Thursday, May 28, 2009

The Butler Longhorn museum

After last night’s discussion about the future of the museum I am interested in what you all think. It is my understanding that $ 300,000 was requested for this year and $ 500,000 was requested for each year for the next few years. Do you think the museum should be turned over to an independent group who does not have to answer to the city council? If you believe it should be turned over to the independent group should our city tax dollars continue to “supplement” the museum? Or should they lease the property and pay for the salaries and work that needs to be done with their own funds? Or should the city maintain control, hire someone else and open the doors to the public using the admissions and donations as funding to finish the museum over a period of time?

Discussion anyone?

71 comments:

BHL said...

Let's learn from Obama's mistake with GM. You don't keep putting money into something just to keep it afloat. IT has to be able to show that it can swim on it's own merits.

BLM is either going to sink or it's going to swim. The "friends" need to present their plan for swimming before council spends one more dollar. If they can't swim, then give the facility to the Seniors. At least then the city gets something for the $$$.

Casey Montgomery said...

We should cut our losses and run.....

P. Moratto said...

More speeches, pleas and bandanas on last night's (Tuesday, May 26, 2009) council agenda, on behalf of the beleaguered and long suffering cow museum.
It's been a real albatross, a thorn in our side, for so, so long. For years and years, we have seen one cost overrun after another, matched by chronic failures to meet a deadline. Now it's all “this close” to being finished, and somebody suddenly wants to take it all away from us and semi-privatize it. Just when some money looks like it might start rolling IN for a change, somebody is already seeing dollar signs.

The people of this city finally had their fill of this unending expense, and now even the city is recognizing their sentiment. Council persons Barber and Sanborn both emphasized clearly to the museum's lawyer that the board has voted “no more money.” BLM's lawyer side-stepped that.
The museum is a multi-million dollar investment of the city's, and we the people who paid long and hard for it, and made it all possible, should be first in line when revenues finally start rolling in. Agreed, we want to push this burdensome step-child out of the nest, and make it self sufficient and financially independent.

Butler Longhorn has got to put together a solid business plan to show that fund raising, grants, accreditations, sustaining memberships, subleases, rent-outs and all its other grand revenue generating ideas are realistic. So far, they aren't talking to us about this, or about how any of it will benefit US though.
What they are talking about is how they hope to siphon very unspecific revenues from it off to their own “needs,” all tax-free, while throwing us a dollar a year for rent. It would cost our Accounts Receivable more to collect the dollar. First and foremost, this has to be adjusted to something that's realistic in today's world. We can give them a break during their first year of growing pains, and set the rent at $100. Thereafter, something closer to, say, a thousand or ten-thousand or twenty-five sounds more like it.
The city needs to establish requirements for concessions, paraphernalia vendors and other ways of generating a return -- for us, not for the museum -- on OUR enormous investment -- part of a comprehensive revenue generating plan for the city that will run separately alongside the museum's. Their lease must not preclude our reasonable pursuit of such cost recovery. We must turn this liability into an asset for the city at long last, and one dollar a year doesn't cut it. Besides that, in order to keep their new IRS 501(c) status, they should be required to turn over any and all net profits to the city. After all, they keep saying it's a non-profit.
The museum is already looking at many other viable means of generating revenues, and revenues must include a return on our investment, not just BLM's repairs, renovations, operating and other ongoing costs.
How “generous” of them to “offer” the city use of it's own property and investment for city events, at “no charge.“ Define ”no charge.“ Because of expected accreditations and possibly 501(c) requirements, we won't be allowed to stage or permit political events, so we also must make sure that museum grounds don't include those portions of Heritage Park that we may need for non-museum events

Morgan_Campbell said...

Mr. Moratto, can you clarify something? You said that BLM has its own attorney. If we taxpayers are providing the operating capital for BLM, aren't we also paying for BLM's attorney to fight our city council. If that's the case, this insanity has to stop.

I haven't been able to watch the meeting yet because Comcast had some technical problems on Channel 16 on Tuesday and Wednesday in my area.

P. Moratto said...

Just guessing, but I think BLM hired their own attorney. Otherwise, I'd be raising the same flag, and thanks for doing so! Having their own lawyer onboard so early is another clue to how much money is at stake here too, so let's not get in such a rush to bail out of that mess that we sell ourselves short.

Audio is so low-tech that I certainly hope the city is not paying that clown more than a sno-cone to run the sound for channel 16. How rinky-dink can you get? And this problem is chronic. I was talking to Jimmy T at least a year ago about it. Everybody seems to be waiting for the next guy to do the obvious -- slap the sound man silly, and get somebody else.

Babs said...

The museum has its own attorney - begs the question is he/she paid or a volunteer?

Are they preparing for battle or what?

Does the friends group have a business plan? If not, they better get one, and fast.

This should have opened 5 years ago, and it's an embarrassment to all involved.

The city must be reimbursed before anyone else gets one red cent.

P. Moratto said...

How often do you find a lawyer who works for free? False magazine claims aside, the museum is decidedly not open yet, so where else would money for a lawyer come from except out of our pockets?
It's a safe bet they have no business plan, or she would have made it her main talking point. She was certainly talking more like a museum saleswoman than a lawyer. Questions that council asked would find answers in such a plan if they had one. The best they have so far is an idea paper with the word "draft" or "discuss" all over it.
The "friends of" is no more. They are now officially the BLM.
Unfortunately, even after the museum opens, incoming monies for it will largely be contingent on earmarks, and they will probably exclude repaying the city. Rent may be all we'll see for a long time, and maybe all we'll ever see.

Morgan_Campbell said...

Mr. Moratto, you made my point exactly. Because BLM has no other source of funding and attorneys don't work for spiritual reasons, we are probably paying for their attorney to fight our own city council. Any council members willing to set us straight on this?

pretender said...

Get real! This blog is so one sided. This is an attempt by those newly elected, that you all love so much, to create a way to rehire an employee that was caught destroying records in her personnel file. Shame on those that are a party to it.

Morgan_Campbell said...

@Pretender - Are you kidding me?

Chuck DiFalco said...

The comparison between General Motors and the Butler Longhorn Museum is absurd. The former has always been a corporation whose mission is to make a profit for shareholders; the latter has been a non-profit organization whose mission is to serve the educational and historical needs of its stakeholders. The only thing they have in common is the threat of dissolution. A museum is not a business!

I hear shouts to shut down the BLM because it is not self-supporting. With this kind of thinking, why be hypocritical and stop there? The League City library is not self-supporting, so why not shut it down? The city pool too! Since the whole League City parks department doesn't make money, why not close all the public parks in town, and sell all the newly vacated land so that we can lower our taxes by a smidge?

By the way, the recommendation to give the BLM to the seniors because the museum is not self-supporting is self-contradictory. With utility bills, maintenance, and insurance paid by the city, a senior center in that building won't be self-supporting either.

Too many knee jerk reactions to shut down the BLM are as bad as the desire of museum supporters who ask the city for money without having a detailed operational plan.

Unknown said...

Council has a big decision to make here and what it is going to come down to is priorities.

Casey Montgomery said...

It seems to me that in economic times like this everyone must tighten the belt buckle a little ( especially city government ). Why keep throwing money at a project that is not coming to fruition and will probably serve very little purpose in the community?

Radical thought of the day-

Speaking of libraries.......

Why, in 2009, are municipalities spending so much money on libraries? Is it for the shows that are put on for the kids? I assume it's not for children's educational purposes as every school has a library....and I KNOW that most adults who are researching something no longer go to the library when the internet is right at their fingertips....just a thought...not bashing libraries but wondering what role they play in 2009 and beyond.

BHL said...

Chuck,
You are missing the point entirely.

BLM is a business. All non-profit is at it's core a business. It must have positive income, whether from visitors, donations, grants, or subsidies in order to sustain operations. My friend runs a non-profit ministry to support Guatamalean villagers, it too is a business, no donations - no services to the villagers.

You don't think museums are a business? Compare today's HMNS to the HMNS when I was kid 35 yrs ago. It's a business my friend.

The difference between BLM and library is MAJOR. The BLM charges admission. LC residents may go once or twice a year, if that much. I mean I can only take my kids once and been there done that, nothing new to see again and they won't care to go back any time soon. The library on the other hand, my daughter always wants to go and bring home a dozen new books to read.

BHL said...

Casey,
When was the last time you've been in a bookstore? The prices are outrageous. That's why I go to library. Otherwise I find a good used book on Amazon.com.

BHL said...

Pat's at it again. Comments to the GDN harping on council not setting priorities right because of their decisions regarding BLM. As if having a successful BLM is a priority on the LC Citizens list. Citizens just want the spending to stop.

P. Moratto said...

Thanks to all for many good points here. I am trying to be reasonable and see both sides, but the one or two of you attacking consensus here are not doing much of a job defending the museum from ugly facts and serious questions.
In the five-or-something years since this all started, we deserve better than what BLM presented Tuesday night.
What in hell have they been doing for all that time? Burning up our money like dope addicts, thinking the party would never end, that's what.
Clearly, they don't have even a grasp of business plan concept, so it's time that WE get one. Let BLM have their little party in the parts of the building that don't get in our way, and we'll use the rest of it to start making some money with this turkey. Just think: it will only cost us one dollar in lost rent to keep our use of the entire thing! BLM can become our guest, for a change.
Oy. Think Biosphere or the so-called "holocaust" museum industry! Now we're talking $$$.

Jeff Hagen said...

In general I like the idea of museums and this one seems like it will preserve important local history that is also significant to the whole state. I don't know enough about this situation yet to choose a position in the debate over continued funding, who should be in charge, who should own it, etc.

However, one thing is clear to me. Regardless of the state of completion, the museum must be opened to the public NOW! If it's not finished, then put up 'under construction' signs. But whatever happens, let the public in immediately. With all these years of delays, whatever the reason and whoever is at fault, we are clearly in a situation of perfection being the enemy of good enough. If the museum refuses to open now, then find new leadership that will open it. If that doesn't work, then maybe it is time for the city to walk away. By 'NOW', I mean before the next council meeting at the very latest.

I'd like very much to be a supporter of this museum and I think many others would as well, but I don't think the museum will be able to maintain public support as long as it continues to be 'coming soon'.

Jeff

P. Moratto said...

You're so right. But keep in mind that we the people/city own it, lock, stock and barrel. We don't have to be held hostage by BLM any longer. We can set our own opening date, bring in an outside concession to open the doors and set-up shop, any time we please. Then BLM can take their good time getting their act together, which can be never as far as I'm concerned.

BHL said...

Posted by Pat on Thayer Evan's Chron blog

"I sure hope the other 95% of our Citizens are watching what is going on here."

They are Pat. Even though they didn't vote in city elections. Had they voted, you still would have lost.

Perhaps if you'd care to come out of your alias, you could explain to us 5% how not continuing to spend the citizen's dollars (yes the money belongs to the citizenry not the elected folks) on a museum yet to be opened with no viable plan for opening constitutes not setting priorities considering all our problems with traffic and recent flooding, not to mention a reduction in revenues due to the drop in housing market and retail.

Your grapes have gone from sour to rotting.

BHL said...

Marc,
If you're out there, I'm curious to know what you think about BLM and the statements of your friend.

P. Moratto said...

Don't get him started. It's hard enough already on poor Marc to resist. Now if we could just get Pat to do so.

Morgan_Campbell said...

Jeff's point may be the best one yet. Just open it while it's still ours to open. Let it sink or swim on its own merit with a reasonable time frame. The council has been giving away their power all this time to the former curator and the friends group. It's time to take the power back.

Jeff Hagen said...

Could it be as simple as the council passing a resolution that declares the museum open and setting hours? I suppose somebody has to be there to unlock the doors and sell tickets, so either the museum group could provide volunteers to do so or council could direct that whatever funds are available are prioritized first to pay for the minimum staff required to keep the doors open to the public. I would like to think that all those museum supporters who have cared enough to speak at council meetings all these years would also care enough to volunteer their time keeping the museum open to the public. It would be nice to see something on the next council agenda dealing with this issue.

Jeff

Unknown said...

It is a shame that we are on the south
shore of Clear Lake across from NASA
and there are not enough common
sense people here to finish a project.

It's all cow dung!

It is possible that the nice lady
attorney at the podium Tuesday has never
seen nor touched a live Butler Longhorn
bull,cow or calf.Did she look like a
cowgirl to you?She did know how to
talk cow dung.

BLM - D9 CAT

If we do not know how to finish the
project,tear it down,stop wasting
----- $ MONEY $ -----.

A working D9 CAT can be bought for
$50,000.We have one skilled worker
in the Drainage Dept. that is an artist
with the GRADALL,he would be able
to operate the D9 CAT in short order.

Be Sweet

Babs said...

Some important questions:

Are there Docents for the museum?

Has there been Docent training?

Who will "man" the museum during its hours of operation - volunteers or paid city employees?

It is time to stop the bickering, get an operations plan and get the blasted thing open!

Can you imagine if PH were still the Cultural Director for the city - even more of our hard earned money would have been poured in - as if he knew anything about culture!

Morgan_Campbell said...

You really aren't going to leave the previous post up are you Mr. Mallios?

Unknown said...

@ Chuck
Dearest, I think you need to look up the definition of "business". Then you need to consider the "business" of the people.

The key issue here has been defined by what is now known as "BLM", and that issue is Jennifer.

The mantra of the "BLM" membership has become "No Jennifer - no Museum".

Their negotiations begin with the city giving Jennifer a $69,000.00 contract to return as curator.

The contractor curator will then be provided with city employees (2 initially)who would be under her direction.

If the city is to do the right thing as defined by Neil Baron, shouldn't it be going out for RFQs for the curator position?

Oh, I forgot, "No Jennifer - no museum".

So Jennifer is larger than the museum itself? That's a scary thought.

Because she is so large, the city is being asked to not consider any other options. No RFQs, no real analysis of her role in the failures of the project thus far, no process to confirm that she is the best candidate to carry the museum to the much anticipated next level.

Where is the independent analysis of where the project is now and where it might go in the future? Where is the qualified opinion of the appropriateness of placing city employees under a "private" contractor? Where are the results of an independent and comprehensive audit of all of the expenditures on this project to date?

Chuck darling, you have always supported due process, due diligence, and open government. Where are you now?

If Jennifer is larger than the museum itself, as "no Jennifer - no museum suggests, then I submit to you that the city has a much larger problem to deal with here than the viability of the project.

You talk about the bias of this blog, what about the bias expressed by no "Jennifer - no museum"? Was the attorney for BLM biased? What about Nancy? Is she biased? She stands to profit from this ill conceived plan of resolution.

The long and short of "no Jennifer - no museum" is that it is a form of blackmail that will require council to abandon the tenets of good government most of them have been so supportive of as they were elected.

What "no Jennifer - no museum" should really mean is no museum.

Chuck DiFalco said...

I am not, and never really have been, either a big supporter or critic of the Butler Longhorn Museum. I know there are some binary thinkers out there who can't tolerate someone who's neither "us" nor "them." I have followed the sad travails of the Ghirardi house to some degree. I realize that the BLM has a painful 7-year history of controversy and bad deals. I visited and toured the entire complex last week. Other than better signage and parking, the BLM is near complete from an infrastructure standpoint. However, I think it's lacking from a leadership standpoint. Almost everyone is
really good at something. Ms. van der Wal seems to excel at fundraising. Lacking financial planning skills, I don't think she makes a good director (I don't like the word the passive-sounding word "curator"). She could not answer properly how much it would cost to get it open. Nobody could answer my question about ticket prices. After 7 years, and nobody knows? The Achilles heel of the BLM is detailed financial planning. Bean counters have a place in this world.

I don't care who else says what, no museum is a business. Not all organizations are businesses. I've been a MUD director for 14 years; just because we have a financial aspect, that doesn't make us a business! I work at a real business, and the MUD is not like that! No business is based on a democratic model!

From merriam-webster.com: business, noun: commercial or mercantile activity engaged in as a means of livelihood.

I think sinking the BLM now would be the worst public relations disaster for League City since the Mayor Lamb embezzlement fiasco. From a national perspective, we will look like we don't know how to complete public projects, and that we don't care about quality of life issues.

The BLM might have to be dissolved because good intentions and dedication alone do not make a project successful. I hope the city leaders and the friends of the museum can find a good way to get BLM running.

Unknown said...

The museums that are most successful employ diversity, first and foremost, to bring in repeat traffic.
Single theme exhibitions have a profound downside in that regard. It's true in New York and Houston. It will be true in League City.High volume will have to occur for this project to ever wean itself from the sponsorship of the city. Diversity does not mean setting up side shows such as weddings and non- political functions to supplement a weak income.

There is an additional problem that will arise if Heritage Park is taken away from the people and used to prop up the museum.

A really scary thought is what if Jennifer, God forbid, passes on? Whether in a figurative or literal sense, wouldn't this mean "no museum"?

Unknown said...

@ Chuck

Projected ticket sales and traffic volume are key components of a business plan for any museum, sweetie.

P. Moratto said...

Chelsea, I nominate you for chief analyst and head of the BLM oversight and steering committee.
Chuck's got some great ideas too.
Let me throw out another. It doesn't have to be all-or-none. Open the doors to that part of the museum that's ready NOW (surely there's something, after this many years and hundreds of thousands of dollars), and rope off or lock up the rest for another day.

LCU, if only you could become as inaudible as you are invisible. Thanks for not using your real name; what a wretch you are. I would suggest a look in the mirror, but I fear shattering glass would befall your rot.

League City Says said...

Here is the bottom line. The museum will never be successful. People may come once but never again. Children don't care about Longhorn. People may come once but never again.

Will families go to the park/pond. You bet but that is FREE as it should continue to be. The G. House people act like they have never seen an old house before. Drive through League City. There are lots of houses like that. The home needs to be given back to the families that donated it.

Did I hear no Jennifer no museum. Well that is your answer right there. Jennifer as I was told violated city policy by shreeding documents from her H/R file. That is no Jennifer,no museum. The museum should be directed by the Parks Department and the city should hire someone. If the former curator wants to be part of the museum she will have to volunteer. Does any of this sound unreasonable?

League City Says said...

Does anyone know what the city has spent on the museum? I heard the house cost over 500,000.00 dollars. Say it ain't so. I believe if Mr. Hall had wanted the city to have it he would have donated the house to the city.

P. Moratto said...

I'm afraid it's worse than that. We have over a million and counting sunk into BLM, and it ain't over yet. No, Uncle Walter was far from being the benevolent sort that he's been painted as.

The GH house itself is the least thing that Ghirardi House hopes to offer. I hope it doesn't become entangled with the grandiose BLM mess, or it will go down the drain too.

Chris John Mallios said...

Mr. Campbell,
Sorry it took so long. Just got on the blog for the 1st time today. Next time call me. 281-682-8873. And I’ll get to it faster. It’s sad some people have to resort to that type of thing to attempt to make a point.

Unknown said...

@LCS
"Does any of this sound unreasonable?"

I don't think so, but there are levels to reason. It might be more reasonable for the city not to assume the responsibility of staffing.Leave staffing of this "world class" project, including the cost, to the BLM.

The museum has been represented as a success waiting to happen by its' proponents. If that is really true, where is the generosity of the affluent private sector and the always vocal cattlemen? Among everyone out there, is there not a collective three million,or even one million, to bankroll something that has been called "world class"?

Why should the financial burden for what is usually a privately funded venture, fall on every citizen? Some could easily see the expense as a tax and fairly ask why their voice was silenced or unrepresented during this decision making process.

There are people that I know in League City, victims of Ike,a down economy, flooding, and other cares, that don't know about,or care about, the museum. They do care about added expenses during troubled times.

Beginning with Ms. Galloway's representations years ago,this project was not ever supposed to be breast feeding on tax dollars for a decade.

As for Jennifer,she resigned,and I don't think she was formally accused of anything. Having said that, my feeling is the city isn't looking to hire her back. So, why would they want to give her a contract and put city employees under her supervision?

adieu

pretender said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
P. Moratto said...

And now, *The Halliseys*A Quinn-Martin Production
Open, Scene One
Shadows accenting wrinkles on the tired woman's face, as the morning sun creeps in...
"Hurricane Ike, a down economy, flooding and other cares? Well. So much for the little people. They can be such a headache, can't they, dear? Why don't you finish your Folger's and shoot off another piece of vitriol to the GDN? I love it when you get worked up like that. It brings back that fire in your eye, and makes you look... young again."

League City Underground said...

You took down my post for what reason? I just want to understnad the rules on this blog. Was it my different oppinion that made it worthy of removal? Because someone else objected to it? If that is the case than I object to all the other posts and demand they be removed also.

BHL said...

I didn't use to believe in reincarnation. But then again, I didn't use to know Pat.

Unknown said...

Both of my little girls took swimming
classes at the League City Pool way
back then.(1974-1975) It is an OUTSIDE
pool,you know.Mr. Hallisey helped provide
and teach the swimming lessons.

Being a bitter and resentful person ages
the body.

Unknown said...

The old West Ranch is now called NASA.
There is a 53 acre site on NASA proper
that is called the NASA Longhorn Project
and it is in partnership with CCISD.
Made a vist to the site a few minutes
ago and guess what,the LIVE longhorns
are beautiful in their natural setting,
a cow pasture.

Yee Haw Cowgirl!

Chris John Mallios said...

LCU,
Your post was taken down for its offensive and insensitive nature. Certainly the part of “rounding up” particular ethnic groups could have been said in a different way. Derogatory terms do not give way to an intelligent thought process.

Of course this is just my opinion. You may appeal this decision ( or repost using your real name) by calling 281-332-5870 or the cell phone 281-682-8873. The person on the other end will listen to your arguments why your posting and the terms you used were with merit.

Hopefully this should help you understand the rules of the blog better and help you express your opinion in a non offensive way. Thank you for participating on this blog and I hope you will continue.

Sincerely,
Chris John Mallios

Unknown said...

Don't feed a stray dog,
unless you intend to keep him.

P. Moratto said...

I'll bet he doesn't even know that Red Chinese communists hold the Guinness Book's world record for genocide (26.3 million), and did it much more recently than his "holocaust" of choice.
But that's the last I'll say, because it's gone off topic now.

Chris John Mallios said...

LCU,
Mr. Moratto is a verifiable person who is willing to put his name on his statements. You fail to do so. The truth does not scare me. I am well versed in history. I do not feel my reply was rude or disrespectful nor do I believe I have revised a political or religious doctrine. As for insignificant, well I’m just an average citizens if you fell they are insignificant then I guess I am. Have a nice day !

Sincerely,
Chris John Mallios

Chuck DiFalco said...

The problem I see with opening up the BLM now is the issue with salaries. It seems both sides, the city government on one side and the friends of the museum on another, want the other side to pay the daily operational labor costs from the get go. Both sides think they have the better bargaining position. But I doubt City Council will approve anything other than utilities unless the friends come up with a written financial plan. Only then will negotiations start.

Unknown said...

Chron.Com

June 01, 2009
Termination talks to begin for
city administrator in League City.

Please see: Storm Stories


below

BHL said...

Just read chron.com;

There's got to be more. I can't believe CR is getting sacked because he asked LH to do his job.

Unknown said...

@BHL

Your suspicion is well founded,Hon.

adieu

BHL said...

Let me add I'm of the opinion LH should be sacked.

Unknown said...

@BHL
Why?

Unknown said...

Visceral:Define

Having to do with the response
of the body as opposed to the
intellect,as in the distinction
between thinking and feeling.
Often described as:

intuition

gut feeling,

gut reaction.


Old Larry is a "Bullshit Artist".
Mayor Toni ask him a question,
Larry answers in a way that
benefits his purpose and when
he turns around,Mayor Toni does
not see him laughing as he
walks away.

Unknown said...

Ida, dear

What happened to nice?

adieu

BHL said...

Chelsea;

Traffic Problems - LH response "It's TXDOTs responsibility"

Water Problems - No forward planning

Recent Flood - No operating standards for cleaning out ditches

3 strikes

Morgan_Campbell said...

This morning's newspaper contains an opinion piece by Kaso Kety who states he is the largest contributor of artifacts on loan to the BLM. This opinion piece is rife with contradictions, dramatic hyperbole and veiled threats which should anger every citizen of League City. Clearly he is the leader of the no-Jennifer-no-museum camp, which begs the question if, as he alleges, Jennifer Wycoff-van-der-Wal was so "tortured" in her position, why would he want her to return to a job that brought her so much anguish?

It's hard to tell whether Mr. Kety cares if the museum succeeds or not and he attempts to persuade readers through extortionary reasoning, that if Jennifer is not re-hired we (the city) will be financially responsible for shipping all of the display artifacts back to their donors.

The paragraph that is most revealing of the kind of people we are dealing with is the paragraph that states "I speak for many in assuring the city we're more than willing to exhaust every legal avenue necessary concerning the safety and return of our artifacts." What this says is, no matter what our lawyer represented to your council last week, I am speaking for the group (and telling the truth, because we know lawyers lie).

I wanted to support the idea of letting the museum open (immediately) and allowing it to succeed or fail on its own merit. Not any more. If their artifacts are so darned priceless and irreplaceable, COME GET 'EM. You were a fool to donate them to a non-entity to begin with.

BHL said...

Morgan, I got a different take.

"We do appreciate deeply Mayor Toni Randall’s positive view of the project and her openness and accessibility. She has been a breath of fresh air in our dealing with the city. We also appreciate those council members who have supported the project these many years, but it’s now time for the city to fully support and complete the project or get out of the way and let the museum go on its own."


It sounds like Mr. Kety has been appreciative of much of the efforts to date, although he seems to be misinformed that it's supposed to be the "friends" who have the plan, not the city. It's interesting that he gives kudos to Mayor Toni, implying that Herr jerr was not helpful, and that he promotes the idea that either the city is on 100% or the that the "friends" are cut loose to swim (or sink).

Chuck DiFalco said...

Mr. Campbell brings up many points in his latest post that I must agree with. To amplify point, Mr. Kety's inflammatory, threatening remarks can only hurt the prospects for the museum in League City. What Mr. Kety might not realize is that he and the friends of BLM must sell their idea to the taxpaying citizens of League City. The good old boy network that dominated our city councils in years past is gone. The city council that agreed to such boondoggles as the Field of Dreams is gone. The city council we now have cannot be schmoozed or bullied. We now have a city council that is responsive to the wishes of the citizens, not favored special interest groups. We now have a city council that asks us what we want, as opposed to previous councils that did what they though was good for us. Mr. Kety's harmful words in the GCDN put him in the league of bully developers that have tried to pave over this fine town.

Morgan_Campbell said...

I did read the parts you quoted BLM and those are exactly the points of contradiction I was referring to. In my mind the sections you quote are minimized because of the language and tone he used everywhere else in the article. I also question the genuineness of the compliments; they could be interpreted as manipulative. Does he even know the Mayor doesn't cast a vote?

Mr. Kety's misinformation about who is responsible for the plan reinforces my opinion that they were foolish to lend their priceless artifacts (and I use that word loosely) to something that wasn't fully developed. In one breath he attempts to bully us in to thinking that the cost of returning their items will surely exceed the cost of completing the museum, in the next breath he wants to swim (or sink) without the city's participation.

Let them have it.

Mac said...

It is quite shameful that the thoughts and ideas regarding a museum are expressed here by a few persons in such an ignorant parochial light. It is evident that those whom have shared there non effective opinion on this blog are related some how to the very sorces of oposition which have created the delays and set backs in the first place. Which also could mean that these very people which are negative regarding something a museum that serves the community at all age levels and holds ever changing intellectual properties; may be the very same people trying to close the museum in order to hide the audits which are coming from the State of Texas for the grant investigation as well as the City audit requested through the projects inception. The are many untruth's about costs which the proffessionals have suspected is the cause to the delays.This is one of the discussion's amongst Texas Cattleman/Businessmen, Houston Live Stock & Rodeo and many other affiliates. The Curator/Director has worked tirelessly, as have the supporters, Boards, Friends Members, volunteers and citizens. They are not the problem they are the solution. The building was to be completed for years, while the curator raised funds, collected the artifacts, created the non-profit, developed all the exhibit planning, brought the people in.
The problem has been and still is the City's management or lack there of concerning projects in general and their development. The Cattleman have given the largest $ donations to the City for the project. These are facts as I am in direct contact with the Cattlemen. It is time let it open and sell our City to the visitors and create more tax revenue.It must be completed by the person which began it or the needed continuity will not be there.Let the many volunteers assist.
Investigate while moving forward.

Unknown said...

@Mac
Excuse me, but I will be borrowing a word from Ida when I tell you that your post was perhaps the largest pile of "bullshit" I have seen since real discussion of this project began.

How much cash have you and your friends contributed to this project?
You have a building. What you don't have is a complete exhibit. Why is that? Why has the opening been kept pending? Could it be that Jennifer, talented though she may be, lacked that certain something required to successfully manage a budget and a time line?

Bring on the audits. I certainly want to know about every penny.

I would also like to see a chronology of the project. I want to see the pitch and the promises down to the very last moo.

Again, if you and your cattlemen think this project is such a sure-fire winner,why don't you pony on up and write that check. Hire Jennifer and her staff. Pick up the utility costs. Keep the concessions and forget about the park.

Unknown said...

adieu

BHL said...

"It is time let it open and sell our City to the visitors and create more tax revenue."

Yes a Longhorm Museum is destined to be a great tourist draw.

Excuse me while I get the shovel.

Chuck DiFalco said...

The arrogance and condescension rife in Mac's post only serves to polarize the parties involved in the BLM. Sadly, I have seen and hear those destructive words from more than one museum supporter. In fact, it is this cognoscenti attitude that makes "supporters, Boards, Friends Members" more part of the problem than part of the solution. Also, just because many people have worked hard for the BLM, which could have quality of life benefits, does not make it a viable project. There were many great NASA projects that never made it off the ground because of lack of financial planning and ignoring the public. Finally, stop trying to sell the museum to the taxpayers because of the secondary revenue it could bring in. We all heard that used car salesman hype for the Field of Dreams, and all we got were spinmeisters that try to turn a bailout of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year into "economic development." If the museum fails to open, it will be as much its supporters’ fault as anyone’s.

Jeff Hagen said...

Chuck,

I tend to agree with your assessment. As an uninvolved but interested member of the public on this topic, the recent statements by BLM supporters are trending towards a condescending and arrogant attitude that troubles me. Some of the things said by BLM friends (especially the threats to take back donated artifacts) are starting to defeat my natural inclination to support the museum. I hope they can avoid becoming their own worst enemy.

Jeff

Non-profit Supporter said...

I am continually astonished at the dealings of the League City government. Since this museum was initiated there has been no leadership, no real support, continual arguments about anything and everything. Directors have come and gone like a revolving door. The only thread of consistency has been Jennifer Van der Wal. Hired as a curator and tasked with creating, building, managing as well as acquiring artifacts. Seems to me that most people would have quit long ago. I can only think that it is her love of the subject that kept her around for so long.
This museum is a non-profit organization whose mission is to serve the educational and historical needs of its community. The subject is rich and fascinating as well as a part of history that is being lost to our modern world. It is something League City should be proud to share. Whether the museum is run by the city (which has proved disasterous) or by it's own board and supporters is the real question.
What a great loss it would be if the museum moved to another city and thrived there. Since such investment has already been made, let's hope some sense will prevail and get this project on it's feet.
As far as appealing to the community... the natural habitat and gardens can be a beautiful setting for events, family outings, weddings and so on. The local history can be introduced in our children's school outings. Tourism alone will draw those who are curious and interested.
What does it take to finally get this act together?

Chuck DiFalco said...

For the most part, I agree with the points made by "Non-profit Supporter." What the post omits is the financial plan going forward. The money previously spent is gone, "sunk costs," and not relevant to future decisions. I agree with those League City council members who refuse to write a blank check to the museum. I agree with those who know that any financial plan is not necessarily a good deal for the city and its taxpayers. Details are everything. More on those in a more formal publication...

P. Moratto said...

The whole museum enterprise is a giant cash cow that generates monies from more than a half dozen sources, and there's no excuse for us sinking somewhere around two-million in TAX dollars into this one, with nothing forthcoming in return.
After five to seven years, the BLM glee club ought to have put something together before now.
They've been milking us all that time, and fully hoped to keep on doing so as long as we were suckers.
At one point, I would have said we should meet them halfway, maybe with matching funds or something. But now, I say not one more dime. We can turn the lights out, padlock the place and let it sit and rot until we can find something productive to do with the building. It won't cost us one more cent to do that, because WE already own it.
If BLM comes back with a realistic plan some day, we can talk. Until then, no deal. If we've got city departments renting or leasing space somewhere else, they can move into the Hall house and cut that expense. Then citizens can enjoy a little cow history at the same time they are doing business with the city!

Jeff Hagen said...

With all the recent public (and behind the scenes) discussions, I have a some questions about the BLM.

1) When artifacts were donated to the museum, was there a clear transfer of ownership to the museum? If so, then how can there be demands made for return of the artifacts merely because of changes in museum personnel? If not, then why did the museum not obtain clear ownership of artifacts that are critical to the importance of a museum in which the public has invested so much money?

2) Why did the director of the museum resign? Was it over disagreement with pressure from the city to open the museum as is?

3) Have all the people who have spoken about the museum during the public address to council meetings been League City residents or business owners?

4) Minor question. I finally stopped to see the Heritage Park. There is a small boat ramp and dock that connects to Clear Creek, which seems useful for a park. But the boat ramp just dead ends in the lawn and there is no driveway. What is the point of that?


And one comment. If the trouble with opening the museum immediately is the lack of budget for operating personnel and if the supporters of the museum truly care about it as strongly as they say, then I think it would be reasonable to expect the museum supporters to step forward themselves and volunteer as operating staff for the museum at no cost in order to open it now.

Jeff

P. Moratto said...

#1 and #2. These may actually become inseperable items before this is all over. Artifacts were supposedly offered on loan, not donated. Therefore, they may be subject to return. However, if monies were solicited and allocated on the basis of the museum having said artifacts, the artifacts could become the proverbial carrot on a stick. If said monies were public funds, somebody may have some tall explaining to do.
#3. Only residents and business owners can speak before council, and must sign-in and state their addresses.
#4. The ramp was intended for use from within the property, not for public access.
#5. This time there is a #5. From the beginning I have felt that most of these seemingly benevolent museum people have no intention of lifting one finger for nothing.