The previous show director (also a board member, as am I) is insisting that my show pick up half of the cost he incurred for the set.  Not only the lumber, which I don't have a problem with...But he insists I must pay for half of the paint as well!  That, I do have a problem with. 

 

We repainted the enire set from the all black he had for his production of Grease, to all jungle for Disney's The Jungle Book.

 

At our previous board meeting he had made the comment that our show would be paying for half of the set costs of his show and I kind of remember agreeing (I'm also the secretary, so I was busy trying to catch up on my recording of the minutes at the time).  When he said set, I took that to mean lumber.  I would just put it down to lack of communication/misunderstanding, but he has been a total a**, not just about this, but to others about various things.

 

Any suggestions on how to deal with this?

 

 

 

 

   Of course it matters.  Why should you're shows production costs help pay for another shows paint.  Would you pay for a dress made for an actress in his play when you had an all male cast for yours?    No way Jose !  And I don't care if he is the president of your board, what he is asking is just not right.  And I would certainly think that any slightly intelligent Board of Trustees would tell him so.

I have produced set pieces such as revolves, flats, rostra & what have you. For a specific production, yet have reused many times over for a myriad of shows.

One that comes to mind was the first 18' revolve, that the particular group took issue with, as being a total waste of time & money. Funnily enough that was about 20 years ago & they still are still using it today for at least a couple of productions a year. At the time the only way I could get it through committee to spend the money, was to justify it on the bases of it being used for two later productions. Probably not a good example, except should those other productions reduce their budget to pay a fee for utilising it? Much the same with the stock standard flats, painted black & used as fixed legs [wings]. So the production I produced them for should actually be very cost effective, as they would have paid for them selves about 20 times over. So in fact now it cost nothing & my budget should be reduced accordingly, every time their used? It is good for my ego, but a pain in the R Send for for anyone to account for it!

Why not every production that uses gel & lighting actually pay out of their budget, for a proportional fee of the replacement costs. [actually this is not that bad an idea!]However this is house all keeping & the theatre budget. Same as toilet paper & soap.

 

 

Here's what happened: 

When it came time to get my expense figures together, I emailed him and asked for a listing of his lumber purchases so I could get my set costs together, figure out where I was spending-wise.

 

When I next saw him, he informed me my show had already paid for half of the cost of his set, including the paint.  Did I mention he is also the treasurer and a tempermental artist?    I was pretty...Well, let's say I was caught off guard.

 

That night, I emailed him again.  This time requesting copies of receipts so I could include them with my set expenses.  My thought here was to do an itemized expense report, forcing him to show me what he had spent.  (For some reason, we never seem to find out exact details of what he has spent on a show.) 

 

After I told a couple of other fellow board members about our exchange (they agreed with me), they tried to talk to him about it.  Make him see what I was asking for was not out of line.  Get him to see the big picture, that we are all part of the same group.

 

After these exchanges and my request for receipts, he emailed me back stating it was a moot point and my show will not be paying for any of his set/paint costs.

 

There are NOT separate accounts for each show.  I'm guessing he just wanted to make his earnings/numbers look better.  Not that is was necessary.  He did direct Grease after all.

 

Submit a budget (the board usually makes changes, often increasing certain budget costs).

 

The budget is simply a guideline, so expenses don't get out of hand.  Of course, the ultimate goal is to come in under budget, while still putting together a quality production.

 

Again Thank You to everyone for your replies.  I was initally a bit stumped about what to do, because I couldn't find adequate theatrical definitions of SET or SCENERY.  My initial arguement was going to be that paint is not part of the set.  It all ended well, though.  I guess there's just no escaping drama in theatre with so many different temperments involved. 

 

 

 

Sometimes people believe that a charity, or volunteer group or a club is being 'mean' by having rules.  But the rules keep peace.  More experienced people will volunteer if they can know what to expect.  Keep the rules simple and clear and let the board decide formally to go around a budget in rare cases--that makes it clear that all agreed.  If you can't summon a board meeting, have an agreement that you need a quorum of the board to agree by email--and that the secretary records this as a board decision.

 

For a charity that I'm VP of, for clubs for which  I've been president, VP or treasurer, I've insisted on similar controls.  Sometimes I've instituted them.  This secures tax status, and protects both the club and the treasurer.  In at least one club, before the simple audit requirment was added, I know of at least two cases where money could not be accounted for--in one of those cases it cast suspicion on the volunteer treasurer.  Would you want to be that treasurer and have your 'friends' suspicious where $100 went?  A person's reputation is worth far more than $100.