Langham Court Theatre board shake-up

Witnesses at the Langham Court Annual General Meeting saw a supporter of the SJW faction openly and blatantly paying for the memberships of literally dozens of new members at the door.  Scrutineers observed that these bought-and-paid-for new members voted in a bloc with the SJWs, who apparently had so little confidence in their support that they felt it necessary to buy the vote.  

These crusaders for a safe environment then proceeded to intimidate the other members in attendance with their boos, noisemakers and verbal attacks on anyone who spoke in opposition to them.  The board of directors sat in stunned silence on the stage, heads bowed, as the chair flailed the gavel in futility.  

Langham Court needs a Sergeant-at-Arms at least as much as it needs a General Manager.

https://en.wikipedia...justice_warrior

Witnesses at the Langham Court Annual General Meeting saw a supporter of the SJW faction openly and blatantly paying for the memberships of literally dozens of new members at the door.  Scrutineers observed that these bought-and-paid-for new members voted in a bloc with the SJWs, who apparently had so little confidence in their support that they felt it necessary to buy the vote.  

 

These crusaders for a safe environment then proceeded to intimidate the other members in attendance with their boos, noisemakers and verbal attacks on anyone who spoke in opposition to them.  The board of directors sat in stunned silence on the stage, heads bowed, as the chair flailed the gavel in futility.  

 

Langham Court needs a Sergeant-at-Arms at least as much as it needs a General Manager.

The organization will fail, the new directors on the hook for taxes and employee costs and then you pick up the pieces and start where you left off.

The next AGM of the theatre board is in about 9-10 months. Why not just take back control? 

The next AGM of the theatre board is in about 9-10 months. Why not just take back control? 

It well may come to that, assuming the theatre survives.  I agree that it's time for GenX and the Millennials to step up and take on the responsibility, hopefully with maturity and wisdom. 

Can Langham Court rise from the ashes?

Langham Court Theatre has run smoothly for the past 20 years that I have been involved, producing six plays per season, each with the involvement of 30 to 50 people, almost all loyal and enthusiastic volunteers.

The theatre instituted a code of conduct many years ago and recently made amendments to the code that reasonably reflected current concerns.

This new code apparently wasn’t sufficient for a small group of people who mounted what was essentially a hostile takeover of the Langham board.

Their aggressive stance caused the established members of the board to resign and the new, reduced board, mostly unknown to the membership and with little or no experience with Langham Court Theatre, then summarily fired the remaining paid staff and cancelled the remaining three plays of the season.

Victoria already has a Phoenix Theatre. I fear that Langham will not be able to rise from the ashes of this scorched-earth policy.

Many of the members and past patrons are perplexed and angered by the actions and attitudes of the new reduced board and this will affect their loyalty and support. A lot of the key volunteers are disillusioned and may not return.

There is now no general manager or box office manager, critical positions to keep even a dark theatre functioning. There are bills to be paid but no revenue stream.

Langham was once one of the longest-running and most successful community theatres in Canada. Now I fear its days might be at an end.

Bill Adams, life member
Victoria

https://www.timescol...ms-dont-4941767

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 11 January 2022 - 04:43 PM.

^Perhaps forcing the theatre to close was the plan all along with the new board members. After all, only rich people attend plays.

coming soon, Langham Court Theatre safe injection site and housing for the most vulnerable

The demise of Langham Court Theatre isn't "underway" ... it's already over, and Langham Court Theatre is already dead.

The letter to the editor above from Bill Adams (himself a foundational figure in the Victoria theatre scene) makes note of perhaps the most important part of this story, and that's the fact that nobody even knows who these people who form the new Board are. 

They're total strangers who have effectively destroyed Langham Court Theatre.

They're really just typical protesters, albeit ones that have found a new and unique way to protest, one that succeeds by inserting SJW sycophants onto a not-for-profit Board of Directors in that said not for profit holds open elections for their Board Members (as opposed to having existing Board members select new Board members on a offset and cyclical basis).

Then, once they have manipulated themselves onto the Board, they simply shut the entire operation down.

There are a few (but very few) old Langham Court Theatre members and subscribers who are currently going along with this charade for an assortment of reasons (largely as "payback" for perceived previous sleights) ... but it won't take long for these folks to understand that Langham Court Theatre is dead, and their alliance with the "new Board" was repaid with the same spite that was assigned to all the rest of the former Langham Court Theatre members and subscribers.

How could they hijack the board with what is presumably small numbers?   Did nobody rally the members, former members, and others when they saw the nominations, for example?

How many people typically vote at the board member election (AGM?) meetings?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 12 January 2022 - 07:19 AM.

Good question.

Not-for-profit AGM's can be attended by as few as a dozen members, largely based on the presumption that nothing is going to happen, and thus any given members attendance isn't really required.

It's a lot like municipal elections ... everything is decided by relatively few people.

Now normally, this isn't a concern. As long time and dedicated members of the not-for-profit tend to the (often seen as boring) business of elections and motions heading into the next season.

In this case, complete strangers were marshalled in advance, and in sufficient numbers to "win" any vote held at the Langham AGM. Memberships were sold at the door, such that many (if not most) of the folks sitting in the AGM were completely unknown to Langham Court Theatre folks.

It's unfortunate, but definitely always potentially possible at a not-for-profit whose Constitution and By-Laws allow for voting in Board Members as opposed to existing Board Members selecting "new" Board Members.

This same thing happened quite a few years ago at Dance Victoria, but to the opposite of what has happened at Langham. The previous administration was summarily booted out by the Dance Victoria Board, only to find at the AGM that a "behind the scenes" movement of Dance Victoria members attended in such great numbers that they booted out the entire existing Board, and replaced them with a Board of their choosing that immediately fired the "new" administration, and put back in place the long standing previous administration.

Not-for-profits with elected Boards need to tread very carefully in order to prevent such occurrences from happening ... and many Boards address the issue by taking a percentage of their Board (say 50%), and declaring that those positions will be assigned by existing Board Members (rather than voted on), this in order to provide long term stability and protection from Board coups such as has occurred at Langham.

Edited by Spy Black, 12 January 2022 - 07:32 AM.

Right.  All good points. 

Live theatre is a multi-layered affair, and indeed there are theatrical choices made by directors that may challenge the norm ... but those "challenges" are specifically chosen as a fundamental part of that directors personal vision for the performance in question ... the most obvious example being Hamilton, with all black actors playing all white historical figures.

But that's a directors very personal choice, based on their very personal vision.

Woke-culture doesn't play into Hamilton at all, which is simply a brilliant piece of writing that was directed by a brilliant director (Lin Manuel Miranda).
Miranda's concept was one of a classic bit of history told in the form of rap music ... and Miranda's brilliance realized that rap was a black music form, and therefore (despite the historical figures being white), having the parts played by a black cast was a case of simple (albeit brilliant) logic on Miranda's part.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 12 January 2022 - 08:18 AM.

There are some whites in Hamilton. All the bad guys.

There are some whites in Hamilton. All the bad guys.

Just like Law & Order: SVU. You always know the bad guy will be a white man.

Just like Law & Order: SVU. You always know the bad guy will be a white man.

Except Brooke Shields and Lou Diamond Phillips.

I’m not interested in the specific argument being waged at Langham Court, but like SJW’s everywhere, this is less about the specifics of Langham, and more about the SJW efforts to change basic theatre norms everywhere. 
 

In this case, it’s about getting rid of the power of a shows stage Director, something that has been a foundational element of live theatre for many decades. 
 

It’s about stealing power from those who have traditionally held it, and giving it to theatre students, and those who feel they’ve been “wronged” by Directors at some point in their past. 

Traditionally, theatre Boards of Directors support (indeed they usually choose) a stage Director for any given show. Thus the BOD coup at Langham. 
 

That’s the basic math behind what’s going on at Langham Court. 

Except Brooke Shields and Lou Diamond Phillips.

And Elizabeth Banks and Hillary Duff.  So attractive white women are also villains.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 12 January 2022 - 08:40 AM.