- April 30, 2025
-
-
Loading
Loading
Yogi Berra was such a smart guy: “Déjà vu all over again.”
The March 17 City Commission meeting on whether to adopt an “implementation agreement” for a new performing arts center was indeed déjà vu all over again. Many of us have seen that movie many times in Sarasota …
Just propose a large-scale development in the city, and then imagine a giant, complicated spaghetti ball that takes months for city commissioners to try to unravel.
Indeed, in this instance, if you pushed through the City Commission’s five-hour discussion, it’s likely you could have reached this conclusion: Timeout. This isn’t working.
Or, as they say when you get that “spinning wheel of death” on your MacBook: Just turn it off, let it sit, take a pause and then reboot.
Here’s reality: City commissioners as a group are not developers. They’re policymakers watching out for taxpayers, a board of directors overseeing and advising on strategy and operations.
At the same time, the interactions at the meeting between the commissioners and Tania Castroverde Moskalenko, CEO of the Sarasota Performing Arts Foundation, clearly sent the message there are communication and responsibility gaps that need restructuring.
A major reboot is needed.
The tenor and content of the conversation needs to change to avoid a total motherboard meltdown. Take a breath. Table the implementation agreement for now. Go back and watch the video of the commission meeting to assess what needs to be addressed to change the conversation from what looks like a losing proposition to getting the process on a track to succeed.
During the five-hour slog, several crucial concerns emerged. We’re certainly not development experts, but if this venture is to continue and succeed, those concerns warrant changes in the way this process is being led and managed.
To begin, one of the foremost necessities for the success of any project involving multiple partners and players is this: alignment.
Everyone must be in alignment every step of the way — who does what, who is or not responsible for what. The City Commission, city staff and Sarasota Performing Arts Foundation tried spelling that out in previous agreements, but it was palpable March 17 that adjustments are needed.
To be sure, there will be disagreements, and circumstances will call for flexibility. But ultimately, the partners must operate with mutual respect and trust.
Lacking that, misalignment will bring inevitable failure.
More on that later. Back to the crucial concerns to be resolved. At the top of the list:
That commitment from commissioners is essential and must come before alignment on the details. It’s the first thing that should be addressed and addressed in a vote at the commission’s next meeting. People want to know.
Not to do that will signal uncertainty, a sign that would reverberate widely, deflate enthusiasm and make it far more difficult — perhaps impossible — for SPAF to raise its share of the funding.
It’s understandable if Commissioner Kathy Kelley Ohlrich and Vice Mayor Debbie Trice are ambivalent about making such a commitment. The cost scares them — for good reason. The Bay Park and performing arts center are the largest city projects since Sarasota city voters approved a bond issue in the early 1960s to construct the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall and build Mound Street and Bayfront Park simultaneously.
But surely Ohlrich and Trice realize their commitments in particular will determine success or failure. As Castroverde Moskalenko told commissioners: Private donors are holding off from writing checks until they see whether city commissioners make a definitive commitment to go forward.
This is akin to city critic Martin Hyde’s chicken-or-egg analogy. What comes first?
Like the private donors, Ohlrich and Trice are hesitant to make a commitment — especially when they do not like the cost or don’t know what donors will contribute.
That bring us to concern #2.
That is not up to the architects. City commissioners and the SPAF must be determine the total amount the city is willing and able to spend.
What can the city comfortably afford to meet its debt obligations; be in line with the growth in the tax increment financing funds; and not create undue default risk?
We’ve seen the number grow — from $185 million to $250 million to more than $400 million.
Perhaps the total cost is not a set number; perhaps it is a range; or cast as no more than a percentage of the TIF.
Commissioners need to see real-world comparables and best practices from other cities that have gone through this. The discussion should also include some examination of what it would cost to design a performing arts center for the future — a center that is outfitted for mega-screen digital sets of the future and not for the old-school truckloads of traveling theater sets.
They need a definitive list of the three to five other major public infrastructure projects that will need financing in the coming years.
With all that, they each should write down their numbers — what they’re willing to spend. Then make a decision and stick to it.
The performing arts foundation in its earlier agreement with the city is obligated to provide the city with its funding commitments at least quarterly. If city commissioners commit to the project and if a cost is determined, spirits and confidence would rise if the foundation shortly thereafter produced its first catalytic contributions totaling in the high five or six figures.
This is a crucial step.
The argument that donors are waiting for the city to commit is a chicken-or-the-egg; but it seems more like SPAF is being chicken.
The city and Sarasota County have done their parts with the TIF.
The SPAF should be a leading public promoter and catalyst. And the best way to create confidence would be for the SPAF to come forward with signature pledges and contributions.
That is standard procedure in major fundraising. Look at the $50 million contribution last month to the Sarasota Orchestra’s efforts. When Miami began efforts to develop a performing arts center, philanthropist Adrienne Arsht contributed $30 million. David Straz Jr. donated an estimated $25 million to the Straz Performing Arts Center in Tampa. The Dr. Phillips Foundation contributed $25 million when Orlando began its development of the Dr. Phillips Center.
This goes back to alignment. You could see throughout the commission meeting the gaps that existed among commissioners, city staff and the SPAF staff and board.
Commissioner Trice appeared visibly exasperated by not having information she requested from the foundation. The foundation relied repeatedly on consultants. Some might say the architects have been guiding the process — or had blank-check influence. Jennifer Jorgensen, the city’s capable director of governmental affairs, has been a ping-pong ball (with little to no authority) bouncing in between the commissioners and SPAF.
All of this is a symptom of a leader-less operation. There is no general in charge.
Indeed, try crafting an organizational chart.
Likewise, imagine this process as a multi-faceted business enterprise, much like the Walt Disney Co. — with its theme parks, film and live theater productions and film and theater productions within its parks.
At the top of this organizational chart is a board of directors in charge of company policy and endorsing (or refining) the CEO’s strategy for growth and the CEO’s efficient and ethical leadership and management of operations.
The CEO reports to the board, and the board lets the CEO execute the strategy — all along the way keeping the directors informed of progress.
Key point: There is more to “this” than a new performing arts center. “This” is all 53 bayfront acres — The Bay Park, Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall, the Sarasota Performing Arts Center, parking, boat ramp, utilities an on and on.
There should be a CEO-like leader overseeing the entire 53 acres, a person who is adept at creating coalitions among public and private groups and also a leader adept at executing the mission. A leader with a proven record.
The leader of this enterprise would create an organization with manager/leaders of the requisite departments. Likewise, there would be an executive leadership team that connects the partners — e.g. Jorgensen, Castroverde Moskalenko, Van Wezel Director Mary Bensel, Lynn Singleton, the founder of Professional Facilities Management and one of the most respected arts facilities operators in the U.S.
Another key point: The Bay Park-SPAC leader should not be the new city manager. While that person is the city’s CEO, it would be a recipe for failure to expect a new city manager to learn, lead and manage every aspect of the city while at the same time oversee everything occurring on those priceless 53 acres.
It makes sense that the point person for the Bay Park/SPAC would report to the city manager, who in turn is the conduit to city commissioners.
There is an immutable maxim in business: Every project, every venture, every business needs a champion. Up to now, the performing arts center has had no singular champion in charge, no one person creating coalitiona and alignment and pushing everyone and the process forward in the same direction. It needs that champion — now.
Obvious choice: AG Lafley, CEO of the Bay Park Conservancy.
For the past six years, Lafley has been leading successfully and within budget the development of the Bay Park and Bay Park Conservancy, all the while keeping city commissioners and city staff informed and aligned.
He is intimately familiar with every aspect of those 53 bayfront acres. And he is intimately familiar with this type of project. Lafley served as chairman of the Cincinnati Center City Development Corp. (3CDC) in the early 2000s, a private nonprofit that has invested more than $2.5 billion to transform that city’s Fountain Square and riverfront into a park and entertainment hub that now attracts more than two million visitors a year.
And, by the way, Lafley also knows a little something about business, budgets, accountability and leadership. In his previous life, he gained some experience (11 years) as chairman and CEO (twice) of a tiny $70 billion (annual revenues), 127,000-employee worldwide company you may have heard of — Proctor & Gamble.
Altogether, if this lifetime legacy project is to continue moving forward — and it should — this reboot is paramount. It is urgent.
It’s buying time to organize; set priorities and cost limits; examine what has worked and what hasn’t; recast the design for the future, as well as its location in the park; set a defined structure and course; and have a champion leading the mission.
All of that would create confidence and enthusiasm for a successful civic undertaking that will stand as a regional treasure and an iconic emblem of who and what Sarasota is for the next 50 years.
