ArtNet checks in on Tucson’s Big Dick #1 art scandal that’s become a swelling controversy in this year’s City Council race:
It is easily the most pathetic attempt to restart the Culture Wars yet. Republican politicians in Tucson, Az., have put the local Museum of Contemporary Art in their crosshairs, attacking what they call a “sweetheart” deal the museum has with the city as it prepares to move into a new space in a repurposed firehouse. To whip up conservative ire, these same critics have resorted to that old standby, demonizing contemporary art as “pornographic” — though their chief example is a single work in a group show featured at the museum more than four years ago.
This article appears in Oct 15-21, 2009.
So once they finish burning down the Museum of Contemporary Art, the religious right will line up on Sunday to attend mass in one of many big churches in town with a steeple attached. Churches influenced by the designs of the famous English Architect Hawksmore. Inside they will worship beneath a giant phallus that was originally called an obelisk or “Cleopatra’s needle”. The lesson here? Don’t try to compete with the churches-it’s their dick or no dick.
Man this story is freaking gey (as not to offend those who are “gay”). I wonder though…how much was involved in this “sweetheart deal?” Perhaps you should have mentioned the amount Mr. investigative reporter.
Yes, I rather have a Art Musuem get to rent the building for a dollar a year than the Tuscon Police Dept or DHS be able to use it. This story is completely biased for what the writer thinks is art. The council should worry about taking care of our police department and not giving this deal to two bit art. This article focuses on the smallest problem of this issue, the actual art and not the issue of who this building should go to on the taxpayer’s expense.
It glides over and makes baseless claims that TPD and DHS does not want the building. TPD has said they want the building THIS YEAR for their SWAT team. TPD might be concerned over the money it would cost to renovate the building. However, it will cost more in the long run for our city to fit the bill to basically give this building to art group. DHS did not push for the building because of the council stubborn stance on giving this building to art group.
This is exactly what is wrong with this council. Their priorities are completely messed up. They rather help an art group than the police. Anyone that agrees the art group should get this building other than the police needs to get their head examined. Especially since they are getting this building by the taxpayer’s expense.
VOTE PROP 200 and show this council we are through with their wasteful special interest spending.
Guy, a blog post does not an investigation make. We’ll have some info for you on that score in this week’s issue.
Nate, do you have any actual evidence that what you’re saying is true? Because city staff say it’s not true and nobody else seems to have evidence that it is true. If you do have any evidence, I’d love to see it before my Tuesday morning deadline.
C’mon, Jim. Let’s not get into propagandistic nonsense. Why dredge up something like this instead of dealing with the overwhelming lack of capability of our Democrat ladies on the Council. Who cares whether the alternative is Republican or Democrat? I’m a Dem but we need anybody other that T and U! Everything else is inconsequential. Stick with the important stuff. Your subject will be dealt with by the people. Don’t try to make it an issue at this juncture. Stick with the REAL issues.
Porter, Investigation good, lapdog reporting bad. A hard earned sentence from a curious Frankenstein’s monster. Your message suspicious, Hmmmm.
Nintz,
The information about how TPD wanted to use this building came from interviews form Officer Larry Lopez from the Tucson Police Officers Association. He has said TPD wanted to use the building for their SWAT team on interviews with newspapers and talk shows. You can hear him talking about it on the Jon Justice talk show. There is a pod cast for it. He is also the one that brought up the Homeland Security issue, but he did not say where the source came from. Get an interview with Larry Lopez, he always talks to the media about the concerns of our police officers.
Nate: Larry Lopez doesn’t want to reveal his sources on that story and there’s evidently no paper trail–memos, e-mails or the like–to substantiate what he’s saying. City Manager Mike Letcher says that it would have cost more to remodel the current TPD HQ and demolish the fire station to provide parking ($52 million) than to build a new crime lab ($39 million), so the city decided to build a new crime lab at the Miracle Mile police station. That sounds like a fiscally sound decision.
Critics of the MOCA deal have now backed away from claims that Homeland Security was interested in the building. Letcher says there’s no truth to that rumor.
So the president TPOA talking about the issue of TPD using the old fire station is not a source? Officer Larry Lopez is a pretty good source if I could ever find one. A veteran police officer and president of the TPOA is pretty knowledgeable on the city issues involving the police. You are bringing up an entirely different story about the crime lab. I am talking about how TPD wanted to take control of the old fire station and put their SWAT team into it THIS YEAR. The DHS issue might have been overblown, but I would take TPD word over our current city council.
Either way you look at it, I do not see how giving a building to a art group for a dollar a year and the potential cost of 3 million to renovate the building for them is a financially sound idea. I rather spend our money on our police and fire department.
The council just does not hold our police as a high importance in terms of budget concerns. I understand the majority of the city budget is for police and fire, but TPD and TFD are still lagging behind in terms of manpower, technology, and funding. TPD hires just enough to fill attrition rates. They do not have enough manpower to double up in high crime areas putting them at risk. I used to work as a MP on DM. If we caught a civilian DUI on base. It would sometimes take hours for TPD to be able to send a unit to arrest them. Sometimes it would to so long that the suspects BAC would be below the legal limit and the police would have to let them go. Normally, they would have them call a taxi or get another ride. However, if they had the manpower the suspect would have a DUI conviction on their record and he would have not gotten off with basically a verbal warning for risking the lives of Tucson citizens.
I am getting off topic, but my point is that our council for years has not put TPD and the overall public safety as a top priority. This is shown since the town council feels like MOCA is more important than requests of our civil servants.
Nate: If TPD was interested in using the fire station, why can no one produce any emails or formal memos from anyone saying: “Hey, this is something we’d be interested in doing?” That would lend a great deal of credence to the whole story. I’m not saying those documents don’t exist, but so far, none have emerged.
Where are you getting this $3 million figure? No one in city government is saying that the city will spend $3 million preparing the firehouse for MOCA, which will be responsible for the cost of maintaining the building. That frees up taxpayer dollars that would otherwise have to be spent to maintain it. Again, if you can substantiate it, I’d love to see it.
Nintz,
The city council has not proved there was open bidding on this building. They need to show emails, proposals, and other evidence showing other bids. Officer Lopez has admitted he did not formally put a request. He does claims the station was never part of a bid process. The council has not shown who else was in consideration for this building. There is a disagreement between the council and TPD on how much it would cost to renovate the building for TPD use. In the article below, Tucson City Manager Mike Letcher admits that in his opinion it would cost too much to renovate the building. This shows the city looked into giving the building to TPD since they have enough information to make the conclusion it would cost too much. This proves TPD was looked at by the city, even without a formal request.
Source:
http://www.kold.com/Global/story.asp?S=113…
The other issues the council is denying will never been proved by either side. Officer Lopez, probably like most people in high positions in the city, has sources he is not willing to give up. The council is not showing proof there were other bids. How they came up with how much it would cost for TPD to renovate the building? Who is going to pay for renovating the building for MOCA? TPOA and other groups have accused the council the city is going to pay 3 million dollars to renovate the building for MOCA.
Maybe the council should show the contract MOCA is going to sign for using the building? They are acquiring the building in two months. I hope the city is on the ball enough to have a contract down on this deal. This would put the issue of who is paying for what to rest.
It seems like you have no problem taking the councils word for it on this issue, but have a huge problem in taking a police officer’s word on it. I will always believe a officer like Lopez over any politician.
Nate: Are you now suggesting that the city never did an Request For Proposals on the property? Because it’s pretty well established that they did with listings in the Daily Territorial. There were no other bids–MOCA was the only one that was interested in the firehouse.
I don’t know where you’re getting your $3 million figure for “renovating the building for MOCA.” MOCA is paying to decouple the utilities from the police station and will spend about $80K on a low-budget remodel so they can open early next year.
Letcher doesn’t say anything about renovation costs in the KOLD piece you reference, so it doesn’t “prove” anything. What Letcher told me was that the city looked at expanding the downtown police station and would have demolished the old fire station as part of that plan, but that plan cost about $50 million and an alternative proposal to build a new crime lab at the Miracle Mile police station cost $39 million, so they went with that proposal.
MOCA should not have been allowed to bid on a city building without first removing common utilities and AC units. Tucson City Counsel is to concerned with arts and not concerned with running our city, along with them are people like you in the media who have been running are fair city into the ground. How about the media wake up, and stop fawning over the Council and start doing real reporting by looking into the facts, all facts not just those that help your own political veiws.
RW: Why would anyone pay for decoupling utilities before they were awarded a lease? That’s a preposterous assertion.
Nintz,
Have you talked to Officer Lopez or do you just take Letcher’s side to the story? All the stuff you claim to have proof on is coming out of Letcher’s mouth. It is a fact the TPD has asked to use that building for three years. It is proven since Letcher knows how much it would cost for the city to renovate it and to give the building to TPD. All three times it was denied because of the costs. Officer Lopez disagrees with his estimate and has said on several interviews, the cost would be minimal for their SWAT team and a backup 911 center to move into the old fire station. I am not talking about prior requests to use the fire station, I am talking about the most recent one. So you can stop bringing up the Crime Lab defense. Face it you have basically the same amount of proof as I do. I have Lopez’s word and you have the Letcher’s. If I was you (I am guessing a reporter), I would ask for a copy of the contract between the city and MOCA. This would be a great way to alleviate any concerns many of us citizens have on this deal. That would be real hard evidence.
I will admit I am biased. I have been disgusted over the waste this city council has done over the years. The millions of dollars they waste of feel good projects and their special interests to stay elected. That is why I do not take Letcher’s word on what happened. However, if you are a reporter, you can not be biased. So again I asked have you talked to Officer Lopez on this issue?
I just hope when you write your articles, they are non-biased and well rounded. I like when I read a article and I can not tell what side the author believes.
Nintz,
I would add one more thing, most of what I read from your articles seems like you do more investigation on the side you personally believe. I stand by my assessment of the above article that you are trying to throw the eye off the ball of the main issue of how the council decided on this deal with the old fire station. Nobody cares what type of art is being displayed and the groups that are making this an issue (including you) are making this non-issue into a issue. I care about what exactly is in the contract with this art group and our city to allow them to rent it for a dollar a year. Who is going to pay for renovation? Who is going to pay for any problems that might come up with the building? If MOCA is told to leave the building, who is going to pay for cleaning up the building? Why is MOCA getting a dollar a year rent? The Tucson citizen has the right to see what is exactly in the contract between our city and MOCA to use this building. Those questions are what you need to be asking other than writing about dicks.
Nate, I call ’em as I see ’em. Your mileage may vary. I’d point out that Bruce Ash, Republican National Committeeman, has made a big deal out of “Big Dick No. 1.” He was interviewed about the subject on KGUN last week and that was the sensational angle to the story, even though that was one piece out of the hundreds of pieces that MOCA has exhibited over the last decade, and the show in which in ran happened in 2005, when the GOP controlled the City Council. While I haven’t talked to Larry, I have talked to Bruce, and both are saying the same thing: Some members of the police force made verbal inquiries into the possibility of using the fire station. That very well may have happened, but there are no written requests, or at least none that have surfaced so far. Nor are the officers who made the requests willing to step forward.
Clearly, you feel that the fire station should have been given over to the police department. City officials, who say that it cost $300,000 a year just to maintain the building and pay utility costs, decided it was better to lease it for $1 a year to MOCA for five years so they wouldn’t have to pay those costs. City officials also structured the deal so that if they want to take the building back, they can give MOCA one year’s notice and reclaim it.
You can call it anyway you want, its your blog. I still would like to see what the actual contract is going to say in writing. Maybe you can go talk to who you know, and get a copy. The issue of giving a building to a organization or group for a dollar a year is not a isolated incident. Other businesses, organizations and groups have gotten this deal by the council. You should look into why some businesses and organizations get this deal and other do not. I can bet it has more to do with who the group knows in the city government and not their financial situation.
Re: “City Council Race: What’s All This About Big Dicks?”
well according to everything i have read regarding moca and trasoff:
The Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District is under the jurisdiction of a four-member board that includes Chairwoman Anne-Marie Russell, executive director of the Museum of Contemporary Art (MOCA)! That’s right — Nina Trasoff oversees that board that makes all of the decisions regarding Rio Nuevo downtown redevelopment funding, and the chairwoman of that board is none other than the director of MOCA!
Councilwoman Trasoff also serves as the Chair of the Rio Nuevo / Downtown, Arts, Culture and History Subcommittee. Essentially, she is in charge of leading the discussion and is highly influential in all decisions made regarding Rio Nuevo downtown redevelopment and any arts projects that are funded.
obviously a severe conflict of interest!???isnt that the usual way! power and control and abuse of that power.