Tuesday, March 27, 2007
PEACE FLAG PROJECT
This note came today from People Productions. It's purely a symbolic thing, but maybe that's what SoHum needs right now, something to symbolize an end to the discord. How can it hurt? The photo is something I shot in Venice Italy summer before last. The "Pace" flags are everywhere in Italy and are available at all sorts of stores and from street vendors. - Bob
At a recent meeting of the Reggae coordinators, People Productions, and Tom Dimmick, many heartfelt emotions were expressed concerning the discord running through our community concerning the annual Reggae on the River festival. The overwhelming consensus was the need for a peaceful solution within our community to bring about healing. Through this need we decided to create a "Peace Flag Project" in Southern Humboldt.
The “Peace Flag Project” seeks to bring our whole community together through a shared purpose; a peaceful solution to the unresolved issues between People Productions, Tom Dimmick, and the Mateel Community Center.
Throughout history peace flags have been displayed in many cultures around the world as a sign of diversity and inclusiveness, of hope and of yearning. The entire community is invited and encouraged to contribute to this Peace Flag Project by sharing in words, or in pictures, your prayers and positive affirmations. These prayers will then be sewn into various displays that will be hung throughout Garberville and Redway.
To participate please bring by your prayers, pictures, and positive affirmations in the format of an 81/2' x 11' size of paper to The People Production office located at 176 Rusk Lane in Redway or email them too people@peopleproductions.net.
Now is the time to unite as one, to let your prayers and hopes be heard for a peaceful solution.
For more information please call People Productions at 707-923-4599 or visit our website at www.peopleproductions.net.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
from the Mateel Executive Director
I sent a copy of Tom Dimmick's latest statement to Taunya Stapp for comment. What follows is her reply. I also inserted a specific question about Summer Arts at the end...
Taunya writes:
First, we'd like to clarify that the Mateel Board never initially asked to sell the event. We are being forced into the situation of considering selling the event by the actions of the private parties involved.
The Board was looking into licensing options after 2005 failed to deliver. It is part of our mission program (to fulfill diversity) plus as our largest asset the decision should go to the membership for a vote. We never discussed selling the event.
We found that licensing wasn't that easy over a long term -- that some entity so inclined could easily jump the event [take over the trademark] after three years. Some of the earlier activities of People Productions showed they had already been working this idea, whether purposeful or not.
Therefore we were left with the option of a short term very controlled license, or creating a production contract with a company responsive to our needs and accountable. Selling the event was not considered a viable option to fix the relationship with People Productions.
As our original statement back in December mentioned, the board, after much debate, decided to license the event for one year so that the Mateel community could come together and decide the long term future of this event. Our press release announcing the termination of the production contract (December 28, 2006) had this statement at the very beginning:
“The MCC board feels that a short term licensing of the event is the best course of action. This will protect our intellectual property that is Reggae on the River and give us time to gather community input on the direction of the show.”
Long term contracts with People Productions have never worked well even though they provided operational funds. We took the crisis People Productions created this year and decided to change things into a positive future for the Mateel.
People Productions, in my opinion, has been very good at crafting moments of dire crisis for the Mateel. These events suck all the lifeblood from the organization until solved to People Productions' satisfaction. Arguably, any time the Mateel has tried to do something, ask for something, or to diversify its income model in a way that did not meet the needs of People Productions, this same type of crisis event has cropped up. This is an ongoing cycle easily identified throughout the boards and management groups that have been at the Mateel.
This year we chose to stop that crisis cycle in the Mateel by using the opportunity of having to cancel their contract to call for a year of long term planning for the Center. This would allow us together, as a community, to decide what future of Reggae on the River would best suit the Center's needs. We could brainstorm, look at options, research those options, and make a normal business decision on our direction.
We are not sure what “offer” Tom Dimmick is referring to at this point. We had two demand letters from Mr. Dimmick received before the contract with People Productions was terminated. One suggested he receive two years for free. We have also heard from a third party about a "suggested offer" and believe this to be what Mr. Dimmick is referring to in his Open Letter.
This offer left the Mateel out in the cold for the first year; had the Mateel turning over its permit to Dimmick (because he doesn't have a permit to do Reggae Rising) and had him attempting to get another one for Mateel the following year. It also states that Mr. Dimmick will do multiple events on his property by subcontracting to Dansun Productions and People Productions. The Board of the Mateel have repeatedly stated they will not work with People Productions again. That discussion/offer also included excluding nonprofit food booths from our show.
Additionally we have stated we will not enter into a long term contract offer with any of the private parties, and that they will need to find financing up front considering what we know of their long term plans. Finally, if Mr. Dimmick is asking for a license, there are more money issues involved that just a per year fee. Again, it makes us very nervous to sign a ten year contract when we have been made aware of Mr. Dimmick's long term plans. We have equipment, infrastructure, lost value to our trademark from the confusion Reggae Rising has created and Mr. Dimmick has promoted, our permit, the value of the lease agreement as well -- all need to be considered should we consider any arrangement. Then we also have our membership to consult as well.
I keep hearing that Summer Arts might actually be on Dimmick Ranch, which, for various reasons, including permit requirments, seems like something very complicated to do. Is the Mateel considering that?
No, the Mateel is not seriously considering moving Summer Arts. Summer Arts will be at Benbow again this year.
Taunya writes:
First, we'd like to clarify that the Mateel Board never initially asked to sell the event. We are being forced into the situation of considering selling the event by the actions of the private parties involved.
The Board was looking into licensing options after 2005 failed to deliver. It is part of our mission program (to fulfill diversity) plus as our largest asset the decision should go to the membership for a vote. We never discussed selling the event.
We found that licensing wasn't that easy over a long term -- that some entity so inclined could easily jump the event [take over the trademark] after three years. Some of the earlier activities of People Productions showed they had already been working this idea, whether purposeful or not.
Therefore we were left with the option of a short term very controlled license, or creating a production contract with a company responsive to our needs and accountable. Selling the event was not considered a viable option to fix the relationship with People Productions.
As our original statement back in December mentioned, the board, after much debate, decided to license the event for one year so that the Mateel community could come together and decide the long term future of this event. Our press release announcing the termination of the production contract (December 28, 2006) had this statement at the very beginning:
“The MCC board feels that a short term licensing of the event is the best course of action. This will protect our intellectual property that is Reggae on the River and give us time to gather community input on the direction of the show.”
Long term contracts with People Productions have never worked well even though they provided operational funds. We took the crisis People Productions created this year and decided to change things into a positive future for the Mateel.
People Productions, in my opinion, has been very good at crafting moments of dire crisis for the Mateel. These events suck all the lifeblood from the organization until solved to People Productions' satisfaction. Arguably, any time the Mateel has tried to do something, ask for something, or to diversify its income model in a way that did not meet the needs of People Productions, this same type of crisis event has cropped up. This is an ongoing cycle easily identified throughout the boards and management groups that have been at the Mateel.
This year we chose to stop that crisis cycle in the Mateel by using the opportunity of having to cancel their contract to call for a year of long term planning for the Center. This would allow us together, as a community, to decide what future of Reggae on the River would best suit the Center's needs. We could brainstorm, look at options, research those options, and make a normal business decision on our direction.
We are not sure what “offer” Tom Dimmick is referring to at this point. We had two demand letters from Mr. Dimmick received before the contract with People Productions was terminated. One suggested he receive two years for free. We have also heard from a third party about a "suggested offer" and believe this to be what Mr. Dimmick is referring to in his Open Letter.
This offer left the Mateel out in the cold for the first year; had the Mateel turning over its permit to Dimmick (because he doesn't have a permit to do Reggae Rising) and had him attempting to get another one for Mateel the following year. It also states that Mr. Dimmick will do multiple events on his property by subcontracting to Dansun Productions and People Productions. The Board of the Mateel have repeatedly stated they will not work with People Productions again. That discussion/offer also included excluding nonprofit food booths from our show.
Additionally we have stated we will not enter into a long term contract offer with any of the private parties, and that they will need to find financing up front considering what we know of their long term plans. Finally, if Mr. Dimmick is asking for a license, there are more money issues involved that just a per year fee. Again, it makes us very nervous to sign a ten year contract when we have been made aware of Mr. Dimmick's long term plans. We have equipment, infrastructure, lost value to our trademark from the confusion Reggae Rising has created and Mr. Dimmick has promoted, our permit, the value of the lease agreement as well -- all need to be considered should we consider any arrangement. Then we also have our membership to consult as well.
I keep hearing that Summer Arts might actually be on Dimmick Ranch, which, for various reasons, including permit requirments, seems like something very complicated to do. Is the Mateel considering that?
No, the Mateel is not seriously considering moving Summer Arts. Summer Arts will be at Benbow again this year.
Friday, March 16, 2007
a response from Boots Hughston
After receiving the statement from Tom Dimmick yesterday (see below) I forwarded it to Boots Hughston for comment. Boots had called me earlier in the day disputing unattributed allegations posted in a thread on SoHum Parlance by someone who calls himself Omar.
"Omar" wrote, "As I hear it... The ED of the MCC gave Boots the final say on whether the agreement would be accepted.
To Be One decided that HE is going to produce the show.
The offer was rejected by him.
We all lose."
Tom D. mentions, ""More than a half dozen offers – offers that allow the MCC to recoup its expenses for the Dimmick Ranch infrastructure and equipment AND realize a return on this investment – have been put on the table. Offers for lucrative licensing arrangements have been made. All are aimed at avoiding litigation – an expense, and one with the potential to involve costly damages for our community center. I’ve actively and aggressively explored settlement in formal settings, through 'friends' and directly – all the while making it clear that I am open to counter-offers."
I asked Boots about this, and about something Tom says regarding traffic mitigation: "We instituted the sale of Thursday night arrival, Pre-Sale Camping for the Dimmick Ranch and Cooks Valley Camping Area, and this effectively solved the traffic problems. This crucial mitigation has already been overlooked by the new producer... The promotion of the event has already violated the spirit of the traffic plan we worked hard to hammer out."
Boots responds:
The offer Tom speaks of is the same Carol offered when she quit some months ago. Take 200K per year for 10 years and give them RotR. He says he’s made offers that have substance, but to my knowledge he has not.
On the other hand 2b1 suggested to Tom a deal might be possible if Tom would consider dropping his lawsuits against the Mateel and board members and the Mateel would consider dropping theirs lawsuit against him. I suggest the show remained as RotR owned and operated by the Mateel, the same as it has been for 23 years. I even explained that 2b1 did not necessarily have to be promoter. I felt this was a very clean way for everyone to get out of this mess.
In reflection I realize he doesn’t want to resolve the problems. His intent is to to take control of the festival one way or another. Just as Tom stated he bought property to have the festival and his intent was to make money. He acts like the festival is somehow already his. It’s sad he doesn’t realize his actions are tearing the community apart. The Mateel has come to him many times trying to resolve the problem. Ex-members of the Mateel have also tried to negotiate with Tom and all have failed, he refuses to even consider a different offer.
This morning he called and rejected my proposal stating he felt he had a stronger hand and wanted to talk to the Board directly. I told him I would pass this on to the Mateel.
Concerning Tom’s remarks stating we have over looked early arrival. He is mistaken, Thursday early arrival has been implemented. We are not forcing them to camp in the neighboring areas as they did last year. We are allowing early arrivals to camp on site as well. This and other options well be on sale shortly.
Other info: Many fault the Mateel stating that the Mateel sued first. The truth is People Productions had already filed a law suit against the Mateel, they just didn’t serve the papers. They was the first to sue, not the Mateel.
Much Respect, Boots-2b1
(note from Bob: I also forwarded Tom's latest statement to Garth Epling from the Mateel Board for comment. I have not heard back yet, but will post his response when I do.)
"Omar" wrote, "As I hear it... The ED of the MCC gave Boots the final say on whether the agreement would be accepted.
To Be One decided that HE is going to produce the show.
The offer was rejected by him.
We all lose."
Tom D. mentions, ""More than a half dozen offers – offers that allow the MCC to recoup its expenses for the Dimmick Ranch infrastructure and equipment AND realize a return on this investment – have been put on the table. Offers for lucrative licensing arrangements have been made. All are aimed at avoiding litigation – an expense, and one with the potential to involve costly damages for our community center. I’ve actively and aggressively explored settlement in formal settings, through 'friends' and directly – all the while making it clear that I am open to counter-offers."
I asked Boots about this, and about something Tom says regarding traffic mitigation: "We instituted the sale of Thursday night arrival, Pre-Sale Camping for the Dimmick Ranch and Cooks Valley Camping Area, and this effectively solved the traffic problems. This crucial mitigation has already been overlooked by the new producer... The promotion of the event has already violated the spirit of the traffic plan we worked hard to hammer out."
Boots responds:
The offer Tom speaks of is the same Carol offered when she quit some months ago. Take 200K per year for 10 years and give them RotR. He says he’s made offers that have substance, but to my knowledge he has not.
On the other hand 2b1 suggested to Tom a deal might be possible if Tom would consider dropping his lawsuits against the Mateel and board members and the Mateel would consider dropping theirs lawsuit against him. I suggest the show remained as RotR owned and operated by the Mateel, the same as it has been for 23 years. I even explained that 2b1 did not necessarily have to be promoter. I felt this was a very clean way for everyone to get out of this mess.
In reflection I realize he doesn’t want to resolve the problems. His intent is to to take control of the festival one way or another. Just as Tom stated he bought property to have the festival and his intent was to make money. He acts like the festival is somehow already his. It’s sad he doesn’t realize his actions are tearing the community apart. The Mateel has come to him many times trying to resolve the problem. Ex-members of the Mateel have also tried to negotiate with Tom and all have failed, he refuses to even consider a different offer.
This morning he called and rejected my proposal stating he felt he had a stronger hand and wanted to talk to the Board directly. I told him I would pass this on to the Mateel.
Concerning Tom’s remarks stating we have over looked early arrival. He is mistaken, Thursday early arrival has been implemented. We are not forcing them to camp in the neighboring areas as they did last year. We are allowing early arrivals to camp on site as well. This and other options well be on sale shortly.
Other info: Many fault the Mateel stating that the Mateel sued first. The truth is People Productions had already filed a law suit against the Mateel, they just didn’t serve the papers. They was the first to sue, not the Mateel.
Much Respect, Boots-2b1
(note from Bob: I also forwarded Tom's latest statement to Garth Epling from the Mateel Board for comment. I have not heard back yet, but will post his response when I do.)
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Dimmick Ranch Press Release - March 15, 2007
This showed up around the same time at the note below from 2b1.
Open Letter to the Community From Tom Dimmick
This community and I have enjoyed Reggae on the River for 23 years. In this spirit, I purchased the Dimmick Ranch and structured a lease for use of the land. That lease was intended to help fund the land’s purchase and the insurance policies necessary for a large-scale event, and in the greater sense, to serve as the new “home” of our annual reggae festival.
Through my experience with the MCC, as a neighbor and landlord, I came to know People Productions and developed confidence in their ability to manage this large-scale event. This played into my willingness to purchase the land and take on the accompanying liability. It also drove me to include PP explicitly in my lease with MCC for use of the land. When Mateel removed PP as producer, the lease was clearly breached and, as a result, terminated.
To ensure public safety, mitigate county agency requirements and accommodate the festival, more than $400,000 worth of infrastructure and equipment were needed. Of this expense $300,000 was covered by the MCC, while I contributed more than $100,000 – a figure above and beyond the $50,000 contracted amount.
We spent countless hours implementing the requirements of various state, county and city agencies to make the 2006 ROTR the best it could be. We also worked closely with MCC members, PP, community volunteers and many of the regions’ non-profit organizations. Together we developed new operational plans for every area. CHP and CalTrans concerns about traffic flow on Friday morning and a new entry location for the festival, necessitated a complete revision of the traffic plan. We instituted the sale of Thursday night arrival, Pre-Sale Camping for the Dimmick Ranch and Cooks Valley Camping Area, and this effectively solved the traffic problems. This crucial mitigation has already been overlooked by the new producer who lacks institutional history.
PP has the institutional history to produce this event. Carol Bruno and much of her staff have 23 years invested in ROTR. I’ve taken in the festival, invested in it and given it a permanent home when it might have otherwise been “homeless” or worse. Yes, the MCC profits the most from this event. But the way I see it, we all have an investment here, and we all stand to lose.
More than a half dozen offers – offers that allow the MCC to recoup its expenses for the Dimmick Ranch infrastructure and equipment AND realize a return on this investment – have been put on the table. Offers for lucrative licensing arrangements have been made. All are aimed at avoiding litigation – an expense, and one with the potential to involve costly damages for our community center. I’ve actively and aggressively explored settlement in formal settings, through “friends” and directly – all the while making it clear that I am open to counter-offers.
To preserve an annual reggae festival for Dimmick Ranch, PP, the fans and our local non-profits that rely on it for their funding, Reggae Rising was launched. While I’ve had an early legal victory in avoiding a temporary restraining order that would have barred the event, I’ve continued to work toward an equitable win-win-win settlement for the three parties invested in the event – and a win for the community.
Now, MCC is selling ROTR tickets to a venue they do not have a right to occupy. The promotion of the event has already violated the spirit of the traffic plan we worked hard to hammer out. Continuing in this manner will hurt us all and threatens to bring down this fine tradition due to safety concerns. It most definitely increases the chance that the lawsuits will be fought to completion. If that happens, any chance for a reasonable settlement with the potential to preserve the original spirit of event and the financial integrity of the MCC AND the Dimmick Ranch will be gone forever. If the MCC continues on its current path, it may well bring down not only itself, but also the festival that has become so important to the community.
Despite the lawsuits, festival confusion, and community division The Dimmick Ranch and People Productions remain committed to helping the MCC through its’ financial short falls. The Dimmick Ranch and PP agenda is to: produce and host a world-class reggae festival that’s safe for all attendees, heals the community spirit, and supports our nonprofit organizations, including the MCC.
Very Truly,
Tom Dimmick
Open Letter to the Community From Tom Dimmick
This community and I have enjoyed Reggae on the River for 23 years. In this spirit, I purchased the Dimmick Ranch and structured a lease for use of the land. That lease was intended to help fund the land’s purchase and the insurance policies necessary for a large-scale event, and in the greater sense, to serve as the new “home” of our annual reggae festival.
Through my experience with the MCC, as a neighbor and landlord, I came to know People Productions and developed confidence in their ability to manage this large-scale event. This played into my willingness to purchase the land and take on the accompanying liability. It also drove me to include PP explicitly in my lease with MCC for use of the land. When Mateel removed PP as producer, the lease was clearly breached and, as a result, terminated.
To ensure public safety, mitigate county agency requirements and accommodate the festival, more than $400,000 worth of infrastructure and equipment were needed. Of this expense $300,000 was covered by the MCC, while I contributed more than $100,000 – a figure above and beyond the $50,000 contracted amount.
We spent countless hours implementing the requirements of various state, county and city agencies to make the 2006 ROTR the best it could be. We also worked closely with MCC members, PP, community volunteers and many of the regions’ non-profit organizations. Together we developed new operational plans for every area. CHP and CalTrans concerns about traffic flow on Friday morning and a new entry location for the festival, necessitated a complete revision of the traffic plan. We instituted the sale of Thursday night arrival, Pre-Sale Camping for the Dimmick Ranch and Cooks Valley Camping Area, and this effectively solved the traffic problems. This crucial mitigation has already been overlooked by the new producer who lacks institutional history.
PP has the institutional history to produce this event. Carol Bruno and much of her staff have 23 years invested in ROTR. I’ve taken in the festival, invested in it and given it a permanent home when it might have otherwise been “homeless” or worse. Yes, the MCC profits the most from this event. But the way I see it, we all have an investment here, and we all stand to lose.
More than a half dozen offers – offers that allow the MCC to recoup its expenses for the Dimmick Ranch infrastructure and equipment AND realize a return on this investment – have been put on the table. Offers for lucrative licensing arrangements have been made. All are aimed at avoiding litigation – an expense, and one with the potential to involve costly damages for our community center. I’ve actively and aggressively explored settlement in formal settings, through “friends” and directly – all the while making it clear that I am open to counter-offers.
To preserve an annual reggae festival for Dimmick Ranch, PP, the fans and our local non-profits that rely on it for their funding, Reggae Rising was launched. While I’ve had an early legal victory in avoiding a temporary restraining order that would have barred the event, I’ve continued to work toward an equitable win-win-win settlement for the three parties invested in the event – and a win for the community.
Now, MCC is selling ROTR tickets to a venue they do not have a right to occupy. The promotion of the event has already violated the spirit of the traffic plan we worked hard to hammer out. Continuing in this manner will hurt us all and threatens to bring down this fine tradition due to safety concerns. It most definitely increases the chance that the lawsuits will be fought to completion. If that happens, any chance for a reasonable settlement with the potential to preserve the original spirit of event and the financial integrity of the MCC AND the Dimmick Ranch will be gone forever. If the MCC continues on its current path, it may well bring down not only itself, but also the festival that has become so important to the community.
Despite the lawsuits, festival confusion, and community division The Dimmick Ranch and People Productions remain committed to helping the MCC through its’ financial short falls. The Dimmick Ranch and PP agenda is to: produce and host a world-class reggae festival that’s safe for all attendees, heals the community spirit, and supports our nonprofit organizations, including the MCC.
Very Truly,
Tom Dimmick
... on the River bandlist
Note: I received two e-mails this evening around the time I was discussing Reggae business on KHUM radio. One was an updated list from 2b1 of who is booked for Reggae on the River. Much is on the RoR website already but there are two significant additions: Ky-Mani Marley — somewhat surprising given the long relationship Carol Bruno and People Productions have with the Marley boys — and Luciano with Dean Fraser, which struck me mainly because Reggae Rising has announced Sly and Robbie with the Taxi Gang — and Dean Fraser is closely associated with the Gang.
(The photo above shows Luciano backstage at Reggae 2001.)
Something that is not clear at this point is whether the various bands and booking agents have signed exclusive contracts. Presumably only one producer is going to actually get to do Reggae in August. What happens to the bands booked for the festival that falls by the wayside? An artists' agent I spoke with earlier today who has acts booked at each festival could not provide a definitive answer. ~ Bob
from Boots-2b1
Bands we have so far.
The Roots
Angelique Kidjo
Ky-Mani Marley
Luciano and Dean Fraser
Lee"Scratch"Perry
Culture Featuring Kenyatta Hill
The Itals
Mad Professor
Wailing Souls
Sierra Leone's Refugee All stars
Norris Man
Marlon Asher
Lutan Fyah
Norris Man
Little Hero
Neutral Sisters
Dubconscious
Dr Israel
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
A Conversation with Tom Dimmick
When I received a copy of the judge’s ruling this morning, a note from Meeka Ferretta asked if I might want to talk with Tom Dimmick. I said, yes, and got a call from him this afternoon.
How do you interpret the judge’s ruling? The press release says it “clears the way.” How do you see it? Is it as cut and dried as that?
It’s definitely a step in the right direction for me, and maybe a precursor of things to come, with the preliminary injunction and ultimately the lawsuit situation. It’s basically the equivalent of winning round one or whatever.
I think it’s a motivation for the Mateel to revisit its stance and its approach towards me. Hopefully it will open the door to some of these settlement concepts that have been getting kicked around for quite a while.
Can you give any detail on what you’re offering?
What I hope we can arrive at is a settlement that makes everyone happy. I’d love to see the Mateel make the money it needs to from the Reggae event, enough to continue doing its thing. And I need to have my long-term security needs met as far as feeling like the event is properly staffed with experienced people. All the offers are about nailing down the right amount of money so everyone can walk away feeling good.
Are you still talking about licensing the Reggae on the River name to avoid confusion? In Humboldt County people are more aware of what’s going on with the festival. On a national and international level they may not know what Reggae Rising is. Bottom line, would you like to get the name back.
There’s a lot attached to that name, both good and bad at this point. I think internationally, Carol Bruno’s name is as important as Reggae on the River, when it comes getting the good artists and the respect of the people who’ve come to enjoy this amazing show over the years.
That may be true for those involved inside the reggae business, record labels, managers, booking agents and so on. But what about the average reggae fan? Will it make any difference to them? I guess what I’m asking is, how important is the name?
Maybe not as important as it was six months ago. It’s just really sad what’s happened here over the course of this dispute. I’m not saying that the name is off the table, but...
I’m assuming you announced a festival with a new name because you felt you had no choice.
That’s right.
There were licensing offers...
Definitely.
So, is it too late to revisit that idea?
I guess I can say that that idea is not all that attractive anymore, basically because of all the negative comments about it being a corporate take-over, which is ridiculous because we’re all people. We all work together; we’re from the community. I have to be evasive about that... let’s say it’s not a priority.
What do you think it will take to heal this wound? That’s the way I see it from the perspective of Northern Humboldt, that the community seems torn apart by all this. What will it take to end it?
It’s going to take a creative solution, a reasonable settlement and a good solution that everyone can get behind and work toward. When we find that and can do it, we’ll look back and say, wow, that was something, but hey, look where we are now. In the end it has to work out.
You use the word “settlement,” which is a legal term. Is that what you’re thinking at this point, to end things out of court by settling between the two parties?
That’s been the concept the whole time, but communications broke down. It just a matter of getting the people together to come up with a real solution and do it.
In your press release you say you “remain open to working together on this.” What do you mean by that exactly.
That if we’re going to make a settlement it needs to work for everyone. We’ve all suffered losses in this dispute. If it’s going to work, we all have to work together.
At the Planning Dept. hearing Thursday you made a comment that seemed to be a response to rumors that there are plans to turn Dimmick Ranch into some sort of year-round concert facility. Do you have any more to say about that? From talking to the Planning Dept. [Michael Richardson] I know that that the EIR could be amended to allow for more concerts.
For 362 days a year it’s a quiet peaceful place and we love it. Now with all the infrastructure and everything there, there’s an opportunity also. Certainly down the road, we would like to add some really top-notch entertainment, but presently we’re just trying to get through the situation right now.
I can see how you’d be eager for this summer to be over.
Returning to the court decision. What everyone seems to be asking is, now that round one is over, what happens next? Has anything changed?
We’ll see. It’s not over. Again, I’m hoping that the door’s open to make a settlement. The clock is ticking. It’s so late in the year. For any event to happen, decisions need to be made right now.
Is there work to do on the site?
Not really. The site is pretty much there. There’s some fencing and stuff like that to be done here and there, but no major construction efforts for this year.
Because all that was taken care of last year...
That’s right. In fact that was basically what led to the whole dispute.
You mean the fact that the added cost of setting up the new site meant there was not as much profit?
That’s right.
Presumably without the set-up costs, there’s more potential for profit this year...
That’s absolutely correct.
One has to wonder, what if...
(Tom is quiet for a little while thinking...) You know I know the answer to that, but I don’t want to go there. We need to get beyond all that.
If you look at what happened at the Planning Commission meeting, it appeared to be a concerted effort to discredit People Productions. It was just ridiculous.
From were I was sitting it seemed pretty self-destructive. All the commissioners were going to decide was how many tickets you can sell, and those limits will be made on whoever does a festival. I can’t imagine what they left that meeting thinking.
Things were blown out of proportion and exaggerated. It was really a sad thing. I hope that the event can bounce back from that.
The planning staff had recommended selling less tickets. I’m thinking whoever does the show just lost a couple of hundred thousand dollars from that night.
Pretty much. I have to say, I felt somewhat vindicated in my choice of producer at that point. It was a choice I made a year and a half ago, and I plan to stick with it long-term.
Anything else you want to add?
Just that we’re working toward a solution that the whole community can get behind. I’m actually cautiously optimistic that we’ll reach a solution, and fairly soon. I’m hopeful. I think we can get there.
So you’re feeling optimistic?
Cautiously optimistic, but yes, I am.
How do you interpret the judge’s ruling? The press release says it “clears the way.” How do you see it? Is it as cut and dried as that?
It’s definitely a step in the right direction for me, and maybe a precursor of things to come, with the preliminary injunction and ultimately the lawsuit situation. It’s basically the equivalent of winning round one or whatever.
I think it’s a motivation for the Mateel to revisit its stance and its approach towards me. Hopefully it will open the door to some of these settlement concepts that have been getting kicked around for quite a while.
Can you give any detail on what you’re offering?
What I hope we can arrive at is a settlement that makes everyone happy. I’d love to see the Mateel make the money it needs to from the Reggae event, enough to continue doing its thing. And I need to have my long-term security needs met as far as feeling like the event is properly staffed with experienced people. All the offers are about nailing down the right amount of money so everyone can walk away feeling good.
Are you still talking about licensing the Reggae on the River name to avoid confusion? In Humboldt County people are more aware of what’s going on with the festival. On a national and international level they may not know what Reggae Rising is. Bottom line, would you like to get the name back.
There’s a lot attached to that name, both good and bad at this point. I think internationally, Carol Bruno’s name is as important as Reggae on the River, when it comes getting the good artists and the respect of the people who’ve come to enjoy this amazing show over the years.
That may be true for those involved inside the reggae business, record labels, managers, booking agents and so on. But what about the average reggae fan? Will it make any difference to them? I guess what I’m asking is, how important is the name?
Maybe not as important as it was six months ago. It’s just really sad what’s happened here over the course of this dispute. I’m not saying that the name is off the table, but...
I’m assuming you announced a festival with a new name because you felt you had no choice.
That’s right.
There were licensing offers...
Definitely.
So, is it too late to revisit that idea?
I guess I can say that that idea is not all that attractive anymore, basically because of all the negative comments about it being a corporate take-over, which is ridiculous because we’re all people. We all work together; we’re from the community. I have to be evasive about that... let’s say it’s not a priority.
What do you think it will take to heal this wound? That’s the way I see it from the perspective of Northern Humboldt, that the community seems torn apart by all this. What will it take to end it?
It’s going to take a creative solution, a reasonable settlement and a good solution that everyone can get behind and work toward. When we find that and can do it, we’ll look back and say, wow, that was something, but hey, look where we are now. In the end it has to work out.
You use the word “settlement,” which is a legal term. Is that what you’re thinking at this point, to end things out of court by settling between the two parties?
That’s been the concept the whole time, but communications broke down. It just a matter of getting the people together to come up with a real solution and do it.
In your press release you say you “remain open to working together on this.” What do you mean by that exactly.
That if we’re going to make a settlement it needs to work for everyone. We’ve all suffered losses in this dispute. If it’s going to work, we all have to work together.
At the Planning Dept. hearing Thursday you made a comment that seemed to be a response to rumors that there are plans to turn Dimmick Ranch into some sort of year-round concert facility. Do you have any more to say about that? From talking to the Planning Dept. [Michael Richardson] I know that that the EIR could be amended to allow for more concerts.
For 362 days a year it’s a quiet peaceful place and we love it. Now with all the infrastructure and everything there, there’s an opportunity also. Certainly down the road, we would like to add some really top-notch entertainment, but presently we’re just trying to get through the situation right now.
I can see how you’d be eager for this summer to be over.
Returning to the court decision. What everyone seems to be asking is, now that round one is over, what happens next? Has anything changed?
We’ll see. It’s not over. Again, I’m hoping that the door’s open to make a settlement. The clock is ticking. It’s so late in the year. For any event to happen, decisions need to be made right now.
Is there work to do on the site?
Not really. The site is pretty much there. There’s some fencing and stuff like that to be done here and there, but no major construction efforts for this year.
Because all that was taken care of last year...
That’s right. In fact that was basically what led to the whole dispute.
You mean the fact that the added cost of setting up the new site meant there was not as much profit?
That’s right.
Presumably without the set-up costs, there’s more potential for profit this year...
That’s absolutely correct.
One has to wonder, what if...
(Tom is quiet for a little while thinking...) You know I know the answer to that, but I don’t want to go there. We need to get beyond all that.
If you look at what happened at the Planning Commission meeting, it appeared to be a concerted effort to discredit People Productions. It was just ridiculous.
From were I was sitting it seemed pretty self-destructive. All the commissioners were going to decide was how many tickets you can sell, and those limits will be made on whoever does a festival. I can’t imagine what they left that meeting thinking.
Things were blown out of proportion and exaggerated. It was really a sad thing. I hope that the event can bounce back from that.
The planning staff had recommended selling less tickets. I’m thinking whoever does the show just lost a couple of hundred thousand dollars from that night.
Pretty much. I have to say, I felt somewhat vindicated in my choice of producer at that point. It was a choice I made a year and a half ago, and I plan to stick with it long-term.
Anything else you want to add?
Just that we’re working toward a solution that the whole community can get behind. I’m actually cautiously optimistic that we’ll reach a solution, and fairly soon. I’m hopeful. I think we can get there.
So you’re feeling optimistic?
Cautiously optimistic, but yes, I am.
The Mateel's Reaction
This just in...
Mateel Community Center Statement Concerning Reggae On The River Court Action
March 7, 2007. Redway, CA.
On March 6, 2007, the California Superior Court declined to issue an ex parte temporary restraining order requested in mid-February 2007 by the Mateel Community Center (MCC). That order would have helped the MCC to immediately proceed with plans for Reggae on the River 2007 without interference from the proposed event Reggae Rising. This competing event is being promoted by People Productions and landowner Tom Dimmick for the same site on the same dates that the MCC has held their event for the past twenty-three years. People Productions has been producing the event under contract for the MCC for the past thirteen years.
"Obviously, the MCC is dismayed regarding the temporary restraining order and we are preparing for a longer struggle to fend off the takeover of our community event as we move past this first step in the legal battle, " said executive director Taunya Stapp. The ruling states that "… plaintiff has not at this juncture established great or irreparable injury will result, nor that pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief." Importantly, it does not say that MCC would not likely prevail on the merits, only that money damages would fully compensate the MCC if it is successful in the underlying lawsuit.
The MCC maintains that it holds a valid lease with Mr. Dimmick and will prevail in the preliminary injunction hearing set for March 26, 2007. A separate order from the California Superior Court orders People Productions, Carol Bruno, and Tom Dimmick to explain to the judge why they should not be enjoined at the upcoming hearing. We have been and we remain the applicants on the event permit from Humboldt County Planning Department. As it stands, the alternate proposed event, Reggae Rising, does not have a Conditional Use Permit nor have they applied for one.
We had hoped we could bring a quicker end to the community’s current plight over Reggae on the River through the restraining order. Now we head to the preliminary injunction where actual evidence will be given and each side in the dispute will be heard. We thank the community for the wonderful support received and acknowledge the dedication of the board, staff, volunteers, coordinators, and members of the public who have continued to give so much to the effort to retain Reggae on the River for the community’s benefit.
Mateel Community Center Statement Concerning Reggae On The River Court Action
March 7, 2007. Redway, CA.
On March 6, 2007, the California Superior Court declined to issue an ex parte temporary restraining order requested in mid-February 2007 by the Mateel Community Center (MCC). That order would have helped the MCC to immediately proceed with plans for Reggae on the River 2007 without interference from the proposed event Reggae Rising. This competing event is being promoted by People Productions and landowner Tom Dimmick for the same site on the same dates that the MCC has held their event for the past twenty-three years. People Productions has been producing the event under contract for the MCC for the past thirteen years.
"Obviously, the MCC is dismayed regarding the temporary restraining order and we are preparing for a longer struggle to fend off the takeover of our community event as we move past this first step in the legal battle, " said executive director Taunya Stapp. The ruling states that "… plaintiff has not at this juncture established great or irreparable injury will result, nor that pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief." Importantly, it does not say that MCC would not likely prevail on the merits, only that money damages would fully compensate the MCC if it is successful in the underlying lawsuit.
The MCC maintains that it holds a valid lease with Mr. Dimmick and will prevail in the preliminary injunction hearing set for March 26, 2007. A separate order from the California Superior Court orders People Productions, Carol Bruno, and Tom Dimmick to explain to the judge why they should not be enjoined at the upcoming hearing. We have been and we remain the applicants on the event permit from Humboldt County Planning Department. As it stands, the alternate proposed event, Reggae Rising, does not have a Conditional Use Permit nor have they applied for one.
We had hoped we could bring a quicker end to the community’s current plight over Reggae on the River through the restraining order. Now we head to the preliminary injunction where actual evidence will be given and each side in the dispute will be heard. We thank the community for the wonderful support received and acknowledge the dedication of the board, staff, volunteers, coordinators, and members of the public who have continued to give so much to the effort to retain Reggae on the River for the community’s benefit.
The Ruling
Mateel Community Center Inc. v. People Productions LLC, Carol Bruno and Tom Dimmick
Plaintiff (Mateel C.C. Inc.) filed an ex parte application for a temporary restraining order and request for an order to show cause re: preliminary injunction.
Defendants (P.P. C.B. & T.D.) filed opposition.
In determining whether to issue a TRO a court must consider the likelihood plaintiff will prevail on the merits at trial, and balance interim harm to each party if the injunction is or is not granted. Interim harm considers the adequacy or inadequacy of other remedies, the extent of irreparable injury, and the need to preserve the status quo. (CCP §526(a); Abrams v. St. John’s Hosp. & Health Center (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 628). The plaintiff has the burden of proof on each issue. (Savage v. Trammell Crow Co. (1990) 223 Cal.App.1562).
The court will deny the application for a TRO finding that the plaintiff has not at this juncture established great or irreparable injury will result, nor that pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief. (CCP §526(a) (2) and (4)).
The application for a TRO is denied. An OSC will issue re: preliminary injunction.
Dated March 5, 2007
W. Bruce Watson, Judge of the Superior Court.
Note: an attachment shows that the ruling was executed March 6, 2007 with copies set to lawyers for all parties.
What does it all mean? [Note: an earlier version of this post also included two quotes from legal briefs that I've since learned have little or nothing to do with the above ruling. I have removed them to avoid further confusing an already confusing situation. - Bob]
Plaintiff (Mateel C.C. Inc.) filed an ex parte application for a temporary restraining order and request for an order to show cause re: preliminary injunction.
Defendants (P.P. C.B. & T.D.) filed opposition.
In determining whether to issue a TRO a court must consider the likelihood plaintiff will prevail on the merits at trial, and balance interim harm to each party if the injunction is or is not granted. Interim harm considers the adequacy or inadequacy of other remedies, the extent of irreparable injury, and the need to preserve the status quo. (CCP §526(a); Abrams v. St. John’s Hosp. & Health Center (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 628). The plaintiff has the burden of proof on each issue. (Savage v. Trammell Crow Co. (1990) 223 Cal.App.1562).
The court will deny the application for a TRO finding that the plaintiff has not at this juncture established great or irreparable injury will result, nor that pecuniary compensation would not afford adequate relief. (CCP §526(a) (2) and (4)).
The application for a TRO is denied. An OSC will issue re: preliminary injunction.
Dated March 5, 2007
W. Bruce Watson, Judge of the Superior Court.
Note: an attachment shows that the ruling was executed March 6, 2007 with copies set to lawyers for all parties.
What does it all mean? [Note: an earlier version of this post also included two quotes from legal briefs that I've since learned have little or nothing to do with the above ruling. I have removed them to avoid further confusing an already confusing situation. - Bob]
Dimmick Ranch Press Release
This came via e-mail from Meeka about an hour after the Journal went to press last night.
COURT CLEARS WAY FOR DIMMICK RANCH, PEOPLE PRODUCTIONS
TO HOST AUGUST REGGAE FESTIVAL
Dimmick Ranch and People Productions, LLC today secured an early legal victory in defeating the effort of the Mateel Community Center, Inc. to obtain a temporary restraining order aimed at preventing the Reggae Rising festival, scheduled for Aug. 3, 4 and 5 on the Dimmick Ranch. Judge Bruce Watson rejected Mateel’s request to require Tom Dimmick, owner of the Dimmick Ranch, to allow Mateel to use his property for its Reggae on the River event and to prevent the potentially competing festival from taking place on the property.
“I am gratified that the Court affirmed my rights,” said Tom Dimmick. “I believe that Mateel’s decision to pursue this course was misguided, and I hope the Court’s decision today encourages Mateel to revisit its approach to this dispute. I remain committed to hosting a summer music festival that is safe and beneficial to the community as a whole.”
The Court’s decision represents a setback to Mateel’s claims that People Productions was properly terminated as producer of the Reggae on the River festival and that Dimmick was not entitled to terminate Mateel’s lease to use his property.
“As pleased as I am with today’s ruling, I would love to see this community come together for an incredible reggae festival this summer. I have made several generous settlement offers and remain open to the possibility of working together on this. The bottom line is that we’re all neighbors, and we’ll still be neighbors after this dispute is over and regardless of the ultimate outcome,” Dimmick added.
Dimmick expressed confidence that he will ultimately prevail in that dispute. He also indicated that he will seek to have the remainder of the case, including claims he will bring against Mateel, resolved under a provision of his lease with Mateel that calls for a private referee to decide all issues in such a case.
Thank you,
Tom Dimmick
COURT CLEARS WAY FOR DIMMICK RANCH, PEOPLE PRODUCTIONS
TO HOST AUGUST REGGAE FESTIVAL
Dimmick Ranch and People Productions, LLC today secured an early legal victory in defeating the effort of the Mateel Community Center, Inc. to obtain a temporary restraining order aimed at preventing the Reggae Rising festival, scheduled for Aug. 3, 4 and 5 on the Dimmick Ranch. Judge Bruce Watson rejected Mateel’s request to require Tom Dimmick, owner of the Dimmick Ranch, to allow Mateel to use his property for its Reggae on the River event and to prevent the potentially competing festival from taking place on the property.
“I am gratified that the Court affirmed my rights,” said Tom Dimmick. “I believe that Mateel’s decision to pursue this course was misguided, and I hope the Court’s decision today encourages Mateel to revisit its approach to this dispute. I remain committed to hosting a summer music festival that is safe and beneficial to the community as a whole.”
The Court’s decision represents a setback to Mateel’s claims that People Productions was properly terminated as producer of the Reggae on the River festival and that Dimmick was not entitled to terminate Mateel’s lease to use his property.
“As pleased as I am with today’s ruling, I would love to see this community come together for an incredible reggae festival this summer. I have made several generous settlement offers and remain open to the possibility of working together on this. The bottom line is that we’re all neighbors, and we’ll still be neighbors after this dispute is over and regardless of the ultimate outcome,” Dimmick added.
Dimmick expressed confidence that he will ultimately prevail in that dispute. He also indicated that he will seek to have the remainder of the case, including claims he will bring against Mateel, resolved under a provision of his lease with Mateel that calls for a private referee to decide all issues in such a case.
Thank you,
Tom Dimmick
