LA_Debacle - Page: 1 of 1

By Carol Jean Delmar
OperaOnline.us
January 20, 2010

Stories from three of the most prestigious newspapers in the nation – The New York Times, Washington Post and Baltimore Sun -- have weighed in on supertenor Plácido Domingo’s role in the financial crises of the two companies he heads: Los Angeles Opera and Washington National Opera. I will focus on the happenings in LA.

First, I would like to make it clear that Domingo has been an asset to the Los Angeles landscape. Since becoming general director of LA Opera, he has elevated the company by utilizing his fundraising skills to raise the capital necessary to produce many of the glorious productions that have graced the stage of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. More importantly, he has attracted some of the greatest international opera stars to our shores so that the West Coast is no longer considered an artistic wasteland when compared to the East, which was sadly a reality in years past.

As the chief administrator of Los Angeles Opera, Domingo must be held accountable for much of the company’s financial woes, although many other people have enabled its failures.

When Domingo accepted the general director’s seat in 2003, everyone knew that he would not be an on-site administrator, so Edgar Baitzel was hired to attend to the day-to-day operations. But when Baitzel died almost three years ago, LA Opera was left in disarray and Baitzel was never replaced.

The problem has been that Domingo lacks management expertise. My ex-husband was director of the Houston Airport System and has an MBA. He always told me that the key to managing any large company is to know how to apply the word “delegate.”

Domingo had much to offer LA Opera when he became its general director, but he didn’t know how to delegate. The company needed direction from someone who was not only knowledgeable about opera, but was fiscally astute and aware of the community so that the productions and repertoire would appeal to potential ticket-buyers. Simply owning a residence in LA does not enable a person to acquire that knowledge. New operas with expensive production costs and dissonant music do not sell tickets, nor do avant-garde Wagnerian extravaganzas that cost $32 million when the company doesn’t have the $32 million to pay the bill.

Much has been written about the economy’s role in the demise of some of our nation’s opera companies (ie. Opera Pacific). Los Angeles Opera’s problems are unique. Just like the other companies, LA Opera was unable to secure the funds already pledged by donors who sufferered unanticipated losses due to the economy. But LA Opera has suffered financially for a number of years, and its leaders went ahead with a “Ring” without available funding. That was irresponsible of them.

Domingo is not solely to blame. Producing Wagner’s “Ring” gives an opera company credibility and prestige. But Seattle Opera has been doing it for years while still living within its means. What is happening in Los Angeles is about egos and status. LA Opera leaders wanted to produce the most extravagant “Ring” the world has ever known. When they realized they didn’t have the funding for it, they developed the idea of having a “Ring” festival to involve the entire county even though most of the residents in LA couldn’t care less about opera or Wagner, and city and county leaders didn’t have the expertise to understand what they were getting into.

Then the Jewish community got involved. Some members of the community, including myself, were opposed to celebrating Richard Wagner’s life since he wrote lengthy anti-Semitic treatises, and his family had personal ties to Adolf Hitler. We thought the “Ring” performances were acceptable but wanted to balance the fringe festival with some non-Wagnerian programming. But other members of the Jewish community – some of them major donors to LA Opera – disagreed. Their love for Wagner’s music superseded penalizing him for his bigotry. All that mattered to them was maintaining the status of the opera company and their status in it, so they tried to hide LA Opera’s financial failings with the belief that a Wagner festival would enhance tourism and enable their unrealistic dream.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich proposed that the festival be diversified rather than celebrate a composer who provided “the de facto soundtrack for the Holocaust.” But Zev Yaroslavsky introduced a substitute motion to endorse the all-Wagner festival, which passed. The supervisors never asked to review LA Opera’s prior tax returns and current financial statements (to my knowledge), they just gave the company their blessings with the directive to publicize the festival. The Board of Supervisors could have served as an umbrella organization to create the checks and balances that LA Opera needed, but on the day the motion passed (July 21), Yaroslavsky said that the politicians should keep their sticky fingers out of art.

It is important to note that LA County owns the Music Center and that LA Opera rents the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion from the Music Center. So in December when LA Opera was on the verge of financial collapse, the opera company came running back to the Board of Supervisors for a $14 million loan, which the board granted with one dissenting vote from Antonovich.

The supervisors were put in a precarious position. They didn’t want to see the demise of LA Opera and didn’t want to lose the rent they receive to keep the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion occupied. It would be difficult, almost impossible, to find a replacement.

According to a letter sent to LA Opera subscribers on Dec. 18, the county issued bonds purchased by Banc of America Leasing & Capital LLC, which served as the $14 million loan to LA Opera. LA Opera is paying back the loan over the next three years with interest going to the bank. Right now no taxpayer dollars have been utilized. LA Opera is depending on pledges from donors to repay the loan, but if the money cannot be raised, LA County taxpayers will no doubt foot the bill.

All of this was avoidable, even in this economy. LA County should not have been called upon to bail out a nonprofit arts organization that has been in financial upheaval for years. In essence, LA County is paying for part of the “Ring.” Stephen Rountree is president of the Music Center and LA Opera’s chief operating officer, but by the time he was called upon for direction last year, it was too late. Volunteer efforts by LA Opera board members had been insufficient.

To make matters worse, LA Opera has produced three of the four operas in the “Ring” to mixed reviews. Los Angeles critics have been eerily flattering as if they have a vested interest in promoting the festival. The national press and yours truly have not been so kind. New York Times critic Anthony Tommasini wrote of the “Siegfried” production: “The main problem is not its weirdness but its often cheap and sloppy look. . . . Ms. Watson’s unearthly Brünnhilde looked like some big-haired Cher on Oscar night.”

Not only has LA Opera overextended itself financially, it has stretched itself to the brink creatively by producing a controversial Eurotrash production that is disrespectful of the composer and singers.

Washington Post critic Anne Midgette has written that Domingo doesn’t have “any particular ability to lead an organization.” Daniel J. Wakin of The New York Times recently wrote that Domingo critics say his companies “are struggling from the lack of a firm local hand.”

Ticket sales for the “Ring” have not been swift although Rountree is overly optimistic. I personally believe that the presentation of three “Ring” cycles should be reduced to two. I also believe that a consultant who is not associated with LA Opera should be hired to oversee the company’s finances.

Ring Festival LA will be the city’s largest arts festival since 1984. From April 15 to June 30, more than 100 events will be focused on Wagner and the “Ring,” with the three “Ring” cycles serving as the festival’s centerpiece. Celebrating one anti-Semitic composer and one of his works for 10 weeks is limiting and therefore a poor representation of the multicultural artistic talent in LA, plus the $32 million price tag seems almost obscene. The Board of Supervisors should not have bailed out LA Opera although I understand why they did.

To place the burden of fault solely on Domingo’s shoulders would be unfair. Influential members of the Los Angeles Jewish community, LA Opera donors, members of the LA Opera board, city and county leaders, and festival participants who advocate all-Wagnerian programming are equally culpable. As I previously wrote on OperaOnline, the UCLA Department of Music has scheduled a concert as part of Ring Festival LA that focuses on composers whose music was suppressed by the Nazis. The event on May 27 has drawn so much attention that it was originally scheduled for Schoenberg Hall but may be moved to Royce Hall to accommodate more people. The UCLA music department is proving that a diversified festival could have reaped financial rewards.

A prominent member of the Jewish community recently wrote me: “You are right about the wasted money on the ‘Ring’ cycle debacle. It could have been avoided, but too many powerful people in our community pushed for it to happen.”