now its Cleveland Orchestra’s residency “as the primary performance venue: the Sanford last nail in the coffin for hopes of reviving and Dolores Ziff Ballet Opera House at the a full-time local professional orchestra” Arsht Center. The Ballet regularly performs (South Florida Sun Sentinel, in Rosenberg in major venues across the country.

2006). The New World Symphony is America’s Construction, which ran from the only full-time orchestra dedicated to fall of 2001 to the fall of 2006, was preparing music school graduates for a marked by contractual disputes, cost career in orchestra and music ensembles. overruns, and delays. Since it was built at Established in 1987, the highly selective orchestra offers students a three-year the peak of the 2000s real estate boom, fellowship and provides a range of construction costs were far higher than performance and instructional anticipated. Projected to cost $225 million opportunities. The New World Symphony is (Wakin 2006), actual costs were more the most financially secure of the Arsht than double that, at $472 million (Arsht Center’s resident companies. Of the resident companies, it performs least frequently at Center Fact Sheet n.d.). The majority – the Arsht Center, with the majority of $387 million – came from public sources, performances – and training – occurring at most of which came from Miami-Dade its headquarters at the Lincoln Theater in County’s hotel tax; private, corporate, and Miami Beach’s Art Deco district. foundation support totaled $85 million. The Florida Philharmonic, a full-time The project was the largest public-private professional orchestra that was expected to partnership in South Florida’s history be a resident company but went bankrupt (Roco 2006). The Center was completed before the Arsht Center opened, paving the two years later than originally estimated. way for the Arsht’s partnership with the Cleveland Orchestra. Recent History: Bankruptcy, Partnerships, and Changing Roles The Concert Association of Florida, which presented music and dance, folded two years The center hosted its grand after the Arsht Center opened. The Arsht opening from October 5 through 8, 2006, Center successfully assumed responsibility with a free extravaganza (Arsht Center for the functions and finances of the Concert Backgrounder n.d.) attended by over Association.

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 9 25,000 people (Tommasini 2007). While a In its first year, the Center few negative reviews surfaced, most of operated at a $2.4 million deficit. Its the early design reviews were positive. exceedingly small endowment – about $3 The acoustics and performance spaces million – allowed little leeway in meeting were lauded by the resident companies, financial projections. Just one year after it performers, critics, and audiences. In opened, the Board fired its president and contrast, programming drew criticism: chief executive and forced the largely due to the bankruptcy of the programming director to resign. An Florida Philharmonic, the center interim CEO, Lawrence J. Wilker, a former emphasized orchestral music far less than president of the Kennedy Center in other comparably large performing arts Washington, was brought in “to right the centers. “The is an ship” (Semple 2007). anomaly,” wrote the New York Times a In January 2008, Adrienne Arsht, a month before its grand opening. “There is national business leader and no resident orchestra, although the philanthropist, donated $30 million. Cleveland Orchestra will have a yearly Renamed the Adrienne Arsht Center for three-week residency, and the New World the Performing Arts of Miami-Dade Orchestra, a training group, will also County (and commonly known as the there regularly. Barely two-dozen Arsht Center), the center used the money classical concerts will be presented this to repay bank loans, expand season. The rest is mostly jazz, world programming, and enlarge the music, Broadway shows and popular endowment (“Donation” 2008). Carnival entertainers” (Wakin 2006). Corporation, the center’s earlier The Carnival Center struggled to namesake, was happy to relinquish its sell tickets its first season, which caused naming rights to the center (Arsht 2010), significant financial difficulties. instead lending its name to the Studio “Consequently, there was a great deal of Theater, bridge, and Art Deco tower criticism both publicly and internally,” (Arsht Center Backgrounder n.d.). said CEO John Richard (Richard 2010). In In December 2008, John Richard, the first season, the center sold 42 the Executive Vice President and Chief percent of available seats (Burnett 2010), Operating Officer at the New Jersey well short of the anticipated 64 percent Performing Arts Center, was brought in as (Tommasini 2007). Classical President and CEO. “Our management has performances, especially those by the changed since we’ve opened,” explained Cleveland Orchestra, sold most briskly, Valerie Riles, Vice President of Board and while productions put on by the center Government Relations. “Now we have were least popular. John Burnett, CFO at community-based programming in the Arsht Center, attributed lackluster addition to ‘mainstream programs’ such attendance to sub-par marketing and as a Broadway series, classical music “esoteric programs” that did not appeal to series, and jazz series” (Riles 2010). the public as expected (Burnett 2010). As the center found its Hispanic attendance particularly lagged programmatic and marketing niche in its (Fleming 2007). In addition, the center second and third seasons, Hispanic had the widespread reputation of lacking attendance and overall attendance parking, which may also have lowered climbed. The center currently runs at overall attendance. about 70 percent capacity, nearly double

10 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development the occupancy of its first few months in Arsht Center, faced with the possibility of operation. In the first couple of seasons, reneging on scheduled concerts, made an the Arsht Center cemented itself as the enormous effort to preserve as many primary hub for the arts in Miami. shows as possible. Arsht Center Executive Expectations that it would promote Vice President Scott Shiller remembered economic development were more than that, over a frenzied four-week period, met: shortly after its construction the Arsht Center leaders restructured neighborhood was inundated with cranes financial deals with performers, putting to build new high-rise condominium on what he called an “unprecedented buildings. The partnership with the partnership” between the Arsht Center Cleveland Orchestra proved to be one of and the performing arts organizations. the greatest successes of all. Miami Ultimately, the Arsht Center embraced having a world-class orchestra hosted every scheduled performance that in its own city: it created a buzz through season except one. Shiller noted that, the arts community, and ticket sales despite the tumult behind the scenes, the flourished. With the center having Arsht Center’s adoption of the Concert demonstrated its value over the course of Association’s duties was a big success: its first season, Miami-Dade County “The community was grateful, the artists strengthened its financial commitment by were grateful, and all the performances agreeing to fund all operations costs even sold out. We were able to turn a very if they surpassed the budgeted amount. difficult situation into a positive situation. Despite its rocky first season, the The Concert Association’s [disbandment] Arsht Center found stability over years was a unique situation where there was two and three. This stability, however, no change for the community. The back was short-lived: in February 2009, the office function changed from one second of its original five resident organization to the other” (Shiller 2010). companies filed for bankruptcy. The Over its first four seasons, the Concert Association of Florida was the Arsht Center solidified its programming, primary provider of world-class classical marketing, finances, and role within the music to the Miami area. “The Concert community. The Arsht Center was able “to Association was important in terms of the create a strong mission statement and community’s sense of place and artistic align our programming priorities and … desires,” said Bob Heuer, CEO of the reach more broadly for arts education Florida Grand Opera. “Unfortunately, the programs for the community,” said John organization got to the point where it lost Richard. We fashioned a couple of so much money partly because it didn’t different symbols for Miami: to be keep up with the times” (Heuer 2010). Miami’s town square and to be world- As a means to retain access to the class and community-based at the same arts for the Miami community, the Arsht time. And we realize that it is important Center agreed to take over the Concert for the community to understand that Association’s performances and contracts breadth and scope of what happens here” for the season. The responsibility came (Richard 2010). with a financial dilemma: upcoming scheduled performances would incur City and Regional Context significant expenses but the revenue from Miami is the 42nd most populous ticket sales had already been spent. The city in the United States with just over

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 11 433,000 residents. Miami-Dade County is Located just north of downtown the 7th largest county in the country and Miami, the Omni neighborhood lies has nearly 2.5 million residents (U.S. directly across from the causeway to Census Bureau 2010). Miami-Dade Miami Beach and a short drive from County has historically been politically Miami’s , , and powerful, often taking on roles – such as Little Buenos Aires neighborhoods advocating for the arts – typically handled (Roca 2006). Miami’s “,” a at the municipal level in other regions. twenty-one-station elevated people Miami is a center for tourism, with mover system looping through the people from around the world visiting to downtown area, has served the experience its tropical climate, white sand neighborhood since 1994. beaches, and vibrant nightlife; for over The Arsht Center’s Omni two decades Miami’s port has neighborhood exemplifies Miami’s accommodated more cruise ships than economic and social transformation. In any other city in the world (Miami-Dade the 1950s and 1960s the County website 2010). It is also a major neighborhood shared the character of center for finance, with one of the largest the nearby Overtown Neighborhood, a concentrations of international banks in predominantly black community the world, as well as a center for where some of the biggest names in commerce, culture, media, fashion, and music would stay when in town. The education. Sears Roebuck store, too, drew crowds. Miami’s population is “The area has had a lot of history and characterized by its incredible diversity life and color to it,” explained Suzette and tremendous growth. Since 1980, Espinosa, Arsht Center Vice President Miami-Dade County gained 900,000 of Public Relations (Espinosa 2010). residents (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). But by the 1980s the neighborhood Many new residents come from outside was largely abandoned: the Sears the United States, especially from the Roebuck building had closed and many Caribbean. of the surrounding blocks were In the 1980s, Miami was known as entirely vacant. The Miami Herald much for public corruption and the drug headquarters and the Omni Bus trade as for its positive qualities. Growth Station were the only signs of life. in the 1990s and 2000s transformed its As Where Miami put it, “the very image, with an impressive skyline of high- moment that ground was broken [on the rise condominiums and commercial Arsht Center]… downtown Miami’s real skyscrapers sprouting in recent decades. estate marketed turned gold” (Arsht “Boutique hotels, designer stores and Center 2009). Property values were high-end restaurants have all helped fluff escalating throughout the city, but values up its stature to that of a glossy-magazine in the Omni neighborhood rose even mainstay. Add to that the rich Hispanic faster. Many area land owners had been flavour that permeates everything from waiting for the right time to build: and music to menus and the overall package is now that a prestigious performing arts attractive,” writes Peter Moss, Director of center was being built in the vicinity, they Sales of the Greater Miami Convention & were ready to capitalize. Between the Visitors Authority. “Things are changing center’s groundbreaking and its opening in the city almost by the month.” in thr fall of 2006, 35,000 condominium

12 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development units had been built within a fifteen-block The Omni Redevelopment District radius (Wakin 2006). Wrote the had $247 million in combined property Washington Times: “Certainly surprising value in the district’s base year of FY1998. is the vertiginous wave of urban By FY2010, total property value topped renovation radiating from the Carnival $1.4 billion. District property tax revenue Center” (Roca 2006). climbed from $700,000 in FY1998 to

nearly $13.8 million in FY2010. Of the total 2010 Omni Redevelopment District revenue, $5.5 million was allocated to Miami-Dade County and $8.2 went to the City of Miami. (Miami-Dade County Omni 2010; Arsht Center Fact Sheet n.d.)

Facilities and Environs At 570,000 square feet, the Arsht Center is one of the largest performing arts centers in the world (Arsht Center (built 2007) Miami International Univ. of Art and Design Condos (built 2007) Fact Sheet n.d.). The complex occupies Omni Metromover Stop and Bus Hub one full block on either side of Biscayne County Schools Admin. Offices Miami Herald Headquarters Arsht Boulevard, a major arterial street that connects the Omni neighborhood to Condos (built 2008) Ten Condos (built 2007) downtown Miami. The buildings on either 900 Condos (built 2008) Marina Blue Condos (built 2007) American side of the street are connected via a Airlines Arena second-level pedestrian bridge stretching : New World Wolfson over Biscayne. The center’s contemporary School of the Arts Campus design, often referred to as neo-cubist, takes on many different shapes through Above, View of new residential construction and its stark angles, stepped-back terraces, downtown Miami down Biscayne Boulevard. and swooping curved edges. Clad in a Source: Jonathon Stover. Below, Omni Neighborhood showing institutions and recent combination of white stone and glass that construction projects. Source: Bing maps. appears blue as it reflects the Miami sky, the façade is in keeping with much of But when the national real estate downtown’s architecture. bubble burst around 2007, Southern Florida was one of the hardest-hit regions. Despite the crash, the Arsht Center’s role in stimulating economic development in its neighborhood is undeniable. While commercial development in the Omni neighborhood has lagged behind residential construction, there are still new parking garages, restaurants, shops, and two new museums in the area (Shiller 2010). Arsht Center viewed from the east. Source: Arsht Center. Source: Arsht Center.

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 13 workshop and education space, an on-site Critics have praised the Center’s restaurant, and public art installations architecture for its proximity to the from five different artists (Arsht Center street, the prevalence of trees and signage Fact Sheet n.d.). along the sidewalks, and the variety of shapes and façade detail along every side of the structure. The Washington Times described the stretch of Biscayne Boulevard running through the Center in this way: For a tiny, colorful stretch, that highway is at the heart of the new Carnival Center. The Plaza for the Arts, with its open embrace to the city and its people, is of a piece with the boulevard. Each theater's cozy relation

to the other, their respective lobbies nodding to each other across the plaza, Carnival Arts Tower beyond the Ziff Ballet Opera creates an intimate and urbane House. Source: Jonathon Stover. atmosphere. The welcome architectural oddity that there seem to An outdoor social and be no back sides or blank walls performance space – the Parker and Vann anywhere in the complex, that each Thomson Plaza for the Arts – is located on terraced side's unique juxtaposition of either side of Biscayne Boulevard, linking materials within each wall seems the two buildings across the busy street. designed to surprise, means that "they While the center houses administrative will be functionally and architecturally space for its own staff, each company’s activated on all sides." (Washington administrative offices and day-to-day Times, December 30, 2006) practice facilities are housed at Michael Spring called it “a people-friendly independent headquarters off-site. place." The building west of Biscayne Finance and Organization holds the 2,400-seat Sanford and Dolores Ziff Ballet Opera House and the 300-seat The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Carnival Studio Theater design for small Performing Arts of Miami-Dade County is and experimental productions. A large a 501(c)3 nonprofit. Miami Dade County open lobby stretches across the façade of owns its land and facilities and the the building, and the Art Deco Carnival Performing Arts Center Trust Board of Arts Tower – the only remaining portion Directors, a thirty-eight-member of the historic Sears Roebuck building – independent body of community and connects to the front of the building, business leaders, manages it. Twenty- serving as the center’s most iconic eight of the directors are appointed by feature. The building east of Biscayne elected officials from Miami-Dade County, contains the John S. and James L. Knight with the remainder appointed by the City Concert Hall, which seats 2,200. The of Miami and the City of Miami Beach center also includes a 3,500 square-foot (Riles 2010; Richard 2010).

14 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development Operations are funded by the The Arsht Center’s President and Miami-Dade Department of Tourism’s CEO John Richard is also President of the hotel tax and overseen by the County Trust, CEO of the Adrienne Arsht Center Manager’s Office. (The 6 percent hotel tax Foundation, and principal liaison to the (Miami-Dade County website 2010) funds Alliance (Richard 2010). Six Vice sports facilities, tourist development, and Presidents (in marketing, finance, county-owned facilities such as the Arsht operations, advancement, government Center.) In all, the Arsht Center was and board relations, and human projected to receive $10.3 million in resources) and an Executive Vice FY2010 (Arsht Center Finance 2010), President in programming (Scott Shiller) approximately 15 percent of hotel tax report to Richard. dollars (Miami-Dade County Tourist As of May 2010, the Arsht Center’s Revenue). endowment totaled $9.9 million and total TIF revenue from the Omni net assets totaled $13.4 million (Arsht Redevelopment District constitutes Center 2010a). In FY2009, the Arsht another regular source of public funds. Center’s budget topped $30 million (Arsht Managed and distributed by the City of Center 2010b); the budget grew to Miami Omni Community Redevelopment approximately $40.6 million in FY2010 Agency, TIF funds are used to pay off the thanks to an increase in earned revenue, center’s construction debt (Burgess and private support, and public support Munoz 2010). In FY2010, the Omni (Arsht Center 2010a). Earned revenue for District collected $13.7 million in FY2010 was expected to total $20.5 revenue, $8.2 million of which went to the million, including $12.9 million in ticket City of Miami and $5.5 million of which sales, $2.9 million in rental revenue, and went to Miami-Dade County. (Miami-Dade $2.5 million in box office fees. Total public County Omni) About $1.9 million, or 35 support toward operations was projected percent of the County’s allotment, went to to be $10.3 million and private the Arsht Center (Glazer-Moon 2010). The contributions were expected to total $9.8 Arsht Center will stop receiving TIF million (Arsht Center 2010a). revenue once its debt is paid off, Projected expenditures of $40.6 sometime between 2020 and 2030. A million for FY2010 broke down to $13.8 small amount of endowment revenue and million for events, $9.4 million for salaries hotel tax dollars also cover construction and benefits, $7.6 million for occupancy debt (Glazer-Moon 2010). costs, $3.6 million in general and In September 2010, the Arsht administrative functions, $3.3 million in Center reorganized its foundation in marketing, and $3.0 in capital and other order to improve operations. The new expenditures (Arsht Center 2010a). Adrienne Arsht Center Foundation is the sole fundraising entity for the center and Programming the Trust controls the Arsht Center’s The Arsht Center’s fundamental assets, including its endowment. An mission is to educate and entertain the advocacy organization – called the Miami community through the arts. It Alliance – incorporates the perspective of achieves its mission by practicing two the resident company representatives principles: presenting art at the highest and community members who once sat level (“embracing excellence”) and on the former foundation. presenting art that reflects the diversity

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 15 and energy of the Miami community the way it should have – criticism that the (“celebrating the difference, renewing the center wasn’t anchored in its community. spirit, and engaging diverse And it wasn’t doing very interesting communities”). Explains Scott Shiller: work,” says Shiller (Shiller 2010). But in “our programmatic decision is that the seasons that followed, the Arsht ‘world-class’ and ‘community-based’ isn’t Center worked diligently to connect to the mutually-exclusive. By bringing in good community by creating additional free work from the artistic community and programming, introducing nonverbal and encouraging local artists to have dialogue, bilingual performances, and bringing in they can share in the creative process more popular entertainment and big- from outside of our community. name shows. …Because we view ourselves as a twenty- Now praised for its ingenuity and first century performing arts center, we diversity, many of the Arsht Center’s don’t want to just bring in work from current programs reflect local art forms other communities or work that’s already not found in any other performing arts been created, but we want to be an center. Free Gospel Sundays was incubator and creator of work” (Shiller developed in 2008 as a way to 2010). incorporate the culture of Miami’s African The Arsht Center delivers the American community. Additionally, the performing arts by hosting and Arsht Center now presents more Spanish promoting its resident companies – the and mixed Spanish-English programming Florida Grand Opera, Miami City Ballet, than anywhere else in the country (Shiller and New World Symphony – and the 2010). The Arsht Center has hosted the Cleveland Orchestra. It serves its mission International Hispanic theater festival, in three other ways as well: by bringing in presented the U.S. premier of a Spanish world-class artists from South Florida and version of Rob Becker’s comedic, one- from around the world; by creating and man play Defending the Caveman, and producing new work; and by renting its produced two musicals itself: The Life and facilities to third parties for corporate Music of Celia Cruz and Miami Libre. The events, lectures, and other events. Many Arsht Center’s programs have produced of these performances – over 300 each audiences of about 40 percent capacity in year – are presented as part of the its first season to 70 percent capacity in “Adrienne Arsht Center Presents” the 2009-10 season (Burnett 2010). program. These have included a broad The center also engages the range of performances, including a community with a wide range of Broadway series, orchestral and jazz educational initiatives geared for series, dance, pops concerts, world music students, teachers, families, adults, and presentations, a comedy series, and a artists. In one particularly successful celebrity chef series. The Arsht Center program during the 2010 season, the also hosts a variety of festivals, a series of Arsht produced an original musical one-act plays, and workshops and panel production called Rock Odyssey for discussions by artists and arts executives. middle-school students. Beginning in In its first year of operations, its April 2010, every 5th grade student in the programming fell short of community Miami-Dade Public School District was expectations. “There was the feeling that bused in to see the performance – 28,000 the center didn’t come out of the blocks people in all. The musical, which was

16 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development based on Homer’s Odyssey, not only strong. Fortuitously, the economic climate provided an opportunity for every child at the time made building an arts center to experience a performance at the Arsht politically popular and financially Center, but also incorporated age- feasible. In addition, an optimally located appropriate math, science, history, and site was available that met existing language lessons into the performance. financial and political goals as well as All costs, including the development, aligned with the public vision for production, student transportation costs, downtown Miami. These factors in turn and educational materials were covered created another critical condition: the by the Arsht Center through county and political support for the public funding foundation support. The production that helped build the Arsht Center. The received highly positive feedback from sound decisions made by many of the students, teachers, and the greater center’s leaders built on these community. preconditions. They chose to partner with a broad range of stakeholders, seeking, in particular, close relationships with the Why the Arsht Center is Successful center’s resident companies. Finally, by At the time this case study was reflecting the needs and interests of written, the Arsht Center was beginning Miami’s diverse population, as well as its fifth season and its accomplishments adjusting for the strengths and were impressive. Area residents valued it, weaknesses of Miami’s arts scene, the with attendance having grown markedly Arsht Center created a center truly built since its first year. Its resident companies to serve its community. and other arts organizations lauded it. Regional Social and Economic Financially stable, the Arsht Center had a Conditions healthy continuing relationship with its major public, private, and institutional The fundamental reason the center funders. It had helped transform a has been successful is that it fulfills a rundown portion of the city into a need. Miami’s performing arts scene grew desirable living and entertainment along with the region’s burgeoning destination, leading to additional local population over the second half of the development, pedestrian traffic, and city twentieth century. Starting in the late tax revenue. It had improved the city’s 1970s, political leaders and arts leaders arts scene, helping make Miami a cultural alike began discussing the idea of building center and destination. And it had strong a major performing arts center in Miami. education programs that reached By the late 1980s, the organizations that thousands of families, teachers, and would become the resident companies students. had grown in prominence. In the 1980s What factors have enabled the and early 1990s, studies demonstrated Arsht Center to be a successful anchor the feasibility of building a performing institution? Some relate to external arts community. The clear, longstanding conditions at the time of its founding, need for such a project likely minimized others to internal decisions made later on. opposition and set the stage for the At the time of its founding, the need for a county-level support that would follow. central arts institution in Miami was Miami’s prosperity over the 1990s and 2000s supported the Arsht Center’s

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 17 success. Dozens of new hotels, built over activated. The Arsht Center seemed like the last thirty years to cater to the just the public works project needed to growing number of tourists, inflated the turn around the neighborhood, and its county-wide hotel tax that, by the late potential as a catalyst for economic 1990s, was able to support a new major redevelopment brought it widespread public works project. The real estate political support. boom of the early- and mid- 2000s The resulting construction boom provided additional momentum; new surpassed expectations for neighborhood construction during the time period was redevelopment. In addition to so widespread that building a new transforming a neighborhood and cultural center seemed timely. In providing a stable revenue stream to pay addition, real estate developers were off construction debt, the Arsht Center’s eager to build residential buildings in the role as the catalytic project for the Omni Omni neighborhood once they knew the TIF has provided millions of dollars in area would be anchored with a additional tax revenue for both Miami- destination and landmark. The residential Dade County and the City of Miami. construction that followed the approval of the Arsht Center increased the tax base in Annual Public Sector Funding its TIF district considerably, providing The Arsht Center could not have funding for the center that far outweighed been built without the funding from expectations. Miami-Dade County, the City of Miami, and the City of Miami Beach that, A Location That Achieves Multiple Goals combined, paid for 82 percent ($387 The two parcels of land on which million) of the center’s construction costs. the Arsht Center stands were donated to However, the public support that Miami-Dade County. Not having to pay for separates the Arsht Center from its peers the property kept development costs low is the annual funding Miami-Dade County and helped create political and provides for operations. The county community support for the project. The contributed over $10 million in FY2010— Arsht Center’s central location and a number that grows as the Arsht Center proximity to a major highway, a major matures. In 2009-10, when many bus station, a monorail stop, and the performing arts centers struggled, the causeway connecting Miami to Miami Arsht Center had an operating surplus of Beach makes the complex highly $347,000. (Arsht Center Financial Report) accessible and visible, and bolsters its “The public money keeps us on course,” role as a landmark. explains Arsht Center Vice President of The site’s inclusion in the Omni Operations, Ken Harris. “It lets us go in to redevelopment district may be its most new areas and evolve into a more mature valuable asset. Although the Omni center at a very young age.” (Harris 2010) neighborhood was largely abandoned Because the center does not have to before the performing art center’s arrival, fundraise for operations costs, as opposed its proximity to key area destinations to many performing arts centers, it has such as downtown and Miami Beach been able to allocate its private and made it ripe for redevelopment. While the foundational support towards its artistic Omni Tax Increment District financing and educational programs. had already been defined, it had not been

18 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development Strong, Committed Leadership and Thomson is one of most amazing civic Stakeholder Involvement leaders I’ve had the chance to work with,” Much of the Arsht Center’s success said Michael Spring. “He had the is owed to strong leadership and, in confidence and courage to think bigger particular, the fact that leaders than others were thinking” (Spring 2010). consistently sought input from, and Arsht Center President and CEO worked cooperatively with, people with a John Richard is another outstanding stake in the project. A variety of leader. When hired in 2008, he became stakeholder entities – Arsht Center the fifth Director of the Arsht Center in management, county officials, the nearly as many years. That rampant directors of related arts organization, and turnover had hindered the Arsht’s members of the business and progress, stability, and the development philanthropic community – were heavily of a unified vision, but all of this improved invested in the project from its initial markedly once the strong leader the Trust planning and design stages through its and Foundation were looking for was ongoing operations, resulting in a mission found. Richard has emphasized and a vision that have changed little over strengthening the Miami community, the years. leading to the center’s final success factor Such consistency did not happen below (“innovative spirit that responds to by accident. Each of the key consultants Miami’s diverse population and unique and coordinators were retained arts climate”). Says Dennis School, Vice throughout the entire process so that, President of the Arts for the Knight according to Department of Cultural Foundation in Miami: “I think John Affairs Director Michael Spring, “there’d Richard is really the person who is be a line through planning and design making the Arsht worthy of a case study” based on [artistic considerations]… so (Scholl 2010). those issues could continually be Strong Relationship with a Limited monitored while we continued to monitor Number of Resident Companies cost.” (Spring 2010) In addition, Arsht Center leadership sought to create an Conflicts between performing arts environment conducive to cooperation center management and resident among stakeholders, thereby companies are commonplace in arts guaranteeing their buy-in and willingness centers and often result from competition to partner. During the design phase, over funding sources, schedule dates, and resident company staff met regularly with audiences. While these conflicts arose at the center’s architects and consultants, the Arsht Center, management was able and, as a result, had a real voice in to keep them in check for a variety of shaping how the facilities would be reasons. The resident companies’ early designed and used. (Spring 2010) involvement in the center’s planning set Former Trust Director Parker the precedent for their continued Thomson’s leadership led to the center’s collaboration. In addition, the relatively high quality design and separate small number of resident companies at orchestral and opera facilities, resulting the Arsht Center – currently three – has in world-class acoustics and a critically allowed for greater venue flexibility and acclaimed viewing atmosphere. “Parker more open dates for Arsht Center programming and outside presentations

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 19 than found at many other comparable one from scratch. And by continuing to performing arts centers. bring in the types of performances that The New World Symphony is the the Concert Association brought to the only resident company to perform at the Center, its new role did not take the other John S. and James L. Knight Concert Hall, resident companies by surprise or force but typically does so less than ten times a them to adjust the direction of their season (New World Symphony website programs. 2010), since a majority of its performances are off-site at its own Innovative Spirit that Responds to Miami’s Diverse Population and Unique headquarters at the Lincoln Theater in Arts Climate Miami Beach. The Cleveland Orchestra also performs from the Knight Concert The Arsht Center’s critical and Hall less than ten times in a season community acclaim is largely due to its (MacDonald 2010). The Ziff Ballet Opera programming – specifically, the way its House, on the other hand, hosted twenty- programming responds to South Florida’s four Florida Grand Opera performances unique culture and large Hispanic (Florida Grand Opera website 2010) and population. The organization, like most eighteen Miami City Ballet performances performing arts centers, aspires to create (Miami City Ballet website 2010) during a programming mix that reflects its local the 2010-11 season. While each resident population and that cannot be found company has priority over third parties in elsewhere. And, like most performing arts booking dates at the Center, most centers, the Arsht Center struggled at first evenings are still available for with how to realize this aspiration. performances from other arts While responding to cultural organizations or for other events. Since diversity is a difficult and always-evolving the facilities are frequently available, the task, the Arsht Center has done center can bring in many arts experiences remarkably well in this regard. By while still generating income by renting incorporating a diverse range of out space for such events as corporate programs – many of which are multi- activities and popular touring acts. language or nonverbal – the center has Until the Concert Association of seen audience levels soar, including Florida’s bankruptcy in early 2009, the attendance from minority populations. “I Arsht Center’s involvement in think John [Richard] understands what a programming was limited; while the performing arts center’s role is in the Arsht Center did bring in productions of community, and he’s going to make darn its own, during its first few seasons it sure that everybody feels welcome here,” focused on operations, marketing, and said Dennis Scholl, the Miami Program building its place within the community. Director and Vice President for the Arts at Focusing on core operations in its early the Knight Foundation. “That’s darn years helped the institution find its difficult in Miami. It’s about making sure footing. Once the Arsht Center took over that novel things are done with ancillary the Concert Association’s responsibilities, programs: like Gospel Sundays or free not only did it benefit from having presentations of [the classic opera reliable finances and operations, but also production of] Carmen, or opening the it was able to build off of an existing Arsht for the inauguration and inviting performance program instead of building everyone around to come to it. Those are

20 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development the kinds of things that make John and the orchestras tour the country” (Arsht Arsht successful. And the team is young, 2010). hip, focused. They know their role is being obligated to the community. It’s not just about selling tickets” (Scholl 2010). Conclusion Programs geared toward minority The Arsht Center has experienced populations have not only brought first- many of the plights common to time audience members to the center, but performing arts centers: construction and many of those same audience members operation costs that far exceeded have then returned for other Arsht Center expectations; perceptions of elitism and and resident company performances. inaccessibility; and financially unstable “We’re seeing an increase in attendance resident companies. Where the Arsht of African Americans to the opera because Center has distinguished itself is in they’ve felt welcome at Arsht Center,” successfully adjusting to overcome these said Florida Grand Opera General obstacles. The center’s cost overruns are Director and CEO Robert Heuer. “It’s a largely forgotten as the Omni success story [getting] involved and neighborhood has become an active and becoming part of the entire community” attractive part of town and as the Omni (Heuer 2010). Redevelopment Area’s property tax base Bringing the Cleveland Orchestra continues to grow. The potentially to Miami is another way the Arsht Center disastrous bankruptcies of two of its shows it understands the needs of its city. resident companies led to a partnership Although the Florida Philharmonic with one of the best orchestras in the Orchestra lacked financial support, world and enabled the Arsht Center to demand for quality orchestral concerts manage and improve additional remained, as evidenced by the success of programming within its facilities. visiting orchestras brought to town Most important is what the Arsht through the Concert Association of Center has meant to Miami. It has Florida. The Cleveland Orchestra’s transformed local and outsider opinions residency gives Miami residents the about the region and helped make Miami opportunity to see one of the world’s best relevant in the performing arts world. orchestras. In addition, the number of The Arsht Center mirrors its city in being performances in Miami – typically around modern, hip, and cutting-edge. Though it six – better reflects the region’s demand lacks a full-time orchestra, it hosts one of for classical orchestral concerts than a the country’s best. Its diverse population full-length season did. When asked what makes fundraising and marketing a the lack of a full-time professional challenge, but the organization capitalizes orchestra meant to Miami, Adrienne Arsht on Miami’s diversity by presenting an responded “It’s totally irrelevant. It exciting and culturally relevant mix of doesn’t matter. You don’t need your own programming. orchestra. We’re coming to a time, many The Arsht Center’s experience people believe, that all these cities raises numerous questions. Does it struggling to have their own orchestra represent a new model for creating or should stop. You don’t have to own your operating a performing arts center? Will own orchestra. Today the great major performing arts organizations

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 21 across the country continue to go bankrupt and, if so, is the Arsht Center’s process of filling those voids replicable? Or are the Arsht Center’s practices a reflection of Miami’s unique cultural environment, making them impossible or impractical to implement elsewhere? Despite these unanswered questions, there are concrete lessons from which other institutions can learn – namely, that certain conditions and decisions will support a center’s ability to thrive. Though not necessarily essential for every performing arts center, the factors conducive to the Arsht Center’s success could also help other new institutions. The Arsht Center’s success was predicated on suitable economic conditions during its construction, committed leadership, consistent stakeholder involvement including meaningful and longstanding involvement of its resident companies, substantial and ongoing public sector investment, the availability of an ideal site location, and a willingness to innovate in order to respond to the needs of Miami’s diverse population and its unique arts climate. The Arsht Center’s success has implications for the state of the performing arts in major urban areas. As orchestras, operas, and many other types of performing arts organizations struggle to remain solvent, Miami offers a vision that includes fewer top-tier orchestras but shared access to those that exist. While some may see this as the waning of an art form, others may see it as the evolution of arts presentations.

22 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development References

Adams, David and Lush, Tamara. 2006. “Launching a New Image.” St. Petersburg Times, November 12, 2006. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. 2009. What the Press is Saying. Fall, 2009. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts website. 2010. http://www.arshtcenter.org/. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. n.d. Backgrounder. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. n.d. Fact Sheet. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. 2010a. Finance and Budget Report to the Executive Committee. May 24, 2010. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. 2010b. Financial Report: Fiscal Year 2010. April 2010. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010. United States Census website. 2009 data. http://census.gov/. Florida Grand Opera website. http://www.fgo.org/. Arsht, Adrienne. Major donor and Foundation Chair, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, June 25, 2010. Burgess, George, County Manager, Miami-Dade County, and Alex Munoz, Assistant County Manager, Miami-Dade County. 2010. Phone interview, October 13, 2010. Burnett, John. Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, June 9, 2010. Cordle, Ina Paiva. 2010. “Lawsuit Pinpoints Discord at Arsht Center.” The Miami Herald, June 10, 2010. “Donation Prompts Carnival Center Renaming.” 2008. South Florida Business Journal. January 10, 2008. Ducker, Judy. Founder, Florida Concert Association. 2010. Phone interview, July 29, 2010. Espinosa, Suzette. Media and Public Relations Director, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, June 22, 2010. Fleming, John. 2007. “The Toddler Stage.” St. Petersburg Times, May 13, 2007. Florida Grand Opera Website. 2010. http://www.fgo.org/ (accessed September, 2010). Gardiner, Pamela. Executive Director, Miami City Ballet. 2010. Phone interview, July 20, 2010. Glazer-Moon, Jennifer. Director of the Office of Strategic Business Management. 2010. Phone interview, August 13, 2010. Harris, Ken. Vice President of Operations, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, June 9, 2010. Heuer, Robert. General Director and CEO of the Florida Grand Opera. 2010. Phone interview, July 21, 2010. Johnson, Lawrence A. 2009. “Concert Association Makes it Official.” South Florida Classical Review. February 14, 2009. Macdonald, Sandi. Miami Residency Director, Cleveland Orchestra. 2010. Phone interview, July 21, 2010. Miami City Ballet website. 2010. http://www.miamicityballet.org/.

Arsht Center | Miami, Florida 23 Miami-Dade County website. 2010. http://miamidade.gov/. Miami-Dade County. 2010. Omni Redevelopment District Growth. 2010. Miami-Dade County. Omni Redevelopment District Growth. 2010-2011. Miami-Dade County. Tourist Revenue Data. 1991-2010. http://www.miamidade.gov/taxcollector/tourist_revenue_data.asp New World Symphony website. 2010. http://www.nws.edu/. Richard, John. President and CEO, Arsht Center. 2010. Personal interview, June 22, 2010. Riles, Valerie. Vice President of Board and Government Relations, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, June 23, 2010. Roca, Octavio. 2006. “Miami Rides a New Wave; Carnival Center for Arts Anchors Revitalization.” The Washington Times, December 30, 2006. Rosenberg, Donald. 2006. “Miami Deal Could Fortify Orchestra’s Financial Future.” (Cleveland) Plain Dealer, January 25, 2006. Scholl, Dennis. Miami Program Director and Vice President for the Arts at the Knight Foundation. 2010. Phone interview, August 11, 2010. Semple, Kirk. 2007. “Fits, Starts and Painful Bumps for Carnival Center in Miami.” The New York Times, December 29, 2007. Shiller, Scott. Executive Vice President, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, July 28, 2010. Spring, Michael. Director of the Department of Cultural Affairs for Miami-Dade County. 2010. Phone interview, August 25, 2010. Thomson, Parker. Founder and former Trust Chair, Arsht Center. 2010. Phone interview, July 21, 2010. Tommasini, Anthony. 2007. “Miami Vivace: New Arts Center Opens Its Arms.” The New York Times, February 4, 2007. Wakin, Daniel J. 2006. “This Season’s Must-Have Urban Accessory.” The New York Times, September 3, 2006.

24 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development Case 2: Arena Stage, Washington, D.C. Developing The Mead Center

Arena Stage is one of the nation’s Case Summary first nonprofit theaters and a pioneer in Founded in 1950 by three theater the regional theater movement. Founded aficionados to fill a gap in Washington, in 1950, Arena Stage moved several times D.C.’s cultural landscape, Arena Stage has in its first eleven years. But, after its move become one of the country’s most to Southwest D.C. in 1961, the institution important and innovative theaters. It has became a fixture in that community. That a long tradition of groundbreaking work: location, however, proved challenging. In it was the first regional theater to be particular, its 1961 complex did not fully recognized with a Tony Award and the accommodate all of the theater company’s first to tour behind the Iron Curtain. Since artistic and administrative functions; as a the late 1990s, Arena Stage has result, many of its workshops and offices distinguished itself through its dedication were scattered throughout the city. to producing works by U.S. playwrights. This distinguished theater Arena Stage has had three homes company completed a major transition in in its six-decade history: a converted 2010 with the construction of a massive, movie theater (1950-1955); a former $125 million complex called the Mead brewery (1955-1961); and its current Center. Completed in the fall of 2010, the Southwest district campus (1961- new building weaves together Arena present). Its 1961 move to Southwest D.C. Stage’s campus structures into a single was part of an urban renewal effort. This building that, for the first time, initiative incorporated plans by I.M. Pei accommodates its many functions on site. and building designs from other The theater company sees the new facility prominent modernist architects. Then as an important step towards emerging as considered a slum, the area was a national leader for the production, redeveloped with wide streets, broad development, and study of American open spaces, and large “super blocks.” theater (Smith 2009). Like other urban renewal initiatives at the This case study explores the time, the effort was ambitious: the city decisions that resulted in the Mead invoked eminent domain and almost Center’s development, examining the entirely razed the area. The initiative led issues that arose as Arena Stage weighed to the relocation or elimination of community interests with financial and community landmarks and businesses political considerations while striving to and a decrease in neighborhood grow as a nationally recognized theater population and vitality (SWDC 2009). The company. building of the Mead Center was also intended to revitalize the Southwest district (its waterfront in particular), but the manner in which the expansion was planned and implemented reflected a very different public policy ethos.

Facilities Arlene and Robert Kogod Cradle – was The Mead Center expansion was designed to compliment the other two. necessary because the existing complex That 200-seat, state-of-the-art facility was could not accommodate all of Arena designed to support the development of Stage’s activities; some were housed in new plays. off-site facilities throughout the city. The The design created a large education and outreach departments common lobby with a grand staircase, a were located north of the National Mall, box office, and a café that linked the three while rehearsals and stage construction theaters visually and spatially. The Mead frequently took place off campus. Center’s layout featured administrative Leadership’s desire to consolidate and play development spaces next to the activities gave impetus to the creation of theaters and a workshop, as well as an the Mead Center since, by the late 1990s, education center that would allow the dispersion of activities had begun to students and professionals to engage with hinder Arena Stage’s emerging vision to each other throughout the play more actively develop new work while development process. Finally, the design also becoming a platform for workshops, of the Mead Center created a large open institutes, and best practices. space for artists to congregate. Deciding how to expand and how to fund expansion took much work but, ultimately, the Mead Center opened in October 2010. Designed by Vancouver’s Bing Thom Architects, the plan consolidated workspace for rehearsals, set design and construction, and administrative services. It featured a dramatic cantilevered roof aligned with the Maine Avenue axis as a salute to the Washington Monument and a glass exterior that opened the theater’s activity ! to the community. The design centered around three theaters: renovation of the two existing theaters and the addition of a third. The two existing theaters – the Fichandler Stage and the Kreeger Theater – were updated with modern technology and “elegant” décor. The Fichandler Stage, with 650 steeply raked seats, was intended for large-scale dramas and

musicals. The 500-seat Kreeger Theater, shaped like a fan, was designed to be one Above, historic facilities. Below, Arena Stage of the most acoustically friendly spaces in exterior after renovation. the country. The third theater – the

26 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

Organization America, and we have the ability to pull in Arena Stage is a private nonprofit the artists at the highest level in the U.S.” 501(c)3 organization that is legally (Smith 2009). named – though rarely called – the Washington Drama Society, Inc. Artistic Education and Community Engagement Director Molly Smith, who focuses on the artistic life of the organization including In addition to production and artistic development, productions, performance of plays, Arena Stage has a community engagement, and the 200-300 wide variety of education and community artists that work at Arena Stage, and engagement programs. Arena Stage has Managing Director Edgar Dobie, who always sought to reach out to the public. joined Arena Stage in the summer of 2009 Edgar Dobie, speaking soon before the and is charged with overseeing new Mead Center opened, said he administrative matters, were both anticipated that the expansion would actively involved with the development of further this effort: “Community the Mead Center and the management of engagement has been a core area for Arena Stage soon after the Mead Center decades. This new building allows opened. The previous Managing Director, everything to be under one roof, and that Stephen Richard, had been with the supports even better programming” organization for seventeen years, and was (Dobie 2009). Efforts to work with the a leader in Arena Stage’s successful local community created the goodwill that capital campaign for the Mead Center later proved invaluable in gaining construction. political support when the organization needed it. Arena Stage has demonstrated a Programming spirit of collaboration in its partnerships Arena Stage is engaged in every with several of Washington, D.C.’s many step of the play production process, from universities, including through internship bringing together artists from the area and other theater education programs; it and around the country, to developing has a particularly strong relationship with new plays and adaptations, play Georgetown University’s theater production and presentation, and hosting department, which was established in speaker series and events to discuss 2005. theater at the national level. Arena has gained national attention by devoting City and Regional Context itself to producing work from the United States. According to Smith, “We focus on As the nation’s capital, American plays and American voices. Washington, D.C.’s economy and culture is That includes all artists who are working primarily driven by the federal in the theater, artists, actors, directors, government, the many organizations and designers, and etcetera. It’s all a reflection enterprises that support and depend on of the diversity we see in America. A the federal government, and the tourism particular focus of that is the diversity that its institutions and historical seen in D.C. We are at a crossroads of landmarks attract. The city is situated on the Potomac River and its tributaries,

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 27

Rock Creek and the Anacostia River. original 1791 plan for the city. The When the Mead Center was under Southwest district, where Arena Stage is construction, the city’s resident located, lies adjacent to the National Mall population stood at 601,723. This and home to the city’s commercially permanent population effectively doubled important waterfront. In the early 1900s, during workdays to over one million the area developed as a blue-collar people, and the metro area, which community of low-rise townhomes. The includes parts of Maryland and Virginia, 1950 Comprehensive Plan for the District contained over five and a half million of Columbia identified the Southwest as people (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). one of several “Principal Problem Areas” Demographically, Washington, D.C. and slated much of it for demolition. The presents a complicated picture. It is plan called for housing “superblocks” and racially diverse but often starkly divided the construction of the geographically. It has one of the most Southeast/Southwest freeway (Interstate highly educated populations in the 695 and 395) as part of a highway system country, with 46 percent of residents intended to connect the area to other college graduates. On the other hand, D.C. parts of the city. The also contains great income disparities: the Southeast/Southwest freeway, the only District’s poverty rate was 14.5 percent in part of the highway system to be 2008, two to four times the rate of completed, essentially prevented any bordering jurisdictions. Yet, according to further revitalization by cutting off the the U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Southwest from the larger urban fabric, had a median household income of isolating the district. While several bus $56,428 in 2008, higher than any of the routes connect the southwestern nation’s fifty states (U.S. Census Bureau quadrant to the rest of the city and the 2008). Real inequalities exist. According Waterfront/Southeastern University to a Washington Post report, “Non- Station gives metro users access to the Hispanic whites in the region have a area, Arena Stage – like the Southwest median household income of $94,290, but district as a whole – has not fully the figure drops to $83,908 for Asians, benefited from its proximity (only seven $58,945 for Hispanics and $55,547 for blocks) to the National Mall and the blacks” (Keating and Aizenman 2007). Smithsonian Museums. Analysis by the Brookings Institution concluded that “although D.C. is in the midst of an economic resurgence, it is still home to a considerable number of low- income households and its poverty rate remains stubbornly high” (Derenzis 2008).

Environs

Washington, D.C.’s four districts ! (Northwest, Northeast, Southwest, and City context, with Arena Stage marked with a star. Southeast) stem from Pierre L’Enfant’s

28 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

Southwest D.C. was underserved (AWI) includes a framework plan that by local restaurants and businesses when guides the city’s efforts. The plan spans the Mead Center was being conceived. thirty years and calls for $10 billion of About half of the neighborhood’s investment to restore and revitalize land restaurants were mid-range to upscale along the Anacostia River. The Southwest establishments along the Potomac district, which has significant frontage waterfront. Most of the remaining along the river, will benefit heavily. The restaurants served fast-food or carry-out. AWI has also developed targeted area Developments spurred by redevelopment plans, including one for the Southwest plans for the area brought additional Waterfront. commercial offerings, including a grocery The Southwest Waterfront Plan, store, pharmacy, and bank, as well as a approved by the City in 2003, covers fifty considerable amount of office space acres of land along the Potomac River leased by the city government. immediately adjacent to Arena Stage. This Two major institutions are located initiative directs $2.4 billion of public and in or adjacent to the Southwest private investment to the development of neighborhood: a federal military base and housing, commercial real estate, and a major league ballpark. The McNair public plazas and riverside green spaces. Military base has been a fixture in the The plan call for the conversion of Southwest neighborhood for decades. existing parking lots and underutilized Since the military has been consolidating streets into two million square feet of bases, the number of military personnel new construction and the addition of in Southwest D.C. has increased. Arena fourteen acres of open space and Stage has a working relationship with the waterfront parkland. Neil Albert, the base and offers reduced ticket rates to Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic military member. Nationals Park, where Development, projected that “[this] the Washington Nationals play, is near the project has the promise of becoming one Southwest neighborhood along South of the East Coast’s great maritime Capitol Street SE. Completed in the spring attractions while at the same time serving of 2008, the ballpark brings thousands of as a community anchor for a great new visitors to the neighborhood most weeks, Southwest neighborhood” (“D.C. Signs and its construction has spurred Land Deal” 2008). residential and commercial development in its vicinity (JDLand 2011).

Waterfront Revitalization and Redevelopment Anthony Williams, who served as Mayor of Washington from 1999 through 2007, made redeveloping the city’s waterfronts one of his priorities on assuming office, a charge that has been supported by the City Council. The resulting Anacostia Waterfront Initiative

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 29

for scholarships for Arena Stage summer camp programs. The Waterside Mall/Waterfront Taskforce, comprised of forty community leaders, stakeholders, business owners, and city officials, includes three action groups that make recommendations on neighborhood retail, public works and street maintenance, and arts and culture. The Washington Waterfront Association (WWA) is a non-profit, nonpolitical neighborhood association that works to

! improve and promote the waterfront Neighborhood context. community and support the area’s dining, cultural, business, maritime, and The city’s efforts to revitalize its residential climate. waterfront neighborhoods appears to be Washington, D.C. has thirty-seven paying off a decade into the twenty-first Advisory Neighborhood Commissions century. The new baseball stadium is (ANCs), which serve as liaisons between widely hailed as a success. Other major communities and government agencies. private developments are in the works in They meet with neighborhood groups on Arena’s Southwest neighborhood. These zoning, traffic, economic development, developments will most likely affect police protection, and other issues, and Arena Stage positively by making then present communities’ positions and Southwest D.C. a more attractive and recommendations to various independent accessible neighborhood, which could boards and commissions, District help Arena Stage attract and retain government agencies including the City audiences. Council and the Mayor’s Office, and occasionally the federal government. While ANCs have little formal power, they Neighborhood Representatives can strongly influence political decisions Many Southwest D.C. residents are that affect their neighborhoods. passionate about transforming their Each ANC is divided into subareas neighborhood and participate in consisting of approximately 2,000 organizations that work to improve it. residents; each subarea is led by an When the Mead Center was being unpaid locally elected representative conceived and designed, organizations called an Advisory Neighborhood included: the Community Benefits Commissioner. Arena Stage lies in Coordinating Council (CBCC), which finds Ward6D-Subarea 4. When the Mead jobs for residents; the Southwest Center opened, Andy Litsky had been Neighborhood Assembly, which conducts Commissioner of Ward6D-Subarea 4 for and promotes charitable and educational eleven years. Arena Stage works with the activities in the neighborhood; and the Ward6D ANC to ensure they have good SW Youth Taskforce, which works with communication with the ANC and the rest Arena Stage to identify students eligible of the community organizations. Litsky

30 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

said, “We [consider] Arena Stage to be a theater downtown was the right choice focal point of this community” (Litsky while others believed it should remain at 2010). its current location and rebuild. Both positions had advantages and disadvantages. By moving downtown, Arena Stage would be in a highly visible Arena as a Public Partner and central location surrounded by businesses, Metro stations, pedestrian The Decision to Stay in the Southwest traffic, and numerous other theaters. However, the financial costs would be Once the leadership at Arena Stage higher than renovating in place. committed to building a new facility, an Remaining in the Southwest would mean important consideration arose: the staying loyal to its neighborhood and location of the center. Arena Stage being part of citywide waterfront leadership decided in 1998 that they revitalization efforts. Arena Stage already needed an improved, centralized facility. owned and occupied land in the At that point, they were unsure whether Southwest, and remaining there meant to build a new facility or to upgrade their enjoying lower development costs and existing facility. If they chose to build the strong support of an existing new, they could move to another place in constituency. On the other hand, the the city; if they chose to upgrade, they Southwest had more crime, meant more would of course remain at their isolation, and offered far less glamour Southwest campus (with only a than downtown. temporary displacement during Feelings ran strong at Arena Stage. construction). “This was a meaningful and heated debate When an attractive development within the Board,” said Edgar Dobie site near other theaters opened up in (Dobie 2009). Molly Smith remembered 1999, Arena Stage strongly considered that “there were strong feelings on all th moving. This site – on 7 Street NW and G sides” (Smith 2009). In the end, Street NW in downtown Washington – discussions with Mayor Anthony Williams was located in an emerging theater and the City Council helped to persuade district; the Woolly Mammoth , the Board to remain in the Southwest. The Ford’s Theater, E Street Cinema, and city was committed to revitalizing the Gallery Place were all nearby (eventually Southwest waterfront. The Mayor and another theater was built there – the City Council advised Arena Stage that Shakespeare Theater’s Harmon Center). staying in the Southwest could be part of Arena Stage responded to the General a larger revitalization of the Services Administration’s (GSA’s) request neighborhood and that might help bring for development proposals (GSA, which public funding to the construction of the was in charge of this parcel of public land, new theater. was looking for a cultural arts Financial considerations also organization and for retailers). Arena played a role in Arena Stage’s decision to Stage’s proposal was shortlisted. At this remain in the Southwest. “The decision point, Arena Stage’s Board of Trustees was made that it was financially too was divided: some felt that moving the onerous to move the theater downtown,”

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 31

says Smith. “We made the decision that if to be a focal point of this community. If we were going to stay, we would develop Arena Stage left, that would mean we something gorgeous for that area of the would be put behind the eight ball with city. It was a galvanizing moment in the development going forward. That would organization’s life… Ultimately, the best continue the trend of development decision was made. The kind of center happening north of Pennsylvania Avenue that we’ve now created in Southwest D.C. and we would languish. … The area would never have been possible would’ve been a ghost town had Arena downtown” (Smith 2009). left” (Litsky 2009). Satisfying Arena Stage pulled out of the neighborhood residents helped Arena in bidding process for the GSA site a couple the long run: passionate neighborhood of days before the selection was to be support helped convince city officials to announced. “It was a bold, brave move on support the project. so many levels on Arena’s part,” said Desiree Urquhart, Director of Government and Community Relations at Securing Public Support for the Mead Center Arena Stage. “It was interesting to me how leadership managed the public Early in his tenure, Mayor Anthony information on the situation. They called Williams focused city redevelopment in the Washington Post to let them know efforts on the waterfronts, including the their perspective and manage how the Anacostia Waterfront to the south of news hit the streets. That was big news, Arena Stage, and Arena’s own Southwest that we were going to stay in the Waterfront. The timing of these efforts Southwest, and I thought it was brilliantly coincided with – and strengthened – handled. It could have been a negative Arena’s redevelopment plans. piece in the paper” (Urhquart 2009). Arena’s efforts were further While the Washington Post lauded strengthened by a realignment of the D.C. the decision, others remained skeptical. Ward boundaries. The neighborhood was Charles Dillingham, the President of a previously part of Ward 2, which major national theater group in Los stretched northwest to the Georgetown Angeles, the , said, “I neighborhood. The southwest portion of thought that was a huge mistake at the Ward 2 was very different than the rest of time. That [decision] was a fork in the the ward. road, 180 degrees. But, if they could get Southwest district residents felt some urban renewal, some that the southwest portion of Ward 2 was redevelopment funds, they could really neglected by Councilman Jack Evans. make it work, and it could be successful” Early in the public debate about Arena (Dillingham 2009). Stage’s possible move, Evans defied Neighborhood residents were popular sentiment in the Southwest by relieved about Arena Stage’s decision to lobbying to move Arena Stage to the stay. Andy Litsky, the ANC commissioner theater district, arguing that building new for Arena Stage’s district, said “We in the would be easier than rebuilding onsite. neighborhood were furious at the notion But in 2002, the neighborhood that the trustees would even consider became part of Ward 6, represented by moving there. We considered Arena Stage then newly elected Councilwoman Sharon

32 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

Ambrose. Ambrose took a very different [She said]: ‘You make sure it gets done’” stance than Councilman Jack Evans: she (Urquhart 2009). actively supported the renovation of Wells did continue Ambrose’s Arena Stage’s Southwest campus as part efforts to secure funding for the Mead of a waterfront redevelopment effort. She Center. Between 2002 and 2009 Arena supported Mayor Williams in developing Stage received $30 million in city grant the AWI, including plans for the money and $10 million in a tax-exempt Southwest Waterfront. loan for the Mead Center’s construction. Even after Arena Stage had Urquhart pointed out that “no other arts committed to staying in the Southwest, organization in D.C. has ever gotten that the ANC lobbied on behalf of Arena Stage much [money].” She credited Ambrose in an attempt to secure financial support and Wells, who “fought tooth and nail to for the project. It also brought get the city to give them the first $25 neighborhood groups such as the million because they saw the significance Washington Waterfront Association and of the project within [the redevelopment the Southwest Neighborhood Association of] the Southwest Waterfront, and what it to testify on behalf of Arena Stage during meant in the community, and what a hearings before the City Council. Said social and community anchor institution Urquhart: “My goal was to make the it would be” (Urquhart 2009). The city neighbors feel like stakeholders in what eventually contributed a total of $30 was happening.” The ANC represented the million to the Mead Center via tax-exempt community in talks with city bonds. redevelopment agencies, explaining the Securing city funding for the Mead positive impact a new theater would have Center allowed Arena Stage to move on the community. “It was a collaborative forward with its other fundraising efforts. effort to make this happen. We were Arena received $365,000 in federal talking about public money, and appropriations and was also awarded everybody had a stake in that” (Urquhart funding in the form of Industrial Revenue 2009). Bonds (IRBs), a type of low-interest bond In 2007, Sharon Ambrose declined issued by the city and purchased by to run for re-election as Ward 6 City private investors. Two trustees of Arena’s Council representative due to health Board, Gilbert and Jaylee Mead, donated issues. Tommy Wells, her successor, $30 million to the project, and the rest of adopted her position on Arena Stage. the Board combined gave an additional “Sharon [Ambrose] made sure to let $35 million. Corporate and individual Tommy [Wells] know that Arena was a giving accounted for the remainder of the project he needed to stick with until it got construction budget. built,” explained Urquhart. “She was sick According to many insiders, and suffering from MS. But she still made Arena’s strong relationship with the it to groundbreaking, despite being frail Southwest community was essential to and sick, showing the dedication she had. the development of the Mead Center. She showed that the city was behind the Community support for the project project. She turned the gauntlet to greatly facilitated the political process Tommy [Wells] at the groundbreaking. and helped overcome fundraising hurdles. Arena Stage’s commitment to engaging

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 33 the immediate community – through happens.’” When the developer casually community giving, discounted tickets for brushed his concern aside, Litsky stood residents, school programs, and direct firm, knowing he had the support of the communication – had created this community: community support. According to Andy In this community we can galvanize Litsky, community outreach efforts “made opposition in a heartbeat – it clear that they were a part of the neighborhood, political, media, and community, and the community is etcetera. If the [views from Arena appreciative of that” (Litsky 2009). Added Stage’s balcony] are blocked, we will Nancy Newlin, President of the oppose it and block it. When we have Washington Waterfront Association: “We a larger community discussion, that are so fortunate to have Arena Stage in will come up. The economic our association and community. The new development committee in council building will be a landmark for our city will embrace that. And zoning and the and community. They will be a focal point office of planning will make sure that in the new waterfront community now [views are protected]. We can exert and for years to come” (Newlin 2009). pressure. (Litsky 2009) The very different attitudes community groups displayed toward When the economy slowed from other nearby developments highlights the 2007 through 2009, many of the importance of community engagement. development projects planned for the While the Mead Center got nothing but Southwest were put on pause or support from the community, other cancelled. Still, optimism ran high as the developments planned for the Mead Center’s opening drew near. neighborhood met strong opposition at Urquhart said, “Whatever we do now will times. Litsky said “that demonstrates that serve as a catalyst for the waterfront that’s the way to play. If you’re an revitalization. [The city] realized what institution such as Arena Stage, that’s the that meant, to be able to bring visitors way you should work with the and tourists to this section of D.C.” community. It has served them very well” (Urquhart 2009). (Litsky 2009). The ANC supported Arena Stage Arena as an Economic Engine even as construction on the project wound down. When planning for PN While the Mead Center was being Hoffman’s waterfront development began built, most of Arena Stage was in 2009, the ANC lobbied PN Hoffman to temporarily housed a five-minute drive ensure that the view sheds of the away in Crystal City, a business district in waterfront from the Mead Center’s main Arlington, VA. The company's larger plaza would not be obstructed. “Arena has musicals were staged at the Lincoln a broad expanse, an open space where Theatre on U Street NW, and some staff people can gather. Whatever they develop positions (including those housed at across the street, I want to make sure that technical shops) were located throughout from Arena Stage on the balcony, people Arlington and D.C. have a view of the water…. I told [PN But most of Arena Stage’s Hoffman] ‘Just make sure that that performances and its community

34 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

engagement activities occurred in Crystal provide inspiration and enjoyment to City. There, Arena Stage occupied the their patrons – both residents of Crystal Forum: an old, 460-seat movie Arlington County and visitors to the theater. Arena Stage occupied this space area. Patrons of the theater benefit rent-free, though it did invest $750,000 to from its beauty and vision and its renovate the space to accommodate its ability to connect people regardless of range of performances. (When Arena age, race, or background. Most Stage returned to the Southwest, Crystal importantly, theaters are economic City was left with a state-of-the-art drivers in Arlington communities, theater.) supporting jobs, generating Arena Stage’s presence in Crystal government revenue, and promoting City exemplified the economic impact a tourism. This study supports this theater can have on its surrounding claim and provides strong and neighborhood. The President and Chief credible data demonstrating the Executive Officer of the Crystal City economic benefits of theater facilities Business Improvement District (Crystal to a neighborhood (“The Economic City BID), Angie Fox, and Arena Stage’s Impact of Theaters” n.d.). Artistic Director Molly Smith were long- The study demonstrated the time friends; their friendship had grown significant, positive financial impact of from a mutual passion for theater. When Arena Stage. Sixty-seven percent of Fox learned that Arena Stage needed patrons at Arena Stage ate dinner at a temporary space during the construction neighborhood restaurant either before or of the Mead Center, she proposed to after the show; on performance nights, Smith using the Crystal Forum. Fox area restaurants experienced a 7 to 20 brokered the deal: the BID would percent increase in sales. Overall, theater- contribute $250,000 to the renovation goers spent more than $2 million in (Arena Stage would contribute $750,000) Crystal City over the course of the 2008- and would act as liaison between the real 09 season, generating over $80,000 in tax estate and arts entities. revenue for the county. The study Once Arena Stage moved into the concluded that theaters in general – and Crystal City facilities, the BID helped Arena Stage in particular – are major local market performances by putting up economic drivers (“The Economic Impact banners and advertising in local of Theaters” n.d.). publications; connected the theater with The Mead Center was designed to local businesses; and studied and have a positive influence on its communicated Arena Stage’s impact on surroundings. The new facilities have a the neighborhood. variety of open public spaces, and also One BID study, published in March offer meeting spaces for community 2009 in conjunction with the Arlington groups and gathering spaces for visitors Commission for the Arts, reported the to the waterfront. The construction of the economic impact of two theaters within center was primarily completed with local the county: labor and, after its completion, Arena Arlington’s theaters are a major part remained a significant employer of local of the county’s social fabric as they administrators, technicians, craftspeople,

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 35 and service providers. (In Washington, Southwest community a more desirable the arts industry alone supports over place not only to visit, but also to live. 26,000 full-time jobs and directly Perhaps most importantly, Arena Stage contributes more than $1.24 billion to the will continue to attract workers, tourists city each year (Arena Stage 2009c).) and residents to the area by making a A large part of Arena’s continued major contribution to the region’s high contribution to the Southwest waterfront quality of life” (Arena Stage 2009c). redevelopment was expected to be its impact on area restaurants. Angie Fox expressed a view held by many when she Conclusion said that Southwest waterfront “needs better restaurants.” While Crystal City Arena Stage transformed its was saturated with restaurant options, artistic direction and its physical space in Southwest D.C. remained underserved. the years preceding the Mead Center’s And the restaurants that existed did not opening. Its community partners necessarily appeal to many of Arena provided the support needed for the Stage’s patrons. The Mead Center was organization to grow as an arts expected to help support new institution, with stakeholders providing restaurants, with those new restaurants fundraising for new programs and in turn supporting Arena Stage by construction, fighting to secure political increasing the desirability of the backing, and other assistance. This neighborhood and adding to the support grew from the collaborative and experience of spending an evening at the mutually beneficial relationships that waterfront. However, the addition of a Arena Stage cultivated for years. multitude of new restaurants would also The decision to stay in the depend on the neighborhood’s economic Southwest to help revitalize a struggling development and population growth. So, neighborhood was not without Arena Stage had a vested interest in the complications, but it exemplified how an development of its neighborhood. Soon anchor arts institution can influence a before the Mead Center’s opening, Arena range of important city stakeholders and Stage’s website read: “With deep roots in gain strong public support. the community, Arena Stage will make the waterfront neighborhood and the

36 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

References “Advisory Neighborhood Commissions.” 2009. District of Columbia official website. http://anc.dc.gov/anc/site/default.asp (accessed September 2009). “Arena Stage Moving to Northern Virginia While Venue Renovated.” 2007. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, October 4. “Arena Stage Raises More Than $100 Million for New Theater Campus.” 2006. PR Newswire US, December 6. “Arena Stage Washington, DC.” 2009. Mid-Atlantic Construction, June 1. “Bing Thom’s Glass Curtain Call At Arena Stage.” 2009. The Southwestern, September. “D.C. Signs Land Deal for Struever Bros. Waterfront Project.” 2008. Baltimore Business Journal, October 1. “National Endowment for the Arts, Arena Stage Announce Application Period Now Open for NEA New Play Development Program.” 2008. US Fed News, June 5. “NEA Announces ‘New Play Development Project’ In Partnership with Arena Stage.” 2007. US Fed News, December 21. “The Economic Impact of Theaters in Arlington County, Virginia.” 2009. Crystal City Business Improvement District and the Arlington Commission for the Arts. March. “Waterfront Station.” 2009. Forest City Enterprises website. http://www.forestcity.net/properties/mixed_use/property_listing/Pages/waterfro nt_station.aspx (accessed October 2009). “What Do You Like Most About Living, Working, And/Or Visiting Southwest?” 2009. Southwest Quadrant Blogspot, June. http://southwestquadrant.blogspot.com/2009/06/arena-stage-gets-critiqued.html. “What is an ANC?” 2009. The Southwest, September. Arena Stage. 2008a. Audited Financial Statement. June 30. Arena Stage. 2008b. “Arena Stage Construction Officially Underway on Expansion to Build Arena Stage at the Mead Center for American Theater.” Arena Stage Press Release. January 20. Arena Stage. 2009a. “Arena Stage Finishes 2008-09 Season on Solid Ground Despite Unprecedented Global Economic Crisis.” Arena Stage Press Release. July 16. Arena Stage. 2009b. Board Manual. Arena Stage. Spring. Arena Stage. 2009c. http://arenastage.org/ (accessed Fall 2009). Bauman, Chad. 2009. Phone interview, July 27. City of Washington, DC website. 2009. http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/tommywells (accessed September 2009). Crow, Heather. 2008. “Theater Attendance: Affected by the Economy or Are There Other Forces at Play?” Citizen Economists, July 27. http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/07/27/theater-attendance- affected-by-the-economy-or-are-there-other-forces-at-play/. Crystal City Business Improvement District Website. 2009. http://www.crystalcity.org/home.asp (accessed Fall 2009) DC Theater Scene website. 2009. www.dctheaterscene.com (accessed September 2009).

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 37

DeRenzis, Brooke. 2008. “Population Dynamics in the District of Columbia Since 2000.” Brookings Institution, Metropolitan Policy Program. July. Dobie, Edgar. 2009. Phone interview, July 13. Fox, Angela. 2009. Phone interview, July 22. Goldman, Derek. 2009. Phone interview, September 24. Haas-Bralove, Susan. 2009a. Phone interview, June 22. Haas-Bralove, Susan. 2009b. Phone interview, September 29. Harris, Paul. 2008. “Capital Achievement.” Variety. February 11-17. Helen Hayes Foundation Website. 2009. http://www.helenhayes.org/ (accessed Fall 2009). Horwitz, Jane. 2006. “Hayes Awards Announces Nominees Group Reports Drop in Theater Attendance.” The Washington Post, February 8. http://washingtondcjcc.org/center- for-arts/theater-j/press-room/generalpressclips/washpost-helen-hayes.html. Horwitz, Jane. 2008. “More Shows, Fewer Showgoers: Helen Hayes Group Cites Increase of 402 Performance, Decrease of 36,000 Patrons.” Washington Post. April 23. Irvin, Alison. 2009. Email correspondence, September 24. JD Land website, 2011. http://www.jdland.com/DC/stadium.cfm (accessed Fall 2011) Keating, Dan and Aizenman, N.C. 2007. “Income Soaring in ‘Egg Head Capital’” Washington Post, September 2. Krouse, Sarah. 2009. “Elinor Bacon is in Love with City Life.” Washington Business Journal, August 14. Litsky, Andy. 2009. Phone interview, October 1. Lowman, Stephen. 2009. “Picturing the Ideal Anacostia Waterfront; At Monthly Public Forums, Sleek Images Meet the Realities of Redevelopment.” Washington Post, March 26. Newlin, Nancy. 2009. Email, September 28. Penn Institute for Urban Research (Penn IUR) Staff. 2008. Notes on proceedings of the Penn Roundtable on Anchor Institutions, held June 6. Penn Institute for Urban Research. University of Pennsylvania. Smith, Molly. 2009. Phone interview, July 27. Southwest DC Blog. 2009a. http://swdcblog.com/2009/09/waterfront-station-is- resembling.html (accessed September 2009). Southwest DC blog. 2009b. http://southwest-dc.blogspot.com/ (accessed September 2009). Southwest DC Organization website. 2009. http://www.swdc.org/ (accessed September 2009). Southwest Neighborhood Assembly. 2009a. http://www.swdc.org/community_leaders/swna/swna.htm (accessed September 2009). Southwest Neighborhood Assembly. 2009b. Annual Report 2008-2009. March 23. Southwest Quadrant blog. 2009. http://southwestquadrant.blogspot.com/ (accessed September 2009). Southwest Waterfront website. 2009. http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/ (accessed September 2009). , Michael J. “Theater’s Temporary Home Gives Area Boost.” 2008. The Washington Post, May 8.

38 Livingston Case Study in Urban Development

Treanor, Lorraine. 2008. “Theatre Attendance is Declining. Tell Us Why.” DC Theater Scene, April 24. http://dctheatrescene.com/2008/04/24/theatre-attendance-is-declining- tell-us-why/. Trescott, Jacqueline. 2007. “Arena Stage Moving to VA While Venue is Expanded.” Washington Post, October 4. Urquhart, Desiree. 2009a. Phone interview, July 21. Urquhart, Desiree. 2009b. Phone interview, September 30. U.S. Census Bureau. 2009. www.census.gov (accessed October 2009). Washington, DC Office of Planning website. 2009. http://www.planning.dc.gov/planning (accessed October 2009). Waterfront Station website. 2010. http://www.waterfrontstation.com/ (accessed Spring 2010). Wikipedia. 2009. www.wikipedia.org (accessed July 2009). Zongker, Brett. 2006. “Arena Stage Announces a $35 Million Donation for an Expanded Theater Campus.” The Associated Press, December 6.

Arena Stage | Washington, D.C. 39

Case 3: The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois Attracting Civic Support

The Art Institute of Chicago (AIC), inopportune time. Leadership argued that the second largest encyclopedic art these decisions were necessary to protect museum in the United States, has been an the long-term investments in the AIC’s important anchor in downtown Chicago core areas of work, including curatorial for more than a century. Esteemed for its activities, education, and conservation. internationally renowned collections, When the Institute took part in strong research program, and leading PRAI 2010, it had emerged from conservation department, it also has an managing this crisis and was addressing associated fine arts school and is a civic the challenge of obtaining a civic landmark in the heart of the city’s commitment to the organization for the commercial, residential, and civic centers. next fifty years. To this end, the Institute Located on public parkland, the was identifying new civic leaders and museum has undertaken several cultivating corporate giving. Its corporate expansion projects, including the 2009 relationships had eroded over the first opening of its 264,000-square-foot decade of the twenty-first century, Modern Wing designed by Renzo Piano. making it challenging for the museum to That facility is situated next to the highly sustain its position as a robust anchor successful Millennium Park. institution. Significant funding from The opening of the Modern Wing corporate donors would make it easier coincided with the global financial crisis, for the AIC to manage its finances, secure which exacerbated the organization’s other sources of support, grow its profile existing financial difficulties. Between within the international arts community, 2008 and 2010, the AIC’s endowment dropped 25 percent and corporate giving fell to unprecedented lows. Institute leaders made the strategic financial decision to lay off employees and freeze salaries, which created public relations problems at an Art Institute of Chicago

and attract new audiences reflective of comptroller as ex-officio board members; Chicago’s new demographics. This case second, it had to provide free public details the efforts the AIC was access; third, it had to remain a public undertaking as it sought to attract civic arts institution (Deloitte and Touche support during trying financial times. 2009). The new structure – designed by Boston architectural firm Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge – epitomized the City Case Summary Beautiful movement with its majestic, Local artists founded the Chicago neoclassical Beaux Arts style (Art Academy of Design (CAD) in 1866 as an Institute of Chicago 2012). By leveraging art school and gallery. The successful grand plans for Chicago, the Institute Academy quickly outgrew its original studio established itself as an important local space and, in 1870, moved to a new, five- civic institution with the potential to rival story building in downtown Chicago. The New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, following year, the Great Chicago Fire the Philadelphia Museum of Art, and the destroyed the facility, leaving CAD Boston Museum of Fine Art (Art Institute financially bereft and physically destitute of Chicago 2010). The new location also (Art Institute of Chicago 2012). Unable to made the museum an integral asset of the rescue the organization, a cadre of CAD’s parks system, a relationship that trustees established the Chicago Academy continues today. of Fine Arts in 1879, taking over many of The building underwent the assets and programmatic functions of improvements with the addition of the bankrupted organization (Art Fullerton Auditorium (1898) and Ryerson Institute of Chicago 2012a). Library (1901). AIC then turned its In 1882, with the leadership of attention from facility improvements to Charles Hutchinson, this organization growing its collections. Chicago changed its name to the Art Institute of philanthropists were eager to build a Chicago and, at the same time, expanded world-class arts facility; many eventually into a new facility on the corner of donated their personal acquisitions of Michigan Avenue and Van Buren Street contemporary (Impressionist) art to the (two blocks from the AIC’s current museum. The Institute also prioritized location). During the 1893 World’s growing its libraries, and the founding of Columbian Exposition building boom, the Ryerson (1901) and Burnham (1912) Hutchinson and other Institute leaders libraries marked the start of establishing successfully lobbied the city for a new a research identity. arts facility along the lakefront – a In the first quarter of the twentieth building that would be occupied by the century, the museum experimented with World’s Congress Auxiliary Building ways to overcome the drawbacks of being during the fair and afterward by the AIC landlocked. Museum leaders decided to (Art Institute of Chicago 2010a). As part build over the Illinois Central railroad of the deal, the Parks Department tracks to the east, which opened up donated the land; the city secured the development possibilities. Later, in the late building’s title and agreed to lease it to 1950s and 1960s, the Institute constructed AIC at no cost under three conditions: the B.F. Ferguson Memorial Building, first, AIC had to appoint the mayor and which still serves as the museum’s

42 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development administrative wing. The museum also (human resources and legal) and the added the Morton Wing to house its modern facilities staff works for both. When the art collection and to restore symmetry to the Institute participated in PRAI 2010, the complex, as well as landscaped gardens to school, with its diversity of revenue connect the facility to neighboring parks. In sources, was profitable but the museum the 1970s, the AIC built the Rubloff was struggling. Building, which added new studios, At that time, its governing board of classrooms, and a film center (Art Institute trustees (which governed both the school of Chicago 2010a). and the museum) comprised ninety-two From 1980 through 2004, Director members. The pool of trustees was split James N. Wood steered the museum between the school and museum, through one of its most successful eras in although they governed the Institute acquisition, attendance, and expansion. jointly. The museum employed 700 He brought popular traveling exhibitions, people and retained numerous championed new presentation modes, volunteers. Staff reported to the board’s and aggressively acquired artwork. executive committee. Each of the ten Furthermore, he pursued several capital curatorial departments had an advisory campaigns. AIC updated the Allerton committee and every museum Building, the Kraft Education Center department had a “support society” that (1993) and the Fullerton Auditorium raised funds for that department (1993) and restored the Ryerson Library acquisitions. The advisory committees (1994). It built the Rice Building (1988) and support societies reported to the and added a suite of galleries to house its executive committee. Asian collection (1990s) (Art Institute of Museum leadership changed in Chicago 2012). In 1999, Wood also 2004 when James Cuno was appointed conceived of building a new gallery for President and Eloise W. Martin Director Asian art, which would later evolve into of AIC after serving as Director of the the highly acclaimed Modern Wing. Courtauld Institute of Art and Director of Following Wood’s death in 2010, The New the Harvard University Art Museums. York Times referred to Wood, who had Under Cuno’s leadership, the museum moved on to become CEO and President raised $400 million in capital and of the J. Paul Getty Trust, as “one of the endowment funds for the new Modern most respected museum leaders in the Wing, showed more of the Institute’s country” (Kennedy 2010). permanent collection, and renovated outdated galleries throughout the museum. These changes reflected the Organization museum’s commitment to focus on the The Art Institute is a 501(c)3 Institute’s assets rather than relying on corporation that encompasses two outside collections, such as traveling entities: the public art museum and the exhibitions (Kinzer 2004; Mullaney 2006; post-secondary educational institution. Finkel 2008). The two entities are largely independent: In August 2011, AIC underwent they have their own leadership teams; further changes when Cuno left the separate financing and budget structures; museum after seven years to serve as CEO and their own endowments. They do and President of the J. Paul Getty Trust share some administrative services (Finkel 2011). In 2011, the AIC

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 43 announced that its Interim Director, site is parkland, which comes with many Douglas Druick, an arts scholar and regulations, and is landlocked, with few former curatorial chair who had been affordable opportunities to grow. with the museum for twenty-six years Operating railroad tracks (Metra Electric, (Art Institute of Chicago 2011a), would South Shore lines) split the complex in become Director. half, which creates design and continuity challenges. The museum has largely overcome Finance these physical limitations through The museum’s 2010 operating creative expansion projects. It has grown budget was $105 million, with primarily through aggressive eastern investments at that time totaling $504 expansion over the tracks. Lake Michigan million and debt totaling $206 million runs against the train tracks at the back of (note that the school and the museum the original building; the Institute shared a balance sheet). In 2009, the expanded onto new parkland when that museum had $93,605 million of revenue opportunity arose. (government and other contributions The museum’s 1 million-square- brought in a third of the revenues) but foot complex consists of the following $97,968,000 million of expenses, elements (only museum, not school, resulting in a deficit of $4,363,000. facilities are on this list): The AIC has a unique financial • Allerton Building (original structure) arrangement, with the Parks Department including three auditoriums acting as the primary municipal funder. (Fullerton is the largest and most The Parks Department uses a portion of prominent) and the Ryerson & property taxes to fund park assets Burnham Libraries through the Chicago Parks District Tax. • East Building including McKinlock From this funding stream, the AIC Court, Rubloff Auditorium, and the receives (on average) $6.5 million in Stock Exchange Trading Room (which exchange for it offering days of free attaches to the school) admission. The City of Chicago also • Gunsaulus Hall including Alsdorf and waives water fees although it does not Upper Gunsaulus Galleries (which provide any maintenance or operating connect the east and west buildings support to supplement the Parks over the railroad tracks) Department. • Ferguson Memorial Building (which serves as the administrative wing)

Facilities • Morton Wing • Southeastern Building including The AIC has resided at 111 South Regenstein Hall and the Sculpture Michigan Avenue for over 125 years. As Court (Rice Wing) noted, the Chicago Parks District owns the • Modern Wing including Ryan land on which the museum sits and Education Center, Griffin Court, and allows the AIC to occupy it rent-free. the Modern Shop Although the AIC benefits from the • Three gardens including South central location in many ways, the site Garden, North Garden, and Pritzker comes with numerous restrictions. The Garden

44 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development • One sculpture terrace: Bluhm Family certification (Art Institute of Chicago Terrace 2008). Together, these facilities house the Pritzker Prize–winning architect Institute’s approximately 260,000-work Renzo Piano designed the 264,000 square collection, administrative offices, public foot building to engage more directly with spaces, and educational programs, and both AIC visitors and the surrounding some spaces shared with the school. urban environment. It comprises two The AIC also controls sixteen other three-story pavilions, one on each side of properties in downtown Chicago. The Griffin Court, a large open hall. The wing museum uses one building for storage; has several public spaces: Nicholas the rest are used by the school (as Bridgeway (a footbridge linking classrooms, administrative space, student Millennium Park to the museum), Bluhm housing, or storage) or leased to other Family Terrace (a sculpture park), Griffin tenants (Deloitte and Touch 2009). This Court, retail shops, and a cafe and arrangement underscores the unique restaurant (Pogrebin 2005). The project relationship between the museum and was privately funded, with a majority of school. While together they comprise a funding coming through a mix of bonds single non-profit organization, they and corporate and individual support; operate largely as separate financial, less than $1 million came from municipal programmatic, and administrative contributions. entities. This system allows for flexibility, but does suggest a fairly independent, as opposed to an especially collaborative, Collections relationship. The AIC has one of the largest The Modern Wing, the Institute’s collections in the country but was only most recent capital project, was built to showing 8 percent of it due to facility leverage two of the museum’s assets: its restrictions. Although landlocked, the extensive contemporary arts collection Institute was capitalizing on the space it and its prime location next to the had by emphasizing the quality of its lakefront and Millennium Park. The $294 collections. million expansion significantly increased The Ryerson and Burnham exhibition space and added a state-of-the- Libraries are a comprehensive art and art education facility, making the Institute history resource with particular strengths the second largest encyclopedic art in archival material on regional museum in the United Sates (Art Institute architecture. The Alsdorf galleries display of Chicago 2008). Conceived in 1999, the Indian, Southeast Asian, and Himalayan project broke ground in 2005 and opened art. The Upper Gunsaulus galleries feature in May 2009 on the southwest corner of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist Columbus Drive and Monroe Street. It work. The Modern Wing presents modern replaced the Goodman Theater and European painting and sculpture, School, which had moved to new facilities contemporary art, architecture and within Chicago’s Loop. Consistent with design, and photography. The rest of the Chicago’s reputation as a “green city,” the complex showcases American art before U.S. Green Building Council awarded the 1950, prints and drawings, Indian and Modern Wing with LEED (Leadership in Islamic art, American and European Energy and Environmental Design) Silver decorative arts, and Asian art, to name a

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 45 few of the collections. In the fall of 2010, studios, programming, and a library for the museum opened its Japanese Art families, children, and students” (Art Galleries in the Roger L. and Pamela Institute of Chicago 2012b). The Weston Wing, and in the spring of 2011, educational facility consists of many the museum opened galleries for African interactive spaces including the David and Art and Indian Art of the Americans in the Marilyn Fatt Vitale Family Orientation lower Morton Wing (Art Institute of Room, Curious Corner, and the Crown Chicago 2010b; Art Institute of Chicago Family Educator Resource Center, which 2011b). supports arts integration across curricula With the new Modern Wing, the and museum learning. museum has not only been able to show In addition to its education and its extensive and renowned exhibition programs, the museum is also a contemporary arts collection, it has been renowned research and conservation able to reshuffle and program other institution. Many of the approximately facility areas. The new galleries provide thirty curators at the museum are the opportunities to give every one of the recognized as leaders in their fields, museum’s ten curatorial departments an actively curating exhibitions and average of 35 percent more space to show publishing scholarly resources. The AIC its collections. also has three separate conservation laboratories: for paintings, objects, and works on paper. The museum is one of Programming very few museums in the country to AIC welcomes 1.8 million visitors employ conservation scientists as well as annually and programs forty-plus conservators, and together the exhibitions a year. Most visitors come conservation teams are responsible for from the metropolitan region or from groundbreaking state-of-the-art other parts of the country. The AIC offers conservation research leading to such free admission fifty-two days a year as exhibitions as Matisse: Radical Invention part of a municipal agreement, although 1913–1917, Watercolors by Winslow this public benefit represents a loss of Homer: The Color of Light, and the potential revenue. upcoming John Marin’s Watercolors: A The Institute prioritizes arts Medium for Modernism. The museum has education and is lauded as a model of its own publications department with a accessibility. AIC’s Department of title list of approximately twelve to fifteen Museum Education works closely with catalogues, including an Online Scholarly public and private schools, community Catalogue Initiative funded by the Getty and business organizations, and senior Foundation in 2009, a forty-five-year-old groups. The AIC hosts approximately research journal, Museum Studies (which 2000 school groups from Chicago and stopped publication in 2011), and other Illinois annually, serving approximately publications on exhibitions and on the 115,000 students a year in 2011 (Art permanent collection (Art Institute of Institute of Chicago 2012b). The 20,000 Chicago 2012c). square foot Patrick G. and Shirley W. Ryan The museum collaborates with Education Center “doubles the museum’s local cultural organizations, the Chicago previous [education] center and includes Park District, and Chicago colleges and five cutting-edge classrooms, three

46 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development universities on many different arts infrastructure. It sits at the center of programming initiatives. urban activity. In addition, every year the AIC The Institute forms part of an works with cultural partners – most often informal, central business district (CBD) arts the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, the cluster: the Chicago Symphony Orchestra is Poetry Foundation, and Hubbard Street across the street, the Dance Chicago – to present themed seasons in which all organizations cross- program and cross- promote their offerings. Through such partnerships the museum offers a broad range of programs – lectures, readings, concerts, symposia, performances – and draws upon the city’s general arts audience. The first of these seasons, Silk Road Chicago (2007–08), was organized with Yo-Yo Ma’s Silk Road Ensemble and the City of Chicago. Other themed seasons have treated the topics of American identities, globalism, and modernism (Cuno and Thurm 2010).

Environs The AIC’s museum is an urban museum in a popular area of downtown Chicago that draws commercial, tourist, retail, Above, the Art Institute of Chicago in Chicago. Below, and residential activity. the Art Institute of Chicago in relation to Millennium Park. James Cuno has employed the words “village within a city” to describe is at the corner of Madison Street and the museum’s surroundings (Cuno and Wacker Drive just a few blocks to the west, Thurm 2010). AIC’s central location is a and the theater district covers much of prized asset, since it benefits from the downtown. Millennium Park houses the activity generated by nearby government , Pritzker Pavilion, interactive offices, parkland, commercial headquarters, public arts features, and other creative private residential development, and public venues. Combined, these performance and visual arts offerings reinforce and enhance

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 47 the city’s cultural stature while also drawing Mexico, and it is the third largest inter- coveted knowledge workers and high- modal port after Hong Kong and performing businesses. Singapore (World Business Chicago 2010a). Chicago has fared well compared City and Regional Context to other industrial cities because of its Located in northeastern Illinois at diverse economy, which spans both the southwestern edge of Lake Michigan, traditional and emerging industries. Chicago, with a population of 2.75 million, Compared to other U.S. metro areas, it is the largest city in the Midwest and the ranks in the top five of Gross Regional third most populous city in the United Product for business and financial States (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). This services, health services, manufacturing, international city anchors the Chicago- and transportation and distribution. The Joliet-Naperville metropolitan statistical city is also a leader in cutting-edge, high- area: the third most populous region in growth industries such as biotechnology, the United States after New York and Los information technology, and green Angeles (Office of Management and technology (World Business Chicago Budget 2008). The City of Chicago covers 2010b). It houses eleven Fortune 500 234 square miles and envelops all of Cook companies including Boeing Corporation, County and a small part of DuPage County Abbott Laboratories, Exelon, United while the MSA spans three states and Airlines, Aon Corporation, R.R. Donnelly, fourteen counties. Chicago is ethnically Integrys, Smurfit-Stone, and Telephone & and racially diverse, with Hispanics and Data Systems (parent company of US African Americans accounting for a Cellular) ( 2009). Also, significant proportion of the total the city is home to a number of important population. urban anchors including universities Chicago is the primary economic (Northwestern University’s downtown engine for its metropolitan region, for the campus, University of Chicago, and the state of Illinois, and for the Midwest, as University of Illinois-Chicago, among well as being a significant contributor to others), hospitals and medical the U.S. economy (generating the largest institutions, and entertainment centers Real Gross Metropolitan Product after (McCormick Convention Center, Navy New York and with a Real Pier, and four sports stadia, in particular). GDP per capita of $45,363) (Bureau of Economic Analysis 2009). The city’s transportation network – which links air, Developing New Civic Leadership water, and rail – has driven its economic success. O’Hare is the second busiest The AIC is an internationally airport in the country for commercial renowned museum in a dynamic urban passengers and freight shipments. Six area. It has made many smart, strategic Class-1 railroads, six highways, and the choices about expansion projects that not country’s second largest public only allow the opportunity to showcase transportation system converge in the its collection but also create physical city. It has one of the top five container connections to other nearby public and ports in the world due to its waterway private assets. Despite a history of savvy connections to the Atlantic and the Gulf of positioning, the Institute, when it took

48 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development part in PRAI 2010, was still seeking to promoting community-based and/or remain on a financially sustainable path – commercial arts industries and workers an ongoing challenge that has been over traditional arts activities. exacerbated by the economic crisis. Through discussions at PRAI 2010, museum leadership made clear that they Developing Local Responses to Changes in Corporate Philanthropy believed that their best strategy for confronting this challenge was to develop The global economic crisis new civic leadership. Broadly speaking, profoundly affected the museum, as it did civic leaders are engaged people or many cultural institutions. Nonprofits, in groups who try to address a problem in general, struggle to bring in earned and society, advocate on behalf of a specific non-earned income in periods when the community, and/or try to increase the economy is not doing well. Experts differ economic, cultural, or environmental on whether larger, better-funded groups health of their community. They do this in are better off than smaller organizations many ways, including volunteering on (since they can access resources that boards; contributing money; convincing lower-profile groups cannot) or if they other groups or corporations or are worse off (since they rely heavily on individuals to donate resources; raising their endowments, annual giving, and public awareness; and offering their corporate support – all of which diminish professional expertise. Civic leaders can when the economy is struggling) to be wealthy patrons, corporations, survive. When large nonprofit arts philanthropic foundations, community- organizations undertake when the based organizations, elected officials, or economy is strong capital campaigns to individual citizens. When AIC employed build or expand their facilities– generally this term, they were interested in multi-year endeavors that take off when securing these diverse civic resources and the economy is strong but may founder voices; however, their discussions when a downturn occurs – problems centered primarily on attracting ensue, including public relations corporate leaders who were willing to problems, since the institutions are then give their own time and money and to recruiting public and private dollars in an direct resources from their corporate environment of high unemployment, philanthropic and marketing efforts to the where individual and household basic museum. needs often cannot be met, and public Museum leaders who took part in agencies often struggle to provide PRAI 2010 were confident that the services. museum’s cultural reputation, geographic When AIC leadership participated location, and public values would help in PRAI, the museum was facing exactly them attract and retain civic leaders; these types of challenges. It had kicked off nonetheless, they recognized that they “The Building of the Century Campaign” faced challenges: corporate consolidation for the Modern Wing in the flush early had diminished opportunities to attract years of the 2000s, meeting its $410 local elites, arts organizations were million capital fundraising goal for the competing against essential social expansion and covering the costs of services for limited public and private design, construction, and an operating resources, and city leaders were endowment. However, it opened right

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 49 after the 2008 financial collapse, which economic changes: large structural created an image problem, raising changes, such as deregulation and questions about whether investments in consolidation, affect the local economy, architecture and arts were a good use of which in turn influences the financial public and private dollars. These image health of the public and nonprofit sectors problems were compounded by a on which the museum relies. decision to increase admission fees (from From the museum’s perspective, $12 to $18) on non-free days, which financial and retail consolidations had amplified the controversy as community weakened corporate ties to the museum, members and the media incorrectly resulting in the disengagement of the inferred that the public was paying for an corporate community (Thurm 2010). In elaborate expansion. This controversy 2010, Cuno, then Museum Director, and highlighted some of the challenges that David Thurm, AIC Chief Operating Officer, the Institute’s leadership faced, and also noted as evidence several patterns: pinpointed an ongoing issue with how the corporations that were once museum could positions itself as a headquartered in Chicago had moved valuable public asset that would attract elsewhere, outside investors with little investment and support from corporate loyalty to Chicago had acquired or philanthropists. merged with local corporations, and While the Institute successfully Chicago corporate leaders had diversified paid for and endowed the expansion, the their portfolios by buying assets outside market crash created a new set of of the region, which weakened their ties problems for the Institute. The museum to the local community (Cuno and Thurm lost 25 percent of its endowment in 2010). According to these museum eighteen months as its investments lost leaders, these changes diminished the value and, at the same time, corporate strength of the business community’s giving dropped to unprecedented lows. connection to the AIC. Large corporations Economic forecasts suggested that – such as investment firms and retail recovery would be far in the future and groups – continued to support capital budgetary analysis showed that museum campaigns but were less likely to give to income would not fully cover expenses. exhibitions and programs. AIC was forced to undertake two rounds Meanwhile, Institute leaders found of layoffs (sixty-five workers in 2010 and that smaller businesses – such as law twenty-two workers in 2009), to freeze firms and accounting firms – were not salaries, and to cut other parts of the increasing their contributions or budget (Viera 2010). corporate memberships. In fact, some While the 2008 financial crisis firms had stopped broad-based support of exacerbated AIC’s financial situation, the civic institutions in favor of concentrating organization’s problems predated the their resources on organizations that broader financial crisis. Being located in a supported social services. global city has many advantages (such as In the museum leadership’s view, being able to tap support from the corporate philanthropy for the arts and corporations, entrepreneurs, and other cultural institutions had eroded. In “creative class” workers that congregate the past, corporate giving had been a in such cities) but it also makes an significant source of income; AIC wanted organization vulnerable to global to recapture this support.

50 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Factoring out the impact of the As part of this effort, Thurm and capital campaign activities in his teamed worked with Penn IUR to FY09, corporate giving declined by about study three factors that shape museum 11 percent in five years' time (down from finances: economic cycles, corporate arts about $2 million in FY04 to $1.8 million in philanthropy trends, and socio- FY09). The exhibition schedule had demographic trends. In a 2010 Penn IUR suffered most – in FY04, seven exhibitions report, The Changing Face of Museum received corporate support Philanthropy: Trends and Strategies for totaling $525,000, compared to two Accessing Corporate Support, the author exhibitions receiving support totaling posited three major findings about the $125,000 in FY09. At PRAI 2010, the health of art museums (Kwatinetz 2010). museum was in the midst of determining First, the economic crisis’s negative how the new landscape of corporate impact on the art museum’s health was giving would affect their organization temporary and would return to pre-crash long term and how they should adapt levels; however, to ride out these shocks, their fundraising strategies in response. museum leaders should alter their They were particularly interested in financial management. Second, the discussing how to recruit emerging civic museum’s share of corporate support was leaders as supporters. diminishing even though corporate giving Museum leaders were working to was increasing in general. The author identity strategies for cultivating civic suggested that in an increasingly supporters from the pool of local leaders competitive environment corporations with wealth, political will, and community were wary of developing partnerships connections, especially corporate leaders. with arts organizations because their Because the corporate landscape had goals were not well-matched and were changed and continued to evolve, AIC was unable to meet the needs of corporations. struggling to define the case they needed Finally, the report suggested that to build in order to secure support. changing demographics and technological In 2010, AIC appointed Thurm, advancements meant that art museums former The New York Times Senior Vice were going to have to operate differently President for Operations, as the if they wanted to grow their audience museum’s COO to address these issues. base and attract new earned and non- Trustees recruited the experienced earned revenues, including corporate financial and development leader to giving (Kwatinetz 2010). “strengthen the museum’s financial position and ease its transition to a more complex institution” (Art Institute of Reinforcing “Public” Identity to Attract Philanthropic Support Chicago 2010c). Thurm focused on raising the Institute’s profile to increase At PRAI 2010, the museum also corporate philanthropic giving and to considered how to use its central location nurture new civic leaders for the as a way to build civic leadership and museum. To do so, he sought to uncover attract corporate philanthropic dollars. the factors driving corporate Even though the Institute had long held a philanthropic giving and to identify central place in Chicago, it was just effective strategies for building new beginning to leverage its proximity to relationships with industry leaders. other urban assets; it was doing this

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 51 largely in tandem with the development and research institution with a rich of Millennium Park. Initially, museum history that was surrounded by many of leaders designed the Modern Wing as a Chicago’s prized commercial, smaller, more internally focused recreational, and cultural assets. Yet, as structure, but changed the building and with many large visual arts organizations the layout to capitalize on the large park in the United States, AIC faced an investment next door. Trustees, museum uncertain future due to changing administrators, and designers envisioned demographics in urban areas; shifting linking these civic spaces by expanding patterns of philanthropic giving; evolving the wing’s size and by building a physical priorities for supporters of arts, bridge between the wing and the adjacent economic, and community development; park. and emerging new technologies that Museum leaders agreed that the made it harder to attract and retain institution’s location was a major asset in audiences. their efforts to recruiting new civic The Institute was emerging from a supporters, including corporate leaders, tumultuous period marked by high- because of its visible centrality in the profile controversies, severe budget cuts, city’s economic, physical, and cultural and significant staff downsizing, and it landscape. Tourists, workers, and was attempting to overcome one of its residents were drawn to the museum’s most formidable barriers – diminished neighborhood by the lakefront and the corporate support from philanthropists area’s commercial, residential, and corporate marketing – to create a recreational, and retail activity. The city’s financially sustainable nonprofit model. larger investments and AIC’s central Leaders believed that by nurturing a new position had strengthened its ability to be cohort of civic leaders they would attract a more diversified urban anchor – and the more corporate financial support. museum was considering using these as a However, AIC staff and leaders were way to draw new civic leadership and unsure of how to create a comprehensive also as a mechanism for this leadership to strategy that could counteract trends in employ in making the case for AIC as a philanthropic giving and could raise valuable civic landmark that justified revenues without corporatizing their art public and private resources. collection or mission. This situation is a common one for many arts anchor. The AIC’s story demonstrates the complexity of wrestling Conclusion with such challenges in ways that In many ways, the Art Institute of acknowledge a larger societal context and Chicago was in an enviable position when also incorporate local and regional it took part in PRAI: it was an realities in identifying potential solutions. internationally renowned arts museum

52 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development References Art Institute of Chicago. 2008.“Art Institute Announces Opening Day of Modern Wing.” Last modified July 18. http://www.artic.edu/aic/aboutus/press/Opening_Day_of_Moder.pdf. Art Institute of Chicago. 2010a. The Prime Mover: Charles L. Hutchinson and the Making of the Art Institute of Chicago. Chicago (IL): Art Institute of Chicago. Art Institute of Chicago. 2010b. “The Art Institute Unveils New Galleries of Japanese Art.” September 8. Art Institute of Chicago. 2010c. “Art Institute of Chicago Announces Appointment of New Chief Operating Officer.” March 3. http://www.artic.edu/aic/aboutus/press/Thurm_PR.pdf. Art Institute of Chicago. 2011a. “The Art Institute Of Chicago Announces Appointment of Douglas Druick As President And Eloise W. Martin Director.” August 24. Art Institute of Chicago. 2011b. “Grand Opening: African Art and Indian Art of the Americas.” June 3. Art Institute of Chicago. 2012a. “Mission and History.” http://www.artic.edu/aic/aboutus/wip/index.html)/. Art Institute of Chicago. 2012b. “Education.” http://www.artic.edu/aic/education. Art Institute of Chicago. 2012c. “Collections.” http://www.artic.edu/aic/books/online/index.html. Chicago Tribune. 2009. “Illinois Fortune 500 Companies for 2009.” http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-chicago-fortune-500-companies- apr15,0,2840178.photogallery Cuno, James, and David Thurm (former Director and current Chief Operating Officer of the Art Institute of Chicago). 2010. Interview by Eugenie Ladner Birch, Amy Montgomery, and Amanda Johnson. June. Deloitte and Touche. 2009. Independent Auditor’s Report: Art Institute of Chicago. Finkel. Jori. 2008. “A Man Who Loves Big Museums.” The New York Times. May 18. Finkel, Jori. 2011. “Getty Trust's New CEO: Art Institute of Chicago's James Cuno” Los Angeles Times. May 10. Kennedy, Randy. 2010. “James N. Wood, President of the Getty Trust, Dies at 69.” The New York Times. June 14. Kinzer, Stephen. 2004. “Art Institute of Chicago Appoints Courtauld Chief its New Director.” The New York Times. January 22. Kwatinetz, Matthew. 2010. The Changing Face of Museum Philanthropy: Trends and Strategies for Accessing Corporate Support. Working Draft. University of Pennsylvania: Penn Institute for Urban Research. Mullaney, Tom. 2006. “A Director Whose Eye is Focused on Change.” The New York Times. March 2. Office of Management and Budget. 2008. “Update of Statistical Area Definitions and Guidance on Their Uses.” OMB Bulletin No. 09-01. Washington: Government Printing Office, 2008.

Art Institute of Chicago | Chicago, Illinois 53 Pogrebin, Rbon. 2005. “Light and Airiness for Art Institute of Chicago’s New Wing.” The New York Times. May 31. Thurm, David (Chief Operation Office of the Art Institute of Chicago) 2010. Personal Correspondence with Penn IUR. August. United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2009. “Gross Domestic Product by Metropolitan Area.” Washington: Government Printing Office, 2009. http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2009/10%20October/1009_gdpmetro.pdf. United States Census. 2010. “Population Estimates for Incorporated Place and Minor Civic Divisions: Chicago.” Washington: Government Printing Office, 2010. Viera, Lauren. 2010. “Art Institute Lays off Some 65 staffers.” Chicago Tribune. May 24, 2010. World Business Chicago. 2010a. “Data: Business Climate: 2010.” http://www.worldbusinesschicago.com/about. World Business Chicago 2010b. “Data: 2010 Key Industries and Economy.” http://www.worldbusinesschicago.com/about.

54 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Case 4: The High Museum of Art, Atlanta, Georgia Expanding the Museum

The High Museum of Art in Atlanta and lectures and later evolved into a is the leading art museum in the museum. In 1926, the Atlanta Art southeastern United States. With Association found its first permanent renowned buildings by Richard Meier and home when philanthropist Mrs. J. M. High Renzo Piano, the High houses over 11,000 donated her home; several decades later, works in its collection. The High is a the institution would be named “The High major player in Atlanta’s arts and cultural Museum of Art” in her honor. scene, independently and as a division of Over the middle decades of the the Woodruff Arts Center (WAC), a twentieth century, the institution’s art nonprofit arts center with four divisions: collections grew, though funds were the High, the Atlanta Symphony scarce and the museum relied heavily on Orchestra, the Alliance Theater, and the donation of artwork, which resulted Young Audiences. in a collection of uneven quality. In 1955, In 2005, the High Museum the Kress Foundation offered a valuable expanded into three new buildings and a collection of Renaissance and Baroque central piazza, all designed by Renzo paintings to the Atlanta Arts Association Piano. The configuration of the 2005 on the condition that it construct a expansion was meant to create a “village fireproof and climate-controlled building for the arts” – an art-driven urban in which to house the works (Abrams campus. While the design garnered 2002: 8). Spurred by this offer, the numerous accolades, museum leaders museum built a new brick structure who took part in PRAI 2010 felt that its alongside the original High house. The potential had not been met, as its central acquisition of the Kress Collection and the piazza remained underutilized several construction of the new building reflected years after its 2005 completion. the museum’s growing professionalism. This case illustrates the High’s Tragedy drove the institution’s experience expanding and renovating its next major growth period when 106 campus, looking back on the process of Atlanta arts patrons died in a plane crash developing and implementing a campus on a museum-organized European tour in improvement plan and considering how 1962. The victims included many of to better meet the plan’s objectives. Atlanta’s top civic leaders. The Atlanta Arts Association built the Atlanta Memorial Arts Center in their honor in 1968 and, at the same time, dropped the Case Summary name “Atlanta Arts Association” in favor The High Museum of Art emerged of the “High Museum of Art.” The Atlanta from the work of the Atlanta Art Memorial Arts Center consolidated four of Association, founded in 1905 to promote Atlanta’s cultural facilities on one fine arts in the city. This association, campus: the High Museum of Art, the established by women volunteers, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra, the Atlanta initially sponsored exhibitions, classes,

College of Art, and the Alliance Theater winning architect Renzo Piano, marked (Abrams 2002: 214-215). another turning point for the High. It The High Museum’s 1955 more than doubled the museum’s size, structure became the cornerstone of the adding 177,000 square feet to the Meier new Memorial Arts Center campus: the building for a total of 312,000 square feet. Atlanta Memorial Arts Center expanded This critically acclaimed addition, that structure to include additional descried in detail below, aimed to create a gallery space as well as facilities for the village for the arts at the Woodruff Arts other three arts organizations. Center (High Museum 2010b, 2010c). The Atlanta Memorial Arts Center resembled arts centers built in other cities – such as Lincoln Center in New Organization York, Kennedy Center in Washington D.C., The High Museum is a division of and the Los Angeles Performing Arts the Woodruff Arts Center, a nonprofit Center in Los Angeles – in that it organization that comprises four visual consolidated many of the city’s cultural and performing arts divisions on one facilities; it did, however, differ from campus. These include: the High Museum others in its inclusion of a visual arts of Art, the Alliance Theatre, Atlanta organization in addition to performing Symphony Orchestra, and Young arts organizations. In 1982, its board Audiences. While there are many renamed it the Woodruff Arts Center, performing arts centers in the country, after Coca-Cola magnate Robert W. the Woodruff is unusual in two respects: Woodruff (Abrams 2002; High Museum 1) as noted previously, it is the only arts 2010d). center to include a visual arts In 1983, the High expanded again: organization and 2) most arts this time adding a prize-winning white organizations that belong to an arts porcelain-paneled structure designed by center are themselves independent architect Richard Meier. Funded in part nonprofit organizations – in the by a successful $7.5 million challenge Woodruff’s case, each organization is a grant from Robert W. Woodruff with the division of the Woodruff Arts Center, museum raising a total of $20 million, the 135,000- ."35" "SUT$FOUFS4UBUJPO square-foot structure "SUT$FOUFS8BZ tripled the size of the $PMMFHF 8PPESVGG1BSLJOH(BSBHF 3FTJEFODF)BMM 4DVMQUVSF4UVEJP )JHI.VTFVN museum, providing PG"SU "ENJOJTUSBUJWF$FOUFS )JHI.VTFVN PG"SU "OOF$PY$IBNCFST generous space for 8JOH 3JDI1JB[[B &MFWBUPS exhibitions, collections, UP4USFFU-FWFM )JHI.VTFVN PG"SU and programs. The new 4JGMZ 8JFMBOE 1JB[[B 1BWJMJPO 5BCMF UI4USFFU 3FTUBVSBOU 4ZNQIPOZ)BMM "MMJBODF4UBHF complex stimulated higher )FSU[4UBHF

.FNPSJBM"SUT#VJMEJOH attendance and raised the )JHI.VTFVN (BMMFSJB 4PVUI&OUSBODF /PSUI&OUSBODF PG"SU 4UFOU'BNJMZ 8JOH organization’s profile, #PY 0GGJDF &MFWBUPSTUP )JMM 4ZNQIPOZ "VEJUPSJVN 4UPSF 1BSLJOH (BSBHF UI4USFFU bringing national attention $PMMFHF "SU(BMMFSZ 3JDI5IFBUSF $BMMBXBZ1MB[B :PVOH"VEJFODFT to both the museum and to OE'MPPS $FOUFS4QBDF Atlanta. 1FBDIUSFF&OUSBODF

The 2005 addition, 1FBDIUSFF4USFFU designed by award-

Map of Woodruff Campus 56 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

rather than an independent nonprofit approximately 20 percent from previous organization. years due to the recession). At that time, The High Museum (as well as each High leadership believed the endowment of the other three divisions) has its own should stand at around $200 million and board, staff, and budget, and determines efforts to increase planned giving in its own programming. The Woodruff Arts particular supported that goal. Center, however, owns the High Because of its relatively small Museum’s facilities as well as the rest of endowment, the High relied heavily on the buildings on the campus; five percent income from memberships and of the High’s annual operating budget admissions ($4.9 million and $3.8 million, comes from the Woodruff’s annual respectively, in FY09). The High corporate campaign (Clark 2010). The Museum’s traditional supporting Woodruff Arts Center also has its own demographic was skewed female, older, board, staff, and budget; it is responsible white, and affluent (as with most for human resources, information American museums). But, with a diverse technology, facility maintenance, limited local population and an aging base of joint marketing (each division also does supporters, the High was working to its own marketing), limited fundraising increase its following among younger, (divisions also fundraise independently), more diverse audiences. and accounting for all four if its divisions. To this end, the museum had Each division is represented on the increased its outreach to younger Woodruff Arts Center Board. potential donors, experimenting with marketing and programs. Marketing for the 2010 Salvador Dali exhibition Finance exemplified this: an emphasis on the The High’s annual operating iconic mustache – and a downplaying of budget in FY09, the year preceding the the High Museum branding – was meant High’s participation in PRAI, was $24.6 to emphasize the off-beat nature of the million (up from $18.9 million in FY05, show and create a buzz that would attract with a high during that period of 30.9 a younger audience. million in FY 2007) (High Museum The High was also making efforts 2010a). In that year, the largest categories to reach out to African Americans. For a of expenses were: $10.5 million for staff; 2008 exhibition of Civil Rights era $4.8 million for installation of exhibitions; photography – entitled “Road to $1.6 million for membership; $1.5 million Freedom” – the High met with African for marketing and communications; and American community groups during the $1.4 million for facilities. Additional planning stage and brought in an expenses included those for advertising firm that targets African administration, fundraising, and American audiences (Penn IUR Staff notes publications, among others. 2010). The David C. Driskell Prize, named The High’s major sources of after a renowned African American artist revenue included earned income, private and scholar, is an award for excellence in donations, and endowment income, with African American art or art history; very limited public funding. The proceeds from an annual dinner to endowment, as of Fall 2010, was announce the prizewinner go toward the approximately $81 million (down David C. Driskell African American Art

High Museum of Art | Atlanta, Georgia 57

Acquisition Fund and Endowment. In the story Wieland Pavilion, the three-story three years preceding the drafting of this Anne Cox Chambers Wing, and an case study, African American visitorship administration building. was up approximately 5 percentage The Wieland Pavilion is connected points from previous years (Clark 2010). to the Meier building (now called the Stent Family Wing) by footbridges, and houses African Art, photography, works Facilities on paper, modern and contemporary art, After the 2005 expansion, the High and major temporary exhibitions. The Museum totaled 312,000 square feet. The Anne Cox Chambers Wing exhibits special complex comprised four buildings and a collections. The Stent Family Wing piazza: the modernist 1983 building, includes the permanent collection and designed by Richard Meier, and the three folk art collections, as well as a café and 2005 wings situated around the piazza, all the new Greene Family Education Center designed by Renzo Piano. Offsite storage and Gallery. and a conservation facility lay twenty The renowned 2005 addition was minutes away. part of an overall upgrade of the

Woodruff Arts Center campus. The campus improvement project also included the opening of an upscale restaurant, a five- level parking garage, and a new dormitory and sculpture studio for the art students (the Atlanta College of Art, an original division of the Woodruff Arts Center, joined the Savannah College of Art and Design (SCAD) in 2005 – SCAD students use the new dorm and sculpture Aerial View of Woodruff Campus Showing High Museum in the center studio, which replaced right. ones razed for the 2005 campus renovation). Of the $180 million Woodruff Arts The 1983 building is a white, Center renovation, leaders marked $110 porcelain-clad modernist building million for the High Museum’s three new described by the American Institute of buildings and new piazza and $15 million Architects as one of the “ten best works of for the High’s endowment. The High architecture of the 1980s.” The 2005 raised $140 million of the $180 million, addition, which has also been widely with the Woodruff raising the remainder. praised, included three new buildings The monies raised were entirely private situated around the Sifly Piazza: the four- and came from well over 5,000 donors (Clark 2010).

58 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

Collections Programming At the end of the first decade of the The High’s programming included twenty-first century, the High’s collection an established school program, adult totaled approximately 11,000 works, educational programs, and a growing including nineteenth- and twentieth- emphasis on attracting younger century American and decorative art, audiences. While the High offered some European pieces, modern and off-site programs (such as membership contemporary art, photography, African events in supporters’ neighborhoods, art, and folk art. The High was known attendance at city festivals, and particularly for its strength in works by neighborhood marketing partnerships), artists from the South and by folk artists education programs were only on site and also for its collection of civil rights- (Penn IUR Staff 2010). era photography. Additionally, the High had distinguished itself by pursuing Environs partnerships with more established The High Museum lies in Midtown museums with larger collections and Atlanta, an area of about four square international reputations. In 2006, the miles in northeastern Atlanta that is one High began a three-year partnership with of the city’s three major business districts the Louvre to create “Louvre Atlanta,” in (the others are downtown Atlanta and which the Louvre lent artworks to the Buckhead). Peachtree Street – the historic High for nine special exhibitions. The street around which Atlanta developed – high-profile exhibitions resulted in a runs through Midtown. The High and the significant increase in memberships and Woodruff lie on Peachtree toward its in attendance (Penn IUR Staff Notes northern Midtown end. 2010). During the period in which the The High had also organized the Georgia Art Museum Partnership (GAMP) with the Albany Museum of Art, the Columbus Museum, the Telfair Museum of Art, and the Georgia Museum of Art. Initially, this three- year collaboration, launched in 2010, was expected to facilitate the sharing of collections among Georgian museums, but at first it centered mainly on professional development activities (Pousner 2010). The High Museum lies in Midtown Atlanta.

High Museum of Art | Atlanta, Georgia 59

attributed much of the change to the presence of arts institutions in the district: “[in the 1960s, Midtown was] someplace you’d drive by quickly – then arts took a foothold. The arts were a huge catalyst in transforming Midtown” (Kennedy 2010a). A 2009 Atlanta Journal-Constitution article described much of Midtown’s Peachtree Street as being “unrecognizable” from its state in the 1990s, when it could be “dicey” (Ramas The High Museum’s immediate surroundings. 2009). The area’s residential population increased by 76 percent between 2000 High Museum was undergoing its and 2007 to 30,000 (Midtown Alliance expansion, Midtown was a high-density, 2010c). mixed-use area with major corporate and The area’s more recent professional offices, a high concentration revitalization has been attributed in part of arts and cultural organizations, and a to the “Blueprint for Midtown Atlanta,” growing residential population. developed by the Midtown Alliance The Midtown Alliance – a (Pendered 2007). This plan, first drafted nonprofit business and community in the late 1990s and updated in 2005-06, planning organization – characterized the envisioned the area as a cosmopolitan, area as “a cosmopolitan center where pedestrian-friendly urban core. The plan people, business, and culture have aspires to turn Peachtree Street into the converged to create an authentic live- “Midtown Mile,” a “high-end shopping work-play community with a personality destination”; to spur the creation of new all its own” (Midtown Alliance 2010b). parks and greenery; to inspire and guide The Midtown Alliance advocated for the the development of eight million square district, undertaking community planning feet of new development mainly in mixed- and administering the Midtown use buildings including 30,000 housing Improvement District (MID), which units; and to make the area an active, provided additional security, sanitation, pedestrian-friendly district with and beautification services to the area numerous transportation options with funding from a special assessment (Midtown Alliance 2010a). on commercial property in the district. The High’s 2005 addition Midtown changed dramatically furthered this pattern of pedestrian- over the last decades of the twentieth friendly development. Other nearby century. Ginny Kennedy, Director of initiatives also aspired to embody this Urban Design at the Midtown Alliance, model: a 2007 market report by the

60 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

Midtown Alliance reported forty mixed- MSA were almost $60,000 and $30,000). use real estate development projects About one in five people in Atlanta lived either under construction or planned for in poverty, compared with about one in delivery by 2012 (Midtown Alliance nine in the MSA overall. 2010c). However, development slowed Historically, civic leaders, dramatically since then (Kennedy 2010b). policymakers, and developers spurred Atlanta’s national economic profile by investing in its airport – by the end of the City and Regional Context first decade of the twenty-first century, Atlanta, Georgia’s capital, anchors Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International a growing Southeastern megaregion that was the world’s busiest airport. Further, stretches from Raleigh, North Carolina in Atlanta housed a number of major the east to Birmingham, Alabama in the corporations, including Coca-Cola, Delta, west (America 2050 2010). The U.S. and UPS. Hosting the 1996 Olympics also Census Bureau defines the smaller boosted Atlanta’s economy and profile, metropolitan statistical area (MSA) as the increasing local spending during the twenty-eight-county Atlanta-Sandy event and marketing the city to Springs-Marietta region, which, according businesses and tourists (French and to the 2006 U.S. Census Bureau’s Disher 1997). American Community Survey, had a population of 5.25 million. At that time, the city’s population was a little over Creating an Arts-Driven Urban 445,000 (U.S. Census Bureau 2006). Campus In the late twentieth century, growth occurred outside the city limits The High's 2005 expansion more while Atlanta itself lost population. Since than doubled the museum’s size and 2000, however, the population of the city greatly enhanced the museum’s ability to has grown. As with many other places, exhibit temporary exhibitions and to both city and regional growth slowed display its permanent collection. In with the recession (Atlanta Regional addition, the 2005 expansion Commission 2010). reconfigured the flow of people and The rise of Atlanta’s suburbs and changed the museum’s interaction with exurbs in the late twentieth century was its campus and neighborhood. Designed due in large part to out-migration by around architect Renzo Piano’s idea of middle- and upper-middle-class whites, building a village for the arts – a bustling, leaving the center city with a higher busy environment that would encourage proportion of lower-income and African foot traffic and bring an urban buzz to the American residents (Atlanta Regional campus – the piazza lay at the heart of the Commission 2010). By 2010, Atlanta’s addition both physically and conceptually. population was about 56 percent African The piazza, modeled after the urban American and about 38 percent white, plazas found in Italian towns, was meant compared to the MSA’s 31 percent and 58 to be the heart of the High’s public life. percent. Median household income in While the design of the 2005 Atlanta was approximately $47,500 and expansion garnered numerous accolades, per capita income $35,500 (in fulfilling its potential was difficult; in comparison, corresponding figures for the particular, utilizing the central piazza to

High Museum of Art | Atlanta, Georgia 61

its full potential was challenging. Museum March, April, and May can be lovely, the staff worked diligently to program the winter months do not draw people space: opening day of the addition, for outside. So, for seven months of the year, example, included non-stop bands, films, the piazza had to be so attractive that it and musicians on the piazza. would draw people to linger outdoors But when activities weren’t when they would not typically be seeking planned, the piazza did not lived up to an outdoor setting (Clark 2011). expectations for it. Museum Director The surrounding built Michael Shapiro reflected: “We designed environment also worked against the the piazza for urban life. Urban life does concept of a town square. Used to a city not just happen, I thought it would. We with wide streets and a car culture, have had these wonderful moments but Atlantans are not in the habit of walking they are separated by long dry spells” when they can drive. As a result, drawing (Penn IUR Staff notes 2010). foot-traffic to campus was difficult (Clark 2011). Street trees in the surrounding neighborhood were few and small and Developing the Concept offered little shade. Both the High and the The concept of a village for the arts Midtown Alliance worked to change these originated with the architect, Renzo habits by changing the built environment Piano. Piano’s concept for the campus – the piazza itself was an effort to do so – master plan and High addition resonated but these kinds of changes may take especially well with those at the High. decades. Said Michael Shapiro: “He helped us to The organizational structure discover what we could be. We weren’t within which the High functioned also trained or experienced to conceptualize posed a hurdle. Opportunities to work the project. He held up a mirror and we cooperatively with other divisions were liked what we saw.” The idea for a piazza limited due to scheduling differences. The – a town square – that would tie together High, open mainly during the day (with and create common space for the some evening programs and extended Woodruff’s four entities made perfect hours), attracted visitors at any point sense (Shapiro 2011). during its open hours; the other divisions were performing arts organizations that attracted people only around Obstacles performance times, giving them much But obstacles stood in the way of shorter and less flexible schedules in the design living up to its full potential. terms of attracting visitors. Arts These included characteristics of the schedules differed, too: theater runs are natural environment, the built generally much shorter than exhibition environment, and of the organizational runs, which limited the opportunities for structure within which the High operated. collaboration. Partnerships had mainly Atlanta’s climate is not conducive been in terms of marketing, particularly to socializing outdoors. In July and to the tourism industry. August, in particular, the city is hot and Facilities shared with the other humid and people do not want to be divisions included the piazza and the outside. While September, October, restaurant: the piazza being used mainly when the High programmed it, and the

62 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development

restaurant – which lay on the piazza – leadership posited that improved also mainly frequented by High visitors restaurant management might have except immediately before or after solved some of those problems (Shapiro performances at the other divisions. 2011; Clark 2011). While the High had its own iconic Most important, said Shapiro and buildings, the Symphony and the Theater Clark, was programming: on the days lay within a building whose shape did not there were programs, the piazza was an relate to what was inside and whose animated, magical place. The facility was functionality had been outlived. If each well respected and well crafted. “It’s a arts component had its own structure, the perfect house for fabulous programming,” notion of village might be more apt and said Clark. On weekends, when most function better. The basic structure of one programs took place – whether those administrative 501(c)3 covering four were parades, or art installations, or creative entities also created tension, with musical events – the design worked the Woodruff Arts Center responsible for perfectly. “It feels fabulous and wonderful administration and the High responsible on Saturday afternoon, but it’s a little bit for creative output (Shapiro 2011). more of a challenge on a weekday afternoon” (Clark 2010). The expansion itself allowed the High to do more programming. The Conclusion Greene Family Learning Center, in Despite these hurdles, High particular, enabled the High to put on leadership believed that the design was more programs and those programs “absolutely the right vision for a museum brought people to the publicly accessible that’s part of an institution with other spaces like the piazza. In that sense, the components” (Shapiro 2011). They noted expansion design could be thought of as no design flaws, praising the scale and initiating positive feedback, where aesthetic. They did note that changes to animated spaces and attractive the restaurant might improve the programming reinforced one another. function as a town square. If the But with limited resources, finding restaurant on the piazza were an the personnel and funding to continually attraction in itself – it was not at the time program the piazza was not a top priority. of High leadership’s participation in PRAI If there was money to hire someone to – they believed it could have helped focus exclusively on animating the piazza, animate the plaza. The space’s design, that could have worked for the High developed by a restaurant consultant, (bringing in people who might then visit required a heavier use of staff than the museum) and for the neighborhood appeared to be economically viable (creating an vibrant attraction for the (Shapiro 2011; Clark 2011). Because the local community), but the High is first and restaurant had an exclusive contract, foremost an art museum, and resources adding a lower-cost option that might are limited. have drawn a wider audience (a food cart, for example) was not an option. High

High Museum of Art | Atlanta, Georgia 63

References Abrams, Anny Uhry. 2002. Explosion at Orly, Atlanta: Avion Press, 2002. American 2050. 2010. “Piedmont Atlantic.” www.america2050.org/piedmont_atlantic.html. Atlanta Regional Commission. 2010. “Regional Snapshot.” www.atlantaregional.com/regionalsnapshots. Clark, Susan. 2010. Telephone interview. August 24. French, Stephen P., and Mike E. Disher. 1997. Atlanta and the Olympics: A One-Year Retrospective. Journal of the American Planning Association, 63: 3. High Museum. 2010a. “Statement of Activity-Museum Operations.” (High Museum, July 2010). High Museum. 2010b. High Museum website “2005 Renzo Piano Expansion Fact Sheet.” http://www.high.org/main.taf?p=8,3. High Museum. 2010c. High Museum website “High Museum Fact Sheet.” http://www.high.org/main.taf?p=8,3. High Museum. 2010d. High Museum website “Overview.” http://www.high.org/main.taf?p=8,2. High Museum. 2010e. High Museum website. www.high.org. Kennedy, Ginny. 2010a. Telephone interview. August 23. Kennedy, Ginny. 2010b. Telephone interview. August 25. Midtown Alliance. 2010a. “Midtown Blueprint Executive Summary.” http://www.midtownalliance.org/BM_summary.html. Midtown Alliance. 2010b. Midtown Alliance website “About Midtown: Our Community.” http://www.midtownalliance.org/AM_community.html. Midtown Alliance. 2010c. “Midtown Community Market Report 2007.” www.midtownalliance.org/Documents/midtown_community.pdf. Midtown Alliance. 2010d. “Midtown Community Market Report 2007.” www.midtownalliance.org/Documents/midtown_community.pdf. Pendered, David. 2007. Blueprint for Ga. 400 envisioned: Sign of maturity: North Fulton County corridor needs vision for growth similar to one used by Midtown Alliance, leaders say. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, December 6. Penn IUR staff. 2010. Notes of June 11, 2010 meeting at High Museum. Pousner, Howard. 2010. High strikes partnership with Georgia museums: Three-year program will foster sharing, collaboration. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, January 21. Ramas, Rachel Tobin. 2009. Economy slows big plans for Peachtree: Shopping district caps Midtown Revival, but there’s still much to do. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 17. Shearer, Virginia. 2010. Telephone interview. July 18. U.S. Census Bureau. 2006. American Community Survey.

64 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Case 5: The Kimmel Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Facing Challenges

Philadelphia’s preeminent its attention to fine-tuning operations, performing arts center, the Kimmel with leadership focused on brand Center, opened in December 2001 to expression, audience development, mixed reviews. The Philadelphia Daily fundraising, and capital improvements. News’ headline read, “Crown Jewel of Along the way, the Kimmel Center battled Avenue of the Arts Hailed as Beautiful, Yet high staff turnover, a poor public image, Flawed” (Stearns 2001) and the front and conflicts with its resident companies. page of the Philadelphia Inquirer read, This short history of the Kimmel “Critics' Thumbs Up and Down” Center offers insights into the early (Subykofsky 2001). Although the public evolution of a performing arts institution, was happy to have a new landmark and addressing what it means to be a newly arts anchor, reactions to its design ranged created cultural anchor institution and from love to hate. In addition, due to the challenges that such an institution hurried construction, the center lacked may face. interior finishes and the acoustics were sub-par for its opening performances. Kimmel Center Incorporated (KCI) Case Summary – and the Kimmel Center building in particular – faced public criticism and internal challenges even after opening History night. At the time this case was written, some challenges had been resolved, while When Ed Rendell became Mayor of others had not; still, KCI had made Philadelphia in 1992, he quickly became a progress and the nature of the issues it proponent of focusing arts activities along faced evolved. Early on, the Kimmel Broad Street, a major arterial north-south Center struggled with fundamental street in Center City Philadelphia (Rendell management issues: creating 2010). Broad Street already housed two programming, defining operational arts venues: the Academy of Music and the Merriam Theater. Philadelphia City agreements with the resident companies, and establishing operations. As these Hall stands only two blocks north of those fundamental issues began to be resolved, venues, at the city’s symbolic center. leadership became increasingly Despite these attractions and the concerned with the center’s financial abundance of offices and rowhomes, the area lacked the vitality found elsewhere viability. Overwhelming construction debt, unexpectedly large operational in Center City. Majorie Rendell – a Federal costs, and a very small endowment U.S. Court of Appeals judge and Ed threatened the Kimmel Center with Rendell’s wife and, eventually, a Kimmel insolvency. This case, written in 2010, Center Trustee – described Broad Street examines the Kimmel’s state after it as “… pretty dead at night” (Marjorie retired its construction debt and turned Rendell). Still, she, Mayor Rendell, and other leaders saw Broad Street’s potential as an arts district and formulated a Mayor Rendell’s plan merged with the strategy to invest city money in arts Philadelphia Orchestra’s efforts to obtain venues and arts-oriented educational a new concert hall, and a multi-company, institutions to stimulate commercial, arts-based, nonprofit organization named retail, and residential development. The the Regional Performing Arts Center redeveloped Broad Street would be called (RPAC) was formed to plan and manage the “Avenue of the Arts.” the complex. RPAC, later renamed In his first two years in office, Kimmel Center Inc. (KCI), invited a series Rendell secured $60 million from the of proposals for the design and state of Pennsylvania toward this idea. Of development of a new center to house the this money, $34.5 million was designated orchestra as well as other arts offerings: for a concert hall (Kimmel Center 2010). ballet, modern dance, musicals, opera, Throughout 1995, Mayor Rendell and theater, and chamber music. Marjorie Rendell met with some of Although the idea of an arts center Philadelphia’s business leaders to found support from politicians and envision what the performing arts center business leaders, performing arts could be, settling on the idea that it would organizations that would perform in the house the Philadelphia Orchestra, which center still had to be found. While was at that time lobbying for better numerous arts organizations needed a facilities. home, most were hesitant to align themselves with the Kimmel Center. Marjorie Rendell explained: “Here we were arriving on the scene. There was uncertainty as to whether we were friends or foe. Were we going to zap their money? Who were we? [These organizations] weren’t sure about putting their fate in our hands. There was fear and uncertainty – the two most crippling states that can exist” (Rendell 2010). Performing arts organizations were not confident that RPAC would serve their needs. In addition to this basic mistrust, organizations feared that if RPAC developed its own programming it would compete with their own for fundraising. RPAC’s leadership met The Kimmel Center’s Relationship to Center City repeatedly with numerous arts Philadelphia and the Avenue of the Arts organizations to convey RPAC’s primary

purpose: to support the resident Ed Rendell believed that by companies financially without interfering creating one consolidated project – rather programmatically. While some than a spate of smaller, competing organizations that were approached projects – Philadelphia would be in a declined to make the facility their home better position to access public funding (two of the more prominent organizations (Rendell 2010). In September 1996, that declined to join were the American

66 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Music Theater Festival and the Philadelphia Theater Company), others PHILADANCO started as a community arts believed the partnership would be organization based in West Philadelphia in 1970 and has grown to become internationally beneficial. Ultimately, eight joined the recognized. The organization blends African Kimmel Center as resident companies: the American-based dance with jazz, ballet, and Philadelphia Orchestra, the Philly Pops, modern. PHILADANCO performs nationally and American Theater Arts for Youth, the internationally about forty weeks each year, and Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia, has dance education programming aimed to cultivate and develop young, emerging dancers and PHILADANCO, the Philadelphia Chamber choreographers. PHILADANCO performs in Music Society, the Opera Company of Perelman Theatre. Philadelphia, and the . The Philadelphia Chamber Music Society (PCMS) was founded in 1986 to build enthusiasm Resident Companies for classical music in the Philadelphia region, as well as to provide artistic opportunities and exposure to gifted performing musicians and The Philadelphia Orchestra, founded in 1900, is composers. Located at the Perelman Theatre, PCMS one of the world’s leading orchestras. The presents leading international chamber music Orchestra plays in Verizon Hall, having moved ensembles, including piano, string and woodwind from its long-time home at the Academy of Music recitals, singers, guitarists, and more. when the Kimmel Center opened. As the most popular resident company with the largest The Opera Company of Philadelphia performs in operating budget, it serves as the face of the the Academy of Music, its home since its resident companies. The Orchestra is facing establishment in 1975, as well as occasionally at financial hardship; in April 2011 it filed for the Perelman Theatre, which offers a more Chapter 11 bankruptcy. While it continues to intimate setting. Five different operas will be perform, it has reduced the size of its ensemble performed during the season. and decreased the musicians’ salaries. The Pennsylvania Ballet is one of the most The Philly Pops was founded in 1979 and, like critically acclaimed ballet companies in the United the Philadelphia Orchestra, performed in the States. Established in 1963, it performs at the Academy of Music before moving to Verizon Hall Academy of Music. (Kimmel Center 2010) with the opening of the Kimmel Center. The Pops, led by pianist and conductor Peter Nero, performs a range of musical styles, from classical orchestral music to jazz improvisation, Broadway hits, to rock ‘n’ roll. In order to demonstrate to arts organizations their desire to promote the American Theater Arts for Youth (ATAFY) is the nation’s largest presenter of curriculum- highest level of artistic performance, related theater for children. Each season ATAFY RPAC promised to include a small, 600- produces musicals geared towards school-age seat venue that would appeal to children, and presents to nearly a million students organizations that drew smaller crowds; at locations across the country. ATAFY is based the theater that was eventually built was out of the Perelman Theatre. named Perelman Hall, after its primary The Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia, funder. The decision to build such a small founded in 1964, is a thirty-three-member venue would have negative long-term ensemble that performs orchestral pieces on an financial implications. Rick Perkins, the intimate scale in the Perelman Theatre, including Kimmel Center’s CFO and VP of Finance, classics, little-known works, and performances featuring guest soloists from around the world. explained: “We wanted to assuage [resident company] fears, so we made the

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 67 Perelman Hall way too small. It should The center opened with a modest have been double that size. It’s tough to endowment of $10 million (Associated sustain performances with that many Press 2003). seats. However, small arts organizations The Kimmel Center opened with don’t want to play in a house that’s 25 this mission statement: “to operate a percent full. That design helped us world class performing arts center that assuage their fears, but in the long run it engages and serves a broad audience became problematic” (Perkins 2010a). from throughout the Greater Philadelphia RPAC leadership approached lease region” (Kimmel Center 2010). negotiations, held during the summer of 2000, in the same spirit of appeasement. To convince arts organizations to sign, Organization and Finance lease terms were highly favorable to the KCI operated the Kimmel Center resident companies; rental rates did not building, the adjacent Academy of Music fully cover the cost of facility operations facility, and the Merriam Theatre at the and maintenance. The Kimmel Center University of the Arts. It owned the would need to find other sources of Kimmel Center building but leased the revenue to subsidize the resident Academy of Music from the Philadelphia companies’ use of its facilities. Orchestra and the Merriam Theatre from While RPAC leadership was the University of the Arts. searching for resident companies, they KCI, a 501(c)3 organization, was were also working to design, fund, and led by President and CEO Anne Ewers build the facility itself. Renowned during the time period covered by this architect Rafael Viñoly, who had recently case. Each resident company was a completed Tokyo International Forum, a separate 501(c)3 corporation that concert hall and conference center in operated, marketed, and fundraised Tokyo, Japan, designed the new center. independently from KCI. While facility The project received wide financial management on behalf of the resident support: the state contributed $63 companies was a primary task, KCI also million; foundations contributed $40 oversaw several other activities, including million; and the remainder came from presenting its own programming and individual and corporate donors (Jones running an educational outreach Apparel Group founder Sidney Kimmel, initiative. It partnered with the for whom the Center was named, gave a Philadelphia Orchestra to own and gift of $15 million; and Ruth and operate the ticket sales company Ticket Raymond Perelman, the William Penn Philadelphia (this collaboration stands in Foundation, and the Verizon Foundation contrast to an otherwise troubled also made major contributions). relationship between KCI and the Construction began in 1998 and orchestra, with a history of on-again-off- the Kimmel Center opened in Winter again agreements to share human 2001. Construction overruns caused the resources, marketing, ticketing, and IT project to go over budget by $30 million, services). KCI also partnered with the for a total cost of $265 million (Rendell Schubert Organization to bring Broadway 2010). To cover the $30 million in presentations to the Schubert-owned unexpected costs, the city floated a variable rate tax-exempt municipal bond.

68 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Forrest Theater on Philadelphia’s Walnut and exhibit space (the Merck Arts Street. Education Center), an indoor public plaza, In 2009, KCI’s operating budget an indoor garden space, administrative was $36 million. That year the center had offices, a restaurant, a lounge, and a total revenues of $30.5 million (down parking facility. Verizon Hall, home to the from $50 million in 2006-2007) and $42.7 Orchestra, included 2,547 seats and the million in expenses, for an operating Perelman Theater for chamber music, deficit of $12.2 million (the 2007 season dance, and drama performances. saw a surplus of $6.8 million). The largest Viñoly's design for the Kimmel sources of revenue were performances Center sought not only to provide a and events ($28.0 million) and visually appealing and acoustically contributions, memberships, and exceptional space for performers and subscriptions ($6.6 million).1 The largest audiences, but also to make the center a expenses were performances and events space open to and enlivened by the public ($32.7 million); marketing and even during non-performance times. The communication ($5.1 million); two main performing venues were management and administration ($3.5 designed as essentially freestanding million); and fundraising ($1.3 million). enclosures beneath the dramatic glass The $12.2 million fiscal deficit (after canopy of the center's roof. The two depreciation)2 is largely a result of net theaters were separated by losses in KCI investments. Unrealized net Commonwealth Plaza, a space meant to gains (losses) on investments and the make the building, in the words of one of change in interest agreements caused the the center's past presidents and CEOs, Kimmel Center to lose more than $6.5 "open, public, porous, and accessible" million in 2009. KCI’s endowment was (Kimmel Center 2010). Viñoly intended to $59.4 million (down from $73 million in make the performance spaces private, 2007 due to the economic downturn) paid-entry spaces within the larger, (Kimmel Center 2009a). functionally public space of the center. After its execution, however, the Kimmel Center's design was criticized for failing Facilities to draw the public to its open spaces, a When it opened in 2001, the failing often ascribed to its street-level Kimmel Center building totaled 450,000 façade. square feet and occupied an entire city block. It consisted of three performance venues (Verizon Hall, the Perelman Theater, and a black box theater called Innovation Studio), an education center

1 The sum of the two listed revenue sources total more than the overall revenue because some of the listed revenue sources actually lost money during the year. Investments lost $4.8 million and interest value changes led to a loss of $1.7 million. 2 When not accounting for investment and cash The Kimmel Center’s Interior Plan depreciation, the Kimmel Center’s 2009 operating deficit was a less-alarming $230,000.

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 69 Programming The Kimmel Center is one arts- In the 2007-08 season more than based institution in a city that has long 800 performances took place at the had a strong reputation in arts and Kimmel Center, Academy of Music, and culture. The Academy of Music – located Forrest Theater, drawing more than one next to the Kimmel Center building – is million visitors. Of those events, 289 were the oldest operating grand opera house in resident company performances. The the country; the Academy of Music, like remaining presentations were brought in the Kimmel Center building, is now and organized by KCI, and included managed by KCI and the facilities are Kimmel Center Presents programs, which collectively referred to as “The Kimmel ranged from performances from classical Center” (KCI, too, is referred to musicians to stand-up comedians; a colloquially as “The Kimmel Center”). Broadway series featuring musicals; and a Philadelphia also houses one of the variety of free events and performances, world’s great art museums – the many of which showcased local artists Philadelphia Museum of Art, which performing classical, jazz, pop, dance, and contains priceless collections from the a variety of other styles for people to Middle Ages to the modern era. Arts experience in either passive or more institutions near the Kimmel Center active ways. KCI also reached about 7,000 include the University of the Arts, the adults and 7,000 students through its Curtis Institute of Music, and the Moore educational programs that year (a fairly College of Art and Design, among others. typical year) (Kimmel Center 2009b). Philadelphia’s unique place in Over the course of the 2000s, KCI American history makes it a reliable refined its programming as it learned tourist destination. Approximately 20 what worked and what did not. While the million people visit the Philadelphia area Broadway Series was a stable source of annually. The Independence Visitor revenue, most other programs did not Center and the Liberty Bell Center each break even and were funded through host more than two million visitors in a grants or from Kimmel Center fundraising typical year. Philadelphia is the sixth most efforts. Unfortunately, a severe budget populous city in the United States, home crunch forced KCI to dramatically reduce to a little over 1.5 million people (U.S. its programming (this is discussed further Census Bureau 2010). The surrounding in “2008 to 2010: Refining an Institution,” Delaware Valley metropolitan area – with below). At the time this case was written, 6 million people, the fifth largest KCI expected the cuts to be permanent. metropolitan region in the United States – comprises a significant part of the northeastern megalopolis between City and Regional Context Boston and Washington, D.C. (U.S. Census The Kimmel Center sits in Center Bureau 2010). Higher education and City Philadelphia at the corner of Broad other research-driven institutions are Street and Spruce Street. It lies within numerous in both the Philadelphia several blocks of City Hall and of several metropolitan area and the city proper dense, mixed-use areas of office space, (the University of Pennsylvania, Drexel, restaurants, shopping, and residences. Temple, and Thomas Jefferson Universities are all within city limits, in or near Center City; Villanova University and

70 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Haverford, Swarthmore, and Bryn Mawr 2001 to 2005: Establishing the Kimmel colleges are all located in nearby Center suburbs). In 2000, the median household Operations income of Philadelphia was $30,746. “This organization was a Research carried out by construction management organization PriceWaterhouseCoopers ranks the until December 14, 2001,” said Kimmel Philadelphia metropolitan area as the Center CFO and VP of Finance, Rick ninth richest metropolitan area Perkins. “On December 15th we had eight worldwide, with a GDP of $312 billion. resident companies who expected us to However, the population within be a venue management company. Yet the Philadelphia varies dramatically by people running the organization didn’t neighborhood. Center City Philadelphia is know anything about that” (Perkins relatively affluent and ethnically diverse, 2010a). Kimmel Center management while other areas in West Philadelphia faced a steep learning curve. They used and Northeast Philadelphia are lower- existing performing arts centers as a income and consist of African-American reference. Said Vice President of Facilities and Latino-American enclaves. and Operations, David Theile, who joined the Kimmel Center six months before it opened: “We’re a young organization. We The Maturation Process of a Newly measure ourselves against organizations Created Performing Arts Institution that are older. When we opened this place The Kimmel Center evolved in up we modeled ourselves off of older stages. At first, its leadership focused on institutions such as the Kennedy Center” the fundamentals: developing (Theile 2010). programming and establishing The resident companies and the operations. By 2005, the Kimmel Center Kimmel Center were all still determining had established its core programming and their roles and relationships; this caused operations but was struggling to remain a lot of friction. The Kimmel Center staff solvent; for the next three years, the felt that the Philadelphia Orchestra was Kimmel Center created and successfully trying to claim Verizon Hall as its own, implemented its first strategic plan, which and struggled to secure theater focused on strategies to establish availability for their own programs. The financial stability (such as paying off debt resident companies and the Kimmel and developing a sizable endowment). Center occasionally clashed over Once financially secure, at least for the fundraising and marketing as well: the time-being, the organization moved to resident companies felt that the Kimmel another stage of development, Center directed money and audiences to concentrating on other fundamental, if their own programs rather than to the less urgent, tasks – many of which had resident companies. lingered since the Kimmel Center’s Financially, the Kimmel Center opening. At the time this case was failed from the outset to meet its budget. written, the organization was in this third The $30 million in construction cost stage of development. overruns meant substantially greater debt payments than expected. To make

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 71 matters worse, facility maintenance costs were the resident companies. While the were much higher than expected. The Kimmel Center for the Performing Arts projections for maintenance costs were was new, the resident companies based on average costs of other (anchored by the 100-year-old orchestra) performing arts centers in the country. already had supporters. However, the giant glass roof led to In its first few seasons, the Kimmel higher-than-average costs: heating, Center developed new programs, learning cleaning, and repair costs were from its experiences. Programming was exorbitant. In addition, Philadelphia was a also refined in response to market strong union town and the hourly rates research by organizations such as the for janitorial, maintenance, and security Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance. staff exceeded that of other performing GPCA research showed that while African arts centers of its size. American and Hispanic populations were On top of that, it became clear that the city’s fastest growing, they were the Perelman Theater, with only 600 under-represented at the Kimmel Center. seats, was too small to financially break With this in mind, the Kimmel Center even; even when all 600 seats were full, brought in more presenters that catered ticket sales simply did not cover to minority demographics. performance costs. Though the Kimmel Center was losing money rapidly, it was Design locked into lease agreements with the resident companies, which had been During the funding process for the structured to encourage the organizations Kimmel Center, the city and the architect to sign on as resident companies and so promised that the building would be an were quite generous. “You couple all of icon and an architectural attraction for that together and it’s a prescription for Philadelphia. Though many were financial nightmares,” said Perkins receptive to the design, it was clear that (Perkins 2010a). In its first year, the the building failed to meet its lofty Kimmel Center overspent its operating expectations. People commonly budget of $24 million by $3.8 million complained that the Kimmel Center was (Associated Press 2003). not built on a human scale. “It’s too big and blocky and difficult to relate to,” wrote the Philadelphia Daily News Programming (Flander 2001). Added President and CEO The Academy of Music turned out of the Greater Philadelphia Tourism to be an important asset for the Kimmel Marketing Corporation, Meryl Levitz: “It’s Center. The Kimmel Center began not the warmest and most engaging presenting Broadway productions from building. The brick wall wasn’t animated the Academy of Music’s theater in 2003; with the banner until recently, and the within a year, revenue from the lobby was cold and uninspiring to people” Academy’s Broadway shows began to (Levitz 2010). offset the organization’s financial woes. The Kimmel Center eventually Programs produced by the Kimmel Center filed a lawsuit against architect Rafael itself, on the other hand, required Viñoly for “deficient and defective design substantial fundraising. The biggest work,” as well as for delays that boosted draws to the Kimmel Center, of course, the project’s final cost by $23 million. The

72 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development suit read “This action arises from an identifiable, public image. In addition, the architect who had a grand vision but was Kimmel Center’s marketing and outreach unable to convert that vision into reality, was not doing enough to convince people causing the owner to incur significant to attend programs or, once they did see a additional expenses to correct and show, to cater to them. Meryl Levitz put it overcome the architect's errors and this way: delays." The two sides agreed to an out- If people weren’t fans of the orchestra, of-court settlement in March 2006; the they saw no reason to go. The Kimmel terms of the deal were undisclosed Center audience development and (Dobrin 2006a). outreach wasn’t quite there yet, even During the design phase of the though [the performances] at the Kimmel Center the interior lobby had Kimmel Center were… But people been marketed as a bustling public space. didn’t really know about it. It’s the But from the time the Kimmel Center challenge of these architect-designed opened, the space was rarely used. The buildings that don’t communicate the city and architect promised four levels of joy of what can happen in them. public space but, in practice, one of the (Levitz 2010) four – the rooftop garden – was usually closed to the public and was often Attendance levels consistently fell uncomfortably hot when open. In short of expectations from 2001 through addition, security guards positioned at 2004. the entrances of the building intimidated people from entering. 2005 to 2008: Becoming Financially Sustainable Public Image By 2005, the Kimmel Center had A Philadelphia Inquirer review of worked out the fundamentals of the Kimmel Center on its one-year operations and programming, though its anniversary summed up public public image and attendance remained sentiment: “Yes, the city finally has an less than desirable. Kimmel Center ambitious arts center inching up to those leadership began to focus its attention on of New York and Washington in quality of the organization’s growing debt. The programming and scale of activity. But Kimmel Center’s first strategic plan, there have been some troubling stumbles. spearheaded by CEO Janice Price, was Among the more serious issues: paltry adopted in 2005. The plan articulated attendance at some concerts, steep fund- objectives for the following few years, raising goals, and an inconsistent visitor with a focus on paying off the Kimmel experience that has not yet inspired a Center’s debt. wide, ardent consensus” (Dobrin 2006a). Since the construction of the Preliminary problems with acoustics, building, Kimmel Center leadership had though remedied, had left the public asked the major Philadelphia arts thinking of the facilities as second-rate. In foundations to help increase its addition, people over-identified the endowment and pay off its loans. Securing Kimmel Center as the home to the foundation support was challenging, orchestra, which left the Kimmel Center however, because three of the major for the Performing Arts without a strong, foundations – the William Penn

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 73 Foundation, Lenfest Foundation, and Joe pledge to pay off the construction debt. “I Newbauer foundation – had recently met with foundations one by one, and supported the center during its most said the [Kimmel Center’s] Board construction, and were reluctant to give doesn’t do enough personally. So I went again so soon. The fourth major back to the Board and said ‘I need 100 foundation – the Pew Charitable Trust – percent involvement, and everyone must had previously declined to contribute, contribute towards the endowment’” and so was unlikely to support the (Ewers 2010). Ewer’s hard stand worked. organization now. Board Chair Bill Each Board Member contributed3 and the Hankowsky and Kimmel Center CEO sum totaled $13.7 million dollars. Kimmel Janice Price met with the foundations Center leadership then approached independently and together. Sidney Kimmel, the largest private donor The William Penn Foundation during the construction of the Kimmel stepped up as an advocate and helped Center. Kimmel contributed the $25 bring the other major Philadelphia million needed to create a $72 million foundations to the table. "It is such an endowment. This fundraising occurred in important community asset. We need to the summer and fall of 2007. make sure it flourishes," Pew Charitable Acquiring the funds for capital Trust President Rebecca W. Rimel said improvements happened almost as (Dobrin 2006b). The foundations gave a swiftly, thanks to the Kimmel Center’s unified response to the Kimmel Center: high-profile advocates. The City of they would pay off its debt if it could Philadelphia contributed $2 million, and prove that it had a sustainable business the Governor of Pennsylvania – Ed plan. The Pew Charitable Trust and the Rendell, the ex-Mayor and original Lenfest Foundation commissioned a study champion of the project – helped bring in by Deloitte & Touche USA to outline a way $5.5 million in capital improvement funds for the Kimmel Center to remain solvent. from the state to be matched on a one-to- Completed in 2006, the study cited the one basis with private donations. Rendell following parameters as a necessary was vocal about why donors should starting point: contribute the matching funds: “the city is • Pay off the approximately $30 million at an enormously exciting plateau, and we remaining construction debt. certainly couldn't let the Kimmel Center • Raise the endowment from a little fall into disrepair. It's just too important" over $30 million to $72 million. (Dobrin 2006b). • Reduce annual cost-revenue liabilities In addition to raising money, by $1 million. Ewers was also serious about cutting • Create a capital improvement plan costs. In September, Ewers restructured with $13 million over a five-year the Kimmel Center’s staff, saving period. $500,000. At the time, the Kimmel had Anne Ewers became CEO of the over 500 employees, including 110 Kimmel Center in July 2007. Her charge people in administration and an excess of was clear: find this money. One of the first things she did was to approach the 3 The fact that each Board Member contributed was particularly impressive because 25 percent of the Board foundations to ask what the Kimmel was comprised of representatives of the resident Center needed to do to ensure their companies, and did not have as direct an allegiance to the Kimmel Center

74 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development ushers. Operations costs were trimmed strategic planning initiative, explained: by addressing inefficient energy, security, “the first plan was about taking root and and maintenance spending (Ewers 2010). surviving. We’re new. The second plan is The Kimmel ended the 2007-08 fiscal about growing and thriving. We’ve taken year with a $1.2 million surplus, which root. We’ve been embraced by the was applied towards capital community, we’ve settled the debt: now improvements. In addition, by this time how do we thrive? What are our the increasingly popular Broadway series aspirations and how will we continue to had cemented itself as a cornerstone of maintain our relevancy in the operational revenues. community?” (Paquin 2010b) When Anne Ewers joined the Paquin worked closely with the Kimmel Center in the summer of 2007, Kimmel Center’s Board, management, and the organization was in a state of financial resident companies to develop a new disarray. Three months later the strategic plan, released in June 2009. The institution had met its $72 million plan was meant to guide the Kimmel endowment and $13 million capital Center from 2010 to 2015: “This strategic improvement thresholds, and was well on plan sets forth an agenda to meet the its way toward balancing its annual needs of an evolving society in a dynamic operating budget. and increasingly complex climate. It On October 26, Ewers met back reaffirms the Kimmel Center’s mission, with the foundations: “I said ‘okay, we’ve articulates its vision, and identifies core made Deloitte’s suggested changes to our values which will underpin the business model, we’ve gotten the Board organization’s culture” (Kimmel 2009). more involved, we’ve gotten the The plan articulated eight strategic endowment to 72 [million dollars], and priorities, and outlined the current we’ve allocated the capital improvement position, goals, and strategic approach to funds. Now we respectfully request the address each. These are outlined in the $30 million to retire the debt’” (Ewers table that follows and discussed further 2010). It took the foundations a few below. months to assemble the funds, but in April of 2008 they collectively put down the remainder of the Kimmel Center’s debt.

2008 to 2010: Refining an Institution By 2009, the Kimmel Center had raised its endowment, paid its debt, and streamlined its operations. “[Anne Ewers] accomplished the major things that the first [strategic] plan laid out as imperative,” said Perkins. “So what’s next? She’s a very visionary type of CEO. So it was time to start doing a new strategic plan” (Perkins 2010a). Vice President Natalye Paquin, who led the

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 75

Strategic Priority Goal

Brand Expression Create a clear and unified brand expression for all venues; improve communications and our institutional image Audience Strengthen audience development and loyalty Development Programming Expand our reach through high quality and diverse programming Arts Education Expand our arts education programs and experiences for children and adults Business Model and Strengthen the business model and operating structure for optimal Operating Structure effectiveness Leadership and Establish the Kimmel Center as a magnet for dynamic and talented Talent professionals and volunteers Fundraising and Enhance the fundraising resources with a robust and sustainable Development infrastructure Capital Improvement Build our capital resources, properly maintain the center, transform our Program public space and embrace green opportunities where feasible Kimmel Center 2010-2015 Strategic Plan Priorities (Kimmel 2009)

Brand Expression Audience Development Articles in the Philadelphia Daily Marketing studies conducted News or Philadelphia Inquirer often between 2006 and 2009 showed that the focused on the design flaws and financial organization did an adequate job instability of the center and its resident recruiting new audiences each year and companies. In addition, despite the vast had an adequate subscription base for improvements to Verizon Hall’s acoustics such a young organization, but that it – most critics and musicians agreed the needed to bring back audiences for a facility was world class – newspaper second show. First-time attendees articles still referenced acoustical constituted 84 percent of the gate. problems. A 2006 marketing study The Kimmel Center’s reaction was confirmed what most at the Kimmel to seek to increase overall attendance, Center already knew: the Kimmel Center bring attendees back for multiple had a negative public image. In addition, performances, and attract an audience the public was unaware of the Kimmel reflective of the Philadelphia area’s Center’s functions and did not associate diverse population. Arts enterprise the institution with some of its most (named Tessitura) would help popular programs, such as the Broadway the center to track its progress by series. gathering data on audience To turn this around, the Kimmel demographics, likes and dislikes, ticket Center’s strategic plan committed the buying patterns, and donation history. institution to the development of a In 2009, the Kimmel Center branding strategy. contracted with the University of the Arts

76 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development to manage the Merriam Theatre (see incorporating the Merriam Theater to following section for more detail), a provide space for additional presenters 1,800-seat theater on the University of (discussed in the previous section); and the Arts’ campus, which afforded the launching an annual city-wide arts Kimmel Center much more space to bring festival. However, due to new pressures in performers. Kimmel needed this added to cut costs, the Kimmel Center’s focus on space, since Verizon Hall was almost expanding its programs shifted to cutting always booked with resident company its least cost-effective programs. Starting and Kimmel Center Presents productions. in the 2010-11 season programming was With the addition of the Merriam Theater, dramatically reduced (see “Business the Kimmel Center could bring in more Model and Operating Structure” section independent presenters – everything below). from large, commercially run concert Lease agreements allowed the presenters (like LiveNation and AEG) to resident companies to first rights to hold small nonprofits – that might draw in new and use prime dates for all of their audiences or inspire existing audiences to performances and rehearsals in the return. various halls. While resident companies Kimmel Center leadership believed typically program their season one or two that it could also strengthen and increase years in advance, commercial artists often the audience base by achieving other route tours with just a few months, or strategic plan objectives: creating a clear even weeks, of lead time. “These practices brand expression; expanding arts create natural tension between KCI and education experiences for children and its resident companies, and a constant adults; and expanding the Kimmel challenge for KCI to program a cohesive Center’s reach through high-quality and fiscally competitive season” (Kimmel programming that consistently engaged 2009). Frequently, the Kimmel Center had broad and diverse audiences. to reject opportunities to present or to rent its venues due to a lack of available Programming dates. The license agreement with the University of the Arts to manage and Over the 2000s the Kimmel operate the Merriam Theatre was Center’s programs grew in number and in intended to allow KCI to present a more attendance. By the end of the decade its diverse range of shows than previously programming was diverse, provided arts possible, an important step towards education to thousands each year, and bringing in new audiences. had solid corporate and foundation From April 7 to May 11, 2011 the support. However, the Kimmel Center Kimmel Center hosted the inaugural continued to fall short of its goal to bring Philadelphia International Arts Festival, in young and ethnically diverse audiences involving about 100 arts organizations (Kimmel 2009). from across the region and the world. The The Kimmel Center committed to festival was initiated by Anne Ewers developing creative strategies with the shortly after arriving at the Kimmel resident companies and other performing Center (July 2007) as a way to bring the arts organizations, and undertook two resident companies together in a major strategies to enhance programming collective effort. The festival was funded and further draw in audiences: primarily through a $10 million gift from

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 77 a major local philanthropist, Lee partnerships with resident companies, Annenberg. Explained the Festival’s community organizations, and other arts Executive Director, Ed Cambron: “For the partners; coordinating the provision of Kimmel Center, this is an opportunity to arts education and cultural experiences position ourselves as a leader for the with Philadelphia’s city-wide Arts for community, and add luster to our brand Youth Initiative; and developing a robust as a significant arts and cultural Arts Education Program for adults institution in Philadelphia. It is an (Kimmel 2009). opportunity to forge more relationships with the arts and cultural community; an Business Model and Operating Structure opportunity to bring more people to its spaces; an opportunity to bring a lot of The Kimmel Center managed to tourists to the Kimmel Center; and an balance its budget for the first time from opportunity to show funders that it is a 2007-09 despite the declining economy. valuable asset beyond brick and mortar” Most of the resident companies did not (Cambron 2010). share the same fortune, and found it A major question that remained difficult to pay the rent. for the Kimmel Center was how to fund The Kimmel Center differed from the festival in future years. “The many major performing arts centers in Annenberg gift was a blessing but still an other cities in two important ways: the artificial way to start,” says Cambron. “We level of public funding, and the size of the were 100 percent funded, but just for one endowment. Many similar organizations year. Big question – how do we sustain in other cities had larger amounts of city, the festival?” (Cambron 2010) county, or state funding, which allowed them to charge below-market rents to their resident performing arts Arts Education organizations. In addition, other The City of Philadelphia had a city- performing arts centers were formed wide vision to provide additional arts and with a large endowment or an affiliated cultural experiences to its community foundation to generate additional income. (Steuer 2010). Yet the city’s public “Here we have none of that,” said Ewers schools lacked adequate arts programs. (Ewers 2010). Twenty-eight percent of elementary Not only did the Kimmel Center schools and 19 percent of high schools in have less income than similar performing the Philadelphia School District did not arts centers, it had more resident offer music or arts instruction. The companies, which meant higher costs. Kimmel Center believed its educational “Some performing arts centers have a outreach could help fill this gap in arts couple of resident companies. We have education while also building future the largest number of resident companies audiences for itself and its resident outside of the Lincoln Center: eight companies. resident companies,” said Ewers (Ewers The Kimmel Center’s 2010-15 2010). The Kimmel Center provided $4.6 Strategic Plan included the following million annually to subsidize resident charges: deepening its relationship with company leases (with the orchestra the School District of Philadelphia; receiving the most support). Historically, developing and continuing strategic the resident companies accounted for 55

78 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development percent of Kimmel Center performances weddings, and college graduations but generated only 12 percent of Kimmel (Paquin 2010b). Center revenues (Ewers 2010). To offset rent reductions, the Despite these subsidies, the Kimmel Center was forced to reduce both resident companies found it hard to pay programs and staff. It agreed to reduce its rent throughout the 2000s. The economic Kimmel Center Presents programs from decline made the situation dire. By 2009, eighty programs in 2010 to fifty, and to the orchestra verged on bankruptcy (the condense or restructure many of the ones orchestra would go on to file for Chapter that would continue. Only the most 11 bankruptcy in April 2011 as part of an popular programs, such as the Orchestra organizational restructuring). Said Ewers, Series, were left unchanged. The Kimmel “the [resident companies] were struggling Center also dismissed fifteen employees so mightily that we knew we needed to (13 percent of all staff), including the Vice make a change. We all have one spine. If President for Programming and one has a cold, we all sneeze” (Ewers Education and the Vice President of 2010). Marketing and Communications (Dobrin The William Penn Foundation 2010). commissioned an independent consultant The Kimmel Center sought to bring to find a solution. The study found that in more popular performances starting in the rents deemed too generous by the the 2010-11 season. “We needed to figure Kimmel Center were still far too high to out what the public wants to see most,” allow the resident companies to thrive, said Paquin. “So we’re putting more and in some cases even to survive. emphasis on Broadway and on popular KCI recognized the need to programming – still fine art, just finest of restructure. “We’re all interconnected,” art that resonates with more people” explained Paquin. “It’s not in our interests (Paquin 2010b). for [the resident companies] to go under. “The restructuring is forcing us to You don’t want a vacant building: you still do more with fewer resources,” said Rick need your tenants. We had to figure out: if Perkins. “…Less shows, programming, less they have to survive, and the only way for people. We’ll have to find bigger them to survive is to lower the rents, audiences and more donors. And that’s what do we have to do to make that something for the long term” (Perkins possible?” (Ewers 2010) Rents were 2010b). reduced dramatically: between 30 percent and 65 percent for each resident Leadership and Talent company for the 2010 season (Ewers 2010). The Kimmel Center had 100 full- In return, the Kimmel Center time staff members in 2006 and 65 in received some concessions. The resident Spring 2010 – a 35 percent decrease. But companies agreed to produce fewer even as it trimmed its staff to reduce performances, freeing up performing costs, the Kimmel Center sought to space for KCI to bring in more popular, improve leadership and reduce rampant and more profitable, offerings. The staff turnover. The Kimmel Center’s Kimmel Center also rented this newly strategic plan identified three strategies available space for corporate meetings, toward this end:

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 79 • Recruit and retain diverse talent at necessary and different way of thinking” various levels throughout the (Perkins 2010a). organization. • Create an environment that fosters Fundraising and Development diversity, creativity, innovation, and excellence. When Anne Ewers first arrived at the Kimmel Center, fundraising was by far • Create an infrastructure that develops talented future leaders. her primary focal point. In the fall of The Kimmel Center – and several 2007, she restructured the development of its resident companies – had been department, eliminating the VP of plagued by extensive staff turnover at Development position, and spent more almost every level. “One of the roadblocks than half of her time fundraising – a will be building a stable, talented model more typical of university organization. We don’t have a culture, or a fundraising than that of performing arts very old culture. And the culture has organizations (McManus 2010). The constantly evolved because the people recession of the late 2000s brought a keep changing. And it’s something that we sharp decrease in donations. Bill really need to stabilize so that we have a Hankowsky addressed how fundraising stable core of stable people running the had changed: “I think that every nonprofit place. It’s a very important thing,” said in America has to adapt to the new Perkins (Perkins 2010a). normal, which is to say that corporate To retain strong staff, KCI fundraising is down, individual instituted a comprehensive staff fundraising is down, endowments are development program, including paid down, and in the performing arts world training, workshops, and leadership ticket sales are flat to down” (Hankowski seminars. The Kimmel Center intended to 2010). invest in staff with the highest potential With resident companies and develop more effective staff struggling to pay rent and with donations incentives and a stronger team culture in dropping off, Ewers had to focus on order to retain quality staff (Perkins development. She hired a consultant to 2010a). assess Philadelphia’s donor base. The The Kimmel Center also wanted to study determined that there were 7,900 bring in new leaders. “We must households with the capacity to give compliment our current team with $100,000 each. “So that let us know ‘yes, creative and entrepreneurial there is capacity here’… but then you have professionals that don’t look like us or are to figure out if they have inclination,” said pedigreed like we are,” explained Paquin. VP of Institutional Advancement and “Today, performing arts centers need Planning, Rosemary McManus (McManus people highly skilled in technology 2010). around the leadership tables talking As part of the staff reorganization about how people communicate and get in February 2010, Ewers created two their entertainment. If you want creative additional development positions to aid leaders, you have to think creatively her and then-Managing Director of about leadership. Your leader of a music Development McManus. school doesn’t have to be a musician. It’s a

80 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Capital Improvements through a process of community “Eight years after the Kimmel engagement and facilitation. In early 2008 Center opened we need to sit back and PennPraxis hosted three public forums at say ‘why did we build such an impractical the Kimmel Center, asking the public building?’” said Rick Perkins. “‘Why didn’t what the Kimmel Center’s public spaces we build something that’s way more were lacking, and what could be done to effective?’” (Perkins 2010). Heating and improve them. The process confirmed cooling the space underneath the large what most at the Kimmel Center already glass roof was extremely expensive. In knew: the façade was perceived as 2009, it cost the Kimmel Center $15.4 imposing and uninviting and most people million to operate and maintain its saw no reason to enter the space unless facilities. The Kimmel Center was they were attending a concert. continually looking at ways to save PennPraxis identified three overall money, and building maintenance had strategies for improving the public space: taken a hit: carpet cleaning became less make the space more comfortable (or frequent and the center relied on the rain “humanized”); connect the public space to to clean the dome. Finding private the arts and the activities being support for building maintenance and programmed at the center; and provide a upkeep (necessary tasks, but not stronger “sensory experience” to glamorous) was difficult. entertain and engage people once inside In addition to finding outside (furniture was installed as a result of the funding for maintenance and upkeep, the study). Kimmel Center investigated other ways to The Kimmel Center hired a design cut costs and increase cash flow, including firm to create a master plan to redesign installing photovoltaic cells on the roof the space using the PennPraxis feedback that would provide energy and shading; (not yet released at the time this case was broadcasting performances and charging researched). Said Ewers: “we have a plan outside audiences to watch; and offering to transform the space. But it all gets back venues for audio recordings. “It’s all about to money. It’s about finding the cash or the money, so we have plans and grant funding to make changes to the way numbers attached to those plans,” said the building looks, works, the way the Ewers. “We’ve visualized them, but public reacts to its exterior, and it all haven’t actually been able to actualize relates back to making the place a them yet. We’re refining how to run the smoother functioning machine” (Ewers building and find those sources of 2010). income” (Ewers 2010). In addition to finding ways to generate funding for the capital budget, Conclusion the Kimmel Center also hoped to improve the building’s public image. “We’re The Kimmel Center matured looking to transform our building,” said considerably since its 2001 opening. The Ewers (Ewers 2010). In 2007 the Kimmel issues it faced evolved from (a) Center hired PennPraxis, an arm of the establishing operations, to (b) becoming School of Design at the University of financially sound, to (c) refining its Pennsylvania that offered design advice structure and operations. This case

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 81 documents the Kimmel Center’s state at Other critical issues that the the beginning of the third stage. Kimmel Center faced were found in nearly Through strategic planning the every performing arts center: owning a Kimmel took the important step of large building that was exceedingly determining the process for establishing expensive to maintain and struggling to itself as a world-class performing arts remain at the forefront of arts and culture center. Kimmel Center staff and despite changing public interests. stakeholders were firmly optimistic about Numerous major performing arts its future. Its level of success in centers have been built from scratch in accomplishing its outlined goals promised the twenty-first century, even though to have a monumental influence on the traditional artistic organizations – like the arts in Philadelphia. Kimmel Center’s resident companies – are Many of the Kimmel Center’s not as popular as they once were. Despite greatest problems simply stemmed from today’s unique cultural climate, the the structure of the organization. While Kimmel Center, and many other newer most aspects of the Kimmel Center’s centers, replicated the same structure were relatively common, organizational structure and physical examples of alternatives were also features as performing arts centers built abundant. The Kimmel Center was solely in the mid-twentieth century. The Kimmel responsible for funding its operations, may have passed up a rare opportunity to unlike numerous centers in other respond to the realities of today’s artistic metropolitan areas, many of which preferences and financial climate. received steady income streams from Possibly, the center was outdated the day either public sources (for example, the it opened. Los Angeles County owned the property Of course, a better alternative may of, and covered all costs for, the LA Music not exist. Developing a new model is not Center) or associated foundations (for only a huge risk in-and-of itself, but example, the Adrienne Arsht Center making different choices at the center’s Foundation supported the Arsht Center of inception might have curtailed its Miami-Dade County in Florida). The development in the first place. Kimmel Center also had more resident Regardless, the string of issues that arose companies to support than any other for the Kimmel Center raises important performing arts center with the exception questions about how an anchor of Lincoln Center (in comparison, the performing arts institution should be Mead Center in Washington, D.C. hosts formed. only Arena Stage, and the Arsht Center does not house the primary administrative or practice facilities for any of its resident companies). In addition, the Kimmel Center devotes much of its resources to its own programmatic efforts (as opposed to the Woodruff Arts Center in Atlanta, which offers no programming outside of its divisions, which are its equivalent to resident companies).

82 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development 12

Participants’ Comments At the birth of the Kimmel Center some believed Comments from the participants and other that it should primarily enhance the resident observers illustrate the many different companies. The secondary function was to perspectives and concerns that must be taken into support itself. Now it has its own artistic account in the creation of a major cultural image… You open the Kimmel Center brochure institution. and it doesn’t mention the orchestra. That idea got rebuked. I’ve been pleading for people to stop building - Jim Undercofler, past President and CEO of the impractical buildings. Don’t build a small theater. Philadelphia Orchestra Don’t build a dome that you have to heat and cool. Don’t get into long-term leases until you A lot of people don’t even see the Kimmel Center know what your costs are. Build buildings that as their parents’ venue, but [as] their will break even. Don’t build buildings that look grandparents’ venue, and I think that’s really spectacular but will hamper the future of the scary. organization with costs that can’t be covered by - Meryl Levitz, President and CEO, Greater the arts. Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation - Rick Perkins, Vice President of Finance and CFO, Kimmel Center The people who were involved with the building of the [Kimmel Center] engaged a brilliant In terms of the niche population that has great architect who had no sense of the practical. wealth – Board Members and individual We’ve spent so much time and money with philanthropists – [Philadelphia has] a thin layer. taskforces, workgroups, and studies, and There is a specific group that has a particular [considered] so many solutions. Why was this interest in arts and culture. The fear is that those not worked out from beginning? We must now same people are already being asked to support rise to the challenges inherent in this building. all of the arts organizations, and that there is - Anne Ewers, President and CEO, Kimmel Center donor fatigue. Is that base capable of supporting that scale of institutions that we have now in the city? - Gary Steuer, Chief Cultural Officer, City of Philadelphia Office of Arts, Culture, and the Creative Economy

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 83

References The Associated Press State & Local Wire. 2003. “Kimmel Center Has $3.8 Million First Year Operating Deficit.” August 22. Cambron, Ed. Executive Director, Philadelphia International Arts Festival. 2010. Phone interview, February 24. Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia. 2010. http://www.chamberorchestra.org/ (accessed March 2010). Dobrin, Peter. 2010. “Kimmel Cuts Budgets, Programs and Staff.” Philadelphia Inquirer, February 17. Dobrin, Peter. 2006a. “Kimmel Reaches a Settlement; It Had Differed with Its Chief Architect Over Design Changes and Cost Overruns. Terms of the Deal Were Not Disclosed.” Philadelphia Inquirer, March 7. Dobrin, Peter. 2006b. “Rendell Says Kimmel Near Solvency.” Philadelphia Inquirer, April 7. Dobrin, Peter. 2002. “The Kimmel Is Still Learning Its Lessons; The City Finally Has an Ambitious Arts Center, But There Have Been Some Stumbles in the First Year.” Philadelphia Inquirer, December 15. Editorial Flander, 2001. Scott. “Critics: Kimmel an Artless Performance; Few Seem Overwhelmed by Philly Center.” Philadelphia Daily News, December 14. Ewers, Anne. President and CEO, Kimmel Center. 2010. Phone interview, March 5. Kimmel Center. 2010. http://www.kimmelcenter.org (accessed Spring 2010). Kimmel Center, Inc. 2009a. Financial Statements, Independent Auditors’ Report and Supplemental Information. June 30. Kimmel Center, Inc. 2009b. Kimmel Center for the Performing arts: Strategic Plan, 2010- 2015. June. Levitz, Meryl. President and CEO, Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation 2010. Phone interview, March 9. McManus, Rose. Vice President of Institutional Advancement and Planning, Kimmel Center. 2010. In-person interview, January 26. Opera Company of Philadelphia. 2010. http://www.operaphilly.com/ (accessed March 2010). Paquin, Natalye. Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Kimmel Center. 2010a. Phone interview, January 11. Paquin, Natalye. Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Kimmel Center. 2010b. Phone interview, February 26. Pennsylvania Ballet. 2010. http://www.paballet.org/ (accessed March 2010). PHILADANCO. 2010. http://www.philadanco.org/ (accessed March 2010). Philadelphia Chamber Music Society. 2010. http://www.pcmsconcerts.org/ (accessed March 2010). Philadelphia Orchestra Association. 2010. http://www.philorch.org/ (accessed March 2010). Philly Pops. 2010. http://www.phillypops.com/ (accessed March 2010). Rendell, Marjorie. Kimmel Center founder, Trustee, and Executive Committee representative. 2010. Phone interview, March 9. Perkins, Rick. Vice President of Finance and the Chief Financial Officer, Kimmel Center. 2010a. Phone interview, February 5. Perkins, Rick. Vice President of Finance and the Chief Financial Officer, Kimmel Center. 2010a. Phone interview, March 3. Stearns, David Patrick. 2001. “Kimmel’s Reviews Mixed Among Out-of-Towners; Critic’s Thumbs Up and Down.” Philadelphia Dailey News, December 18. Steuer, Gary. Chief Cultural Officer, Office of Arts, Culture and the Creative Economy. 2010. Phone interview, February 25. Subykofsky. 2001. “Kimmel Center’s Gala Opening Wows ‘Em; Crown Jewel Avenue of the Arts Hailed as Beautiful, Yet Flawed.” Philadelphia Inquirer, December 17. Thiele, David. Vice President of Facilities and Operations, Kimmel Center. 2010. Phone interview, January 22. Undercofler, Jim. Former President of the Philadelphia Orchestra (2006-2009). 2010. In- person interview, March 24. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2011. http://www.census.gov (accessed October 2011).

The Kimmel Center | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 85

Case 6: The Martin Luther King, Jr. Library, San Jose, California Developing a Joint Library

When the Martin Luther King, Jr. creation process, and functionality (MLK Library in San José, CA, opened its doors 2007a). to the public for the first time on August 1, 2003, over one hundred people were already waiting in line. At the official grand opening celebration two weeks later, nearly 12,000 people visited the library (Albanese 2003). The library stands eight stories tall and has 477,000 square feet of interior space (MLK Library 2007). Built of pre- cast concrete and blue-tinted glass, the contemporary building has a large central atrium and two-story light wells that allow natural light to spread throughout the library, including to its underground level. The building contains special collections rooms, computers that provide access to all visitors, a young children’s area, a teen center, a coffee shop, and a bookstore (Storar 2001). Thirty-three imaginative art installations by renowned conceptual artist Mel Chin lie throughout the structure. The library has won numerous awards, including the 2004 Library of the Year award from Thomson Gale and Library Journal, the 2004 CAPIO Award of Excellence from the California Association for Public Information Officials (CAPIO), the 2004 Silver Anvil Award for best practices in public or governmental relations from the Council for Advancement and Support for Education, the 2005 James C. Howland Gold Prize for municipal enrichment from the National Above, Martin Luther Kind, Jr. Library exterior. Below, interior. Source: www.sjsu.edu. League of Cities, several green building

awards, and at least eight other awards The Martin Luther King, Jr. Library commending the building’s design, has received such attention because it is the only large-scale joint city-university

library in the country. It serves as both not only improved library facilities for the the main library for the city of San José city of San José and San José State and the only library for San José State University, but has also helped revitalize University. According to the April 29, an area of downtown San José and 2007 edition of the San José Mercury become a source of pride for its residents. News, the “city, university partnership is one success on the books” (Ostrom 2007). The partnership did not always seem to be headed for success, however. The process required powerful leadership and fortuitous timing to belie the strong doubts about whether the tenth largest city in the nation and the fifth largest university in the California State University (CSU) system would be able to meld their operations, missions, The MLK Library’s relationship to Downtown San resources, and users. Only a few years Jose. after opening, however, the library received between 8,000 and 13,000 daily When discussions of the joint visitors when school was in session and library project began in 1996, the City of about 2.5 million visitors annually, with San José had a population of 870,000 over 1.5 million items available to anyone (MLK 2007b). San José is often referred to who entered the building (Light 2007b). as the capital of the Silicon Valley, and in This case explores the challenges the late 1990s the high-tech industry was of melding the operations, missions, booming. The city population was resources, and users of two distinct growing rapidly but the main library, also entities in order to develop and operate a called the Martin Luther King, Jr. Library, single institution. was small and out-of-date. Relative to the size of San José, the library system had little funding. Four blocks west of campus, the old MLK Library was sandwiched Case Summary between, and over-shadowed by, a high- rise hotel and the city convention center, Site Context which was expected to expand. San José State University (SJSU) is The library is located in the heart located on the eastern edge of the central of San José, within a cluster of the city’s business district in downtown San José. anchor institutions, including San José Within blocks of the campus lie City Hall, State University and other academic a pedestrian mall, and Santa Clara Valley institutions, a hospital and two large Transportation Authority (VTA) light-rail medical centers, the HP Pavilion sports lines connecting downtown with the arena, and the San José Repertory greater San José metropolitan area. The Theater. The library has become a new university had 1,153 faculty members and type of anchor institution, merging town 19,291 full-time students for the 1997-98 and gown for the good of the greater school year (Berry 2004), most of whom community. In doing so, the building has

88 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development were from the San José area originally A Library Vision Emerges and most of whom drove to campus. “We brainstormed about some San José State University is one of ideas over breakfast,” said San José’s twenty-three schools in the CSU System. It Mayor Susan Hammer about an initial prides itself on providing wide access to meeting in 1995 with then-new SJSU teaching and avoids being insular and president Robert Caret. Caret thought the overly research-based. But prior to the city and university could work together MLK Library project, the university had a more closely than they had in the past history of interacting only minimally with and Hammer welcomed the overture. the city and had a relatively poor “And we got together again about a month relationship with the area’s community. or two later. Caret said, ‘You know, we The discovery of common interests, need a new library.’ And I said, ‘You know, however, provided a solution to these we do, too’” (Hammer 2007). town-gown tensions. Much like the city, As both President Caret and Mayor SJSU wanted to upgrade its library Hammer took to the idea of a joint library, system. And like the city, SJSU was short they talked to their advisors and formed on funds to do so (Breivik 2007). teams to further investigate the idea. Property taxes in San José were at These investigations were, however, kept an all-time high in 1997. One beneficiary fairly quiet. The public, and even most of this increase was the San José people who would end up working on the Redevelopment Agency (SJRA), a public project, did not know it was being entity overseen by the mayor and the city considered until the February 3, 1997 council and charged with revitalizing the State of the City Address, given by Mayor city physically, socially, and economically. Hammer: In 1997, the SJRA had a five-year budget of $539 million – half as much as the city …In true spirit of Silicon Valley, had spent on redevelopment over the government must continue to be less previous forty-one years all together bureaucratic and more (Bonanza 1997). With this ample funding, entrepreneurial. … That’s why my one of the agency’s primary goals was to proposals tonight are invitations for expand the downtown. Other projects partnerships – where a creative included a $30 million theater, a $51 government works in concert with million library and parking lot complex, others to solve problems. … I offer the and a $10 million expansion of the city following partnerships for our future: convention center. In addition, the SJRA First, San José’s public library system was partnering with multiple developers is grossly inadequate for a city whose to build new residential buildings residents and businesses must downtown. The property tax base was confront global competition. …The projected to grow even further, from $75 stacks in our main library contain million in 1996-97 to $129 million in mostly popular subjects and current 2002-03 (Bonanza 1997). fiction, and we have less than half of the material that is available in many other big city libraries. Because of budget limitations, the idea of a state- of-the-art library, with materials worthy of Silicon Valley, has seemed

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 89 an unreachable dream. … At the same Existing Facilities time that our city needs improved When the idea for a joint library library services for our knowledge- was being formulated, the two library hungry public, San José State systems were entirely separate. Each was, University is struggling to find in its own ways, lacking. resources for an expansion of its library. University President Robert Caret and I believe we can satisfy both City Library System our needs by joining forces. …I After over thirty years in an old propose the construction of a single downtown post office building, the city’s new library on the edge of the San José central library moved to the Main Library State University campus to make 21st- building in April of 1970. While San José century knowledge available to the had the largest library system between residents of our city and the students San Francisco and Los Angeles, it was and faculty of the university. relatively small for the city’s population. Mayor Hammer went on to argue At the time, the system had seventeen that, by pooling resources, city residents local library branches in addition to the would gain access to the university’s Main Library, with the main branch collection – with a million volumes and handling system-wide administration, thousands of periodicals – while the management, cataloging, acquisitions, university would gain financial support outreach, and interlibrary loans (MLK from the City and the Redevelopment 2007a). Agency. She envisioned a main library, In 1986, construction began on the second to none in information technology, convention center, located next to the that would be part of a long-term plan to Main Library. Two high-rise hotels were improve the entire city library system. erected next to the site, overshadowing While the public may have been the library. In the mid-1990s, talks began impressed with the idea, those affiliated about enlarging the convention center. with both library systems were startled. The library site was the logical place to The proposal had not yet been discussed expand. Meanwhile, the library’s atrium with either the library board or the design and escalator system created faculty at San José State University. numerous functional problems; at only President Caret was not even in town for 118,000 gross square feet, it drastically the announcement. University Library needed to expand as well. Dean Patricia Breivik noted, “The Mayor said she wanted to announce it at the University Library System State of the City Address, but you just Before the creation of the joint don’t do that!” The abrupt announcement facility, San José State University split its had the potential to upset key figures at collection between two buildings: the the library and derail the project entirely. Wahlquist building and the Clark Library. Breivik continued, “Right there, the Most of the older materials were stored in project should not have worked” (Breivik Wahlquist, on the current site of the King 2007). Library, on 4th and San Fernando streets. Wahlquist also contained non-academic campus offices and services. In 1982,

90 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development newer publications were moved to Clark collection. Items had to demonstrate Library, located near Wahlquist on the continual use by users in order for them northern side of the campus. Wahlquist to remain in the collection and circulation had roughly 96,000 square feet of library was high relative to the gate count. SJPL space and Clark had approximately spent only 12 percent of its funds on 103,000 square feet of space. (MLK materials, while SJSU spent 22 percent. 2007a) With the University’s collection (Light 2007b) Table 1 below outlines growing, administrators expected shelf some of the basic differences between the space to be exhausted by the year 2005. library systems. In the meantime, expanding aisles of books were competing with already- Main Entire limited seating space. Clark and University City Public System Branch System Wahlquist had only enough seats for one in every twelve students – by far the Total lowest rate among the six largest Collection campuses of the CSU System. Items 1,458,000 301,000 1,426,939 Acquisitions Processed 12,833 39,093 260,623 Vastly Differing Systems Use Gate Count 1,280,184 577,092 ----- SJSU and the San José Public Out of Library System (SJPL) had similar Building problems: they both needed technological Circulation 287,000 842,314 6,034,303 upgrades and room to expand. Meeting Reference Transactions 122,344 195,626 670,636 these needs together permitted both ILL to and institutions to realize economies in from other funding the construction and Libraries 22,000 3,719 ----- maintenance of the combined library Staff Full building. SJPL’s operating budget of Time Employment 110 163 318 $32,367,000 was merged with the SJSU Total Square library budget of nearly $6,800,000 and Feet (Gross) 199,000 118,000 ----- the 356 full-time staff of SJPL was Comparative Annual Data for Year 1996-97, San combined with the 82 staff members at Jose University and Public Libraries (MLK 2007b) SJSU (MLK 2007b). Despite the mutual benefits of this cooperative enterprise, the two Developing the MLK Library organizations’ missions, cultures, and operating systems differed significantly. The university collection was intended to The Planning Process be comprehensive and cumulative, focusing on acquiring and retaining Feasibility Taskforce materials essential to support the university’s academic programs. Mayor Hammer and President Circulation was light relative to the gate Caret demonstrated strong leadership count, and services were academic in from the start by vocalizing their support nature. The city library, on the other for the project. In April of 1997, Jane hand, had a more popular and utilitarian Light, Director of SJPL, and Jim Schmidt,

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 91 Director of the SJSU Library, put together Mayor’s Advisory Committee a taskforce of about fourteen staff from Hammer gathered the support of both libraries to analyze the feasibility of the City Council. In March of 1997, the the project. Light and Schmidt asked their City Council authorized the City Manager group to determine whether there were and staff to participate with staff from the any insurmountable obstacles that would SJRA and SJSU to develop a plan for the render the project infeasible. Jim Schmidt joint library. The City Council appointed a believes the phrasing of the charge was seventeen-member Joint Library Advisory particularly clever: “It meant not giving Committee, chaired by Councilwoman [Hammer] a list of difficulties. [We were Charlotte Powers. The committee was to] determine if there’s a great, big charged with (a) collecting public input, immovable rock”(Schmidt 2007). Susan (b) identifying potential delivery and Hammer made sure to use the same operational issues, and (c) generating forward-thinking language to her proposals to ensure the library met the advisory committee. Jim Webb, a member needs of both the city and university of the feasibility taskforce, agreed with communities. The Advisory Committee Schmidt, “You have to understand the met for the first time in April of 1997 and value of the question,” he said. “She didn’t agreed to an initial, but extendable, six- ask if there were problems with the month time frame to make idea…you don’t come back with a list of recommendations. problems” (Webb 2007). Preliminary committee meetings set the tone for the organization yet to Additional Meetings come. The feasibility task force included Four other groups began meeting representatives from both the city and concurrently. university libraries, which demonstrated 1) Mayor Hammer and President that both sides were serious about Caret continued to get together. SJRA working together. The optimistic, pro- Director Frank Taylor soon joined the active nature of discussions continued conversations, and at the suggestion of throughout the project. The task force SJPL Director Jane Light the San José City reported back to Hammer two months Manager, Regina Williams, began to later: there were many glaring obstacles, attend the meetings as well. but nothing insurmountable. Hammer By June of 1997, many questions and Caret signed a letter of intent shortly remained to be answered. The SJRA thereafter. anticipated a project budget of around Hammer continued to champion $90 million, while the university expected the project, saying that it was “a personal a figure closer to $120 million. And while priority and a fabulous thing” (Hammer the SJRA favored a one-third city, two- 2007). This attitude filtered down to third university financing split, the library staff on both sides, as well as to university expected to split costs fifty- everyone else working on the deal. fifty. Hammer met regularly with leadership 2) More frequent meetings from the San Jose Redevelopment Agency included members of the SJSU and with the Deputy City Manager, Darrell administrative staff, including Library Dearborn. Director Jim Schmidt and Vice President

92 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Don Kassing; SJPL Director Jane Light; Though the library staffs were SJRA staff; and Mayor Hammer’s Chief of initially quite skeptical about the project, Staff (who also worked for the City the attitudes of Light and Schmidt helped Budgetary Office). The City Manager’s change the perception of the joint library. office joined these discussions as well. Also, its benefits were becoming more The group focused on how to conduct a clearly defined: feasibility study; explored financing • Expanded floor plan options; planned for parking issues and • The ability to provide the latest the replacement of existing campus technology functions and buildings. Light also met • A 67 percent increase in collection regularly with SJRA staff to keep them up- capacity to-date on the dialogue between the two • Up to 3,000 user seats, more than library directors and the Mayor’s twice the combined capacity of the Advisory Committee. two individual libraries 3) The most frequent meetings • Increased space for public meeting were between SJPL’s Jane Light and SJSU’s rooms Jim Schmidt, with the two often • Improved library parking accompanied by various consultants. • Increased opportunities for SJPL Schmidt and Light began to develop a programming due to greater use of “preprogram” of each library’s needs and multi-media and the close proximity determine what areas of overlap could to the university and its variety of on- reduce the total size of a combined campus speakers and activities reference collection. At the time, the two • Expanded collections and services for libraries occupied 370,000 square feet at both city and university users three locations. Initial estimates of Planning teams analyzed combined needed space within twenty feasibility at three levels. Preliminary years fell between 500,000 and 600,000 discussions centered on the size, cost, and square feet. funding sources of the project. Most Light researched how other joint involved agreed that if these first issues libraries were operated, though all could not be resolved, then the project existing co-owned libraries in the United should not progress to the next stage: States were of a much smaller scale. The examining whether the two libraries SJSU and SJPL had consultants study could fulfill their somewhat different necessary site size, square feet, and cost. missions at least as well, if not better, Light and Schmidt worked to meld the with a joint facility. Finally, planners findings. As each side worked together, focused their attention on how the facility the spirit of the collaboration began to would operate day-to-day, including take form. The building, and even its policymaking, staffing, budget, and creation process, was according to Light, maintenance. “not a merger, but a marriage” (Light 2007). Each sides was a separate entity that sought to keep its identity. However, A More Efficient Process each entity not only cooperated with but After Mayor Hammer announced also supported and made concessions to her proposal for a joint library building, the other. confusion among the members of the

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 93 planning teams persisted for a few leadership from city, SJRA, and SJSU months. The scope of the Mayor’s administrative staff. The goal of the core Advisory Committee’s responsibilities team was to present a finalized plan to was unclear and “some thought maybe it the City Council in six months. was window dressing,” said Light (Light The Mayor’s Advisory Committee 2007). became the Joint Library Advisory Additionally, some of the library Committee, consisting of the fourteen systems’ consultants were not as original members and joined by optimistic as Mayor Hammer. One seventeen administrative staff support university-appointed consultant, a real members from SJSU, the city library, the estate negotiator, came to a meeting and SJRA, and the Mayor’s Office. Consultants completely altered its tone and for the city and university were present at temperament. The consultant was not these meetings, as were Brule and her invited back, but it took some time before assistant. The role of the Joint Library dialogue resumed between the Advisory Committee remained largely the university’s President’s Office and the same: to secure public input, identify the SJRA. (Light 2007b) service-delivery issues and public impacts The SJRA hired Anderson Brule of the project, and work with staff and Architects (ABA) as group process consultants to generate a proposal that consultants in August of 1997. ABA best met the needs of the city and President Pamela Anderson Brule began university communities. working with the Advisory Committee to Two new subcommittees were clarify its role and strengthen its created: an Operations Subcommittee and organizational structure. Light worked a Public Input Subcommittee. Each especially closely with Brule and told her consisted of a few members of the to “‘be a cheerleader for the project. Don’t Advisory Committee, administrative staff ask why, but how.’ It was never should we (including Light and Schmidt), and a do it, but how should we do it,” Brule said variety of consultants. The Operations (Brule 2007). Light and Brule met at Subcommittee reviewed operational Brule’s home. The two brainstormed and issues, library staff focus group findings, mapped out the organizational process public process input, and consultant needed to make the library a reality. “We recommendations. The Public Input had to be careful not to step on toes. At Subcommittee reviewed the proposed this point [the Mayor’s Advisory public process, implemented focus groups Committee] was the agency making city and public surveys, and notified the decisions, but we wanted it to be more of community of meetings and presentations a joint effort” (Brule). open to the public. Each of the other ABA devised a planning process groups occasionally met in public forums that was primarily staff-driven, with staff as well. from both sides having regular input. A Brule not only set the structure of new organizational structure was created. organization, but the tone and ground At the top of Brule’s organization was the rules for each meeting. Before she “Core Team,” which consisted of the San arrived, the meetings were unorganized Jose Redevelopment Agency’s Executive and often started late. She quickly Director, the City Manager, Mayor emphasized the importance of starting Hammer, and President Caret, as well as meetings on time, documenting

94 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development proceedings carefully, making sure architects, Carrier Johnson and Gunnar everyone shared a clear sense of the aim Birkets. Schematic design began to help of each meeting and a commitment to provide visual support for the University accomplishing it. She also created an as it lobbied for funding from the atmosphere that was open to discussion, California State University System. While where input was welcome from every Light and Schmidt had the final say on person. Brule believes that this “inclusive” operations decisions, the SJRA and method of dialogue helped dissolve the university architects and project boundary between the two entities, managers dealt with design issues that create more interaction, allow for did not directly affect operations. SJSU creativity, and enable viewpoints from Vice President Don Kassing showed the both sides to mix. latest designs to the CSU Chancellor and As Brule noted, “From a natural trustees and worked to get influential biology standpoint, there were two members of the California State organizations being brought together that University System excited about the could reject each other: very different project. cultures, leadership, IT, everything” (Brule). ABA created detailed charts outlining the overall planning process, the The Memorandum of Understanding structure of each committee, and even the Between May 1997 and May 1998, way in which each meeting built towards the Joint Advisory Committee met eight a final goal. In-depth documentation was times. Technical teams had created an kept throughout the process. An absolute operations mission statement and draft solution was still a long ways off, but they recommendations, and SJRA, city, and were “getting the essence of what would university staffs had defined the physical happen to make the library operationally aspects of the project and their targeted effective. We became aware of what info sources of funding. On May 7, 1998, a they needed, and we were able to feed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that information to them.” The prospect was submitted to the City Council and of merging two such different Redevelopment Agency board. The organizations was an exciting challenge document was written by the SJRA and for Brule. Says Brule: “This was the most signed by its Executive Director, Frank fascinating period of my life” (Brule). Taylor, SJSU President Caret, City Meanwhile, Schmidt and Light Manager Regina Williams, and their continued to refine the building program attorneys. and features. Basic ideas, such as The MOU outlined the terms and complete access to the library for every conditions under which the university, visitor, became cemented. The size of the city, and SJRA “agree to continue the library was reduced from 630,000 to feasibility of the development and 530,000 square feet. The Mayor’s Office operation of a joint City/University felt the building was still out of the budget library.” The MOU provided detailed and size was reduced further, to 485,000 descriptions of four main areas: the site square feet. (Light 2007b) and ownership; the development process; ABA was invited to stay on during apportionment of costs; and operations the design process as local architects that (MLK 1998a). The MOU would be worked with the design and executive followed by two other major legal

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 95 agreements in the years to follow: an common,” an irrevocable grant as long as Operating Agreement and Development the operating agreement (yet to be Agreement. created) remained in effect. By sharing the land as tenants in common, the Site Location and Ownership university would retain ownership of the land, but both parties would fully own the The preferred site was the corner building and have complete access to the of 4th and San Fernando Streets, on the land. The MOU also specified that the northwest corner of San José State university would pay all relocation University’s campus where the Wahlquist expenses and that ownership and Library stood. The location, on the operational responsibilities would be downtown-facing side of campus, lay a outlined in the operating agreement. few blocks from a pedestrian promenade with retail, restaurants, and a light-rail line and about a mile from the downtown Development Amtrak train station. The area adjacent to The building was to have 145,000 this corner of campus was an SJRA- gross square feet of space for city use, and designated enterprise zone, intended to 320,000 gross square feet for the revitalize the area by increasing university, approximately a 31-69 percent residential development. The SJRA helped split, for a total of approximately 465,000 fund six new residential developments square feet of programmed space. It within a few blocks of the proposed site, would be between six and eight stories including a 314-unit condominium tall, with a basement, an atrium, and retail development called the Paseo Plaza and space, and would have entrances on both Villas, built directly across the street. the city and university side of the building (MLK 1998b). The MOU specified that the university would pay for an environmental impact report (EIR) and be reimbursed by the SJRA. To expedite the process, Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) for architects had already been prepared; a joint panel of SJRA/city and university staff would select consultants. SJSU, the SJRA, and the city

would jointly sign off on Site before demolition of Wahlquist Library. designated “design milestones” and cost Source: King Library Archives. estimates to continue with each phase.

While a construction management system The MOU set out language for had not yet been decided upon, both future use of the land as “tenants in parties agreed that its cost would be

96 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development fronted by the SJRA and reimbursed by party requesting the change would pay the university. The SJRA would have total for it in its entirety (MLK 1998b). control over the construction bidding process, and the university and the SJRA Operations and Development would oversee all change orders. The total budget for the joint The MOU clearly stated the library was estimated at $171 million. library’s purpose: to provide access to all, The SJRA would provide $70 million, promote intellectual freedom, and offer subject to board approval. SJSU would high-quality services and materials. All provide $10 million in fundraising and an collections would be accessible to the additional $91 million conditional on public and to the student body, with approval from the university Board and limited exceptions. the passage of a higher education capital The city and university would bond measure scheduled for a vote in retain authority to maintain and manage November 1998 (MLK 1998b). their respective collections. Operating budgets for both libraries would remain the same, and neither side would lay off Apportionment of Costs staff due to the merger. The most heavily The MOU detailed cost used materials would be located on the breakdowns under two scenarios. If the lower floors, and the circulating university bond funding were to be university and city materials would be approved and binding development and largely separated, with university operations agreements were to be collections positioned in the upper levels executed, predevelopment cost of the building. Any cardholder would be apportionment would be the nearly same able to check out any circulating material. as the construction break-down: Non-circulating materials such as approximately 41 percent for the SJRA reference books and special collections and 59 percent for university. The would be available for in-house use by all discrepancy between space usage and users. funding amount was due to the fact that Library governance was to be San José State already owned the land; by decided prior to the Operations paying a higher proportion of Agreement. Security was to be paid for development costs relative to their jointly, and utilities and building building usage, the city was, in essence, maintenance would be split on a square- paying the university for their share of foot basis. The hours of operation were the land. In addition, the SJRA wanted to still undecided, but would be no less than fund a higher level of building finishes eighty hours a week during semesters than the CSU standard. If the bond and sixty-three hours a week in the rest of measure were not to be approved, or the the year. A preliminary project schedule, Development Agreement or Operations budget, project description, program, and Agreement was not executed, then the square footage allocation were described cost apportionment for costs incurred up (MLK 1998a). to that point would be 50 percent-50 percent. Additionally, if any design changes were made by only one party, the

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 97 Issues, Concerns, and Opposition they were not involved early on in the As library planning became more planning process. defined and more public, a variety of Numerous actions were taken to obstacles emerged. Determining how the try to involve SJSU faculty in the process library would work operationally was and address their concerns. Anderson especially difficult because precedents did Brule Architects added a Faculty Task not exist. The needs of users – community Force to the planning structure, ensuring members, students, and faculty – differed; the faculty a voice in the decision-making staff differed in abilities and professional process. Concessions to the faculty focus; and expenses needed to stay below included a no-sleeping rule designed to what separate facilities would have cost. prevent homeless people from sleeping in Finally, San José State University the library; the agreement that library academic faculty, library staff on both material and Internet access were to sides, and the public all created remain entirely uncensored; and the significant opposition to the library. promise that at least 50 percent of the circulation of university materials would be for students and faculty and that the Faculty library program would be reassessed Many faculty members believed every five years. An all-afternoon panel that a joint library offered the city was arranged for the Academic Senate to benefits, but did not benefit the meet with Deputy City Manager Darrell university. Three faculty groups Dearborn, the university’s lawyer, influenced the library’s development university library staff, University process: the Academic Senate; SOUL Facilities, and Vice President Kassing. The (“Save Our University Library”), the panel answered questions for upwards of faculty-created organization in support of three hours before the Academic Senate a university-only library; and the campus went to vote. The measure passed by a faculty union. They were primarily two-thirds margin. concerned with library conditions for the students, worrying that the public would Staff be noisy, disruptive, and take more than their fair share of seats, computers, and The administrative staff housed in other resources. Some professors were the Wahlquist Building was strongly convinced that university books and opposed to temporarily relocating to the assigned reading would be taken out by university parking garage on 10th and the public and thus be unavailable to the San Fernando Street during construction. student body, or returned in poor In addition, much animosity was created condition. Other major concerns were by one of the most basic requirements of that homeless visitors would detract from creating a new library – that library the academic environment, and that the faculty members did not want to change public library system would try to censor how they did their jobs and did not want materials that it deemed racist, to have to merge ideologies and homophobic, or pornographic. Lastly, workspace. Patricia Breivik, Dean of the many faculty members were upset that university library, said, “The University staff doesn’t want to be outnumbered by City staff. And City staff doesn’t want to be

98 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development out-stubborned by University staff” upgraded as well. Hammer began (Breivak 2007). Each library staff had its working with the City Council to create stereotype of the other. University support for a general obligation bond librarians have faculty status, do research, measure to rebuild the entire branch and publish, “and they can be snooty system and add additional branches in about it,” Jobell Whitlatch, SJSU Faculty neighborhoods that had no library. “I Union Head, said, while “academic worked collaboratively with council librarians also have the reputation of members,” Hammer said. “You scratch my thinking they’re too good to work at a back, I’ll scratch yours. I interacted with joint reference desk” (Whitlatch 2007). them at lunch and dinner. Everyone came Staff reservations were dealt with on board quickly” (Hammer 2007). decisively. Breivik explained, “People The City Council approved placing were entrenched in what they were doing the bond measure on the November 2000 for twenty years, and then suddenly they ballot, after Hammer had left office. It have a new job! A lot of the fear was required a two-thirds vote and received emotional, and irrational, almost” over 75 percent support. As a result, new (Breivik 2007). Input was sought through local branches were created, significant meetings and surveys by consultants. A rehab of the existing branches was grief counselor was brought in to work funded, and the community had little with the staff. But the message was clear: reason to oppose a new downtown the library would be built no matter what. library.

The Community The Operating Agreement While some community members The Operating Agreement and joined the “Save Our University Library” Development Agreement were both picket lines, the greater community approved on December 17, 1998. Most generally welcomed the idea of a joint aspects of both documents mirrored the library. Some people were worried that MOU signed seven months earlier. The they would not feel welcome at a joint terms of the Operating Agreement university-public library. But frequent “govern the rights and liabilities of the community meetings demonstrated that university and the city with respect to the the public’s concern was less with the joint library and the library building.” joint venture between the university and The two parties agreed that the the city than with the effect a new central joint ownership of the library would be in library would have on the local branches, the form of tenants in common, not a which were responsible for most of the partnership, which would allow the system’s circulation. university and city library finances to City Council members in San José remain separate. The allocation of space, not only represent the community in local laid out in the agreement, was: the library politics; they also serve on the board of has approximately 475,000 gross square the SJRA. Mayor Hammer worried that if feet, with the university occupying 66.5 the project did not have widespread percent of the total and the city occupying public support, then it would be halted. the remaining 33.5 percent. The building She promised that in addition to the joint has four types of space: city, university, library, neighborhood branches would be common space, and shared space. The

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 99 shared space could potentially change in Changing the Operating Agreement use in the future, although both parties requires approval of both the SJSU President agreed that if at any point either party and the City Council (MLK 1998c). disagreed that the space should be used as shared space, the party requesting the change would have to pay for any The Development Agreement improvements or alterations (MLK The Development Agreement, also 1998c). signed on December 17, 1998, set forth As laid out in the Operating the rights and obligations of the SJRA, the Agreement, the university is the sole city, and SJSU with respect to the design owner of the land, but grants the city an and construction of the project. exclusive easement over the entire A third of total space would be property. The easement is irrevocable allocated for the city, and the SJRA agreed and will remain in place as long as the to fund 41 percent of the cost of the joint Operating Agreement is in place. All library, plus enhancements for public art, personal property on the site is jointly escalators, and the San Fernando owned as tenants in common. Proceeds entryway. Again, this gap between space are shared, with 59 percent going to the allocation and project funding resulted university and 41 percent to the city. Each from the university’s contribution of the party retains the right to determine its land and was meant to cover the city’s own selection of materials, collection share of acquisition costs. The university management, budget, program services, agreed to fund 59 percent of project costs and lending policies. In shared sections of in exchange for approximately 66.5 the library, the two parties act as co- percent of library space (MLK 1998b). managers. The agreement created a joint While the SJRA funds were secured library committee that shares information at the time of the Development between the two entities, with a six- Agreement, university funds were not. member subcommittee advising the co- The university expected its money to managers on joint policy issues. come with the signing of the 1999-2000 All collective bargaining state budget by the governor of the State agreements within both entities were of California. The university’s obligations kept. Therefore, the university and city set forth in the Development Agreement each retained authority and responsibility were contingent upon the signing of the for its own employees. The square-foot state budget. However, even after the CSU usage proportions of 33/67 percent System received its funding, SJSU still divided library maintenance expenses; needed to compete with the other UC other areas, such as the elevators, were state schools to have funds allocated split 50/50 percent. The agreement towards the joint library. If funding from specified that the Friends of the Library the university side was not received, the and the University Library’s Donations Development Agreement would be and Sales Unit run the library bookstore, terminated. with both the university and city needing The Development Agreement to agree to the use and management of outlined four project phases: the the retail space and all advertising. construction of temporary replacement spaces for facilities; the relocation of current occupants of the Wahlquist

100 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development building; the demolition of the existing Redevelopment Agency Funding Wahlquist buildings; and the construction The SJRA obtained its funding of the new joint library building. through tax increment financing. A base The city and the university agreed amount of property taxes within project that the joint library should be eight areas went towards schools, the city, and stories, not including a lower level with Santa Clara County, but as property skylights, and have two entrances, one assessments increased above that level, th facing the corner of 4 and San Fernando the additional funds paid off debt service streets and another facing the campus. issued to redevelopment projects. There Both the University and the SJRA directed were three factors that led the SJRA to and worked daily with the architects. The approve 41 percent of the expenditure, or Gilbane Building Company was selected $70 million, towards the project: for construction management, overseeing 1. The SJRA determined that a joint demolition, engineering, and library would benefit the area and the construction. The general contractors surrounding redevelopment projects were selected through a competitive bid in downtown San José, including the process (MLK 1998b). Century Center, San Antonio Plaza, the The Development and Operating Park Center Redevelopment Areas, Agreements were signed by the Assistant and the community at large. City Attorney; SJRA Executive Director 2. Without agency contribution, there Frank Taylor; SJSU President Bob Caret; would be no other reasonable means and City Manager Regina Williams. of financing the new public library. 3. The SJRA contribution would assist in Library Funding the elimination of various blighted conditions in the downtown area. The estimated total project cost for The SJRA Board approved one- the joint library was $171 million. The year and five-year construction budgets city’s contribution of 41 percent came to for the project. The agency worked as the $70 million, and was to be paid by the developer and project manager during SJRA. As described above, the $101 the development process. million in funding for the university was slightly more complicated. The university was able to contribute $5 million of its University Funds own money and hoped for $86 million San José State University had from the CSU System. The remaining $10 roughly $5 million available for capital million would be raised through private spending, and, after numerous fundraising, directed by the university discussions with Mayor Hammer, Library Development Office (MLK 1998b). President Caret was willing to spend it all on the library. “Susan Hammer was a City Funding Redevelopment Agency $70M really, really good negotiator,” said then SJSU Vice President (who later became University Funding President) Don Kassing (Kassing 2007). University Funds $5M Private Fundraising $10M Proposition 1A Bond $86M

Total Cost $171 M

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 101 Proposition 1A Bonds million for the project, and President In 1998 a statewide Higher Caret allotted $5 million from San Jose Education Capital Outlay Bond was State University coffers. The Development passed, creating $209 million in general Office of the university library was to obligation bonds to be split among obtain the remaining $10 million. twenty-four projects and twenty-three This task was made especially total schools in the CSU System difficult because of the fast-track nature (California LAO 1999). These funds were of the project. Construction began only a to be used in the 1999-2000 budget, with couple of years after the initial idea had the trustees of the CSU System deciding been posed. Typically, large donors are which projects were worthy of funding. reluctant to give to a project that looks as Early on, Don Kassing spoke with though it will be constructed regardless of CSU trustees about the project, as well as their contribution. To make things even with CSU CFO Richard West. As Schmidt more difficult, the local economy went and Light refined the library program and into a marked and prolonged downturn in operations, Kassing kept the trustees early 2001 with the end of the Internet updated through multiple briefings. boom. Leadership at SJSU knew that the only In some ways, though, the unique way to get the library built would be nature of the project mitigated the threat through significant funding from the 1998 posed by the economic downturn. Capital Outlay Bond. It helped the cause Caroline Punches and the Development that matching funds from the SJRA were Office targeted a wide array of potential in place, but they needed concrete plans financial contributors, including major and images to impress the CSU board. San José employers; SJSU faculty and staff; Thus, even before the Memorandum of and individuals and foundations with a Understanding was signed, consultants history of giving to SJSU, libraries, literacy and architects had begun design work. campaigns, or unique collaborations. The Starting design so early in the process not fundraising was a success from each only helped sell the idea but also helped targeted area. The largest contribution, $2 expedite the development process. The million, came from The Koret Foundation. swift pace would be continued through The Koret Foundation supports fast-track construction. organizations in Israel and in the Bay Area that “help build vibrant communities, promote personal initiative, Private Fundraising and encourage creative thinking.” Said Private fundraising at SJSU was foundation president Tad Taube, “This overseen by the Office of University valuable community resource will serve Advancement, and led by the more than a million people in the Silicon Development Office of the University Valley, and it will further one of the key Library, headed by Director of goals of the Koret Foundation: to advance Development Caroline Punches. Punch’s educational opportunities for the people office was charged with obtaining the gap of the Bay Area” (Koret 2003). financing for the University. The The gift was the largest ever University pledged to contribute $101 received by the university library and the million. The CSU System secured $86 second largest ever received by the university. The Development Office raised

102 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development $16 million, greatly exceeding its original firms had experience worked on previous goal of raising $10 million. The excess projects together, the SJRA thought they money went towards special collections would be a particularly good fit for this and the library “wish list,” a list of complicated venture. elements the library directors hoped for Carrier Johnson served as the but deemed inessential. executive architect. They documented the At first it appeared that naming entire project, designed the public rights to the library would go to the interior spaces, developed construction largest donor, but it soon became clear drawings, and supervised construction. that would be unpopular with the press They were led by project design leader and with city residents. The library Kevin Krumdieck. Gunnar Birkets worked retained the name of the Main Library, as the design architects, creating the the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library. overall massing and external aesthetics. In early 1999, the SJRA hired Gilbrane Building Co. as the construction Building the Library management company. Patricia Breivik After the Operations and was hired as SJSU Library Dean in August Development Agreements were approved, 1999, still during the design phase. ABA continued working on the project, Shortly after taking her new position, now in the design phase, concentrating on Breivik caused a slight stir by requesting the interior design of operational areas. a couple of design changes. However, ABA also designed space for special Breivik “realized the greater goal, and collections and the multi-cultural center, made concessions to keep things on track and assisted the design architects with and not cause too much disruption” said furniture, fixture, and equipment design. Montenegro (Montenegro 2007). The city Because they had been working so closely also requested change orders, deciding to with both libraries, ABA understood the add a teen center. Both sets of design nuances and implications of their designs changes went off without a hitch, and did very well. Communication was highly not delay the construction process. efficient, which saved time in the design The efficiency of the process was a process. result of good prior planning. The SJSU architect Art Heinrich acted different players were on the same page as project manager until the because of the democratic process responsibility was transferred to Frank utilized, where communication flowed Taylor and Dolores Montenegro of the easily. On a typical project, Montenegro, SJRA in March of 1999. The SJRA initiated as project manager, would have any the design team selection process, and information sent to her, and she would seven teams, all with nationally send it out to everyone else. Because of recognized architects, competed and the complexity of the project, power was presented their ideas for the library. In decentralized. People called each other on June of 1998, the SJRA chose Carrier the phone and emailed. This allowed Johnson, Gunnar Birkerts, and ABA. people to ask questions quickly and Gordon Carrier, a Principal at Carrier cheaply. The city, the SJRA, the university, Johnson, had studied under Gunnar general contractors, and builders allowed Birkerts, and maintained a good people to trust each other and work relationship with him. Because the two

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 103 collaboratively; and time, money, and lack of bickering and competition, and relationships were saved as a result. the good communication and shared Conflicts were dealt with quickly. goals, made it easier for other people, At one point, due to a clash of such as the general contractor and personalities, the SJRA told the general project managers, to do their job. The contractor that they did not want to work mindset filtered down to them as well. with a certain subcontractor. The (Brule 2007) subcontractor was fired, eliminating a Construction began in July of 2000 problem before it became a large issue. and ended in July of 2003. Books and staff Numerous other difficulties were easily were completely moved into the building bypassed as well, despite there being no a week before its opening. Despite fast- precedent for this type of project. There track construction and a complicated and were a total of four unions working on the unique project, the library was completed project: city management, city non- on time and under budget. management, university faculty, and university staff. Employees could not be merged because the unions had different contract agreements. Also, city and Conclusion university employees were covered by The Martin Luther King, Jr. Library different city and state personnel opened to the public only seven years regulations, including salary schedules after the initial idea was discussed – a and pension plans. However, there was no very short time period for a project of its backstabbing, and the payoffs of this truly size. The efficiency of the planning and collaborative effort showed. According to development process is even more Montenegro, “personalities just meshed” remarkable when considering the large (Montenegro 2007). number of diverse stakeholders who each Brule, President of ABA, believed had a role in the process and the fact that that luck had little to do with the success there was no pre-existing model for a of the project as a whole or of the joint city-university library. construction process in particular: Since its completion, the Martin Art Heinrich, Dolores Montenegro, Luther King, Jr. Library has been and Jane Light were highly considered a success almost unanimously. responsible for setting down the Most of the people involved in its pattern of behavior and cultural development agree on the factors that framework…They had an infectious made the project possible, but they are culture of trust. Attention to detail, to split on whether they think the process process, and to the needs of others can be duplicated. In addition, opinions created a better method and system. vary on how the process, in hindsight, Involving everyone’s input created could have been improved and on what fewer barriers later on. By having the future has in store for the library. (See detailed documentation, it allowed us sidebar.) to remove people from the process The creation process of the library when they weren’t a good fit, if they was successful for three main reasons: weren’t optimistic enough or good • It met specific needs enough. And that was good. And the • It was backed by strong will

104 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development • It was helped by fortuitous timing strong willingness to collaborate. The Both existing libraries were out-of- missions of the two groups must align as date, too small, and had little funding. well. Finally, there must be a site where Additionally, the same site happened to both institutions want the building to be be the optimal location for both libraries. located. The political climate allowed for partnerships and funding opportunities that would not have been possible had the Participants’ Comments proposal happened any earlier or later. Comments from the participants and other The SJRA had a surplus of money due to observers illustrate the collective wisdom all-time high property values in Silicon about the reasons for the success of the project: it met the specific needs of both the Valley (a couple years later the bubble university and the city, enjoyed the support burst and the SJRA became much weaker of determined leaders, and benefited from financially); the university was able to fortuitous timing. raise private funds at the time of construction; the university bond There had to be a site that was geographically suitable for both the measure passed in the state vote; the university and the city. I would guess it SJRA was hoping to expand downtown in would be rare that a city can afford to have the direction of SJSU; and the city and its main library located on a university university were hoping to mend their campus. By the same token, the university relationship. must have ground on campus that’s located right from their perspective.” Most of the people who were - Darrell Dearborn, Deputy City Manager instrumental in creating the Martin Luther King, Jr. Library agree that its One of the impetuses to this is that both creation process was far from flawless. It bodies needed a new library. So that’s got off to a rocky start with public necessary. You have to have the need. If the circumstances are right, and the need is concerns for the local library branches, an there, it could happen again. The model we angry Academic Senate, and Save Our used to bring constituencies and leaders University Library pickets. The frantic together – it can work. Obstacles, challenges, pace in which the university, city, and and the site... there are a lot of factors. I can’t SJRA attended to the project caused some imagine this would be able to happen in a [rural or suburban] environment. The people to feel left out of the decision- geographical connect (is necessary). making process. In hindsight, the public, - Susan Hammer, San José Mayor the Academic Senate, and the student body might have been consulted shortly I’ve never been involved in a project that had after the idea was formed. However, so much strong leadership, buy-in and commitment. And that filtered down to others believe that this may have ended everything. It was contagious. Even the folks up taking away from the initial screaming and against it called us later and momentum that led to the project’s said ‘We were wrong.’ We always made it success. solution-driven and never worried about the The MLK, Jr. Library serves as a problem. It became a contagious culture. We became a culture, which is interesting. The model of how university-municipal cultural tie is that everyone is passionate, collaboration can succeed. But certain driven, optimistic. preconditions must be in place for it to - Pamela Anderson Brule, Consultant and Architect work. Both entities must have a need for a new building, available funding, and a

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 105 There was unambiguous commitment from the top of both organizations. Bob Caret was artful and tactful with the Academic Senate, and never ambiguous about his support for the project. Susan Hammer’s intramural politics didn’t waver her posture or demeanor: it was never ‘should we back off?’ but ‘how can we fix this fire?’ There were a number of places along the way where if they hadn’t acted this way, it could have hit the ground. - Jim Schmidt, SJSU Library Director

I’ve never worked on a team quite like that, where people were just making it happen. That was, to me, one of the amazing things. I said to Pam [Brule], ‘that was the best team I’ve ever worked with.’ I don’t think I’ll ever see one like that again. The reality is that there was something special going on. - Jane Light, San José Library Director

I don’t know if you’ll see it again. [The project was made possible by the] mix of needs that converged; the collection of people involved; and the innovative nature of this city. - Don Kassing, SJSU VP

106 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development References Albanese, Andrew. 2003. “Joint San José Library Opens; Public/university facility seen as model for partnerships.” Library Journal. September 1. Berry, John N. 2004. “The San José Model; Gale/Library Journal Library of the Year 2004: San José Public Library and San José State University Library.” Library Journal. June 15. Borgsdorf, Del. San Jose City Manager. 2007. Phone interview, June 22. Breivik, Patricia. Dean, University Library, San Jose State University. 2007. Phone interview. June 22. Brule, Pamela Anderson. President, Anderson Brule Architects. 2007. In-person interview, July 18. California Legislative Analyst’s Office, 1999. http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_1999/cap_outlay/cap_outlay_crosscutting_anl99.ht ml (accessed July, 2007). Dearborn, Darrell. Deputy City Manager, San Jose. 2007. Phone interview, June 25. Hammer, Susan. Mayor, San Jose. 2007. In-person interview, July 16. Kassing, Don. 2007. President, San Jose State University. In-person interview, July 17. “Koret Foundation Gives 2 Million to New Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library.” 2003. Ascribe, Inc. March 12. Light, Jane. Director, San Jose Public Library System. 2007a. In-person interview, July 19. Light, Jane. Director, San Jose Public Library System. 2007b. Phone interview, June 4. MLK Library. 2007. http://www.sjlibrary.org/ (accessed summer 2007). MLK Library Archives. 2007b. MLK Library Memorandum of Understanding. May 7, 1998a. MLK Library Development Agreement. December, 1998b. MLK Library Operations Agreement. December, 1998c. Montenegro, Dolores. Project Manager, San Jose Redevelopment Agency. 2007. Personal interview, July 17. Ostrom, Mary Anne. 2007. “City, university partnership is one success on the books.” San José Mercury News. April 29. Powers, Charlotte. San Jose City Councilwoman. 2007. Phone interview, June 18. Punches, Caroline. Director of Development, San Jose State University Library. 2007. Phone interview, August 28. San José Redevelopment Agency. 2007. http://www.sjredevelopment.org/ (accessed summer 2007). “San José Redevelopment Swims in Cash Bonanza.” 1997. The San Francisco Chronicle. December 12. San José State University Library. 2007. http://library.sjsu.edu/gateways/academic/ (accessed summer 2007). Schmidt, Jim. Director, San Jose State University Library. 2007. Phone interview, June 19. Storar, Suzanne T. 2001. “Writing the Book on Collaboration.” California Construction. March.

Msrtin Luther King, Jr. Library | San Jose, California 107 Webb, Jim. Library Feasibility Taskforce member. 2007. Phone interview, June 22. Whitlatch, Jobell. San Jose State University Faculty Union Head. 2007. Phone interview, June 19. Wolfe, Pat. Library Foundation member. 2007. Phone interview, June 26.

108 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Case 7: Music Center, Los Angeles, California Taking on New Roles

On October 8, 2009, the Los resident companies, four world-class Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra played performing arts institutions: the its much-anticipated first concert of the Philharmonic, the Los Angeles Opera, the season in the world-famous Walt Disney Center Theatre Group, and the Los Concert Hall in . Angeles Master Chorale. These As the Orchestra played, more than 2,000 institutions operated independently, but people watched a projected simulcast of all relied on the Music Center to manage the performance on the nearby Music the venues in which they performed. Center Plaza along Grand Avenue. The This case examines the Music excitement of the night extended beyond Center in the decade between 1999 and Los Angeles, as the performance was 2009, while it was in the process of broadcast worldwide on the Internet. It transforming it role within its community, was Gustavo Dudamel’s first night as the which was itself undergoing a conductor of the Los Angeles transformation. During that period, the Philharmonic. With his youth and energy, Music Center’s role comprised two the exuberant twenty-eight-year-old components. The first responsibility – and prodigy from Venezuela signaled a the one for which the Music Center was symbolic changing of the guard to the Los historically and popularly known – was to Angeles Philharmonic and to the classical manage and sublease the facilities in music world in general. The concert which the four resident companies ended with a ten-minute standing performed. But a second component, as ovation. The next day the Los Angeles important to the organization as the first, Times, observing the confidence of the was also emerging: running a broad array conductor and the enthusiasm of the of popular performing arts programs audience, wrote that “what the Gustavo intended to fill the gaps in performing Dudamel gala Thursday night at Walt arts left by the four resident companies. Disney Concert Hall [meant] for the Los In line with these expanded Angeles Philharmonic … was an embrace responsibilities, the Music Center was of a new generation and cultural point of contemplating taking on additional view, which is no small thing” (Swed responsibilities – including potentially 2009). programming a public park – to further To the public, the role of the its engagement with its community. Philharmonic that night was obvious: to perform. But another organization – the Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles Case Summary County (PACLAC), known as the Music Center – also played a central, if less publicly visible, role. The Music Center History operated the where the Orchestra performed that night The vision for the Music Center as part of the campus that housed its arose in 1955 when a citizens’ group

appointed by the Los Angeles County venues, and installed an underground Board of Supervisors sought a permanent parking garage. The Music Center held home for the LA Philharmonic. The effort primary responsibility for raising the was led by arts advocate and fundraiser balance of funds required for , who raised construction; fundraising was complete at $18.5 million in private donations. In the time the Concert Hall opened in 2003. addition to raising a large portion of the necessary funds, Chandler articulated her vision for a performing arts center that would be made up of multiple venues. Rather than a single, all-purpose concert hall, Chandler successfully pushed for three separate facilities to allow the Music Center to host a wider variety of events – chamber music and experimental theater alongside traditional theater, opera, and symphony performances – in appropriate venues.

Los Angeles County provided the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion site in the Bunker Hill neighborhood of downtown Los Angeles, and helped secure funding by floating $14 million in mortgage revenue bonds. In 1961, the informal citizens’ committee Chandler headed formed the official corporate entity formally called the Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles County (PACLAC) but commonly known as the Music Center. The Music Center opened its first venue, the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, on December 6, 1964. This opening was followed by the openings of the Mark Taper Forum and the Ahmanson Theatre in 1967. It wasn’t until 2003 that the Music Center opened its fourth venue: the long- awaited $274 million Walt Disney Concert Hall, designed by Frank Gehry. Planning for the Concert Hall had begun in 1987 with the receipt of a $50 million gift from Walt Disney’s widow, Lillian Disney (the Disney family would later donate an additional $50 million to the project). Los Angles County provided the land they had set aside for this purpose, as they had Ahmanson Theatre done for the Music Center’s original

110 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development renovation of the Mark Taper Forum. Later stages would include the renovation of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion and the Plaza.

Walt Disney Concert Hall

Facilities During the period covered by this case, the Music Center’s eleven-acre Welton Becket-designed campus comprised four primary venues. The Los Angeles Opera performed in the 3,197- seat Dorothy Chandler Pavilion; the Tony Award-winning Center Theater Group performed in both the 750-seat Mark The Music Center occupied four buildings Taper Forum and the 2,200-seat spanning two city blocks. Ahmanson Theater; the Los Angeles Philharmonic and the Los Angeles Master Chorale performed in the 2,265-seat Walt Disney Concert Hall. The Walt Disney Concert Hall occupied a full city block and fronted Grand Avenue. This newest addition to the Music Center also had two outdoor amphitheaters totaling 420 seats and a 3,000-square-foot gallery operated and programmed by California Institute of the Arts. In addition to the four primary venues, the campus also included the Music Center Plaza, a 225,000-square- foot public gathering space at the center of the complex that hosts festivals and other events. (See sidebar for a description of the resident companies.) The narrative of this case study is set while renovations of the original campus were underway: specifically, during the first stage of the project, the $30 million

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 111 Organization Resident Companies The Music Center, a 501(c)3 While the resident companies supported the corporation governed by a Board of Music Center’s initiatives, they generally Directors, was lead by the Center's agreed that the new programs had little to do President and CEO Stephen D. Rountree. with their own interests. Said Music Center CEO Stephen Rountree (who also served as the As outlined above, the Music Center had COO for the LA Opera), “there is a sense from two functions. First, it operated and the resident companies that the Music Center managed the Music Center campus, shouldn’t stray too far from having a mission renting venues and event spaces to the of serving them” (Rountree 2009). resident companies and to a wide array of

The Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra is third parties (for awards luncheons, non- one of the world’s premier orchestras, resident performances, graduation presenting classical music, jazz, world music, ceremonies, etc.); that it did under organ recitals, holiday programs, and pop contract to the county (which owns the performances. By far the largest resident facility). The landlord/tenant relationship company at the Music Center, a typical year’s budget hovers around $90 million (LA best described the Music Center’s Philharmonic 2008). The LA Phil plays in both relationship to its four resident the Walt Disney Concert Hall as well as the companies. The Music Center provided , an outdoor amphitheater in use of a venue and some office space to Hollywood, about 10 miles northwest of each resident company. In return, each Downtown Los Angeles, which is not leased by the Music Center. resident company gave the Music Center rent and treated the Music Center as its The Los Angeles Opera, the youngest resident principal performance home (several of company, joined the Music Center in 1986. It the resident companies also performed in presents eight or nine productions per season secondary venues). In operating the four and has a budget that ranges between $40 and $50 million per year (Stern 2009), including venues, the Music Center broke even: educational and community programs. rent, county funding, and other revenues (e.g. from restaurants) supported LA’s preeminent nonprofit theater company, operation of the resident companies’ the Center Theatre Group, develops and venues, but did not contribute to the produces year-round theater in the Ahmanson Theatre and the Mark Taper Forum at the Music Center’s other activities. Funding Music Center, as well as the Kirk Douglas for these other activities – primarily Theatre in Culver City. Like the other resident programming and events – came from a companies, the Center Theatre Group has combination of grants and private educational programs to build future theater donations. While the Music Center audiences and to bring theater to the schools. Its 2009 budget approximated $52 million operated the venues in which each (Center Theater Group 2009). resident company performed, each resident company remained responsible The Los Angeles Master Chorale is the for its own administration. Each smallest resident company with a budget of performance organization had its own just under $4.5 million in 2009. The innovative professional vocal ensemble presents a range artistic/music director, executive/general of traditional and contemporary chorale music director, and Board of Directors. in the Walt Disney Concert Hall. The Music Center’s second role was as producer of its own programs and events, including a K-12 arts education

112 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development endeavor, a series of family concerts and small compared to similar organizations festivals, a professional dance series, and elsewhere (Sherman 2009a). Donors a year-round calendar of participatory faced competing requests and had to performing arts events known as “Active decide: should we contribute to the Music Arts.” Center or a resident company? The opportunity for the Music Despite these problems, relations Center to take on this second function between the Music Center and the came as a result of a major change in its resident companies improved relationship with its resident companies dramatically throughout the 2000s. in the early 1990s. Originally, the Music “There is more of a connection and Center raised funds for all the resident affinity now. That was the good thing that companies and the Music Center; LA came out of [decentralized fundraising]: County funded the facility operations. there’s much better collegiality between After a protracted struggle during the development departments,” said Howard 1980s, the resident companies eventually Sherman (Sherman 2009a). won control of their own fundraising. While the Music Center initially resisted relinquishing fundraising responsibilities, Finance when the resident companies began In fiscal year 2009, the Music raising their own funds the Music Center Center’s budget totaled just over $60 was freed to expand programming and million.1 The Music Center managed to reinvent its role within Los Angeles balance its budget and even record a County. surplus in fiscal year 2009, despite the Initially, that new structure losses of over $7 million in earned income created competition among the resident and investments attributed to the companies and the Music Center. Music recession. The recession, however, did Center Chief Operating Officer and Vice devalue the Center’s net assets by over President of Operations Howard $20 million from 2007 to 2009. Sherman, who had been with the Stephen Rountree explained that organization for twenty-three years, put it funding for the Music Center’s programs this way: “There was a lot of could be unreliable, which could interfere territorialism. In the beginning it was with its ability to pursue its mission. ‘give [the money] to me!’” He added, “The “There are a few obstacles. The first is hardest thing about making that money, and that’s always at the top of the transition was that it was hard for the list. It’s more than a greater quantity. donors. They were now being solicited by Some sense of reliable income is needed. four or five entities. But it [did increase] The Music Center has a very small the fundraising capacities” (Sherman endowment, and most is restricted to 2009a). certain programs” (Rountree 2009). According to Howard Sherman, While County funding for the operation of fundraising at the Music Center and the resident companies quintupled since 1 The Music Center’s budget was larger in fiscal year being decentralized. However, vestiges of 2009 (the most recent year for which numbers are the old system remained. With the available) than typical due to $38 million in capital improvements made during fiscal years 2008 and 2009. exception of the Philharmonic, the For comparison, the Music Center’s budget in fiscal resident companies’ endowments were year 2007 was $50.8 million.

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 113 the facilities at the Music Center was Education consistent and reliable, the programs The Music Center Education relied heavily on individual giving and Division (MCED) began in 1979 in grants. The Program Director for the Arts response to widespread cuts in arts at the Irvine Foundation, John McGuirk, programs in local school districts. In the summed up the challenge: “…they have to first decade of the twenty-first century, it come up with a business model for how continued to provide leadership to make they fund [a program area]. Is it private or quality arts education a central part of individual philanthropy? Can they get the school curriculums throughout the people who have been coming for free to county. These programs were supported start paying, or to become annual by donations from private funders, members? Or are these programs valid government agencies (such as the Los enough to cover with giving and public Angeles Arts Commission, the California funding? Now they need to move forward Arts Council, and the National and develop their business model” Endowment for the Arts), and fees paid (McGuirk 2009). by the schools. State policy affected the Music Music Center education programs Center’s funding as well. During Arnold brought professional artists in music, Schwarzenegger’s tenure as Governor, the dance, theater, and the visual arts to State reduced the annual budget for the schools for performances, workshops, California Arts Council from $30 million long-term residencies, and teacher in 2003 to $5 million in 2010. A more professional development. In addition, positive development was the State’s the Music Center produced festivals, approval in 2006 of new funding for arts award programs, and curriculum education through the California resources for teachers. During the 2008- Department of Education; the measure 09 school year, the Music Center was at first a major catalyst to help local produced 13,000 activities, involving 110 school districts rebuild their arts artists and ensembles in over 600 schools programs, but progress was held up by (Music Center 2009). After the Kennedy enormous budget cuts for K-12 schools Center, it is the second largest arts enacted in 2009. education program in the country. In addition to school-based Programming programs, the Music Center also produced free programs for children and As noted, a central component of families at the Center’s downtown the Music Center’s evolution was to campus. Performing Books was a family present programming beyond the performance series developed in resident companies’ performances. collaboration with the Los Angeles Times Programs included arts education, dance, featuring professional storytellers and a series of free and low-cost participatory artists that brought children’s books to events referred to as the Active Arts, and a life. World City, a free Saturday variety of other initiatives. performance series, was designed to celebrate the diverse cultural traditions reflected in the Los Angeles population.

114 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Dance establishing Active Arts, the series of Glorya Kaufman Presents Dance at programs that followed this line of the Music Center had become one of the thinking, is to profile and validate premier presenters of dance in Southern non-professional artists and art- California, featuring some of the world’s making. We’re not de-emphasizing the most illustrious dance companies. The worth and contribution that program, which featured a wide variety of professional artists and the art they types of dancing, also provided learning provide to the public, we’re adding to opportunities at the Music Center and and enriching the idea of how throughout the county for adults and important it is for every person to children, as well as post-performance exercise their artistic creative muscle. talks, school lectures, and classroom (Ramirez 2009c) demonstrations. Active Arts had established an ongoing series of free or low-cost Active Arts recreational art-making events that encouraged people to sing, dance, play Launched in July of 2004, Active music and tell stories together (Music Arts was a series of programs designed to Center 2009). Dance Downtown was a free expand the public’s experience of “dance party” on Friday nights where performing arts centers and give people beginners, experts, and professionals opportunities to actively engage in could learn and practice different styles of different creative activities. Josephine dance. Instrumental music programs Ramirez explained the premise further: included Public Practice, where One of the things we have to come to participants can practice their grips with now and for the future is – instruments in spaces around the Music how do we evolve our programming Center; Drum Downtown was a group and our spaces in anchor institutions drumming experience; and Get Your like the Music Center? We began our Chops Back, a series of music lessons, exploration not with the assumption allowed people to relearn instruments that we all of sudden have to invest and play in ensembles with others in the billions of dollars with a high-tech same situation. Other Active Arts varnish on what we already do, but by programs created opportunities to tell adjusting our assumptions about how and listen to stories (LA Storytellers), or to we build community via the arts – participate in sing-alongs. growing from a place that not only provides great art but that also Other Programs enables the creative capacity of the public. With that premise we turned to The Global Pop concerts brought the glaring truth that in what pop stars from countries that represented constitutes “the public” there are far LA’s diverse immigrant population. The more people out there who make art Grand Avenue Festival, an all-day family not for money than there are those event led by the Music Center and who do it professionally. So why not Downtown BID, was the collaborative let the Music Center be their venue, product of eleven Grand Avenue cultural too, somehow? Our idea in organizations and restaurants. The Music

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 115 Center also provided lecture series by International Airport was one of the internationally recognized figures. world’s largest airports. Downtown LA attracted thousands of people to its cultural, government, and City and Regional Context commercial buildings. Although The City of Los Angeles, at the time downtown was relatively crowded during this narrative is set, had a population of working hours, on weekends and 3,833,995 (U.S. Census Bureau 2011) and evenings its population fell as many was the second most populous city in the residents and tourists were attracted to United States and covered 469 square the region’s unique neighborhoods and miles. It lies within Los Angeles County locales. Downtown lost most of its (one of the largest counties in the United department stores, theaters, restaurants, States), with 4,060 square miles and and housing when freeways were eighty-eight other cities including Beverly constructed in the 1950s and 1960s. Since Hills, Pasadena, and Long Beach. (LA the 1980s, the city, other government County 2009), LA County’s population entities, and private developers have had grown from a little over six million sought to redevelop downtown LA when the Music Center opened in the through various projects such as early 1960s to 9.8 million in 2010 (U.S. California Plaza, Library Tower, LA Live, Census Bureau 2011). and, currently, the Grand Avenue Project. Los Angeles’ extraordinary ethnic In recent years, downtown has expanded and racial diversity reflected its history as a residential community as well, and its status as a primary gateway for gaining about 16,000 new units of market immigration (both legal and illegal). LA rate housing (Downtown Center BID County had the largest Latino and Asian 2009). populations of any county in the United The Grand Avenue Project was one States, with more than ninety languages step in a long and ongoing attempt to spoken in it. Los Angeles’ economy was revitalize the Music Center’s Bunker Hill also diverse: financial and business neighborhood in LA’s downtown. Once services, high-tech manufacturing, craft home to elegant Victorian mansions and and fashion industries, and, most LA’s upper classes, Bunker Hill began to famously, the entertainment industry decline with the pre-WWII construction were its drivers. of freeways, which enabled the city’s Los Angeles is infamous for its population to live in increasingly sprawling footprint. Although the State of dispersed patterns. In 1955, Los Angeles California created the Los Angeles County began a renewal effort that involved Metropolitan Transportation Authority large-scale slum clearance and the (MTA) in 1993 to build and operate a construction of modern office buildings public transportation system and plazas. By the early 2000s, many of incorporating buses, light-rail lines, and a these original buildings and older high- subway, the city was still struggling to rises were being converted into create a balanced mass transit system residential properties, many with city- during the time period covered by this sanctioned mixed-income requirements. case. Angelinos continued to rely heavily The Grand Avenue Project targeted on the automobile. Los Angeles redevelopment on the parcels of land located directly across the street from

116 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Walt Disney Concert Hall, so had the development due to the economic potential to have a dramatic impact on downturn, and the other components of the future of the Music Center. Plans for the project stalled. So, while most of the this $3 billion mixed-use development project was on hold in 2009, construction project included 3.6 million square feet of of the public park was moving forward, new development (including large with an expected completion date of residential, retail, office, and hotel 2012. components) as well as streetscape Plans to manage the park once improvements and a public park system built, however, were in flux. Originally, connecting landmark cultural and civic the County intended to create a new buildings. The project entailed publicly nonprofit organization, funded by owned land, a private developer, and an revenues from development; since the oversite committee called the Joint revenue-generating portion of the Powers Authority (JPA) made up of development was on hold, that had representatives of the City of Los Angeles, become infeasible. When the Music Los Angeles County, and the Center leadership, who had been involved Redevelopment Authority. in the development process from the beginning, recognized the problem, they saw an opportunity. Josephine Ramirez described their proposed solution: “So we at the Music Center talked to [the county]… [We told them] we have the experience and all the relationships, and the infrastructure big enough to absorb the operation of the park with appropriate public funding. It makes more sense than starting up a whole new company. So the county said ‘huh, that makes sense’” (Ramirez 2009b). In 2009,

The Music Center is located in downtown Los conversations were ongoing and the Angeles, within blocks of two subway stations and Music Center’s role was far from settled. multiple cultural and political centers.

In 2009, development of the public park was the only part of the project Developing a New Role for the making progress. The JPA stipulated that Music Center before ground was broken or financing The change in the Music Center’s put together, the project’s developer had role within the city over the past decades to accept a contract to build a public park has been monumental. While serving the on the parcels connecting the Music resident companies remained a primary Center Plaza to the City Hall. The Related responsibility in 2009, the fact that the Companies – the development company Music Center was no longer involved with that won the bid to develop the the resident companies’ programs or properties – accepted that contract but finances means it was free to change its subsequently was unable to secure focus to include actively engaging the financing for the remainder of the public in ways its resident companies did

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 117 not. And the changes within the city and highlight the role of the arts in society. neighborhood over this time period have (PACLAC 2009a) presented new needs for the Music Center to address. Once the updated mission was The 2009 update of its mission adopted, Music Center staff were tasked statement encapsulated its change of with developing programs to realize their focus. While the old mission reflected its goal of engaging the community in active role as both landlord and administrator of and progressive ways. Fortunately, they the resident companies, the new mission were not starting from scratch but were emphasized its role in public outreach as building on existing dance, education, and well as retaining its primary role as community engagement programs – but landlord. The 2009 mission reads: while major strides had been taken to create bold new programs that addressed On behalf of the County of Los the artistic needs of Los Angeles, many of Angeles, the Music Center is these ideas still had to be fleshed out. The committed to building civic vitality by Music Center was also trying to enhance strengthening community through the its role in the community by engaging arts. We accomplish this by bringing with the city directly. to life one of the world’s premier performing arts centers and by providing distinctive leadership and Developing Successful Programming diverse opportunities for lifelong and Linking It with the Active Arts learning and engagement with arts The Music Center provided the and culture. public with opportunities to actively

engage with the arts. The Music Center’s We advance our mission through biggest challenge in fulfilling that role was three core strategies: that people were not used to coming to a • Operate and vitalize the Music Center set location to engage in the arts. Instead, through resident company they played the guitar, sang in a choir, relationships and services; acted in a school play, listened to music presentation of dance and on their iPods, and went to concerts in unrepresented performing arts their neighborhoods. “We are trying to genres; creation of participatory arts find how to be more relevant to how engagement programs; and fostering people are engaging in the arts now and creative experiences and engagement in the future,” said Josephine Ramirez. in and through the arts. “[This] means more participation, more • Create, develop, and implement technology, spectacle, large gatherings, diverse educational and participatory celebrations, use of outdoor space, large arts programs for children, families, ephemeral structures. It doesn’t demand and adults in schools, neighborhoods, formal attention, but it does capture your and at the Music Center. imagination and force you to pay • Provide leadership to advance the arts attention. It will, through that, bring all as part of the core curriculum in K-12 types of people there and in a more schools and as central to the larger interactive way” (Ramirez 2009c). civic agenda, to underscore the The Music Center’s education essential value of creativity, and to programs formed a strong foundation off

118 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development which the organization could build. The suffer in part from an identity complex: Music Center’s lauded education who and what is it? Most people know the programs had a long history of success. Music Center through the resident And, these programs shared with their companies. And the Music Center is there, Active Arts program (launched in 2004) a but is it just the buildings?” Misciukowski similar mission: to engage a larger said that construction of the Walt Disney segment of the public in the arts, and to Concert Hall has increased the Music fulfill a void by reaching out in ways that Center’s visibility: “Since [it] was built, best met the public’s needs and abilities. there has been more dialogue about what In addition, existing education programs the Music Center is and what it directly strengthened the Active Arts by accomplishes” (Misciukowski 2009). building interest and a connection to the arts for students and families, and by informing participants about other Music Addressing the Needs of Greater Los Angeles Center activities. The Music Center’s leadership saw One way for the Music Center saw opportunities to grow educational to cement its place within Los Angeles programs by fostering cross-collaboration was to assist the city in addressing among different arts institutions. improving urban infrastructure problems Rountree noted in 2009 that difficulties that directly and indirectly affected the remained, however: “… everyone is afraid arts. After all, said Rountree, “the areas to give up their own education programs around [arts institutions] can’t crumble, out of fear of losing fundraising dollars. or their missions would be undermined” It’s much easier to collect money if it’s for (Rountree 2009). Traffic congestion was a children’s education” (Rountree 2009). major problem that affected not just the Nonetheless, such collaborations were Music Center, but the Music Center’s starting to emerge. For example, the stakeholders and the City of LA in general. Music Center had convened the resident Michelle Clark, the Music Center’s VP of companies and other Grand Avenue Development, reported that “we hear cultural organizations (such as REDCAT daily from people who rarely come to the and the Museum of Contemporary Art) to Music Center any more because they find collaborate in support of the new the traffic unbearable” (Clark 2009). The downtown Arts High School and its feeder same could be said for many people’s middle schools. Together, these “Grand attitudes toward downtown Los Angeles Avenue Partners” helped expand and in general. strengthen the scope and quality of the Representatives from the Music arts programs in the local middle schools. Center, including President and CEO Developing great programming Rountree, took a leadership role by that catered to the needs of people in LA working with the City Council and various in the twenty-first century was an Transportation Committees on essential first step in attracting users. But transportation problems, and the Music public outreach and marketing to Center established itself as a player in the advertise these programs was also field by donating money for studies to necessary. Said City Councilwoman and help solve transportation problems. Music Center Board Member Cindy “Traffic and transportation is a huge deal Misciukowski: “The Music Center does – a big city issue,” said Rountree. “The

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 119 Music Center’s future and fate depends on happen?’ LA is maturing, and the Music LA solving traffic issues. Big chunks of the Center is a natural leader” (Misciukowski audience are alienated from the Music 2009). Center because they can’t get there Developments in the Grand without spending huge amounts of time Avenue Project toward the end of the first and effort. The city is key in helping decade of the century supported reform this. The county is big here, too, Misciukowski’s vision of the Music since the metro rail system is a county Center’s leadership role in promoting thing. … The key to getting people to the activity along Grand Avenue: the Music Music Center? Improve access. We have to Center was the potential future manager be prepared to take a leadership role” of the public park being developed as part (Rountree 2009). of the Grand Avenue Project. The Music Another role the Music Center was Center was, in 2009, discussing this considering playing to help tackle greater possibility with the county, with the Los Angeles’ issues was finding ways to outcome far from settled. The result of add to the LA nightlife. For a city of its these negotiations was anticipated to size and energy, Downtown Los Angeles have a dramatic impact on the future of was surprisingly quiet at night. While the organization. Said Ramirez, “It’s a downtown had become livelier after the possible game changer. It helps add construction of the Staples Center sports culture to public space. It could help to arena in 1999, the groundbreaking in solidify the direction we want to go.” 2005 of the nearby LA Live development The willingness to take on the to the south, and especially due to a larger responsibility of operating, and adding residential population resulting from the civic life to, park space in downtown LA development of dozens of apartment and demonstrated just how serious the Music condominium buildings in the late 1990s Center was about expanding its existing and 2000s, it remained relatively subdued role. This expanded role would change at the end of the first decade of the the institution’s responsibilities, the way twenty-first century. Downtown LA did it was perceived, and its position within have a supply of bars, restaurants, and Los Angeles. It was, however, just one nightclubs, in addition to music, sports opportunity, albeit a major one, that the and theater activity – however, most Music Center was considering in support agreed that there was room for its new vision. improvement. Still, the resurgence of downtown LA was underway, though far from Conclusion complete. City Councilwoman Cindy Misciukowski said the Music Center had Between 1990 and 2009 the Music contributed to its nascent renewal. “The Center experienced dramatic changes in Music Center is becoming known in the its leadership, operational structure, and broader public and in some of the core responsibilities. In some ways things governmental entities as an operator of a began to settle down for the Music Center place that is open to the public.” She toward the latter end of the decade under added: “There’s a sense that after a consideration, with the development of a decade of LA asking ‘where is the center, new mission and vision. At the same time, where is the core, where do things some things were just getting started:

120 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Active Arts programming was still being tested and was at the time financially unsustainable; relations with the resident companies were evolving; and a new role of park operator was being considered that could radically change the face of the Music Center. The changes at the Music Center created some turmoil, but also allowed for a level of creativity, self-reflection, and progressiveness that is rare for an established institution. When its fundraising role was greatly diminished, the Music Center sought new responsibilities to fill that gap. That allowed the Music Center to try to figure out where it was truly needed, and how to grow into its new role. Los Angeles was a very different place in 2009 than it was in the early 1960s when the organization was created. The Music Center transformed in part to reflect and cater to its new metropolis. The city’s evolution allowed the Music Center to make monumental changes. By thinking about the state of its own affairs, the state of Los Angeles, and the state of the arts in society, the Music Center created a bold new vision. In 2009, it remained to be seen how successful it would be in reaching its goals but by serving as a national leader at the forefront of a movement to bring the arts into the twenty-first century, by aspiring to engage the public in new ways that best met public needs, and by attempting to do so by tackling fundamental urban problems that are not normally associated with the arts, the Music Center was demonstrating the many possible impacts of an anchor institution.

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 121

References Alossi, Rich. 2008. “$3 Billion Predicament: Grand Avenue Project Delayed.” Angelenic Downtown Los Angeles, January 11. http://www.angelenic.com/302/3-billion- predicament-grand-avenue-project-delayed/. Borda, Deborah, Los Angeles Philharmonic Chief Executive Officer. 2009. Phone interview, October 16. Center Theatre Group. 2009. Audited Financial Statement. June 30. Center Theatre Group. 2009. http://www.centertheatregroup.org/ (accessed Fall 2009). City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs. 2009. http://www.culturela.org/ (accessed September 2009). Dillingham, Charles, Center Theatre Group Managing Director and Board Liaison. 2009. Phone interview, October 14. Downtown Center Business Improvement District. 2009a. Downtown Los Angeles Housing Information; 1st Quarter 2009. Spring. http://www.downtownla.com/pdfs/econ_residential/1Q09Housing Book.pdf. Downtown Center Business Improvement District. 2009b. Downtown Los Angeles is Grand: Guide to Art, Entertainment, Hotels, and Restaurants. Grand Avenue Committee. 2009. http://www.grandavenuecommittee.org/index.html (accessed Fall 2009). Hollywood Bowl. 2009. http://www.hollywoodbowl.com (accessed Fall 2009). Inez Bush, Arts Coordinator for the Culver City Unified School District. 2009. Phone interview, October 19. James Irvine Foundation. 2009a. 2008 Annual Performance Report. February 2009. http://www.irvine.org/home. James Irvine Foundation. 2009b. Expanding Opportunity for the People of California: Annual Report for 2008. July. http://www.irvine.org/home. Knowles, Terry, LA Master Chorale Executive Director. 2009. Phone interview, September 28. Los Angeles County. 2009. http://www.lacounty.gov/ (accessed Fall 2009). Los Angeles Master Chorale. 2009. http://www.lamc.org (accessed Fall 2009). Los Angeles Master Chorale. 2009. Los Angeles Master Chorale Revenue and Expense Detail. September. http://www.lamc.org. Los Angeles Opera. 2009. http://www.laopera.com/ (accessed Fall 2009). Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra. 2008. Audited Financial Statement. September 30. Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra. 2009. http://www.laphil.com/ (accessed Fall 2009). McGuirk, John, Irvine Foundation Program Director for the Arts. 2009. Phone interview, October 13. Misciukowski, Cindy, Music Center Board Member and former City Councilwoman. 2009. Phone interview, October 14. Music Center. 2009. http://musiccenter.org/ (accessed Fall 2009). Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles County. 2009a. Music Center at a Glance. October.. Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles County. 2009b. Music Center Audited Financial Statement. June 30.

Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles County. 2009c. Music Center Contributions Detail– Ongoing. Los Angeles: Performing Arts Center of Los Angeles County, Fall. Ramirez, Josephine, Music Center Vice President of Programming. 2009a. Phone interview, June 19. Ramirez, Josephine, Music Center Vice President of Programming. 2009b. Phone interview, October 5. Ramirez, Josephine, Music Center Vice President of Programming. 2009c. Phone interview, December 14. Rountree, Stephen, Music Center President and Chief Executive Officer. 2009. Phone interview, July 8. Sherman, Howard, Music Center Chief Operating Officer and Vice President of Operations. 2009a. Phone interview, June 30. Sherman, Howard, Music Center Chief Operating Officer and Vice President of Operations. 2009b. Phone interview, October 16. Slavkin, Mark, Music Center Vice President of Education. 2009. Phone interview, July 7. Stern, Marc, Los Angeles Opera Chief Executive Officer. 2009. Phone interview, October 5. Swed, Mark. 2009. “Music Review: L.A. Phil Embraces a New Generation with Dudamel.” Los Angeles Times, October 9. The Grand. 2009. http://www.thegrandla.com/#/home (accessed Fall 2009). U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. 2010 data. http://www.census.gov (accessed October 2011).

The Music Center | Los Angeles, California 123

Case 8: The Woodruff Arts Center, Atlanta, Georgia Adapting to a Changing City

The Robert W. Woodruff Arts on arts education; growing diversity Center bills itself as “the heartbeat of within the Atlanta area; and a burgeoning Atlanta’s arts community” (Woodruff Arts number of arts organizations throughout Center 2010). The center has come a long the region. The changes undertaken by way since its humble beginnings nearly the Woodruff in the first decade of the half a century ago: originally home to a twentieth century provide insight into the fledgling art collection, a volunteer youth relationship between the structure and orchestra, a large stage (but no theater culture of a city and the operations of an company to perform on it), and a small, arts anchor institution. unaccredited arts school, the Woodruff is the region’s preeminent arts organization. It houses Georgia’s top orchestra, theater, Case Summary and art museum, and contributes more financially to arts education initiatives than any other organization in the state, History including the state government itself The Woodruff Arts Center, (Woodruff Arts Center 2010). The Woodruff’s transformation originally called the Atlanta Memorial coincided with that of its metropolitan Arts Center, was created in 1968 in honor and immediate environments. In the of 106 Atlanta civic and arts leaders who 1960s, Atlanta was surrounded by perished in a 1962 airplane crash in Paris. When founded, the center contained three farmland; the Midtown neighborhood in which the Woodruff opened was run arts organizations: the Atlanta Symphony down, marked by decaying two-story Orchestra (ASO), the High Museum of Art retail buildings and aging single-family (High Museum), and the Atlanta College of homes. Four decades later, the Atlanta Art. In 1969, the Alliance Theatre joined area was the archetype of booming the arts center as a fourth division. population growth and uncontrolled Prior to their co-location, these sprawl while Midtown Atlanta had were small organizations occupying scattered, substandard space. The High become a second downtown. This case study explores Atlanta’s Museum was founded in 1905 as the transformation, its effect on the Woodruff, Atlanta Arts Association, assuming its and the Woodruff’s response, focusing on current name after moving its small the major changes the Woodruff collection of donated works into a implemented between 2000 and 2010; residential home donated by Mrs. Joseph some of these changes responded to M. High in 1926. The Atlanta College of relatively recent events and others to Art, established in 1905, offered studies in drawing, painting, photography, and trends that had developed over decades. Four trends in particular influenced the other mediums. The Atlanta Symphony Woodruff: population growth in outlying Orchestra debuted as a city youth counties; cuts in public sector spending orchestra in 1945 and evolved into an all- adult, professional organization. The orchestra originally did not have a concert hall in which to perform and used Woodruff’s Divisions a rundown municipal auditorium as its primary venue. The Alliance Theatre, The Atlanta Symphony Orchestra (ASO) is established in 1968, presented two one of the country’s leading orchestras. The orchestra’s primary home since 1968 has productions at the Atlanta Memorial Arts been the Atlanta Symphony Hall, an Center in its inaugural year before joining outdated venue that there have been the arts center as a division the following numerous unfulfilled plans to replace. For season. thirty-five years the orchestra has also The High, the Orchestra, and the presented summer concerts at the outdoor Chastain Park Amphitheatre in northern Alliance Theatre remain divisions of the Atlanta. Starting in 2008, the orchestra also Woodruff. The fourth original division – performed at the Verizon Wireless the Atlanta College of Art – left in 2006 to Amphitheatre at Encore Park, twenty-one merge with the Savannah College of Art miles from Midtown Atlanta and Design. In 2005, a new division – The High Museum dominates Atlanta’s Young Audiences, which brought arts visual arts scene. Although its collections education to schools – joined the center, total only about 11,000 pieces, a relatively dramatically expanding the Woodruff’s small collection for a major art museum, it educational programming. (See the has made up for this by instigating sidebar for more information on the partnerships with more established museums and by presenting innovative Woodruff’s divisions.) Individually, the exhibitions. divisions were the region’s preeminent arts organizations; taken together, the The Alliance Theatre develops, produces, Woodruff dominated the arts scene. and performs plays. The Alliance won acclaim throughout the 2000s, having launched three Tony Award-winning hits to Organization Broadway and, in 2007, becoming the only regional theater in the Southeast to win a The Woodruff Arts Center is Regional Tony Award. But although its unique in that its constituent arts audience levels had grown markedly, it faced organizations are equal members, or more competition from other arts organizations than did the other divisions “divisions,” of one single organization. In (Fox 2010). most other cities’ arts centers, the constituent arts organizations are Young Audiences of Atlanta joined the independent organizations that share a Woodruff in 2005, becoming the center’s first campus. The Woodruff’s unique new division in thirty-five years. A local chapter of the national Young Audiences organizational structure was established organization, which brings educational arts at the center’s founding and, while some experiences to schools, Young Audiences responsibilities have shifted as the center originally came to Atlanta in 1983. The and its divisions have grown, the addition of Young Audiences bolstered the divisions remain independent Woodruff’s ability to expand arts education regionally. organizations with control over their own artistic and operational management. Each division has its own Board of university presidents, other important Directors. A common Board of Trustees – community leaders, and representatives with eighty members composed of the from each division – oversees the heads of large and small business owners, divisions’ Boards. The Woodruff’s senior

126 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development management team consists of a president and resources. So when you succumb to and chief executive officer, four vice the collective you submit to everything presidents, and a director of strategic that the policies of communism require, planning. Its President and CEO Joseph R. which is kind of the greater common Bankoff, a former senior partner at a good: shared resources, shared growth, leading Atlanta law firm, has been actively [and] shared risk. This is the challenge of involved in Atlanta’s arts and civic life for the theory, not that it’s fatal” (Hogle many years. 2010). Although each constituent organization has its own Board of Directors charged with programming and Finance some fundraising, the Woodruff owns the The recession profoundly affected real estate (land and buildings) and the Woodruff, helping account for a $4.7 approves its constituents’ budgets. million operating deficit in fiscal year Division staff report to the division Board 2009. Revenues totaled $103 million, Chairs, who are represented on the while expenses reached $108.5 million; Woodruff Board. The divisions do not pay the High Museum was the only division rent, but do pool their finances. Most with an operating surplus. Earned programmatic revenues are raised revenue (ticket sales, memberships, directly by the individual divisions. The merchandise, etc.) constituted the Woodruff Center central fundraising greatest source of revenue (accounting campaign raises money for administrative for 44 percent of the Woodruff’s income), expenses. followed by contributed revenue via WAC Unlike many other performing arts and division corporate campaigns (26 centers, programming at the Woodruff is percent), interest and investment income done exclusively through its divisions. (9 percent), distributions from the The Woodruff Arts Center, Inc. does, endowment (4 percent), and other however, develop initiatives, such as its support income (2 percent). City, state, focus on arts education and diversity, and and federal support totaled $900,000, or a undertake leadership roles, such as little less than 1 percent of the Woodruff’s political involvement in public sector arts FY2009 revenue – an extremely small initiatives or legislation, that do not proportion for a major performing arts always directly involve a division. It center. (Woodruff Arts Center 2009- develops strategies and priorities that 2010). influence the direction of the divisions. The Woodruff Arts Center The unique structure of the maintained several financial interests Woodruff Arts Center and its divisions located off of its campus: it owned the has advantages and disadvantages. Paul 14th Street Playhouse as an investment, Hogle, the VP for Institutional though its divisions did not perform Advancement at the ASO, explained that there; held a 50 percent interest in a joint sharing one 501(c)3 has “meant mixed venture with a private firm (Live Nation) things. It’s a great theory … Who could in the lease of the city of Atlanta’s argue with the argument that there’s Chastain Park Amphitheater; and owned efficiency to be had? The challenges are the Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre at that efficiencies aren’t what propel arts Encore Park in Alpharetta, Georgia. organizations to greatness. It’s passion

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 127 Division Total Percent Operating Percent more worrisome. Woodruff Arts Center Revenues of Expenses of and Gains Budget Budget assets declined from $761 million in 2006 Atlanta $40.3 39% $44.5 41% to $621 million in 2009 – an 18 percent Symphony million million Orchestra reduction. Over that same period of time, Alliance $9.3 9% $9.9 9% liabilities grew from $199 million to $227 Theatre million million High $24.7 24% $24.1 22% million – a 14 percent increase. The Museum million million Woodruff’s endowment declined by $48.9 Young $1.5 2% $1.5 1% Audiences million million million in the 2009 fiscal year alone. WAC $13.4 13% $13.8 13% Eighty-three percent of the Woodruff’s Admin. million million SD&A $14.7 14% $14.7 14% liabilities were bond payments, which Teleservices million million stemmed primarily from the construction TOTAL $103.8 100% $108.5 100% million million of the Verizon Amphitheatre, the FY2009 Woodruff Operating Expenses. Source: expansion of the High Museum’s Woodruff Arts Center 2009. buildings, and debt refinancing that took place in 2009 (Woodruff Arts Center The Woodruff also owned an 2009). additional, and more unusual, asset: a for- profit company that provides telemarketing fundraising services for Facilities and Environs nonprofit cultural organizations. WAC The Woodruff’s constituent acquired this company, called SD&A organizations share a campus in Midtown Teleservices, Inc. (SD&A), in 2004 as a Atlanta, an area that has experienced way to provide additional revenue near-continuous office construction for streams to the Atlanta Symphony the past twenty years and has come to Orchestra. Based in California, SD&A is function as the city’s second downtown, separately managed and financed. employing some 65,000 people. The Owning a for-profit company is extremely Midtown area is located between rare for a nonprofit organization and can downtown to the south – with its be quite complicated legally and concentration of corporate headquarters, financially. Despite this, and although office space, and historic landmarks – and SD&A produce minimal profits initially, the generally affluent, residential areas to the Woodruff hoped its expertise in the the north. arts industry would create a competitive The twelve-acre campus contains advantage enabling the company to thrive nearly one million square feet of facilities, (Merz 2010). including the Memorial Arts Building, the The Woodruff’s ownership of an High Museum of Art buildings, and three off-campus and a for-profit company plazas. The Memorial Arts building expanded the center’s influence. In 2010, houses the 770-seat Alliance Theater, the however, SD&A was operating at a slim 1,762-seat Atlanta Symphony Orchestra deficit and the debt payments for its new Hall, the 200-seat Rich Theater, space for facilities were hindering the already cash- Young Audiences, an art galley, a strapped institution. While the restaurant, a store, patron lounges, Woodruff’s overall operating budget Woodruff Arts Center’s administrative shortfalls were a reason for concern, the offices, and a 400-car underground declining value of the organization’s parking garage. Also on the site are a investments and endowment was even residence hall and sculpture studio leased

128 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Delta Classic Chastain at Chastain Park Amphitheatre in northern Atlanta and the Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre at Encore Park, twenty-one miles from Midtown Atlanta in town called Alpharetta. The orchestra has performed at Chastain during the summers since the early 1980s and at Verizon amphitheater since 2008. The Woodruff’s campus has been greatly expanded and improved since the center’s founding. When the art center was established, the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and the Alliance Theatre were housed in the Memorial Arts Building and the High Museum occupied the original High family home and an adjacent facility constructed in 1955. In 1983, the High Museum’s original facilities and its 1955 addition were replaced with a critically- acclaimed building Above, Birds Eye View of the Woodruff Campus. Below, Woodruff Site designed by Richard Plan. Meier. As its collections grew further still, the by the Savannah College of Art and museum opened a new addition, designed Design. by Renzo Piano and constructed in 2005, which doubled the existing exhibit space In addition to the central campus, and included an educational center. the Woodruff has two off-campus venues The Woodruff and the orchestra’s that serve to spread the Symphony efforts to replace the orchestra’s facilities Orchestra’s reach to residents living – which, by the late 1990s, were obsolete further out in the metropolitan area: – have been less successful. The WAC got

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 129 as far as securing initial financing, miles in length and has a population of purchasing a six-acre site near the 1,034,000 (U.S. Census Bureau 2008). campus, and, in February 2005, unveiling Populations in the Atlanta MSA designs for the new symphony hall to skyrocketed from 1.5 million in 1960 great fanfare. Financial and real estate (Demographia 2010) to 5.4 million in complications, however, halted the plan. 2008 (U.S. Census Bureau 2008); almost While corporate and foundation gifts all this growth lay outside of Atlanta’s city were secured, cash-strapped city and limits. As the region’s outlying areas state governments declined to contribute ballooned in population, Atlanta became a hoped-for $100 million. By 2006, the infamous for its poor transportation capital campaign stalled at $120 million, networks, its lack of mixed land uses, and far short of the estimated cost of $300 an overall lack of density. million. In 2009, ninety percent of the The Woodruff was forced to metropolitan area’s population lived consider other options – specifically the outside of the city’s boundaries (U.S. construction, in partnership with Fulton Census Bureau 2009). The city’s County, of the $36 million 12,000-seat population effectively doubled during summer facility, the Verizon Wireless each workday, creating “a clog of traffic Amphitheater, in nearby Alpharetta. How that hinder[ed] suburban access and a this project was conceived and built is sense of connection to the cultural discussed below, in “Addressing a institutions in the city” (Bankoff 2010b). Changing Community.” Much of the region’s population rarely entered the city limits. Although the greater metropolitan City and Regional Context area had grown, between 1970 and 2000 At the time of the Woodruff’s the population in the city itself declined founding, Atlanta was a relatively small 16 percent (from 497,000 to 416,000) city, surrounded by farmland. Though (Demographia 2010). The city started to recognized as one of the nation’s see an increase in population in the economic and transportation centers, it 1990s, and over the course of the 2000s it was not known for the arts. increased 29 percent to its current Since then, the city and the larger population of 537,958 (U.S. Census metropolitan region changed Bureau 2008). dramatically. Between 1973 and 1999, Regional growth patterns affected Atlanta’s metro area expanded 247 arts in the city and throughout the region. percent (Yang 2002). The region’s Hundreds of nonprofit arts organizations geography includes few natural obstacles formed throughout the region to serve to expansion, and the strong corporate the dispersed population. As county presence in Atlanta – home to the governments grew, many created arts headquarters of Home Depot, Coca-Cola, councils that promoted arts through UPS, AT&T, Turner Broadcasting Systems, marketing and coordination. Fulton and the Center for Disease Control and County Arts Council (FCAC), created in Prevention – has drawn residents to the 1979, went beyond this to also directly area. fund and operate arts centers and Atlanta is located in the center of organizations (Njoku 2010). With the Fulton County, which stretches seventy exception of Fulton County, the

130 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Woodruff’s relationships with counties regularly enter the city limits. Said Joe was informal, except through their school Bankoff, “Atlanta has grown and the systems. The FCAC contributed to the transportation burdens have made it Woodruff, and partnered with it on the undesirable for people to figure out if Verizon Amphitheater project. they have the emotional courage to drive 45-60 minutes to get back from work, and then drive another 45-60 minutes back to the downtown to see a show” (Bankoff Addressing a Changing Community 2010). When it opened, the Woodruff However, starting in the mid- (then called the Memorial Arts Center) 1990s, the city of Atlanta started to was a small performing arts center in a densify as more people – especially young city with little history with large arts professionals – started to move organizations. Over the decades the downtown. In the early 2000s residential divisions prospered and the Woodruff and mixed-use construction boomed in established itself within the Atlanta both the historic downtown and in the region, though the dramatic changes in Woodruff’s Midtown neighborhood, the Woodruff’s environment complicated which, as noted earlier, had emerged as a this maturation process. Staggering second city center. In 2008, planning sprawl, changing demographics and theorist and researcher Christopher tastes in the arts, decreased arts funding Leinberger wrote “We are witnessing the in Georgia public school systems, and an beginning of the end of sprawl. Like much influx of area arts organizations led the of the rest of the country, the Woodruff to reexamine its role and overproduction of automobile-driven significantly alter many important aspects suburban development at the fringe of the of its organization. In the first ten years of Atlanta metropolitan area has reached its the twenty-first century, the Woodruff limits” (Leinberger 2008). built a state-of-the-art venue twenty-one The Woodruff, as the preeminent miles away from its existing campus, performing arts organization in the altered its programming to reflect Atlanta area, sought to engage changing demographics, became the populations from the entire region. Long largest arts education supporter in the distances and congested traffic, however, state of Georgia, and reevaluated its arts were obstacles. Additionally, as Atlanta’s leadership role to more actively support suburban population had grown, other arts organizations. hundreds of additional performing arts organizations had emerged, competing with the Woodruff for attendance, Sprawl influence, and financial support, a Atlanta is infamous for its poor phenomenon discussed more fully below. transportation networks, its lack of mixed land uses, and an overall lack of density. Woodruff Response According to Smart Growth America, Atlanta was the fourth most sprawling Since the early 1980s, the Atlanta area of the country in 2000 (Smart Symphony Orchestra has presented a Growth America 2010). Most people in summer concert series at a city-owned the Atlanta MSA lived too far away to amphitheater in the city’s 268-acre

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 131 Chastain Park, about eight miles north of real estate developers, plans for Encore Midtown, Atlanta. According to John Park evolved; the county envisioned a Sparrow, Vice President of Orchestra state-of-the art rock venue with Initiatives and General Manager at the considerable potential for associated real ASO, Chastain Park was difficult to reach estate development (Fox 2010). for people living in Atlanta’s outlying While this vision differed from areas, and the venue itself was less than what the orchestra would have come up ideal: a portion of the seats were table with itself, many aspects fit nicely with seating with drinks and conversation, and the orchestra’s aspirations: as an some patrons viewed the performances amphitheater it would easily as more of a background than a focal accommodate the orchestra, and as point (Sparrow 2010). In the late 1990s, commercially driven concept it would the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra provide a welcome source of revenue at a recognized the need to expand its time when the orchestra was struggling footprint beyond Midtown, explained ASO financially (Fox 2010). Additionally, the CFO and interim CEO Don Fox (Fox 2010), area’s demographics reflected the a realization reinforced by the findings of orchestra’s target demographic – affluent, the orchestra’s long-range strategic plan diverse, and with a high proportion of that called for developing new audiences. families – and was growing rapidly (from A consultant hired to identify 13,000 residents in 1990 to 35,800 in potential locations for a new facility 2000 to 49,900 in 2008 (U.S. Census recommended partnering with Fulton Bureau 2008)). County on its plans to build a performing Fulton County initially rejected the arts venue in the northern part of the orchestra’s suggestion to partner. But county. These plans for a new facility leadership persisted, knowing that the were part of the County’s efforts, begun in opportunity was an excellent one. John the 1990s, to develop arts in the northern Sparrow recounted that “We pressed and southern parts of the seventy-mile- hard and ultimately convinced them we long county, rather than leaving them were the right partners” (Sparrow 2010). concentrated exclusively in Atlanta, Ultimately, Fulton County and the explained Veronica Njoku, Director of the orchestra combined visions and aptitudes Fulton County Arts Council (Njoku 2010). and work began. By 2000, many towns had benefited from The County created a 501(c)3 to the county’s efforts to create nonprofit acquire land – a forty-five-acre parcel arts organizations and performing arts adjacent to north-south Route 19 – and to venues and citizens in northern Fulton commission a design that would County were lobbying for similar accommodate both rock-and-roll and treatment. After successfully convincing symphony concerts. The project cost $38 Fulton County Arts County (FCAC) to million: the city of Alpharetta contributed undertake a feasibility study, the idea of a $14.5 million tax exempt bond; Fulton Encore Park (initially called the North County and the city of Alpharetta each Fulton Center for the Arts) was born. contributed $1 million; and the Woodruff The County chose Alpharetta, an raised the remaining $21.5 million. The affluent suburb twenty-one miles north of Woodruff’s share consisted of Atlanta, as the location for the new venue. approximately $8.5 million from internal With input from community leaders and debt, a $5 million Woodruff Foundation

132 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development grant, a $5 million gift from the nominated as one of the United States’ Woodruff’s endowment, and a $3 million best outdoor venues. gift from two Woodruff Board members. The amphitheater was an A gift from Verizon in 2007 resulted in overwhelming success for the orchestra. the venue’s name change. In its first year, audiences totaled 25,000 The county-led 501(c)3 people, sixty percent of whom had never transformed into a new 501(c)3 – with been to a symphony concert before (Fox orchestra and Fulton County 2010). In its second year, 2009, audience representatives – that owned, operated, levels decreased slightly, but the and managed the center’s development. orchestra still drew much larger audience According to Don Fox, ASO’s Vice throughout the season than it had prior to President for Business Development, the building the amphitheater. “It’s been a orchestra had “the strongest hand” as the great experience for us and economically amphitheater was developed and in its rewarding,” said Fox. “And it’s been a real operations once built (Fox 2010). opportunity for us to brand the symphony Leadership decided to rent the facilities at in a different way and in a rapidly- cost for performances and for special growing part of our community” (Fox events such as high school graduations. 2010). The venue also provided a valuable marketing opportunity for the Woodruff as its name was printed across numerous signs and printed materials at the amphitheater. Also important: the creation of the amphitheater did not decrease attendance at the orchestra’s midtown venue, Symphony Hall.

A Changing Population The Woodruff was taking stock of and reconsidering its role in its community while being situated in one of the country’s most dynamic regions, a fact that posed both challenges and opportunities. The region’s population was highly transient and increasingly diverse, phenomena that contributed to a lack of widespread support for the arts. The city’s population was also becoming younger, and younger audiences demanded different types of cultural and

Above, Delta Classic Chastain Park Amphitheater. arts engagement than Woodruff had Below, Verizon Wireless Amphitheater. traditionally offered. The Atlanta region’s highly The Verizon Wireless transient population included many Amphitheater opened in May 2008. In individuals who had spent most of their both of its first two years the facility was lives in other areas of the country and of

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 133 the world. According to Joe Bankoff, it Another important aspect of was much more difficult to draw Atlanta’s changing population was the attendance and financial support from influx of people moving into the Atlanta people who did not view a performing city limits. After 2000, Atlanta became arts center as part of their past nor part of one of the country’s fastest-growing cities their future: “It’s a completely different (Leinberger 2008). Camille Love mindset. If you’ve lived in Atlanta for explained that many of those new years you’re thinking about supporting residents were young, and looking for something that will be there for your entertainment and social opportunities. children. If you’re moving in three to five She noted that the Woodruff could work years, you’re not. You have to find ways to to attract these audiences when they reach out and capture these people” were young, with the hopes they would (Bankoff 2010). remain loyal supporters: “The Woodruff The Woodruff also had difficulty should consider how they can program reflecting the needs and interests of the differently so that young people – who region’s population, in part because the will get old, and hopefully be cultured by region’s demographics were changing then – can hopefully look at culture as rapidly. The Atlanta MSA’s African part of their entertainment mix” (Love American population had grown faster 2010). than the population overall: in 1970, African Americans constituted 20 percent Woodruff Response (376,000 people) of the total population (Black, Kolesnikova, and Taylor); in 1990, Joe Bankoff said that, to make the 26 percent (736,000 people); and in Woodruff relevant to Atlanta’s population 2008, 31 percent (1.6 million people). now and in the future, it had to change its And, since 1990, Hispanic and Asian image and work harder to engage new populations increased from 2 percent to audiences. “It has to change from your 13 percent of the population (U.S. Census grandmother’s museum – white, old, Bureau 2008). uninteresting. People are interested in Historically, the Woodruff offered diverse things. Classical arts programs are few performances and programs aimed at one thing, but there’s a whole crowd of black audiences, leading to its reputation people who are interested in socializing as elitist and uninviting, a perception that and meeting face-to-face” (Bankoff 2010). affected the level of public funding. Strategic planning initiatives, Camille Love, Director, City of Atlanta started after Joe Bankoff’s arrival in 2006, Office of Cultural Affairs, explained: “The identified specific ways to turn the Woodruff doesn’t get a lot of public sector aspiration toward inclusivity into reality. funding. That’s the major reason why For example, to promote awareness of these major institutions have gotten more and access to the arts, the Woodruff diverse: it’s because the public sector developed adult education programs. To funders made them do it [to compete for improve its branding and marketing to the limited available public funds]. If you youth, the Woodruff and its divisions want our money, you have to open conducted studies between 2007 and yourselves up to the community” (Love 2009 that recommended incorporating 2010). spontaneity and social interaction into more programs, implementing more web-

134 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development based and social networking advertising, In March 2010, the High Museum and concentrating branding efforts on a opened The Allure of the Automobile; an more youth-oriented image, all of which exhibit of eighteen of the world’s rarest the Woodruff has since worked to cars. Flora Maria Garcia, President and implement. CEO of the Metropolitan Atlanta Arts and The Woodruff also strengthened Culture Coalition (MAACC), which its relationship with the National Black promotes and advocates for Atlanta’s arts Arts Festival, a national organization with and culture, said the exhibit contrasted a strong presence in Atlanta that starkly with the more traditional art celebrates the art, music, and culture of collections typically presented at the people of African descent. In 2007, the Museum, instead “appealing to the Woodruff teamed with the National Black NASCAR people” (Garcia 2010). The Arts Festival to fund The Atlanta exhibited generated positive buzz Dialogue, a program hosted by the throughout the region. Woodruff in which local families Camille Love reported that the developed performances expressing their Woodruff’s efforts to be inclusive made a perspective on what it means to be an difference. “The Woodruff partnered with American in Atlanta in a post civil-rights the National Black Arts Festival to make it period. Two years later, in 2009, the the home for that festival. That has been Woodruff hosted the National Black Arts very positive and perceived so. The High Festival’s annual summer music festival Museum has a series of film festivals that at the Arts Center’s campus. The are diverse and that’s important. And the Woodruff volunteered its performance programming within all of their divisions spaces and petitioned the city to close off has diversified… There are a lot of 15th Street, which borders the Woodruff’s positive things that have gone on. The campus, for a stage, vendors, and art Woodruff has reached out and the stalls. The festival celebrated African- community has reached in” (Love 2010). based culture through film, art, dance, theater, and musical performances. Both organizations agreed the festival was Decreased Arts Funding in the Schools successful and planned to make it an Georgia’s underperforming public annual event. schools were particularly weak in art To better engage the public, the education. In the mid-2000s, the state had divisions introduced new programming. the nation’s second lowest public high Susan Booth, Artistic Director at the school graduation rate (Georgia Budget Alliance Theater, for example, said that and Policy Institute 2005) and ranked the Alliance was “striving to have our 46th in SAT scores (Woodruff Arts Center audience look like our community, but 2007). This educational weakness created not sequential: not white audiences to a pressure for school districts to improve at white play, black audiences to a black the same time the recession created a play” (Booth 2010). Booth, who became shortfall in educational funding. As a Artistic Director in 2001, took over from result, schools emphasized the core Kenny Leon, who had also initiated more curriculum and, in many districts, diverse programming at the Alliance decreased spending on the arts. While the when he was appointed Artistic Director City of Atlanta public schools managed to in 1988. retain their arts programs and personnel,

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 135 almost every other district made cuts. component of public education” (Bankoff “The arts funding is being so drastically 2010). cut in every school system,” said Carol One of the most visible and Fuller, a drama specialist in Cobb County. dramatic moves in this direction was the “I’m in a county that has zero arts incorporation, in 2005, of Young initiatives. Every high school has a drama Audiences as a new division. Woodruff teacher here, but it’s the idea ‘we need leadership initiated this partnership, some place to dump kids’ not the believing that adding this experienced mentality of ‘we need a strong arts arts education entity would allow the program in our county’” (Fuller 2010). Woodruff Arts Center to reach new While most districts reduced staff, counties and increase the organization’s tightened programs, and instituted ability to raise education-related funding. mandatory furlough days for arts For Young Audiences, joining the personnel, Fulton County set a new Woodruff promised to increase their precedent. Facing a $120-million deficit, visibility within the general community the Fulton County School Board voted six and to schools and to generate additional to one in favor of massive cuts to its 2011 funding. budget. Measures included a reduction of Young Audiences developed “Arts nearly 1,000 personnel (including 500 for Learning Lessons,” an arts integration teachers), increased class sizes, a program that derived from arts literacy shortened school year (by three days), standards and goals. Said Executive and the elimination of the instrumental Director Tony Kimbrell, “Over the years music program in the schools (Staples we’ve seen that schools are much more 2010). focused on outcomes and achievement tests and the time they’re willing to spend Woodruff Response on things that don’t directly correspond with their goals is limited… [as a result] As schools’ emphasis on the arts we’ve seen schools that have eliminated diminished, the Woodruff paid more all of their arts specialist positions. So attention to education. The divisions at what we do has become more important.” the Woodruff had always had educational In response, Young Audiences worked programs but, until the 2000s, these more closely with classroom teachers to consisted of class field trips to an ASO or design programs whose outcomes can be Alliance performance or to a High more easily quantified using standardized Museum exhibit; while useful, these measures (Kimbrell 2010). programs were almost an afterthought. The Woodruff’s other three The Woodruff’s 2008 strategic plan divisions also added arts education shifted education from an afterthought to programming. Susan Booth created an a top priority. “The focus on education innovative Alliance Theatre program moved from an activity to the core of our called “the Collision Project” that enabled mission as part of this strategic plan,” high school students to study a classic explained Bankoff. “Our mission was play, deconstruct the themes, and then more than just entertaining patrons. The write, develop, and perform it over the Center needs to be useful. The most useful course of a three-week workshop thing we can do is help kids. The fact is, (Woodruff Arts Center website 2010). the arts are a critical and missing The Alliance also developed a set of

136 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development programs targeted at the region’s • Improved basic abilities including growing immigrant population to expand thinking skills, social skills, and literacy efforts for young students. The motivation to learn orchestra and the High Museum • A tendency to view school as a developed additional educational positive environment programming aimed at teachers, adults, Joe Bankoff expounded on the families, and students. In all, through its value of arts education in a 2008 letter to four divisions, the Woodruff produced The Atlanta Journal Constitution: hundreds of programs for both students Our children need to practice working and teachers each year, reaching 700,000 together and solving problems in students in seventy-six counties annually groups. They need to discover that (WAC website 2010). they can learn from others different The Woodruff became one of the from themselves. Finally, our children largest providers of pre-K-12 arts need to learn how to keep on learning. education in the nation, and aimed to In short, in an economy where the remain a leader in the field. The Woodruff highest value is moving to innovation, began working in 2008 with the Atlanta design, and creativity, we need to be City School District to create an arts teaching these skills. (Bankoff 2008) magnet high school. While Atlanta already had several arts schools, they had set By focusing on art education, the catchment areas; the Woodruff’s magnet Woodruff performed a valuable service to school would use Woodruff facilities and the community and further established artists-in-residence and draw students itself as an arts leader. In addition, from the entire district. Director of Fine introducing the schoolchildren of Atlanta and Performing Arts at the Atlanta City to its divisions would help build the next School District Cynthia Terry said that the generation of Woodruff audience partnership between the Woodruff and members and supporters. the district had developed into a strong one: “It went from a peripheral partnership to a one-on-one partnership. Increased Number of Atlanta Arts Organizations We meet monthly to decide how to make this school come into being” (Terry As the Atlanta region grew, 2010). hundreds of new arts organizations were The Woodruff joined arts created. However, the Woodruff remained education proponents nationwide in the most recognized arts institution and pointing to the strong correlation received by far the most private financial between engagement in the arts and support. Explained Veronica Njoku, “For academic success. A National Assembly of many years, a lot of the big companies States Arts Agencies (2006) study give to the Woodruff fund and feel that identified three primary types of benefits they’ve given” (Njoku 2010). The associated with the study of the arts and Woodruff’s dominance on the fundraising student achievement: scene – aided by the fact that the Board is • Improved academic proficiencies composed of the biggest corporate including reading, language skills, and leaders in the region – had created a mathematics skills legacy of resentment among other Atlanta arts organizations, despite the fact that

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 137 specific organizations exist to support Some have maybe one more year left to small- and medium-sized arts live” (Njoku 2010). organizations. The Woodruff, on the other hand, Woodruff Response did not see the multiplication of arts organizations as a threat. Said Bankoff: The Woodruff’s response to the “We have a large collection of arts proliferation of arts organization organizations – an explosion of stemmed in large part from the character nonprofits. We have a lot of little new of its chief executive, Joe Bankoff. “The cities popping up, and they want their previous CEO [Shelton Stanfill] treated own arts center. To energize people about the arts center…as a bank to raise funds, the ownership of the arts is a good thing. distribute it to the divisions, and stay out No one will confuse the Cobb Symphony of the way,” said Paul Hogle. “He was both Orchestra with the ASO. Those who get acclaimed and criticized for that. That’s a into their own band and then want different approach than [the one] Mr. exposure to others will find their own Bankoff is currently taking. We’re going to way to us. As I go back to it, we need an be the building, the relationship, and part ecosystem. The Cobb Symphony of the decision. That’s the major Orchestra is not a competitor. Our difference over the past decade” (Hogle competitors for funding are the private 2010). Joe Bankoff, a partner at one of universities and faith-based institutions” Atlanta’s preeminent law firms, brought (Bankoff 2010). his experience as a major community Starting in the mid-2000s, arts business leader and as a collaborator to organizations struggled to obtain prior the Woodruff. levels of private funding. Partly due to Bankoff came to the Woodruff with increased competition, part of the the idea of increasing its leadership role struggle to raise funds could also be within the greater Atlanta community; explained by a change in philanthropic that included working more directly with attitudes. Explained Njoku, “the shift other arts organizations. Bankoff named towards less private sector funding for three reasons a performing arts center the arts started with [Hurricane] Katrina. needs a thriving arts community to People shifted giving from culture to survive. First, “one quality theater in a social services. The pattern of private town will never make it. You need a sector giving has gone down for the arts” community of people who care about (Njoku 2010). theater… You need to collaborate to build The recession that followed made and sustain an ecosystem.” Second, one matters much worse. Giving declined organization cannot possibly do dramatically – approximately 25 percent everything: it should do what it does well less than in healthy years (Njoku 2010). and let others excel in other areas. Third, Budget deficits forced the public sector to a collaborative environment in which pull back funding as well. The effect was organizations are thriving improves the catastrophic for many arts organizations. art. Said Njoku in 2010: “I have 50-60 With Joe Bankoff’s arrival, the [examples of struggling organizations]. Woodruff began to reach out to smaller It’s bad. They’re terminating staff, they’re arts organizations, offering assistance in cutting programs, they’re closing down. areas such as ticketing and marketing.

138 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development One effort that created s lot of good will Conclusion toward the Woodruff was a collaboration Atlanta transformed dramatically on ticketing (Garcia 2010). The Woodruff in the forty years since the Woodruff Arts used a specialized – and expensive – Center’s founding and, to maintain its computer program to manage ticket sales, place as the region’s preeminent fundraising, and marketing. Licensing performing arts center, the Woodruff costs exceeded the capacity of most small- adjusted to those changes. By responding or even mid-sized arts organizations; to its environment, the Arts Center grew sublicensing, however, was a possibility. dramatically and gained influence in The Woodruff, at the behest of a small Atlanta’s arts and culture world. The arts organization and with help from Woodruff addressed some major MAACC, offered to act as the master problems facing the city – difficulty license holder in a consortium sharing the accessing city arts facilities, less arts service, devoting a full-time staff member education in the schools, a scarcity of to manage the service. Smaller artistic programming geared toward organizations that belonged to the minority populations, and insufficient arts consortium pay a share of the licensing leadership – and in doing so benefited the costs. “None of this could’ve happened if community. Bankoff described it this way: everyone had acted in their own,” said Flora Maria Garcia (Garcia 2010). Major arts institutions – whether Joe Bankoff also established you’re talking about the Lincoln himself, and the Woodruff, as a Center, Kennedy Center, LA Music community leader and advocate through Center, Kimmel Center or us – if they his involvement in state-level arts-related are to survive, they have to be political issues. Bankoff helped draft a adaptive to their community. The preliminary proposal for House Bill 1049: thing they have in common is their legislation that would enable Georgia form of the art and their aspiration to counties to increase their county sales tax excel in that art. The thing that differs a fraction of a percent to go toward is the community, the politics, and the supporting arts and cultural desire. Darwin said the most adaptive organizations (Saporta 2010). The bill survive. So we have to be adaptive. A had widespread support in the arts standalone organization may flourish community. The proposal would have then go away. But if you have a cluster allowed each county to decide whether to of things which you’re trying to serve institute the tax at all, the rate at which it a community over time, you have to be would be levied, and the way it would be sensitive to those things in the used. While the bill ultimately did not community. (Bankoff 2010) pass that year, the Woodruff For an institution to survive it demonstrated its ability to advocate not must adapt to its environment. The only for itself and for the arts in general, Woodruff Arts Center is an anchor but also as a leader and supporter of institution for northwest Georgia because other area arts organizations. it not only adapted to, but also responded to these changes in ways that both grew the organization and made Atlanta a better place.

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 139 References Bankoff, Joe. 2008. Editorial. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. August 3. Bankoff, Joe, President and CEO, Woodruff Arts Center. 2010. Phone interview. March 2. Bankoff, Joe, President and CEO, Woodruff Arts Center. 2010. Written notes. March 2. Black, Kolesnikova, and Taylor. 2010. The Economic Progress of African Americans in Urban Areas: A Tale of 14 Cities. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review. September/October. Booth, Susan, Artistic Director, The Alliance Theatre. 2010. Phone interview. March 2. Demographia website. 2010. “Atlanta Growth from 1960.” http://www.demographia.com/db-atl1960.htm. Fox, Don, Vice President for Business Development, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra. 2010. Phone interview. March 26. Fuller, Carol, Drama specialist in Cobb County. 2010. Phone interview. March 12. Garcia, Flora Maria, President and CEO, Metropolitan Atlanta Arts and Culture Coalition. 2010. Phone interview. February 26. Georgia Budget and Policy Institute. 2005. Georgia Rankings. Hogle, Paul, Vice President for Institutional Advancement and Learning, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra. 2010. Phone interview. March 1. Leinberger, Christopher. “Sprawl to Meet its Limit in Atlanta.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution. November 5,. Love, Camille, Director, City of Atlanta Office of Cultural Affairs. 2010. Phone interview. March 23. Kimbrell, Tony, Executive Director, Young Audiences. 2010. Phone interview. March 1. Njoku, Veronica, Director, Fulton County Arts Council. 2010. Phone interview. March 25. Sparrow, John, Vice President of Orchestra Initiatives and General Manage, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra. 2010. Phone interview. March 5. Saporta, Maria. 2010. “Bill Proposes Splitting Pennies for Arts.” Atlanta Business Chronicle. February 5. Smart Growth America website. 2010. “The Sprawl Index: Atlanta, GA.” http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/sprawlindex/factsheet_atlanta.html. Staples, Gracie Bonds. 2010. “Fulton Parents Gather to Create Plan to Stop Education Cuts.” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. March 30. Staples, Gracie Bonds. 2010. “Fulton Slashes Nearly 1,000 School Jobs.” The Atlanta Journal- Constitution. March 18. Staples, Gracie Bonds and Fox, Patrick. 2010. “Metro Schools to Slash Again.” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. March 14. Terry, Cynthia, Director of Fine and Performing Arts, Atlanta City School District. 2010. Phone interview. March 18. U.S. Census Bureau. 2008. American Fact Finder. 2008 data. www.census.gov Woodruff Arts Center. 2007. In Education and Economic Development: The Arts Count! January. Woodruff Arts Center. 2009-2010. Annual Corporate Campaign: Form and Function.

140 Livingston Case Studies in Urban Development Woodruff Arts Center. 2009. Consolidated Financial Statements, Supplemental Schedules, and Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants. May 31. Woodruff Arts Center. 2010. Marketing Initiative Status Report. February 4. Woodruff Arts Center website. 2010. http://www.woodruffcenter.org/. Yang, Xiaojun. 2002. Satellite Monitoring of Urban Spatial Growth in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, July.

Woodruff Art Center | Atlanta, Georgia 141