I guess it is the misfortune of success. The Pavilion brings in a lot of money, as you can see;

They also have millions in reserves. So why are we still subsidizing them?

Just look at the executive salaries, the Director, Smith was making $164K just 5 years ago. So apparently while he was laying people off during Covid he continued his raises. Not bad for running a couple small theaters and an out dated science center.

We also throw millions each year in maintenance of the building (taxpayers own it) from the entertainment tax. While actual building repairs like a roof, windows, foundation, etc., should be covered by the owners any equipment purchases such as lighting or sound or anything that is NOT a permanent part of the building should be the Pavilion’s expense, and the council needs to change their maintenance contract with the Pavilion when they revoke the subsidy to reflect it.

The Pavilion has proven that they can float the boat on their own, so why don’t we let them?

I also heard a rumor that the Pavilion is planning a big concert at the end of summer at Great Bear. Not sure who will all play, but they have a $2 million dollar budget supposedly.

By l3wis

12 thoughts on “The Pavilion Subsidies need to end”
  1. The Republicans who champion words like “Liberty” and “Freedom have now given us a Supreme Court that has made our presidents kings.

    AND, is it just me, or has the SCOTUS’s opinion on presidential immunity made their Chevron reversal from last week moot?…… OH, the irony that they fear an administrative dictatorship, but not a presidential one. Because, aren’t the administrators emboldened by their president?

    Perhaps, there is a distinction between constitutional acts and criminal acts, which there is, but wouldn’t the new presidential immunity make all official acts constitutional? Because, although, some would not be upholding the law, which is a presidential duty, they are not criminal because they are official, and thus they are constitutional – upholding the law that is – because they are necessary to fulfill official presidential duties.

    You watch, this current conservative SCOTUS will walk back this immunity opinion whenever it involves a Democratic president by calling an act in question as unconstitutional, but will call it constitutional because it was not criminal because it was a necessary “official act” with any future Republican president.

  2. if a former president has immunity, does that mean a former mayor does too?

  3. Given the SCOTUS decision, Nixon should get the last potential two and a half years of his presidency back. Ford should not be seen as a president. Ford was initially named “Leslie King”. Ford was the only “president” never elected by the people. Ford was a King, who was a king in his own time, who should have never been a king.

  4. Triple M,
    In this State, who would indict and prosecute the Mayor?
    The Minnhaha County State’s Attorney? ahahahaha.
    Were there an indictable offense, AG Jackley already has ready the “Nothing to see here folks. Move along” card which he used to cover for graft, fraud and corruption during the Rounds/Daugaard administrations. Besides, there is another gubernatorial campaign to run from the AG’s office (Marty For SD 2.0).
    And federal prosecutors, even those appointed by Democrat Presidents, seem uninterested in tackling cases which would involve political figures.

  5. Does the Mayor have executive privilege? Because, how does that work if he’s a part of the Council, which is like a legislative branch? Or, is he like Cheney, who after having “private meetings” with energy executives, while being vice-President, claimed that federal laws requiring public disclosure of the attendance lists of executive branch meetings didn’t apply to him, because he then claimed as vice-President, and as a member of the Cabinet of an executive branch and had offices in the White House, that he was actually a member of the legislative branch, thus laws pertaining to the executive branch did not apply to him, because as vice-President, he was actually – and more importantly – the President of the Senate, which is a legislative branch.

    #OhTheGamesTheGOPPlay #KOTUS #KingChevron

    ( and Woodstock adds: “Yeah, this is kind of like that girlfriend I once had who claimed I was her boyfriend until I ran out of money”…. 🙂 )

  6. “Say, is it true that Jerry and Martin were like fourth cousins, twice removed?”…

  7. In the majority sense, our current federal Supreme Court is not a court with a conservative philosophy, rather, it’s a court with a conservative agenda….. Just me, there’s a big difference. #FederalistSocietyTools

  8. Does this recent immunity decision mean it was okay for Munson to complete the Phillips to the Falls project without Council approval? #KingMunson #KingDavid?

  9. I’ve changed my aspirations. I now hope one of my grandkids grows up to be elected king “Someday”.

  10. It’s the year 2034 and CNN is still running stories saying that Biden should step down, but defiant King Biden says “NO!”……

Comments are closed.