Jamie Pollard sounded off Monday night towards critics of athletic department recommendations to the university, released on Friday, designed to limit the damage from COVID-19 and resulting budget shortfalls during Cyclone Radio Network’s Coaches Show on Monday.
The point that has drawn the largest amount of consternation, and been most widely debated on social media, is an indefinite closing of C.Y. Stephens’ Auditorium in the Iowa State Center.
“The revenues generated from community members attending performing arts at C.Y. Stephens’ are simply not enough to cover the costs of facility operations,” Pollard wrote on Friday. “The university has been subsidizing operations at Stephens’ Auditorium at nearly $1M annually. In addition, the facility has significant deferred maintenance issues which would require another $25M to $50M to bring the building up to today’s standards. As a result of the significant financial challenges facing the university and the athletics department, we are recommending that C.Y. Stephens’ Auditorium be closed indefinitely and future shows cancelled.”
Pollard followed up that initial statement with a tweet on Sunday (linked below), but he truly unloaded his thoughts and explained his reasoning for even considering closing C.Y. Stephens’ Auditorium on the radio show with John Walters and Brent Blum.
You can read the comments from the man himself, in full, below.
“First of all, no-one wants to close C.Y. Stephens’. No-one wants to lay off sports. No-one wants to let people go. No-one wants to cause any additional harm to anybody, but the fact of the matter is COVID’s winning, folks. It’s winning economically in a way that most people can’t even fathom. Long before COVID, Iowa State University was (facing) significant budget challenges, because enrollment was declining significantly. The campus was looking for all different kinds of solutions. One of the campus’ (problems) is for years the campus has been subsidizing the Iowa State Center and, specifically, subsidizing C.Y. Stephens’. People that passionately enjoy the arts have their tickets subsidized by the university.
“The university was in a great position to fund that for the past umpteen years, but that total is now almost a million dollars a year. The thought that there are people in the community, doctors, lawyers, you name it, that are going to events and, quite frankly, tax dollars are subsidizing their tickets. That doesn’t happen in football or basketball. People that go to our events have to make huge donations to have access to buy those tickets. The university was really struggling because that was a million dollars that was starting to be a cost that maybe was going to impact faculty salaries, faculty staffing, student services. They were looking for solutions. Not answers, solutions.
“The athletics department offered to take it on and see if we could figure out how to creatively find some solutions. We subsequently found a solution to incorporate the Scheman operation into our athletic department facilities and events staff. It did result in some staff layoffs and eliminating some positions, but Scheman is now running in our operation and running without any subsidies from the university. In addition, we had started down the pathway to some renovations to Scheman, a connecter to Hilton and additional parking. We really had developed a plan that was going to long-term make Scheman sustainable.
“Then, as you know, we were working on the entertainment district concept. The entertainment district concept was hopefully going to infuse some much-needed capital into the Ames community so that we could build a convention center for the city of Ames. The city of Ames does not have a convention center, they rely solely on Iowa State University, and a hotel at the convention center to be able to generate revenues that hopefully we could then use to reduce the subsidy of C.Y. Stephens’ and possibly even renovate C.Y. Stephens’. Ironically, some of those same arts people complained about the entertainment district concept.
“I just don’t get people who are getting their tickets subsidized complaining about people trying to find solutions. Then when they don’t want those solutions and they have to face the reality that it could go away, then they want to cast and throw stones for people at that. That’s all I was pointing out.
“You know what, COVID’s winning, folks. Now it’s a choice. It’s a choice of do you continue to subsidize those community members’ tickets or do you layoff people or do you drop a sport? I wonder if some of those arts people would want to sit across from some of our student-athletes and say, ‘You know what, I love arts so much at Iowa State, but I need to get my tickets subsidized, so we’re going to eliminate your sport or eliminate your position.’ That’s the reality that we’re facing as a campus. It has nothing to do with throwing stones like, ‘Oh, athletic department people because we don’t like art.’ It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the harsh reality of what COVID has done to our community.
“Quite frankly, Ames is a privileged community with a lot of white-collar jobs and, you know, most of the people that have been hurt by COVID have been service-level, entry-level people and a lot of people that are professionals haven’t felt the pain. Now, maybe they’re going to have to start feeling the pain. That’s going to be a wake-up call for some people.
I hate to feel like I’m Mr. Society, but, you know what, some of the vicious, ruthless, righteous people that have reached out and just groused, I’m appalled, because none of them have solutions. Their answer is don’t take away my subsidy.”
I love what JP has done for ISU and the athletics programs. I love his passion and his ability to move things forward with sometimes unique solutions. I agree that nobody should be subsidizing entertainment of any kind.
With that said, I also think JP can come across as a whiney jerk when he’s in a difficult position. I don’t think verbally attacking swaths of the community is beneficial for anybody, and it’s not a good look, even if it’s largely correct. The part about who has suffered is very misplaced and I think presumptuous on his part.
I might be odd, but I think you can both support JP as a whole and see that he has faults just like everyone else. Rather than talking down on those that he says are talking down to him, let’s leave the emotion out of it. His points are valid, but his attacks are unprofessional and add to the drama he’s supposedly against.
So, this part:
[QUOTE] “You know what, COVID’s winning, folks. Now it’s a choice. It’s a choice of do you continue to subsidize those community members’ tickets or do you layoff people or do you drop a sport?[B] I wonder if some of those arts people would want to sit across from some of our student-athletes and say, ‘You know what, I love arts so much at Iowa State, but I need to get my tickets subsidized, so we’re going to eliminate your sport or eliminate your position.’ [/B]That’s the reality that we’re facing as a campus. It has nothing to do with throwing stones like, ‘Oh, athletic department people because we don’t like art.’ It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the harsh reality of what COVID has done to our community. [/QUOTE]
…I mean, he’s sort of saying the same thing to the theater/music/dance kids who perform at Stephens, right? And the staff who works it? Not that I’m saying those people should win out, either, just that you can’t really be okay saying that to one group and not the other as a university. It really shouldn’t fall to the ISU athletic department to keep it going, that’s not their responsibility. But the university overall can’t decide which wins.
Is there possibly still a mortgage on that building? Why couldn’t it just be temporarily closed until we can get through this?
[QUOTE=”CYEATHAWK, post: 7304109, member: 4798″]
[QUOTE=”Jeremy, post: 7303920, member: 1″ a whiney jerk verbally attacking talking down unprofessional and add drama.
[/QUOTE]
Wipe off the makeup and there it is. I was never a big fan of JP when he was initially hired, but I have seen what he has done over the years for ISU and can admit I was wrong and the man has probably forgot more about management than I will ever know. So it’s up to you…….but you might want to give the guy a break.
[/QUOTE]
Did you not read the rest of the entire post where I said he has done a great job and I support him, full stop. BUT I can also agree with somebody while taking issue with them doing exactly what they’re excusing others of. He’s essentially saying the same thing to the “art community” that he is complaining about them saying about him.
AGAIN, you can both support a person and their body of work while also disagreeing with a singular event or set of comments that further cause rifts when this world has more than most of us can handle as is.
There are a lot of great and opposing viewpoints in this thread but I think everybody is talking past eachother rather than finding things aren’t binary.
1 – I agree that arts shouldn’t be subsidized. But if you have done nothing over the past several years to try and remove that subsidy or to at least make the community aware so things could be done, it’s hard to now act with emotion like people are bitching about it. ISU dropped the ball on this by not having it be an effort long before C.Y. was moved to the AD. And JP dropped the ball by using it as a wedge between the community, the University, and the AD all of a sudden. He is right, but completely misguided in how he’s presented it. And read number 3 on why I don’t thin using the word “subsidized” is correct in this context.
2 – I don’t think anybody has ever said they don’t WANT fans in the stands, they’ve said they don’t personally feel it is safe or in the best interest of the community. His comments were borderline arrogant and political in how he attacked those with a different viewpoint, while saying he was appalled by their attacking him. I personally don’t think fans should be there, though clearly I want them there. But is that worth attacking me for?
3 – His whole comments around subsidies are somewhat misplaced, and maybe even strategically dishonest. Just because the building has been running at a loss, doesn’t mean ticket sales are being subsidized. Any business that runs at a loss is technically subsidizing any sales and whatnot because it isn’t making them an overall profit. If that’s the spin, then that means we have a lot of subsidized sports within ISU and that “art community” could make the same argument against JP – why his “subsidizing” Cross Country ok but “subsidizing” arts isn’t?
AGAIN – I like JP, I respect JP, and I think he has been an amazing AD that I want here for a long time. But that doesn’t mean he doesn’t often times get too emotional and combative – even self-righteous – when complaining about those exact attributes of others.
[QUOTE=”Clonefan32, post: 7304273, member: 6660″]
The first bullet point is so comical I don’t even know how to respond. They cared deeply about CY Stephens and would have come up with the money but wont now because of Jamie letter?
You want to talk about someone coming off as whiney, there’s your example.
[/QUOTE]
Where in JP’s examples has he ever given people that option? He just says people have taken advantage of it for so long but I can guarantee you 99% of them never knew it was running at a loss. That is not subsidizing, that is poor management, communication, and solutioning over years or decades of time.
[QUOTE=”Urbandale2013, post: 7304405, member: 38924″]
No offense but I think you are missing the point Jamie is making.
1. I agree Iowa State has dropped the ball on CY in the past. That said I think it is misleading at best to say Jamie hasn’t been fairly upfront with the challenges there and trying to make it more sustainable. The entertainment district was very clearly about making the ISC a destination instead of the even location segregated from the rest of a night out.
2. Those were extremely targeted statements at specific people and how they acted. It wasn’t at regular people who don’t think it’s safe to have fans. I think Pollard has been more than gracious to people uncomfortable attending games. I also think he’s done everything he can to make it a safe experience for those that do want to come.
At the end of the day people have to understand the ramifications of what they are advocating. If you advocate for no fans you are advocating for a scenario that sees tough cuts to things people like. The decision to have fans is not a financially neutral decision. Preference should absolutely be made to health and safety but that preference comes with a financial cost. A lot of people like to pretend the financial impact doesn’t exist.
[/QUOTE]
I agree in many ways with that. I do agree there are financial implications to everything – but then lets tackle those problems rather than get into arguments and fights with the very community that supports the University. I understand that COVID has necessitated making decisions that are not good or comfortable, but having such a negative and verbal focus on those upset about something they never knew had challenges isn’t constructive.
C.Y. Stephens isn’t going to magically collapse tomorrow – why not say we’re going to keep it closed until COVID has passed and come up with approaches to better align it with the community’s needs and financial sustainability rather than just say it’s closed?
Again, the world we live in requires a very careful approach to messaging and solutioning that sometimes takes effort. I wish he would use his messaging to rally people around supporting these institutions and sports rather than making them the scapegoat for a sudden closing of them. Announce a committee to work with the city on a solution, announce a goal to bring in outside investors, etc – just don’t attack a large swath of the community when you blindside them with news it’s been losing money for decades.
And again – subsidizing is not the same as running at a loss. You can’t say these people are having their tickets subsidized just because the sales don’t offset all costs. You can have loss leaders in sales, you can have low margin items, and you can just have bad management over time to not keep the cost structures properly aligned. But if people are paying fair ticket rates comparable to venues, then it isn’t a subsidy.
[QUOTE=”NorthCyd, post: 7304442, member: 12585″]
My issue with your third point is that Pollard is potentially talking about cutting cross country. Everyone seems to be acting like the only cuts they are talking about is Stephen’s Auditorium when he also listed sports and jobs being cut. He pointed out that football is the moneymaker and season ticket holders pay the bills for a lot of other things. I imagine part of the reason he is pissed is that no one seems to care that they are going to cut jobs and sports programs but people are pissed they won’t be able to go to the symphony.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with that. But he’s so out there on this “subsidizing art” as a horrible concept when not using the same terminology with those sports. In his own concept, Football is subsidizing those other sports – no question about it. So when he complains about the art community bitching about having their subsidized tickets taken away, he’s forgetting the argument also goes back to why can’t he simply increase Football tickets $5-10 to offset the costs of those sports.
Again, I’m not arguing with subsidizing being a bad thing in general, but then let’s make sure we stick to facts and not emotions. Putting down “the art community” because they don’t want to lose their venue is no different then him being concerned about the sports programs possibly getting cut. But blaming it on subsidies for art and not for sports programs is strategically dishonest.
Reality is very clear and very painful, but unavoidable.
Some people will lose their jobs. Some sports programs may get cut. C.Y. Stephens may stay closed for a while.
But he’s the one that has separated out the art community as arrogant whiners when it’s his incomplete and bad messaging from the get-go that made it appear to many as he was treating art differently from athletics.
Both will be impacted, let’s not further divide the community when none of them are at fault. Solutions could be found, the question is how much energy is going into treating athletics and arts as equal urgencies as real-lives are impacted by both.
[QUOTE=”NodawayRiverClone, post: 7304675, member: 39167″]
On # 3. – Yes, the revenue sports subsidize the non-revenue (profit-non-profit) sports. In the past, when there was not enough subsidy money, baseball went away. Now, in the list of near athletic ice-age potential budget cuts, closing CY Stephens – which was (yes) subsidized (not a spin) is mentioned with the possible loss of more (subsidized) sports. Yet, all that is mentioned is the CY Stephens situation, as if no other moves are being contemplated. If the typical revenue sources for CY Stephens have not paid all the bills, then money from the University’s budget or the Athletic Dept budget does indeed subsidize operation of the venue, It is not incorrect to say ticket prices are subsidized if their sales make up the bulk of operating revenue.
[/QUOTE]
But he’s very clearly making things sound like the art people are somehow getting below market value ticket costs and now complaining if that goes away. That is not the case. Tickets at CY have been at market value and people have paid those rates. If that rate doesn’t pay the bills, that’s not the fault of the art community, that’s the fault of the management of CY over the past couple decades.
He is purposely (in my opinion) trying to make it sound like subsidies in this instance is giving people an advantage when clearly the business is upside down on the balance sheet.
I will say it again – you can love JP and all he has done while ALSO thinking he needs to be better at communicating – or let somebody else help craft the message. ISU has a great Marketing and Communication team.
Regardless of if you’re talking about layoffs, cuttings sports, or closing CYS – words matter more than anything. This is a good example why most schools and businesses have a communications team that helps make things very clear. JP likes to do it himself, which is fine when the topic is sunshine, but not when it comes to this. Then to go on the radio and literally rant about a portion of the community reeks of arrogance.
I like JP and love what he’s done… and I think he’s a bad communicator when his backs against the wall. This isn’t the first PR issue he’s created and it won’t be the last. As long as we can all agree that you can both support somebody and disagree with something, that’s really the end of it.