Now that the community has had a few months to absorb the news of the San Francisco LGBT Pride Celebration Committee's mismanagement of its finances, it's time to work toward this year's event – just six months away – and to restore confidence in the organization. This requires effective communication from the board and a willingness to help on the part of the Bay Area's LGBT community. The Pride Parade and festival is one of the largest events of its kind, and we want to keep it the fun, inclusive, and dynamic event that it has become.
Below is some unsolicited advice that we hope Pride board members, contractors, and staff consider as the new year begins, as the committee contends with picking up the pieces. (For our previous statement on Pride's problems, see http://www.ebar.com/openforum/opforum.php?sec=editorial&id=286).
Leader needed
SF Pride's staff has been furloughed for the past month, mostly due to the $225,000 debt the organization incurred, according to a report from the city controller's office issued in mid-December. SF Pride has been without an executive director since Amy Andre's resignation in mid-November. A staffer who could have stepped in to provide transitional leadership is no longer with Pride. The crisis could worsen if the leadership vacuum is not filled. While it's doubtful that Pride has the funds right now to attract top talent for the ED post, the board must find the resources to hire someone who can help stabilize the organization, either as an executive director or general manager.
Ideally, that candidate should be familiar with SF Pride and nonprofit management. Running the parade itself is largely in the hands of capable contractors and volunteers, so that experience isn't as necessary. What is needed in this top position is someone who is organized and an effective fundraiser. SF Pride needs a person who can meet with top sponsors, both to alleviate any concerns they may have and to see if they can possibly increase their level of giving in the short term. After 40 years, SF Pride is truly an institution, and hundreds of thousands of people are going to line the streets of San Francisco the morning of June 26 regardless of the state of the Pride Committee. Those factors should be attractive to sponsors, many of whom court the LGBT community and have traditionally received a return on their Pride investment.
Pride's new leader also needs to meet with the 2010 beverage partners and develop a payment plan so that these groups will receive the money owed them. As of last week, no additional payments have been made on the $46,000 due to the partners. Nonprofits who staff the beverage booths at the Pride festival are an integral part of the event, and they receive a portion of the proceeds based on volunteer hours worked. The community partner program is an example of the benefits Pride provides to the greater community, but organizations are going to be hard-pressed to participate if an agreement isn't worked out in advance. These nonprofits, which can receive several thousand dollars from the beverage program, are at risk of sitting this year out if the situation is not rectified. Conversely, the Pride board will have an overwhelming task figuring out an alternative plan to staff beverage booths if not enough nonprofits take part. It's in everyone's interest to come up with a repayment plan and re-establish the old formula for this year's beverage partners.
Board development
Currently SF Pride has six people on its board, far fewer than the 15 allowed in its bylaws. The current board should continue an aggressive outreach plan to recruit new board members. One person has already joined the board since the controller's report was written. For residents interested in community service, this could be a great opportunity to be a part of the rebuilding process of an organization with a rich history. Perhaps someone who is retired or working part time should consider joining the Pride board.
Specifically, the controller's report stated that "by functioning with far fewer than the maximum allowable number of board members, SF Pride is not maximizing opportunities for its board to provide governance responsibilities or the wide range of skills (legal, public relations, finance, programmatic) needed by the organization."
We agree with this assessment. A full board means that there are more talented people available to do the work, and that, too, would help current board members.
Board fundraising
The previous board president liked to say that the Pride board was not a "fundraising" board, it was an "activist" board. That philosophy worked fine while the money was coming in, but it has become clear in the last six months or so that the Pride board needs to convert to a fundraising board. Virtually all nonprofit boards seek to raise funds; in fact, that is usually a prime factor in assessing board members. Yes, it is important that Pride maintain its roots and political activism, and we're not suggesting that it become a board like that of a Fortune 500 company. The Pride board has already had some success securing a $45,000 donation from the Dorian Fund, along with a loan of $55,000.
The board should consider holding a community fundraiser as soon as possible. This will involve the community in Pride's financial situation as well as generate broad support from area residents and merchants. One caution, however: Pride should not put up the costs upfront for any fundraiser – the venue, food, and beverages should be donated so that all money raised at the event can go directly to Pride.
The Pride board needs to buckle up and focus because it must move forward quickly. The community advisory committee it established in November should begin publicizing its meetings so more people can attend.
In short, it's going to take the community working together to help SF Pride. The board should welcome such participation; the more people that get involved, the easier the job will be for everyone.