EVENT CANNIBALIZATION

We have a dilemma in our community. On the upside, we have more signature festivals and events than communities much larger. We’re also fortunate they have earned national reputations and leverage the Durham brand.

There are some members of our community though, who are intrigued with securing more and more events. I don’t think it is that they don’t value the events we have. They just don’t realize how fragile festivals are.

You see, festivals compete. Not with one another as much as they compete for time slots, underwriting and sponsorship, volunteers, locations, media attention and audience with all of the other leisure options both residents and visitors have here.

What Durham needs to do is worry more about how to make existing festivals and events sustainable, not recruiting new ones. A lot of communities have generic events…or events so ubiquitous that they don’t add to a community’s distinctiveness.

My opinion and the opinion of the Durham Convention & Visitors Bureau is that as a community we need to focus on retaining and making our existing events better as well as protecting them as much as possible from the events from the United States of Generica.

DAMNED BY FAINT PRAISE – HELL NO--INVISIBLE!

Maps like this are why so many people are confused about the location of Research Triangle Park. This world class business park for research and development is located 4 miles from Downtown Durham, nestled in SE Durham County and encompassed on three sides by the City of Durham.

Yet this map places it only in the Southeastern United States. Durham isn’t even on the map but Raleigh, two towns away from RTP, is shown, giving the impression the Park is in Raleigh.

It isn’t one of those things like they only had room for the large cities. Winston-Salem, a city smaller than Durham in the last census is on the map, but not Durham.

It isn’t done to intentionally slight Durham, but the result is the same. No wonder people get confused. More to come…

ARE WE STILL IN HIGH SCHOOL?

I’ve noted before that a friend of mine once told me that “politics is personal, not logical.” And maybe that’s what the news media has become. I know reporters always seem more interested in the anecdotal than generalizable. That’s why it only takes one comment now on a blog or listserv to spawn a news story, e.g. “activists are concerned.”

But have you listened to the news coverage of the Democratic National Convention? It’s just like high school. “She really doesn’t like him!” “She was ambiguous.” “She didn’t apologize.” “She raised money for him but he didn’t for her.” “Inside sources tell me...”

All that’s missing is “he hurt her feelings.” Geezzz! Isn’t there something on which to report that is more substantive than that? And whatever happened to verifying fact? No wonder politics is personal.

AN ECONOMIC PLAN FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

A hundred years ago, two African American gentleman with differing viewpoints spawned two different movements to achieve racial equality. They were both frequent visitors to Durham.

The two leaders, of course, were Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Dubois. One argued for equality through economic development and the other through social change. From reports at the time, it seemed they didn’t always get along and people seemed to take sides on the issues. But one thing was clear: there was a tolerance of ideas, debate and public discourse evident then.

In Durham, at the dawn of the 1900’s a group of African American leaders appear to have fused a both/and approach adapting parts of both movements. It was then that Black Wall Street was spawned, the Sit-In Movement took root in the basements of Durham churches, and organizations like the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People were formed.

Sometimes it is hard to tell if that same tolerance for ideas or fusion of ideas still exists across the United States. I remember the puzzling and seemingly intolerant reaction to Dr. Shelby Steele’s The Content of Our Character and his more recent book, White Guilt. And similarly to Bill Cosby’s 2005 speech at Howard University.

I’m now reading a new book recommended by friend and colleague Bill Geist, written by one of his former Board members, Dr. John Yancy Odom. It is very insightful and full of useful ideas that I’ll leave for you to read for yourself.

But I wonder if his Saving Black America; An Economic Plan for Civil Rights will receive the same response as Dr. Steele’s books or if the inspiration of Presidential Candidate Barack Obama will lead us back to the positive and open debate about racial equality that Washington and Dubois had.

CULTURAL COST/BENEFIT DESERVES THE SAME STANDARD APPLIED TO AMERICAN TOBACCO

When Tom Bonfield (new Durham City Manager) and I got a chance for extended conversation during his first week on the job, we touched on something I’ve mentioned before. I got the impression he agreed and will take it into consideration.

Currently, when local government annually reports the performance of a cultural facility or event, a very narrow definition of cost and revenue is reported. Even though these quality of life facilities were never intended to pay for themselves, it minimized their impact to not show revenue leveraged by more than the revenues generated inside the facility.

When local government invests in a public/private venture like adaptive reuse of the huge American Tobacco Complex, it takes a what appears to be a much better approach and compares not only revenue specific to the three parking decks or the Ballpark or soon the new theater but also the spending and property taxes leveraged by ATC’s increased value and those investments, public and private.

To me, it has makes sense to treat cultural facilities the same way. The sales tax alone generated by visitor spending surrounding use of the Civic Center or Museum of Life or Science or Carolina Theater or Full Frame Documentary Film Festival, is far greater than what is spent just inside the facility or event. Not to mention the increase they spur in surrounding property values.

When DCVB analyzes these facilities, the full impact of the facility on generating tax revenues is applied, not just the revenue generated at the door. We hope we can work with City and County officials to apply a consistent standard.