CHAP Commission Ignores Concerns - Passes Controversial Interior Controls on Senator Theatre

Well, yesterday's CHAP hearing went pretty much as expected. Rumor had it that the CHAP commission had already decided the outcome before the public hearing. Although they denied that when pointedly asked the question by Senator owner Tom Kiefaber, their lack of consideration of the objections raised by Kiefaber and members of the public, including myself, and their hasty movement toward unanimous passage of the controversial measures certainly indicated the fix had been in before the meeting even started.

I got audio of the whole sad, sorry affair, and video of some of it. Those with strong stomachs may want to listen to this.

The entire portion of the meeting on The Senator took nearly two hours. I chose not to show the staff presentation by CHAP, which was a summary of the legislation, in the videos. The actual legislation is just a sideshow to the real issue at this point.

I figure anyone who really wants to know the details of the legislation can go to the CHAP web site. The actual legislation might not be a problem if it were currently needed, and if it weren't for the inauspicious timing, which has scared off private investors and had serious detrimental consequences.

The videos therefore focus on the objections to the legislation by Senator Theatre owner Tom Kiefaber, testimony by members of the public, and the CHAP board's hasty passage of the measures anyway. They are a study in government indifference and the exercise of royal power by the elite.

Part 1: Board members are introduced. Senator Theatre owner Tom Kiefaber begins his testimony agreeing in principle with the aim of preserving The Senator's interior, but objecting to the legislation for its negative consequences.



Part 2: Kiefaber gets further into his testimony, detailing how a pattern of CHAP actions with "inauspicious" timing has derailed multiple rounds of negotiations with potential private investors in The Senator. Bob Embry catches up on his sleep.



Part 3: Kiefaber wraps up his testimony and requests that the legislation be withdrawn so that it will not interfere with the upcoming foreclosure auction on The Senator and not impede the search for a buyer who will have the resources to run The Senator without leaving the financial burden on taxpayers.



Part 4: Kiefaber asks the CHAP board whether or not it is true that the outcome of the meeting was already decided before the meeting started. CHAP Chair Tyler Gearhart denies this, but as the meeting progresses and the CHAP board ignores objections by Kiefaber and others, it becomes more and more clear that the outcome actually was already decided.

In this section also, public comment begins and Gayle Grove, long-time Senator employee, gives her testimony. My camera battery ran out, so I will report that Gayle was suitably attired in camo pants and a t-shirt that read "Do Not Star With Me You Will Not Win."



Part 5: Public comment continues. I give my testimony, where I object to the CHAP board taking actions that have scared off potential buyers and scuttled private sector solutions, which has necessitated the city to spend almost $1 million in a recession when the city's budget is seriously strained. Although I don't object to the city spending money on preserving this wonderful theatre, I do object to the timing of these actions, which appears manipulative and suspicious. (Gayle and I had coordinated our outfits, and although you can't see it, I had borrowed the "They're Lying" t-shirt from Han Solo.)

I also point out Bob Embry's conflict of interest (yes, he's Mr. X!). Embry has been involved in The Senator's finances in the past, including a previous Abell Foundation foreclosure attempt in his role as President of the Abell Foundation, and he also has a long-standing personal connection to a prominent developer who has publicly expressed interest in owning and/or operating The Senator.

Tom Harris also gives his testimony, asking several pertinent questions about why the CHAP board is proceeding with these measures at this time.



Part 6: Johns Hopkins of Baltimore Heritage is the only member of the public to speak in favor of the CHAP measures. It is pretty clear his organization has not considered the timing or other suspicious factors, but only the need to protect The Senator's interior. Hopkins speaks of The Senator as a kind of museum, and Tom Kiefaber speaks up to point out that it is absolutely not a museum, but a living, evolving entity in an ever-changing industry.



Part 7: The CHAP board ignores most of the objections raised and continues with discussion of the finer points of the legislation that they clearly intend to pass.



Part 8: The CHAP board proceeds to a vote. Tom Kiefaber objects one last time on procedural grounds: the neighborhood associations for the surrounding neighborhoods were not notified, in violation of CHAP's own procedural guidelines.

The vote goes forward anyway. Bob Embry abstains due to the criticism of his conflict of interest, but only after making sure the measures were passing unanimously, and reportedly after being the driving force behind the whole thing up to this point.



There is apparently an appeal process, and the city council still would have to approve this before it becomes law. Another disappointing day in the petty politics of Smalltimore.

CHAP hearing on The Senator tomorrow!

Baltimore City's Commission for Historical and Architectural Preservation (CHAP) will meet to discuss proposed Special List designation of The Senator's interior spaces tomorrow. According to the hearing agenda, public discussion of The Senator will begin at 2:00 PM in the Phoebe Stanton Conference Room at the Department of Planning on the 8th floor of 417 E. Fayette Street in Baltimore City.

Eddie Leon, formerly known by this blog as "the guy" will be the staff presenter. I don't think Mr. Leon is Mr. X.

I have previously raised concerns on this blog about the timing of these actions so close to a foreclosure auction, which has reportedly scared off potential private investors in The Senator. I continue to be concerned about this matter and about conflicts of interest on the CHAP commission itself.

This really CHAPs my hide!

This latest development in the Senator saga really CHAPs my hide.

What’s up with the CHAP notices that have recently been posted on the front of The Senator Theatre?

For those who don’t speak acronym, CHAP is Baltimore City’s Commission for Historical & Architectural Preservation. In 2007, they added The Senator to their “Special List,” which was created just for the theatre, and now they’re attempting to slap restrictive controls on any interior modification to this privately-owned property. It seems that this alarming attempt to seize municipal control over The Senator’s interior spaces is unprecedented. Libertarians, are you reading this?

That’s right. With this proposed legislation, Baltimore City is saying that whoever owns The Senator Theatre will have to make specific permit applications to CHAP for ANY modification of the interior of the theatre, and at the commission’s discretion, it can hold up a permit for up for six months while CHAP takes public input on proposed modifications to private property. Whoa. Are there any constitutional lawyers in the house?

And get this: The Senator is the only building in Baltimore on the “Special List.” Just The Senator. Now isn’t THAT special?

From a preservation standpoint, The Senator Theatre building is already protected. It has been on the National Register of Historic Places since 1989, and it was placed there after owner Tom Kiefaber successfully campaigned to get it listed.

As Lewis Carroll would say, the city’s actions regarding The Senator Theatre are getting “curiouser and curiouser.”

An inside source in city government tells me there are staff members in the planning department who are quite upset over the heavy-handed machinations of a particular powerful CHAP commissioner that the source would not name.

Seems like this reportedly scary honcho has everybody afraid to blow the whistle on what looks like a blatant attempt to fix the auction of The Senator.

I’m told that this mysterious CHAP commissioner is the sole prime mover driving this highly questionable effort forward, which will seriously undermine the bottom line value of The Senator, intentionally or not. Let’s face it: would you bid on a building if you knew you potentially faced six months of red tape for any modifications of its interior beyond routine maintenance?

A quick investigation of the CHAP website turned up an interesting fact: Mr. James “Buzz” Cusack sits on the commission. Excuse me if this seems like the kind of thing that gets taken off of government web sites after bloggers notice them. I took a screen shot.

The Baltimore Sun has reported that Mr. Cusack, who runs the Charles Theater, a rival to Tom Kiefaber over the years, has announced his intention to be one of the bidders on The Senator if it goes to auction. So, is Buzz Cusack the mysterious commissioner who is conducting this railroad train? If not, then who is? Anyone out there know who sponsored this action by CHAP? Pray tell.

Another article in the Baltimore Sun reveals that Kiefaber is not happy about CHAP’s attempt to place restrictive controls over the renowned theatre that he and his family have lovingly preserved since 1939.

Kiefaber said a plan to preserve the building's interior, however well-intentioned, contributed to his decision to stop showing first-run films. The proposal, by the city's Commission for Historic and Architectural Preservation, would severely restrict any structural changes that could be made to the Senator's interior. In the long term, Kiefaber said today, that would affect the building's value by limiting a prospective buyer's options. In the short term, he said, the move scared off an investor whose capital could have helped Kiefaber meet payroll for his 23-person staff.

So just the specter of this controversial CHAP action scared off an investor? Well surprise, surprise. So that’s why The Senator closed down so suddenly for the first time in seven decades with no warning.

And why does the City now seem to be backing off their well-publicized “offer” to Kiefaber that would have him sign over The Senator to a non-profit and allow him to keep his home?

Is it just a coincidence that Deputy Mayor Andrew Frank’s prediction in the Sun of when the mid-April auction will take place also coincides with the date set for the upcoming CHAP hearing? Maybe it’s just my paranoia about the way our fair city operates behind the scenes, but this whole affair is starting to reek of something foul.

When I asked Kiefaber about all this, he (uncharacteristically) said very little and looked a bit rattled by the inquiry. Is it just me or do Tom’s public statements lately about these matters seem like a captive’s communications from a kidnapper’s lair?