Amid long-running and newly created debts, the Columbia City Ballet board has further tightened the financial reins on executive and artistic director William Starrett. But as it was doing that, the board had to simultaneously put out another fire when Starrett threatened legal action against a former board member who questioned his spending.
 |
| City Ballet Director William Starrett |
These back-to-back issues have frustrated board members, but not enough to threaten Starrett’s leadership of the ballet, which he has headed for 23 of its 58-year-history.
“I don’t have any hesitation telling William I disagree with him,” says Nancy Kress, board chairwoman. “Yes, he can do wrong … I can support him but I can also question him. He is ultimately responsible to the board.”
For the coming year, the ballet has a $1.2 million budget, a decrease from $1.3 million last year. Its debt is $288,000, whittled down from $386,000 a year ago. The debt was $407,000 in 2007.
The City Ballet is being run in a fiscally responsible manner and Starrett does not have a carte blanche, Kress says.
“No checks are signed by William alone,” she says. “There are checks and balances.”
Much of the debt can be traced to the ballet’s ambitious 2005 production, Off the Wall & Onto the Stage: Dancing the Art of Jonathan Green. Lackluster ticket sales for some subsequent productions have also contributed to the ballet company’s situation.
As the board was nailing down budget numbers last week, it learned about a “cease and desist” letter sent in Starrett’s behalf by an attorney. The Aug. 14 letter accuses Barbara Iaquinto, who resigned from the board in June, of making “numerous defamatory communications” and publishing “false information impeaching the honesty, integrity, and reputation of Mr. Starrett.” The letter threatens a lawsuit to seek damages if Iaquinto does not “cease and desist.”
Iaquinto says it appears the letter was prompted by questions she asked about the City Ballet’s operations while she was on the board.
“When the letter came, you could have knocked me over with a feather,” says Iaquinto, who continued doing volunteer for the company after leaving the board.
The City Ballet is mentioned in the letter from the Ellis, Lawhorne and Simms law firm, but the ballet board did not sanction the letter and many board members didn’t even know about it until after it was sent. (Several found out about it from this reporter.)
Starrett says the letter was about his personal and professional reputation and had nothing to do with the ballet company. Last weekend, Iaquinto received an email from Starrett that indicated he was withdrawing the complaint. She has asked for a letter from an attorney to formally close the matter.
This is certainly not the first time the City Ballet has faced tough financial times and internal conflicts. After all, Starrett and City Ballet founder Ann Brodie had a huge falling out after he took over the company in the late 1980s. In the past decade, the City Ballet has had several financial reversals.
Board members blame some of the current money problems on the poor economy, but many of the debts have dogged the company since 2005.
 |
| The 2005 production of Off the Wall and on the Stage has left the City Ballet with an enduring debt. |
That’s when the City Ballet created Off the Wall and Onto the Stage, inspired by the art of Lowcountry native Green. It cost about $1.2 million to produce and brought in about $800,000. The show was expected to be a moneymaker, but it didn’t get as many bookings around the country as expected and when it did sales were not always that good. The company will perform Off the Wall in Chicago in February, which the board thinks might give it a new life and the company some income.
Then the ballet got into deeper trouble earlier this year. Starrett’s most recent creation designed to put the company on the map was a ballet about the Columbia-based rock band Hootie & the Blowfish. The Hootie & the Blowfish Ballet premiered in April 2009 at the Koger Center for the Performing Arts. Expenses were higher than expected and ticket sales lower. The result was essentially a break-even run for a production that was expected to be a blockbuster that would offset other season losses. Overall, ticket sales totaled $78,003 over three performances and expenses were $78, 440; the ballet sill owes $17,500 of that amount to Fishco, Hootie’s management company, for production-related expenses. (The band members donated their time, but not that of their production staff.)
Board members say despite the fact that the company is adding debt Starrett is not running roughshod over them. The board has not been a rubber stamp for his expenses, says board member Coralee Harris, who was chairwoman during a financial crisis in 2000 and 2001.
Still, at a retreat earlier in the summer, one board member asked Starrett directly if he understood that he worked for the board — not the other way around.
“The board has always been willing to question what is going on,” Harris says. “You do get tired of talking to the wall though.”
Often, Harris says, everyone gets so excited and carried away by the Starrett’s artistic ideas they lose track of the money.
In trying to better manage the company financially, some board members have suggested the executive director slot should be spun off as a separate position. Others object to removing any of Starrett’s authority.
Creating such a position “has long been on the wish list” of the ballet, Kress says.
Board members have from time to time explored the idea of hiring a separate executive director. Two years ago, the ballet company’s treasurer Chris Ray told The State: “The ballet needs a strong financial manager who can balance William’s requirements with what we can afford.” The company has a finance director.
“Every penny is scrutinized,” says Gail Morrison, a board member and former board chairman.
Board members and Starrett say the company doesn’t have the money — at least $50,000 — to hire an executive director. (Starrett is paid $99,000 annually, an increase of $20,000 during the past decade.) The company recently laid off its marketing manager.
The “cease and desist” letter came at a bad time — when rumors were flying about the budget. The letter put the company in an awkward position and could have triggered a liability insurance policy that protects board members.
While the letter is mainly about Starrett protecting his reputation it “disturbs us,” Kress says.
“There will be a withdraw of the letter,” she says.
Jeffrey Day blogs at carolinaculture.org. For Day's commentary on the City Ballet, see his Aug. 26 and Aug. 30 entries. |
Comments (19)
