10:00am | I had a dream. In it, the Long Beach Redevelopment Agency issued a request for proposals that said, “We’re committed to building a 10,000 square foot custom art facility in Downtown Long Beach. We’re looking for the best ideas about how to make use of the building. We are looking to develop strategic partnerships with experienced individuals and organizations who have a proven and successful track record of running art facilities and institutions. Proposals should include specific measurable goals, data to support financial models, research into target markets for both audiences and artists, and ultimately create a world class destination that will be a beacon of innovation, creativity, and civic pride.”
Imagine the best and brightest from Long Beach, and the Southland, shoulder to shoulder, presenting a stack of great ideas to the RDA from which they can select and implement one. What a beautiful dream.
Some History:
The reality, however, arises from a fiction created nearly two decades ago: The East Village Arts District. Once upon a time, artists illegally lived in empty store fronts, converting them to live/work spaces. The store fronts, being in a blighted area, were cheap to rent and all but ignored by everyone. There were full-time fine artists, an impressive band rehearsal studio, and several mixed use performance/gallery spaces. One day, someone had the bright idea to evict all the artists, close down all the arts related businesses, redevelop the area, and call it an Arts District. Why? Because young, upwardly mobile professionals like the ‘hip’ vibe that comes from ‘arts,’ and are willing and able to pay more than scruffy artists.
The RDA bought up properties, and sold them at pennies on the dollar to local developers who converted many to ‘artist lofts.’ The original agreement, at least as I remember it, was that these were to be ‘low cost’ or ‘affordable,’ and that there would be an application review panel to confirm that ‘real’ artists, and not just rich wannabe artists, would live there.
“The conversions cost us too much,” the developers cried! “We can’t afford to keep rents down.” So, after all was said and done, rich young professionals moved in, and all the artists moved away.
Of course, the people who moved in saw, soon enough, that the Arts District concept was a myth. Instead, they found themselves in an area where retail businesses turned over with shocking rapidity, where still-blighted areas mere blocks away were far more impactive on their quality of life than the few cool spots in the area. Savvy entrepreneurs were duped by the myth and came, filled with energy and vision, and excited by opportunity. They too quickly discovered the harsh reality: Political infighting and short sightedness were more than ample reason to leave, and find success elsewhere.
The Model
The Torpedo Factory Art Center in Alexandria, Virginia, which serves nearly 200 artists, is a true ‘adaptive reuse’ project. It used an existing building to create gallery and studio spaces with little significant modification to the existing structure. Its success is rooted solidly in the low cost of modifying an existing structure into a new use.
This idea was seized upon by people who had invested in the myth of the Arts District. They hoped that such an ambitious project would 1) utilize properties that had long laid fallow, 2) act as a destination site for tourists, 3) lend legitimacy to the beleaguered Arts District concept, and 4) finally encourage people with money to live in the area.
Unfortunately, the few properties that fell inside the confines of the district were, for one reason or another, unsuitable. Then it was suggested that, as part of a huge multi-story mixed use development, the ground floor retail space be designated for the project.
Around this time, the City did a feasibility study based on this model. It was shown that, within a year, the facility would be a million dollars in debt. Fortunately, the real estate market crashed and the developers wisely pulled out of the project. Still, the RDA had already purchased the property, and had set aside funds for its development.
Adaptive Misuse
Now, it seems that the RDA is moving full steam ahead, poised to spend millions of our dollars on what is being called the Art Exchange, or ArtX. While the concept made sense when applied to a true adaptive reuse model, the last two iterations have gone off the rails and into the realm of municipal madness.
Instead of utilizing one of the many existing buildings in the City to house artist studios and create exhibition space, the RDA is building an entirely new building from scratch, and calling it ‘adaptive reuse’ because it includes the facade, and part of one standing wall, from what was once the beloved Acres of Books.
I am not saying that this current model is doomed to failure but, so far, nobody has shown me a business plan. According to Carl Morgan, Redevelopment Project Officer for the Downtown area and point person for this project, the RDA is committed to paying only for “brick and mortar.” All office and art equipment must be paid for by the group that will operate the facility.
Still, the RDA has already invested at least $55,000 in this current effort, much of it spent on consultants and board retreats for the fledgling ArtX 501(c)3 led by real estate developer Phil Appleby. I’ve not been able to find out the costs for staff time or architectural services but, if I had to venture a guess, it is at least that much, but probably more.
The RDA has also donated books and antique produce boxes to Appleby’s group, which they used to raise funds, and provided them with a retail space on 3rd Street. So far, I’ve not heard the estimated value of these donations, or the amount raised in the two fund-raising events they held. The RDA has also recently been giving public art contracts to board members of the ArtX group.
It should be pointed out that there are some really wonderful people on the ArtX board, including artists, legal experts, property managers, and government officials. The list is impressive. Still, the one person who had experience working in a large arts institution, Alex Slato, is no longer involved. No one on the board has any experience in running an institution of this scope and size.
It should also be pointed out that, throughout this entire process, at no time has the Arts Council for Long Beach played any role, and nobody can say why. This, too, is absolutely baffling.
More of the Same
The plan, which includes studio space, exhibition space, office space, and an education center, centers around a ‘hot shop’ area, with kilns for ceramics and glass. The city currently operates a ceramics kiln at Bixby Park as part of their Parks & Rec programs. There are ceramic kilns at Long Beach City College, CSULB, and in the City of Lakewood’s Civic Center. There is no shortage of access to kilns for local ceramic artists, as far as I can tell.
As for exhibition space, the RDA just launched a new gallery space, The Collaborative, that’s being shared by the Museum of Latin American Art and the Arts Council for Long Beach, which will use it to mount curated shows of emerging artists. The RDA also owns the much hailed Expo building in Bixby Knolls which, thanks to Blair Cohn, is being used as a home to multiple galleries, live music, and theater. The RDA, through a contract with Phantom Galleries LA, has been using the many empty retail spaces throughout the downtown area as temporary gallery spaces.
Our community has access to ceramic kilns, lots of exhibition space, and countless already existing buildings that could be used as low cost artist studios. There is no need for a brand new, custom built structure to fill these needs.
Disgracing Openness
The RDA Board and staff have somehow come to believe that the Art Exchange model is the best and only idea worthy of consideration and, quite frankly, that is false. The RDA does not know what the best idea is, because they’ve not bothered to ask. Although the RDA claims that every aspect of this process has been open to public scrutiny, the decision to move forward with the ArtX plan was not. If they had wanted their process to be open, they would have put a call out to the community for ideas. That never happened.
No Contract
Everyone is acting as if this project is a foregone conclusion, and that talking about it, asking questions, looking for alternatives, and demanding accountability is bad. In fact, our disinterest and silence about this project will most assuredly guarantee its failure.
Building plans have been submitted, but ground breaking has been shifted from September to December, and may yet be further postponed pending the ArtX group’s ability to raise more money. Not a single shovel full of dirt has been dug up.
Also, according to Morgan, the RDA has not yet signed a contract with any individual or group for the operation of the facility they intend to build. Why the RDA invested so much money in an organization with which they have no contract is, to me, mystifying.
The good news: When pressed, Morgan confessed that there might be an opportunity for a variety of groups to submit proposals for the operation of the facility.
Name Game
I feel obligated to introduce one last tidbit of insight. I typed the words “Art Exchange” into my preferred search engine and was surprised at the result: At the top of the list was a virtual gallery selling art. Next, a store that does framing. After that, galleries, mostly. Lots and lots of galleries. The “Art Exchange” name evokes a retail sensibility, not that of a hub of cultural and creative energies. We can, and must, do better.
Speak Up
We still have time to speak up, and make sure that our municipal resources produce the results we expect, and deserve. Contact Suja Lowenthal’s office, the RDA Board, and your own councilmember. We don’t want to be scratching our heads a few years from now, wondering why yet another expensive project has failed to produce the results that were touted.
Additional Resources
View the most recent Environmental Impact Report.
The RDA’s Proposed Concept page, still with no estimated budget.