Comments on The Seattle Center Bill

We could just march there anyway.

But a better bet would be the sculpture park.

By my calculation, you could fit well over 30,000 people into the recently lidded Cal Anderson/Teletubby Park. 7.37 acres = 35,000+ sq/yds. Fun!

A Pride event at Cal Anderson Park would be some good times! If your calculations are correct, you could fit 30,000 people into Cal Anderson Park -- some of them would be standing in the fountain -- but you probably couldn't also fit enough potties for 30,000 people and the hundred booths and a stage and the dour-lesbian skill-share workshop and emergency services for the twinks-on-meth conga line...

That's why you would close the streets around the park. . . .

It seems to be poor planning on the Pride Committee's behalf. They were so determined to move the event off of Capitol Hill, where it did well for years, and helped support LGBT-owned businesses, but then they didn't plan for the financial viability of the event in future years.

It wasn't lack of financial planning. It was the intentional driving away of sponsorship by some, and the effects of fighting within the community that drove sponsorship away. Most prides have a broad base of sponsorship (more than beer and condom companies). Very few large corporate sponsors will get involved when there is infighting within the community when it already is a "controversial" event. In this case a handful of people and bar owners intentionally killed the event. That's what killed the budget.

Unless the community pulls together whether the event is on the hill or downtown it will be a flop compared to other pride events. Read the article from 2002 by Amy Jenniges. The move to downtown and the center (along with a name change) was an attempt to create a new start and was done in part because the same city that complained about the size of the event in 2002 (and didn't want it to expand) forced the issue in part.

Most pride events of comparable size operate on significant 6 digit budgets with broad based sponsorship. Until the community pulls together and personal agendas stop controlling the event, whatever event is held in Seattle will be limited in scope.

Don’t flatter yourself. Pride does not lose money because it’s controversial—not in Seattle it’s not. It loses money because it is run by enthusiastic amateurs, rather than professionals who both know what they’re doing and have enough time to do it (Bumbershoot, Folklife). Sponsors don’t like sponsoring poorly organized events where it’s unclear who’s in charge. How come the stoners at Hempfest do OK? Geez.

Folklife and Bumbershoot have clear, transparent organizational structures that make it easy for sponsors and City government to interact with them over the long term. Unless Pride changes its organizational structure, City government would be dumb to hand over the Seattle Center for a pittance.

It’s typical Seattle dysfunction. Everyone has to be listened to, involved, respected blah blah blah. It’s why cooperative socialism doesn’t work in the real world. Giving up the cooperative socialist model doesn’t mean you’re not gay anymore. It just means you have your shit together. Other people will notice. Sponsors will come. And the City would have less case to say no to having the event at the Center.

Hempfest keeps its financial head afloat in Myrtle Edwards Park the same way Pride survived in Volunteer Park -- using volunteers and exempted from usage fees. Despite our little bubble of urban tolerance, Pride is controversial to major corporate sponsors. They might give some money to Pride, but not the big bucks they give to the other big events held in Seattle Center.