RTP-area local music and culture

[Phillip Grosshans <phillipg AT NODAMNSPAM.duke.Spamfree.edu>]

Alex, my dear friend, (and others with a stake in this issue),

First, I appreciate how you and Caleb, and many others, have been
leading and organizing the fight against the performing arts center.
However, I'm concerned that Clear Channel has become too central in
the arguments against the center. I see Clear Channel as a dangerous
little red herring that too much of the community has been seduced by.

Clear Channel isn't the problem. The problem is that millions of tax
dollars are going to develop an Arts Center that no one seems to want.
It's not going to meet ADF's needs. Duke wants no part of it. Your
average citizen doesn't even know about it and probably doesn't want
it. The arts community seems to think it's misdirect money. The Durham
cultural map saw no need for it.

Yet, every time I talk to, or read something by, one of you who are
opposed to the Arts Center, the first thing I hear is something along
the lines of "Clear Channel is evil."  Well, sure, they are.

But, doesn't that diminish the message?  Doesn't it just make all of
us seem like a bunch of shrill, out-of-touch folks who don't at all
represent the "average" citizen -- we paint ourselves as elitists who
just don't like Clear Channel and mainstream culture?  Doesn't it
allow Bell to justify silencing you?  He can dismiss you as
malcontents that are simply misinformed about the project and opposed
to it only because of the hot-button name "Clear Channel."  That
seemed to be the central message that the reporter for the N&O picked
up on <http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1305112p-7427366c.html>

I'd urge you to reconsider your rhetoric and your strategy. Frankly,
Alex, I was shocked to read your prepared comments and see that they
began by focusing on Clear Channel (your later comments about City
spending are much more germane).  It seemed to be the complete
opposite of what we had discussed on Saturday in regards to that N&O
article.

The central argument that needs to be made is that this proposed
Center doesn't meet the needs of Durham. The study that the council
funded doesn't call for such a center
<http://www.durhamarts.org/pdf/Ch2_Facility_Inventory_Master_FNL.pdf>.
It calls for a small mixed use facility and a cooperative use facility
that meets the needs of ADF and others.  That's an argument that can't
refute -- that their own planning study doesn't support it.

And , all of us need to work on getting the kind of people who love
Clear Channel programming to be opposed to this project.  If the
Council can see that the planned audience/attendees don't want it,
then they'll reconsider. But, currently the City Council thinks that
the "average citizen" will attend events managed and booked by Clear
Channel. All of you that showed up last night don't matter anyway to
them; they don't think you will be patrons of the Center, so you don't
matter in their thinking.

Drop the anti-Clear Channel rhetoric. Drop the "get the freaks out"
and scare Bill Bell strategy. Focus on the money and risk issues. The
kind of issues that a good old fashion Republican could embrace --
limit spending.  The kind of argument that I make with working class
secretary people here at Duke -- they're going to spend your tax
dollars on an Arts Center that even the arts community doesn't want
and the you and I might end up paying for.  Get your W-loving,
God-and-Country types to get upset about it and get them to start
writing the council. Then, you got a chance to stop this. 

I don't mean to criticize or insult anyone fighting the good fight
against the Center, especially as I'm guilty of missing the meeting
last night.  But, I do think an inordinate amount of attention has
been lavished on "Clear Channel" in this fight, and I think your
arguments against the center will be stronger if you never mention
Clear Channel again.

-pg, my 2 cents


On 8 Jun 2004 08:28:18 -0700, bd189 AT yahoo.com (alex kostelnik) wrote:

>To all of you who came last night to City Council:
>
>It was powerful.  It meant so much to me to see you
>all there.
>
>It was such a weird mix- artists from all around the
>triangle respectfully representing the community, and
>the Mayor and City Council blatantly abusing their
>offices in a public forum- right in front of us all.
>
>Ths is an experience I will remember.
>
>James H. is being _nice_ in his characterization of
>the meeting.  Believe me.
>
>>written last night< 
>
>Mayor Bell got dirty on us tonight.  He planned all
>along to not let opponents of the Events Center talk. 
>
>
>And he purposely led us to stay four hours to tell us
>that.
>
>Since he knew the council would approve the four month
>extension on the planning process, he did not _have_
>to refuse public comment.
>
>In short, the Mayor believes it was totally worth it
>to insult the anti-events center constituency.
>
>And he seems to think he can totally get away with
>that.
>
>Ah, what people do when they get a little power.
>
>And Dianne Catotti!!  Dammit I voted for her!  I mean-
>she got into office with the heavy help of the
>people's alliance.  Dirty game playing here. She sat
>there like.. Duh..  totally playing the game and
>letting us down- way down.  She knew.
>
>Here’s the speech I never gave.
>
>-----------
>
>Mr. Bell, Ms. Conner and members of City Council
>
> These days access to the airwaves and concert venues
>is more controlled than ever by Media giant Clear
>Channel.  Payola is the thing of the past- they do it
>now legally and it’s business as usual.
>
> So why are my tax dollars going to support this
>monster that threatens the first amendment itself and
>is an insult to the arts community?  
>
> If the City of Durham respected it’s own arts
>community it would have asked them first about their
>proposed Events Center.  CC’s involvement in the
>City’s management proposal is proof  that we were
>never asked.  
>
> The citizens and arts community of Durham does not
>want the Events Center.
>
> Residents of Durham are very touchy these days about
>City Spending.
>
> I would love to see the City try to get this proposal
>to pass an open public process with a bonds vote.  It
>would never pass.  That’s why the city is trying to
>use Certificates of Participation.  (COPs).  These do
>not require public approval.
>
> The city is doing this on their own.  I believe they
>are about to bring another scandal down upon
>themselves.  They will have only their selves to
>blame.
>
>Remember what happened with the ballpark?  This is
>turning out to smell, look and taste the same.
>
>-Alex Kostelnik
>Artistic Director, The Scrap Exchange
>North State Sound Studio
>ABCD (Artist and Business Coalition of Downtown)
>(www.abcdDurham.com)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       
>               
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 
>-- ch-scene: the list that mirrors alt.music.chapel-hill --
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ch-scene