When Jerry Frautschi announced his gift to create the Overture Center almost ten years ago, he had no firm opinion as to the structure that would operate the facility. In fact he assumed that the new facility, built on the site and concept of Madison's Civic Center, would continue with City of Madison control.
Then mayor Susan Baumann wanted no part of the facility. Her concern was the responsibility of the new performing arts center, both managerial as well as financial.
She informed Frautschi the gift was welcomed, but that he would have to find an alternative to the city when it came to ownership and management of Overture.
She informed the pubic of something different.
She told members of the city council and the press that the eventually adopted Madison Cultural Arts District (MCAD) was a condition of Fratuschi's gift. Actually MCAD served the needs of then Civic Center director Robert D'Angelo, who was looking for a structure that would guarantee him the benefits of public employment without the the inconvenience of an elected executive who might keep an eye on him.
It was a condition, not imposed by the donor, but by Baumann.
That condition set in motion a series of events and decisions which lead to the untenable situation MCAD experiences today.
The worst of all public structures is a legal public body with no constituency.
MCAD, like Wisconsin school districts or municipalities, is a creature of the state. It is established by state law and its powers are derived from the state. Unlike the school boards and the municipalities, MCAD does not have elected leadership.
That does have some advantages. Its board, appointed by state, city and county leaders, does not have to worry about a meddlesome public.
There is a downside. There is no public electorate that cares what happens to MCAD.There are no stakeholders to turn to in a time of crisis.
Now Overture, despite performances booked and tickets sold, is facing a crisis which needs public support, but cannot obtain it. Laying off public employees may save a modest amount in operating costs, but fails to solve the larger problem of public engagement.
When Baumann made her decision, she deprived the people of Madison of a free and open debate as to how the new Overture might be operated and managed. The outcome might be the same, the MCAD.
However, it was more likely city management would continue. which then would have set in motion an entirely different set of decisions, which may have avoided today's crisis.
author's note: Wisconsin has similar structures such as the area technical colleges. Fortunately for them, there is an active public since they have the ability to tax; there are area-wide constituencies that support, or oppose, what they do.
Make that MCAD - Madison Cultural Arts District - not MCAT.
Posted by: Marius | December 29, 2008 at 09:23 PM
Interesting read. It's a shame the state the Overture Center is in.
Posted by: lukas | December 29, 2008 at 10:01 PM
The article "Overture Center: where it went wrong" contains the assertion that former Mayor Baumann wanted the Madison Cultural Arts District (MCAD)to be an independent public entity so that its original CEO, Robert D'Angelo, would not be under City/Mayoral supervision, since he would not be a city employee. In fact, Mr. D'Angelo and his successors as the CEO of MCAD, have been and are City employees; they have the same City employment contracts as the heads of all or most City departments.
Another correction. You state that MCAD is a creature of the state having been established by state law; The applicable state law says such a District can be established by action of the City; the state law defines the structure of MCAD, but it did not, by itself, create the District.
Dick Lehmann, former Madison alder, having served on the common council with Mr. Soglin. I have been general counsel to MCAD since it was formed.
Posted by: dick lehmann | December 31, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Dick: D'Angelo technically was a city employee, but unlike the old administrative stucture where he reported directly to the mayor, under the MCAD structure his regular supervision for management purposes was by the board, not a single individual. A check of meetings scheduled with the mayors after MCAD was formed would confirm that.
Baumann and D'Angelo had different purposes for perferring the structure. Baumann wanted to avoid responsibility for the new Overture facility. D'Angelo wanted the greater freedom of serving under a board rather than a single supervisor.
MCAD is a creature of the state. Without state statute allowing the creation of such districts, it could not exist, with or without enabling municipal legislation. The city of Madison has no authority to create any entity with condemnation powers without state approval. The power of condemnation is a power of the state and can only be delegated by statute; a delegation that may be general or specific.
Posted by: Paul | January 02, 2009 at 09:01 AM
Hi, Paul - flawed model, let me count the ways.
Posted by: Paul Beard | January 03, 2009 at 12:14 AM