The 2015 promoter of the Hollister motorcycle rally responded to criticism offered Monday night by city council members about a financial dispute and his concern, causing a riff, that some vendors have sold merchandise without doing it through the event’s permitting process.
Chuck Schwartz, chairman of ConvExx, the promotional company that oversaw the 2015 event, contended to the Free Lance that the city and Hollister Downtown Association breached the contract by allowing third-party vendors to set up shop on private lots without paying any fees.
With each sanctioned biker rally in recent years, there have been three relatively large lots used by outside T-shirt vendors along the 700 block of San Benito Street. Those vendors have operated outside the fee system of the rally area because they’re on private property, while other paying vendors have generally put up their booths on the closed-off San Benito Street while paying the promoter.
Schwartz said the absence of revenue from those three merchandise areas contributed to the $90,000 he still owes on the city’s $180,000 in costs agreed upon before the rally.
“A contract clause gave us exclusivity on any vendor space in the downtown area, not just the rally area but downtown,” Schwartz said.
He contested there’s a city code also barring anyone from selling Hollister-branded merchandise during the rally.
“There were three giant vendors, and I know them all, selling stuff with no investment,” he said. “I actually paid their security. Part of the money to cover security was for them. It just seems to me that someone along the way should acknowledge that this is an issue.”
City Councilman Ray Friend, who has been active in talks with Schwartz on the rally, defended the city’s position on the matter. Friend said he thought Schwartz had been long aware of the vendors who historically lease space at Jessie’s Gas, the empty lot next to the Metropolis store and the corner spot at Hollister Muffler. He also disagreed with the notion that the city should dictate what private business owners do with their properties during the rally.
In reviving the dormant motorcycle rally in 2013 and other prior rallies, supporters cited the vast, potential benefits to small businesses, who have the capacity to get creative and make money over that weekend instead of closing shop. He said telling a business owner he or she can’t rent out a space is “kind of difficult.”
As for the city code on the matter, Friend said it must “be ironed out.”
But that city code provision—referred to as “Authorized Event Vendors” under a section governing “Parades and Public Assemblies”—merely gives an event organizer the “right to control and regulate the sale of goods, food, beverages, or services within the boundaries of the event in accordance with the terms and conditions of the event permit.”
That code lacks any mention of giving event organizers jurisdiction over private properties in the general downtown area, as contended by Schwartz.
Schwartz, though, said such rules are standard in other cities such as Las Vegas, where he runs another motorcycle event. He hasn’t run into this problem elsewhere, he said.
“It doesn’t exist because the city (Las Vegas) won’t give a permit to a competitor,” he said.
If Schwartz followed the blueprint of the 2013-14 promoter, Worldwide Dynamics, he might have considered pursuing a trademark on the event name he created. Worldwide Dynamics’ pursuit of the “Hollister Motorcycle Rally” trademark spurred the event’s name change this year. Owning the trademark would equate to royalties for use of the name on merchandise.
“I told the city they need to buy the trademark,” Schwartz said.
Schwartz also responded to Councilman Victor Gomez, who referred to him as a “shady character” at Monday’s council meeting.
“I’ve always taken the high road on this,” Schwartz said. “That’s why I’m pretty silent. I am not wanting to do battle with anybody.”
On two occasions in an interview with the Free Lance, Schwartz said he still desires the job of overseeing the Hollister rally. He said he had offered to pay back the $90,000 over the next four years, but city officials were not open to that.
“What they’re saying is, ‘Just pay us the $90,000 and then we’ll talk.’ I don’t think that’s appropriate.”
Under contract provisions with the HDA, which acts as an intermediary between the promoter and city, the promoter was required to pay the full $180,000 estimated cost before the rally.
Friend said city officials didn’t act on it when the promoter failed to pay up in early July.
“According to the contract, he was supposed to pay the full amount by July 1,” Friend said. “So the city did not push the issue and did not say, ‘You did not pay us’ or ‘We’re not going to have a rally.’ Nobody mentioned it to him, so he didn’t do it.”
