A better way forward
Non-profit rep cites issues with third-party vendors, loss of student employment opportunities and risk of losing venue’s character.
Friends of the Cactus Cafe board member Reid Nelson announced today that he was withdrawing from discussions with the University of Texas Office of Student Affairs regarding future plans for the legendary music venue.
In his letter to Vice-president of Student Affairs, Dr. Juan González and Dean of Students, Dr. Soncia Reagins-Lilly, Nelson cited issues with models being discussed that involve third party vendors in Cactus Cafe operations, and the potential loss of student employment opportunities and continuation of daily cafe and bar operations under such models, as well as how such third-party involvement might affect the fundamental character of the venue. Additional concerns involved the lack of consideration in the discussions of continuing the current model and retaining the current staff.
“I am happy that over the course of several meetings we have managed to reach a largely cordial working relationship within this group,” Nelson said. “However, it has become clearer and clearer that, despite the fact that the proposals made to the Union Board and under review by Dr. González suggest certain approaches — such as maintaining the status-quo model and simply adding program elements to it to address concerns of student participation and retention of current staff — such issues are simply not on the table for discussion in these meetings.”
“There seems to be a headlong approach that has developed over the course of these conversations toward a third-party vendor model that I am simply uncomfortable with — how it might affect the fundamental character of the Cactus Cafe in the future and with the fact that a decision in this regard seems already to have been made.”
Nelson was asked to participate in these conversations with other members of the community, students and the UT administration. The purpose of the meetings was to assist Dr. González in reviewing the three proposals made to the Student Union Board in February for an operating model for the Cactus Cafe that would continue current programming and provide greater access and participation by, as well as learning opportunities for, students in operations at the venue.
In departing from the discussion group, Nelson suggested that the group consider instituting a 12-month pilot program that would keep the current model in place, with current staff and operations remaining a function of the Union, but adding to that model with programs that would enhance student involvement and learning, such as student performing-artists-in-residence, internships and participation in programming and booking.
“Both I and Friends of the Cactus Cafe would be more than happy to work with the University to make such a pilot program successful,” Nelson said.
The actual email sent to UT administrators and a related press release are below.
From: Reid
Date: Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Subject: A better way forwardDear Juan and Soncia,
I entered these conversations regarding the future of the Cactus Cafe in good faith. However, I made it clear from the beginning that I would approach them one at a time and continue with them so long as progress was being made toward the goals of our organization, Friends of the Cactus Cafe, to preserve the fundamental character of this legendary venue in its current location under professional experienced management.
My understanding of the Student Union Board’s charge to Dr. González is that he was to evaluate the three Cactus Cafe proposals presented to the Board in February and make a recommendation at the April 30th Union Board meeting on how best to move forward. This conversation group was to assist in reviewing those proposals.
Progress to date has been painfully slow. In three meetings we were able to come to agreement on what the goals for the Cactus Cafe were going forward. After yesterday’s meeting, it appears we have not even agreed on those goals.
Of the proposals that are supposed to be under review, at least one contemplates retention of current staff at the Cactus and another proposes building on the current business model to achieve greater involvement of students in Cactus operations. Discussions to date have revealed that, at the very least, half of the members of this group support keeping the Cactus Cafe operationally on the Texas Union books as the simplest and most seamless means of achieving the goals. However, you have made it clear that a model that builds on the operational status quo within the Union and any discussion of retention of current staff are off the table for these conversations.
I have serious reservations with your plans to present three potential models to Union management and have them decide which one is best for moving forward. On one hand, putting that decision, even ostensibly, in the hands of those who wanted to end the Cactus Cafe as we know it, seems ill-advised at best. On the other hand, what also seems apparent to me is that a model has already been decided upon by the administration, one that involves a bifurcated approach of a third party for-profit entity running cafe and bar operations and programming done through some other university entity.
Quite frankly, I’m beginning to feel a little like one of the students on the Union Board who, as is clear from the record, was asked to approve a decision to close the Cactus that had already been made two months before. There are, as you have stated, other discussions going on outside of our group. It was not clear to me until recently that those involved not just opinion-seeking of interested parties, but substantive discussions on moving forward with a particular business model.
When these conversations began, the operative position of the University, as expressed by one of the Union Board members, was that no third party would be taking over the Cactus Cafe space because of current space allocation to other third parties in the Union and the laws governing such allocation. Apart from any discussion about the viability of additional third party vendors coming into the Union, I have serious substantive reservations about what effect such an arrangement would have on the fundamental character of the Cactus Cafe. It will affect both employment opportunities for students and the extent to which daily cafe and bar operation can continue as they currently do. It also seems to me an unnecessarily complicated model that is ripe for conflicts down the road, and that cannot help but have a deleterious effect on the whole Cactus Cafe experience that makes the venue what it is to so many. Moreover, the involvement of a for-profit, third party as part of the business will complicate our group’s involvement, as a non-profit organization, in supporting the venue.
Finally, there are also other issues that I have encountered outside of our discussions that I believe will ultimately negatively taint this process.
For these reasons, regrettably, I cannot in good conscience continue as a part of these conversations. However, I would like to depart from them on a constructive note.
It seems to me that all of the work that is currently going into making third-party participation viable in the Union under current law could just as easily be devoted to revisiting the Union budget in a way that would allow the Cactus to remain operationally on its books. In my experience, change, particularly change in cultural institutions like the Cactus Cafe, is best effected not through a “blunt-cut†approach, but through gradual transition. If the Cactus Cafe mission is to change to include more student involvement in programming and greater learning opportunities for students using the venue as a resource (which I agree it should), that can best be accomplished, it seems to me, by adding those elements to the current model over time.
My suggestion would be that you seriously consider a 12 month trial program of maintaining the status quo at the Cactus Cafe, and adding to the current model the programs that would address the concerns of student participation, access and learning opportunities. I honestly do not see how that would fail to make everyone who has an interest in the future of this venerable room happy. We have moved, in terms of the atmosphere of our discussions in this group, from mostly contentious to largely cordial and friendly. I would have no reservations working with you both to develop a successful model based on such an approach.
Kind regards,
Reid Nelson
| fotcc_press_release_2010-04-02.pdf |
Comments
Mr. Nelson,
Well, sir, thank you for trying. Thank you for sitting at the table.
I share your disappointment that even as the meetings to which you were privy occurred, "other discussions going on outside of [that] group" (neither open to public scrutiny nor subject to democratic review) have pressed forward.
Given these "other discussions," what options can you suggest for those of us concerned with preventing the destruction of the Cactus as it presently exists? How can we help?
Maybe students interested in such issues as production etc. could take an informal class? Oh wait, that's gone too. This is all so classically UT bureaucratically stupid, myopic, and embarrassing.
What an excellent letter in every respect. It's really hard to imagine that they will remain intransigent in the face of such a constructive offer and such a positive plan. Although I'm sure they will for now. Well, Reid, at least you've inspired me not to wait any longer to make a donation.
The above item I posted comes from the Austin Chronicle 2/19/2010. So I guess Liam O'Rourke was somehow wrong again if they are now exploring third party vendors involvement with the Cactus Cafe. I guess they will close one of the other businesses so they can bring in a vendor......
5) The cafe will become a franchised food outlet.
O'Rourke: "That can't happen, because under IRS rules, 10 percent [at most] of an educational building can be dedicated to third-party vendors." But that doesn't rule out relocating an existing vendor into the Cactus space. Smith initially said, "It will go back into the inventory of rooms that are reservable for recognized student organizations and faculty departments. We have 17 of those kind of rooms where people can have meetings in, activities, dinners, all the rest of that stuff, soup to nuts."
Thank you for the prompt update. The letter is direct, cordial and very well reasoned. I hope it is met seriously with honest follow up measures.