As a "small" independent media producer who is making a living in New Mexico in an industry I have worked in for over 30 years, I would like to address some issues brought up on this list. First I do oppose SB235 because any caps will send a wrong message to all producers large and small. It is also is a slippery slope to capping the amount of the rebates leading to elimination of the rebates. The industry itself is now downsizing - budgets are smaller and studios are producing less movies, and therefore New Mexico will see fewer of the mega films. The last two films that the SIC loan money on had budgets in the $18 million dollar range. Attracting independent films, large and small, is key to building and growing the industry in New Mexico. While a $50 million film can have a greater impact then a $10 million film lets not be blind to the fact that $50 million films are on the decline and $10 million films are on the increase.
Brent I agree with you that independents producing low budget projects benefit from the larger productions. The road also travels in the other direction. Small projects keep the skills of those working on larger projects sharp and if they own equipment keep that equipment working along with serving as on the job training for apprentices. I do think it is wrong to try to silence the voice of independents. This is the tone of this string on the list. No one owns the ball and bat in this game. We are all equals or should be if we are to be "united in our stance". Small and Independent Producers have concerns that are unique and to be told to stay home is truly an insult. We have legislation coming up that will benefit all of us. We might not be professional lobbyists but we know how to get bills or memorials introduced and passed. Small and Independent Producers choose to be proactive and not reactive. Our equals are the mom and pop stores, the farmers, the restaurant owners, the small oil producers and every small business in New Mexico.
See you on Friday.
On Feb 2, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Brent Morris wrote:
***This is a MISP Listserv message. Responses are sent to the list by default.*** ***For more info about MISP and the listserv, scroll to the bottom of the page*** * I agree with Jon that we must be united in our stance here that this $2M cap per project is detrimental to our industry, and low budget filmmakers should also see it as such. I know there has been a lot of debate here about the lack of funding for smaller New Mexico-originated projects. And for those working in the low budget arena, a $2M cap might seem perfectly reasonable indicating a total budget of $8 million and up -- no small potatoes for many of us. Yet it seems to me that New Mexico's production industry has thrived on the bigger budget films and series, which have trained and developed a powerful work force who bounce back and forth between bigger and smaller budgets. It's much easier getting crew members to work low/no-budget projects after they've banked their hours and paid their mortgages from salaries on higher-paying gigs.
Even assuming the same amount of $8M and under projects choose to shoot here with such future caps in place (which I think is fallacious), those of us who work on those films know full well the budgets cannot support intensive construction, special effects and second units that put many local crew members and vendors to work, or schedules that last for much longer than six to eight weeks. I believe if these proposed caps are put in place New Mexico will become a second class production center, Moviemaker Magazine's recent blurb aside. It's not enough to live in a great place to be an independent filmmaker if you can't make a living doing so, and we owe many of our favorable rates and terms to conditions created by the presence of bigger industry here.
I would look forward to hearing more detailed ideas for tightening up the rebates that would not discourage producers from seeking other locations. 6 month residency seems standard fare. I imagine we could spearhead some further innovations as Jon suggests that might benefit our state in the long run without scaring off out-of-state investment.
See you on Friday at Media Day.
Brent Morris
indieproduction.com
On Feb 2, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Jon Hendry wrote:
***This is a MISP Listserv message. Responses are sent to the list by default.*** ***For more info about MISP and the listserv, scroll to the bottom of the page*** *
Now that we have had a chance to spend some time with Senator Smith's bill I think we have a clear idea of where he's going and we'll be able to come up with some persuasive arguments on why the rest of the legislators shouldn't go with him.
Before I get into this we should all resist the temptation to demonize Senator Smith or anyone else who opposes the continuation of film initiatives – these guys have been given a very serious task which is to present a balanced budget that can pass both houses and be signed by the Governor and in doing so create the minimum amount of disruption to all New Mexicans. It's also an election year so House members at least need to be more keenly aware of the concerns of their constituents. It does not help for us to berate them, question their intelligence, or integrity. Frankly, this citizen legislature is better than what we can expect for what we pay them, which by the way, is nothing. They can't even cover their expenses which is probably why over half of the primaries and almost half of the general election seats will be uncontested. To those of us who are unprepared to make a compelling case for the retention of our tax incentives I say, "grow up" or perhaps more accurately "grow a pair" because this is all part of the process, nobody is going after us personally and we have a compelling argument to make. We need to be able to sell that argument not only to the legislature but to the teachers, prison guards, and healthcare workers who need to know that we're making money for them and not getting money instead of them.
The bill has two major components. One is a cap per project of $2 million for production, and $2 million for post. I see very few movies that cost as much to post as produce so that is the first fatal flaw. The second is as written we lose not only our major movies but our TV series since they would treat them as one picture. I think we need to focus on the argument of the economic benefits of mega movies, particularly the idea that above the line and any out of state crew brought in (though that number diminishes year by year) is non- rebateable anyway. The impact of a $50 million movie is significantly higher than a $10 million movie and that's what we're talking about. The impact of a TV series is higher than both. The second part is something that I can certainly live with although I'd be curious to know the mechanism to enforce it, and that is a six month minimum residency for a crew. Personally I could even see this extended to a year. I think the bill drafters are giving us an opportunity to have the discussion of what should and should not be rebated. The Film office introduced a bill three times previously that significantly tightens up the definition of a NM business and puts in a strict "bricks and mortar" requirement. I think along with an expanded definition of residency that is certainly a way we could go. To me it's as important where the money ends up as it is where it goes. Just because Home Depot pays NM taxes doesn't mean we should be financing Arthur Blanks aquarium in Atlanta. I would like to see us argue against this bill but have a back up proposal that tightens the rebates, who can be rebated, and there are some other innovative proposals that could lessen the fiscal impact. This would be a great time to look at them.
Either way this is the big one. Rep. Kintigh's bill was soundly defeated in House Labor and rightly so. We're going to have a much harder time with this bill. We need not only labor, vendors and film makers, students and teachers, those who already benefit from the film business as well as those who hope to. Film & Media Day is Friday and it looks like that is when the bill will get its hearing in Senate Corporations. We're going to need everyone there prepared with respectful arguments and ready to lobby. The IA is paying an enormous amount and has received several generous in kind donations plus thousands of volunteer hours to set up a large base camp across the street from the Roundhouse where we can show who it is we are and what it is that we do. We're also paying expenses to bring in school kids from around the state, buying them t shirts, feeding them lunch, and putting on multiple demonstrations of the opportunities of this business. That is in addition to our full time four person political team and office at the Roundhouse – none of which comes cheap. We could easily blow this if our testimony centers on "I'll just move back to California or on to the next rebate state", or "Actors make $1500 a day". If you don't feel you can be part of a united, well argued, disciplined lobby effort then you may have a constitutional right to address your law makers but could I remind you that you also have a constitutional right to stay home and leave it to the professionals.
Jon Hendry
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
Get it now. LEAVING THE LIST /LIST INFO: To leave the list, please email us at:
artslab@unm.edu For other list info, please visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/web/media-industries-list-info Available in RSS:
http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml
NOTICE: This email is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this email is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 505-286-2596 and return the original message to us at the listed email address.
Thank You.
Kenneth Segura Knoll
No comments:
Post a Comment