Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 1 USE OF COMM CTR 08-04-80DATE: July 28, 1980 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Royleen White, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR USE OF CLIFTON C. MILLER COMMUNITY CE~I=ER AND OTHER CITY FACILITIES BY L.P. REPERTORY COMPANY NEW BUSINESS NO. 1 8~.4"80 BACKGROUND: As Council may be aware, the L.P. Repertory Company produced and Presented "Catch Me If You Can" this spring, utilizing several City facilities. The production was co-sponsored by the City, and unfortunately, there were problems with the project. The basic financial arrangement was an 80/20 split after the L.P. Repertory Company recovered its initial Sl,O00.O0 production expenses. The City received $175.00, according to Community Services staff; accounting procedures made it impossible to audit the figures. Since Community Services staff did not handle door-sale tickets, it was a matter of accepting L.P. Repertory's figures regarding what the City's share would be. (This report is not suggesting that the Company's figures were inaccurate; it is merely pointing out the fact that no financial control was available.) The L.P. Repertory Company also donated draperies for the Community Center; see below for further details. The L.P. Repertory Company utilized the Clifton C. Miller Communtiy Center for the production; dates were May 19 through June 1. Department classes had to be moved or cancelled; this involved approximately 345 persons. Two previously booked rentals had to be cancelled, which resulted in a $590.00 loss of revenue. Opportunity costs (revenue anticipated but not received due to facility being block-booked) were estimated at $1,000.00. The Company also utilized the Council Chambers for auditions, the employees lounge for a dressing room, City Hall for a press party, Lambert School for rehearsals, and Red Hill Maintenance Yard for set construction. Sets are currently stored at the Maintenance Yard. Community Services staff has reported that Lambert School and the Red Hill Yard were left in poor condition, resulting in higher-than-usual maintenance costs. A ladder was broken; its replacement cost was $153.00. Although no hard data is available, Maintenance and Community Services staff report an inordinate amount of time was spent coordinating and "troubleshooting" this project. Perhaps due to the vagueness of the agreement, L.P. Repertory Company members made many last-minute requests which were not anticipated. In all fairness to the Company, this was their first production in this format, and perhaps they were unprepared regarding what would be entailed. It also appears City staff was unaware of the scope of the project. The L.P. Repertory Company was basically positive about the audience the play generated. In a letter to Councilman Edgar, Managing Director Sarah Coleman quoted an'audience of 658 for the run of "Catch Me If You Can" (ten performances). L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Two July 28, 1980 This portion of the report has summarized some of the problems encountered with the 1980 production. The remainder of the report will discuss the L.P. Repertory Company's request for 1981 and inform the Council of its impact on revenue, facilities, and staffing. DISCUSSION: I. Clifton C. Miller Community Center The request for 1981 revolves around performance dates of March 26 to 29, April 2 to 6, and April l0 to 13 in the Clifton C. Miller Community Center. However, due to the fact~that the stage will be up for almost three weeks, the building will be unavailable for alternate usage in most cases, negating potential revenue. Secondly, the building is already booked to several groups which will have to be cancelled and refunded. Thirdly, many Community Services classes will have to either cancelled or rescheduled. (Rescheduling is not an easy task, as all available space for classes is utilized to its maximum.) A listing of conflicts and revenue impact appears below: Wed., 3/25 Senior Citizens Club; 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.; stage needs to be set up. If this is done after the Club meeting, it will require Maintenance over-time. If the Club is cancelled out for the day, the stage can be set up during normal working hours. The Senior Citizens Club is a City-sponsored function, attracting 150-200 Seniors every Wednesday. Thurs., 3/26 Community Services Department classes cancelled or displaced involving 125 people. Some smaller classes can work around stage. Fri., 3/27 No conflict; smaller classes work around stage. Loss of potential revenue. Sat., 3/28 No conflict; loss of potential revenue. Sun., 3/29 City-sponsored Senior Citizens Pot Luck either cancelled or displaced, affecting approximately 75 members. A.A. meeting inconvenienced, but can work around stage. Mon., 3/30 Tues., 3/31 Wed., 4/1 Thurs., 4/2 Community Services Department large classes either cancelled or displaced, involving approximately 125 persons. Smaller classes and Senior Citizens Club can work around stage. Fri'., 4/3 Building rented to Clock Collectors; would have to cancel them and return their $70.00. Sat., 4/4 'No conflict; loss of potential revenue. Sun., 4/5 A.A. meeting inconvenienced, but can work around stage. L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Three July 28, 1980 Mon., 4/6 Tues., 4/7 Wed., 4/8 Thurs., 4/9 Community Services Department large classes either cancelled or displaced, involving 125 persons. Smaller classes and Senior Citizens can work around stage. Fri., 4/10 No conflict; loss of potential revenue. Sat., 4/ll Facility rented to Parents Without Partners; would have to cancel them and return their $140.00. Sun., 4/12 A.A. meeting inconvenienced, but can work around stage. L.P. Repertory. has stated that set will be struck after completion of 2:30 p.m. matinee, and will be done before 5:30 p.m.A.A. meeting - a very tight schedule. (However, stage will still be up. ) Mon., 4/13 Maintenance personnel take down stage during normal work day. Projected direct and opportunity costs/Clifton C. Miller Community Center only: Maintenance over-time (stage set-up) $25/hour x 3 = $ 75.00 Rental revenue returned $ 210.00 Opportunity costs (loss of potential rental revenue) $1,200.00 SUBTOTAL $1,485.00 II. Other Requested Facilities A. Lambert School L.P. Repertory has requested use of a room for rehearsals, beginning two and a half months prior to opening. This indicates a start date at Lambert of January lO. The Company has requested all day Saturday and Sunday for the period January 10 through March 22. Beginning March 6, they have also requested Friday evenings. B. Red Hill Maintenance Yard Company has requested use for set construction. The dates and times are basically the same as those for Lambert School. C. City Hall Employees Lounge Company has requested use on performance dates: March 26-29, April 2-5, and April 9-12. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday evenings: 7:00-11:00 p.m., and Sunday afternoons: 1:00-5:00 p.m. This area is needed for a dressing room. There is a conflict with a Community Services class, which would have to be cancelled or rescheduled (three Thursday evenings). L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Four July 28, 1980 D. City Hall Lobby and Conference Room Company has requested use for opening night party, Thursday, March 26, This would entail a few hours' time after the first performance, plus set up, clean up, and tear down. £. Council Chambers (or other facility) The Company has requested a suitable facility for auditions, approximately three months prior to opening. This would require two evenings, and dates are somewhat flexible. Opportunity costs (other facilities): The Council Chambers is the only involved facility which is rented to outside groups. Loss of potential revenue would be between $200.00 and $400.00 (average $300.00). SUBTOTAL $ 300.00 III. Unresolved Items from 1980 PrOduction A. Draperies at Community Building In a memo dated May 30, 1980, Bob Ledendecker recommended that a permanent traverse track be installed, and that the drapes be modified to provide door openings, hooks for hanging purposes, and adjustments to provide a finished length above the floor. The staff estimated a cost of $25,000 to $30,000 to properly install new draperies and hardware. This alternative would have to be weighed against the potential life of the present curtains, and the price of hardware, et cetera, for these. Ledendecker also expressed concern regarding the the sun resistance of the draperies. He recommended that the drapes not be utilized unless they are sun resistant. As Council is aware, the Senior Citizens Club is very much in favor or the draperies staying up. One alternative, however, is to take them down and rehang them only for the L.P. Repertory performances. Should the draperies come down, this Department has considerations regarding storage and re-hang. Staff does not know of an available space to properly store them, and is also concerned about cleaning costs incurred prior to re-hang for the next production. Should the drapes be cleaned, they would probably have to be fire-proofed again. B. License and Permit Board Hearing Gary Napper, in a memo dated July 18, 1980, expressed a positive recommendation for such a hearing. After meeting with Sarah, staff ascertained the L.P. Repertory does have a Guild which raises funds, has a membership, and holds regular meeting. As staff is unaware of the exact nature of such a hearing, we are unsure as to whether to concur with his recommendation. The intent of the ordinance appears to be geared to "questionable" forms of entertainment, and one wonders L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Five July 28, 1980 IV. Vo whether an investigation (Sec. 8-22) is warranted. Such an investigation might offend the L.P. Repertory Company as well as be an unwarranted expenditure of City funds. C. Set Storage The previous agreement allowed L.P. Repertory to utilize the Red Hill Maintenance Yard in order to store sets for one year after the 1980 production. Currently, the sets are at Red Hill, and staff is concerned that storage for City equipment would be unavailable in future years should the L.P. Repertory equipment storage continue expanding. In addition, there ii a question regarding insurance coverage for the stored sets. They are not City property; therefore, they would not be covered in the event of theft or property damage. Insurance Considerations As Council is aware, producing a play includes a great deal of technical work -- carpentry, painting, working with electrical apparatus and so forth. It appears that this issue was not addressed in the previous production. Either the City must cover L.P. Repertory Company members, or the City must require L.P. Repertory to provide a certificate of insurance. A third alternative would be to require Company members to sign a waiver, much as we now require independent contractors to do. Maintenance Costs and Considerations The Maintenance Division will incur costs for a production such as L.P. Repertory has requested. These include stage set-up and take-down, hauling sets and props from Lambert and Red Hill facilities, returning same in City vehicle, and general assistance from time to time. In normal facility rental, many of these costs would be covered in the fees charged to user groups. However, if fees are again waived, Council should be aware that no revenue will come in to cover either "soft" dollars or over-time incurred. Even though groups generally do their own set-up and take-down, Maintenance costs are incurred. SOft dollar costs for the 1980 production included the following, and 1981 should be similar: Set up stage, move scenery, other set up Janitorial service ($80/shift/day x lO performances) SUBTOTAL $ 130.00 $ 8OO.OO $ 930.00 Additionally, staff felt that the Lambert School and Red Hill facilities were not left in satisfactory condition. A clean-up or maintenance desposit might be appropriate in the future. Should additional maintenance be required, the funds can then easily be taken from this deposit. If the facilities are left in an appropriate condition, the entire deposit would then be returned. L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Six July 28, 1980 VI. Community Services Costs and Considerations Community Services staff time to coordinate the project, troubleshoot problems, sell tickets, handle telephone and counter inquiries, and assist L.P. Repertory Company members with last-minute difficulties was also a factor. Another "soft dollar" figure, this amounted to approximately $400.00, in addition to regular assistance per the agreement, which was close to $200.00. Soft dollar costs for Community Services staff: VII. Summary of Projected Costs VIII. SUBTOTAL $ 600.00 IX. CCMCC Direct and Opportunity Costs Council Chambers Maintenance Staff Community Services Staff $l,485.00 300.00 930.00 600.00 TOTAL $3,315.00 Financial Arrangements There are several alternatives available to pursue: A. Flat rental fee to L.P. Repertory Company; L.P. Repertory then receives all revenue. B. A straight contract percentage split: either 80/20, 75/25, 70/30, 60/40, or any appropriate division of revenues. C. L.P. Repertory retains initial production costs, then City and L.P. Repertory split remainder. Alternative "A" is the easiest for staff to administer, as staff would not need to be concerned about ticket revenue. Accounting would be strictly L.P. Repertory's responsibility. On the other hand, L.P. Repertory's Sarah Coleman has stated she would be opposed to paying rental fees. Should either Alternative "B" or "C" be adopted, then proper accounting procedure's must be utilized. This means either L.P. Repertory or City staff would be required to produce sequentially numbered tickets, another additional expense. Should Alternative "C" be adopted, L.P. Repertory should be required to submit a detailed accounting of their production expenses. Connection with Miss Tustin Pageant The Tustin JayCees have requested a block of time just prior to the proposed L.P. Repertory production. In the past, Council has directed staff to waive fees and give the JayCees a reasonable amount of time in the Community L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Seven July 28, 1980 Center. Should this pageant take place again, the effect on classes, staff time, and lost revenue would roughly equal that of the L.P. Repertory production. Staff was unable to meet with the JayCees representative prior to Council packet being finalized; however, a meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, July 30. Staff anticipates a request similar to those of past years. The meeting has been set up to negotiate specific dates and times. SUMMARY: This report has been unusually detailed; however, staff feels Council should have as much data as possible in order to make an informed decision. Staff needs direction from Council regarding the scope of the City's involvement in this proposed production. While the Community Services Department is in support of expanding Cultural Arts opportunities for all Tustin residents, staff is also aware of budget parameters. As stated earlier in this report, the production will cost approximately $3,315.00 in both "soft" dollars, rental refunds, and opportunity costs. Other disadvantages include cancellation and displacement of classes and Senior Citizens programs. Rental refunds and cancelled programs cause negative public relations for the Community Services Department and the City of Tustin. Utilization of the Center for an extended period of block time negates its function as a multiple-use facility. The disadvantages must be weighed against the advantages of having a fine theatre production in our facility. The production itself is a positive public relations vehicle for the City, perhaps balancing out the negative aspects. Additionally, Ms. Coleman appears to be willing to schedule as flexibly as possible in order to disrupt a minimal amount of Community Services programming. The L.P. Repertory Company is well known and is certain to produce a quality production. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Regardless of which alternative Council elects to choose regarding policy aspects of the L.P. Repertory request, staff requests the flexibility to negotiate a detailed agreement regarding exact use of facility, amount of staff support, and other operational considerations. This agreement would spell out "who does what" well in advance, in order to avoid last-minute crises. ALTERNATIVES FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: The first issue to be decided is whether to approve use of the building on a block basis by L.P. Repertory for a production. Alternatives are straightforward: A. Approve request for dates. B. Deny request for dates. II. The second issue concerns the financial considerations. Does Council wish to L.P. REPERTORY REQUEST Page Eight July 28, 1980 III. waive all fees, enter into co-sponsorship, or charge a flat rental fee in consideration for City support? Options include: A. Waive rental fees, with staff directed to negotiate a percentage of revenue for City. City co-sponsors event. B. Charge L.P. Repertory a flat rental fee for the production. City can either co-sponsor or not, depending upon Council prerogative and fee negotiated. C. Require a maintenance deposit. D. Do not require a maintenance deposit. Staff would also appreciate Council direction regarding the following: A. What direction should staff take regarding the draperies at the Community Center? B. Does Council feel comfortable with a standing agreement to store L.P. Repertory sets on. City property? C. Is a License and Permit Board Hearing required? D. What are Council's thoughts regarding insurance coverage for such a program? E. Should Council decide to co-sponsor the production, staff would appreciate direction regarding what would be an appropriate amount of staff time and resources to devote to this project. - RAW:ss .ATE: August 4, 1980 Inter-Corn TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ~ FI~OM: Royleen A. White, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO L,P. REPERTORY REPORT ~ ~' Sarah Coleman of L.P. Repertory. Company was given a copy of the subject' staff report last Friday, in order that she could review the data. Sarah requested that her comments be made available to Council prior to consideration of this item. USE OF COUNCIL CHAMBERS (page 4; Section II. E) Ms. Coleman states that the Company is willing to use another facility in an attempt to reduce costs. Staff listed the $300.00 figure for the Council Chambers in order to cover all possible contingencies. The $300.00 figure would be reduced or eliminated if another facility were utilized. MAINTENANCE COSTS AND CONSIDERATIONS (page 5; Section V) Ms. Coleman wants to inform Council that she feels that the Maintenance person would be on duty, regardless of whether L.P. Repertory were utilizing the facility. Ms. Coleman states that the Maintenance person's presence is not required during performances, and she thinks the figures listed for maintenance are too high. RAW:ss