University of California • Berkeley
All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal
agreement between the Regents of the University of California
and Harold L. Zellerbach dated 11 July 1977. The manuscript
is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary
rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are
reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California
Berkeley. No part of the manuscript may be quoted for publi
cation without the written permission of the Director of The
Bancroft Library of the University of California at Berkeley.
Requests for permission to quote for publication should
be addressed to the Regional Oral History Office, 486 Library,
and should include identification of the specific passages to
be quoted, anticipated use of the passages, and identification
of the user. The legal agreement with Harold L. Zellerbach
requires that his son, William J. Zellerbach, be notified of
the request and allowed thirty days in which to respond.
The Bancroft Library University of California/Berkeley
Regional Oral History Office
The Arts and the Community Oral History Project
Harold L. Zellerbach
ART, BUSINESS AND PUBLIC LIFE
IN SAN FRANCISCO
With an Introduction by
Jacob K. Javits
An Interview Conducted by
Harriet Nathan
Copy No._
1978 by The Regents of the University of California
Harold L. Zellerbach
TABLE OF CONTENTS — Harold L. Zellerbach
PREFACE i
INTRODUCTION by Jacob K. Javits ill
INTERVIEW HISTORY v
FAMILY LIFE AND SCHOOL DAYS 1
Grammar Schools and High School 2
Visiting Grandparents in Nevada City 3
Earthquake and Fire in San Francisco 5
Two Years at U.C., Berkeley 8
University of Pennsylvania, The Wharton School 10
Engagement and Marriage 12
The Taylor System 13
THE FAMILY PAPER BUSINESS: SOME EARLY RECOLLECTIONS 16
Working for the Zellerbach Paper Company 16
Setting Up a Personnel Department 17
Unions 18
THE DOCK STRIKE (1971) 20
GOVERNMENT: COMMISSIONS, POLITICIANS, ISSUES 23
California Beaches and Parks Commission 23
Pat Brown as Governor 25
Tidelands Oil Funds and Commission Powers 26
Managing the Bond Issue Campaign: Two Types 29
Father, and the California Fish and Game Commission 34
The Lunch Table 35
A Son for the Democrats 36
Supporting Jack Javits 38
Some Political Pictures and Personalities 42
Political Principles 51
Nancy Hanks and an Appointment 52
Picking and Backing Candidates 53
YMHA AND THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER 59
THE SAN FRANCISCO ART COMMISSION 61
Appointment as President 62
The Municipal Band 64
Some Critics 65
Commission Membership 66
Proposal for a Music Festival 73
Mayor's Proposal for a Bond Issue 74
A New Commission Secretary 76
"Design" and Location: Senior Citizens' Center 79
The Question of Approval and Certification
Neighborhood Arts and the Arts Council 86
Developing New Support for the Arts
Focus on Youth
The Hanks Report and the McFadyen Report 90
Ruth Asawa and Art in the Schools 93
Associated Council of the Arts, and State Councils 95
Neighborhood Developments and the Black Writers Workshop 98
The Apex and the Base 99
The City Budget Process 101
Some Speculations on the Future 107
San Francisco Art Festival 109
Art Commission Gallery 111
Zellerbach Family Fund 113
PROBLEMS OF FINANCING AND ORGANIZING FOR THE ARTS 114
San Francisco Ballet, and Artists' Attitude 114
San Francisco Art Institute 119
NEED FOR FACILITIES: A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER 121
Location and Feasibility 122
Lessons from the 1965 Bond Defeat 123
Impetus for Neighborhood Arts and the Booking Crunch 124
An Interim Committee 126
The Fox and the Orpheum
Polling the Community 129
SAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION 131
The 1971-72 Opera Season
The Star System 134
Opera in Los Angeles 135
Opera in Europe 136
Business Support for the Arts 138
The Repertoire 139
SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION 142
YOUNG ARTISTS 144
A Violinist 144
A Soprano 146
A Pianist at the Conservatory 151
ZELLERBACH PAPER COMPANY: DEVELOPMENT OVER THE YEARS 153
The Export Department 153
Boxes, Paper Bags and Paper Towels 155
A Book Paper Machine in Port Angeles 156
Managing the San Francisco Division 160
President of Zellerbach Paper Company 162
Reorganizing the Systems 163
Profit Centers 166
Transportation and Modern Merchandising • 166
Some Corporation Customers 169
Recycling 170
DEVELOPMENTS RE: THE CITY'S INTER-AGENCY COUNCIL ON THE ARTS 172
Coordination and Administration 174
Consolidation: De Young Museum and the Legion of Honor 175
Committee on Activities Sponsors a Festival 180
Ruth Asawa in the Schools 181
DEVELOPMENTS RE: ART COMMISSION, THE SENIOR CITIZENS' CENTER, 182
AND OTHER QUESTIONS
Back to Phase One 183
Artists Selling in the Streets 185
Commission Stands on City Problems 187
CONTINUING DEVELOPMENTS RE: INTER- AGENCY COUNCIL 188
Official Policy and a Voluntary Organization 188
Neighborhood Arts and Park and Rec 189
Need for Independent Contractors 190
A LUNCH MEETING ON GROUP THERAPY 193
NEWHOUSE FOUNDATION 194
Representation on the Board 195
Regulations on Foundation Grants 196
Foundation Policy 196
TEMPLE EMANU-EL 198
Rabbi Reichert 198
Rabbi Fine 198
Cantor Rinder 200
Successive Rabbis 202
Building Membership 203
Open Seating 204
The Rabbi's Job 204
DEVELOPMENT RE: PERFORMING ARTS CENTER 206
Nonprofit Corporation to Build a Garage 206
Revenue- Sharing Funds and Public Subscription 208
Local Facilities and Expanding Activities 209
Musical Acoustics 211
LACUNA HONDA VOLUNTEERS 214
TRUSTEE, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 216
Learning to Specialize 216
Alumni Society in the West 218
Trustee from the West Coast 219
A Building Fund and a Contribution for a Theater 220
The Problem of Athletics 221
The "Voyager" and a Dedication 222
Annenberg Center and the Zellerbach Theater 224
THE SAN FRANCISCO BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU 226
THE SAN FRANCISCO COMMERCIAL CLUB 227
THE SAINTS AND SINNERS MILK FUND 228
FIBREBOARD 231
RAYONIER 232
From Wood Pulp to Synthetic Fibers 233
Shifts on the Board 234
Consolidation and Cooperation 236
NIANTIC 238
JOSEPH MAGNIN 241
Depreciation and Financing Expansion 241
Going Public 242
Setting Meeting Days 243
The Amfac Offer 245
INDEX 247
PREFACE
The Arts and the Community Series was undertaken by the Regional Oral
History Office to document the state of the arts in the San Francisco Bay Area —
especially in San Francisco — and to note the public and private patronage the
arts have received in the past. In addition, the purpose is to trace new
developments in federal, state and local governmental support stimulated by
the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts and the emergence of
state and local art councils and commissions. Early discussions with Harold
L. Zellerbach and Philip Ehrlich, Sr. during 1970 presaged the on-going interest
in and support of the project by the Zellerbach Family Fund of San Francisco.
The Fund for many years has contributed to both traditional and community arts
activities. Mr. Zellerbach provided the first memoir, "Art, Business, and
Public Life in San Francisco" and served as chief consultant and advisor for
the series from its inception until his death in January 1978.
The oral history process at the University of California at Berkeley con
sists of tape-recorded interviews with persons who have played significant roles
in some aspect of the development of the West, in order to capture and preserve
for future research their perceptions, recollections and observations. Research
and the development of a list of proposed topics precede the interviews. The
taped material is transcribed, lightly edited and then approved by the memoir
ist before final processing: final typing, photo-offset reproduction, binding
and deposit in The Bancroft Library and other selected depositories. The product
is not a publication in the usual sense but primary research material made
available under specified conditions to qualified researchers.
The series on the arts and the community, with its focus on San Francisco,
will supplement memoir collections produced by the Regional Oral History Office
in such fields as Books and Fine Printing; Arts, Architecture and Photography;
memoirs of individual artists; and the Social History of Northern California.
The Regional Oral History Office is under the administrative supervision of
Professor James D. Hart, the director of The Bancroft Library.
Willa K. Baum, Department Head
Regional Oral History Office
Harriet Nathan, Project Director
The Arts and the Community Series
30 March 1978
Regional Oral History Office
486 The Bancroft Library
University of California at Berkeley
ii
THE ARTS AND THE COMMUNITY INTERVIEW SERIES
Zellerbach, Harold L. , Art, Business and Public Life in San Francisco.
1978.
Boone, Philip S. , The San Francisco Symphony , 1940-1972: An Oral
History. 1978.
Asawa, Ruth, Art, Competence and Citywide Cooperation for San Francisco,
1978.
Neighborhood Arts Project interviews in process:
Snipper, Martin
Goldstine, Steve
Other staff members of the Neighborhood Arts Project
ill
INTRODUCTION
This memoir of the life and experiences of Harold L. Zellerbach deals
with a much beloved gentleman of our times. He is uniquely a Calif ornian,
with the sun and open spaces in his eyes, and the frontier spirit, innovation,
and unyielding determination in his head and heart — all so characteristic
of the State.
Mr. Zellerbach is a highly personal man, deeply involved with his
friends, his family, his business associates, his colleagues in public and
political endeavors. He is a man who is not content to deal with others only
with that facet of character, interest or activity that interfaces his own.
He believes, in turn, that his friends are interested in his life. He is a
man extraordinarily gifted in winning friendship. His friends love him dearly,
because he himself is such a constant fountain of interest and takes such a
lively interest in them. He has a sense of history, both in his business
affairs and in his civic responsibilities.
In his business affairs, he joined first with his father, Isadore, his
brother, David, and later with his son, Billy, to develop the Zellerbach Paper
Company (which later merged with Crown-Willamette to become the Crown Zellerbach
Corporation). As an institution, its extraordinary record of achievement and
incomparable record of amity with its customers and suppliers are eloquent
testimony to this facet of his character.
In his public responsibilities, Mr. Zellerbach 's long-sighted understand
ing of the cultural and artistic needs of his beloved city of San Francisco
have put the city years ahead of most of the other great cities of the United
States.
Finally, he knows better than most that man does not live by bread alone.
He understands truly the quality of artistic expression in people's terms, in.
theatre, music, the opera and the visual arts; and, in the sheer symphony of
a city of broad ethnic diversity.
Mr. Zellerbach 's unique relationships with the university community,
both at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Pennsylvania
are also significant aspects of his life and career. They include both his
unending enthusiasm for collegiate sports - especially of the University of
California, and his profound understanding that learning means building upon
experience and reality, upon hypothesis and dreams. Hence, his diversity of
interest ranging from schools of journalism to college theatre.
iv
Finally, no appreciation of Mr. Zellerbach's life and character would be
complete without noting his deep concern for and love of family and of youth.
His children and grandchildren mirror their father's and grandfather's
enthusiasm for them, his own sprightliness, and his constant interest in the
future.
And, as to his wife, Doris, she is not only a dear wife, she is the "Doe"
of his life and chronicles.
His planning and building and working for tomorrow, while enjoying
thoroughly every bit of today, are splendid demonstrations of his inner spirit.
Harold Zellerbach remembers every good meal he has ever had anywhere in the
world, at which restaurant or hotel and with whom, and he is much travelled.
He is greatly admired by his host of friends, and, by way of assessment, by
his own wife and children.
Jacob K. Javits
United States Senate
5 January 1978
Washington, D.C.
INTERVIEW HISTORY
Harold L. Zellerbach was interviewed for the Regional Oral History
Office as part of a series on "The Arts and the Community." The interviews
were conducted by Harriet Nathan, "interviewer and editor for the Regional
Oral History Office.
Time and Set
ting of the
Interviews :
Conduct of the
Interview:
The thirteen interviews were held at Mr. Zellerbach 's office
on the 18th floor of the Crown-Zellerbach Building, 1 Bush
Street, San Francisco:
Interview 1
Interview 2
Interview 3
Interview 4
Interview 5
Interview 6
Interview
7 -
June 18, 1971
July 30, 1971
August 20, 1971
August 27, 1971
September 17, 1971
October 8, 1971
October 29, 1971
Interview 8 -
Interview 9 -
Interview 10
Interview 11
Interview 12
Interview 13
• November 19, 1971
• December 17, 1971
- January 28, 1972
- November 17, 1972
- December 8, 1972
- March 30, 1973.
Interview sessions usually began at 10 or 10:30 a.m. and lasted
until shortly before noon. Incoming phone calls related primar
ily to Art Commission affairs, the arrangement of meetings with
local political figures on commission business, or lunchtime
gatherings with a wide variety of friends and associates.
Mr. Zellerbach1 s office, which commands a panoramic view of the
Embarcadero area and the Bay, displayed memorabilia reflecting
some of his most vital interests. They included a tied-wire
sculpture and wedding-anniversary dough-plaque by sculptor and
Commission member Ruth Asawa, photos of four generations of
family members, and pictures of Presidents, Senators and other
political personalities. There were also framed letters of
commendation and awards citing his service and contributions to
the city of San Francisco, the University of Pennsylvania and
the University of California.
vi
Conduct of the Always fresh in aspect and elegantly tailored, Mr. Zellerbach
Interview: responded readily to questions concerning his characteristic
effectiveness in marshalling civic support for the arts,
developing his philanthropic interests, helping his friends,
or focusing on business affairs. He illuminated discussions
of political theory and practice with personal experiences,
expressed his views with clarity and briskness, and salted it
all with humor.
Asked specifically how public-spirited citizens could increase
their chances for political success, he considered his own
technique and said, "First, talk to each member of the board
(commission or committee) that will vote on your proposal.
Next, fill the public hearing with genuine supporters from as
many different groups as possible, people who really care.
And finally, never let the matter come to a decision without
sufficient 'yes' votes in your pocket." With a grin and a dry
chuckle he added, "Just do your work first, and remember how
to count."
After transcription, the interviews were lightly edited and submitted
to Mr. Zellerbach for his review and approval. He provided a few editorial
corrections .
Harriet Nathan
Interviewer-Editor
30 December 1977
Regional Oral History Office
486 The Bancroft Library
University of California
Berkeley, California
Editor's note:
Mr. Zellerbach died on January 29, 1978. Obituary notices on following pages,
San Francisco Chronicle, 1/30/78
VII
HAROLD L. ZELLERBACH
Industrial, cultural leader
Harold
Zellerbach
Dies on Ship
Honolulu
Harold Lionel Zellerbach, for
decades one of San Francisco's
most prominent industrialists and
patron of the arts, died in Honolulu
yesterday while vacationing on the
cruise ship Mariposa.
Mr. Zellerbach, 83, was found
dead in his stateroom early yester
day by his wife, Doris. The cause of
death was not known immediately.
For a half century, Mr. Zeller
bach had been a top executive at
Crown Zellerbach Corp., the paper
company founded by his grandfath
er in 1870.
He was appointed president of
the firm in 1928. By 1969, when Mr.
Zellerbach retired as chairman of
the company's executive commit
tee. Crown Zellerbach had become
the world's second largest manufac
turer of pulp, paper and paper
products.
Among his most significant
contributions to the Bay Area was
his generosity in time, skills and
money to the arts.
As a member of the San
Francisco Art Commission for some
30 years — 28 years as president —
Mr. Zellerbach had a long and
profound influence on the cultural
life of the Bay Area.
As president of the Zellerbach
Family Fund, he was instrumental
in the $1 million gift to the
University of California, Berkeley,
to help finance the Zellerbach
Theater in 1967.
A few years later, a Zellerbach
Theater was erected on the Univer
sity of Pennsylvania campus, in
part because of a $500,000 contribu
tion by the Harold and Doris
Zellerbach Fund, of which he was
president.
In 1974, Mr. Zellerbach pledged
$1 million toward the construction
of the proposed San Francisco
Performing Arts Center.
Chronicle Art Critic Alfred
Frankenstein, vice president of the
Art Commission, said last night that
during Mr. Zellerbach's presidency,
which ended in 1976, "the commis
sion completely changed its charac
ter.
"When he assumed its presi
dency, the commission was very
little more than an architectural
advisory board.
"During his years as president,
the work of the commission contin
uously expanded until today, it
directs activities of a large and very
busy network of neighborhood arts
centers, runs the San Francisco
Symphony Orchestra's summer
concert season, underwrites numer
ous musical, theatrical and dance
events, and supervises the activities
of the city's street artists ..."
Mr. Zellerbach was also active
on an international scale. In 1957,
he headed the Zellerbach Commis
sion that conducted a study of the
post-World War II refugee problem.
Two years later, he was a U.S.
delegate to the Atlantic Congress
that met in London under NATO
auspices.
Mr. Zellerbach's service to the
state government extended over
more than a decarte, first as a
member of the California State
Park Commission, appointed by
Governor Edmund G. Brown Sr.,
then as a member of the successor
State Park and Recreation Commis
sion, appointed by Governor Ron
ald Reagan
He served in varying capacities
on other cultural bodies: vice presi
dent of the San Francisco Sympho
ny; and director of the Fine Arts
Museums of San Francisco, the San
Francisco Art Institute, the San
Francisco Ballet Guild, and the San
Francisco Opera Association.
He was also president of the
Crown Zellerbach Foundation and
the Newhouse Foundation, a local
fund set up to provide financial
help to graduate students at the
University of California and Stan
ford. He was director of the Laguna
Honda Home Auxiliary
He was an emeritus trustee of
the University of Pennsylvania and
an alumnus of its Whurton School
of Finance and Commerce, and was
long active in their alumni affairs.
Before the merger of the Cali
fornia Palace of the Legion of
Honor and the M.H. de Young
Memorial Museum.-, ho was a trust
ee of the former, and was also a
trustee of the Saints and Sinners
Milk Fund
Mr. Zellerbach was born here
on March 25. 1894, the son of
Isadore and Jennie Baruh Zeller
bach. He attended the Univeristy of
California, but took his Bachelor of
Science degree in economics at the
University of Pennsylvania in 1917
On graduation he joined, as
personnel manager, the Zellerbach
Paper Co., which his grandfather
had founded in 1870.
In 1928, he was elected presi
dent and ten years later was also
named executive vice president of
Crown Zellerbach Corp.
In 1956, he was named chair
man of the corporation's executive
Chronicle obituary
continued. viii
an Irratuisco (Ojromclr * * Tues , Jan. 31,1 978
HERB
ONE WAY to go: The peaceful death at 83
of Civic Leader Harold Zellerbach aboard a
cruise ship in Honolulu brings to mind the
time a friend said to Novelist Kathleen
Norris, then in her 70s: "Did you hear about
Emily? She had lunch with her niece at the
Mural Room, then she went to the Symphony
matinee and after that she had tea with her
sister at the Francisca and dinner with her
children and grandchildren, and that night
she died in her sleep" .. . "My," sighed Aunt
Kate. "Doesn't it just make your mouth
water?"
committee, serving until 1969. He
also served as acting chairman of
the board during the term of his
brother, J.D. Zellerbach, as Ambas
sador to Italy from 1956 through
1960.
He was elected chairman of the
board of the Zellerbach Paper Co.
in 1957
He served as president of the
National Paper Trade Association
and in 1961 received the American
Marketing Association's highest
honor, the Charles Coolidge Parlin
Award, as "an eloquent spokesman
of the marketing concept."
He served on the boards of,
among others, the Pacific National
Bank, Rayonier, Inc., Niantic Corp.,
and Fiberboard Products, and was
a member of the San Francisco
Stock Exchanga, the U.S. Council,
and the U.S. Chamber of Com
merce, and in 1958 headed the
United Crusade.
He served a number of terms
as president of Congregation
Emanu-EI and of the Young Men's
and Young Women's Hebrew Asso
ciation. He also served on the board
governing Hebrew Union College in
New York and the Jewish Institute
of Religion in Cincinnati, the oldest
theological seminary in America
He was honored by Congre
gation Beth Israel in 1960, on the
occasion of the temple's observance
of its centennial anniversary, for
"bringing great honor to our city
and the Jewish community "
Among his clubs were the
Commonwealth, Commercial.
Press, Stock Exchange, Variety,
Concordia-Argonaut, Villa Taverna,
the St. Francis Yacht Club, and the
Beach Club of Pebble Beach. He
was also a Mason and a Shriner.
Survivors include his wife, the
former Doris Joseph; a daughter.
Mrs. Stephen N. Loew Jr.; two sons,
Stephen and William, president of
Zellerbach Paper Co. and a senior
vice president of Crown Zellerback
Corp.; seven grandchildren, and
three great-grandchildren.
Funeral arrangements were
pending.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, TUESDAY. JANUARY^!, 1978
30 C
ix
*
— i.-.'.S
Harold L. Zellerbach, 83, Dies;
An Industrialist and Patron of Arts
FRANCISCO. Jan. 30— Harold
Lionel Zellerbach, a prominent industrial
ist tnd patron of the arts, died yesterday
while vacationing on a cruise ship in
-Honolulu. He was 83 years old. " ..,," ':i
^"He was found- dead in his stateroom
by : his wife, Doris. The cause of death'
wait not immediately known.
Mr. Zellerbach had been a top executive'
for; 50 years of the,. Crown Zellerbach'
Corporation, a paper company started by
•?hls' grandfather in 1870.
- -He was appointed president of the con*
^rern In 192& By 1969, when he retired
* a* chairman of the corporation's execu-
^.ye committee, Crown Zellerbach had be
come one of the world's' largest manufac-
^urers of pulp and paper products.
^^Mr. Zellerbach contributed hundreds of
^'thousands of dollars to the arts. As presi
dent of the Zellerbach family fund, he
arranged a $1 million gift to the Universi-
-ty of California at Berketey to help fi-
', .nance a campus theater.
Contrbuted to Pennsylvania U.
~: A few years later, the Harold and Doris
-Zellerbach Fund contributed $500,000 to-
JVard a campus theater at the University
£of- Pennsylvania., In 1974, Mr. Zellerbach
..pledged $1 million toward the construc
tion of a new performing arts center in
• San Francisco-
According to' local -art critics and ob
servers, Mr. Zellerbach's contributions,
which went beyond monetary gifts, were
"Instrumental in establishing San Francis
co as « major cultural center in the Unit-
*:ed States. - •• -
*--For 28 years he served as president
*of"the San Francisco "Art Commission.
-He- also served as director of numerous
Jocal cultural associations, including the
--Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, the
^San Francisco Ballet Guild and the San
Francisco Opera Association.
*n He was an active, energetic man whose
International interests led to- his being
•named in 1957 to head » commission set
up to look into ways of solving the post-
• World War II refuge* problem. Two years
later, the commission recommended that
-the United States admit 50,000 refugees
-within- two years as part. of an interna
tional "crash program'.' to solve the prob
lem; .- . . . -i
Fibun BKftridi
V Harold- L. Zellerbach
— ,. . • \
In-1959, he was the United States dele
gate to the Atlantic Council, a private,
nonprofit organization set up to promote
communications between countries in the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. He
was a member of the War Production
Board, the Office of Price Administration
and the Civilian Production Administra-
.tion. .- .
Began as Personnel Manager
Mr. Zellerbach was born in San Fran
cisco on March 25, 1894, the son of Isa-
dore and Jennie Baruh Zellerbach. He at
tended the University of California at
Berkeley and earned his bachelor's degree
in economics at the University of Penn
sylvania in 1917. ,
He started at the Zellerbach Paper
Company as personnel manager and in
10 years was elected president. He was
elected chairman of the board ofthe com
pany in 1957.
Me served on a number of civic and
business organizations and was the presi
dent of a number of them,, including the
National Paper Trade Association and the
United States Chamber of Commerce.
He served on the- board of the Hebrew
Union College in New York and the Jew
ish Instrtute of Religion in Cincinnati.
He is survived by his wife, Doris; a
daughter, Mrs. Stephen N. Loew Jr., and
two sons, Stephen and William.
FAMILY LIFE AND SCHOOL DAYS
(Interview I, June 18, 1971, and Interview II, July 30, 1971)
Zellerbach: Being a San Franciscan, I was born at 1550 Fell Street on
March 25, 1894. It was right opposite the Panhandle. At that
time, my mother Jennie and father Isadore and my brother Dave
and I were living with my father's parents, Anthony and Theresa
(Mohr was her maiden name). They had a big house. My father
and his father built it. In those years it became customar7
to have separate houses. Before that, families always lived
together. After my sister Claire was born, which was two and
a half years later, my mother decided that there was no house
big enough for two families. So we moved up the street to
1730 Fell St., which is also opposite the Panhandle. It was
only a couple of blocks away from my grandfather's. From there
the first school I went to was Dudley Stone, which is still in
existence on Haight Street.
I forget the name of a young kid I used to run with. At
that time there was a lot of construction going on of frame
houses. I used to go out with this fellow. He was older than
I was, and I was climbing through these new frame houses, and
once I didn't get home in time to suit my mother, when I was
supposed to be in. My father came out after me.
Of course he found me where he found me; then he got hold
of me, and when he had me in the stairway (we lived in a flat,
we were in the upper flat). I'll never forget. He gave me a
swift kick on my bottom. I think that's the only time in my
life that my father ever punished me. He never punished any
of the children. My mother did all the disciplining in the
family.
Nathan:
That was a rather dangerous place for boys to play.
Zellerbach: Yes. Well, I understand that, but this was one of the things
I never forgot. I guess the next incident that came along
was the earthquake and fire. Of course that was years after
we had moved .
Grammar Schools and High School
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Zellerbach: We moved out of 1730 Fell Street, I think, when I was in the
primary schools. We moved over to 1812 Broadway, which is
still standing and now Federal Judge Harris lives in it. After
Dudley Stone, I went to Pacific Heights School. That's where
I graduated from grammar school. From there I went to Lowell
High, which was located on Sutter Street, between Gough and
Octavia, which is now the Red Cross building.
Do you remember any of your teachers in grammar school?
Oh sure. There was one, Archie Cloud. He taught English.
He became, eventually, the principal of the school, and then
I think was superintendent of schools for the board of education.
Then there was a Miss Stinson. She was an old maid, and she
taught Latin. I'll never forget her. I had a teacher in
history by the name of Clark, and he also became, later on, the
principal of Lowell High. Of course, this is where I met a
great many of my fellow students. I guess I've known them all
my life now.
Nathan: Have many stayed in San Francisco?
Zellerbach: Yes. Well, quite a few of them. We lived right near the May's,
that's Dodie May. I forget who she married. Then the Dorns .
I don't know if you remember Camille Dorn. She married. They
were all out in that neighborhood. It was a pretty high-class
neighborhood over the years. They lived opposite the Panhandle.
In high school I went at the same time as the Koshland
boys were there, and Fred Cans. I've got a list of the old
alumni. My brother was there too when I was there. I went
three years there and then I went to the University School, a
private school, to get my fourth year. I wasn't doing too well
in my studies, so away I went to private school the last year,
and graduated from there.
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Were you interested in athletics at all? Did you play any
of the sports?
I used to play, but I was not what you would call an athlete.
Visiting Grandparents in Nevada City
Nathan: Right. Would you like to tell me a little more about your
memories of your parents and your other grandparents?
Zellerbach: When my brother and I were young, when we were going to primary
school, my mother used to take us up to visit her parents, who
lived in Nevada City, where my mother was born. The house is
still there, and is still owned by a member of the family.
Those were the years we had just six weeks vacation. That's
all we got in San Francisco. So we went up there, and my
grandmother took care of us, also my grandfather. He probably
was retired, but he used to sell lottery tickets. That was
his business in Nevada City.
Nathan: Was he also in the mining business?
Zellerbach: No, he wasn't in the mining business. I don't know what
business he was in earlier. My grandmother was a wonderful
cook. She cooked us all kinds of things to fatten us up, before
she shipped us home. In those days, we went there on the train.
It took us from nine in the morning until five at night to go
144 miles.
Nathan: What train would that be? Southern Pacific?
Zellerbach: We went Southern Pacific up to Colfax. Then we took the Nevada
County Narrow Gauge from Colfax. We went through Grass Valley
to Nevada City. I think it was a twenty or twenty-five mile
narrow gauge railway. I think it took them to go that distance
about an hour and a half. In those days they had wood -burning
locomotives.
Nathan: So they'd have to chunk the wood into the firebox. What did
you do for food? I'm sure boys would have to eat during that
long trip. Did you take a basket of food with you?
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Oh yes. We had box lunches, and my mother gave us a lot of
lemonade. In those days they didn't have long distance
telephones, so they didn't know when we got there. My grand
mother would have to write letters home to say we had arrived.
So we went there until--! don't know when we stopped going.
I think after we were in grammar school, and my grandmother
was just too old, and we wanted to do other things in the
summer.
But I had one experience. They had a big cherry tree
right in the yard, a big tall cherry tree, so I used to climb
up the tree. My grandmother used to be very frightened of
it and used to try to get me out. I was up there picking
cherries and eating them. Well, one day, I fell out of the
cherry tree and broke my wrist. There was quite a bit of
excitement. As soon as that happened, she shipped us home,
so my mother could take care of us . I was always getting into
some kind of trouble like that.
Yes, I'm beginning to get a picture of you as a little boy.
What else did you do when you visited in Nevada City? Did
you help sell lottery tickets?
No, no, no. I didn't do that. We used to go down to the old
National Hotel, which is still there, and watch the stages come
in; old stagecoaches, coming down from Downieville and the
upper mountains. We'd watch them come in, and see them unload.
In the daytime we'd go swimming in the swimming holes with
the local kids. Then every once in a while we'd go watch the
train come in or go out. It was something to do. They finally
put in an electric train that went between Nevada City and
Grass Valley, and so that used to be a treat for us when we had
the money. We'd ride over there and ride back. We used to
enjoy it up there.
Yes, it would be a nice place to go.
It was very memorable.
The lottery that you speak of, was it a statewide lottery?
No, no, no. It was private. The M & F lottery. It was
Metzger and Franklin. That was one of them. I don't know
whether there was another one, but that was the big lottery
at the time.
Nathan: And if you won, did you win a money prize?
Zellerbach: Sure.
Earthquake and Fire in San Francisco
Zellerbach: I don't think I've told you about the earthquake and fire.
Nathan: No. I'd like to hear about that.
Zellerbach: My mother had to get out of 1730 Fell Street, so just before
the earthquake and fire, about six weeks before, we had moved
into a new home on California Street between Franklin and
Van Ness Avenues. You know where Hanni and Girard is, on
California Street? Well, that was where our house was. My
father and mother had a big celebration when they moved in.
At the time I was not yet in high school, in 1906.
Nathan: Would you be about twelve years old then? You may still have
been in the end of grammar school. Sixth grade?
Zellerbach: Probably. I used to go to Pacific Heights School then. I
had a room up on the third floor. My sister Claire was down
near her mother, and my brother, I think, was up on the top
floor too. I was asleep when it started to shake. I buried
my head in the pillow; it felt like this was the end of the
world. I really did some praying. I went to Sunday school,
so I used my Sunday school knowledge, and did some praying.
When it finally settled down the side of the house had gone
out, right alongside of my room. It opened up the side of the
house, and here I was, looking up in the sky.
Nathan: It was lucky it had fallen out rather than in.'
Zellerbach: Yes. It fell out. It didn't drop down, but I mean it just
opened up and leaned out. My father of course went down to
check the business records, and said, "The fire has started."
So he moved us out to my grandmother's. We went back to
1550 Fell Street.
Nathan:
How was her house? Did her house stay in one piece?
Zellerbach: No, no. I'm coming to that. The fire was moving up, and
at that time the soldiers were starting to set up a backfire,
and blasting houses and buildings to try to stop the fire
from crossing Van Ness Avenue. Of course, Van Ness was
saved, quite a bit of it, but the fire did cross Van Ness
Avenue at Geary Street, and went all the way up to Washington
Street. I know it stopped at Broadway, but I think it stopped
at Washington and went up to Franklin. It didn't go any
further than Franklin. I know it stopped at Washington,
because the old Goldberg house is still there, at Pacific and
Franklin. That was from before the fire. Unfortunately, we
were in the one block, so our house was burned out, the same
as the old Spreckels mansion. I don't know if you remember
that or not.
Nathan: Yes, I do.
Zellerbach: That Spreckels mansion was burned out and gutted, and many
beautiful homes were lost, many fine homes on Van Ness Avenue.
So our place burned down. My brother and my father went down
to get the books of the business, because they didn't know
whether they could save any of the warehouses. They did save
one of the warehouses, which was in the Houghtaling Block on
Jackson Street, between Sansome and Montgomery. Out of all
the structures, which you might call occupied, business-
occupied, it was the only one that was saved. My brother got
the smart idea that we may need something to get money to live
on, so he had all of my mother's flat silverware packed up,
and we took the silverware with us. We didn't take anything
else but the silverware. So we were out in the park.
We used to sleep out in the Golden Gate Park, because
everybody was afraid of the earthquake. They kept us out
in the Panhandle, right opposite my grandfather's house on
Fell Street. The old Jewish Orphan Asylum was on Divisadero
Street and Hayes Street. Anyway, they still ran their bakery,
and my father and mother knew the superintendent, Henry Mauser.
His daughter is still alive. In fact we used to go down there
and play every once in a while with the orphans. So that's
where we got bread. I forget what other rations they had left.
We lived in the park until, oh, I guess, for over a week.
Nathan: That long?
Zellerbach: Oh yes. 'Til the fire was out. The fire was pretty well under
control at the time. We were out there for a week or ten days,
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
and then the Red Cross was in, and the city was under martial
law. Then the Southern Pacific made up trains to get as many
of the citizens out of San Francisco as they could. You
didn't have any money, so they rode you free. In the meantime,
my father went over to Oakland. He'd just bought a branch over
there, or bought out another company, so they had an Oakland
branch. He found an ark down on the estuary, and he bought
the ark in which to live. So that's where he made his head
quarters. He shipped my mother and my brother and sister and
myself to Los Angeles, and we stayed with my mother's brother,
J.Y. Baruh and his wife Alma, out on Gratton Street. That
was way out at that time. Now, of course, it's in town.
Did you have to sell any of the silverware that your brother
carried out?
No. Anyway it was a good idea. At least he saved us something.
That was the only thing we saved!
Yes, how would you know what to save if you have to leave your
house?
Well, we couldn't. What were we going to take it in?
streetcars weren't running, nothing was running.
The
We did business with the Englander Drayage and Warehouse
Company, which was owned by the Englander family. My uncle Jake
married an Englander. They hooked up several of their drays,
and that's how they got the books out of down town. Then they
came out and that's how we loaded the silverware into the dray,
and took it out to the park.
So your father did save the books?
Oh yes. The books were saved,
far the fire would go.
Of course nobody knew how
When you were in the park, did you feel any of the aftershocks?
I don't remember that. I don't think they lasted too long.
There were a few for a couple of days. I think we stayed at
the California Street residence a day or two until we thought
it was time to get out, so then we moved out to the park. Of
course the park was full with refugees too. Every place.
Nathan:
What a thing to remember.
Zellerbach: Then we went to Los Angeles. We got there in April, and we
came back home in the middle of August because school opened
August 15.
Nathan: Did you have any place to stay then?
Zellerbach: Yes, well my mother had gone back. She left us down there
with my aunt until she could find a place. She found a home
out on Clay Street, Clay and Broderick. After the fire, the
family lived there; then they moved down to 1812 Broadway;
and we lived in 1812 Broadway until my father bought a house
out at 3524 Jackson Street, I think in 1915, which my mother
lived in until she passed away. So that was the story of my
youth.
Two Years at U.C.. Berkeley
Zellerbach: I went to the University of California after I got out of
high school. I entered California in 1913.
Nathan: That's U.C., Berkeley?
Zellerbach: U.C. Berkeley. I stayed there two years although I wanted to
go East. So my mother made a deal with me that if I went two
years to Berkeley, why then I could go East. She, I think,
figured in the back of her mind after I got into Berkeley,
that I would probably stay the full four years.
Nathan: Did you commute, or did you live on campus?
Zellerbach: We lived at 2411 Durant Avenue, in Berkeley. That was an old
boarding house. That was quite a gang of young boys in
there at that time.
Nathan: Are they people you remember?
Zellerbach: Well, I remember some. There was, for example, Julian Weston.
His name was Weisbein. Julian Weisbein was there, and Les
Jacobs, I think was another one, and Ed Fuld, who was Mrs.
J.D.'s brother, he was there. And my brother lived there. And
quite a few others. It was only a few blocks from campus.
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach;
Nathan:
Zellerbach :
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Do you remember any of the professors particularly? Did
any of the professors make an impression on you?
At California? There was only one who made an impression
on me. In those days you always tried to take one cinch
course.
[Laughing] That hasn't changed too much.'
And the best cinch course was a language course in Japanese.
There was an old Professor Kuno, and he was a little skinny
fellow. One of these twitchy kind, you know. Most of the
students used to tease him all the time. I don't think he
ever failed anybody. Always passed them. So I took Japanese
for a year.
Did you learn any Japanese?
I learned at that time, but it's so long ago that I wouldn't
remember it. Of course one of the sad things in the United
States is that whereas we had to take languages--! took German
both at high school and college—after you learn the language,
then you have nobody to talk to after you're out of school,
so you forget it. This is one of the sad things in my time.
Now, of course, more people talk foreign languages, so the
younger people now are in that. I don't know whether they
continue talking or not. I have a grandson that's been taking
French for almost all of his life, and I've never heard him
speak any yet.
Which grandson is this?
Gary. At California I used to go out for track. That was my
athletic effort, but I never got any place. I used to go out
for athletics, so I went out for track, but I wasn't fast
enough to make the team.
It's fun to be part of it, and not worry about it.
That's right.
10
University of Pennsylvania. The Wharton School
Nathan: Were you taking a business course?
Zellerbach: Well, no. At that time at California the only business course
they had was economics. California had no business school.
One of the reasons I wanted to go East was that I wanted to
go to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
At that time, Wharton School was the only undergraduate
business college in the United States. Harvard was graduate,
and Amos Tuck at Dartmouth was graduate. And also they
required Latin and Greek- -
Nathan: For business?
Zellerbach: Well, for entrance. And I took Latin of course. That was
prescribed in high school. But as soon as you could make
your requirements, you stopped taking Latin. And I never took
Greek. So when I was looking around for universities to go
to in the East, the only one was Pennsylvania that didn't
have those requirements. So that was a second reason I went.
The first was of course, for the business course.
I went there in 1915, and I graduated in 1917, right at
the beginning of the First World War. There I remember quite
a few of my old professors very well. I still quote them. We
had a professor in insurance who taught stock exchange
operations and things of that kind, by the name of Solomon
Heubner. I guess he was one of the greatest authorities on
insurance in the country. For many years he used to teach life
insurance classes for insurance companies' salesmen.
Then I had a man by the name of Conway in banking. I had
Professor Hess in advertising and salesmanship. Then I had
Joe Willitts. His forte was marketing, but from a different
point of view. In other words, he analyzed markets, population
and movements and things of that kind.
Nathan: This seems very advanced for that early date, doesn't it?
Zellerbach: This whole thing was advanced. They were one of the top
schools. Many of their graduates went on to become very
substantial business people in the country. Then I had a
professor called Simon Patten, who taught economics. I think
of all the professors I had, he probably left the greatest
11
Zellerbach: impression on me, the way he taught. I often think of some
of the stories he told us, so that you would think, you know.
He taught you to think.
Nathan: Can you remember one as an illustration?
Zellerbach: Yes. I remember he was talking about how two people can get
different points of view. One day he described sitting up
on top of the hill overlooking an industrial city in a valley,
the valley below. One young fellow, all he saw was the beauty
of nature and that's what his reaction was. The other saw all
the industry and the smoke and said, "Must be a prosperous
community." So he merely outlined that, showing how two people
sitting and looking at the same thing can get completely
different views on the same scene.
Nathan: Particularly a good story for the present time, isn't it?
Zellerbach: Yes, well, that's what I say. This is just one example of the
way he taught. Primarily of course economics, but to make
you think economics.
When I was in high school, we took American history and
the book was written by a Professor Hart. He wrote the textbooks
that we used in high school here in San Francisco on American
history, and he was one of the great authorities on American
history. I thought this would be a wonderful course for me
to take, to have the privilege of being taught by this great
professor of American history.
So I signed up for the course the first year I was there,
not knowing anything about it except his reputation. Well,
I found out it was a cinch course, and he was --oh, he was
about, I think, five foot two, had very thick glasses, and
couldn't see, and talked in a low monotone. And so, his
classes were always filled with football players and athletes
and all the boys that wanted to take cinch courses. And of
course, I was very much interested in hearing him, so I used
to sit down in the front row so I would get everything,
because I was very serious at that time. The instructor
would come in and take the roll call, and as soon as the
instructor left, half the class left. The professor couldn't
see, and so he didn't know who was there. I stuck it out,
but any time I felt like I needed something else to do, I
used to sneak out too. I don't know how many failed, but
anyway I passed the course.
12
Nathan: Did you go on with American history, or did that just finish
the subject for you at school?
Zellerbach: No, that finished it. I graduated in '17, and I had to do
two and a half years of work in two. Some of the credits I
had from California didn't count there, so that meant I had
to make them up in order to graduate with my class. This
was my senior year. I had some very good friends. I made
a lot of good friends there. I lived in the dormitories.
One of my friends was my wife's boyfriend when they were young.
She came down to Philadelphia to visit, you know, on weekends.
She probably had her eye on me, and so eventual ly- -we 11 , it
was early in the first part of my senior year that I met her.
Engagement and Marriage
Zellerbach: I always tell the story on her. Her mother used to drive one
of these old carriage electric automobiles, and we went out
one night to a party in Cleveland. I was there visiting,
and so we were going or coming--! don't know, anyway we got
into a thunder and lightning storm. Of course I was never
used to thunder and lightning in San Francisco, so I guess I
was a little facetious, and said, "We don't get this in
San Francisco, and if you lived out there, why you wouldn't
be bothered with it." So with that, she fell in my arms and
said, "I accept J"
Nathan: [Laughing] Poor innocent young man that you werej
Zellerbach: That's how we became engaged. She of course won't admit to it.
Well, anyway, when the war broke out, we were announcing our
engagement in Cleveland at a big party, so the families all
decided, as long as we were at war the thing for us to do was
to get married while there was time. So we got married, in
April of 1917.
Of course I had to finish college, so we went back to
Philadelphia. We didn't have any honeymoon. We just got
married and went back to college. The first day I was in
Dr. Willits1 class, he heard that I just got married, so he
announced it to the class. One of my most embarrassing moments I
Nathan: [Laughing] YesJ How terrible.1
13
The Taylor System
Zellerbach: Anyway, then after I graduated, I went back to Cleveland.
Her father was one of the owners of Joseph & Feiss Co.,
manufacturing clothiers. They had what you call the Taylor
system of management. J & F were the first plant that
introduced time studies into manufacturing, and also
introduced manufacturing in a line.
Nathan: An assembly line for clothing?
Zellerbach: Yes. I'd studied that, the Taylor system, closely, so I
was anxious to see it work. I went out there, after we
graduated, and we lived with her parents. I worked there
until November.
Nathan: Can you tell me a little more about how this assembly line
worked? The cutters would start at one end —
Zellerbach: The cutters started, and then one person made a sleeve, and
another person made the body of the coat, and one person put
the lining in it, and another person put the sleeves in,
then they put the collar on—whatever the sequence was.
Finally it got to the finish line where it was pressed.
Each worker had one specific function. No worker ever
made a whole suit or a whole coat. One worker put on buttons,
another worker made buttonholes, and another one sewed two
pieces of pants up, and passed it on. One thing was added,
just like one of these automobile lines. They were all time-
studied, so they all had quotas to make. And then if they
went over their quotas, they received bonuses.
Nathan: Were these workers men or women?
Zellerbach: Mostly women. The only men around were when they got to the
pressing and cutting cloth. The only problem was that they
made just two or three models, in navy blue, brown and gray.
Of course they were very inexpensive suits, because of the
way they manufactured them, but then when styles started to
come into men's suits, they couldn't change. So as a
consequence, they had a reorganization, and they put in
modern cutters, and they put in new designers, and they made
suits in many colors instead of just three colors. That's
when they had a change of management, in order to revive the
business. The company is now part of Van Heusen. They took
14
Zellerbach:
over the Joseph & Feiss Company just a few years ago.
that was ray first experience.
So
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Then my father wrote me on the first of November and
said he thought it was time for me to come home and learn
the paper business. So I took my bride back to San Francisco
the same month. For months we lived with my parents. My
mother told us there was no house big enough for two families,
so we should go find our own as soon as possible, which we
did. We lived in a flat at 3543 Washington Street.
We had our first two children there, Rollie, my daughter,
and Billy. Stephen was born after we built our own home at
3410 Jackson Street. We lived in that til 1958. Then the
children were all married. We were running around in a five
story house with all kinds of room, so my wife decided we
would go into an apartment. That's when we moved into 2288
Broadway. In fifty-five years, we've only lived in three
residences. That's a pretty good record.
Yes, it is. How did you work out housing arrangements with
your own immediate family, when the time came?
As I said, my immediate family consists of my wife, a daughter,
and two sons. During my active days in business, I had a
great deal of traveling to do, and when our children were
young my wife had the major burden of raising the children.
Being that she was a student of kindergarten training, it gave
her a very excellent background.
The family has had very close ties, but our philosophy
has been that when they were old enough and wanted to live by
themselves or get married, we raised no objections as we knew
there would be a time when they would live their own lives.
Ever since they were born I had deep feelings that as long as
I brought them into the world it was my obligation to take care
of them. One of my idiosyncrasies was that I didn't want them
waiting around for me to pass away in order for them to live
a comfortable life. As a consequence, I have put each of my
three children in an independent position financially, which is
one of the best things I personally have done for them. Also,
it did have the results I was aiming for.
Jennie and Harold L. Zellerbach
1961
Seated: Doris, William and.
Harold L. Zellerbach
Standing: Margery, John and
Nancy Zellerbach
1977
S.A.Z.. ,
Left to right: Guide, William J. Zellerbach,
Doris J. Zellerbach, Margery H. Zellerbach,
Rolinde Loew Bloom, John W. Zellerbach,
Charles R. Zellerbach, Rolinde Zellerbach
Lowe, Michael Stephen Wilson, Stephen W. Loew,
Nancy Zellerbach, Susan Loew Wilson, Thomas
H. Zellerbach. 1963
(Stephen A. Zellerbach, Merla B. Zellerbach
and S. Wilson missing)
15
Zellerbach: The family gets together for special anniversaries, such
as my 80th birthday when I took the family to Honolulu for a
week. And in 1963 I took the family, including all my grand
children, to Hawaii and we had quite a get-together. In the
spring of 1972 I again took all my children to Europe to help
Doris and me celebrate our 55th wedding anniversary.
Life is not worthwhile without family and friends, and
we have been very fortunate with. our children, grandchildren,
and great-grandchildren.
v
16
THE FAMILY PAPER BUSINESS: SOME EARLY RECOLLECTIONS
Nathan: I wondered about how your father established his business
again after the earthquake and fire?
Zellerbach: My father of course had some very good manufacturing
connections in the East. One company, the Champion Coated
Paper Company—we were their agents — shipped us almost a
train load of paper and said, "Pay us when you can."
Nathan: They must have trusted him.
Zellerbach: Well, that's what I mean. That happened with quite a few of
our vendors. He didn't know whether he had any money or
didn't. He didn't know whether the banks had books that
survived. I was a little young then to know the details, but
I do remember that this one outfit shipped them I don't know
how many cars of paper, printing papers. So between the San
Francisco warehouse and the Oakland, they were back in business.
In the meantime, we already had a branch in Los Angeles.
Nathan: Right. At this time was the business serving as jobbing
agents? You didn't do any manufacturing of paper at this time?
Zellerbach: No; purely wholesale, or jobbing. The first paper mill we
bought was in 1917. That's when they bought the Carthage Mill.
That's another long story.
Working for the Zellerbach Paper Company
Zellerbach: During World War I everybody was drafted, but unfortunately my
hearing was impaired, so they didn't take me. The war didn't
last long enough to really get down to the numbers of some of
those that had marginal difficulties. So I worked in the
17
Zellerbach: business, as soon as I got back from Cleveland. At least, I
was on the counter, selling, and then I organized an export
department, which during the war was very successful. We
made a lot of money out of it. Then I was a salesman on
the street, and then I came inside and went into management
of Zellerbach Paper Company, the San Francisco Division. I
became manager of that I think it was 1927 or '28.
Nathan: You were already starting to use the things you had learned
in the Wharton School, probably.
Setting Up a Personnel Department
Zellerbach: Yes, I did. We were the first ones to set up a personnel
department. When I went into business, the foremen hired
all the laborers, and the sales managers hired the salesmen,
and the head bookkeeper hired all the bookkeepers. They just
talked to them and they were hired to go to work. There was
no training, nothing.
So I instituted a full-fledged personnel department,
where they had to come in, write up their history. We didn't
give them examinations, but we did some testing and inter
viewing in quite some depth. We managed the personnel in one
area. All the hiring and firing was done in the personnel
department. Where there was a superintendent who was firing
anybody or hiring anybody in his department, we stopped that,
because one of the things we found was that our superintendent
was a member of the Catholic faith, so we had a hundred percent
Catholics in the operating departments.
Nathan: That's quite a story.'
Zellerbach: Well, that's not the only one. We bought a Salt Lake division
that was owned by Mormons, and our manager was a Mormon, and
I don't think we had a Gentile working in our Salt Lake
division until we retired the manager. We just couldn't get
him to hire anybody but a Mormon. That's all. A hundred
percent. I used to say to him, "There are a lot of Gentile
customers.1" You know, a Gentile can be anybody but a Mormon.
Any religion. I used to say to him, "You've got to hire some
Gentiles." After he finally retired, we put in a Gentile
manager.
18
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
You were far ahead of the times, really.
Why yes. That was due to my knowledge from college,
thing applied in getting into the export business.
The same
Right. The personnel practice that you're describing, is
of course very interesting, because it's still a big problem
in any business right now, too.
Unions
Zellerbach: When I went into business, there was no such thing as a
personnel problem. We had no unions. That is, in our ware
house the only union we had were Teamsters, and the Cutters,
who cut paper. Otherwise, we weren't bothered with unions
until during World War II, when everything was put under
control. President Roosevelt and his famous pronunciamento
on this War Production Board. That's when he put in a
paragraph that there should be no discrimination because of
union membership. This gave the impetus to organizing.
Without that--I don't know, I guess we would have them by now,
but this would be a grave question if we'd have them as much
as we do now.
Nathan: Was the paper industry slower in becoming unionized than some
others?
Zellerbach: Yes. Our mills weren't unionized until after the war.
Nathan: Do you have any opinion about whether it is desirable or not
desirable to have a union?
Zellerbach: Well, I guess it's fifty-fifty, like all these things. One
of the problems of course, in unionization today, is that
the Congress, legislature, city governments- -they kowtow too
much to unions. In other words, things are not equal. Unions
have more privileges than businesses. Unions can make deals,
businesses can't. Unions are not under anti-trust. Businesses
are.
Of course, there are a lot of bad practices that have
crept into unionism, such as featherbedding, which you know
is still going on in a rampant way. I read about it in this
19
Zellerbach: morning's paper with the cemetery workers. One of the demands
is that when the strike is over, they've got to pay time and
a half for burying more coffins than they normally did in a
day's work before the strike. They limit the number of coffins
they can bury in a day. So if they bury any more, they've
got to pay over time. That's what we call featherbedding.
That's the same thing with the musicians' union. If you bring
an outside band in, you've got to have a standby band. I
don't know the minimum number of standbys you have to have,
but you have to have them, and you pay them, and they don't
do a thing but just sit there.
And then of course, there was the big fight over firemen
on locomotives, and these work rules that were passed by the
Legislature many years ago: the full crew law. Of course
that's not good for the free enterprise system, because the
free enterprise system is really based on volume production
at the lowest cost. In order to do that, you've got to do it
with a minimum of labor and a minimum of handling the merchandise.
That's why you're getting all this automation. Unionism put
a lot of firms out of business. That's what they did to the
New York newspapers; put five of them out of business. Today
you have three newspapers in the city of New York.
Nathan: Right. I would also like to ask you about the other side;
what may be desirable about unionism, if you feel there is
something?
Zellerbach: What's desirable about unionism? Of course it does protect the
workers from management abuses which they had in the old days
in the needle industry, the sweatshops and things of that kind.
I don't say it's all one-sided. There can be abuses on both
sides. Under the present law, there are still more abuses on
the union end than there are on the management end. Of course
a lot of small businesses get away with murder, because they
haven't got enough employees. But they throw up a picket line
around a business because a man's family works there and none
of them are unionized, even though that place is not being
struck.
20
THE DOCK STRIKE (1971)
Zellerbach: I'm having to do a little politicking and get my friends back
in Washington busy.
Nathan: Do you think they'll be able to do something helpful about
the dock strike?
Zellerbach: If they don't, they're going to declare this a disaster area,
because supplies run out in manufacturing operations, and
everybody in the whole chain is feeling the pinch. Look at
these boats sitting out there, twenty-four, twenty-five boats
sitting out there now for over a month. You've got the whole
West Coast shut down. Can't ship anything out or in by water.
You can imagine what this is doing to the international trade
that comes in here.
Nathan: Does this affect Crown Zellerbach?
Zellerbach: Why sure, we're affected. After all, we're on Southern Pacific
railroad tracks. That's the way we get most of our freight.
We're dependent on Southern Pacific. Now, they've got to
Santa Fe. We could use Santa Fe, but that's now out. The .
only thing that's running is Western Pacific. That's all
we've got here in California. Up north, it's probably not
quite so bad. They have Great Northern, and Northern Pacific.
Union Pacific is down. Southern I think is down. Back East
I think they've had I don't know how many more. If they don't
start doing something, Mr. Nixon will be an ex-president.
Nathan: When you mention that you're going to talk to your friends in
Washington, do you mean legislators?
Zellerbach: Yes, certainly, legislators. Those are the only ones that
can d_o anything. The President of course can initiate it, but
he has to have the cooperation of Congress. They're just coasting
21
Zellerbach: along. I guess they're waiting for the hue and cry of the
public, which they're commencing to get. The unions, union
leadership, have no feeling for anyone else but themselves.
Nathan: What kind of action would you like to see?
Zellerbach: Well, I think eventually, you're going to come to compulsory
arbitration with any of these unions who are serving the
general public. It means one thing to have the railways
and all the shipping shut down. It's another thing to strike
a couple of restaurants. There's a big difference. It would
even have been a disaster with the American Tel. and Tel. on
strike, except that they're so automated, and they've got
all their supervisory people that come in and take over. So
the effect on the general public is not very great unless the
strike lasts a long time. Then things start to break down,
and your phones are out of order. Then you've got a different
problem.
Nathan: In this big transportation strike, do you try to get other
people to act with you in order to get your voice heard? Or
do you like to act by yourself?
Zellerbach: If I answer that question, we may be treading on the anti
trust laws.
Nathan: Is that right? Well, I don't want to lead you into prison.1
[Laughter]
Zellerbach: You won't lead me into prison because I've had too much
experience with anti-trust regulations.
Nathan: I take it that you still feel a great responsibility toward
the Crown Zellerbach operation?
Zellerbach: Well, after all, it was the only job I've ever had, and the
only company I've ever worked for. I have a substantial
interest, a family interest in the company. The family's
fortunes have been in this company for a hundred years. So,
until Uncle Sam gets most of it in the next two or three
generations, why then that's something else again. Then it
won't be the same interest. It will just be another public
company. Well, it is now, for that matter.
Nathan: It's really primarily a western enterprise still?
22
Zellerbach: Well, it's based here, but we're nationwide. We're also
overseas now. As I said, I was delayed this morning trying
to reach Washington.
Nathan: That's rather exciting. You're really involved in big doings.
Zellerbach: Well, after all, I'm a consultant yet in the company. They
still pay me, so as long as they pay me, I do a little work!
23
GOVERNMENT: COMMISSIONS, POLITICIANS, ISSUES
Nathan: Right. And of course you do a lot of work with various
public agencies. What kinds of problems do you deal with
there?
Zellerbach: First of all, I wouldn't accept an appointment, unless I
knew the man that appointed me personally and knew him very
well. There was only one exception to that.
California Beaches and Parks Commission
Nathan: What was the exception?
Zellerbach: That was when I was on the California Beaches and Parks Commission.
I was appointed by Governor Pat Brown. This is one commission
that I never aspired to be president of, because I didn't want
the responsibility. It took up too much time and I didn't
have the time to do it, with the Art Commission and all the
other things I was doing. I didn't want the responsibility
anybody has who is president of the commission, especially if
you haven't got proper staff. When I was first appointed on
the Park Commission, we had a director, Charlie de Turk, who
was a very good conservationist and a good teacher, but a very
bad administrator.
After I got on the commission, it took me about three years,
about two and a half years, to convince Pat Brown that we had
to have a new director. The commissioners were doing practically
all of his work. We couldn't get sufficient funds out of the
administration, and the department of finance, because they
didn't trust the administrator. He got the state into several
problems because of his wanting to please everybody and never
24
Zellerbach: saying no. One of them is this Haslett Warehouse thing that's
going on now.
Nathan: What is that?
Zellerbach: I'll tell you about another one where he had written a letter
to a friend of mine, by the name of Gil Foote, who owned a
very large farm and acreage up at the base of Mt. St. Helena.
The administrator was very anxious to have it go to the state,
so he wrote Mr. Foote a letter, just a friendly letter, and
said he thought it was worth a couple of million dollars.
Under the law, when the commission votes to purchase the
land, it goes to General Services, and they have to appraise
it. You're not permitted to purchase it for any more than
its appraised value. The appraised value came in at around
$850,000. Then we were in trouble. There was a big law suit
on, and finally the state withdrew. Of course that cost us
lawyers' fees, his lawyers' fees, our own fees, and everything
else. We didn't buy the land. But he was suing us on the
basis that he had a commitment from the director that it was
worth two million dollars.
Then we got in trouble over here at the Haslett Warehouse
by leasing it to these people, and letting them put up a
million dollars in it on the assumption that when the lease
ran out it would be renewed. Under state law, the California
Park and Recreation Commissions are not permitted to hold any
property unless it's for recreation purposes. So now the
Park Commission has turned the property over to the General
Services Administration to sell.
Nathan: That's really quite a story.
Zellerbach: Well, that's what you run into. I was chairman of the finance
committee, and I used to sit in the meeting with the director
of finance of the State of California. I was making all the
commitments for the State Park Commission, telling him what
he had to do to fulfill them. After he retired he became a
professor at one of the state colleges, teaching conservation.
Nathan: Well, now that we're on this very interesting California
Park Commission (perhaps we can talk later about how you
became the family Democrat) , how did this appointment come
about?
25
Zellerbach: The appointment came about because I was very good close
friends with Pat Brown for years. I supported him when he
was district attorney here, and I supported him when he ran
for attorney general, and I've known Pat I guess for forty
years .
At that time I was pretty active in the Democratic Party.
When he was elected, he talked to me one day and said, "I
want you on one of my commissions." I said, "Well, I don't
want to get on one of these commissions that's going to take
a lot of time, and I don't want to get on one of these
commissions that get into nothing but controversy. I want
something that would be a good thing." So I suggested the
Park Commission. When Joe Knowland resigned I took his place,
on the commission.
Nathan: That was Joe Knowland, Sr., wasn't it?
Zellerbach: Yes. He was head of the commission for years. Pat was the
first Democrat to be governor in many years. The Knowland
Republicans were pretty influential up there with Warren, so
as long as Warren was there, Joe was there. When Warren went
to the Supreme Court, Pat came in, and he won. He won twice,
so it was eight years. The third time he didn't win.
Pat Brown as Governor
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Right. What do you think of Pat Brown as governor?
have some opinion on that?
Do you
Yes, I do. I think Pat was a very good governor. There wasn't
a dishonest bone in his body. The trouble with Pat was, his
prime trouble was, that he was also a person that would never
say "no." So it was the last man that saw him, the one he
remembered for what he had promised to do. It may have been
the complete opposite of what he had promised many others that
he would do. This got him into quite a bit of trouble.
I had an experience with him myself that was not to my
liking. When I went on the commission the Legislature (I didn't
know this until after I got on the commission) had just stripped
the Park Commission of all its powers. According to my under
standing they had become merely advisory. When I found this out,
26
Zellerbach: I went to Pat and told him, "Listen, Pat, what the hell. I
don't want to stay on the commission to be an advisor, and
spend a lot of time and effort for just advice. It's no
good unless the commission has some power of setting policy
at least." Of course Knowland and his group administered,
and they had to approve every bill, and it irked the legislators,
Tidelands Oil Funds and Commission Powers
Zellerbach: Of course there was the Democratic ascendancy in the Legislature.
They didn't know how long Joe Knowland, Sr. was going to be
the president of the commission. The move was made in order
to get back at Joe, because he was very arbitrary on how he
distributed the tidelands oil funds. When that was settled I
think there was around $80 or $90 million in that fund, which
the commission had the power to distribute. And Joe distributed
it where he wanted it. Of course this got him in wrong with
a great many legislators because they felt that it should be
equitably distributed in different areas, some of the areas
of their own provinces. So what they were after was Joe
Knowland. In order to get even with him, they stripped him
of his powers.
But then right after that happened, Joe resigned, and
then I went on just a few months after Pat was in office,
maybe three or four months. Anyway, when I took his place,
I didn't know that the commission had no powers. Finally, I
guess I spearheaded a move with the governor to amend the law,
to give the commission some powers back. This goes back to
when the Park Commission was run by Swede Nelson. He is a
very able fellow, but he went off after about a year or so.
After I got on, he took over the head of the forestry division.
We got this amendment drafted and approved by everybody
including the governor, and we had legislators who were all
for it, and we had [Eugene] McAteer who was the one that
introduced it for us. We did our politicking up there. I said,
"Now, Pat, we're going to work on this, and you'll back it
a hundred percent?" I said, "We'll get this through and I
expect you to sign it." "Oh yesj" No question. He said,
"This is what I want. You're entitled to it, and you're not
asking for more than you should have," and so, he committed
27
Zellerbach: himself. The next thing I knew, the bill went through and he
wouldn't sign it.
The bill was passed in the last minutes of the Legislature,
when everything is crowded in and they slip things over on you.
It seemed that one of the things that the legislators were
pretty sore at was the way that the State Fair was being run.
Of course the Sacramento Bee was the mastermind. Anyway, the
legislators were very put out about it.
So what they did was to slip a couple of amendments onto
our bill, which stripped the State Fair commission of their
purchasing power. Well, they curtailed it. Of course in the
meantime I was on a cruise, just after the Legislature was
over, in January or whenever it was over. Before I left, I
said, "Now, Pat, I want to be there when you sign it. I want
my picture taken with you." He said, "Well, I'll have you
up here. I'll let you know."
When I got back home, I started to inquire, "What the hell
happened to the bill?" I called up, and they said they'd let
me know. I wanted to know whether Pat signed it or not. A
few days later I got a telephone call from the press reporter
from the Examiner, one who handled the Legislature. He said
to me, "Mr. Zellerbach, did you know that Pat vetoed your bill?"
I said, "No, I didn't know that. I just can't believe he
vetoed it." "Well, he did." So I immediately got in contact
with his assistant up there, and I said, "I just got this report
that Pat vetoed that bill. I want to know, because after all
he promised that he was going to sign it." So he said, "I'll
have to investigate."
For several days I didn't hear. They knew but they were
afraid to tell me. Finally I called again, and I said, "What
happened to the bill?" He said, "Mr. Zellerbach, Pat had very
good reasons that he had to veto it." I said, "He had no good
reasons to veto it, and you can tell him from me I'm very unhappy
about it, and I think that when he said that he was going to
sign it he should have signed it." 'Veil, he got so much
pressure from the Sacramento Bee, and he was afraid if he didn't
veto it he'd be in trouble with the Sacramento Bee." I said,
"Well, that's a pretty bad excuse after all the work we put in
on that. I want to know the next time the governor comes to
San Francisco. I want to see him."
28
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Pat didn't come to San Francisco. It was a couple of
months before Pat could face me. I made a date to see him.
I went out to the State Building.
That was in Sacramento?
No. In San Francisco. I wouldn't go up to see him. I said,
"I'll see him in San Francisco when he comes down here. I'm
not going up to see him." So anyway I went out to see him.
When I came in, oh boy, he was so apologetic: "I'm terribly
sorry. I made a big mistake." In the meantime I found out
why he did it. I said, "Well, Pat?" He said, "We'll put
another bill in right away, and we'll get this one through."
I said, "Why didn't you sign the bill and tell the Fair people
and the Sacramento Bee that you'd put a bill in deleting the
amendments? That's what you should have done." He said, "Yes,
I guess you're right. I should have done that. It's too
late now." I said, "Yes, I know it's too late now, Pat. I'm
damned disappointed. You don't do things like that with me,
Pat. When you tell me you're going to do something, you
better do it!" 'Veil, Hal, I'll never do it again."
But that was Pat. Now, I wasn't the only one, because I've
heard stories that would knock your eye out with Pat, you know.
The trouble with Pat, he didn't have his assistant there
writing down the things he promised, and that made him a lot
of enemies. One thing about Pat: Pat tried. And as I said,
there wasn't a dishonest bone in his body. Whatever he did,
he thought he did the right thing. Pat was, you know, a hell
of a nice guy and you couldn't help but like him. I still do,
but I never forgot that experience.
From then on, anything that he said, I put it in writing,
so that whenever he said he'd do something, by golly, he did
it.
What happened finally about the measure?
another bill?
Did he put through
We finally got a ruling from the legislative counsel. There
was one word that gave us the power to set policy. The
interpretation was one word. I forget what the word was.
I've got the whole thing stashed away, but this one word gave
us the power that we were seeking. In other words we had the
29
Zellerbach: right of policy making. As long as we had the right of policy
making there was no need of any further action. We had it
confirmed by the attorney general too. So that was my
experience with Pat.
Managing the Bond Issue Campaign; Two Types
Zellerbach: During Pat's administration, they put two bond issues on the
ballot. One of them was, I think, for $100 million. The
first one. That was pushed through the Legislature.
Nathan: This was for a purchase of park land?
Zellerbach: Well, yes. For acquisitions and things. The bill was pushed
through, to go to the public for the bond funds. So again
I was not consulted. I was away, on my usual holiday in the
early months of the year, and when I got back I was appointed
the campaign manager for Northern California. When I read the
bill, it was so full of pork that you could smell it cooking.
I said, "Being on the commission, naturally I'll support it,
but not vehemently." Naturally I'd have to be for it, but if
I was asked any questions about it, I would tell the truth.
The only money we raised for the campaign came out of Crown
Zellerbach. I sent my personal contribution.
Nathan: You wouldn't ask anybody else?
Zellerbach: I asked some, but we got a nominal amount. I don't think we
spent over a couple of thousand dollars up here. I wouldn't
spend it because I didn't believe in it. I went around and
interviewed the heads of the newspapers here, Charlie Gould
[Examiner] , and also we saw Scott Newhall [Chronicle] . They
asked me what I really thought of the bill. I said, "I've
got to be honest with you. The bill's so full of pork it
smells. This is like the bills that Congress passes, you
know, for the U. S. Engineers. Harbors and all that."
Nathan: Oh right. The Corps of Engineers.
Zellerbach: Yes. Same kind of types, you see. The Legislature was going
to spend the money. They put it on the ballot for June. I
think they only had sixty days to do any work on it. But of
30
Zellerbach: course, I went up and interviewed them. I said, "Don't
quote me, but if you'll just read the bill yourself, you
can editorialize on your own conclusions." Which of course
they did.
Nathan: [Laughing] After you had pointed the wayj
Zellerbach: Yes. They were against it. It went down to defeat by over
a million votes. Then we said, "Well, we'll go for another
one." We started right after this was defeated. When I
talked to the administration I told them, "The only bill
that I will support is one where the Park Commission controls
the spending of the money. And if the Park Commission
controls the spending of the money, I'll go out and work for
it. Then it will be a legitimate bond issue."
So this was for $150 million. And politicians put
something in for everybody. So there was $40 million in it
for the counties, for the additions to their present park
system. Any request had to be approved by their own planning
commissions, and it was subject to approval of the State Park
Commission, and Recreation Commission. In other words it
was still controlled by the state. The Recreation Department
had the approval of it, after the counties, and the money
was divided on the basis of population. I think it was
seventy-five cents per capita. I'm not sure.
Then we had $5 million I think—for Fish and Game. That
left us $105 million. I think there was $80 million in it
for land purchase and the balance was for development. There
were three areas that could recommend: the governor could
recommend, the Legislature could recommend, and the Park
Commission could. But every recommendation had to be
investigated and a study made, and a recommendation made from
the commission. The only way it could get by was if the
commission recommended it. If the commission vetoed it, that
was the end of it. The Legislature couldn't get any of the
bond money, nor the governor. Of course the Legislature had
to approve it. When we put in a recommendation to buy, then
they had to approve and appropriate the bonds. Some of them
we got tussles over. But every bond issue, every purchase,
was approved by the commission.
Nathan: That's quite different from just recommending.
31
Zellerbach: That's right. We got the approval. So if the Legislature
really wanted to put a park in someplace, we said, "All
right. Go ahead and take it out of the general fund. Give
us some money, and we'll go buy it." [Laughter] That's all.
I was the finance chairman, but I could really run the
whole thing. Ray King did the work. He was the campaign
professional. He did a very fine job, a wonderful job. He
was the secretary for Assemblyman Z'berg. We got him out of
Z 'berg's office, so he knew the legislators very well himself,
and had very good connections up there. He was very knowledge
able.
We started the campaign in October and we didn't go to
a vote until a year from the following November. They suggested
June, and I said, "Nothing doing.' We want plenty of time."
We went up and down the state, and I went with them, to the
editors and publishers and all that I knew. We went to every
chamber of commerce, every sport club, to get their endorsements,
I don't think we had any opposition, practically.
When the people voted, we came out with a plurality of
a million and a half. So if I didn't do anything else while
I was a commissioner, I did that.
Nathan: You got right to the heart of things, which is the control,
and had honesty in your proposal.
Zellerbach: Well, yes. In other words, I didn't look for money or
anything. All I wanted to know was, Who signs the checks?
That's the guy I want to see. All the rest is periphery.
This was the same thing on the commission. The bond law was
written that way. It wasn't introduced until I gave it my
final approval, so I had plenty to say about it. Some things
I compromised, naturally.
Nathan: Thinking again about that first measure, you said it was so
full of pork you could smell it. What was wrong about the first
one that was right about the second one?
Zellerbach: The first one was that the Legislature spent the money. The
Park Commission had nothing to do with it. They told us what
to buy. I consider that pork. In other words, parks weren't
being purchased on knowledge, they were being purchased on
politics. The best way to stop that was to just say, "Nothing
doing." So that's what happened.
32
Zellerbach: That's the end of the bond story. Then of course, you
know, the commission met in different cities, different
areas near the parks every month. Our meetings used to last
for two days. The first day we used to look at different
sites, and what was going on and the second day was the
meeting.
After Charlie de Turk, we had a young fellow by the
name of Jones. He was with us until Reagan became governor.
During the legislative session of the year that Reagan was
elected, they consolidated Recreation, Beaches and Parks.
Both commissions had seven members. Part of the law was
that the new Park and Recreation Commission had nine members,
so that meant that five of us would be left out.
I didn't know Reagan, and I didn't care one way or another
in fact, because, not knowing him, I'd have no influence at
all, and that makes a big difference. I don't like government
jobs where I haven't an open door to the boss. My feeling
on that is I don't want to be one of these lame ducks, and I
won't be. In other words, every time there's a change of
administration, I put in my resignation. It was up to them
whether they wanted to accept it or not. If they didn't
accept it, then I said I wanted a new appointment. I wanted
a letter to the effect that they wished me to stay under their
administration. Of course I always tell them as far as I'm
concerned, I'll work for you, I'm your man, and my job is to
do a good job plus making you look good. I'm one of the
commission, and I'll work with you, but understand that if
there's anything you don't like, you talk to me. Anything I
don't like, I'll talk to you. That's the way I work."
When we were looking for somebody to replace Charlie
de Turk, we went after William Mott, Jr. but Bill Mott wouldn't
take the job at that time. Then when Reagan came in office
he appointed Norman Livermore, the director of Resources, and
William Mott, Jr. became the director of Parks and Recreation
under him. We were waiting around to see what the governor
was going to do to fill the nine positions on the Park and
Recreation Commission. In the meantime the two commissions
still ran solo. I received a letter from them asking me if
I would continue to serve.
Nathan: That's surprising. Don't you think it was?
33
Zellerbach: I thought Reagan was going to drop somebody, and I didn't
know any reason why he should keep me. But anyway, he
appointed me for the longest term of the Pat Brown holdovers.
I was the last of the Pat Brown holdovers to leave office.
Nathan: How long into the Reagan regime did you continue?
Zellerbach: Let's see. It was a year ago March when my term expired.
So I was there with him for two years. No, more than that.
Three. I was very glad he didn't reappoint me; I would have
had to resign, because I couldn't have gone against Pat
Brown. I mean, I couldn't have supported Reagan in his
campaign for re-election. He didn't appoint me, so that was
fine.
Anyway, before I accepted I tried like hell to see him.
He was always too busy. He couldn't. He'd say, "I'll let
you know," and then I'd call again. "Oh we know. He wants
to see you, but he's so busy," and I got stalled and stalled
and stalled. Then when Mott took office, I told Mott. I
said, "Bill, I have to resign, because I won't work unless
I know the man I'm working for. I've no influence with him.
I can't be of any great help to you."
"Oh, yes you can. You're the key between the old
commission and the new commission. You can be a great help
to me. As a favor to me I'd like you to stay on." I said,
"That'll be the only reason." I did, because he's the best
in the business. There's nobody better than William Penn Mott,
Jr. So that sums up the main incidents of my career. There
were a lot of others, but they're minor, personal stuff.
One thing I will put in the record. I never took a dime
of expense. Nothing. The only free thing I ever received
was when we were having the meetings. If they went on a
tour I rode in their automobiles.
Nathan: [Laughing] I see. You're a very unusual man.
Zellerbach: Yes. I want to be independent. I didn't want anybody
questioning me. One time the commissioners1 expense accounts
were questioned, because we had one who was taking his family
on vacations and putting it all in on the state. Of course
everybody's name was listed. Mine had no expenses.
34
Nathan: [Laughter] That must have been quite a surprise I
Zellerbach: So I wasn't called upon to answer anything. And the same
thing on the Art Commission. I've never taken a dime out
of it. Anytime I go to the Pop Concerts, I pay for my own
seats.
I started in giving Thanksgiving Luncheons for the Park
and Recreation Commission when they met in San Francisco
in November. They always meet here so I gave them one last
year, after I'd gone off the commission. I want to give
them another one this year. You knowJ I receive all their
minutes and Mott's in touch with me all the time.
Nathan: I see you have an unofficial influence.
Zellerbach: Oh yes. I know Bill very well. It was a great experience,
to work with all the conservationists.
Father, and the California Fish and Game Commission
(Interview III, August 20, 1971)
Nathan: You talked last time about your activities as a member of the
State Park Commission. I wonder if we could talk about some
of your other political beginnings, perhaps going back as far
as your father, Isadore, who I understand was a member of the
State Fish and Game Commission? How did he become interested
in that?
Zellerbach: My father was always interested in politics because he was
one of the great salesmen of his time. He always connected
everything he did with seeing if he could get more business.
Never overlooked a thing. Even when he received requests from
people to do things for them, he always looked at the watermark
in their letterhead. If it wasn't on Zellerbach paper, he
always notified them that "If -you want favors from me you'd
better use our paper." He did this all the time, and of course,
he was a hundred percent correct.
When I was first in the business I did the same thing.
After all, if people wanted you to help them, there's only
one way they can reciprocate, and that was to give you their
business. We didn't ask them for anything more, but just the
35
Zellerbach: courtesy. If we're their friend, they should patronize their
friends. They don't get anything from their enemies, so they
should patronize their friends. This is the philosophy I've
had in my lifetime with people.
In other words, my friends are my friends. As far as
I'm concerned, I'll do everything I can for my friends, and
as far as I have enemies, I can't worry about them. Let
them get their favors from their own friends. That's the
way I look at it. My father was in business, and of course
the State of California buys a lot of paper. It's one of the
largest accounts in the state. So my father was always well
acquainted with the governors and the purchasing agents, and
the state printer. He always used to have a very substantial
business from the state. And he always kept that up. This
was one of his own hobbies, to watch the state business.
The Lunch Table
Zellerbach: My father used to have a lunch table over at what he called
"Dirty Dick's." That's a little restaurant, which was on
Leidesdorff and Sacramento, called the "Cold Day" Restaurant.
Nathan: Isn't that Tadich's?
Zellerback: That was old Tadich's. Tadich's Cold Day Restaurant. He
ate there every day, and all his cronies showed up, including
all the politicians; he was appointed Fish and Game Commissioner
by Governor Richardson.
Nathan: Friend Richardson 1
Zellerbach: He was a very old friend of his. He also was a very close
friend of the secretary of state, Frank Jordan. Frank Jordan
used to buy the ballot paper for the state. Our company used
to get the ballot paper. In those days it was a stamped
ballot so everybody had to use a big sheet of paper, and of
course, it had a watermark in it, which was secret, so that the
paper couldn't be faked.
Nathan: So that you couldn't substitute other ballots?
36
Zellerbach: Yes. It was like money, you know. You had to have it so
that the watermark was secret, and nobody knew what it was
until the ballots were printed, except my father, and the
manufacturing company and Frank Jordan. When the state came
to accept bids for the ballot paper, my father always had
the watermark, and no one else had it. There wasn't time
enough for anyone else to get it and make the paper, so we
always got the order.
When Governor Young came in, that's when my father got
acquainted with John Francis Neylan, the attorney. John
Francis Neylan was the governor's right hand man. I forget
what they called them then, but he was the same as the director
of finance .
Nathan: Right. I had a note that he was the state director of finance.
I guess that would be it.
A Son for the Democrats
Zellerbach: And so my father got very well acquainted with him, so that
he would continue on. Then when Merriam was elected, he was
still very friendly too.
But then being a very astute politician my father noted
this was when Roosevelt had come into office, and the Democrats
had started to take over the government. Merriam ran again
for a second term against Olson, Culbert Olson. Of course, I'd
always been a registered Republican. In those days whatever
your father was, you followed. We were Republicans. I didn't
do much in politics. In fact, I hadn't done anything in
politics up to that time, so my father suggested that I
re-register and become a Democrat and get into the Olson
campaign. Which I did.
Nathan: What did you do in the Olson campaign?
Zellerbach: Well, I raised money, and went out on the campaign trail for
him and became acquainted with all his aides, and people that
were in his campaign. Judge Matt Tobriner was the one that
introduced me into the Democratic Party. Then I got acquainted
with George Killion. He was right next to the governor, and he
37
Zellerbach: handled finance and stuff of that kind. We put up plenty of
money for the campaign, and then of course when Olson won,
one thing my father wanted to continue was the Fish and Game
Commission,
I thought I had that all set. Also I indicated that,
after all, being in the campaign and everything being equal,
I felt that our company should be favored with the paper
business. Well, Mr. Olson was not to be trusted. He had
made certain commitments . One was that he would appoint my
father. Well, he didn't. He came out right away: anybody
that did business with the old Republican administration
couldn't do business with the new administration. So my
father was out, and the Zellerbach Paper Company was out.
So I started to go to work, because these fellows kept
asking me to do them favors all the time. I said, "To hell
with you." I said, "I don't play games. I was in your
campaign, raised a lot of money for you. I don't expect
anything that I'm not entitled to. I don't want a dime or
half a cent more than anyone else. If we're not competitive,
that's all right. But if we're competitive I expect that
we should get the business. Not only that, but people should
help us get the business."
Well, I had many sessions with George Killion about it,
because they were trying to elect a Democratic Assembly.
They needed money for the campaign. I told them as far as
I was concerned they weren't going to get one red dime, not
a thing from me or anyone else that I knew, unless they
fulfilled their obligations. When they fulfilled their
obligations, I would then go to work again.
It didn't take long for Mr. Killion to set things right,
although they never did reappoint my father. That's how I
got into politics. That's when I became a Democrat. I've
been a Democrat ever since. I won't say that I admire all
their philosophy, but there isn't much difference between
the Republican philosophy and the Democratic philosophy except
that the Republicans are a little more conservative and more
favorable for business. The Democrats are not as favorable.
They are more favorable to labor, and they're quite a bit
more liberal in giving away money, tax money.
^ ^ ^o
i-H O -
O f-c
^ OH •
rt g >-
MH 4->
C/) *
fT3 (H CO
C O •!->
•H U -H
rX >
co rt
6 rt
O
H
t-j
O
• H
DO
rt
U -H
CO >
O
IH
PQ
LO
CT>
C rt
3 o
+J
•H
38
Supporting Jack Javits
Zellerbach: But I was young enough so that it didn't bother me any. So
I stuck to the Democratic party, and I have ever since.
I think the only Republican that I've ever put up money for
was Jack Javits, because of my personal friendship. When
the list of campaign contributors came out for Jack, my name
was on it, and of course all the boys in the party said,
"Vhat are you doing? Are you playing games?" I said, "No.
I don't play games. After all, Jack Javits is one of my
closest personal friends. Whether you like it or not, I'm
going to support him. If you don't like it, then you can
throw me out of the party."
Nathan: [Laughter] How did you get to know Senator Javits?
Zellerbach: I got to know Senator Javits, oh, when I was first active in
business. It goes back to I guess about 1931. That's forty
years ago. '31 or '32. I was one of the directors of the
National Paper Trade Association, which was the trade associa
tion for the wholesalers, the paper distributors. The associa
tion had an old time secretary who was also a lawyer. He
passed away, so I went out hunting for a new lawyer and a new
secretary. We had a committee out. I wasn't on the committee.
They were hunting for a New York lawyer, and at that time I
didn't know any New York lawyers.
They had Ben Javits, who was Jack's older brother. He
was of the law firm of Javits and Javits. Jack at that time
had just entered the law firm. Jack was twenty- seven years
old. Ben came and he addressed all the assembled members
who were there on their annual convention. Everyone was taken
with him. Ben is a very good speaker. So they hired the firm.
We had our meeting in February, right over Washington's
birthday. We always used to get lots of heavy snow and heavy
weather in New York. This year, I guess it was 1932, Ben went
to Florida for the winter, so Jack substituted for him. Jack
made a speech, and everybody was so taken with Jack and thought
he was so much better than his brother, that we sent word that
we would have Jack Javits as the firm's representative, to do
our work. Of course Ben was still out of town, and so Ben
was very delighted that Jack got the job. And that's how Jack
and I got acquainted.
39
Zellerbach: In 1935, I was the president of the National Paper Trades
Association. The first time we met we became very close
friends. Jack during the Second World War was in the chemical
warfare division. He left the Army as a colonel. Then he
decided he would try out for representative from New York.
Of course, New York being Tammany-ridden, the only way he
could get into any politics at all was to change his registra
tion. So he became a Republican.
He became a Republican and he ran--I forget who was the
first fellow he ran against, but he was an old time Democrat
that had been in the House from this district for many years.
Jack being young, and virile, went out and rang doorbells, and
made speeches every place. He got his name in the paper for
his liberal attitudes. He was even more liberal than the
Democrats. Of course to Republicans he was a renegade. But
when the election was over, he won it.
Nathan: His first try!
Zellerbach: He won it. Of course he was in a Jewish district. He became
a member of the House. He continued as a House member. He
then ran for attorney general of the State of New York. After
the election--! think the governor at the time he was running
was a Republican. The Democrats were swept in, just like
when Reagan ran he swept in all the Republicans except the
attorney general. So Jack ran and he won the attorney general
ship. He was the only Republican that won in the state ticket.
He became the attorney general, and that was a four year hitch.
So after that was over, then they wanted him to run for
mayor. Whenever he ran, he always talked to me about what I
thought he should do. I had to take the attitude, "Well,
after all Jack, it's up to you, but I feel if you want nation
wide support--" In other words, I was collecting campaign
funds out here for him, and other places in the country. "If
you become a local candidate, like attorney general in New
York, I'll send you a contribution because you're a personal
friend , but I have no reason to go out and ask anybody for
money. This is a local office. This is not a national office.
"If you're a member of the House, or become a member of
the Senate, then you're a national figure. Then we can collect
money for you."
40
Zellerbach: Anyway, I think after his four years, two or four years,
they wanted him to run for governor. I told him I thought
he'd better go back into the Congress. I think this is when
he ran the first time for the Senate. And he ran against the
mayor, you know- -Wagner. He beat Wagner.
Nathan: That was giant -killing in those days, wasn't it?
Zellerbach: Before that, when he ran for representative, he beat young
Mr. Roosevelt, who ran against him.
Nathan: Which Mr. Roosevelt was that?
Zellerbach: It was Franklin, Jr. He beat him- -Franklin ran in his district,
but Jack won. And when he ran the second time for United
States Senator, he was the only Republican that came out of
New York City with a plurality. He pulled more votes in that
election in New York State than President Roosevelt did. In
fact, I think he pulled more votes than Governor Rockefeller
did.
Then this last time, when he ran the third time, he was
practically a shoo-in. One time there before he ran the third
time, they were pressuring him to run for mayor. He thought
that would be a stepping stone. I said, "That's a stepping
stone to no place." I told him, "I've had so much experience
with mayors in San Francisco. Anybody that becomes the mayor
of a big city ought to have his head examined. What do you
want that grief for when you're in the Senate, and you're one
of the elite? (At that time there were less than a hundred
senators.) You fellows are one of the most powerful groups
of men in the whole United States, practically in the world.
For you to give that up to get into a mayor's job, I'm going
to send you to the psychiatrist. That's absolutely crazy."
So finally they pressured him, and he called me and
said, "Well, I've thought it over, and I'm going to run for
re-election to the Senate." I said, "That's fine, Jack.
You've made the right decision. You'll never regret it."
Nathan: Right.
What is there about being mayor that destroys one
politically?
41
Zellerbach: Well, look at any of them. Look at what's happened to the
mayor of New York. He wants to be President. He's got as
much chance to be President....! think Roosevelt was not in
the Senate. Truman was a senator. Following Truman came
Eisenhower. Eisenhower wasn't a senator. Then came Jack
Kennedy, senator. Then came Johnson, senator. Then came
Nixon, who was an ex-senator, and a vice president. And the
way they have it stacked now, the Senate's got it bottled up,
unless some great hero comes along—like Eisenhower — that they
just can't lick. You really didn't have a choice of Presidents
last year. Two years ago. Three years ago. We haven't had
a choice in candidates for higher office in fifteen, twenty
years. We vote for the lesser of two evils. That's how you
vote today. You're voting for a man, but whoever he is, he's
the lesser of two evils.
Nathan: Do you think this is going to change?
Zellerbach: After all, when you voted for Reagan, you had Reagan and you
had "Big Daddy" [Jesse Unruh] . So you voted for the lesser
of two evils, didn't you? I assume you did. That's what I
did.
Nathan: I didn't vote for the greater evil, I can tell you that.'
[Laughing]
Zellerbach: They talk about popular candidates. The only way they can do
that is to do like they do in the South, have run-offs.
Nathan: Right. You're thinking of a primary election, that would
really be a nominating primary?
Zellerbach: Yes. Well, everybody runs, and then the two top highest run,
and the one that gets the most wins. That way you get an
opportunity to at least vote twice. The first time you can
vote for the candidate you really want. The second time, you
vote then for the lesser of two evils.
42
Some Political Pictures and Personalities
Nathan: Have you ever gone to a national convention?
Zellerbach: No, not really. We had the Republican convention here. At
the time, we rode the Republicans around. In fact, I've got
a picture over here of Eisenhower. Did you ever see it?
Nathan: No, I haven't.
Zellerbach: Haven't seen it? I have a lot of presidents over here (on a
cabinet in the office). There. I'll tell you a story on this
too.
Nathan: Oh yes. There are a lot of familiar faces in this picture.
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. Many of them have passed away. This fellow here--
Nathan: This is Eisenhower in the front row on the left.
Zellerbach: Yes. That's me. This is Dave Sachs. And this is Goldenson,
who was the president of ABC. He gave a luncheon. Here's
Rudolph Peterson.
Nathan: Is that the Bank of America president?
Zellerbach: Yes. And here's a lawyer, big lawyer, Herman Phleger. He was
Eisenhower's personal attorney when he was in office. Here's
John Eisenhower. Here's Jim Black.
Nathan: Jim Black of PG&E?
Zellerbach: Yes. He's dead. Here's Gwyn Follis. Robert Watt Miller.
Here's Bill Crocker. Here's that movie star that gave Ike
elocution lessons.
Nathan: Oh, Robert Montgomery?
Zellerbach: Yes. I was the first man, right after James Haggerty there.
Here are the names on the back. Oh, here's Sol Linowitz.
I didn't remember him. He's the big Xerox man. And Montgomery.
Ed Littlefield. Littlefield is over here.
Nathan :
Oh yes. Which one is Phleger?
Harold Zellerbach with President Truman
Seated: General Eisenhower, Harold Zellerbach, David Sachs,
Sol Linowitz, Elmer Lower, Leonard Goldenson. Standing:
Edmund Littlefield, Robert Montgomery, William Crocker,
George Montgomery, Robert Watt Miller, R. Gwin Follis,
James Hagerty, Francis Martin, James Black, John Eisenhower,
Herman Phleger, Rudolph Peterson, Christian de Guigne.
July 15, 1964 at the St. Francis Hotel, San Francisco
43
Zellerbach;
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Herman Phleger is here.
I don't know who he is.
This is Chris de Guigne . Elmer Lower.
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Now, what were you doing with all these people?
I was invited. I was very close to friends of his--very close
to Dave Sachs. They wanted some prominent people of San
Francisco. I think Dave was a Democrat too. I'm not sure.
But anyway during the campaign, the second Eisenhower
campaign, that was when Stevenson was running.
What did you do?
I was in the Stevenson campaigns. Both of them. I was all
for Stevenson. I liked Stevenson. So did my wife. We got
very well acquainted with him, you know, very well. Of
course it came to President Eisenhower's notice that there
was a Zellerbach in the Stevenson campaign. So he asked my
brother, who was a very good friend of Ike's, "Who is that
Zellerbach that's in Stevenson's campaign?" My brother said,
"That's my renegade Democratic brother."
The first time I met Eisenhower was here. When he met
me, of course I said, "You knew my brother very well." He
said, "Yes, I certainly did know your brother very well."
So I said, "Well, I'm the renegade Democrat that you asked
about." He laughed like hell. "I'm glad to know you.'" He
said, "I don't mind knowing Democrats."
Ike sat down first and everyone was standing around.
They didn't want to sit next to him. I went over and I said,
"Mr. President, is it all right with you if a renegade Democrat
sits next to you?" He said, "Sure.' Sit down here. Nobody
will sit next to me."
So, that's you in that very good seat.'
That was the story. I used to be in Roosevelt campaigns. I
used to be very high up. And I used to give a lot of money.
Here's another one I received from the early years,
from Truman.
Oh yes. That's a picture of President Truman looking very
lively, and you looking equally lively.
44
Nathan: How did Truman impress you?
Zellerbach: Oh, I think Truman will go down as one of the great Presidents
of the United States.
Nathan: Tell me why you think Truman would be one of the greatest?
Zellerbach: Well, because Truman was a man of the people, as you know.
That's how he was elected. That's how he beat what's-his-
name. [Thomas Dewey] He was earthy. He could communicate
He made decisions. Truman never weaseled. He made some of
the biggest decisions of any President. The atomic bomb.
Getting rid of Douglas MacArthur. You can go back over many
of his great decisions, and they were great. Yet he used to
like his liquor and he used to like his poker games, and his
old cronies. There was one thing about him. He liked his
friends and he trusted his friends. I didn't know him too
well, you know. He never appointed me_ to anything. He
appointed my brother as the Marshall Plan man in Italy.
Nathan: This was J.D.?
Zellerbach: Yes. J.D. Of course I sent word back. I said, "What the
hell's the matter? JI'm the Democrat, and you appoint my
brother?"
Nathan: What a good answer.'
Zellerbach: So I stayed home and worked while he was over there for two
years, giving away a billion dollars in Italy.
During the last campaign of Roosevelt, I was back there.
He was having these teas, you know, for the faithful, the
contributors, and those that got money for him. I was asked
to come down. This was the time he wasn't too well, as you
know. George Killion was high up at that time, going way up
the ladder. George said, "Come on down." Jim Farley said,
"Come on down, Harold, and see the President, and have a chat
with him."
I said, "Well, you know, there's nothing I'd like to do
more, but how can you put that man through this? Has he the
strength to do this? It's an imposition." He said, "Well,
you're going to have to swallow it. If you want to come, you
can come. If you feel you're doing him an imposition, don't
come. But you might as well, because he's going to have it
45
Zellerbach: anyway." I said, "Well, if that's the case, I'll be there."
I was. I had a nice chat with the President, and of course
he was re-elected. He didn't last long, as you remember.
Three, four months. Truman took over. So I met him.
Nathan: You were saying that Farley invited you to come. How did
Farley operate? Did he work on this "friend" system?
Zellerbach: Well, no. I knew Farley. I'd been in two campaigns with
him. Out here I was one of the leading Democrats. When
it came to local candidates I used to sit in on who the
party was going to support. I knew my way around very well.
Nathan: Was Farley effective as an organizer?
Zellerbach: Oh, Farley was one of the great organizers. He was one of
the most able guys in the business. He was a real pro.
Believe me. Never forgot a name.
Nathan: Did he travel out to the West?
Zellerbach: He traveled all over. He ran the President's campaigns. He
was his public relations man, his press representative when
he was in office. Sure. Farley was right up at the top.
Nobody was any closer than Roosevelt and Farley. Anyway I
was right up there. I never received any appointments from
any of them, which didn't bother me any.
Nathan: You were saying why you liked and admired Truman as being
very down to earth and not changing his quality. Why did
you like Adlai Stevenson? What was there about him?
Zellerbach: Adlai Stevenson had a great personality. He was very smart,
very witty. You were attracted to him more by his personality
than anything else. I mean, he was a lot different from
Truman. Truman was friendly, but he was a tough friend. Do
you know what I mean? He didn't gush over anybody. He wasn't
the outgoing person that Stevenson was. I haven't seen very
many that are as outgoing as Stevenson was. The mayor is
outgoing.
Nathan: Alioto?
Zellerbach: Yes. He's the same type. Certainly you couldn't call Eisenhower
outgoing. Ike in his administration isn't going down as a
great President. He's a great man. There's no question about
46
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
that. It grows out of his being a wonderful person and a
military hero.
You were saying a little bit about Adlai Stevenson and what
there was about him that you liked.
He was just very personable, and smart, as you know. He made
a very able governor. He was, I guess, more one of the
literati. He was a little above the people. He didn't
communicate in people's language, you remember. He always
had a smart answer. He always had to have a laugh. He had
more of that in his speeches, whereas Truman was down to
earth.
Nathan: Of course, perhaps it had something to do with which person
you're running against too. For example, Eisenhower may
have been a harder person to beat than, who was it? Tom--
Zellerbach: Dewey. Yes. There's no question that Eisenhower was an idol.
Nathan: Right. And you don't accomplish much against the idol, no
matter what you do.
Zellerbach: That's right. Oh, I think that Adlai Stevenson would have
made a great President.
Nathan: Yes. I'd like to go back again to Javits, whom you were
discussing earlier. Senator Javits. What was there about
him that made him able to appeal to the voters and to go up
the ladder?
Zellerbach: Well, there were several things about Jack. Jack, in the
first place, was honest. Mentally honest, as well as honest
in every other way.
Nathan: What is "mentally honest"?
Zellerbach: He doesn't say things that he doesn't believe in. In other
words, he won't get up and say, "I'm for this," when he's not.
So when he says something, this is what he believes. Now,
he may change his mind, as every person has a right to do,
and he has in several instances, but this is one of his
qualities. Not only that, but he's a very able speaker too.
Very fast. He's got a quick mind. Brilliant. He knows the
law. Hard worker. One of the hardest workers there is. I'm
remonstrating with him all the time, (after all, Jack is
47
Zellerbach: sixty-seven years old) that he has no business playing
competitive sports like tennis and handball, jumping in
swimming. In other words, he should get into noncompetive
sports. He loves tennis, but he doesn't have to play against
top stars and try to beat them. He shouldn't be doing the
work that he does.
I'll give you an example. Last time I saw him he was
going to make a trip around the world in two weeks. He had
to hit Paris at a certain time for a meeting. He wanted to
go to Vietnam. He had meetings in Japan. I said to him,
"Jack, if you've got to go to a meeting in Paris, what the
hell do you want to go around the world for? Go over to Paris
and take a few days off." "Oh, I don't think so," he said.
He was leaving, and instead of leaving on the day he
was supposed to leave, he didn't, because we had the railway
strike. Jack being the ranking Republican on the Labor
Committee of the Senate, he had to stay. He was the one that
drafted the compromise law. Jack's law took precedence over
the President's. He stayed, and he didn't go until midnight.
I talked to him on the phone just the day before in Washington
because I didn't expect him there. I was going to be in
Washington and I didn't know whether he was going to stay
there, or whether he was going to get out. I said, "Jack--"
(this meant that he had a week less.) I said, "Jack, you're
crazy. What are you going to do?"
He said, "Well, there's a plane that leaves at 7:30,
takes me to New York at 8:30. I get on Northwest Airlines,
and it takes me direct to Tokyo." Of course you leave at 8:30
New York time, and there's eleven hours difference between
Tokyo time and New York time. So you get there the day after,
but it's the same sun day. You know, you're moving with the
sun, so you arrive in Tokyo at 5:00 the morning you left, I
mean, by the sun. Not by the date line.
So, he says, "I don't know whether I'll go or not. I'll
have to see." They didn't finish his work in the Senate, they
didn't adjourn until 12:30. Then he went back to his office,
he worked 'til 2:00 (I got this from his secretary). God
knows what time he got up to get the 6:30 or 7:30 plane to
New York. Then he transfers over to the other, gets to Japan,
is met by a delegation. He has a meeting with ministers that
evening. And all the next day he's meeting officials in Japan.
48
Zellerbach: The next day he flies to Vietnam, stays there a couple of
days. Then he flies from Vietnam to Paris, and he's in
Paris for four days and he comes home.
Now this isn't just one instance, this is what he does.
He says, "Well, this is my life." I said, "I know it's your
life, Jack. After all you're now sixty-seven years old.
You aren't forty-seven. You're not as young as you used to
be when you and I first met. I used to do a lot of things
too that I don't do now."
Just the other day I sent him a couple of clippings
from papers. Mike Friedman on heart failure; the things
that can cause it. I don't know whether you read the article.
Nathan: Yes, I did.
Zellerbach: Then Friedman delivered a speech at Yale on the same subject.
So I sent Jack these two things. I said, "Jack, I'm sending
them to you because I love you, and I don't want to see
anything happen to you." So I got a nice letter back from
him thanking me very much for the interest I take in him. He
said, "I know it comes from the heart. I'll try to do better.1
Nathan: Well, you never know. Sometimes these ideas sink into a man's
mind, and he may act on them a little.
Zellerbach: The way he goes, at his age, he could drop over like McAteer.
Nathan: That's right.
Zellerbach: McAteer--they picked him up off the floor.
Nathan: Yes. Yes, that was a pity.
Zellerbach: He was saying, "That's my life." He's one of my very closest
personal friends. I used to go to New York all the time and
he would come down and have breakfast with me. Monday morning
at 8:00. The two of us.
Nathan: You keep your friends a long time.
Zellerbach: Oh sure. I keep them a long time. I think I have a lot of
good ones. I do.
49
Nathan: Do you ever try to talk politics with him? For example,
would you try to lobby him on behalf of, say, the National
Endowment for the Arts?
Zellerbach: Oh, he was the one that started it. Sure. I lobby him on
anything. I sent him a hell of a telegram when we had the
rail strike and the dock strike here. I sent him a wire and
I said, "Unless you fellows do something back there, California's
going to be a disaster area."
Nathan: I think you were doing some of that the last time we met.
You were getting some telegrams out on the strike.
Zellerbach: Sure. I got an answer from him. I got an answer from all
of them that I wired to. I wasn't asking anything for myself.
I was lobbying for the good of the people. Jack has always
taught me the axiom: whatever decisions you make, say to
yourself, "Is this in the public interest?" If it's not in
the public interest don't do it. That's the philosophy I live
by--his philosophy. If it's not in the public interest, don't
do it.
So that's my association with Jack. That's what I've
done — that's the way I get myself in politics. Start with
the members of the board of supervisors. As they go up in
the world, you keep with them. A lot of leaders have come
out of the supervisors. Judge [Alfonso] Zirpoli. McAteer.
Leo McCarthy. [George] Moscone. These are more recent. I
could take you back when Christopher was a member of the board
of supervisors. Jack Shelley. I remember Jack when he was
a member of the board.
Pat Brown was never a member of the board. He came out
of the district attorney's office. I knew him. I was with
Pat for twenty- five years, the whole time he has been in
politics.
I knew "Big Daddy" pretty well, but "Big Daddy" [Jesse
Unruh] was a little too much "a politico" for me. Do you
know what I mean by "a politico"?
Nathan: Yes, I think so. I didn't know that would bother you.
Zellerbach: It bothered me because he was too much of a force. You couldn't
get anything through the Legislature unless he okayed it. He
was like Samish, Artie Samish.
50
Nathan: Oh really? You think Unruh and Samish were comparable?
Zellerbach: Oh, damn right they were. You didn't get anything through
the Legislature unless they said so. That's how I got
pretty well acquainted with Mr. Unruh. When I was on the
Beach and Park Commission, I was doing some lobbying for
them. I used to go pay my respects to Mr. Unruh all the
time.
Now of course, I'm not as active as I used to be. I
don't say this facetiously, but my name stands for a great
deal. It has a lot of prestige behind it. I don't endorse
candidates very lightly. I've got to know them pretty well
before I endorse them. I'm going up to sign for Francois.
I'm going to sign for him because I like [Terry] Franjois.
I'm very fond of him. I think he's a very excellent man.
I'll show you something else.
[Showing picture] Here's my good friend, Tom Lynch.
Well, there's my friend Jack [Javits]. I got that for a
birthday present. That's his family.
Nathan: Oh, isn't that great? That montage is very cleverly done.
Zellerbach: Here. See, I'm out there signing up for Tom Lynch. He was
running for attorney general. No, he was running for district
attorney. I forget what year this was.
Nathan: I see McAteer's face in the background.
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. You can see a lot of them, a lot of the old guard.
Here's a cute line by Tom Lynch on the picture: "Harold: What
the hell are you running for?"
Nathan: [Laughing] I think that's marvelous.' Your hand is up and
you're swearing to something. You do look like a candidate
there.'
Zellerbach: Sure.
Nathan: And you were signing his nomination papers?
Zellerbach: I was signing as sponsor.
51
Political Principles
Nathan: Oh right. And that's what you're going to do for Terry
Francois? Are there any other members of the board of
supervisors that you feel eager to support?
Zellerbach: Well, when I say "eager to support"--being in the position
I am, president of the Art Commission, and always having
something to do with city hall, budgets and everything else
that goes along with it, I've made a habit of always supporting
the incumbents. Period. Some that I don't like too well,
I don't give them as much. I give them a token contribution.
Those that I admire a great deal more, I do substantially
more for.
Nathan: I see. I'm learning a lot about politics from you.
Zellerbach: This is what you have to do. In other words, it's an old
adage in politics, "If you ask a favor, you've got to expect
to give one." Never forget it. If you don't want to do a
favor for anybody, don't ask him for anything. This is like
me and the Burtons. I've never donated anything to the
Burtons, I've never given them anything, and I've never asked
them to do anything. I get letters every once in a while
from Phil. He calls me "Dear Hal." I don't think I ever
met him. Maybe I have met him when he was supervisor. I'm
not sure. But I don't like their policies, I don't like
their attitudes. His brother John up in the Legislature
introduces a bill to change the inheritance tax laws so that
nobody can leave more than a million dollars. That's all you
can leave. The rest they're going to take away in taxes.
Well, that's worse than socialism. You may as well go all
communistic. We're going socialist anyway, more and more,
but we're not going communist. There's a big difference.
There's one thing you learn, when you're at this a long
time. When you go before any board or commission, and you
want something, you never have it brought up unless you know
you've got the votes. If you haven't got the majority, don't
bring it up. Never get defeated. That's the worst thing you
can do.
Nathan: We're going to have a handbook on practical politics here
before we're finished!
52
Nancy Hanks and an Appointment
Zellerbach: Well, I've advised many on practical politics. Even my good
friend Nancy Hanks.
Nathan: Have you? Yes, well, we do want to talk about Nancy Hanks.
Zellerbach: Whenever she wants practical politics she phones me.
Nathan: Really? All the way from- -New York is her base?
Zellerbach: Washington.
Nathan: I will say you and she have done quite well lately.
Zellerbach: Well. After all, you help if you believe in a person, what
they're doing. In fact I had a discussion with Jack about her.
Jack had a candidate of his own for the chairmanship of the
National Endowment.
Nathan: Javits?
Zellerbach: Yes. Jack. He had a candidate of his own. Of course I was
pressuring him for Nancy. He was giving me some arguments,
and I was giving him arguments. She was the best qualified
person in the United States in the arts, of anybody. And I
know a great many of them who have lots of experience. She,
in my mind, was the best qualified. That's what I based my
pressure on. Therefore, let's get somebody who is well liked,
knowledgeable, smart, able, and who will do some good for the
arts. She won't be playing games. So I got after everybody
I knew. Jack was one of the keys. Finally he came around.
He found that his candidate was not going to be passed. Then
he started to agree with me. Then he got behind Nancy.
And of course Alan Cranston was for Nancy. There were
other senators that I know pretty well, and I got onto them.
Anybody that was close to the President that I knew, I let
them have the word. I couldn't write the President. I know
him. I met him when he was vice-president, but--. So, the
thing was nip and tuck. I was really putting the heat on. She
had a lot of really good sponsors. She had the Rockefellers.
That's where she came from: The Rockefeller Brothers' Fund.
53
Zellerbach: She had the experience. She was president of the
Associated Councils of the Arts. She was very well known to
a great many people in high places in the East. She wasn't
unknown. I did my share out here. I just gave her one piece
of advice, which she followed to the letter. After she was
asked by Nixon, I got hold of her and I said, "Now Nancy,
before you accept, don't accept through a second man. Insist
that you want a meeting with the President himself. You
want to know what his politics and feelings are towards the
arts, and whether you will get his support. And if you don't
get that promise of his support, you just say, 'Well, I'm
terribly sorry, Mr. President, I'm not interested.1"
So she sent the word. They said, 'Veil, you don't have
to see the President." She said, "I must see the President
so I can have a talk about my responsibilities and his
relationship to me and what he wants me to do. This is what
I want." After several weeks, he made an appointment for her
out here at San Clemente. She flew out here. She was supposed
to be with him fifteen minutes, and he kept her two hours.
When she came out, she came out with his full support and
knowledge of what she believed. They had an understanding,
a complete understanding. She accepted. Every time she sees
me, she says, "I can't thank you enough for that piece of
advice. This was the thing that made it go." "I can only
tell you, Nancy, with twenty years of experience with mayors,
and everyone else, I never served under a mayor unless he
appointed me or asked me to serve himself. I'm no lame duck
for anybody. Not me. I want access to the top man. I want
to have a rapprochement with him."
Picking and Backing Candidates
Nathan: Can we talk about national politics again? I'd like to ask
about your friend Scoop Jackson, who has announced that he is
going to run for President, and how you feel about him, and
maybe whether you're going to support him or not.
Zellerbach: Why is that germane to the history?
Nathan: It's germane to your interests. You see, a number of your
connections and activities have had to be connected to
politics, and you've been a very active and very effective
politician, usually sort of behind the scenes. So now I'm
54
Nathan: interested in how you see a candidate for President. How
you pick one.
Zellerbach: I'm not going to pick him. I'm just going to back him.
There's a big difference between "picking" and "backing."
I used to sit in the councils and discuss candidates, and
who the group should run, but I'm beyond that now. I'm an
elder statesman, and let the kids pick who they want. If
I don't like him, well, I don't support him. That's all.
I've got a problem right now with Roger Boas, who I supported
for supervisor for a long time. I've known him since he's
a child. I'm very fond of him. Of course he's been after
me to come in his campaign, oh, months ago. So I told Roger,
"Roger, I'm sorry, but this is too early. I'm not going to
commit myself this early. This is over a year and a half
away . "
Nathan: This is for Congress?
Zellerbach: For Congress. Yes. Well, you've seen in the papers. He's
announced. The other day, I see that several of my other
good friends are now contemplating running. Mr. Pelosi,
Mr. Mendelsohn are thinking of running, and who else? There's
a third one. All members of the board of supervisors. Well,
in my position, with them all running for Congress, I probably
won't come out for any of them. You see, I'll probably give
them all a donation. But I probably won't come out for them,
because if you come out for one, you've got to come out for
them all. And of course that you can't do.
It's different if someone is running for supervisor, and
there are five supervisors to be elected. You can come out
for five of them, but you can't come out for twenty of them.
That you never do. If you back a person, you've got to back
one. Like the mayor. You know, Dobbs and Feinstein wanted
me to endorse them. So I said, "Well, it's too bad, but
you're too late. I'm already committed to Joe Alioto. He's
got my money, and that's who I'm going to stick by. I wish
you well, but you got started too late." And that was the
advice I gave. I think I told you that story.
That was the advice I gave Fred Goerner.
Nathan: I haven't heard that. Tell me about it.
55
Zellerbach: You remember, Feinstein came out for mayor the last day of
filing, which was on a Friday. I was going over to the
Oakland baseball game in the Oakland Arena, or Coliseum,
or whatever they call it, on Saturday, with Fred Goerner.
Fred and Merla are very chummy with Dianne, and I know her
too. I'm very fond of her. She's a very nice woman, very
attractive of course. I've worked with her as supervisor.
I think she's very able. But Fred was going to take charge
of her radio and television campaign. He would be one of
her top advisors. So he asked me what I thought about her.
I said, "You really want to know, Fred?"
He said, "Yes." So I said, "As far as I'm concerned,
you can repeat what I tell you. In the first place, she's
too late. All the big names and all the big money are
committed to Alioto." He announced back in June, or July,
a couple of months before the others came out. So all the
money was committed, and the names were committed. He had
lots of support among the big business and big Democrats.
He gathered up the support. After all, he was the incumbent,
and he's done a good job.
I think the ones that I contacted to get money for him,
were all pleased with his attitude, and what he's done. Maybe
not a hundred percent. You can never be a hundred percent.
So I said to Fred, "My advice to you in the first place
is, I don't know why the hell she wants to run for mayor.
It's the worst job of any I know. This is the fourth man
I've been through. I wouldn't have the job if they gave it
to me. If she takes the job and she's finished with it, in
four years she'll be an old woman. I don't think she can
ever stand up to the job that has the demands on it, with
as little power. She's only been in office two years. She
has no record. Her greatest asset is her good looks, and her
pleasant manner, and all. But when it comes to experience in
depth, what is she offering? Look at a couple of her backers.
Nathan: Who are they?
Zellerbach: Mr. Willie Brown and John Burton. A lot of candidates back
away from endorsements. They don't want certain endorsements
even if they're giving money.
56
Zellerbach: [President] Johnson didn't participate in Hubert's
[Humphrey] campaign. These things are a matter of political
judgment. Anyway, she ran. I saw Fred a couple of days
after it was over. He was in a blue funk. He was so shocked
that she ran third, and a poor third. He thought she was
going to win. In fact he told me a few days before election,
"We've got a winning candidate." "Well," I said, "you'd
better wait and see what it says in the polls."
"Well, look at the polls. We've got polls that show
that she's ahead." I said, "You can't believe some of those
polls you get. I've got a poll, a postcard poll. I've got
two of them. I filled them both in for Alioto. You can make
a poll look like anything you want."
Nathan: Are you at all troubled, or bothered by Alioto 's present
problems?
Zellerbach: Troubled with what?
Nathan: Alioto 's court difficulties about fee-splitting?
Zellerbach: Well. The trouble here, you know, is the press comes out
and finds you guilty before you're tried. After all, in
American jurisprudence, they have to prove you guilty. It
isn't like in French law. In French law you've got to prove
yourself innocent. So as long as he's not proven guilty--
I think Joe is too smart to do something like that. Anybody
can make a mistake. Basically I think he's just too smart,
and too great a lawyer himself to get himself boxed. But if
you read the papers today, the headlines all come out and say,
"Joe did this," and "They can't trace that," and all of the
rest of it. They don't give you the whole story, they just
take it the way they want it. They're trying to give the
public the impression that there's something fishy about it,
you know.
There's the additional fact that both these cases against
Alioto, I think, have been politically inspired by the
administration.
Nathan: By which administration?
Zellerbach: By the Republican administration.
57
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan: Nationally, you mean?
Zellerbach: Nationally and statewide. You remember when he was running
for governor, the article appeared, that very timely Look
article. But he withdrew. He announced he was thinking
about running. This article came out about his being charged
with the Mafia connection. Do you remember that? And now
of course, Look wants to settle with him. They've already
said that the information about this meeting at the Nut Tree
was not true. So Joe was sticking to it. He's not going to
let them off. They disagreed on what kind of announcement
they'd make. They won't agree that it was malice. Well,
you know, with libel suits in this country, you've got to
prove more than that the statements are not fact. You've
got to prove that there was malice.
It's almost impossible to prove libel against a public
figure, anyway, isn't it?
Sure, malice is a tough thing. Once in a while they can get
it, but it's damned seldom. It's a tough thing to prove.
They can prove that what they wrote was not true, but they
say there's no malice in it. "We thought it was correct, and
we verified it," and so on. But you can't convict them on
the fact that what they said was untrue, and damaging to his
reputation, unless you can prove malice.
Now, of course, this thing has been dragging for over
two or three years. And of course they brought it to life
just when he was running for mayor. They decided to discredit
him for mayor. Well, he won, so the public isn't worried about
it. These are situations that you get into.
Now what was it we started to talk about?
Nathan: I just wanted briefly to ask you about your old friend Scoop
Jackson.
Zellerbach: Oh, Scoop Jackson. Well, I've known Scoop Jackson for many
years.
Nathan: Why is he called "Scoop"? Was he a newspaperman?
Zellerbach: That's a nickname. I forget. It's been in the paper many
times about Henry. The nickname is Scoop. He comes from
Everett, Washington. He was a Congressman up there. He
58
Zellerbach: represented the county that our mill is in, Port Angeles.
I got acquainted with him. We're very friendly. I've
supported him. When he ran for Senator I supported him,
even though I can't vote for him. When I was lobbying for
the National Endowment for the Arts appropriation I had
written Scoop. I got a very nice letter back from him. He
was all for it, and would do everything he could.
I would have seen him in Washington, except he wasn't
there. He was out campaigning already. Of course when Scoop
was first Representative, up in Seattle, he was considered
a red-hot. He was. He's not now. He's now considered much
more conservative. He's able, and he's a good talker, and
he's got a pretty wife, nice children. Anyway, I know him,
so what else? I support him like anybody else.
Nathan: Did you feel during the time he represented the area around
Port Angeles that he was friendly to the lumbering industry?
Zellerbach: Oh yes' He's done some fine work, all the time, on the
problems of the whole paper industry. There's a lot of it
up there. He and Magnus sen, both of them, have done very,
very good work with our problems.
Nathan: What kinds of problems would come to their attention?
Zellerbach: Well, sometimes the labor laws they would want to enact,
sometimes pollution or forestry practices. It could be
anything that affects the total industry.
Nathan: And you thought that he was essentially sympathetic to the
problems of industry?
Zellerbach: Sure, he's sympathetic. After all, you know, you have to be
sympathetic to your constituents. There's a group of them.
There's Mr. Tunney, you see. When he was a member of Congress,
he represented Imperial Valley, so he shied away from the
Farmworkers Union. You never heard of him coming out for Mr.
Chavez. He was way in the background. He had nothing to say
except that once in a while he criticized the way Chavez was
doing, but after all, that's where his support was.
59
YMHA AND THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
(Interview IV, August 27, 1971)
Zellerbach: I was appointed, I did my service on the Art Commission, but
I don't know whether I indicated that my first job in public
service was when I went on the board of the YMHA [Young Men's
Hebrew Association] .
Nathan: Oh, let's talk about that.
Zellerbach: That's the first time I did anything on the outside at all.
Nathan: Who interested you in that activity?
Zellerbach: Let's see--Mr. Kahn, Ira Kahn. That was Sydney Kahn's father.
Mrs. Kahn was a Clayburgh. He was in J. Earth & Co. He
was one of the partners. I knew him. He was on the board,
and he asked me to go on the board. That was when the YMHA
was on Haight Street, in an old house. I was on that board
quite a few years. In fact, I think I told you the first job
I did in raising money was building the present Jewish
Community Center. I was chairman of the finance campaign.
After that, I was the one that--Emma Loewe came later...
I brought her husband, Blumenthal, to San Francisco to run
the place. He was the one that started Camp Tawonga. Then
I think I got off the board. I'd done my stint. In fact,
I served under Jesse Steinhart, who was president for many
years after I first went on. That was my first public service.
Nathan: Did you find that you liked it?
Zellerbach: Well, you know, it was very enjoyable. Like anything else, it
was a challenge. I was president for quite a few years. I
don't know how many.
Nathan: What did the YMHA do?
60
Zellerbach: It did some of what the community center does now, but they
just changed the name. It was like the YMCA. The same kind
of thing: athletics and education and lunches and dances.
Same basically as the present community center. That's when
we changed the name—when they built the new build ing- -from
the YMHA to the Jewish Community Center. The Art Commission
followed later.
I think we dedicated that building out there, the
Community Center, in 1925. I'm not sure. I think I told
you that Archbishop Hanna was there. Mayor Rolph was there.
It was snowing.
Nathan: In San Francisco!
Zellerbach: The first time in my life the snow was on the ground and
stayed there. We laid the cornerstone. That was my first
fund raising, doing public work.
61
THE SAN FRANCISCO ART COMMISSION
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
How would you like to talk now about the San Francisco Art
Commission? How you came to it and what you have been up
to? Let's see, you were first named to the commission in
1948, is that right?
Well, I'd have to go back and check on that, but I think I
was named by Elmer Robinson. I saw him yesterday at lunch.
He was having lunch at the Palace Hotel, with the fire chief
and one of his assistants. You know, he has very bad eyesight,
so he doesn't see you until you get close to him. So I went
over and greeted him, and he introduced me. I turned to the
chief and I said, "You know, this man's responsible for
He appointed me to the Art
Robinson said,
putting me in public service.
Commission, and I've been on it ever since."
"Well, that's the best thing I ever did."
Very nice. Was Elmer Robinson a Democrat?
No' He was a Republican.
How did he name the family Democrat to the Art Commission?
Well, I don't know if I was a Democrat then or not. But
that wouldn't make any difference. The mayor is a non-
partisan office--so, after all, I've served under two
Republicans, and now my second Democrat. They would prefer
a member of their own party, but it's a good thing for mayors
to take a few from the other party. Just like the President
took Mr. John Connolly.
When I was running the Zellerbach Paper Company, the
San Francisco branch, Mr. Herbert Fleishhacker , Sr. and my
father were very close friends. Every time I got into trouble,
62
Zellerbach: wanting to influence an order to come to the Zellerbach
Paper Company, my father would say, "Go up and see your
friend Herbert Fleishhacker , and I'm sure he'll get you
the order." So I became acquainted with Herbert, Sr. , and
we became very good friends. I think he was involved in
a race track, Tanforan Race Track. They use a lot of paper
cups and everything. We weren't getting the business, so
I told him about it, and he said, "Well, I'm sure I can fix
that." And he did.
Every time I asked him, he was always very gracious
about it, and I always got the business. Of course he used
to ask me too. If a friend wanted some business from
Zellerbach's, he'd call me, and I'd say, "You've got it."
You know, the old story, if you ask a favor, you've got to
give one.
Then he was very close to Elmer Robinson. So was my
father, for that matter.
Appointment as President
Zellerbach: One .day while I was talking to Herbert Fleishhacker, he
said to me, "You know, I think it would be very good if you
did some public service. I'm going to talk to Elmer Robinson
about making you the president of the Art Commission." At
that time, Herbert was the president of the park commission.
He was the head of the park, San Francisco Park and Recreation.
He was president of that thing for many years. He spoke to
Elmer, and I got a phone call. I went up to see him. He
said he'd like to appoint me, and I should be the president
of the Art Commission. I said, "That sounds very intriguing,
as long as it wasn't onerous." It was pleasant work.
So the mayor appointed me, and I have been president of
the Art Commission now through Robinson--and then came [George]
Christopher, and then came [Jack] Shelley, for his four years,
and now this is with [Joseph] Alioto. This is the end of his
four years. I think that's the four mayors. Robinson had
eight years, and so did Christopher. Shelley had four. That's
twenty. Alioto has now had three, so I guess I've been with
the commission twenty-three years.
63
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach;
Right .
time?
Now are these appointments for a given period of
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
For four years, and at the pleasure of the mayor.
It seems somehow that this was a very quick rise,
appointed and made president at the same time.'
You were
Well, yes, you know, it was his commission and he could do
as he wanted with it. I guess he felt that I probably could
do a good job for him because anytime I take any kind of a
political appointment I always am very sure that I have the
mayor's or the governor's support.
When I was appointed to the commission, Joseph Dyer was
the executive director. His father used to be one of the
senior executive vice presidents of Southern Pacific Company.
His father was the operating man of the Southern Pacific for
the whole system. A very close friend of Herbert's. Of
course that's where Joe got his job. He was the first secretary
of the Art Commission, when they changed the city charter. I
have the charter here. If you want to know the date, I can
give it to you.
Oh, fine. I have the present provisions, but I don't have
the original.
It was adopted on March 26, 1931, and effective January 8, 1932.
That's the original charter. Joe Dyer was appointed on the
commission at that time.
So Joe Dyer was in right from 1932.
He was the first secretary. So I inherited him. Joe was
very arty. He was a fine character, a fine person. The Dyer
family here was socially prominent too. Joe always knew the
right people, and was well acquainted with the Burlingame
crowd. Joe's forte was music. Anything you suggested to
Joe that was within the category of something new, you may as
well talk to the wall. Joe always had an excuse that We
couldn't do it. So as a consequence, we just went along. I
didn't push Joe too hard, because after all the only way we
could have changed the activities on the commission, would
have been to change the secretary. I wasn't for getting into
64
Zellerbach: that political hassle.
Of course for Mr. [Alfred] Frankenstein [of the Chronicle]
we were his whipping boy. He really was after us for years.
The Municipal Band
Nathan:
What did he want you to do differently?
Zellerbach: Well, for example, there was the Municipal Band. The Municipal
Band was getting $20,000 a year, and it was a pick-up band,
at the call of the mayor. If the mayor didn't use them
enough during the year, two months before the fiscal year was
over, which is June the 30th, why then the boys all had to
toot out the money, so they wouldn't have anything left. They
used to go out and give concerts at the old people's homes,
and the hospitals. They'd create events. They always played
when the fisherman were blessed. The Municipal Band was
always there. There were certain other holidays, when they
always gave a concert. He was always very critical of that.
I don't blame him. I was critical too.
Every time we went up and the mayor wanted to do something
with the budget, I said, "Why don't you lower the budget and
forget the band?" But we never forgot the band, because we
had Pop Kennedy who was the president of the Musicians' Union
and was a member of the Art Commission for many years. The
first time that he was off in all the years that I was on the
commission was when George Christopher became mayor. He and
Pop didn't get along, so when Pop's term expired he wasn't
re-appointed. That caused quite a hassle.
Then when Jack Shelley went back as mayor, then Pop got
back on the board.
Nathan: I see.' [Laughing] When Pop Kennedy was off the board, you
still didn't get rid of the band?
Zellerbach: Oh no.
Some Critics
65
Zellerbach: I just learned to go along. You can always do the things
that you can justify. Of course, this area is where Mr.
Frankenstein used to go after us.
Also when we started these open air art shows, he used
to criticize us unmercifully on the pictures that we bought.
He always was after us. Of course he was after me too,
because he didn't think I did anything.
Nathan: Did you ever get acquainted with him and talk to him?
Zellerbach: Frankenstein? I know him very well. Sure. Any time he
wanted anything he came to me, and I'd help him, but then
he'd still lower the boom. One instance was, he was
publishing a book, in Honolulu. He needed money to get it
finished, so I put up the money to finish it. And of course
he was very nice and appreciative and all that, till the next
time. Then Bingo I
We started to think about concerts, pop concerts. He
used to raise hell with Fiedler and the orchestra. He didn't
take into consideration that we didn't have the whole
symphony.
When the symphony season was over, we used to hire the
San Francisco Symphony, but they were hired as casuals. Now,
we have a contract with the Symphony, and we get the Symphony
orchestra, with all their first chair men. In those days
we didn't get the whole Symphony. We got probably from 60 to
70 percent of the symphony personnel, but we very rarely had
any of the first chair men.
Nathan: They would go off and do something else?
Zellerbach: Yes. They would go off on vacation, or they would have
concerts of their own or something, so the second chair or
the third chair men became the first chair men. Of course
they were trying to operate with 25 percent of the musicians
that were not used to playing with the orchestra. He used
to go after us for that.
66
Zellerbach: So finally the Chronicle changed his job. He's now the
critic of painting and sculpture. Robert Commanday is now
on music. We've had a better break from Commanday.
Nathan: Is he more sympathetic?
Zellerbach: Well, Commanday I think knows more about music than
Frankenstein did.
Nathan: He was an art man, primarily, wasn't he?
Zellerbach: I don't know. He hated everything, you know what I mean?
Nothing could please him, unless you had a Raphael. Anyway
I used to give interviews. He always wanted to have inter
views with me, and then of course he'd pick the things that
he could pick on. Finally one day he called me and wanted
to see me right away. I said, "I'm terribly sorry. If you
want any interviews, you go see Joe Paul, who is the public
relations man. I haven't got time." So I quit giving him
interviews. I wouldn't talk to him. That was one of my
instances.
But Fried was very competent.
Nathan: You think Fried was good?
Zellerbach: Very judicious and very fair. Fried wasn't the kind that tried
to stir up controversy. To my way of thinking, the whole
Chronicle editorial policy is to stir up controversy. In this
area, they did the same. Fried was very nice, always cooperative
in every way. If I gave him a story where he could help us,
he'd write it up. As a consequence, I used to give him exclusives,
Of course that used to get Frankenstein madder than Hell.
Nathan: I can believe it.'
Commission Membership
Nathan: Now as for the members of the Art Commission, do they serve for
a fixed term?
Zellerbach: Four years at the pleasure of the mayor. It's not a fixed
term. From that point of view, the mayor can always dismiss
you. I think it's in the charter some place.
67
Nathan: Perhaps you could explain one thing in the charter provisions
for me. It says that there shall be six ex officio members.
Zellerbach: That's right.
Nathan: This is the list of the ex officio members: the mayor,
chairman of the public library commission, recreation and
parks, city planning, de Young Memorial Museum, and the
California Palace of the Legion of Honor. Now, when the
de Young and the Legion of Honor are put together, then will
another ex officio person be named?
Zellerbach: No. How can there be another one? This is the charter.
The only thing that will happen is that the president of the
combined museums will be the president, and they just won't
bother changing the charter. All it is is they just won't
appoint somebody.
Nathan: Yes, I'm sure you're right, and maybe this isn't important.
But you need sixteen people, and you won't have sixteen.
Zellerbach: You don't need sixteen people. During my term of office, out
of sixteen, it took nine people to get a quorum.
Nathan: I see. Well, in here it says you only need six for a quorum.
Zellerbach: I know, the charter was amended. That's the charter amendment
that I had passed.
Nathan: I wondered about that, because it seemed like an odd number.
Zellerbach: Well, the reason is that, you see there are ten regular members
and six ex officio. And of course the mayor never shows up,
and some of the other presidents don't show up. Some are very
regular and some of them we've never even seen, so as a
consequence many times we couldn't get a quorum. I kept
attendance records and I showed what happened: that we just
couldn't do business with having to get a quorum of nine
every time because that meant some of the ex officio's had
to show up. As a consequence I got it down to where six was
a quorum so we could always do business. In other words, all
we need now is four.
Nathan:
Four to approve?
68
Zellerbach: Yes.
Nathan: The majority of the quorum is what you need?
Zellerbach: Sure. I didn't have any trouble putting that through. All
I had to do is demonstrate that we couldn't get quorums.
If they wanted a viable commission we had to get relief. So
it went right through. The mayor recommended it, and the
board of supervisors passed it, and it went on the ballot,
recommended to pass. No one objected. Who was going to
object?
Nathan: Were there any ex officio members who were interested over
the years?
Zellerbach: Oh yes. Sure. Walter Haas, when he was president of the
park commission, attended practically every meeting. And
Bill Wallace has been very constant. He is the president of
the Legion. Now since the consolidation Ransom Cook is
president. He was my Wells Fargo banker, he used to lend me
money all the time.
Ever since he has been president of the de Young, Ransom
Cook has been more active. But his predecessors never showed
up, or only when I used to call them and say, "I need you,
so please come on down." They would show up only because I
asked them to. After Walter Haas got off, Walter Shorenstein
went on, and he showed up once. After Walter went off, then
Lori Di Grazia was on. He's shown up twice. The president
of the library commission shows up all the time. The planning
commission- -once in a while, if I need the president's vote
I get him over, but he sends Mrs. Porter. She's been on all
the boards. She acts as representative of the planning commission.
She has no vote. She's the liaison. Of course I've been
urging the planning commission to send somebody, because we
do a lot of business between the two commissions.
There is a lot of overlapping. The Art Commission has a
lot of buildings to pass a yes or no on. The same thing with
the planning commission. The planning commission has to work
with us because all structures going on city property have to
be approved by the Art Commission. Anyway that's the way it
works. I've been doing my best over a period of years, and
I've been fairly successful in stopping the mayors from appointing
political hacks. In other words I've tried to upgrade the
quality of the members.
69
Nathan: What are you looking for in the members?
Zellerbach: I'm looking for qualified people. For example, you know the
make-up of the Art Commission. You have it right there.
We have two architects, one landscape architect, a litterateur,
a musician, an artist, sculptor, and three lay members. Before
the mayor appoints them, the commission is supposed to confer
. with the people in this particular field. For example, when
we appoint an architect, we usually get recommendations from
the A. I. A., the local chapter of the A. I. A. The same with
landscape architects. Of course the two architects and the
landscape architects are very important. I've had members on
the commission who were really "commercial" architects. Do
you know what I mean? Anything was all right as far as they
were concerned. They weren't particularly interested in seeing
that the city got quality buildings.
But we have Ernest Born, who I guess is really an
architect's architect. I think he is one of the most knowledge
able of the architects we have, primarily for his education
in the arts, and in architecture. He is really very fine.
We have Alec Yuill -Thornton who is a little more practical
than Ernest. Ernest is an idealist. He has upgraded what's
been going on. Then we have Mr. Mayes, who is a landscape
architect.
Nathan: Oh yes. David Mayes.
Zellerbach: You see, it's sometimes difficult to really get some of the
top flight people, because they have to live in San Francisco.
A lot of top architects don't live in San Francisco. It's
somewhat the same thing with the other members that have to
be qualified. We have Ruth Asawa; she's our sculptress, a
very able sculptress. She's well known. And of course Tony
Sotomayor. He's I guess one of our best-known artists, a
painter. The only trouble with Tony is I can't understand
him. He's lived here practically all his life, but he still
talks with a very Spanish accent. He's a devoted person, and
he does a fine job, and he knows his business.
For litterateur we have the old stevedore-
Nathan: Eric Hoffer?
/
Zellerbach: Eric Hoffer.
70
Nathan: That's an interesting appointment.
Zellerbach: He's all right. He was a little tough at the beginning, but
Eric has proven himself very well. Another architect is
not an architect member, but a public member, Tom Hsieh.
He's Chinese. He's very good. He's a young fellow, very
able. He has a very fine reputation, a good reputation. He
studied under Ernest Born. Ernest Born thinks very highly
of him. Hsieh takes his job very seriously, and considers
it a great honor to be on the commission. That's what we try
to make it.
Nathan: Is there a conflict of interest problem for architects?
Zellerbach: Well, if you're on the commission you don't do any San Francisco
public works.
Nathan: That could be a sacrifice.
Zellerbach: That's right. We've had architects that went off because they
just couldn't afford to stay on. They do a lot of public
work. But anyway, that's the way it is.
Of course there is the episode of Mr. Jeremy Ets-Hokin--.
Nathan: Oh yes, tell me about that.
Zellerbach: It seems that Jerry's father, Louis Ets-Hokin and Jack Shelley
were very close friends. When Jack was a congressman, Louis
used to get a lot of government business. Jack used to be
one of the senior men on the Military Committee, where they
had a lot of business to pass out. They were very, very good
friends, politically primarily. When Jack was running for
office, of course the Ets-Hokins and Jerry, were all behind
him. After Shelley won the election, or even before, Jerry
said, "Well, I'm going to be the next president of the Art
Commission."
I took the position that I served under a mayor and I
was in his camp, or else I didn't serve him. In other words,
he gave me support or else I wasn't interested in the job.
Each mayor that I served under, I always sent in my resignation.
When Elmer got off and Christopher came on I sent in my
resignation; and I did with Jack Shelley and I did the same
with Alioto. I said, "You can be free to do what you want."
Of course I always had a conference. They called me right up ,
to see them and hoped I'd stay. I said, "Oh yes. I'd be very
71
Zellerbach: glad to stay under the condition that I get your support.
After all, I'm working for you now. I'm planning on working
for you, and my job is to do a good job on the commission
and make you look good. That's what the commissions are for,
to be for the public, between the public and the mayor."
Each one of them then re -appointed me. I went up to see
Jack, before he was sworn in, in his office. He was still a
congressman. He came out here and was getting oriented to
the job. I went up to talk to him about the Art Commission,
gave him a list of the members, who they were and how I felt
about them. I had my resignation there for him. He took it
and wrote on it, "Not accepted!" and handed it back.
Nathan: [Laughing] Nice and quick!
Zellerbach: I still have it. So then I talked to him about the appointees;
if he had any changes, naturally he'd do as he pleased, but I
hoped that before he made an appointment he would talk to me.
I felt very strongly that the commission should be a strong
commission. I said, "Jack, I don't want you to appoint a lot
of political hacks. Because if you appoint political hacks,
you may as well disband the commission." So when he appointed
anybody I was always called into consultation. When I was
first up there and spoke to him, I told him, "I understand
that Jerry Ets-Hokin's going to be the next president of the
Art Commission."
He said, "Who told you that one?" I said, "Jerry's got the
story all over town that you're going to accept my resignation,
and that he's going to be the next president." We got into
quite a discussion over Jerry. I said, "Now, Jack, he's one
person that if you appoint—it 's your privilege, but--you're
going to rue the day when you do. He isn't going to do you any
good, and he's going to do you a lot of harm. He has a
brother-in-law (married to his sister), Robert Lauter, a very
fine young fellow. Lives right next to Steve and Merla, on
Presidio Terrace. Anyway, I said, "If you want to do Louis a
favor, you appoint his son-in-law. The son-in-law is a very
able young fellow, and I like him very much. He'll do a good
job. If you appoint Jerry, God help the commission."
We went over all the rest of them, everyone else. He
wanted to put Kennedy back on. I said, "Well, personally I
would prefer that you don't put the president of the union on,
72
Zellerbach: he wears his union hat practically all the time. In other
words, he's there to protect his boys, and inasmuch as the
bulk of our money is spent on music he can't exert judgment
in the public interest. I have nothing against Pop Kennedy,
I like him very much. He's a fine fellow and he's served
under me a long time. But I just want you to know how I
feel about it. I think the commission would be better served
if a good musician, a reputable musician was put on the
commission instead of the president of the union."
He said, "Well, I think you're right. I think you're
right. I'll think about it. I'll think about it." Anyway,
he put Pop back on.
Nathan: Had Shelley enjoyed rather strong union support?
Zellerbach: Well, Shelley's a union man. He was head of one of the unions
here. Certainly. He was union through and through. But you
could always reason with Jack. Jack may not have been one
of the most able guys in the world, but he was a nice guy. I
was very fond of him. So I went off on a cruise, which I
normally do in January and February, go away for a time. On
the way, I received word of Jerry's appointment.
Jack had appointed him. So when I came home I went up
to see him and I said, "Jack how did you happen to appoint
Jerry? You told me that you weren't going to appoint him.
You were going to appoint his brother-in-law."
"Well, Louis and his wife Rosie came to me and they
literally cried: This was Jerry's great ambition to be on
the Art Commission." It was the only favor they wanted.
Would he please do it? He said, "I just couldn't--! just
couldn't say no."
"Well," I said, "you've appointed him. So he's on.
Now you'll see what happens."
Nathan: What did happen?
Zellerbach: What happened, it was unmerciful. The first crack right out
of the box he was very acrimonious at the meetings. He was
very vocal. Anything I said or tried to do, he would insist
I didn't know anything! Every time he got into one of these
things he upset all the rest of the commission. Very few of
them ever voted with him.
73
Proposal for a Music Festival
Nathan: This sounds sort of self-defeating.
Zellerbach: Sure, well that's always the case. Anyway, first Jerry was
going over to Europe. He wanted to stop at the different
cities where they give these performances — festival cities.
He thought he had a good idea to organize a festival for
San Francisco. I didn't know this. He goes to the mayor and
asks the mayor for one of these official letters. The mayor
gave him an official letter that he was a member of the Art
Commission and was over there investigating music, with a
big build-up in the letter. In the meantime Jerry had his
own public relations people. The first thing we see, when
he's leaving, he's standing on the top of the stairs going into
the airplane, with a big coat on, fur-lined with the fur collar
outside and a muffler, ready to go. Jerry's headed for Europe.
Big article. He's going to investigate all the festivals and
bring something good home.
So anyway Jerry went, and soon he was sending home stories ,
which the public relations people had printed, about all the
people he'd met and what he was going to do. When he got home,
at the first commission meeting he said that he had some very
fine ideas, and he thought we ought to organize and have our
own festival, of course in the summer.
In the summer months we have the Ice Follies coming in,
we have the Pops Concerts, we have the Civic Light Opera, and
so everything was pretty well taken up with what was going on.
So anyway, the commission in general was not very much
interested. He waxed forth. He said, "Now, what we have to
do is we have to raise $500,000 to finance this. What I want
is the Art Commission's endorsement."
So of course this is where I came in. I started to
question him. I said, 'Veil, Jerry, this is fine. This is
a very good idea. You're going to need $500,000. Have you
any idea where you're going to get it?" "Oh yes.' I'm going
to get $50,000 from Pan American, $50,000 from TWA, and
$50,000 from United Air Lines. Oh, we'll raise the money.
It'll be very easy."
74
Zellerbach: I said, "Well that's fine. I find it quite difficult
even getting money out of the city for anything we want to
do. But if you can raise the $500,000, I'm sure that the
Art Commission will be glad to endorse it." 'Veil, they
can endorse it now. It's a cinch. I'll raise it. You
don't have to worry."
I said, "Jerry, I don't think you should put the Art
Commission in that position. I think you should at least
do a little preliminary work and see if you can get some
promises for the $500,000."
Nathan: This would have been beyond the normal budget?
Zellerbach: Sure. After all, we were spending pretty close to a $100,000
on concerts, we had $25,000 for the band, we had a chorale-
Nathan: Your budget was already committed?
Zellerbach: Yes. Believe me, everything we received took blood, sweat
and tears to get. He said, "Oh, well I'll get some from the
supervisors, the mayor." I said, "That's fine. You go talk
to the mayor and see what he will do." So anyway we got by
that meeting. Then every meeting for a while he kept bringing
it up and I kept saying, "Well, what commitments have you,
Jerry?" "Well, I'm about to get them. I'm about to get them."
He had all the pieces in the paper, and the critics. He
always had interviews with the critics and brought everybody
in and had his picture taken. I don't know whether I've got
his picture and stuff left or not. Finally it just faded out.
Mayor's Proposal for a Bond Issue
Zellerbach: Then the next incident came with the bond issue for the new
symphony hall and the re-doing of the opera house. The mayor
came out for it. He had a meeting with his art commissioners
and naturally asked them to support it. Naturally, if this
was the policy of the city, we went along, or if we didn't like
it, we should resign. That's what I said to them myself. I
said, "If you can't support the mayor's program, then you
75
Zellerbach: should keep your mouth shut and say nothing. If you don't
then you should resign. Then you're a free lance and you
can say anything you want."
Anyway that was fine. Then they started the publicity.
Louis Lurie came out against it, and then Louis got hold of
Jerry and said, "This was for the rich," you know, and all
that stuff. They put out all that propaganda which was very
telling.
Jerry came out against the mayor and called him all kinds
of names. I called the mayor up and said, "Well, Jack, how
much of this are you going to take before you throw him off
the commission?" 'Veil," he said, "he makes one more statement
and I'm going to throw him off the commission." I said, "My
advice is you'd better do it now."
Jerry waited for another couple of weeks, and then he
took another blast at the mayor. He said that the mayor was
incompetent. When I got hold of the mayor and said, "Well,
what are you going to do?" he said, "I'm going to throw him
off." "FineJ Hurry up and throw him off and get rid of him."
Which he finally did. So of course Jerry was going to bring
a law suit that it was illegal. Anyway, after the mayor
threw him off I said, "Well, Jack, I told you so." "Yes, you
did. I should have taken your advice." I said, "You didn't,
so it serves you right."
So that was Jerry. That was the episode of Jerry. There
was a lot in between, but those were the main incidents. It
put the Art Commission in a terrible light. It really almost
wrecked us. We had to do some re-building.
When other commissioners' terms expired, I suggested to
the mayor that he just forget them. They really tried to
undermine the work of the commission. I used to say, "I may
lose a few battles but I never lose the war." That's been
my reputation. Everybody says that I rule the commission with
an iron hand. I don't say I rule with an iron hand, but I
influence them. If I find I have any commissioner that's
double-crossing the policies of the commission, then that's
when I start after them. I'll say this, with Shelley and
even with Christopher, I always conferred with them before
they appointed anyone. I've even had much better cooperation
with Alioto. He knows the arts better, and understands it.
As a consequence, when I suggest these things—once in a while
76
Zellerbach: we disagree on a name--I never just recommend one, I recommend
two or three. If he has somebody, then he talks to me about
it. As I said before, we have nearly all the elements of
the city represented.
Mrs. Martinez represents the Spanish-speaking people,
and then we have Asawa, who is Japanese, and we have Hsieh,
who is Chinese. We have our litterateur who represents the
stevedores.1
Nathan: Do you have any Black members on the commission?
Zellerbach: No, we haven't a vacancy. There are a couple of Blacks I have
ready. We still have a vacancy on music.
A New Commission Secretary
Zellerbach: Mrs. Agnes Albert was the music member. Alioto appointed her.
She didn't get along with Martin Snipper. She used to tell me,
"You can't work with him. You can't believe him!" All this
kind of stuff. So I once had to tell Agnes, I said, "Now
Agnes, Martin Snipper's been around this commission putting
on the art show for twenty years. He knows the work." (This
was after Joe Dyer died.)
We had quite a to-do on that one, too, getting Martin,
but anyway, I said to her, "As far as Martin's concerned, he
knows the work, he does what he's told. He may not do every
thing that you like, because Martin is not a great administrator.
He has to have somebody with him that can administer. But
Martin has great ideas. He's an artist in his own right, and
he knows music. He does a good job. He's the one that got
the brainstorm on the Neighborhood Arts program. We've done
much better with him with the Pops Concerts. And all the
expansion that we've had since Joe died, it's been Martin's
doing. Now I think the Art Commission is better known, and
has a better reputation." With Joe Dyer--I could never get Joe
Dyer to do anything, so when Joe passed away--
Nathan: That's not a civil service job?
Zellerbach: Oh no. He's appointed by the commission, with the concurrence
of the mayor. You always ask the mayor first, so when Joe
passed away, Jack Shelley was the mayor and I talked to him.
77
Zellerbach: I told Jack, "Jack, I don't know who you've got in mind, but
after all, the best person is Snipper. He's been around for
twenty years, he knows the work, he's an artist. I know him,
and I'm not for breaking in somebody new. I'm too old. I
don't want to take the time and the responsibility."
So we had a difference of opinion on the commission.
The rebels were headed by Sally Hellyer. She just married
a Lilienthal. She was on the commission. Sally was able.
She was always politicking. She was behind the scenes.
Nathan: What was her aim? What was she trying to accomplish?
Zellerbach: Well, she didn't think that we were doing what we should as
a commission. Sally and a couple of the other "artistic"
commissioners wanted a change. They didn't want Snipper.
They felt that we should look around the United States and
get some very fine artist or somebody that would represent
the arts. So I argued with my commissioners and said, "I'm
terribly sorry, but as far as I'm concerned the mayor's
approved, and I've recommended Martin Snipper. He has the
experience, he knows the commission, he knows the people in
City Hall. I'm not going to break in somebody new."
The thing heated up. Finally when it came time to
elect Martin, I was counting my votes. I had to counteract
the artist group, Sally and a couple of the architects--!
think she had about four votes, four or five votes. Not any
more than that. I then got busy and talked to all the other
commissioners, especially some of the ex officio's who were
all very good friends of mine: "I'd appreciate it if you would
come to the meeting, listen to the arguments, whatever you
want, but I'd appreciate it if you would vote for Martin
Snipper for secretary." I explained the reasons, and they
said, "Fine. If you want him, that's fine. We'll be there."
I said, "Now don't fail me.'"
So I had my majority all checked off. I had the votes.
Then of course we had a very private meeting.
Nathan: Because it's a personnel matter?
Zellerbach: If it's a personnel matter you can have a private meeting.
This was a private meeting of just the commission. Sally got
up and made her speech and so did a few others. I told them
78
Zellerbach: my story again, and said, "This is the way I feel." After
all the discussion I said, "Will somebody please move the
appointment of Mr. Snipper?" It was all cut and dried, and
the motion was to appoint Mr. Snipper the executive secretary
of the Art Commission. It got a second. "Was there any
further discussion?" So I said, "All those in favor—call
the roll." They called the roll, and when they called the
roll he was elected.
That's why I said I never go into a meeting unless I
know I've got the votes.
Nathan: How did the others take the result?
Zellerbach: Well, that's all right. The majority voted. It didn't
bother me. If they didn't like it, they could get off.
After that episode, for the confidential record, Sally didn't
know why she wasn't re-appointed. I knew why she wasn't
re-appointed. I just had my say to the mayor. In fact it
was Alioto. I said, "Well, I would prefer that she wasn't
re-appointed. I think we can get somebody else." So then we
got Ruth Asawa. A very fine reputation. Just as good as
Sally's, or better.
Nathan: How do you encourage people who bring in new ideas to the
commission? I gather you do?
Zellerbach: We do. Sure. They can bring in any idea they want. For
example at the last meeting there was a motion passed that
we should ask the board of supervisors for $50,000 to have a
commission by Darius Milhaud to celebrate--is it his 30th
anniversary, or his 65th birthday, or his retirement or some
thing? I forget what it is.
Nathan: I think he's retiring and going back to France.
Zellerbach: Well, anyway, we thought it would be a wonderful thing if the
city would put up $50,000 and have Darius do the work, and
then we'd get the Symphony to perform it. I said, "Well, I
agree, it's a very fine thing." So we passed a resolution.
"Now, who's going to get the money from the supervisors?"
[Laughter] Well, all right. It's all right with me. They
can pass it for $100,000! But I said, "Now this is your
responsibility to get this money from the board. You've
passed the resolution, so you go right ahead. If you get it
you'll have my full support. I'll do anything I can to help
you get the money."
79
"Design" and Location: Senior Citizens' Center
Zellerbach: It's a very good idea. I never object. I'll vote for anything
of that kind. I've no problem on that. But when I find --like
this hassle we had just recently about that Senior Citizens'
place out on 6th Avenue — there was a difference of opinion
on the board, I let them battle it out. It's all right with
me.
Nathan: What is the issue?
Zellerbach: Well, the issue is that the members of the Civic Design
Committee do not want the thing located in the park. And of
course, under the charter, we have the right to say where it
goes. In other words we can approve or disapprove it. Now
there's a schism between Born and Alec Yuill-Thornton. Alec
upholds the Park Commission; they have the right to say. Mr.
Born says that when you have a "design," the design includes
placing, and it includes landscaping, and all the rest of it.
The Art Commission has the authority, under the definition of
design.
Probably before we get through we'll have to have a
judge. We'll have to go to court to get the definition of
"design," to determine whether we have the right. One of the
questions they asked, I discovered in a two-page letter which
Alec Yuill-Thornton sent to the commission, after Born sent
his opinion. If the Park Commission brings this up again,
this will be the question: What is the definition of design?
One of the questions Born asked Yuill-Thornton: "If they have
the right to place the building, and we don't like where the
building is placed — in other words, we think the front should
be this way instead of that way, do we have the right to
change it?" Alec says, "Yes, we have that right, we have the
right to say where the building is to be placed."
Nathan: I see. Do I take it then that the Park and Recreation Commission
does not want the building in Golden Gate Park at all?
Zellerbach: No' No. Park and Rec want it there.
Nathan: But who is opposed to having it there?
Zellerbach: The Civic Design Committee and the Art Commission.
80
Nathan: They think it should not be in the park?
Zellerbach: Not in the park at all.
Nathan: I see. So the ex officio member from the Park Commission is
not involved in the fight?
Zellerbach: Sure. He was there.
Nathan: But he's for putting it in the park.
Zellerbach: He was for it, and there were two other members, Alec Yuill-
Thornton, and then we had one other member—the president of
the Library Commission. There were three of them. They voted
in favor of putting it in the park. All the rest of the
commission voted it down.
Nathan: Do you have any personal view about it?
Zellerbach: Well, I feel that 6th Avenue in the park is not the right
place. The old people themselves were out there saying they
don't want it in the park.
Nathan: They don't want it in the park?
Zellerbach: No. They say they have enough recreation in the park. Right
there they have the museums, they have the aquarium, all that
stuff. They have plenty of seats around there right near the
playground. They don't need that there. They want it someplace
where they can get better use out of it.
Nathan: You would think their view would have some effect.
Zellerbach: Well, the thing was railroaded. I cross-examined the manager,
you know, the director of the Park and Rec. What's his name?
Caverly. I asked Caverly, "Have you had a survey made?
You know, one of these demographic surveys, where all these
people live? Have you had any hearings so they could come
and express themselves?" Of course his answer was, "This is
my business. I've been working with the elderly for twenty
years." I said, "Well, that's fine, but you have everybody
here, and only one of the older persons talked in favor.
Everybody else talked against it. They didn't want it. This
was their own meeting."
81
Zellerbach: He explained how many places he looked. He looked at,
I think, seven locations, places in the park. I said, "Did
you look at any other places?" He said, "Yes, two on the
outside. But the Park Commission ordered me to select a
place in Golden Gate Park." I said, "Then they ordered you
to select a place. Your hands are tied. You can't go outside
the park."
Then of course there were a lot of pros and cons in the
papers. In fact the Examiner was right in there. They had a
couple of editorials. They said the Art Commission shouldn't
use a subterfuge of their power to stop the building from
going in the park, because the charter says we have no right
to locate any of the buildings, but we have the right of
approval. They said, "Notwithstanding that fact, we are also
against the thing going in the park."
Nathan: I see.' Are they really putting it up to the Art Commission
to fight the Recreation people?
Zellerbach: Well, of course everybody put it up, because the senior
citizens came in and said, "This is the only place we've been
able to express our opinion. The Park Commission wouldn't let
us." Toward the end of the meeting, I said, 'Veil, according
to the law, they have the right, but my advice is, you go to
the Park Commission. They are having a meeting." I told them
the date and the time. "Now you go out there to that meeting,
and you put your protest in right out there."
Nathan: I see. You had a delegation of the senior citizens?
Zellerbach: Yes. I told this delegation, "You go out to the Park Commission,
and do your fighting out there." Of course the whole thing
now is up in the air. I don't know what the next step is.
I'm not going to worry about it. My attitude has always been
to support other committees, whenever possible. Ernest Born
called me and wanted me to see a couple of people and talk to
them about the location. He said, "I'd appreciate it if you
would see them."
I said, "Ernest, you know I'd like to do anything for you,
but this I'm not going to do. As far as my supporting the
Civic Design Committee goes, you don't want me to say I don't
agree with the Civic Design Committee. You expect me to
support you, don't you?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Well if I
get into the act, how can I support you?" He said, "I didn't
82
Zellerbach: think of that." I said, "Well, you'd better think. You just
tell them that I'm terribly sorry, but I always--usually--
support the commissioners' recommendations." Once in a while
I have a say, if I don't think they're right.
Nathan: This is the way I understand it. The Civic Design Committee,
and the Art Commission, do not want the building in the park.
Is that right?
Zellerbach: All except one of the members on the Civic Design Committee.
Nathan: How many are there on the Civic Design Committee?
Zellerbach: Let's see: three, four, five, six. Ruth Asawa is on because
we combine the Civic Design Committee with the other artists.
I fought for eleven years to get an ordinance passed to give
us 2 percent of the total building cost of public buildings
for embellishment. So as a consequence, artists have to be
on the Civic Design Committee when they start talking about
the usage of the 2 percent embellishment.
So that was another long, hard struggle.
Nathan: I bet it was. It took eleven years?
Zellerbach: It took eleven years to get it through the board.
Nathan: And is it in force?
Zellerbach: Sure. It's in force. We are getting the 2 percent. I mean,
it's somewhat voluntary, but it's public policy. They don't
have to do it, but they're all doing it.
Nathan: Embellishment would mean paintings, sculpture, fountains--?
Zellerbach: Yes, sculpture outside, fountains, anything like that. Working
with Park and Rec , I've noticed it hasn't been too good ever
since the other fellow retired.
Nathan: The director? Kimball?
Zellerbach: Kimball. Yes. Kimball was very good, but since Kiraball, there
were some nonentities. The man that succeeded Kimball was
retired early. And then, of course, the president of the
commission is very important. Since Walter Haas, they've run
through quite a few.
83
Zellerbach: One of the problems has been that the mayor is giving
it to very active businessmen, and they don't spend the time.
It takes a lot of time and doing.
The Question of Approval and Certification
Zellerbach: You know, there is the question of when we get into doing a
public building. If they have anything pertaining to grass
or trees, then it's turned over to the Park and Rec to
maintain. Of course the Art Commission is in on the original
landscaping design. We approve of it.. We had a big fight over
that once. They said that landscape design was not our
business. Our business was to approve the building, and it
was up to them to approve the landscaping. We won the argument,
and the design includes landscaping. Not only landscaping,
but it includes the plot. It includes the whole.
We had a big argument over Portsmouth Square. They were
going to build an underground garage there, and the Art
Commission said that it had to be approved by us. They brought
their lawyer, and they said, "That's not to be approved by you.
We're just building underground, and the park comes over it."
I said, "You just try to build and see what happens to you.
You see if you can get by—getting your plans through, without
our approval, because you're building on public property. I
don't care if you're just building walls." So then the attorney
cooled off right away, and he said, "Yes, you're right."
Nathan: Did the Art Commission approve that bridge from Portsmouth
Square to the Chinese center?
Zellerbach: Yes, we approved that.
Nathan: Are you happy with it?
Zellerbach: Well, you can't say that we're happy with it. We thought that
it shouldn't go up. It's not our business to say that you
can't put it up. We made them redesign that I don't know how
many times. This we're in charge of, what they put up, and
how it's decorated. But the Planning Commission approves it--
not necessarily the design of the building, but the fact that
they can have it. This is what the Chinese wanted, the ones
that were building it. Now the Chinese wish that they didn't
84
Zellerbach: do it. We told them that before they put it up, because it
takes up a piece of Portsmouth Square, and that's the only
square in Chinatown that they can use. We indicated that to
them. So of course, when they put it up, then we had to
re-landscape Portsmouth Square. They said we had nothing to
do with it. We said, "Well, you go ahead and see if we have
nothing to do with it. We'll never approve the bridge. You
can do what you want. It's part of the design." So, that's
what we do, you see.
Unless we approve it, the comptroller can't certify. If
the comptroller can't certify it, they can't get a contract,
because the comptroller won't pay any money. That's how we
get control of it. That I learned very early in the game,
when I first was on the commission. My predecessor used to
get the designs for public buildings and pass them without
even looking at them. The same with these canopies that come
out over the city streets, these electric things. My good
friend Harry Ross was the comptroller, so he advised me how
we should do it, and he would back us up. He said, "I won't
certify any plans unless they're approved by the Art Commission.
It took some of the other agencies a little while to find out.
Then when they found out that they couldn't just bully us into
doing things, because if we didn't approve it, they took it
to the comptroller, and the comptroller said, "I won't certify
without Art Commission approval." They found out in a hurry.
So those are the kinds of things that creep in.
Nathan: This decision of the comptroller to act--there's no ordinance
that requires it?
Zellerbach: No, no. If the Board of Supervisors passes something, and
there's no money, the comptroller won't certify it, and the
Board of Supervisors has to go and raise the money.
Nathan: But the decision of the comptroller about what he will or
won't certify, that's entirely at his discretion?
Zellerbach: No. His discretion only comes based on what the charter says.
Now, the charter says public buildings must be approved by
the Art Commission. If the Art Commission doesn't approve it,
he can't certify it. It's not discretionary with him.
That would be the same thing with a bond issue. If the
Public Works Department wants to do something, to spend money,
to get a contract, it's got to be certified by the comptroller.
85
Zellerbach: He has the money. When the bills come in, he's got to have
the money there to pay them, so he can't certify anything
unless he knows he has the money. If he hasn't the money,
then they'll have to put an appropriation through the Board
of Supervisors, and if there's enough in taxes, he can pay it
out. If there isn't, too bad. He can't certify, unless he
knows he's got the money.
Nathan: Right, now just thinking again about this Inter-Agency proposal
that's going to go into effect, do you foresee that it will
require extra funding?
Zellerbach: Over a period of time it's bound to require extra funding. The
more activities they get into, the more funding it's going to
require. It's just like anything else. It's Parkinson's Law.
When you start something, it's very hard to stop it. That's
why the mayor's always very loth to add anybody to the payroll
of any of the departments. If they once get them in on civil
service, they can't get rid of them. It's a position, and they
keep filling it whether they need it or they don't need it.
(Interview V, September 17, 1971)
Nathan: We were just talking about Martin Snipper coming in to succeed
Joe Dyer as the executive secretary of the Art Commission. I
was about to ask you how you found Martin Snipper.
Zellerbach: How we found Martin Snipper? I think we were hunting for
somebody to run the open air art show. I don't know how we
got acquainted with Martin. I don't know whether Joe Dyer
found him, or who found him. Martin ought to know. He has
his own history. He always had a desk in the Art Commission,
and kind of worked out of there, even though he was teaching
art at one of the high schools here, and also the senior
citizens' classes that they gave down at the school on Fillmore
Street.
I think I said before, all that Joe was interested in was
music and the arts. As for doing anything beyond that, Joe
always had excuses; he couldn't do it. He didn't have the
time. Joe was a wonderful person. He came from a good family.
He always had a certain mystery about him. I would ask him
for lunch: Oh, he was busy. Then I would go to the table at
86
Zellerbach: Trader Vic's and Joe had his table there every day, a little
single table, and there he'd be, sitting drinking his martini.
He was not what I call a dynamic person. He knew his music
and he knew his art. He had a lot of talent. And he knew
his society people. But that's all he did. I never could
get him to do anything else.
Nathan: Were you thinking of going into the neighborhoods, like the
Neighborhood Art festivals?
Zellerbach: Well no, but we had other areas that we could have gotten into,
especially in the musical areas and the art areas. The only
thing we did outside of Pops Concerts was this open air art
show. Of course he was interested in that. We had a chorus,
and the same thing with the Municipal Band. I tried to get
him to do something with it, to make it more representative.
But Joe said, "Oh, we've been doing this for all these years--
the union, you know. So, let's not disturb it."
Well, I wasn't going to fight with him. He'd been in
the office since the Art Commission started. He was a nice
guy and my wife loved him. I was very fond of Joe too, as a
person. But as a business associate, he was a blank.
When he passed away, Martin was a natural successor,
because he'd been hanging around the office for twenty years,
and he knew everything that was going on.
Neighborhood Arts and the Arts Council
Zellerbach: Martin is the one that started all these new programs. Martin
is very good at that. He had imagination and he knows art
very well. Martin has one weakness: he's not an administrator.
It took me three months to find out what he's spending on the
Neighborhood Arts program. I'd say, "Where's the budget? I
want to see what you are spending." They just spent it, and
then all of a sudden they're running short, and what are they
going to do? Well, I don't run things that way. That's what
got my old friend June Dunn into trouble. I told you about
that, I think. That's in the record too.
Nathan: We hardly went into that.
87
Zellerbach: Didn't we put that in the record about June Dunn?
Nathan: No, we really haven't discussed Neighborhood Arts very much,
and that's very important. I'd like to hear what you have
to say about that. How did that begin?
Zellerbach: It began, I think three or four years ago. It seems that
San Francisco State was giving a course in civics and wanting
their students to have experience in the neighborhoods.
Dr. Arthur Bierman--! don't know whether you know Dr. Bierman--
Nathan: I know of him.
Zellerbach: He was the head of this. He and Martin got together. I
guess the whole idea at that time was the beginning of the
Associated Councils of the Arts, and they were expanding
that all over the country, starting new organizations. At
that time there was a Bay Area Arts Council. It was headed
by a Doctor McKenna out at State. He's the head of dramatics
there. A very nice gentleman. He was very much interested
in this whole area. I was interested in it because we were
trying to organize all the arts around here for this council.
They couldn't get the financing to keep the thing going. I
helped them, the Zellerbach family, the Zellerbach Family Fund
helped them as well. And I got some other contributions to
try to keep them going. If they depend too much on one person,
it's not good.
Nathan: Did your interest in this develop after you were on the
Rockefeller panel? Is that what got you interested?
Zellerbach: This was almost the same time as the Rockefeller panel. I
think it was one of the first around the country. McKenna
saw the value of it, to try to coordinate the arts activities,
especially with the state college interested in this whole
field of developing arts. Bierman and Snipper got together,
and we started the Neighborhood Arts program.
The first basis was to try to organize Neighborhood Arts
Councils in order to get them to support the arts in the
neighborhood. Then we started to send out help from the
students out at the San Francisco State University. They
were supposed to be doing the leg work and developing this
thing.
88
Developing New Support for the Arts
Zellerbach: Then it got moving. There was another fellow in with Biertnan.
He became the manager and the director. In other words, we
tried to get an organization going. We had this idea of
developing arts in the neighborhoods, especially trying to
get the mature people out, to see if we could get them to the
ballet or symphony or things of that kind; to see if we could
stimulate any appreciation, so we could have a more favorable
attitude by the majority of the people in the community for
the arts, vis a vis the view that the arts were only for the
rich.
So we went on this theory that you have to spread your
base, because we could see the troubles that the Symphony and
the Opera and the Ballet were getting into. In the first
place they became expensive, and in the second place, the
average person was afraid to go into the Opera House. They
didn't have the proper clothes.
This was the start of the deterioration, because as the
large donors started to pass away, their children, their
successors, weren't as interested in giving money away, and
of course had less to give away after they paid death taxes.
This has been a constant erosion of large individual donations,
not only to the arts, but also to the UBAC and the Welfare Fund.
They don't receive too many large contributions any more. At
one time, my mother gave the largest individual contribution
to the United Bay Area Crusade. Well, when she passed away,
we were doing our share, but we didn't pick up what she gave.
Until the estate was settled and the Zellerbach Family Fund was
in funds, that was another loss. Mr. Alexander, of Alexander
and Baldwin, was the head of the Community Chest here for years.
He was a very large donor. The Crocker family, the Haas family
were the large individual donors. There were a great many
others. As they passed away, the agencies had to look to
other sources and broaden their base.
These are all the movements of the times. Anyway, this
director lasted about six months; he wasn't so good at
organizing, and getting the thing going in the first place.
89
Focus on Youth
Zellerbach: The first mistake was, we were trying to attract the elders.
Well, the elders couldn't be less interested, but we found
that the children were interested. So we dropped the elders,
and we went to the youth. We figured that we'd better spend
our efforts on the new generation rather than on the old
generation who were too set in their ways to try to change.
You couldn't develop the interest because they didn't have
the background. They didn't have the chance for the education,
musical education or art education. Of course the youth
these days, since we've been going, are much better educated.
There are more of them in college than there were when I was
in the same category.
When we changed our whole basic program to get the youth
of the city interested, we then had to look for another
director. Bierman recommended June Dunn. We went on the
premise that we were not going to patronize any of the neighbor
hoods. In other words, we would stay out unless they could
organize within the neighborhood themselves, and get the
artists or the people who were interested in the arts to
become an indigenous part of the neighborhood. We would help
support them and help the supply situation. If they needed
a projector or a loudspeaker, or some flyers, we'd supply
those. But we didn't say, "We want to send a rock band in;
now you fellows go get the audience for them." We didn't do
any of that. They had to do the work themselves. It has to
come from the people themselves.
June was a good organizer. She knew that group, the
group that we were after. She used to be in union labor
circles, so she knew this whole gang. It took a person that
knew them to get in there. So June organized it.
Last year, I think I told you, we were coming to the end
of the line with June, because she and Snipper couldn't get
along. June became a little Hitleress. It was either her way
or no way. Becky Jenkins got into the act. I don't know if
you know who she is. She substituted for Gloria Unti on our
Arts Resources Board for the study we made. She was one of
the members of the group that the mayor appointed . I think
you've read that, haven't you? Have you read the regional
Arts Resources development report?
90
The Hanks Report and the McFadyen Report
Nathan: Yes. And am I right in thinking that the study was financed
by the Zellerbach Family Fund? And the city has adopted a
number of the recommendations?
Zellerbach: Yes. This was done' for the City of San Francisco, in other
words, for Mayor Shelley. It's called The San Francisco Arts
Resources Committee Report to the Honorable John F. Shelley,
Mayor of San Francisco. It's all done through the city,
although we co-sponsored it.
We have some recommendations here from the resources
committee. Here's the paragraph, "Arts in the Neighborhoods."
That's what we've been doing now. It says, "Neighborhood art
is art generated spontaneously in the community. It includes
all forms of visual performance and represents the most direct
expression of contemporary civilization. It is extremely
important to recognize it as art."
It goes on to tell about it: "Our Rec Commission conducts
commendable arts and crafts programs the year around....
These efforts are worthy of support, but they still fall
short of the goal for art that is generated spontaneously in
the neighborhood. The orientation of art as a recreation is
primarily instruction, the transfer of specific technical
disciplines from teacher to pupil. The orientation of the
artist is characterized by the exchange of ideas.... The
distinction raises a problem because the spontaneous is hard
to define, and tends to elude organized programs. However,
effective neighborhood programs do emerge."
Then it goes on: "Arts Instruction in the Secondary and
Elementary Schools—Arts Resources Authority." What we would
like to have is a Bay Area Arts Resources Authority, which
would include the schools, but the minute you get into that,
you get into all kinds of legislation. You have to have
legislation from the state to include the schools. Then you'd
have to have charter amendments, and then you'd have to have
a lot of these independent areas like Park and Rec and the
schools give up their authority over spending money. Well,
the minute you do that, you're in trouble.
91
Zellerbach: So we avoided that, and we're going for voluntary
cooperation among agencies.
Anyway, this report is the basis upon which the Art
Commission is operating. There are a lot of things in there
on further recommendations which we haven't been able to
implement. We can't move as fast as we'd like to on these
recommendations. We have to get the people ready for it.
This is like ecology, you know. It was years and years before
all of a sudden everybody thought they were going to die the
next day from the fumes of the automobiles, and that had to
be cured tomorrow. Well, it's the same thing with this Arts
Resources idea.
You see, this follows the Rockefeller report. That's
how I met John McFadyen. This report is the result of Nancy
Hanks' report to the mayor.
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nancy Hanks did a separate report earlier, for the mayor?
How did you get that going?
After the bond issue was snowed under in 1965, I thought we
ought to have somebody come out here with knowledge of the
arts to tell us what happened. You know, we were licked, but
good. I'd really like to find the basic reasons, although
I think most of us knew them. We felt we should have some
expert advice. So knowing Nancy as well as I did, I asked
her if she would take on the assignment. She said she didn't
know whether her bosses would let her.
Her bosses are the Rockefeller family?
The Rockefeller brothers are her bosses. The Rockefeller
Brothers' Fund. Not the Rockefeller Foundation. The
Rockefeller Brothers' Fund. She was working under Laurance,
So I wrote Laurance a letter, and said it would be a great
service to the San Francisco community if he would permit her
to come here and make this study for us, tell us how we could
do it.
Laurance is the one that is always interested in parks
and ecology; Rockefeller Grove was all done through Laurance,
John D. Ill, who headed this committee on the arts, gets into
the music and the paintings and the performing arts. That's
his domain. They were very gracious, and permitted Nancy to
come out .
92
Nathan:
Who paid for her to come out?
Zellerbach: We paid all her expenses,
Nathan: When you say "we" is that the Art Commission?
Zellerbach: No. The Zellerbach Family Fund put up the money. We paid
all the expenses and we wanted to pay her for her time.
She wouldn't take any money for her own services, but we
did pay all her expenses. After all, you couldn't ask them
to do it.
Nathan: No. It was quite a compliment to you that she wanted to
come.
Zellerbach: That's right. She went around and talked to all the important
people, including Lurie. Nancy was the one that recommended
we go into fine arts a little more deeply. As a result of
her report, we decided to go ahead with it, to go into it
more deeply, as you will find in that McFadyen report. Neighbor
hood Arts is one of the things that they highly recommended,
and especially with what happened to the bond issue, one that
was needed. If you wanted people to put up money and vote for
bond issues and things of that kind, they'd have to be part of
the action.
It was the same thing when we started to try to get any
money out of the board of supervisors; art was the last item
that was down at the bottom of the totem pole. If you know
politics, you know that unless there is a demand, they couldn't
care less. If there's anything to be cut out of the budget,
they'll cut the stuff that people don't care about. This
has all had its effect on the board of supervisors and the
mayors and everybody in public office. They go out in the
neighborhoods to win votes, and they find out what's happening
here and the demand for this, and what it's been doing. With
the arts in the neighborhoods moving very rapidly the fact is
that we've had a couple of people out here from the National
Endowment, and one from the General Services Administration
from Washington. They spent three days here. First, they
were only going to spend one day and they were so fascinated
and so involved that they stayed three days and when they left
they said, "This is the greatest thing that's going on in the
United States. There's nothing like it." A lot of people have
tried it.
93
Zellerbach: We've had people up from Los Angeles. They want to do
the same thing, but they don't know how to organize it. And
so as a consequence none of them have been successful. We're
the model for the whole country. And of course, that pleases
everybody. This Neighborhood Arts Program is now known.
There's no secret about it in the city. Everybody knows
about it and we're receiving, as I said, more demands all the
time.
Nathan: You educate a lot of people as you go along.
Zellerbach: I hope to be around a little while longer, but this thing
must go on. Somebody, especially representing the family,
has to get hold of it. Up to now, any time they land in any
kind of trouble I'm the guy that has to personally handle it.
Ruth Asawa and Art in the Schools
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
How does the rest of the Art Commission regard the Neighborhood
Arts Program?
They're all for it. Ruth Asawa, a member of the commission,
the sculptress member--she 's done a terrific piece of work
out in the schools herself. I don't know if you've heard of
it or not. I'll give you an example of it. Here's a couple
of postcards you can use to write your friends.
OhJ Isn't that charming,
at Alvarado School.
This is a mosaic playground mural
That was done as a result of an award to Ruth Asawa.
Ruth Asawa worked with the students, parents and teachers on it?
She worked with the parents of the kids, and with the people
who were in the area there. She knew the ones who were
interested in art and she knew the ones who knew art. She
got the principal of the school interested and the teachers.
She had to have their cooperation. It was all done by the kids.
Go out there and take a look at this. This is fantastic. I
was out there when it was dedicated. They had the pieces of
the mosaic here. They had to chip them into the sizes and
fit them in, draw the designs first. This is the result.
94
Nathan: You know, it's the most colorful, lively piece of art, and I
see all the people here--
Zellerbach: This is done by children from about seven years up to ten.
I gave Ruthie her first money. You know me, a soft touch.
I gave her her first money to buy supplies and things. Nothing
for a salary or anything. She didn't have any money to buy
supplies for the kids to work with.
Nathan: The school district didn't provide it?
Zellerbach: The school district? No. They found a room for her to work
in. That's what they did. They cooperated with her, the
teachers, and others. They permitted the children to take
the time out of their classes to go into this. But she had
no money for supplies or anything like that, so we've been
still helping to finance this. Now she's been getting, I
think, some school money and some other outside financing.
She's doing such a hell of a job. Whenever she runs short,
we make it up for her.
Nathan: She's going to do something like this in another school, now?
Zellerbach: She started there, now she's trying to move into the high
schools.
Nathan: Right. Now, this is Alvarado Elementary School?
Zellerbach: Yes. That's up on Castro Hill. It's primarily a white school.
Very nice, nice principal.
Nathan: And now she's going to try the high schools?
Zellerbach: Well, she's now expanding it. Eventually the school department's
going to have to take over. This is what she's after. What
the school department has to do, is overlook the fact that
these artists that do the teaching are not Ph.D.'s or haven't
gone through college. They're going to have to make exceptions,
otherwise this thing would fold right away. It would be the
same if we had to hire civil servants on our Neighborhood Arts
Program. Take examinations, then you'd take them from the top
of the roll, then you could kiss the whole program goodbye.
They just don't have those kinds of qualified people.
Nathan:
You're really going after the artists?
95
Zellerbach: This is what they're developing. They're trying to develop
in the youth an understanding of what art means. A lot of
these kids have latent talents. This is bringing them out,
and they all love to do it. They're very proud of what
they've done.
You can see now in just the last three years what's
happening in arts all over the country. The [National]
Endowment [for the Arts] this year has received $30 million.
Last year they had $15 million. The Congress has been handing
out money only for the last four years. Up to that time they
couldn't have cared less. When the appropriation came through
this time, the House of Representatives voted 400 to 5 in
favor. So that gives you some idea of all the work that the
Associated Council of the Arts has done in organizing these
state councils, putting the pressure on their own officials.
Associated Council of the Arts, and State Councils
Nathan: Now, you've been involved in this Associated Council of the
Arts?
Zellerbach: Right from the beginning.
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
How did you get started with the Associated Council?
that after or during the Rockefeller study?
Was
It was after the Rockefeller Brothers' report came out. I
was a pretty close friend of Nancy's, and we got to talking
about it. When she was out here working for us, I said to
her, "Nancy, what are you going to do with this Rockefeller
Brothers' report? Are you going to send it out and put it in
the libraries and let it stagnate? After all the money that
Mr. Rockefeller has put into this thing, you ought to do
something to implement it."
The Arts Councils of America had started down in North
Carolina, I think. I said to her, "What you have to do is
develop this thing as a kind of an 'industry association.'
Like the paper merchants, the steel institute. It has to be
organized along the same lines. There's the Mama and the Papa
sitting at the head, and then spread the gospel around."
96
Zellerbach: After three years, from a start of three state councils,
now they have state councils in every state of the union, and
all of the commonwealths. That's why you have a vote of
400 to 5, because these people in the state arts councils
are seeing what's doing. That was part of this whole program.
Then you saw where they organized the pressure group. I think
the group is called Partnership for the Arts.
Nathan: I had a copy of that paper. It's called "Write to Your
Congressman." I think Phil Boone sent it out.
Zellerbach: Yes. Phil Boone is the head of that out here. Anyway, that
was all the symphonies and the operas and the museums and
everybody. This is the only way you can get things done.
Any time you want to get public funds, always remember a
politician answers to where he gets his votes. If he thinks
he has a program that the public wants, he'll rush to it.
I've seen it here in the ecology movement. Everybody's
in the act. Half of them don't know what they're doing. It's
the same thing you saw in the paper—they said, "Get rid of
all phosphates." So now they come back and they say, 'Veil,
phosphates are much better than some other things—you can't
get rid of them until you find something better." What they
have now is worse than the phosphates.
You see, this is jumping to conclusions without knowledge.
This is what's going to do more harm than good. That's one
of the problems with the Sierra Club today, too. I was just
reading their bulletin about their program. Now they're going
to petition the National Park Service to have the Hetch Hetchy
Dam torn down and turn back the Hetch Hetchy Valley to the
public, and let San Francisco get their water supply someplace
else. Well, [laughing] when they start to talk about things
like that, they commence to be out of their minds I They don't
know that the Hetch Hetchy and all this complex up there is
supplying water for practically the whole Bay Area. If they
think that they're going to tear this down and just say, "Let
them get their water from someplace else--." You know, it's
very easy to say, but to have it done--. This is like tearing
down the Embarcadero Freeway. That Embarcadero Freeway will
be there for years after all the people that are complaining
are dead and buried. This is what they call public pressure.
97
Zellerbach: I don't say that everything that the Sierra Club does
is wrong. Their trouble is, like all these institutes of
that type, they only can see one point of view. Nothing
else counts.
After all, there are always two sides to a story and
the best thing to do is listen. This is what happens when
you want to get anything done as far as the government is
concerned. If you can produce the votes, pressure groups,
they'll listen. That's why business is always the whipping
boy, because they don't control the votes that the unions do.
They figure all the union votes are voting one way. Well,
of course they aren't, but the threat is there from the
union leaders. They say, "We're coming out after you." Like
the president of—what 's the old boy's name in Washington,
head of the AF of L? Meany. Meany comes out and says, "We're
going to fight you. We're not going to obey the freeze," and
all that kind of stuff.
Of course business is supporting it, because they feel
it's-
Nathan: Supporting Nixon and his policy?
Zellerbach: Yes. Sure. Because they think what he did was long overdue.
For that matter the unions agreed. A poll was taken right
after that of union members, of those who were in favor and
those who were against it. Eighty-five percent were in favor
of it.
It's like Mrs. Feinstein who is going to run for mayor.
She gets a poll of 600 people, a cross-section of 600 people.
She's only behind the mayor by ten percent. By the time
election time comes, she'll be behind him a lot more than
that, if I'm not mistaken.
When people get into politics, they become victims. I
guess you'd call them the victims of their own importance.
Politics is like a fever. You like to hear yourself talk,
and you want to be in public places. Feinstein and Dobbs and
Newhall have as much chance of becoming the mayor of San
Francisco as—I'd almost lay you ten to one they won't. How
can they start six weeks before the election?
Nathan: How long do you have to start, before an election, if you want
to win?
98
Zellerbach: Well, if you want to do something, sometimes you have to
start eighteen months ahead of time. Nixon was electioneering
for four years before he became President. What did John
Tunney do? He was around for over a year, getting himself
acquainted .
Anyway, this is off the subject.
Nathan: Perhaps, but this is certainly speaking to the point of "What
constitutes political power?" You're saying that the same
problems apply in the field of support for the arts?
Zellerbach: That's what I'm saying. You see, this is the same thing with
myself. I go up before the finance committee of the board of
supervisors, which I have to, to get our budget through.
Nathan: That's for the Art Commission?
Zellerbach: Yes. I am listened to, because when it comes to election time
they want my endorsement, they want my money, and they need my
help. So, the old saying is, if you give a favor, you have
to expect to give one yourself. You expect to pay it back.
Neighborhood Developments and the Black Writers Workshop
Nathan: One thing I did want to ask you. Did the origin of the Neighbor
hood Arts Program have to do with the need to broaden the base
for public support for the more formal art happenings, the
Symphony and Opera, and Ballet?
Zellerbach: Oh, not exclusively. No, because in the future arts are going
to be performed more in the neighborhoods than they are in the
central areas. The central area will be the apex, like the
Opera and the Symphony. If you want to have a city noted for
its art, you have to have a drawing card, you have to have an
apex. People who will fill theaters out in the Hunters Point
neighborhood might never go to the theaters out in the Sunset
district. It becomes more localized.
By the same token, the Black Writers Workshop group produced
a play, and it was very successful.
99
Nathan: Were they associated with the Black Light Explosion Company?
Zellerbach: Yes. And they were invited back East to put on a show at
the Lincoln Center.
Nathan: Isn't that exciting.1
Zellerbach: We (the Zellerbach Family Fund) helped finance the trip.
This group was developed through the efforts of the Neighborhood
Arts Program. They're invited back East to produce their show,
and now from there on, they can go up. They then too, can
broaden their base, and they can take their show anywhere.
When it becomes a city-wide thing, or a country-wide thing,
then it can go anyplace. But it first has to be popular in
its own area.
The Apex and the Base
Zellerbach: But in the meantime, they have to have something as the apex,
like the Opera and the Symphony and the Ballet, the museums,
the library. You have to have all these things. These are
the bulwark.
For example, if you can develop a very good musician in
one of the neighborhoods, or a singer, then they can go to the
Merola Auditions. The same thing with the orchestra. The
same thing with the ballet. We don't care where they took
ballet, they can audition any time. This is what you have to
have. If you don't have that, you have nothing for them to
look forward to.
Nathan: So you see a number of levels operating at the same time.
Zellerbach: That's right. But the basis has to be in the neighborhoods.
That's where you have to find your talent and develop it.
Then after you do that, the more you develop it and the more
they see it growing, the more they see the success of their
own people, the more they feel the Opera's good. All you have
to do is go out and go to the Opera, and go to the Symphony
and see the kind of an audience you're getting now. You should
see some of the dresses, some of the costumes that came into
the opening night.
100
Nathan: You feel that you are now seeing a different mix than you
used to see?
Zellerbach: Certainly we are. You can tell the Establishment from the
others. If you want to see a different mix, come out on
Wednesday night, students' night at the Symphony. But this
is the basic concept. This is why this whole thing is
succeeding the way it it.
Nathan: Well, this is really quite a new thing, this whole intensive
neighborhood development.
Zellerbach: Yes, and it's growing like Topsy. Just the other day, as I
mentioned, they had a group of people come up from Los Angeles
to look over the Neighborhood Arts Program, because they made
an application to the Endowment (National Endowment for the
Arts) for help for their neighborhood programs down there.
Mr. Whitfield, who is head of that section of the Endowment,
said, "I won't consider any grant to you, because you have no
organization. You've got nothing to show. If you want to
get ready to apply for a grant, you'd better go up to San
Francisco, because that's the finest neighborhood arts program
there is in the United States."
Nathan: That 's exciting! You should be very proud.
Zellerbach: I am. After all, when you start something, and you see it
develop, and grow, and be successful, that's what you're
interested in. Then after it's all done and going, then it's
time to turn it over to somebody else to run.
Nathan: That's really something, to originate it and get it launched.
Zellerbach: Sure it is. As long as you see that you're not throwing your
money away, that it's a needed thing. Whenever I appear before
the finance committee [of the board of supervisors] , and they
say, "Well, look at all the demands we have on welfare and
everything else," I say, "I know. That's fine. But there are
a lot of people that aren't on welfare. That goes back to the
saying that you can't live on bread alone. You have to have
something for the mind. You have to educate the mind and bring
them up to where they go off of welfare." So then they look
at me and don't give me any argument.
101
The City Budget Process
Nathan: Now, to refresh my memory on this—when the Art Commission
determines the budget it's going to need, what is the
process? Do you go to the Chief Administrative Officer next?
Zellerbach: Oh, no. Every department in the city government puts in
their budget for the next fiscal year, which starts July 1.
It goes in about six months ahead. We put our budget in for
what we think we should get, and then we start doing the
compromising. We say, "What's the minimum?" This is where
I have to do my work. This last year we put in a request for
$265,000, and we finally got $50,000. The fifty we got out
of the city was $15,000 more than we got the year before. We
did the same thing with the Chief Administrative Officer. He
gave us $35,000 last year. Now this year he gave us $50,000.
Nathan: Now, is the $50,000 that the Chief Administrative Officer
gave you the same that the supervisors give you?
Zellerbach: Well, it's city money; two parcels of fifty each.
Nathan: I see. So, you have to go through both.
Zellerbach: Yes. The board of supervisors has to approve the recommendations
of the Chief Administrative Officer as to what he gives the
money to. I have to have the members of the board of supervisors
indicate that if he grants the money, they will approve it.
This is my challenge.
Nathan: Right. Now, how many votes do you have to have on the board
to get the budget approved?
Zellerbach: Never worry about the board if you get through the finance
committee.
Nathan: Ah. And how big is the finance committee?
Zellerbach: They have three, so all I need is two votes.
Nathan: And who's on the finance committee?
Zellerbach: They are Terry Franjois, Mendelsohn and Dorothy Von Beroldingen,
who's the chairman.
102
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Right. So out of those three you need two.
I need two. And I never go into the meeting, unless I have
the two promised.
[Laughing] I seel So you always have two votes.
I work on the third one, but as long as I know I've got two
sure votes, I don't worry. I've got enough members of the
board of supervisors that are for this program, so the minute
that the finance committee approves the budget, sends it in
to the board of supervisors, it's all right. I don't think
it's been changed in years. The minute they start to change
one item, that opens a whole Pandora's box. So as a consequence,
it goes through without any question. If there's any question
on anything in the budget, it's got to be done at the finance
committee level.
You take it as your responsibility to get that budget through
the finance committee?
That's right. That's my job.
I see. Now you got $50,000, is that right?
Yes, $15,000 more than last year. I always get a lecture
from Dorothy. She always opens the meeting and says, "Unless
it's something extraordinary, don't expect anything. We have
to keep the tax rate down." She goes through a long harangue,
which I've heard now for years. Every time, there's always
something. So after she gets through making her speech, I
usually get on first. The Art Commission then is called in.
I always bring a group there.
Are these staff people who come with you?
Staff, and friends, and anybody. I pack the audience. I don't
go in without support. We're all there. The Blacks, the
Chinese, the whole kit and kaboodle, they're all back there.
You've got to make a show. The press is there.
Naturally no one knows that I have two votes, so I go
through the performance.
Nathan:
Do you read a statement?
103
Zellerbach: No, no. I don't need a statement. I go with the budget, you
see. We have a budget. "Will you put in $265,000? I want
a minimum budget. We have to have a basis. The city must
support it. We won't get any outside support for this without
the city sponsoring it. It belongs to the city. It's a city
activity, and they should take the full responsibility."
"Knowing how tight things are," I've heard this speech
many times. I can recite it by rote. Then they all laugh,
and I go on and I say, "Now, we've got so many demands and
are being pushed so hard, because of a success, we've just
got to have more money. Last year, the Zellerbach Family
Fund came to your rescue, but we aren't going to come to your
full rescue this year. Our contribution this year is going
to be $30,000 instead of $60,000, and you're going to make up
the difference; so I expect $15,000 out of you, and I expect
to get $15,000 out of the CAO, providing you tell him that
you approve it."
Nathan: I see. Now, does the CAO have separate funds?
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. This is the hotel tax.
Nathan: Oh, of course.
Zellerbach: So then I go through my harangue and they all say, "It's
wonderful. It's great." They start to sell themselves.
Knowing that lots of times there's a slip between the cup and
the lip, they never tell you that they approve it.
Nathan: They don't take a vote right there?
Zellerbach: They take a vote, but then they say, "It means we will
consider it." I learned my lesson over the years. Now I
say, "I have to know that when you go into committee, that
you will support this, because I have to let my people know
whether they're going to eat after July 1st or not. I'd
rather give them enough notice, either way. So, if you don't
tell me you'll support it, I'm going to give notice and I'm
going to close the thing." Then I poll them. I say, "How
about you?" He says, "Yes." "How about you?" He says, "Yes."
And then of course von Beroldingen says, "Yes."
Nathan :
She does?
104
Zellerbach: Oh yes. Sure. The other two I know. Then I go away and I
don't worry, because when they tell me they're going to do it,
if they don't do it, then believe me, I'm back after them.
Nathan: Right. Now, let me go back a minute again to the amount. I
just heard you say $50,000 and I thought you started with
something like $265,000.
Zellerbach: Yes, we asked for that. When they come out with a total
request for all departments, we've got $265,000 in there. So
when it comes back to what they gave us, they gave us $50,000.
Nathan: And then they look as though they have pared it down?
Zellerbach: You've always got to give them--
Nathan: [Laughing] I see! I thought I had lost $200,000 in there
somewhere I
Zellerbach: No. No. I knew we were going to receive $30,000 from the
Zellerbach Family Fund. I felt quite confident we'd at least
get $20,000 out of the Endowment. I asked for fifty and got
thirty.
Nathan: You got thirty from the Endowment?
Zellerbach: And I got thirty from the San Francisco Foundation. They had
given us a grant the year before, but due to the June Dunn
episode, they didn't know whether we were reliable. So after
we brought our new management in and things were moving, I
went to Mr. White, through his assistant. I had them up to a
meeting with all the new staff. He was out with Martin and
he went out with Eric Reuther to see what was going on. He
became very enthusiastic, and he got us $30,000 from the San
Francisco Foundation.
Nathan: The foundations are really putting up quite a large share,
aren't they?
Zellerbach: Well, between the Zellerbach and the San Francisco, we're
putting up $60,000. The Endowment is putting up thirty, so
that's $90,000. The city puts up a hundred, so that's $190,000.
Nathan :
The city puts up a hundred?
105
Zellerbach: Between the two, the CAO and the Board of Supervisors. So
we have $190,000. We did get an extra ten from the city
for summer work. Now I'm going out there for some other
money from some other funds.
Nathan: Now, this summer work that you spoke of, what was this?
Zellerbach: The $10,000 was an extra grant that the city obtained from
the federal government, for summer activities. So they gave
us the ten to use for summer activities, which we spent.
Nathan: This is not Endowment for the Arts?
Zellerbach: No. This was another grant from the city. They had this to
dispose of and they gave it to us instead of the Park Department.
Nathan: [Laughing] I see. Now, let's see, the chairman of the Park
Commission is an ex officio member of the Art Commission?
Zellerbach: He may have known about it, but this one other person had the
say about it.
Nathan: You knew the person I
Zellerbach: I knew him very well. He knows us and he wanted to be helpful,
so he gave us the money. He said, "You can do more good with
it than the park." I said, "I know damn well we can." Because
basically what we're doing should be part of the Park and
Recreation Department. If Park and Rec could take the staff
and do it, this would really be where it belongs.
Nathan: Oh, you mean Neighborhood Arts Program?
Zellerbach: Yes, it's recreation. We're doing it, because we're the Art
Commission and we say it's ours. I wouldn't turn it over to
them because they haven't the capacity to handle it. So we'll
probably keep it for a few years. Maybe always, I don't know.
Nathan: Just see how it develops from there.
Zellerbach: I'll give you five more minutes, and then I've got to meet the
supervisor for lunch.*
*The following portion of the city budget discussion was
inserted here from the interview of March 1973.
106
Nathan: Now you're working on the supervisors one by one. Is this
how it goes?
Zellerbach: I work one by one. I don't want two of them at a time. One
by one and then we can talk.
Nathan: Is this the Performing Arts Center that you're discussing?
Zellerbach: Well, I'm talking about it, but the main thing is the Art
Commission budget. I have to get that fixed.
Nathan: So, you're not talking only to the budget committee members,
but to the whole board of supervisors, one by one?
Zellerbach: Oh, yes. First I get to the mayor. Then I get to all the
members of the budget committee, if I can. Then, after the
budget committee members, I go for the rest of them. Because
that informs them and when it comes up before them there is
never any question. I always figure that you give them the
information, they know how the budget is made, and what we're
doing. We keep them fully informed all the way; we send them
all kinds of stuff. Yesterday I was up with John Molinari.
So, we went over the budget. It didn't take long to go over
the budget because I'm only asking for $46,000 more from the
city. That's very little for me to ask. [Laughter]
Nathan: Why are you so modest in your request?
Zellerbach: Because I've got them up to where I want them. I just want
now to get the Neighborhood Arts Program in a position so
that we're getting a minimum of $200,000 a year out of the
city. And with this new budget this would bring it up to
$200,000, so I don't have to depend on outside foundation
money .
It gives us more money than I get from the foundation-
it gives us money to do some of the things that I wanted to
do. This is the basic budget. Of course, next year I'll be
back for 5 percent or so because of escalation. I didn't have
any problem with Molinari. He said, "I'll buy this right away.
I don't want you to raise your sights on me."
Nathan: I see. [Laughs] Well, that's only fair.
107
Zellerbach: Yes. So I said, "Don't worry." Then, of course, we got
into a discussion on the Performing Arts Center. He says
that the mayor is railroading it, but he wants to be
satisfied himself. He's not taking the mayor's word. See,
John is a good Republican.
Nathan: Well, you know how to get along with them.
Zellerbach: I get along with all of them. They don't bother me. I'm in
a position where I don't want anything. We've given a lot
more. After all, we've been damned good, and they all know
it. So, I have no qualms.
Nathan: When you have these little individual meetings, do you take
them to lunch?
Zellerbach: I take them to lunch if they're available. But I have to
talk to them before the budget gets over to them. I don't
want to wait until after the committee is starting to meet.
I don't take any chances. I want to know that I have the
votes. I count my votes, and then I'm all right. Then, they
call me to appear, and I appear and give them the story at
the meeting room with our people and make a show. That's what
they like. You know my philosophy; I never go into a meeting
where I want something unless I have the votes in the pocket
and it's my pocket. If I don't have the votes in my pocket
then I don't bring it up.
Nathan: I see. [Laughs] This is very fine. The five minutes are up.
I could listen to you all day, but I know you have places to
go.
Some Speculations on the Future
Zellerbach: Have you all the Art Commission stuff you want now?
Nathan: I do want to ask you about what you see as the future direction
of the Art Commission activities. Do you think they will
continue to emphasize the Neighborhood Arts Program? Or is
there something cooking that you see as a new development?
108
Zellerbach: This Neighborhood Arts Program can spread in all directions,
like in the schools. There's no limit to where it can spread.
The Art Commission, of course, supports music and things of
that kind; we're cooperating with the Symphony and cooperating
with the museums, cooperating with the Park Commission. This
is one of the things we try to do, to organize a joint
committee. We had an ordinance ready, trying to get it through
the board of supervisors, but we were advised by the powers
that be that it was the wrong time.
Nathan: What did the ordinance provide?
Zellerbach: One of the things was that the heads of all the departments
spending money on the arts would work as a committee- -a city
committee, recognized by ordinance, and appointed by the
mayor — to cooperate on all arts programs so that we could get
rid of a lot of overlaps. We could coordinate programs so
that everybody wasn't trying to do the same thing. We would
try to recommend where money should go; not to control it, but
coordinate through some sort of Inter-Agency Council. After
what happened on this Crime Commission, they were afraid of
what would happen if they tried to put this through the
board of supervisors. We'd have people asking, "Why isn't the
public represented? Why isn't this done? Why isn't that
done?" So they advised that we'd better wait a while. When
we get the election over, we may take another shot at it.
We had everybody's approval, all the commissions' approval.
Everything was set, with the ordinance all written and all
approved. So we had to write letters and tell them that we
had to postpone it temporarily. This is what you've got to
do.
That would go further towards the control of the development
of the arts in the neighborhoods in every department that would
have an interest. This includes the schools.
It took us three years to get this to where everybody agreed
it was a good thing.
Nathan: That was quite an accomplishment.
Zellerbach: You're telling me' I really had to twist some arms.
Nathan: I'll bet you didj Well, you manage to get your way in the
long run usually.
109
I was ready,
Zellerbach: If I know I'm right, I'm going to fight for it.
willing and able to fight for it, which I did.
Nathan: Probably it will happen eventually.
Now, I might ask you to think back to your participation
on the Rockefeller panel, when you went back east to take
part in the Rockefeller panel on the Performing Arts. Were
you invited to take part in that because of your interest in
the Art Commission?
Zellerbach: I imagine because of my reputation out here in San Francisco
as being the most knowledgeable in the field of the arts.
I've been through all of it, from the top to the bottom, and
being president of the San Francisco Art Commission gives you
stature.
Nathan: Right. I have a note that last year the National Businessmen's
Committee for the Arts rated San Francisco as the weakest in
businessmen's leadership in the arts.
Zellerbach: That's true.
Nathan: How do you account for this?
Zellerbach: When they say we're the weakest, that can't be very much
weaker than any other place, because there are damned few
doing anything. We get very little money out of business.
This is why this panel was organized by David Rockefeller.
He was trying to get business to be conscious that they
must support art. San Francisco business does support the
arts. They support the Symphony and they support the Opera.
Now they have to spread a little bit, you see.
San Francisco Art Festival
Nathan: Does the Art Institute, have a direct relationship with the
San Francisco Art Festival?
Zellerbach: No. They sometimes participate; some of their artists show
their work, but that festival is all the Art Commission's.
110
Nathan: What is the Institute's main aim? Is it to train artists?
Zellerbach: It's a school for training artists. They've developed some
of the finest artists in the country today, like Siegrist.
They've got a long list of artists they've trained. In fact,
most of the artists have come up through there and have
exhibited over at the art festivals. Some of them haven't,
but a great many of the local artists that have made good
originally exhibited at the San Francisco Festival, the open
air festival. That's why I get annoyed at Frankenstein,
because he thinks it should be professional.
I don't know why a fellow that makes good, and has his
own agent here, and exhibits at any one of the galleries
needs the festival. If he has a work that's worth $500, or
$1000, $2000, $3000, there's no purpose in his hanging it
out there.
The purpose of the open air festival is to provide a
place for the amateur, who has no other place to show his
work. Give him an opportunity for the public to see it. These
art critics criticize the festival because we have few
professionals showing works.
Of course the whole thing is screened before the show is
hung. Otherwise we wouldn't have room to put up all the
paintings that are offered and the other things. That's the
only connection we would have with the Institute. Some of
the students show their works out there.
Nathan: Your thought then is that the Art Festival helps people who
really haven't gotten launched yet?
Zellerbach: That's right. Sure.
Nathan: Do you feel that the artists that are at the next stage, who
are professional but who are having some kind of a struggle
selling their products--do you feel that the city should aid
them in any way?
Zellerbach: Well, after all, the city puts up $5000, usually. They didn't
put up the five this year. They cut it, and put up $2500, and
the Zellerbach Family Fund put up the difference.
Nathan: That's for the festival?
Ill
Zellerbach: Yes, for the purchase awards. They buy the paintings for
what the artist prices them. When the works are judged, if
they're part of the prize winners, we buy them. Then this
year for the first time, we had money from Ahmanson, in
Los Angeles. I think it's the Home Savings and Loan. They
made us a grant of $50,000; $10,000 a year for purchase of
paintings for themselves, which they expect to exhibit in
their different branches. They're taking part in the affairs
of the places in which they're operating. They just came
north, and they're very much interested in getting some
publicity. So, we had $15,000 to buy with this year, which
is the most we've ever had.
In the meantime, the artists sell paintings at the show.
I think they sold $5000 worth out there this year. So that's
a total of $20,000 worth of paintings bought this year. For
the struggling artists, that's pretty good. This year I
think we had another 250,000 or 300,000 people go through
that place. Four days. You have never been to one, have you?
Nathan: Yes, I have.
Zellerbach: Of course, this was the biggest one, the best one we've ever
had. Bob Howard, you know, had a retrospective. He showed
a couple of his works out there, and also he showed quite a
few of them in our art gallery, the San Francisco Art
Commission's Art Gallery out there, right next door.
Nathan: Yes. Capricorn Asunder.
Zellerbach: Bob Howard was one of the original art commissioners when I
went on. He was very able, and a world -renowned sculptor.
He moved to Europe for a few years, and retired from the
commission. He was a very able, a very fine gentleman.
Art Commission Gallery
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Tell me a little more about the Art Commission Gallery,
that operate all year around?
Does
Yes, sure. It's just running now for about six months. The
artists did it all themselves, all free labor. We didn't have
any money to fix it up. I forget if we paid for the materials.
Anyway, the materials weren't very much, like the paint on the
wall.'
112
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Do you pay rent?
No, it's city property. That's where our Art Commission
office is. It used to be the offices of Zelinsky Paint
Company. They had a garage right next door. The front
half we're using for a museum, and in the back half we store
our own trunks and other materials that we own.
Who actually runs the Art Commission Gallery?
what pictures to show?
Who decides
Snipper has the responsibility, and I guess some of the
people up at the Neighborhood Arts program work with him.
Elio Benvenuto , who runs the art show, is, I think, running
the gallery.
It's all part of what we're doing. If you read the
San Francisco Charter and read what the Art Commission is
doing, we have usurped a lot of powers that were not written
there. There's nothing written in the charter that we should
run a Neighborhood Arts program. We feel that's part of the
work that the commission should do. Anything pertaining to
the arts, we say is our field. So we add on to it.
I was interested in this gallery (which I think is a great
idea), and the way it runs. Does the artist get the full
price of his pictures? The gallery doesn't take any operating
expenses?
I don't think they do, no. It's a service. We get applicants
coming all the time. I think they're booked ahead already
for a year.
Yes, I can believe it.
problem for artists.
Getting shown in galleries is a big
Well, sure. You know, a lot of things are going on in the
art field. I guess I have a reputation as being probably one
of the most knowledgeable in the art field. Not that I'm an
artist, because I'm not. When I say knowledgeable, I mean
I know what's going on in the different areas. I'm in them
all. I have a feel for it now, from long experience, so I
ought to know something.
Nathan:
I'm sure you do.
113
Zellerbach Family Fund
Nathan: From time to time you have mentioned some of the activities
supported by the Zellerbach Family Fund. Could you tell
something about the Fund and its purposes?
Zellerbach: Yes. The Zellerbach Family Fund was established during the
latter part of my mother's lifetime so that her three children
could handle the donations to charities in which she was very
interested. This was done, of course, because of my mother's
poor health. During the years she was alive, the corpus of
the Fund was only large enough for current donations, and it
wasn't until she passed away that, in accordance with her
will, one half of the estate was given to the ZFF--a substantial
amount of around $14 million. The fact that my brother and
sister had pre-deceased my mother left me as the only child
alive. I then increased the Board of Directors to three
family members and three outside members, and we hired Mr.
Edward Nathan as the Director, and Miss Rosemarie Zilka
continued as the Secretary.
What the Family Fund wants to accomplish goes back to
short pieces of advice that my father gave, while he was alive,
to all three of his children, and I quote, "Remember in your
lifetime that the people of San Francisco and California have
been very good to the Zellerbachs, and you should always be
good to them." Basically, that is what we have aimed to do.
Also, knowing my mother to be quite a religious woman, we feel
that the Fund should support Temple Emanu-El, where she was a
member and a devoted Jewess. She attended Temple every Saturday
when she was able, and she raised her three children in the
Jewish faith. As to my father, he was born a Jew, period.
So from my point of view, we have been very interested in
supporting the arts; both the performing arts, and the artists
and their organizations. We also do a lot of innovating of
grant support, as well as other established charities that
serve the people, as that is our primary thrust.
114
PROBLEMS OF FINANCING AND ORGANIZING FOR THE ARTS
Nathan: You were saying earlier that the big individual
philanthropists, the big donors, are leaving the scene, and
that in general their children don't support the arts to the
same extent that their parents did. Is there a lot of
variation?
Zellerbach: Listen. I've got a son, Billy, who couldn't care less. I
have another son, Stephen, who is a devotee. In fact, today
he'll be elected President of the San Francisco Ballet.
Nathan: Oh really! That's great.
San Francisco Ballet, and Artists' Attitude
Zellerbach: Yes. They're having a reorganization, and he headed the
reorganization. Since I've been on the ballet board there
have been two parts to it: the Ballet Guild and the Ballet
Company--a two-headed monster. The Ballet Guild supplies the
money, and the Ballet Company spends it, but you can't always
hang on to it, you know. You've got to have one boss. I've
been fighting for it for some time. They had a blow-up not
so long ago between the two elements. I went to the meeting
as the senior member.
Nathan: You're a member of the guild?
Zellerbach: Oh yes. As the senior member I laid down the law. I said,
"Either this thing is going to be one, or else as far as any
more Zellerbach support is concerned, you are finished. We've
had all we're going to take. Now if you want our support, if
115
Zellerbach: you want my support, this thing has to be put in a businesslike
condition, and run like a business. Just like the Opera and
the Symphony." So this is what's happening. We're waiting
for the final signature on the agreement. When that's done,
Stephen will serve. If it isn't done, Stephen won't. It will
probably be called the San Francisco Ballet Association.
Nathan: And there will be, what? An artistic director?
Zellerbach: Oh, it will be the same thing as the way the Opera is run and
the Symphony's run. They have a business management, and
they have artistic management, but the president has to have
the last word. It's like trying to let Mr. Kurt Adler be
the business manager for the Opera. The fastest way to go
broke I know of, is to let the artists handle the money.
They have to handle it, but it must be under supervision, tight
supervision.
Nathan: How is the Ballet reorganization going?
Zellerbach: They're in the throes of doing it now. I read the proposed
contract with the Christensens on the consolidation. The
Christensens originally owned the school, but then they turned
it into a nonprofit organization. They are still running it,
of course. They've been at it for years. What we all have
to do is make it proper in writing. Lew Christensen is sixty-
two years old. If they go out of a job, they've got nothing
to eat on. So they feel that they should be protected, and
we agree with them.
Now the question is how much protection, because the
Ballet funds are not so great. You have to go out and get
the money.
Nathan: Does the city help support the Ballet?
Zellerbach: I think the city this last year gave them $55,000 or something
like that. Maybe a little more. But it's in that area of
$55,000 to $75,000. They've had a Ford grant that ran for
ten years, I think. It's only got a year or two to go. Then
they've got to get some more financing. They're always in
debt, because when they give their spring season it's a losing
deal. The only thing that they make money on is the Nutcracker,
at Christmas. When they put on the new Nutcracker, you know,
they had all new costuming and scenery so they went into hock.
They're still paying that off. That has to come out of their
revenues from the Nutcracker, so they have nothing to fall back
on, unless the Ballet Guild goes out and raises the money.
116
Nathan: Do any large corporations underwrite productions for the
Ballet, in the same way that they do sometimes for the Opera?
Zellerbach: No. So far none of them have. Our problem with the Ballet
has been this divided authority.
Nathan: Can you explain a little more about the divided authority?
Zellerbach: With the Christensens running the school, and the Ballet
Guild raising all the money, the Ballet Guild has had very
little control over the Christensens. If they put in a
budget and the Ballet Guild approves it, there's nobody from
the Ballet Guild that really can ride herd and say, "Do this.'"
or "Do that.'" There has to be one boss. It will be the
president of the Ballet, who will be the boss. Mr. Christensen
and the rest of them will have to take orders.
That's the only way you can run these things. I've had
too much experience, and I know unless there's one boss,
you're in trouble. It's the same thing at the Art Commission.
Everybody says I'm a tyrant. Well, that's good. I'm running
it, and I have the responsibility. When it comes to the policy
matters, I'll make the decisions. I'll listen to both sides,
but I'll make the decision.
Nathan: Are you thinking in terms of drawing up budgets and accounting
for expenditures?
Zellerbach: Certainly. After all, most artists don't understand money.
It comes off of trees. They think it's a deep well.
(Interview VI, October 8, 1971)
Nathan: We were talking about artists, and you were saying that they
sometimes had an unrealistic attitude toward money.
Zellerbach: Artists have some of this attitude. When we give them a
budget, we want to see that they don't go over it, and that
they're spending it in accordance with so much a month.
This business of borrowing- -"We '11 take a little from this
month, and we'll cut down next month." They never cut down,
and you wind up with a deficit. If you budget for a deficit
and it's approved, then it's up to the directors and supporters
117
Zellerbach: to go out and raise the money. But I'm not a believer in
that. I believe if you have a budget, and you have the
money, it's perfectly all right to spend it.
Nathan:
When Kalamos was the business manager —
What was his name?
Zellerbach: Leon Kalamos. He was a good man as far as promotion goes.
He would submit a budget for a tour, and the Ballet Guild
would approve it, and then by the time he got back off the
tour, he was over his budget, ten, twenty, sometimes thirty
percent. So then we'd say, "Where are you going to get the
money?" "Well, I had to do this. This emergency came up
and I had to do this, and I had to do that." All he did
was give excuses. In the meantime, the Ballet owed the money,
which he had committed.
This was the same thing I had when I ran the campaign
for the bond issue, for the state of California, for Park
and Recreation. $150 million. I was the treasurer, and
nobody could spend anything unless it had my okay before they
spent it. I had to know what it was for and know the money
was in the bank. So when we finished that campaign, there
was one pledge we had but we didn't get the money. I think
it was a thousand dollars. I put up the thousand, and that
was all. We were just that close.
Now, the same thing with these politicians. My good
friend John Tunney has a deficit now, he still has a deficit
of about $250,000. He's been trying to liquidate it now for
the second year. In fact, the deficit was a great deal more
than that after his election. He spent money, and if he
hadn't been elected he'd have been paying it off the rest of
his life. There's nothing so dead as a defeated candidate.
It's a good thing he won this election, because there's a
good chance of getting the money.
Nathan: Was he one of the people you supported?
Zellerbach: Yes, I supported John. I think very highly of him. He ought
to be a very good representative of California. He's a high
class young fellow, smart, able, very pleasant. He was in
here with me for an hour before his election, asking support.
It was the first time I really sat down and talked to him.
118
Nathan: What kinds of issues were you interested in?
Zellerbach: I wanted to know what his attitudes were, naturally, on
private enterprise and taxation. I wanted to know what his
feeling was on labor, and the different things that affect
our daily lives. Now, you've been here [in the office] time
and again. You can see all these boats sitting out here.
I've seen them sit here now for ninety days. It kind of
makes you sick that one man can shut down the whole water
transportation system on the West Coast. That's too much
power for one person.
I see. Well, I'd like also to go back a little more to the
Ballet Guild. It's now called just The Ballet?
It's not quite finished, but my son expects it to be.
And has he been elected?
Yes. He's the president now of the San Francisco Ballet,
whatever the new company is. He was elected president of
San Francisco Ballet Guild. I don't know which one will be
the surviving group name, but whichever it is, he is the
president.
Nathan: How did you become interested in the Ballet to begin with?
Zellerbach: I think Joe Dyer got me interested in it. I'm not quite sure.
I forget who was the president at the time. I've never taken
an office. I never aspired to be the president of the Ballet.
Nathan: I wondered. I was finding your name in lots of places, but
I didn't find it there.
Zellerbach: No, that's right. Same thing on the Beach and Park Commission.
I did not want to be president. There was too much responsibility,
and it took too much time.
Nathan:
Zellerbach;
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
But you had some feeling for it, you liked it.
119
San Francisco Art Institute
Zellerbach: Oh yes. Well, that's it. It needed support and I was
breaking into the arts. Having been the president of the
San Francisco Art Commission, I felt it was one of my duties
to take an active interest in these different areas. As a
consequence, I was elected to the San Francisco Art Institute
board of directors.
Gurdon Woods, who was the head of the school, was on the
Art Commission with me, so he asked me if I would come on
the board. I was taken to lunch by Prentis Cobb Hale, and
Jane Neylan. She was there and so was Selah Chamberlain.
There were a couple of others. They wanted me to come onto
the San Francisco Art Institute board. I said, "I'll think
about it," which I did, and I said, 'Veil, I'll join."
In June, I attended my first meeting. At the time,
Selah Chamberlain was the president. Jane Neylan was there
and Prentis was there. I forget who else, but it was sort of
a potent group. Gurdon Woods came in and I sat there listening,
naturally, as a neophyte. Gurdon made the announcement that
he would have to have $25,000 within two weeks, or else they
would have to close the school, because he had to give
assurance to his teachers that there would be money to run
the school.
I of course was a little bit shocked, not too badly.
I listened to the debate as to how we were going to raise the
$25,000, and whether they'd sell off a piece of the land, and
they'd do this and that. They did everything except say, "I'll
put up some money myself." They were all evading their
responsibility. I listened for quite a while, and then of
course, I had to have my say, which I usually do.
I said, "I'm just on this board for the first time.
There's no use arguing about selling a piece of land when
you need the money in two weeks. How are you going to sell
it in two weeks? The school will be closed by the time you
sell it. The answer is, you have to raise the money right
here." I said, "I'm new on here, but I'll tell you what I
will do. I'll underwrite $5000, and I'll have it up within
a week, if four others will also put up $5000, or underwrite
the five." So Selah put his up, and so did a couple of others.
When it came to Prentis, Prentis hemmed and hawed. I said,
120
Zellerbach: "Prentis, either put up or shut up. You know, you're the
ones who put me on here. Now, I'm on here, and you're not
taking the responsibility. I don't know why I should put
up my money at the first meeting. If you're really
interested in maintaining the school, then you have to put
up your money. "
Nathan: When you say "underwrite" you mean either you will get the
money from someone else, or you will at least guarantee that
it will be there?
Zellerbach: You guarantee it. That's an underwriting. Sure, you
guarantee the $5000. So Prentis, reluctantly, very
reluctantly, agreed. We got the $25,000 together, and
the school was saved. So that's one thing I saved.
Nathan: Is the Art Institute a private school?
Zellerbach: It is a private school. Sure.
Nathan: Right. So the board of directors appoint members to the
board?
Zellerbach: Yes, that's right. It's a self-perpetuating board. They have
a connection with the University of California; the University
of California was trustee of the property. They owned the
old Mark Hopkins home. That's where they started. Then they
sold that land, and they went down here and built the original
school. The school was in disrepair. I'll tell you who else
was on, I think at the same time too, Elise Haas, and Mrs.
Helen Crocker Russell [Mrs, Henry Potter],
121
NEED FOR FACILITIES: A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
Nathan: Now perhaps one more question looking back at the Ballet. Of
course financing is a problem, but do you think it is desirable
for the company to tour?
Zellerbach: Well, yes. One of the great problems with the Ballet has
been that it had no home. We have a school with a dance floor,
and they can put up folding chairs and probably seat around
100 or 150 people, so that they could put on new ballets,
but that's not really enough. After all, when you train from
a child, and become a good ballerina, this is your life's
work. You have to have a chance to go ahead .
Unless they can be seen, who knows whether they're good
or bad? One of the things I've been struggling with, is to
try to get the Ballet a home, a place where they can have
their school and have an auditorium. We work in the Nourse
Auditorium. We had that fixed. We had a contract all ready,
and the school board had approved it. It would have cost us
about half a million dollars to fix it up. It would have been
a perfect setting.
Nathan: What happened?
Zellerbach: In the first place, we had quite a protest from the Opera,
because the Opera uses that and the gymnasium, which is
right alongside it, for their rehearsals. Without that,
they'd have to buy a rehearsal hall. That would have put
them into bankruptcy. It's just that close. The other thing
is, we could get it financed all right by the nonprofit bonds.
We had a corporation already organized, but then we'd have
to get the board of supervisors to underwrite it. You have
the question of feasibility. If you don't take in enough
money to pay off the bonds and the interest, you couldn't sell
122
Zellerbach: them unless the city took them on as a general obligation.
We could have collected some private money, but one of the
tough things about that would be that you could only get a
twenty-year lease. They would grant us a lease for a dollar
a year if we'd put in all these improvements. But after
twenty years it would all belong to the city.
Nathan: Oh, great.
Zellerbach: Do you see what I mean?
Nathan: I certainly do.
Zellerbach: So, that's kind of difficult to raise money under those
circumstances. So in the meantime we've got this Performing
Arts Center under consideration. I've been working on that
now for five years. We get closer, but yet further away.
Nathan: Where would you like to see such a center located?
Location and Feasibility
Zellerbach: The site is already there. It's right behind the Opera House.
The site is in redevelopment and it's being held for cultural
activities. Which this is. They say, "Well, we can't hold
it forever." They're just having a feasibility study as to
how much income we feel we can get, and how much it will cost
to finance it.
Nathan: Who's doing this feasibility study?
Zellerbach: Some outfit in Los Angeles. The mayor appointed a group for
this, and Bob Hornby is acting as the director general, and
coordinator. Bob is an engineer. He retired from Pacific
Lighting, so he's the perfect one for it. He's done a lot of
work for the Opera. He was Prentis's assistant when they were
raising money. Also, he was in when they attempted to get that
bond issue for the rehabilitation of the Opera House.
123
Lessons from the 1965 Bond Defeat
Nathan: You were saying a little earlier that the Performing Arts
Center was both closer and farther away. Why is that?
Zellerbach: There was the debacle of the bond issue in 1965. It was
supposed to have two-thirds majority, and I think all they
had was between thirty and forty percent "yes" votes.
Louis Lurie and his group were against it, and that's when
Jerry Ets-Hokin got into trouble with Jack Shelley, because
Jack was for it, and Ets-Hokin came out against it.
Nathan: On what basis did Lurie and his colleagues oppose the bond
issue?
Zellerbach: Well, Louis felt the amount of money they asked was too big.
I think it was $29 million.
Nathan: Close to that I think.
Zellerbach: $29 or $30 million. I forget the sum. They were building
another monument out there. They were going to build a
classical building, the same as the Opera House is now. And
they were going to do a lot of things there that really
weren't necessary. They weren't worrying about the public's
money. They didn't have much preparation. That's one of
the things that is always wrong.
I went through that with the state bond issues, so I
have that experience. Anyway, it was defeated badly. They
wanted to know, "Now, what are we going to do?" That's when
I had Nancy Hanks come out here, which I told you about.
So anyway, we got the McFadyen-Knowles report, and that
indicated what was needed. Of course the thing that really
killed it was the fact this was "for the Establishment." Why
should the poor people put up money for the Establishment to go
there with their diamonds to the Opera House? The average
voter, I guess, felt, "Why should we put up the money?" So
they voted it down, notwithstanding the papers and everybody
who were behind it.
After getting this McFadyen-Knowles report, there was no
question that if we ever wanted to get this thing off the
ground you had to get to the neighborhoods.
124
Impetus for Neighborhood Arts and the Booking Crunch
Nathan: So that was really what started the Neighborhood Arts?
Zellerbach: That was the start. Now, basically, what we felt was, you
need preparation. I said, "You have to prepare for this,
and you have to get the public interested, make them a part
of it, make them feel it's theirs. It's not just the
Establishment's, it belongs to the public." This is how the
Neighborhood Arts program got started. It started on the
premise of trying to educate the public that they needed a
new Symphony Hall, a new Performing Arts Hall. The city
lacked one, and we were missing all kinds of good shows that
couldn't come in here, because there was no place for them
to show.
Nathan: I gather the Opera House is booked.
Zellerbach: It's booked all year, practically. There are only a couple
of weeks in the year that you can get there. Booked straight.
The Opera takes over the middle of August starting rehearsals.
They open September. They close the end of November, and
two weeks later the Symphony opens. That runs through May.
So the only time you have it open is June and July. It's
the same problem we have with the Nutcracker [ballet]. You
can get in the Opera House after the Symphony is out. The
Symphony performs Wednesday night, Thursday matinee and Friday
night. So you can't get in Thursday night, because you can't
afford to move that shell in and out. Everytime you move the
shell it costs $300 or $400. So really then, it's open on
Saturday afternoon, Saturday night, Sunday, and Monday, because
the musicians don't work on Monday. You have Tuesday. Then
you're out. So you can't bring these big ballets in here and
expect them to run four days and sit for three.
You miss a lot of good stuff that can't get in here. We
started out on the premise that we'd have to see just what
reaction we could find from the public. We started in
cooperation with San Francisco State. That was Dr. Bierman.
He held that class out there. We put this cooperative effort
on at the beginning. As I said before, we first were going to
try to educate the adults. Well, that lasted three months
and we found out they couldn't have cared less, so we knew we
were on the wrong track. Then we shifted to the children and
the youth. We decided that the only way you could reach the
adults was through the children and the youth. This is the way
it's been going ever since.
125
Nathan: Right. Now this is very interesting, because you are building
interest in the neighborhoods. In what way will this help
you develop facilities downtown?
Zellerbach: Because the people themselves become interested. We have the
Black Writers' Workshop now, so they need facilities. They
all need different facilities, you see. This is what we're
encouraging. Today you educate people. The Opera and
Symphony and the Ballet are attracting people to the performances,
Well, you see what the Symphony is doing. I received a letter
that Mr. [Philip] Boone just wrote to the CAO telling him all
that they are doing, and how many people are involved, and how
many of the youth. And also, as you know, the Symphony is in
the schools now, which it has never been before. They're out
in the neighborhoods, which they've never been before. And
the parents come to hear the children work with the Symphony.
Also the Symphony performs with the children there, and they
bring the parents. And there is the Children's Opera. Also
if they have any spare tickets, they give them away.
And the Ballet--we usually cooperate and send the ballet
dancers out to the schools. So it's a general education,
including what the Neighborhood Arts Program is doing, and
the San Francisco Art Institute is also working on it. Both
museums are sending a truck out to the neighborhoods to entice
children to come to the museums. Well, you see, the renaissance
that's happened in the last five years in the arts all over the
country. The fact is that the National Endowment for the Arts
received $30 million this year. That's the biggest appropriation
yet. New York State gives over $12 million. This chintzy state
here gives $165,000.
Then you have the same thing going on in Los Angeles.
They have their center, but they have nobody to fill it.
Now, in San Francisco, the Zellerbach Family Fund and
myself personally were encouraging all this. Making grants,
to encourage this development. Because the more of this you
get done, the less opposition you will have when the time
comes. Of course the question is the escalation of cost. If
this center had been properly engineered, and the architects
were modest, they could have built what we want today probably
for about $9 million, maybe $8 million. It's going to cost
twice that.
126
An Interim Committee
Nathan: Right. Now, Robert Hornby is interested in a simpler plan,
I gather.
Zellerbach: Yes. After all, we have a group. The mayor has a committee
appointed, and Bob Hornby was named director general of the
group. This includes all the facets of the arts: the
Symphony, Ballet, museums, all have representatives.
Nathan: So in a way, you're almost gathering a nucleus of what was
described in the studies.
Zellerbach: We have the nucleus standing by, this interim committee.
They're all standing by, waiting. What are we doing to do?
Well, we're about ready for the feasibility reports. They
were going to take three months. It's been damn near six.
I don't think we're going to like what we're going to hear.
Nathan: You think it'll be very costly by this time?
Zellerbach: I know it. I don't think the income is there. That's my own
intuition. I think the revenue won't be there, not revenue
enough to pay for operating the center.
Nathan: But the agencies are also scrambling for funds.
Zellerbach: Sure. Sure. The Opera House showed deficits last year, of
over $450,000. This year it will probably be more. Of course
their deficit isn't anywhere near what this new thing is going
to show.
Nathan: What do you see as the way to solve the deficit problems?
Zellerbach: To solve it?
Nathan: Yes.
Zellerbach: The only way that you're going to solve it is either being
subsidized by the federal government, or the state government,
or the city government. You won't be able to raise enough public
funds to carry it. You can raise some. You can probably raise
several million. But that's going to be a drop in the bucket.
The land's going to cost almost $2 million.
127
The Fox and the Orpheum
Nathan: Would the land be cheaper if it were not at this central
place in downtown San Francisco? Or wouldn't that help much?
Zellerbach: You'd have to go to some empty lot. You can't build a thing
like this out in the slums. You have to build it where people
will come, that's handy. We may have an alternate. I think
we should take another good hard look at the Orpheum Theater.
As you know, we did have the Fox Theater. We could have opened
the Fox Theater for a million dollars. Mr. Christopher said
no. They had the cash to pay the million, too. I was with
Harry Ross, and we were doing our damnedest to persuade the
mayor and everybody to buy it. They said, "Oh, it's a mill
stone. What do they need it for?"
Nathan: Isn't that a pity?
Zellerbach: That was the crime of the century.
Nathan: Did they feel that it would bring in more tax money if it were
privately developed?
Zellerbach: It wasn't a question of that. They just didn't know what they
were going to do with it. Well, of course they would have had
to put up money to fix it, but they weren't far-sighted enough
to see it. You can go back to St. Louis and see the same
darned thing. They took an old movie house, and, I think, for
$2 million they rehabilitated the whole thing, and it's the
most magnificent thing you've ever seen. Marvelous acoustics.
Nathan: Where is the Orpheum that you are referring to?
Zellerbach: Right there at Market and—what is it? Hyde? Right there at
the BART subway station.
Nathan: I see. You think this is a possible alternative.
Zellerbach: There's a possibility there, yes. They'd have to do a little
engineering, but using a thing like that would certainly be a
hell of a lot less expensive than buying new. So, we'll have
to see. I figured this would be my last big effort.
Nathan:
There's no such thing as a last big effort!
128
Zellerbach: If I ever get this off the ground while I'm alive, and see
it built, then I'll rest happy. But you see, I've already
indicated the Zellerbach Family Fund would put up $1 million,
providing the city would guarantee that it would be finished.
I think I could raise other monies too, on the same premise.
Nathan: Surely this location near the BART station makes a lot of sense.
Zellerbach: It does, you know. It makes a lot of sense, but you don't
know whether you can make it work. You have to have the whole
thing engineered to see whether you can include the number of
seats you need. We already know that they would have to extend
the stage. The stage isn't big enough. The height of the
stage has to go up. You probably could do it for maybe around
$5 or $6 million, including the property. It would be a lot
different from this. This, I estimate will cost between $18
and $20 million without the real estate.
Nathan: Now, we'll assume that this is eventually going to be developed,
one place or another.
Zellerbach: No. Let's say it's our hope.
Nathan: Right. Now, it would house the Ballet? What else would go
into it?
Zellerbach: Yes, the Ballet, and it would probably house the Symphony.
Nathan: So that would free the Opera House?
Zellerbach: It would free the Opera House, and also, the Symphony would be
interchangeable. If they needed this, the Symphony could move
over to the Opera House for some of their performances. No
reason why they couldn't. They have the shell there. But you
just couldn't handle the Opera in the Orpheum.
Nathan: Right. And were you thinking that touring companies would
also come?
Zellerbach: Well, sure. Definitely.
Nathan: Because right now, Zellerbach Hall in Berkeley is getting a lot
of the touring companies who might like to come to San Francisco.
Zellerbach: Well, certainly. They're showing a lot of that. Cupertino
now is getting them. Even this little thing they put over
here at San Rafael with 2200 seats--
129
Nathan: How many seats would you ideally like to have in this place?
Zellerbach: They have to have not less than 2700, up to 3200, in order
to make it feasible. We may have to settle on 2700, even
though they'd like 3200. Every time you put another seat
in it, it costs you more money. But this is a question of
engineering.
Nathan: Right. Do you have any idea when this report is going to be
made?
Zellerbach: It will be made when we decide. I'm afraid to release it.
It won't be released until after election, that's a cinch.
Polling the Community
Nathan: I see. It's had one very interesting development; it has
brought together all the people who are interested.
Zellerbach: Oh yes. There's no question about it. And it's going to take
time. We've had polls taken. I've had two polls taken. I'm
going to have another one taken pretty soon.
Nathan: What sort of polls?
Zellerbach: Polls on the question of the attitudes of the people towards
the Performing Arts Hall.
Nathan: Now, you're polling people in San Francisco? How about other
parts of the Bay Area? Are you polling them at all?
Zellerbach: We can't depend on them. They aren't going to pay the bill.
They aren't going to underwrite it. We have to get the votes
here. Oakland votes won't do us any good.
Nathan: I see. I was thinking possibly some of your paying customers
might come from the surrounding areas.
Zellerbach: Well, we may be able to have some of our big customers make
some of the contributions, making grants, giving funds. But
we can't get them to underwrite it. I mean, this is not a BART,
Nathan: No. [Laughing] Maybe it's just as well. How are the polls
coming out?
130
Zellerbach: Well, the last poll we took was a little better, but not
much. There wasn't much change. So I think before long we
may take another one, and see if we've had any change in
attitude.
Look at what happened as far as ecology is concerned.
All of a sudden, it's in the air. Everybody's for it now--
this is popular, so the Legislature can't pass bills fast
enough. Now if they could do the same with the arts, you
could have all the money you want. After all, the European
countries have supported the arts for years.
Nathan: Yes, and they expect to subsidize them.
Zellerbach: Well, sure. After all, Italy supports all the opera houses,
and England does the same. Ballet—they have the Royal Ballet.
They have Covent Garden. They have the London Philharmonic.
They have all these things. The European governments have
been doing it for years. For that matter, so has Russia, even
under the czars. If the Commies can do it, there's no reason
we can't. After all, the Commies are supporting the arts.
That's the story.
This has taken time. I've been working at this now right
from the start of the Rockefeller Brothers' report. That was
the shove-off. I've been in it right from the beginning, and
watched the whole thing develop. I've seen a lot in the arts
in my lifetime .
Nathan: Right. And a tremendous change, really, from an appeal to the
elite, to an appeal to everybody.
Zellerbach: Well, it has to be everybody, because there are no big fortunes
like there were. I mean, where are you going to find the
Huntingtons and the Stanfords? There are the Rockefellers, yes,
but that's only a question of time. Ford Foundation. Today,
the only millionaires that can be developed are the people like
Hewlett-Packard, who start from nothing with an idea, and all
of a sudden they're multi-millionaires.
131
SAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION
(Interview VII, October 29, 1971)
Nathan: We have touched on a number of art activities, but there are
still a few that I would like to ask you about, if you have
some observations to make. We were talking last time about
performing arts facilities, and the need in the city. So
perhaps we could talk about the San Francisco Opera Association.
Is this something that you have been interested in for some
time, and are you still involved with it?
Zellerbach: As far as San Francisco Opera Association is concerned, I've
only been a member of that board for the last two years.
Prior to that time, my brother was a board member. So my
connection with the Opera was not quite as close, except the
last couple of years, because then they needed a little money.
The Zellerbach Family Fund was importuned to give them a
substantial grant so they could get the curtain to go up.
Nathan: That new gold curtain?
Zellerbach: Yes. This last year. So we did make them a grant of $50,000.
We paid them $25,000 at once, and we thought we'd give them
the second $25,000 when the curtain went up.
Nathan: That was to guarantee that it would go up. [Laughing] I see!
Zellerbach: The curtain went up, and they received their grant. The Opera
now is going ahead. When Prentis Cobb Hale took over the
presidency, he asked me to go on the board, which I did. Of
course, I've always been pretty close to Prentis, before I
even took the job. I think I've told you a lot about him.
Anyway, now Bill Orrick, Jr., is the new president. I've
known him very well for a long time. He's a very fine
acquisition to the Opera Association. I think he'll do a good
132
Zellerbach: job. I think very highly of him. He's strong, capable,
thorough. These things have to be put in the hands of the
younger people. Of course, that's what I've been trying to
do, get rid of some of them. I think I'm probably about
ready to be rid of the Ballet, since my son Stephen was made
president. So he has a job on his hands, to straighten out
the Ballet. I think he will. If he does, this will be all
in his favor, as far as taking over some of the burdens of the
family in the arts sphere. I'm sorry to say that my son, Billy,
has not acquired the tastes yet.
Nathan: How about your daughter? Is she interested in the arts?
Zellerbach: Well, my daughter is, yes. But she lives in Los Angeles. I
know she's active in a number of things, but I don't think
she's active at all in the Orchestra or the Opera. After
all, they have no Opera down there. As for the Orchestra--
they have enough people without my daughter, so she wouldn't
have the same incentives down there.
The 1971-72 Opera Season
Nathan: I understand the San Francisco Opera, this season, is regarded
as having hit a new high. The Opera season this year has had
really great successes.
Zellerbach: I think so far, the Opera season this year has been the best
season we've had in many years. I mean, the opening night
with Manon with Beverly Sills and this tenor that was with her-
Nathan: Nicolai Gedda?
Zellerbach: Yes. Nicolai Gedda. I thought it was the best opening we've
had in years, and the audience showed it. This last Tuesday
night we went to see II Trovatore with Leontyne Price. They
had a Spanish tenor come out from the Met, who came on twenty-
four hours ' notice to take the place of a tenor by the name of
King that was supposed to have the job. I think his name was
Placido Domingo. He was out here last year. He sang opposite
Price. In fact, he stole the show. Price was terrific, but
this guy was really- -people stood up and cheered and hollered.
This is really one of the greatest Trovatore 's I've ever heard
133
Zellerbach: in my life. And the music is beautiful. Not only that, but
each participant has a lot of arias. So you get a chance to
hear the stars — it's almost like a concert, you know. There's
very little crowd chorus work, and there's no dancing in it.
It went off very well. They condensed it into two acts
and six scenes.
Nathan: How did that strike you?
Zellerbach: I liked it very much. The first act, even though it lasted
an hour and a quarter, you didn't realize it. The thing was
moving, and the voices were great. They had one intermission,
and the opera was over at a quarter to eleven. Usually, when
they go the full score of three acts and all the scenes, you're
out at midnight. They didn't cut any of the opera. They just
made the scenes different.
That was great opera. When you have a season with
thirteen operas, and if you have two good ones, you consider
that a very successful opera season.
Nathan: Yes. We've already seen two good ones: Manon and Eugene Onegin.
Zellerbach: I had tickets, but I couldn't go. I had a cold. I understand
Eugene Onegin was not so good.
Nathan: Is that right? I was thrilled with it. I thought it was great.
Zellerbach: Yes. Well, it's a different type of an opera. Of course
Tchaikovsky's music is so--
Nathan: It's true, it's a little softer. I like blood on the floor in
an opera. Eugene Onegin is not like that, but it's good.
Zellerbach: Sure. Everybody to his taste. Of course, you have some other
good singers coming up. You have Joan Sutherland coming up.
Nathan: Oh yes, in Maria Stuarda.
134
The Star System
Zellerbach: You have several others coming up. Of course this year we
used the star system.
Nathan: What do you think of the star system?
Zellerbach: There's no question that if you have great voices like Price
and Sutherland and Sills, and the tenors that are equal to
them, you have great opera. All you need is leads, and the
rest of them usually warm up to it. That's what happens in
a good opera. Everybody's in the act, you know.
If you want to read a critic, read Fried 's critique in
last Wednesday afternoon's Examiner. I never read a more
raving notice than Fried gave that opera. Which it deserved.
We were thrilled. My wife was so exhilarated that she
couldn't go to sleep.
Nathan: Good for her' It is thrilling. No doubt about it.
Zellerbach: That's right.
Nathan: I wanted to ask you one more thing about the star system that
you touched on at first. You bring these marvelous people
and you pay them a good fee. What do you think this does to
the next generation of performers? Does it hold them back, or
do you think it helps them?
Zellerbach: After all, look at this Grace Bumbry. She was educated down
at Santa Barbara, by Lotte Lehmann. Her first concert was
given out at the Legion of Honor. That's where I heard her
first. She was big. She had a great voice. One of these
deep, full voices, like a Negro spiritual. Look where she's
come, in apparently a very few years.
In the meantime, now she's thinned down, and she's married
to a rich German. She's living primarily in Germany, and comes
over here and sings. She's made a great reputation in a few
years. In other words, if they have it, it doesn't take long.
If they don't handle their voices properly, and don't take care
of themselves, don't keep on taking lessons and improving
themselves, it doesn't take long before their voices start to
fail. The public knows it right away.
135
Nathan: Do you think the spring opera season — Spring Opera and
Western Opera Theater — helps bring along the new singers?
Zellerbach: Sure. That's one of the purposes of it. They have the
Merola competition every year, and the winners of that are
given contracts with the San Francisco Opera. They usually
use them in the Spring Opera and the Western Opera Theater.
This brings them along. That's the way you have to do it.
Opera in Los Angeles
Nathan: Right. You were saying a little earlier that Los Angeles does
not have an opera company of its own.
Zellerbach: They don't have their own opera company. They hire the
national company of the Met. We used to send our opera company
down there to the Shrine Auditorium. The Shrine Auditorium
held 6000 people, and they could make money. Then, when they
went into the Opera House at 3200, they had all the additional
expenses. The last time they went down there, they lost all
kinds of money. The Los Angeles Opera Association had to
underwrite them. So they didn't feel as though they wanted to
underwrite it any further.
We're still negotiating, but it should be like the San
Francisco and Los Angeles Civic Light Opera. It's the same
thing. When they go down there, they should call it the
Los Angeles Opera, and when they come here it's San Francisco.
You know, there's a little jealousy, because the San Francisco
Opera is, next to the Metropolitan, the finest in the country.
No question about it. People come out here from New York,
from all over, to hear our opera. So that's why it costs so
much money. I think they expect a deficit this year of close
to a million dollars.
Nathan:
How do you think that a first-rate opera ought to be financed?
Opera in Europe
136
Zellerbach: Over a period of time, the government must take over the bulk
of the deficits, like they have in Europe for years and years
and years. If you go to the Vienna Opera and see the way
they produce it, somebody's putting up money, because they
can't take it out of the house. The house is too small o I'll
never forget it. I went over there once, some years ago, and
we heard Turandot . You know, where she runs down the stairs --
Nathan: Yes, wearing the peacock gown?
Zellerbach: Birgit Nilsson was the lead in it. You've never seen such
costuming. They had the horses, they had everything. You've
never seen a production like this in your life. Every scene
was a real scene. Not like they have out here; by magic
lantern they give you different changes of scenes. That's the
modern way of keeping costs down. But not over there. Over
there, everything is right on the button. If you want to see
opera produced, this is where you see it.
I've been in La Scala, and I've been in the Rome Opera;
I was at the Paris Opera, and the Paris Opera smells to high
heaven. It was so bad. The French are very particular. They
only like to have French singers. People don't go over just
to hear the Paris Opera. It's a great sight to go into the
Opera House. It's a magnificent opera house. It's very baroque,
lots of gingerbread in it. But the Paris productions don't
hold a candle to ours.
Nathan: Did you think La Scala, the opera in Milan, was good?
Zellerbach: Oh, Milan, yes. No question. They put on great opera. Their
productions are good, but not as lavish as what we've seen in
Vienna.
Nathan: You were saying that government eventually has to put up a
larger share of the budget?
Zellerbach: They're doing more and more all the time in San Francisco,
with the hotel tax.
Nathan: Yes, this is the way the city helps support it. Do you feel
that the National Endowment for the Arts should come through
with money for the Opera?
137
Zellerbach: They have. For example, the Russian opera is imported by
the National Endowment. They have put up $100,000 a year.
So, of course they need a lot more money than they
had this year to do a real job, but at least spreading the
money around could make some of these things much more
viable. If people tell their representatives that they
must support art, why, this becomes popular like ecology. In
the last four years I've heard more about ecology than I had
all my life before. It's a different philosophy.
We used to build a paper mill. No matter how much odor
we spewed out of our stacks, they came and they hunted for enter
prises to locate there. They'd give you tax breaks to locate
in their town, in order to get the payroll and the industry.
So if you emitted a few mercaptans, the people that lived
there started to get used to it. When they could smell those
they knew the mill was running, and everything was fine.
That's not so, now. Our company is spending over $80
million in five years for cleaning up streams, and the air,
cleaning up pollution, you know.
Nathan: Is that in California and Washington?
Zellerbach: All over. Of course, we don't earn anything out of the $80
million. In fact, it costs us money.
Nathan: Yes, I see why you're very alert to this.
Zellerbach: How many years did you used to go over to Berkeley, past the
Oakland mud flats?
Nathan: Many years of the "Stinking East Bay." I remember it perfectly.
Zellerbach: You remember it, do you?
Nathan: Yes, I certainly do! [Laughing] I don't miss it a bit.
Zellerbach: That was going on for years.
138
Business Support for the Arts
Nathan: Yes. Thinking some more about building public interest and
concern about various issues, like support for the arts, I
noticed that some businesses have begun to finance particular
productions.
Zellerbach: We're trying to have the business community take their share,
which they haven't done. If you look at the statistics,
you'll find business has been a minor contributor. I think
about one percent of the total amount that's spent on arts
comes from business, which is nothing. Of course you'll find
a great many of the men in the top places in these big
corporations have no feeling for the arts. They think it's a
waste of corporate money. They're not sympatico. I think
these times are going to change. You can see it going on now,
with these different companies supporting the arts much more
than they have in the past.
Nathan: How do you answer this contention that it isn't necessary for
business to support the arts?
Zellerbach: You find a lot of the stockholders will complain that they
have no right giving their money away. Instead of giving
money to the arts, and to the city, and UBAC, they say, "You're
giving the stockholders' money away.' Instead of that, you
should increase our dividends and let us give it away."
Nathan: How do you answer that?
Zellerbach: Today, business is a member of the community, just like a
person. In fact, businesses have a responsibility, and more
so all the time. We have many people working for the company;
all they do is public relations, showing that we're trying to
be good citizens. That's the answer.
Nathan: Yes. I also had a note about the San Francisco Opera Guild.
How effective do you think it is?
Zellerbach: The San Francisco Opera Guild I think is very effective.
They're the women's arm of the opera. They're the ones that
put on the Folderol and the Opera Ball—raising money. From
whatever money they raise, they usually make a grant to the
139
Zellerbach: Opera for some new production or something of that kind. Also
it's a question of getting people interested in going to the
Opera. That's of great assistance.
Nathan: Right. I had a note that they raised about one percent of
the necessary income. There was another promotional kind of
thing that businesses do, apparently. They can buy blocks of
tickets at a special price.
The Repertoire
Zellerbach: There is some promotion of that kind, but that takes a lot
of work. Of course, everybody wants to go to the good operas.
When it comes to putting on Lulu--I think you'll find that
you can buy all the tickets you want to Lulu.
Nathan: This brings up the repertoire. What do you think the
repertoire ought to be during the year?
Zellerbach: When you're in show business, one basic principle is, you give
the public what they want, and they'll buy it. You don't
put on opera to please the critics. You don't play an orchestra
to please the critics. They're always crying that you don't
give anybody an opportunity. Well, we'll give them an
opportunity, if somebody wants to underwrite it, we'll perform
it. If they put on Carmina Burana, and Lulu, and a few modern
operas, they could shoot a cannon through the aisles and hit
nobody. You put on Madame Butterfly, and Trovatore and all
the popular, well-known operas, it's different. That's what
the people want. When they mount an opera, I would say it
probably costs them between $40 and $50 thousand. So you can't
monkey around.
You can lose on the 50 percent order. If it costs you
50, and you get 25 out of it, you don't make anything. That
runs into money fast. You schedule six repeats, you can't
stop it. You must go through with it. So the answer is, give
maybe one modern opera, and for the rest you give those that
the people want, and will come in here and pay for.
I told you that about the Pops Concerts. The same thine
with the Orchestra. Of course, with the Orchestra, you can
always work in one or two moderns, providing you give a good old
140
Zellerbach: Tchaikovsky symphony or a Chopin, or some of the old-timers--
Brahms--that people like. If the new stuff doesn't take up
too much time, so they don't leave, it's okay. Yet, it does
give them a taste of modern music. But to put a whole program
of modern music--that is the big fight over in Oakland.
Nathan: Oh, with Gerhardt Samuel? Is that so?
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. Samuel's becoming too modern. They were losing
so much money they couldn't afford him. That's the answer.
Nathan: It makes the choice of program very crucial.
Zellerbach: Yes. It's all crucial. It's whether you live or die.
Nathan: I take it that you do not think much of the argument that the
public taste needs to be developed.
Zellerbach: Any change is going to take generations. All right, you have
jazz. Now, jazz is out. Now it's rock. So we don't know
what it's going to be next. It will be something else. But
what schoolchildren are learning now, what they're doing in
the schools, with the Opera and the Symphony, they're learning
about the old masters. They come out with a better appreciation
of what over the centuries has been called good music. Now,
as for modern opera, you know—why, even Bartok is a little
modern. And then there's Alban Berg and this English composer,
Benjamin Britten. When they have Britten, I stay home. It
doesn't do anything for me. I like a little melody. So do
most people. Why does everybody love II Trovatore? and
Butterfly? and La Boheme? and Johann Strauss? Even Per
Rosenkavalier. That's fairly modern, but at least he has the
waltz in there.
Nathan: That's right. It is melodic.
Zellerbach: He has a lot of modern in too—you know, good heavy German
stuff in it. There you are.
Nathan: I wondered whether you were acquainted with Merola?
Zellerbach: I knew Merola but not very well, because I had no business with
him.
Nathan:
Are you getting acquainted with Kurt Adler?
141
Zellerbach: Oh, Kurt Adler, I've known right along. We've done a lot
of business between the Ballet and Adler. We've had many
a scrap with Adler about his use of the Ballet.
Nathan: The use of the ballet in opera productions?
Zellerbach: Yes. The San Francisco Ballet. Not the use of ballet, but
the use of the San Francisco Ballet. I did so much screaming
that we finally got it through his head that the San Francisco
Ballet should have the work. They have the dancers, there's
no reason why the Opera shouldn't give them the work.
Nathan: If he didn't use the San Francisco Ballet, what other group
would he have?
Zellerbach: Well, he used to hire a ballet-master, and collect, you know-
Nathan: Oh, I see. He did it himself.'
Zellerbach: Yes. On his own, you know. Sometimes he had ballets in there
that really smelled to high heaven.
Nathan: [Laughing] That's what I was just thinking] They were
terrible!
Zellerbach: Sure, those things have happened.
Nathan: I wanted to ask you one more thing about financing the Opera.
I see that the San Francisco hotel tax provides eight percent
of the arts budget, or did last year. Do you have to fight
that out every year, or is that fairly automatic?
Zellerbach: You have to scrap for the amount.
Nathan: I see. Have you been involved in the Opera broadcasts?
Zellerbach: No.
Nathan: Any other thoughts about the Opera that you would like to tell
me about?
Zellerbach: I think you have most of my ideas. Fairly basic.
142
SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION
Nathan: Shall we move on to the San Francisco Symphony Association?
Zellerbach: Well, yes. We've got to move on to some things, here, or
it'll be next Christmas!
Nathan: Right] Have you had a longer association with the Symphony?
Zellerbach: I've been a little bit more intimately involved with the
Symphony than I have with the Opera, although I was never
on their board until my brother passed away. They asked me
to take his place. That's when Phil Boone took over the
presidency of the Symphony. He's done a terrific job, really,
a marvelous job. I've had a closer association with the
Symphony, by far, than with the Opera. It's only in recent
years that I've done anything as far as the Opera is concerned,
I haven't done much.
Nathan: There is a natural link, I suppose.
Zellerbach: First you get on one, then another. As president of the Art
Commission, it's always good for me to keep my fingers in all
these artistic pies, so as to see what we can do: more
coordination of what we're doing, and what things are needed.
Nathan: When the San Francisco Ballet performs, do they use musicians
from the San Francisco Symphony?
Zellerbach: No. They mostly use the Oakland Symphony musicians, because
when they want to use the San Francisco Symphony, they're
always busy with their own season.
Nathan: Oh, I see. Yes, the season becomes a problem, doesn't it?
143
Zellerbach: Well, sure.
Nathan: I wonder which conductors you may have known. Did you know
Pierre Monteux?
Zellerbach: I knew Pierre Monteux. Of course there was also Alfred Herz,
Nathan: Did you know him at all?
Zellerbach: Well, I'd met him, but I was pretty young then. I was more
active in business than I was in the arts. My brother had
always been very active in the Symphony, for years, and he
occupied that field; there was enough for me to do in others.
The same thing at the Mount Zion Hospital. He and my sister
were always on the board out there, so my associations out
there have not been as close.
Nathan: I see. I assume that you probably knew Josef Krips.
Zellerbach: Oh yes. I knew Krips fairly well, the same as I knew Pierre.
You know, we didn't entertain each other.
144
YOUNG ARTISTS
Zellerbach: Monteux was the one that recommended Lenore Joffe, my first
protege. I told you about Lenore.
Nathan: I don't know about your protege.
Zellerbach: Oh you don't? That was my first real contact with Pierre.
A Violinist
Zellerbach: She was taking from David Hauser, who used to be the first
violinist. The Jewish Community Center was helping her. Eva
Soline Goldman was at the Center there. I knew the Soline
girls from when we were children. She brought Lenore home one
evening to perform for us. She was a little tike. I don't
think she was over six or seven years old. A child prodigy.
Pierre was very much interested in her, and thought she would
go very far. I said if that's the case, I'd see what I could do
do to help her, which I did for quite a few years. Lenore
had a family. Her mother and her father and a sister and a
brother. The father needed work. It was one of those
situations. I put the father to work down at the Zellerbach
Paper Company. I paid for her lessons with Hauser. Then
Pierre had her perform with the Symphony. She did very well.
People were sympathetic to a child prodigy. As she grew older,
the first thing I had to do was get her a better violin. She
was playing a little violin, and she needed a bigger one. I
think that cost me a couple of thousand dollars.
Then I had her play with the Pops Concerts, and she played
at different places. In the meantime, she concentrated on her
violin. She had private lessons, school lessons. So she had
to have clothes, and everything that went with it.
145
Zellerbach: She finished high school and wanted to go to Mills
College, in their music department. So I sent her to Mills
College. In the meantime, her violin was not good enough,
so I bought a Guarnerius. You've heard of Guarnerius?
Nathan: Yes, I have.
Zellerbach: But this time, I didn't give it to her. I kept the ownership,
and loaned it to her. I didn't know then how smart I was.
The conductor of the Kansas City Symphony used to spend his
summers here, and worked with some of the colleges. He was
very good. He was very much taken with her work.
After she entered college, she had to have an automobile
to get around, so of course she asked me for an automobile.
I said, "Uh-uh. I'm not giving you an automobile. You're
over there to study. You're not over there to run around in
an automobile." Then she got into that stage that young
people do, where they don't know what they want. She didn't
want to have any more to do with her family. She didn't want
to have any more to do with me. She wanted to live her own
life. She was living with two other women students. I think
she finally graduated, but she dropped her violin and didn't
pay any more attention to it for the last couple of years she
was there. She took up physical education.
I kept in touch with her. She said she was going to teach
physical education at some private school. I said, "That's
fine. I'd like to come over and see you some time." She'd
love to see me. So Mrs. Zellerbach and I went over. She was
living over in Hayward, or San Leandro, somewhere in there.
We went over there one Sunday. She was there and she had a
piano. I saw my Guarnerius violin, lying under the piano.
I said, "Is that the Guarnerius violin?" She said, "Yes."
I said, "Inasmuch as you don't use it any more, I think I'll
take it back." She said, "That's fine. You go ahead." So I
took it back, and eventually I gave it to the Jewish Community
Center as a gift. I think they eventually sold it. All I got
was the tax deduction.
Every once in a while she'd call up, or write me a letter,
say what she was doing. She kept in touch with me. Then
finally, she wanted to know if I would take her back; she
had made a big mistake. I said, "I'm sorry, but you had your
opportunity. You didn't use it properly. As far as I'm
concerned, you know how to play the violin, so get your job
as a musician."
146
Zellerbach: She did get a job in the Kansas City Orchestra in the
string section. What she's doing now I wouldn't know. Her
father passed away. I think her mother passed away. Her
mother used to write me letters about how sorry they were.
That was my first protege.
A Soprano
Nathan: Did you have another one?
Zellerbach: I had another one. Yes. One year we were in Europe in May,
I think. We came back on the Andrea Doria, one of her first
trips. There was a man on board who was a very famous purse -
maker from New York. He heard I was on board. He knew about
my connection with the Art Commission, and music, in San
Francisco. So he got acquainted with me, and said, "I'd like
to introduce you to a young soprano on the boat. She's just
coming back from La Scala, to go home to visit her parents."
So I said, "Sure, I'd love to meet her, and talk to her."
We arranged to meet and went over what she was doing. At
that time I think she was eighteen or nineteen years old.
Nathan: Do you remember her name?
Zellerbach: Yes. Franca Duval.
Nathan: I know that name.
Zellerbach: You should. It cost me a lot of money to publicize that name."
[Laughter] She showed me all her pictures, and the opera she
sang in. She was going to sing in the ship's concert for the
sailor's fund. I thought she had a very lovely voice. I
said to her, "We have the Pop Concerts coming on in San
Francisco. They open in July. I don't know if we have somebody
to open it. If our executive secretary, Mr. Dyer, hasn't done
anything about it, I'll see what we can do to put you on."
I got home and talked to Joe Dyer, and he said, "No, we
haven't anybody." I said, "We can open with a beautiful young
soprano and get a lot of good publicity on her first appearance
with an American orchestra." Joe said, "I'll arrange to have
her meet Fiedler, and if she's okay we'll put her on."
147
Zellerbach: We had her on. She came out, and I gave a big cocktail
party for her and Fiedler and introduced her. She was a very
beautiful young thing. I think I have her pictures around
somewhere. Anyway, she gave a very nice concert, and she had
good notices. Then went back to New York and settled. I paid
for her lessons, and I had to buy her clothes. In the meantime,
we had a contract. In other words, for anything that she made
over $10,000, I would get twenty-five percent. This was a
business deal.
Nathan: I see. Is that a usual arrangement?
Zellerbach: If I wanted to get a tax deduction, I have to treat it like
a business. In the horse race business, you're allowed to
deduct depreciation. The sponsors are in it for business.
So I was in this for business, to promote her, see what I
could do with her.
I had her introduced, auditioned at the Metropolitan.
I placed her with one of the biggest and best agencies. We
knew them very well, because we had dealings with them out at
Winterland, the Ice Follies. The Music Corporation.
They heard her and said they'd be very glad to do what
they could. I got her a year's contract with them. They
didn't do much, so I said, "Well, forget it." Then I found
another, Lester Schurr, to try to promote her.
In the meantime Kurt Adler auditioned her. I always
used to get the same answer back. "She has a very lovely
voice, but it's not true."
Nathan: A bad ear, maybe?
Zellerbach: I don't know. I'm not that critical. It's not a true voice.
She doesn't get something right. The recommendation was
always that she belongs in musical comedy or light opera. So
I told her that. I said, "We have to put you in light opera
and make some money."
"Oh, no." She was better than Tebaldi, and better than
Callas. They're a lot of bums. She's the best in the
business. She went back to Italy, but she could never get
into the big time. I knew Ghiringhelli at La Scala. He still
runs it. I became very good friends with him. He gave me
the excuse, 'Veil, she's an American, and they like to use
148
Zellerbach: Italians." Then I found there was a lot of underground work
between Ghiringhelli and the agent, little commissions pass
the ball. So I found a guy and was about ready to make a
contract with him to represent her and get her in La Scala,
the Opera House. Just about when he was ready to sign the
contract, the guy dies.
So then she went into a traveling group, one of these
Italian operas. Went to Bordeaux and went to little towns,
like Cannes, all over France and Belgium. She was going to
sing in Bordeaux—not Boheme , but-- What's the opera with
the old count, you know? A nobleman. Scarpio, what's--?
Nathan: Tosca.
Zellerbach: She had the lead in Tosca. So Joe Dyer and my wife and myself
made plans to go over and hear her in Bordeaux. We had
tickets, we had everything ready to go. Two days before we
go, we get a cable from her. She's got the flu, and she
won't be able to sing. So we went over, but we didn't hear her.
Finally, I did get her into La Boheme in the San Francisco
Opera. She played—not Mimi. What's the other one?
Nathan: Oh, the girl, the flirtatious one. The one who has the special
role in the cafe. I'll think of her name. Musetta.
Zellerbach: Yes, Musetta. She was on a Saturday matinee, and she had
excellent notices. She did a hell of a job of acting, but I
couldn't get Adler to give her a lead.
Anyway, they had this opera, it was before the Spring
Opera. McEnerney supported it, I think. They wanted to give
Franca a job, to sing in one of the operas. But that wasn't
good enough for her. That's second rate. If she took that
job, she would lose other jobs, because it would detract from
her singing. So she didn't take it.
reputation of herself,
her eight years or so.
That was a big mistake. She should have taken it, but
she was "too good," you know. She always had such a high
I was getting no place fast. I had
I said, "Well, Franca, I think I've
had it." "What are you going to do? What am I going to do?"
I said, "I've spent all the money on you that I'm going to
spend. I'll give you a year to find yourself, but after the
year's up, then you're on your own." Which I did. I was just
throwing money down a rat hole.
149
Zellerbach: But in the meantime, I had my income tax examined. I
don't know if you know Lou Aaron? He's my CPA. The young
tax examiner came down here and looked over my relationship
with Miss Duval. He asked me if I had any personal relation
ship with her. I said, "No." "Is she a relation of yours?"
"No." "Is there a family relation of yours?" "No relationship
at all." "Well, she says here she has--" It wasn't a maid,
it was some term for a maid.
Nathan: A companion?
Zellerbach: No, no. It's a woman that does housekeeping for her, took
care of her. I supported that too. He wanted to know who
she was. Wanted to know the history of her, and so forth.
In the meantime, I was pretty well documented. I had all the
clippings, all the reviews, everything. I had a stack that
high. I said, "Here it is." I said, "I promoted her. She's
highly recommended, but she just got so far, and evidently she
couldn't go any further. There isn't enough work around. So
I've done my duty, and I'm fading out of the picture."
He said, 'Veil, are you sure this isn't a personal matter?"
I said, "No, strictly business. You've seen the contract I've
had with her. You've seen the books." I kept books on her,
with all her expenditures. I had a summary of her expenses
and what she took in, what she laid on, and what for. I said,
"After all, she could have been a bonanza. She could have
made me a millionaire." I said, "She's no different than
Frankie Sinatra. I'd love to have had Frankie Sinatra when he
first started—had an interest in him. That goes with Bing
Crosby. That goes with any of them. After all, she's no
different. If you can have a horse, and the horse is deductible,
I see no reason why she's not deductible. She's in the same
category." So after he was with me for about half an hour or
so, he says, "Yes, I guess you're right."
The result was that this protege" of mine lived in Paris,
and finally got herself a job as a prima donna in the Folies
Bergere. She sang seven nights a week and two matinees. She
worked two solid years. In the meantime she married a fellow
by the name of Carlo Nel. He ' s a very nice young fellow. He
was the coming—what 's his name, with the straw hat? French?
Nathan: Oh, the coming Chevalier?
150
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Yes. He was the coming Chevalier. He imitated Chevalier.
He was Chevalier's protege, except Chevalier didn't do
anything for him. He used to sing on television, in night
clubs. After the two years, they decided to come back here
and see if he could find a job here. They lived back here
for six months. He was no Chevalier, and they weren't looking
for him. So they moved back.
I still correspond with her, and see her. We're very
friendly and all. So anyway, we went one night to hear her
in the Folies Bergere.
How was she?
Of course we were right up front, to see all the Folies girls
all made up, and the costumes were filthy dirty, oh and the
paint odor that came off the faces, and everything else.
You could just smell it all. She came out and she sang Tosca.
When we heard her screeching, I had to take my handerkerchief
out almost and weep. Her voice was completely gone. Just
forcing herself. That was the end. That was the last time I
heard her. In the meantime, last year I think, or the year
before, she went into a French musical comedy and spent I think
a year in that. I don't know what she's doing now. So that
was my last protegg.
That's quite a story,
you.
It's quite a gamble for them, and for
Nathan :
These are things you learn. I thought she was a great prima
donna, I could travel around Europe with her, my wife and
myself, and meet all the princesses and princes and everybody
else fawning over her. But that was the end. She's the last
protege.
That's a fascinating story.
151
A Pianist at the Conservatory
Zellerbach: Those were the only two, and I've never taken another one. I'm
now interested in little Karen Hutchinson, the Black pianist.
Nathan: How old is she now?
Zellerbach: She's now eighteen. We met her when she was about fourteen
years old. I first got acquainted with her when Fiedler
found her and had her on one of our Pop Concerts. She had
rave notices. She's little kid, five feet tall. Her hand
just reaches one octave, that's all. She works to widen her
hands all the time, to reach the octave. But boy, is she
intense. Can she play.
Her father's a doctor down in San Mateo. Dr. Hutchinson.
A very nice gentleman. Her mother's a charming woman. They're
all musical. There's a brother that's musical too. She went
over to a teacher here who thought she should go to the Paris
Conservatory. That's where she is now. This is her second-
third year, I think. She's been winning all the prizes. This
year we had her back, and she played Gershwin's Rhapsody in
Blue. She got a terrific ovation. So anyway, she's back for
another year.
Nathan: She is not a protege".
Zellerbach: No. Oh no. I just helped a little. She's out at the San
Francisco Conservatory. They sponsor her. So I send them a
donation to use for whoever they want. It's not specific.
I give it to them, and it's up to them. If he doesn't want to
give it to her, that's his business. You used to be able to
do it directly, you see. Under the new law you can't. He's
delighted, because it gives the Conservatory a better reputation.
Nathan: Sure. And you have a certain verification that this person is
talented too.
Zellerbach: Oh yes. No question about it. She has good talent. There'll
be a big difference in the next five years. But I'm not doing
what I did before. Her father and mother support her. What is
given goes for her lessons over there, to help her father and
mother out .
152
Nathan: Right, and the family really is still in charge.
Zellerbach: Yes. I'm just a friend.
Nathan: You manage to find some very interesting things to do.
Zellerbach: That's the history of my protege's.
Nathan: A very good story.
Zellerbach: I've been offered many more, but I've turned them down.
Nathan: It certainly must have added interest to your life, even when
it went wrong.
Zellerbach: It did. It's lots of fun, you know. It gives you something
to try, to help somebody. If they succeed, or if they don't
succeed—well.
I just came out of helping a good friend of mine get
his son into U.C. at Santa Cruz. He couldn't wait to get
in, you know. The youngster comes from Cleveland, and he
couldn't get in on his own. I knew his father and mother very
well. I didn't know the boy very much at all. "Oh, he's a
good boy, a good student. Everything is fine. His heart will
be broken if he doesn't get in. He's so anxious." But to make
a long story short, I got him in.
He was there less than a month. I had a letter from him.
He's decided he's going to leave, because he wants some time
to think over what he wants to do.
Nathan: [Laughter] Oh.
Zellerbach: When I read that letter, I was fit to be tied.
153
ZELLERBACH PAPER COMPANY: DEVELOPMENT OVER THE YEARS
(Interview VIII, November 19, 1971)
Nathan: There is another part of your life that we could talk about,
the paper industry itself. We really haven't gotten into
the Zellerbach Paper Company or the Crown Zellerbach operation.
Maybe you would like to develop the business part of your
story that we barely touched on in the beginning. Is it
correct that you began to be affiliated with the Zellerbach
Paper Company in 1917?
Zellerbach: That's right. November, 1917.
Nathan:
And you began as personnel manager?
The Export Department
Zellerbach: No, I didn't begin as personnel manager. As I said earlier,
I took charge of the export department. It was during the
war. We had had no export department. But then during the
war, we had all kinds of business from the Orient: Japan and
Indochina, and Australia. Coming out of the Wharton School,
I knew something about a bill of lading and a few other things,
so I built up a very large business during the war. Of course
as soon as the war was over, the gravy train quit, but during
that period, we made a lot of money out of our export business.
We were shipping newsprint to China. You know, they had
a standard size of lightweight newsprint that they used in China.
It was 31 inches by 43 inches, and 27 pounds to 500 sheets.
That's lightweight.
154
Nathan: Is that how big a newspaper page is opened out?
Zellerbach: A page opened out, is probably about somewhat the size of
our own. The Chinese papers were only four pages' they just
fold them up. We shipped them out in bales. That was the
size that was normal for Oriental newsprint, and we shipped
a lot of pulp paper out there, to Japan. Cardboards, everything
I could lay my hands on.
Nathan: How did it happen then that you could get this business?
Because European suppliers were no longer furnishing it?
Zellerbach: Yes. The Orient had no other sources of supply. Europe was
shut down, so the only place they could get it from was here.
We did a big business. I made some pretty good connections,
and I bought all they would give me, and I sold all I could
get.
Nathan: When you say pretty good connections, do you mean suppliers?
Zellerbach: Suppliers. So that's how I started.
Nathan: You started with a big success^ That's wonderful.
Zellerbach: In fact we started a branch down in Batavia, that's now
Jakarta. We ran into trouble down there, when we shipped a
lot of coated book paper. Not having much knowledge of
storage in the tropics, [laughter] we found it stuck together,
because of the humidity. It wasn't packed right. So we took
a little loss down there. We closed the branch and said,
"The hell with the thing. We'll just ship paper and let
somebody else store it." But anyway, that didn't amount to
an awful lot.
Nathan: At that time, I suppose, the American producers were not
competitive with the Europeans?
Zellerbach: Oh we weren't competitive with anybody. You could name any
price you wanted. In fact we were just finishing our newsmill
up at Port Angeles, our first newsmill. I had just finished
college, married, and just moved back out here.
155
Boxes, Paper Bags and Paper Towels
Zellerbach: Have I told you the story of the National Paper Products
Company?
Nathan: No, tell me about it. That was National Paper Products?
Zellerbach: Yes. They built that board mill at Stockton. It's still
there. It's part of Fibreboard now.
Nathan: You called it a board mill?
Zellerbach: A board mill. Fibreboard. They made boxes. Cannery boxes,
cannery cases. That was the time, I think I told you, when
my father got the contract from the California Packing
Corporation.
Nathan: No, I haven't heard this.
Zellerbach: That's how we built that mill.
Nathan: With a contract from California Packing?
Zellerbach: Yes. He was the one that arranged it. A paraffin company.
We were the only manufacturers of cannery cases on the coast,
and we used to do a little jobbing. We used to do a large
business with them. They did the same with us that Crown did
when we built the Port Angeles Mill. They said they were
going to take everything direct. So my father fixed them up
by getting the Cal Pak contract, which is the largest one,
and we built the mill with it. That was our second. Then I
think our third was Port Townsend. That's the old Zellerbach
Corporation.
Nathan: You didn't need a contract? You had financing, then?
Zellerbach: Yes. That mill also made board to start with, and then they
also put in a kraft machine. Those two machines are still
running.
Nathan: Is kraft what the big paper bags are made out of?
Zellerbach: Yes. That's when, in 1925, we consolidated with Crown-Willamette,
If you want it, I'll get you the history.
156
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
I'll be glad to have it.
think I have all of it.
I have parts of it, but I don't
Nathan :
Zellerbach:
We were in the mill business before that, in 1917. That was
at the beginning of the war, when we had a connection with
the Carthage Paper Mills, and they supplied us with paper
toweling. We converted it into the paper towel. We had a
patent on the interfolded towel, so we had a converting plant
here in San Francisco. The paper towel started right here.
Then we opened up back East, and we had this connection to
supply us the raw materials. When the war broke out, they
didn't want to supply us any more, because they could earn
more money by doing other things. That put us in the position
of having to buy them out.
I was just married and I was living in Cleveland temporarily,
working for the Joseph & Feiss Company, the clothiers. I think
I talked to you about that.
We had a little Overland automobile, you know, a little
four-cylinder Overland. There were two seats in the front,
and you got in the back, a convertible. So my wife and I hit
the highway, and we drove from Cleveland to Carthage, New York.
That's where we had our first contact with a paper mill. I
had nothing to do with any of the negotiations. I just went
there to visit it, and see what it was.
And eventually then, it was bought out?
Yes. We bought them out.
A Book Paper Machine in Port Angeles
Zellerbach: One incident was with the Whelan Brothers. They had several
pulp mills all along the British Columbia coast, with timber
attached to them. They were trying to sell these pulp mills,
because they were in financial difficulty. They came out, and
I interviewed them as the export manager. I turned them over
to my father, and he found out that they had a brand new paper
machine, a book paper machine, in storage over at Port Angeles,
They were going to ship pulp over to Port Angeles and make it
into book paper. That way, they would avoid the duty.
157
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Oh.
There was a duty on paper but not on pulp?
Nathan:
Zellerbach :
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
That's right. Wood pulp and newsprint always come in free,
but paper, coated book paper, has a substantial duty on it.
So they shipped the pulp in and they would make the book
paper, and they'd do pretty well. This was a brand new
machine, that had never been run. It had been sitting there
for years. We found that out, so my father thought it was
quite an opportunity. I was sent up to look over the pulp
mills, but I didn't know anything about it. This mill was
an independent company in which the Zellerbachs have a
majority interest. It was publicly financed.
Now, when you say publicly financed, was that when Dean Witter
and Company began to handle your stock?
No, it was Blyth- Witter, at that time. Then they split up,
and it became Blyth and Company. Blyth handled most of our
underwriting until this last underwriting. They've been our
financers for years. We got the mill built.
Now on the trip up the West Coast to look at the Whelan
pulp mills, the only transportation was by boat. A mill right
near Vancouver was called Mill Creek. I went to see that,
and I took the steamer up to Swanson's Bay on the coast near
Prince Rupert, B.C., and stayed there and looked at that
operation. Then they had another mill on Vancouver Island,
on the west coast, at Port Alice. We were dropped in the dead
of night in the fog at Port Hardy. We had to cross an
isthmus, and then take a boat on the lake to get to Port Alice.
We debarked from the steamer around six or seven in the
evening. The steamer waited out in the stream. I don't know
how they knew where they were. They were waiting for the
Indians to come out and pick me up.
The Indians?
Yes. A couple of Indians came out. They brought a boat.
Bravely, I got in it. I didn't know where the hell we were
going. So we started off, and all we could hear were the
foghorns, but the Indians knew where. they were going, and
eventually we arrived at Port Hardy. There was a bar with a
few rooms above it, musty and cold. I went to bed, but I
didn't take my clothes off. I put heavy blankets on me, so
heavy they were like lumps of lead. But it was so damned cold,
I couldn't do much sleeping. It was almost daybreak, so we got up.
158
Nathan: How big a group were you then?
Zellerbach: There were only two of us traveling. There were other people
there. Then we had some of our own people come over from
Port Alice to get us. We had to tramp over an isthmus, to
get to the boat, and the boat took us up to Port Alice, which
was a very interesting, quite a good operation. It was their
best.
Nathan: Was that a saw mill?
Zellerbach: Oh no. These were all pulp mills. So then we went over to
Port Angeles, and they showed me this paper machine. When
I went back to report to my father, I said, "I don't know
much about the pulp mills they've got, but I think the most
interesting thing is this brand new paper machine in storage.
You could get that running in a hurry, and I think you could
make a lot of money."
We negotiated, and they brought the paper machine in.
Instead of buying the pulp mills, we bought pulp from them,
and we made newsprint on the paper machine. I still was in
the export department, and a general manager of the Melbourne
Age came up. That was a newspaper in Melbourne, Australia.
They couldn't get newsprint, so they wanted a contract with us.
We finally made a contract for 500 tons a month for five years.
I think I charged them--I don't know--I think it was eight cents
a pound. Before the war, newsprint was selling at around, I'd
say, three or four cents. We got eight cents a pound, at the
mill. That was $160 a ton.
Nathan: Did they have to pay for transportation?
Zellerbach: They had to pay for the transportation, and they had to post
an irrevocable letter of credit for the whole amount. In an
irrevocable letter of credit, the bank guarantees the payments.
We started to ship against it before the war was over, and as
soon as the war was over, the guy came running back and wanted
to cancel the contract. We said to him, "No, nothing doing.
We'll adjust the price, but you have to extend the contract,
so we'll get the full tonnage." He said he'd have to go back
and consult. So we said, "Go ahead. In the meantime, we're
still shipping." He finally came back and said, "No," they
wouldn't extend the contract. We said, "That's all right.
We'll fulfill the contract."
159
Zellerbach: Well, couldn't we do something? They said, "We're going
broke paying this bill." We said, "We're sorry. We'll go
broke if we don't collect, because that's how we built the
mill, on the basis of this contract." In other words, five
years, at $160 a ton, that's what? 30,000 tons of paper.
I think we must have made about, oh, say at $160 a ton — I
think we made over $100 a ton on it. We made $600,000 to
$700,000 a year. In those days it cost about a million and
a half dollars to build a mill, including the paper machine.
So this contract practically paid for the mill.
Nathan: How did you finally resolve it? Did you just keep shipping?
Zellerbach: Certainly. We had the letter of credit. There was nothing
they could do. They couldn't sue us. I even had the Consul
General of Great Britain certify the contract.
Nathan: Did you foresee that this might happen?
Zellerbach: We were taking no chances. We never did any business with him.
So why should we take a chance? We could have sold the paper
to others, at the time. That practically ended my export
career. When the war was over, I got out of the export
business.
Then I organized the first personnel department the
Zellerbach Paper Company ever had. I brought new ideas from
the Wharton School.
Nathan: What were some of your new ideas?
Zellerbach: We used to have the superintendent hiring and firing the
warehousemen, and each department head hiring and firing all
their own personnel. But I centralized the whole thing, as
I mentioned earlier. We started to set standards, and begin
a little sense of order. If anybody wanted to hire any help,
they had to come through the personnel department ; then we
set up applications and histories and background. Before
that, the only thing the superintendent asked a warehouseman
was, "Where did you work last?" He had no record of where he
worked, whether he was a thief, or who he was. When I came
out of the Wharton School, this business of centralizing
industrial relations and personnel work was just getting
underway .
160
Managing the San Francisco Division
Zellerbach: Then, the next step, I was made the manager of the San Francisco
division of the Zellerbach Paper Company. Then I hired a
young man who had been in the same class with me , a Calif ornian.
He came in as the operating manager.
Nathan: Do you remember his name?
Zellerbach: Yes. Gene Breyman, E.A. Breyman. Then the superintendent had
to work under him, you see. That caused a lot of commotion,
because the superintendent was an old-timer. My father said
I was wrecking the business already.
Nathan: The change must have come hard.
Zellerbach: Oh sure. A lot of the changes came hard. Then I brought a
young fellow out with me from Pennsylvania, Dave Morris. I
put him in the export department after I got out. He worked
with us for, oh, I guess five or six years. Then he went
into the paper business himself, as a competitor.
Nathan: [Laughing] I see! That always feels good.
Zellerbach: That taught me a very good lesson too.
Nathan: What lesson was that?
Zellerbach: You want to be sure when you give a friend a job, he doesn't
double-cross you and go to work for himself. If you put him
in selling, he'll take his accounts with him.
Nathan: But how can you protect yourself?
Zellerbach: Well, I can protect myself from my own friends. I can't protect
myself from people we hire off the street, except knowing that
the basic Jewish trait is that they usually can't work in a
big corporation.
Nathan: Is that so?
Zellerbach: That was my experience.
Nathan: They're too individualistic?
161
Zellerbach: That's right. They've got to work for themselves. They've
got to be their own bosses. My younger son is an example.
He worked in the Zellerbach Paper Company for quite a few
years, did a good job selling, but it was too confining. He
criticized everybody, nobody was doing anything right. He's
a good salesman, brought in a lot of business. Then he got
married, and I used to go out and see him when his son Gary
was a baby. I used to drop by there around 5:15 p.m., and
my son had already been home. He got off work at 4:00 p.m.,
to get his siesta. [Laughing]
Nathan: That's not your style.
Zellerbach: No. No. That was not my style.' My wife would holler because
I never would get home. So finally Steve made up his mind he
just couldn't work for us. It took him a long time to get
up the nerve to tell me he was going to quit. I said, "Really?
If you want to quit, you don't feel right, then do it. But
you have a great opportunity here." Well, he didn't think he
had. I said, "Then, Steve, if you want to go on your own, go
ahead. I'm not going to stop you."
So he quit. He's been a wheeler and dealer ever since,
in one business after another. He's smart. But he has to be
his own boss .
His brother is just the opposite. Bill works well with
people. He works well in an organization. There are no two
alike. Bill is the only Zellerbach left in the corporation.
He might occupy a very important position there. He's the
senior vice president of the corporation, and he's president
of the Zellerbach Paper Company. He's a member of the board
of directors. He's a member of the executive committee. He's
right in the top management group, which is where he should be.
Nathan: What is the relationship now between the corporation and
Zellerbach Paper Company?
Zellerbach: The corporation owns the Zellerbach Paper Company.
Nathan: But the company is a separate operation?
Zellerbach: Well, it was, but they have been consolidated. The com
pany is still run as a separate operation. We still have
the directors meetings, and the Crown -Zellerbach executives come
162
Zellerbach: to the directors meetings. But they don't touch it. It's
an entirely different business, the same as when I ran it.
But we are wholly owned by the corporation.
I ran the business, and they kept their nose out of it.
When they wanted to get their nose in, I said, "Either I run
it, or you run it, because you don't know a damned thing
about merchandising. It's like a manufacturing man trying
to run a department store. They don't mix. It's an entirely
different mentality; the jobbing business, and wholesaling
is service."
Nathan: The Zellerbach Paper Company does jobbing and wholesaling?
Zellerbach: That's what they are, wholesalers. They don't manufacture
anything. Anyway, getting back to the early days, I was the
manager of the Zellerbach Paper Company I think until '29. In
'29 I was thirty-six years old.
President of Zellerbach Paper Company
Zellerbach: I was pretty young when I became President and took charge
of the Zellerbach Paper Company from my father. Of course,
during my regime I made a lot of changes.
Nathan: What kinds of changes?
Zellerbach: I made a lot of changes in the policy of running the company.
We put younger people in charge, and we rebuilt our sales
organization. We put in inventory controls. My father was
always a person who said he could never lose a salesman. He
was always afraid the man was going to take business away from
the company.
Nathan: So he wouldn't fire him?
Zellerbach: No. He just couldn't lose a salesman. It was a fetish.
Drunks or no drunks.' [Laughter] When a salesman came in and
said, "Mr. Zellerbach, I haven't had a raise. I want a raise."
My father would say, "Don't worry, I'll take care of it."
Then he'd walk out, thinking he was going to get a raise, and
he never got one.
Nathan:
Did your father do this on purpose?
163
Zellerbach: No, he would just make the man feel happy. Then when he
started to holler again, oh, he forgot to do it, you know.
But I had to change all that. If a person came in and wanted
a raise --especially when I was running the San Francisco
division and I didn't think he deserved it, I told him why.
I said, "You're not earning enough to justify a raise."
Reorganizing the Systems
Nathan: Talking about your interest in Zellerbach Paper Company, and
about reorganizing the sales system, I did want to ask you
a little more about that. Did you assign people to a certain
territory?
Zellerbach: Sure. You know, in the first place, we tried different
areas of selling. You divide the city. During my father's
time, a salesman would go all over town. He didn't have any
territory. He just had accounts. They assigned accounts to
different men. He'd go maybe down here for one, and way out
here for another. We finally reorganized it all into areas.
Then we kept the salesmen in the area.
That took a little doing, to get them to give up some of
their old accounts. But you increased efficiency.
Nathan: Were they paid a salary or commission?
Zellerbach: They were paid a salary; then we finally put in both the salary
and bonus. My father always fixed wages by guess and by God,
you know. He'd chisel around with the boys. The more they
hollered, the more money they got.
So we got going, and related the compensation to their
gross profit. What were they making on the sales? It wasn't
dollars, because they'd go out and sell all kinds of merchandise,
and if we can't make a trading margin on it, what good is the
business? Then we put in perpetual inventory.
In the old days with my father, he never had any inventory
controls. The only time they knew they couldn't fill an order
was when they were out of it. They had no records, so they
never knew whether they sold a ton a month, or ten tons a month,
164
Zellerbach: or if they sold a ream a month. As a consequence, we had
all kinds of colors of bond papers. Some colors never sell.
We reduced the numbers of stock and reduced our inventory,
and put in all these different kinds of controls.
So many of the things that I started we still use. Now
we've even modernized that. The same thing in credit control.
The salesmen never handled credit. We finally put in the rule
that the salesman had to collect his accounts, and if he
didn't collect them, he couldn't sell them. Small competitors
used to cut prices and then give credit. That isn't what we
did.
We did that same thing with printers, you know. We said,
"We want you to make money on our merchandise, and if you
can't make money on it, then you tell me, and maybe we can
help you. But as long as you're making money, we expect to
make money. So we don't expect to haggle with you on the price."
Nathan: So you sold to printers? You mean you sold to newspapers?
Zellerbach: Printing papers, yes. We had a business that was divided into
printing papers, wrapping papers (now it's not the wrapping
paper division, it's the industrial paper division) and then
we had stationery and notions. But now we are out of the
notions. That we found was too expensive when we started
putting in controls.
We used to sell Listerine, and they used to fix the price.
I think we made a gross margin of ten percent. We had to
break cases. If a druggist or somebody wanted three bottles,
we would give them three bottles, and by the time you did all
the work, you couldn't make any money. The same thing with
razor blades. You couldn't make any money on razor blades,
Devote your time to something you can make money on. Get new
items, and things of that kind.
It's the same thing, I remember in Los Angeles. We had
a big stationery business; sold playing cards. We were one
of the U.S. Playing Cards' largest customers. It was computed
on how many playing cards they sold. But they were a short
margin area. They turn over fast, they're expensive. Finally
we put a check. We weren't selling them. Our warehouseman
was selling them.' [Laughter] We were losing all kinds of money
on them. So we threw those out. The only way we'd sell playing
165
Zellerbach: cards was in bulk. We wouldn't break a case, and they were
all under lock and key. The same thing goes with watches
and things of that kind. We have merchandise control. We
have some pilferage; you can't avoid it. But it's pretty
difficult. Unless they're a couple of people in cahoots,
they can't carry out cases of toilet paper, and cases of
towels and cases of printing paper, unless somebody's going
to pack them out and put them on a truck.
We've already found that, where we had collusion between
a teamster and a warehouseman. Then we used to put detectives
on their trail. One time we found a whole garage filled with
paper.
Nathan: [Laughter] That was all your paper?
Zellerbach: Sure. A couple of our personnel were just taking it and re
selling it to small grocery stores, at a lower price than
they could buy it anyplace else, naturally. Those are things
you learn as you grow older in business. New controls come
in. So when we put in perpetual inventory, we knew how much
of an item we were selling, and how fast it sold. Normally,
unless it turned over within sixty days, we discontinued it.
Nathan: When you found an item that didn't sell well, and you would
discontinue it, then did you have the alternative of finding
a new item?
Zellerbach: We were always picking up new items. That's for sure. If
you're selling one year, you may not the next year, because
uses go off. For example, when they had the Crocodiles we
used to sell a lot of small-sized bags. We don't sell any
small-sized bags any more. If we do, it's very rare. If we
sell a quarter-pound bag, that probably goes to a drugstore,
or a candy store. If you sell to a grocery store today, you
sell these big bags for packaging. And you sell the smaller
ones, but you don't get much below an 8-pound bag.
Nathan: Do you have any plastic bags?
Zellerbach: Oh sure. We handle them and make them. We do a big business
in plastics now. We also have some exclusive lines which are
very good. We sell cellophone in rolls for conversion purposes.
We converted ourselves for grocers and people who want different
size sheets, small sheets for wrapping meats, and different
things. We carry a list of 20 or 30,000 items.
166
Profit Centers
Nathan: Do you sell things that might be competitive with paper, like
aluminum foil?
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. We have aluminum foil, but the corporation doesn't
make aluminum foil. We have wax rolls and things of that
kind. For example we used to sell corporation brands of toilet
paper, Zee and Chiffon. Only in certain of our divisions now
do we sell them. We couldn't make any money on them. Unless
the corporation wanted the business and were willing to pay
the Zellerbach Paper Company for doing it, we said, "We're
not going to lose money. The corporation will make it, and
we'll lose it. That's not what you call profit centers."
Nathan: Profit centers?
Zellerbach: In a large corporation, you have profit centers. The Zellerbach
Paper Company is a profit center. Our principle packaging
division is a profit center. Our corrugated division is a
profit center. Our timber operation is a profit center.
Transportation and Modern Merchandising
Zellerbach: We have our own truck lines, private. We don't haul for anyone
else but ourselves, so we don't get mixed up with the ICC
[Interstate Commerce Commission].
Nathan: When you say "we" does that mean the corporation?
Zellerbach: The corporation. The Zellerbach Paper Company started the
truck line. In fact, the Zellerbach Paper Company runs it for
them.
Nathan: When you were organizing the salesmen for Zellerbach Paper, did
your territory include just San Francisco?
Zellerbach: You mean when I was the manager of the Zellerbach Paper Company
in San Francisco? We had a branch in Oakland, we had a branch
in Sacramento. Our territory included more than San Francisco.
167
Zellerbach: We went up the north coast as far as Eureka and Crescent
City, right up to the state line. And then we went down as
far as, I think, Paso Robles. The merchandising is entirely
different now.
Nathan: How do they do it now?
Zellerbach: Now you have freeways, and fast motor transportation. When
I was in business, we had horse-drawn vehicles. Later on,
we had motor vehicles. When I first started we had big two-
horse drays. That's why we had that warehouse right in the
middle of town, because you had to be near your printers, you
had to be near your customers. Now it doesn't make any
difference where they are.
This is my son Bill's operation. He's the one that
developed this. The San Francisco region today runs all of
Northern California; we don't have a separate manager any
more in Sacramento or Stockton, or Oakland. In fact we have
no warehouse in Oakland. We used to have a big warehouse
there. There used to be a big warehouse in San Jose.
Nathan: Where is the warehousing done now?
Zellerbach: South San Francisco. Today they load the trucks at night, and
they go out the first thing in the morning. They run these
big vans down to San Jose, all the way. The San Jose orders
come up to the San Francisco division, and if it's there by
4:00 p.m., it's delivered the next day.
A printer used to call up; he had to have it in an hour,
so we'd send it out. Now he gets it in the regular delivery.
If he wants it faster, he has to come and get it. There are
a lot of things we don't do that we used to do, because we
were small and needed all the business—we still need all the
business we can get, but we don't do certain things any more.
Nathan: I take it that the freeways have been very important in your
delivery system.
Zellerbach: Well, sure. All of our operations are right near freeways.
For example in south city, all the trucks coming to San
Francisco deliver every day, and they go to Oakland every day.
We have a distributing point down in. San Jose, where a big van
will go down, and then they'll transfer a lot of their
merchandise to a smaller truck. The truck will operate out
of there.
168
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Could any of this be done by train, if you wanted to?
No, you can't operate that distribution by train. You can't
afford to handle it.
Would containerization work?
Of course we do deliver a lot of merchandise by railway, in
carloads. Yes, we sell carloads of paper, like newsprint.
There's also a lot of newsprint that's not shipped in carloads,
and it comes down in these great big over-the-road trailers.
They can handle around forty tons, sometimes by a truck and
a trailer. You see them on the highways.
Yes.
How would I recognize one of your trucks?
It's either Crown Zellerbach, or Zellerbach Paper Company.
Yes, I've seen them.
Sure. There's a paper company, up in Everett, Washington. We
buy the paper, and they give us a freight allowance, so we
can go up there and pick up the paper that we own. It's not
theirs. It belongs to us. Now, if it didn't belong to us, we
couldn't pick it up. We couldn't haul for them, but if they
give us a freight allowance, that's another thing. They can't
pay us freight. If they pay the freight, then we'd be a
common carrier. You can't afford to be a common carrier,
because after all, the rates are set. You don't have to own
a truck line of your own to be a common carrier. You can get
any common carrier to do it for you.
And you found that it is more efficient to have your own truck
line.
Yes, it's not only more efficient, but we make a lot of money
doing it. We save a lot of money. It runs into many thousands
of dollars; that's pure profit.
169
Some Corporation Customers
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Yes. You were saying that in the earlier days, your father
had connections in Sacramento, and so he had the state's
paper business. Are you still involved with it?
It was bid business in my father's time, but they didn't
have so much business to give out. Of course my father was
in, so they used to fix the specifications a little bit, to
make sure he got the business.
Do you also bid for other public agencies? Say for the city
of San Francisco?
Oh we supply many public agencies (the corporation, not
Zellerbach Paper Company) . The corporation supplies Sunset
Magazine. Time -Life and Crown Zellerbach have a joint
operation at St. Francisville, making book paper for Time -Life.
We don't make all their paper, but they have to take half the
capacity. If they can't take it, it's too bad, but they have
to pay the machine down-time for it. In other words, if we
can sell it, they'd be very happy. It costs them less to pay
for the down-time than it does to sell it, because they don't
make anything off it. We ship their paper for their magazines
that are printed out here, you see. Time and Life are printed
in Los Angeles.
Does book paper have some rag content?
Some very high-grade book papers, special papers, but not the
ordinary book papers. For ordinary book paper, some is coated,
and some is uncoated. If you pick up a novel, it is an
uncoated book; and then you pick up some of these Sunset
colorful things, that's a coated book. Life is on coated
book paper. Time is on coated book. There are different kinds
of paper.
170
Recycling
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Later I want to ask about how you recycle the paper,
you involved in any of that?
Are
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Yes. Sure. You want to know about recycling? Just sit here
and I'll get you the whole story, and you can read it.
[Laughing] I want you to tell me.' But I'll read it anyway.
When people think they're going to be able to get a hundred
percent recycled paper, there's going to be nothing but
recycled paper, that's a lot of bull.
Oh, you can't go just on recycled paper?
No. Just forget that, because there isn't that much around.
Recycled paper is picked up by the scavengers, or these waste
paper people. Then it's got to be sorted by hand. It becomes
so expensive vis-a-vis making it out of new pulp, new materials,
that you can't afford to use it.
If volunteers who believe in this were to do the sorting for
you, would that make it possible?
How are you going to depend on volunteers to keep chewing gum
and cellophane and all this stuff out? You can't recycle that.
If it gets in with paper, you wreck the machines. This recycling
business is like this law that Muskie's passing: by 1985 you
have to prove that the water you're putting into the stream
or the lake is of a quality that you can swim in, and you can
drink it--it has to be pure. Well, that's the millenium. Even
now, you don't drink pure water, unless it's distilled. If
you drink distilled water, you'll have goiter.
People don't use their common sense. You can make paper
out of wool. If you have a wool dress, that can be recycled
and bleached and made into paper, because it has a fiber.
But if you have some of these man-made substances, you can't
do it, because there's no fiber to them.
Right. You were saying that you have been engaged in recycling
in the industry?
171
to Stockton Mills. You'll
there. It's been in there
Zellerbach: Oh, for years. Yes. We've recycled newsprint. We recycle
paper right in our own mills. When we get the book paper, and
we put it into sheets, we have a side edge. Or even in making
rolls, you may have a side edge. That all goes back in the
beaters, and is recycled, and we use it again. That goes for
corrugated cases. There's a big collection of corrugated cases
and they're all recycled. Go up
see a big recycling operation up
for years. People think this is something new. They pass
laws about recycling. They have to define, "What is a recycle?"
When Congress says, "Everything's got to be 100 percent
recycled," then newspapers would have to go out of business.
You can't make a sheet of paper that's 100 percent recycled,
because there's no strength to it. You've got to put fiber in.
Even this has got fiber in it. A lot of this yellow note -pad
could be recycled, I mean the filler. This kind of paper has
got filler in it.
Maybe this is sulfite bond. Let's see what it is (tearing
a piece). There. You see, this has no recycled material in it.
See the fibers? All right?
Nathan: Yes. Is this sulfite?
Zellerbach: It might not be sulfite. It could be sulfate. See? This is
short-grain, you see. Cross-grain is tougher than with the
grain. (Demonstrating) This way it tears easily. This way
it doesn't. So therefore, when you put it in rolls, you put
the grain the long way. You can't make the grain the short way,
because the paper can jump the paper machine, with the grain
running in this direction. So it's got to be run that way. You
don't make paper cross-grained. There's a certain amount of
cross-grain in it, to give it some strength, but it's not the
same strength.
Same thing with the newsprint. Newsprint is about 75
percent ground wood, which has no fiber at all. It's a mush.
You've got 25 percent sulfate pulp in it, so it'll stick
together. Otherwise, it would never get through a press. So
when they say it's got to be 100 percent recycled, that's a
lot of bushwaJ
172
DEVELOPMENTS RE: THE CITY'S INTER -AGENCY COUNCIL ON THE ARTS
(Interview IV, December 17, 1971)
Nathan: Do you think the ordinance plan we spoke of earlier will be
brought up again?
Zellerbach: No, we decided not to bring the ordinance up. I talked to the
mayor last Monday. We're going to have a luncheon the first
part of January, at which he will be the host, or the chairman.
Then he will announce to the group what we propose to do, and
it'll be organized on an informal basis.
Nathan: Is this regional, or primarily for the city?
Zellerbach: This is the City's Inter-Agency Council on the Arts. It's
the one with the heads of all the city agencies that spend
money on the arts, plus the three museums. The museums are in
on it anyway, and the Opera, and the Symphony.
Nathan: That's great, isn't it? Knowing the way you work, I presume
you have already talked to some of these people.
Zellerbach: Yes, it's all been done. Everybody's agreed to it, and we
were supposed to put the ordinance in, and then the mayor
stopped us. He didn't think it was proper timing. He felt
that we'd get a lot of groups coming in, thinking we should
expand it and everybody being in on the act. Well, of course
that isn't the purpose of it.
Nathan: What is the purpose?
Zellerbach: As we said before, the purpose is to coordinate the city
agencies that are spending city money in any areas of the arts.
They're spending a total of probably a million and a half or
more to support the two big museums, and the San Francisco Art
Museum gets their rent free. And of course what the CAO grants
173
Zellerbach: to them from the hotel tax fund. On the other hand, the
Symphony and the Opera are not city agencies, but they're
so dependent on the city, they felt that they should be
in on the act, so we got them in. This way we hope to be
able to coordinate this much better.
The Park and Recreation Commission has a lot of money
to spend on recreation and the arts. A lot of those things
that we're doing in the Neighborhood Arts Program should be
done by the Park and Rec. They have more facilities, and they
have more money. They're not dependent on foundations. We're
starting in already with the Art Commission and the Park and
Rec to see if they can't work out a joint effort. Eventually,
if the Park and Rec get the proper help, and they have the
facilities and somebody to take a real interest in it who's
qualified, I think that instead of the Art Commission running
neighborhood arts, it could be the Park and Rec.
Nathan: Now, if Park and Rec carried some of these activities, what
would be the main focus of the Art Commission?
Zellerbach: We have plenty of work to do now. This was just a plus, in
trying to get this going. You read the Arts Resources Report.
You read the recommendation, which was to take the arts to
the neighborhoods. Now, they have mini -parks and public
squares and the other facilities that the Park Commission is
in charge of — after all, they're in charge of the Palace of
Fine Arts, that has a thousand-seat theater. We have to get
on our knees, and try to see if we can use it. The same thing
with the Nourse Auditorium. We've been trying to use that.
We can get it from the school department, and they'll give say,
the San Francisco Ballet Association, a lease back, for twenty
or twenty-five years. But then the Ballet will have to put
up about $500,000 or $600,000 to put the auditorium in shape.
If the Park and Rec were in it, then this comes between two
public agencies . So then it would be up to them to dig up the
half a million dollars out of the board of supervisors, and
also the school department, that's holding a few bucks too.
174
Coordination and Administration
Nathan: Would you think that there might have to be another person to
coordinate the various agencies for art activity?
Zellerbach: If we have this Inter-Agency, the Inter-Agency then should
be the controlling factor.
Nathan: But you'd have to staff that?
Zellerbach: Well sure. The way we have it set up, the Art Commission
would be the Secretariat. The president of the Art Commission
would be the chairman. It might happen to be me at the
present time. I'm not going to hang onto the Art Commission
forever. I'm trying to find a successor, but I haven't been
able to yet. I have to have an opening for him, too. I had
a very able young fellow who has been on the commission. I
was going to train him, and all of a sudden his business moved
to New York, and he went to New York. So that was the end of
it. Since then, I'm sorry to say that I don't see anyone on
the commission that I feel would be qualified to do the work
that I've been doing. I think he has to be a citizen that
people respect, and has access to the funds, and knows where
to get them. Of course that takes a period of time, and you
have to have a proper reputation. Take a person like Bill
Roth, for example. If Bill would take over, this would be
fine. He has the know-how, he has the backing, he has funds
to put up himself, in case of need, the same as I've been doing
over the years.
This Neighborhood Arts Program would never have gotten
off the floor, if it was left to the city. We'd never be
receiving money from them, unless somebody—being a little
facetious--like myself, was pushing the supervisors and the
mayor, putting the heat on them. If they could avoid putting
up the money for arts, they would give it to somebody else.
That's one of the problems.
Also, the president of the commission has to be the policy
maker, and watch that the boys follow the policy. Sometimes
that's difficult. For example, now, in practically all
situations, Snipper is an excellent man. He's an artist in
his own right, with lots of imagination, but as an administrator,
he just doesn't understand. You need to put somebody alongside
him. That's a little difficult, because we only have two
175
Zellerbach: positions. We've never had more than two employees on the
Art Commission, since it was founded. We have the executive
secretary, and a stenographer. We've been trying for a
third person for years. I think we have a half a person now.
Maybe this year we may push it through to get an assistant
to Snipper. It's a question of handling money and seeing
that things are done. Martin is being underpaid now.
Nathan: Is he on civil service?
Zellerbach: Yes, civil service. We've been trying to classify him in a
higher rate range. So we did get him classified, and then
the civil service boys out there pulled a couple of fast ones,
and he didn't make it. I was out there with him, and we all
agreed, and the civil service administrators all agreed to do
it. And I said to Martin, "Now, go ahead." So then when he
finds the thing is slipping, he should have come to me because
I could have said, "Here, you guys pulled a fast one. Now go
correct it," before it was too late. It went before the board
of supervisors, and was passed, and it was too late.
So I have it fixed up in this last conference with the
mayor. The mayor agreed a hundred percent that he's underpaid
and he should be paid more. I think he's drawing $13,000 a
year. Comparable people, or un-comparable people, are drawing
a lot more from the city than he is. You find similar jobs
are getting all the way from $18,000 to $25,000.
Consolidation: De Young Museum and the Legion of Honor
Zellerbach: You try to find the head of an art museum, and see what you're
paying today. You don't get them for chicken-feed any more,
because there aren't that many qualified around.
That's one of the things that helped the consolidation of
the De Young and the Legion of Honor. The De Young fired
their director, and so they suggested that we share our director,
Ian White, who's a very able young fellow. We insisted that
we get together on who was going to be his boss. If we were
paying him, and he was running two museums, who was going to
tell him where he was going to be and what he was going to do?
In order to have one master, they consolidated the boards now,
176
Zellerbach: as one organization. So in that way, he was able to get a
substantial increase in his compensation, which he deserves.
These are things you have to do, when you're playing around
with civil service and government. It's a mystic maze.
Nathan: Yes. I missed the date of that luncheon when the mayor will
call the people together. Is that going to be in January?
Zellerbach: Yes. The date is fixed already, and we're getting prepared.
We have the luncheon room. So now Joe Paul [Ed. note, 1976.
Joe Paul is deceased.] is getting everything on hand.
Nathan: Are you going to call in the press at this point?
Zellerbach: No, we don't let the press come in and sit and listen. It's
informal, so it doesn't come under the Brown Act. If it
came under the Brown Act, if it was formal, then it would
have to be open. This has nothing to do with the Brown Act.
So we can meet and talk all we want without worrying. The
only way you can have a private meeting today, you know,
under the Brown Act, is if you're talking compensation.
Otherwise it must be open to the public.
Nathan: How do you feel about this?
Zellerbach: At the Art Commission, there's nothing secret there. I think
six is a quorum. Three is not a quorum. So three of us can
meet without any problem. The minute you have four, then you
have a meeting and it's open to the public.
Nathan: I see. Thinking again about this inter-group organization,
about how long do you estimate it would take to be set up?
Zellerbach: Well, we have it all set up now. The only thing is, we have
to start meeting, and organize our programs and what we want
to do. You need to get the ideas to the other fellows, and
they have to sift them down, and see how they're going to
operate. Probably, like all these things, they operate with
different committees, different areas. You'll have a
committee on the Neighborhood Arts; you may have a committee
on music; you may have a committee on painting, or you may
have a committee on any area. Then they report to the whole
group. Then there is the question of how often you have to
meet , and matching up budgets . Which agency is going to apply
for the money, in order to do the work?
177
Nathan: And you think that the facilities will get better use this
way?
Zellerbach: If they don't, then we have a lot of bums working for the
city. I don't think we have. It's a very good team. I
think it should work out, because it's to the best interests
of all concerned. After all, the city is spending
almost $11 million on the arts now, the arts and related
things. The museums are costing them $18 million, and then
the Chief Administrative Officer is spending now I guess over
$1 million hotel tax on the arts, or things relating to it.
Then, they have the schools, the libraries. Joe Paul figured
it for me. Even the supervisors didn't realize how much the
city was spending on the arts.
They maintain the Opera House, and they get $450 a
performance of the Symphony and the Opera.
Nathan: Is that all?
Zellerbach: That's all. The Symphony has a lien on everything in the
Opera House, so they go in there for three nights. They can
put something else in, but they can't put it in if the
Symphony wants the time. If they bring in a big company like
the Bolshoi, you can't keep them there for four days waiting
to get back into the Opera House for three. So, today, now
with the Symphony, the new contract, they're putting up the
length of the orchestra service to forty-nine weeks. It's only
a matter of time before it'll be fifty-two. Of course part
of that is taken by the Opera. The Opera wants more time too.
They'd like a longer season. You'll notice that when the
Opera closed one week, they closed on a Saturday night, or a
Sunday night, and the Symphony opened the following Wednesday.
Then the Symphony closes in June; the regular season closes
in May, probably they'll extend it. Then the Opera already
would like to start rehearsals, in June or July. Anyway, we
need new halls so that the Opera can rehearse someplace else.
They don't know where. And if they do, it costs them money,
and they don't have the money, and they'll go broke, and it's
the old story. There's always the little internecine fighting
going on.
Nathan: Right. Well, maybe this cooperative group can help a little.
178
Zellerbach: There's no question about it. It's going to be a great help.
It can really be revolutionary, in the handling of, not only
the arts and related activities, but also any exhibition of
any kind, any entertainment of any kind, not only in art.
After all, look at the money the public's put up for
Candlestick Park. Now they're going to build a new Sports
Arena.
Nathan: Oh really? I missed that.
Zellerbach: Down on Yerba Buena. Candlestick Park, when the football
team doesn't practice there, they use it once a week, not
every week. They have nine home games. The baseball season
runs from April till October, but 50 percent of the time
they're not there. They're on the road.
Nathan: Too bad the Opera can't rehearse at CandlestickJ [Laughter]
Zellerbach: There you are. You've got a $25 million facility out there
that has practically no other uses.
Nathan: Now, do you foresee that this inter-agency group would set
priorities for development of new facilities?
Zellerbach: Well, they would certainly discuss them; they couldn't rule.
Every agency is still independent, because everybody guards
spending of his own money. As far as saying whether they can
build or not, that's not our business. You can't tell the
Redevelopment Agency what they're going to build. They have
the money and they're the ones that have to make the decision.
In the meantime, after it's built, then sometimes the city
has to take over and manage it, run it. Like the War
Memorial Board runs the old Opera House, and the War Memorial.
Any time they build a park, all these mini-parks have to be
taken care of by the Park and Rec. When they build a Plaza
down here, and if it has any greens in it, or flowers, they
have to take care of that. That's a big operation.
We've worked with the school department, who is very happy
to let us use their auditoriums at the various schools, when
the schools are not in session. The schools aren't in session
on the weekends, and they aren't running at night. They have
vacations. There are quite a few of the schools that have very
good facilities, especially some of the newer ones.
179
Zellerbach: Mission High has a very good auditorium. I haven't
seen the new Lowell auditorium, but I assume that must be
pretty good.
Nathan: Has Neighborhood Arts gone to those auditoriums yet, or are
you just considering it?
Zellerbach: No, we haven't gone into them, because that's up to those
that are doing it, if they want to go in. For example, the
San Francisco Ballet was put on last spring season out at
the college. They have a wonderful facility out there, you
see. Here you have this Palace of Fine Arts theater, with
a thousand seats, sitting there idle. One of their troubles
is the stage isn't big enough for ballet. It's a question
of the hangings. It was built for motion pictures. They did
use that for the picture festival. Since then, no one's used
it. The Ballet has used it a few times, but it wasn't too
successful, because they can't put the whole Ballet on the
stage. The Ballet now is in the Opera House, and they're doing
very well.
To have a building approved, they have to go through the
Planning Commission, the Art Commission, and for example they
have to go through Public Works and they have to go through
the electrical department. If you build a private building
you don't have to do that. All you do is have it approved
by the Planning Commission. When you build a public building,
you have something else again.
Nathan: It's sort of sad that all these groups are underfinanced.
Zellerbach: Of course, everybody's underfinanced. It's chronic.
Nathan: I'm interested also in what you said earlier about the inter-
agency group in the city. They have been dealing with this
question of the center?
Zellerbach: We're just getting that started. That's the second thing that's
coming from the original study. In the original study you'll
find that they wanted this inter-agency group. But the trouble
is when you make this official, you're dealing with too many
city agencies.
For example, there's the city level and the state level
and then you'd be dealing with the school districts and by
the time you try to change the law, you may as well forget it.
180
Zellerbach: Because people hate to give up what they have. So, the answer
is cooperation. Now, if this was to be a governmental
function, you couldn't have a group like the Symphony because
it's private.
Nathan: Right. So, it's both governmental and private.
Zellerbach: Yes. So, the only way we could do it was to make it voluntary.
The mayor is the head of it and this is the official policy
of the city. So, when he says they all come to a meeting, they
all come. As long as we have the mayor and he's all for it,
that gives it status. Then, after it gets organized and going
I don't care who the mayor is, it's beyond him to do anything
except to help it because if he doesn't then he starts to get
himself into trouble politically.
Committee on Activities Sponsors a Festival
Zellerbach: We've had two meetings now, the whole group, and we're going
to have another one probably in March. We have three committees.
One is facilities, one is finance, and the other activities.
The first thing is, they're going to put on a big show out at
the Civic Center with young people's schools, and children
from four to eight or ten, with primarily the work that Ruth
Asawa has been doing, plus what the Neighborhood Arts have been
doing.
It's going to be a festival, with all the facets: paintings,
sculpture, everything that the kids have been doing. This is
being organized by one of the committees, the committee on
activities, which is headed by Mr. Bill Roth.
And the facilities committee, we had a meeting with them
just a week ago talking about this whole [Performing Arts]
complex and as well as the Neighborhood Arts and what they can
do. Therefore, we involve all of them and they say that they're
all for it or all against it. If we get Allan Jacobs coming
out and saying, "Well, this is a lot of hogwash, you don't need
this. This is in the wrong place. The planning commission
doesn't want to approve it," then you're in trouble. So, the
answer is you put them on your team right away.
181
Ruth. Asawa and School Board Policy
Zellerbach: And you have Ruth Asawa, who got into the schools. She did
it herself. She had quite an article in the San Francisco
magazine, The Chamber, the Chamber of Commerce magazine last
month. She's done enough there, and that's the first money
and first recognition she's had from the school board (for
$35 thousand) for school projects.
That means now that this is the school board's policy.
So, instead of fighting to get in they acknowledged that
she's done the work. See that? (A wall plaque of Ruth
Asawa's "dough" work.)
Nathan: Oh yes. 55. Is that for your wedding anniversary?
Zellerbach: Yes. That's Ruth Asawa's gift to my wife and me.
Nathan: It's really delightful.
182
DEVELOPMENTS RE: ART COMMISSION, THE SENIOR CITIZENS'
CENTER, AND OTHER QUESTIONS
(Interview X, January 28, 1972)
Zellerbach: Yesterday I was on the phone for over an hour and a half
to different people.
Nathan: What were you tring to accomplish?
Zellerbach: This was all on the Senior Citizens' building. The Leroy
Vane bequest. The question of location. There's a
hassle going on between the elderly people and Park and Rec.
We have letters every day again now, that they don't want the
Senior Center located at Sixth Avenue. And the Park
Commission says they have a lot of people who say they want
it there, which is par for the course. It's usually fifty-fifty,
you see. The Civic Design Committee of the commission are not
unanimously against it, but the majority are against the
location.
Nathan: In the park?
Zellerbach: Yes. Of course there's a question under the charter as to
whether the Art Commission has the authority to say where the
location is. Our power is that we have jurisdiction over the
design of the buildings, and the landscaping and the plotting
of the building. But whether or not we can dictate the
location, that's another story. The Art Commission can hold
the thing up, not by saying they don't like the location, but
under our rules, any designs for public buildings are to be
submitted in three stages. The first stage is the preliminary
drawings, and plot plans, so that they don't get into a lot
of expense in making definitive drawings and then have them
thrown out .
183
Zellerbach: Then if the Civic Design Committee approves, they go to
the second phase. The second phase usually is partial working
drawings, so that they can still make changes if necessary,
but the plotting, placing of the building, is usually fixed.
When the second phase comes, they may have some changes in
entrances or things of that kind, you know; circulation and
traffic and parking come up, when you're designing a public
building.
Back to Phase One
Nathan: Have you had phase two?
Zellerbach: Oh no. This is phase one. Phase one was up once before and
we disapproved it. Now they're bringing phase one back again,
and I don't think there 've been any changes. They haven't
done anything as far as following suggestions of the Civic
Design Committee. There's a big discussion, and no unanimity
of opinion. For example, they're putting this building up,
and they only have ten parking spaces. The senior citizens
think they should have more parking spaces.
When they started to take soil tests, they found there
was a very large water main that runs right under the building
site. Which would mean that they're going to have to spend
a lot of money to protect the water main, and to make it
available, in case anything happens to it. So that's another
thing that they're all disturbed about. That'll raise the
cost of the building substantially, just getting the protection
of that water main. Or they'd have to move the water main.
At 36th Avenue there's the old police academy that's now
being used for senior citizens. There's a lot of parking and
a big area there. It's quite popular. A great many of the
senior citizens would like to see them rehabilitate this and
enlarge it, you see. They can put in 10,000 more square feet
and make it a real center for them, with parking and everything
else.
Then you have a group that thinks it ought to be in the
downtown area someplace.
184
Nathan: By the terms of the Vane bequest, could you take that money
and rehabilitate the other building?
Zellerbach: Some say we can't and some say we can. They can call the
whole complex by this man's name. There was a question that
the grant stated that he would prefer it in the park, but it
wasn't fixed that it had to go in the park. The Park
Commission is resting on that, that because he wanted it in
the park, it should be in the park.
The public's raising hell if we take anything away from
the park grounds, for buildings, because after all, it doesn't
cost anything. The land is there, so a lot of people in the
government say, "Well, let's put it in the park." They're
not putting any more monuments in the park. They haven't in
some years now. Of course that can change with a new Park
Commission. There's nothing against it by law.
This is going to be the hassle on Monday. I've advised
the president of the Park and Rec that I wouldn't have it
come up on Monday, because, I say, "You're going to have it
come up on Monday, you'll have nothing but a hell of a fight,
and you're going to be licked." He says, 'Veil, we know we
might be, but we've all decided, 'Let's find out one way or
another.'" I said, "You've already found out. All you're
doing is coming back for more."
Nathan: Is this Di Grazia?
Zellerbach: Yes. He's a nice guy. I'm trying to coach him a little bit.
Knowing the attitudes there, for me to go out there and try
to jam this thing through, I can't put myself in that position,
I have at times jammed things through, but not of such
consequence as this. The only time I pushed something through
was against Mr. Taliaferro.
Nathan: Oh, really?
Zellerbach: Well, I haven't seen you since Taliaferro. This was before
Christmas. His first meeting. He was put on the board as
a music member.
Nathan: A member of the Art Commission?
185
Artists Selling in the Streets
Zellerbach: Yes. So I said, "What did he ever play?" to the mayor. He's
a young Black. He likes to talk. I think he has a program
on NBC on Sunday. It follows some—what is it? The "discussion
of the week" or one of those national programs. And of course
at his first meeting, he started to say that we should pass
a resolution endorsing the right of the artist to sell in the
streets.
That was the first day I met him. After he got through
talking, I said, "Well, we're in no position to take any
action today. This is in the hands of the police department.
The law is against it. We're not here taking sides unless we
know more about it." So I said to him, "If you want to, you
go ahead. Go to the police department, go to the Downtown
Association, and get the facts of the matter. And at the
next meeting you can come in and make a report."
The next meeting, he comes in with a long "whereas,"
you know, a resolution. "Whereas. . .whereas. . . " All
about the poor artists. And we should go on record urging
the supervisors and the mayor to let the artists sell on the
streets. So he said the mayor has already come out and said
they could. Temporarily, you remember, right before Christmas,
he let them stay in certain spots, and they were testing in
court, too. Of course the police won the case. It's a police
right that they had to get a permit before they could sell.
Then they threatened to arrest them all. You read it in the
paper, I'm sure, so I'm not going to repeat that.
I guess it was at the January meeting, right after the
holidays, he brought this resolution in, saying what the
mayor had said. He had a young lawyer there too. I advised
the commission that we shouldn't take a position. We were
a public body, and we were all working under the mayor, we
were all his appointees, and we had no right to take a position
that would embarrass the mayor. And I wanted to know what
his position was, whether he favored it, or didn't favor it.
So I got a big argument, and the attorney said, "I had a
long conversation with the mayor. I can tell you, the mayor
approves this. This is what the mayor wants. We don't have
to wait." And he started to make a speech. So I let him go
186
Zellerbach: for a few minutes, and I said, "Now, wait a minute. The
mayor told you. That's fine. He didn't tell me. Till he
tells me, I'm still going to recommend that we lay this on
the table until I see the mayor and come back with his
official policy. I will report what his official policy is
at the next meeting."
The commission followed my advice on a move to lay it
on the table for the next meeting, when I would bring in a
report. Of course Taliaferro voted no. My good friend,
Ruthie Asawa, she voted no! [Laughing] Which is really
understandable, with Ruthie, if you know her.
Nathan: No, I don't, yet.
Zellerbach: Ruthie 's an artist. She did this sculpture right up here.
Nathan: Oh, this lovely tied-wire on the wall?
Zellerbach: Yes, that's one of hers.
Nathan: That is beautiful.
Zellerbach: Yes. I think it's very lovely. She even made a six -pointed
star for me.
i
Nathan: Right! A sunburst with a six-pointed star. That's lovely.
Zellerbach: She is a complete artist herself. She's married to an
architect and has children. She's a little thing. She's sweet,
and she's naive. After the meeting was over, she came and
she says, "I guess you're mad at me, because I voted against
you." I said, "No, I'm not mad at you, Ruthie. You vote the
way you want. The only thing is that you don't use your brains.
You're too emotional. Once in a while you should stop and
think, and reason." She says, "Well, you know me." I said,
"Yes, I know you. If I didn't know you, I wouldn't love you."
Commission Stands on City Problems
187
Nathan: Now, is it your view that a commission should not take a
position until you know what the mayor's view is?
Zellerbach: On a city problem of that kind. We take stands on a great
many things that have nothing to do with the mayor. We're
taking positions all the time on buildings and landscaping.
But when it comes to a policy, a thing of this kind, which
is against the law, I say we have no business taking a stand
until we know what the policy of the city is.
Nathan: So you felt that it was not primarily a question of art, or
the Art Commission, but it was in another area?
Zellerbach: It was in another area. I agree that artists should have a
place to display their wares, but it should be in conformity
with the law. We did have a place for them. We had a place
down on one of the piers, called the Silver Market. It was
going along quite successfully. The artists ran it themselves.
Neighborhood Arts helped them get it started. Then after a
few months, I think they were either going to tear the pier
down, or they wanted the space there for the Harbor Commission,
so they had to get out. Then they found another area. It
was in one of the redevelopment areas, and they were in that
for a while, until it came time to tear the building down.
So then they were out of that, and they had no place to go.
We could take a stand that we agree, the artist should
have a place to display. But not against the law.
Nathan: Is it your thought that the Art Commission will probably help
them find a more permanent place?
Zellerbach: Well, they are. The mayor has already designated certain
streets for them. You see, the mayor is making this decision
on the fact that he thinks it lends more charm to the city
and intrigues a lot of the visitors, like the cable cars and
those musicians that were playing.
In the number of years that I've been in politics, one of
the things that I feel is, if I'm working for the mayor, he's
my boss, and my job is to protect him as much as I can. Now, if
he makes a lot of damnfool decisions, that's not my business.
It's his. I can holler at him after he's done it.
188
CONTINUING DEVELOPMENTS RE: INTER-AGENCY COUNCIL
Nathan: I wanted to remember to ask you about this inter-agency
meeting. How did that go?
Zellerbach: It went very well. Everybody approved it and we're going
right ahead with it now. We had a very good lunch. We had
everybody there except one.
Nathan: That's amazing.
Zellerbach: I thought it was excellent, because the meeting was called
with only a week's notice. Showed the interest in it.
Nathan: How many people were there?
Zellerbach: I think there were around twenty-one or twenty-two.
Official Policy and a Voluntary Organization
Zellerbach: The mayor called the meeting, and he's the one that chaired
the meeting. I didn't chair it. We paid for it.
Nathan: You mean the Zellerbach Family Fund paid for it?
Zellerbach: Sure. But through the city, you see. We make the contribution
to the city. So we have all the city agencies that deal with
spending money on any area in the arts.
Nathan: What is happening now?
189
Zellerbach: Well, now everybody's agreed that we should go ahead on a
voluntary basis, on an informal basis. We're following the
ordinance, what the ordinance proposed. It said the
president of the Art Commission is the chairman of the Inter-
Agency. The secretary of the Art Commission is the secretary
of the Inter-Agency. The first thing, we've asked everybody
to send in the budgets of what they spend on the arts. That
goes for performing, and also for painting and dance and
sculpture, or anything pertaining to the arts. Literature, or
poetry.
We're now working on that, and as soon as we get that
compiled, find out just what everybody is spending and just
what areas they're interested in, either the mayor will call
another meeting or I'll call it, and then present the composite.
At that time, we'll start to implement it by probably appointing
committees of interest. In that way we can start to coordinate.
The Art Commission and the Park and Rec have already had
one meeting. We developed a point that they have a great
many facilities, but they have no money to make use of them.
They have a director for each facility, but he has no money
to spend on doing anything.
Neighborhood Arts and Park and Rec
Zellerbach: The first reaction from the head of the Park Department was,
"We've got all these. We can cooperate. We'll supply the
facilities, and you supply the activity."
Nathan: That makes sense. Now would something like Neighborhood Arts
be able to use their facilities?
Zellerbach: Yes. Neighborhood Arts are to supply the activity.
Nathan: Wonderful!
Zellerbach: Which is wonderful for us, see, because now we can cooperate
with them and they'll give us places to perform, and areas in
the parks and mini-parks. They can take the credit, and we'll
put on the performances. Because they have the money to spend
and it's recreation, basically. The Neighborhood Arts Program
190
Zellerbach: belongs in the Park and Rec. Eventually if we can get this
thing developed far enough, I would recommend that it go to
the Park and Rec, if they can properly organize. Everyone
in Park and Rec practically is in civil service. You can't
run a neighborhood arts program with civil servants.
Need for Independent Contractors
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
The civil service, under the civil service laws, is organized
so that it just won't work. They have to do just the way
we've done, to make independent contractors out of them. You
see, today the Art Commission contracts with every member of
the staff. The workers said, "Well, we have no social
security, we have no health and welfare." I said, "There's
no reason at all why we can't work something out." Which we
did.
We worked out social welfare benefits. I know we worked
out the health coverage with one of these--! think Blue Cross
or one of these agencies. The way we worked it, was that
whatever it cost, we would increase their pay by that amount.
They would have to pay it directly, themselves. We couldn't
pay it. The same thing with social security. So in that way,
we made them all happy.
You know, the kind of employees we have: they're so
heterogeneous a group. You're liable to find anything, you
know. You were at the meeting. You met Eric. Now, Eric was
dressed very well.
I thought the presentations were just excellent,
speaking of Eric Reuther?
You're
Yes. Eric Reuther. He had his little pigtail, but I thought
he looked very presentable.
Oh, absolutely.
He's a very fine young fellow. After all, that's the way he
likes to dress. You know that when he's coming up to a
meeting like that, that he would put on the best he had. I
looked at his shoes. His shoes were practically new. He had
a nice pair of pants on. His vest was nice and clean. The
only thing, he didn't have a tie on.
191
Nathan: No, but he had a rather nice ornament, and that's the style
now.
Zellerbach: Yes, he had all the decorations. It looked like he had — the
thing in the center looked like it was the Ten Commandments.
I don't know whether you noticed it or not.
Nathan: [Laughter] Yes, I did, but I thought it looked like an
Oriental charm of some sort, in a metal holder.
Zellerbach: It was metal.
Nathan: Buddhist, maybe?
Zellerbach: I don't know what it was. It looked to me like it was the
Ten Commandments, because it had two tops, and then it had
writing up and down. I didn't get close enough to see if
it was Hebrew or not. But anyway, he makes a very good
impression, and you can't deny it.
We've been working on this Inter-Agency plan now for
four years. It has taken time. The Arts Resources Study was
made in 1966. You have a copy and you've read it. Now,
almost everything that's being done has come out of that
report .
Nathan: Yes, that was really a fine job.
Zellerbach: Sure. This has all been done under that general study.
Thinking of what has happened here in this city as a result
of this, and the leadership that the Zellerbach Family Fund
has taken in this area, personally I feel very pleased.
Nathan: You have managed to get things moving, and that's very
exciting.
Zellerbach: When we start to get a little competition, in the Neighborhood
Arts, you see, the boys started to holler, "We've got a lot
of competition. Everybody's doing the same thing." So I
said to them, "What's the difference? The more the merrier.
Get them all in. Makes it much easier on the whole to get
money." Because you can't get a politician to do anything
unless he knows the public wants it. That's the first thing
you have to know in politics: votes. If something you're
doing will get a guy votes', he's for it. In three or four
years the whole country will be arts conscious, and you'll be
getting much more support from all public agencies.
192
Zellerbach: You really can't kick at San Francisco, because I think
they've supported the arts right along, in more ways than
one, ways that don't show. As I said before, the Opera and
the Symphony get the use of the Opera House at $400 a performance.
Well, that doesn't even clean it up any more, pay for maintenance,
you see. If anyone else comes in, they have to pay anywhere from
$1000 to $2000 a performance, plus five or ten percent on the
gross over a certain amount. Sometimes, they get a run, for
example on the Russian ballet, they could get a run of around
$3 or $4 or $5000 a night.
Now, they're each getting $200,000 a year out of the
hotel tax. And then you have the two museums, which are
costing the city almost $1,800,000 to maintain. That's not
chickenfeed. You have the library. The school department
spends well over $1 million on their arts program. We counted
up, and it was over $10 million that they've all been putting
out. The Art Commission—we were the beggars. We've always
been the beggars. We've been the tail of the dog. But I think
we're getting in a position, we're not tailing so much any
more.
I think the Art Commission has some standing in the
community. Everybody respects it, I hope. That's what I've
tried to do. Any of the mayors I've been under, I've tried
to advise them on their appointments, to keep these political
hacks off.
193
A LUNCH MEETING ON GROUP THERAPY
Zellerbach: This phone call had to do with affairs of the University of
Pennsylvania; Dr. Dripps, he's one of the outstanding
anesthesiologists in the country. He's out here on a year's
sabbatical, working at the University of California hospital
on research. I'm getting together a lunch party. He's going
to be there and so is Mike Friedman, and I hope Joe Sloss, the
president of Mount Zion, and the new superintendent out there
will meet him first, because it's a courtesy, and the second
reason is, the University is doing things at the hospital with
a lot of doctors in on the same case. That way they're getting
the patients in and out of the hospital a lot faster, and
they're saving the University a lot of money.
Nathan: At UC?
Zellerbach: No, Pennsylvania. I asked Dripps if he'd talk to them [at Mt.
Zion Hospital]. He said, yes, he'd be happy to.
I said, "I think you'd better take advantage of him while
this man is out here. You can learn something, and you may
save yourself some money. Whether you do it or not is your
business. I think it's for your own benefit." So I finally
got them together. They're all coming up to the table, and
then they'll adjourn and they'll meet and talk, whatever they
want. I want to get them acquainted and let them arrange for
a further meeting. So I invited a lot of others, you know,
some of the boys at the table. Call them up and get them up
there, so it's kind of a mixed group, you know. Talk about
everything—politics , women, baseball, football, anything.
Nathan: That's a very fine idea.
194
NEWHOUSE FOUNDATION
Nathan: A little earlier this morning we were saying something about
the Newhouse Foundation. Is this one of your interests?
Zellerbach: Yes. The Newhouse Foundation, you know, is a charitable
foundation.
Nathan: Is it a private foundation?
Zellerbach: Yes, it's a private foundation, started by Arthur Newhouse,
one of the Newhouse brothers. I think it's been in being now
probably--oh, I'd estimate maybe fifteen years. Colonel Tyler,
who is a lawyer for the Newhouse brothers, was the one who
organized this. The will made the grant.
Nathan: Were the Newhouse brothers businessmen?
Zellerbach: Will was a lawyer, and Arthur—he was the baby- -he just lived
on income. He used to work for my uncle, Julius Gabel, who
was a salesman in the printing business. I remember when he
worked for him. There was another brother. I don't think any
of them married, so they had no heirs.
Arthur, the young one, was the last of them. When he died,
he left the whole estate to the Newhouse Foundation, to do
certain things. Colonel Tyler was the lawyer, so he incorporated,
and the will stipulated that there were three areas of interest.
A third of the income was to go for scholarships to the
University of California and Stanford each, on a fifty-fifty
basis. And a third of the income was to go preferably to people
who were temporarily embarrassed for money, particularly the
white collar, if they didn't want to go to public charities. In
this area he felt they could do quite a good job. Well, we couldn't
find too many of the white collar people. We got a few. We
195
Zellerbach: spent quite a bit of money on operations, and things of that
kind, which they couldn't afford. But they didn't want to go on
a charitable basis. We used to get them through the Family
Service Agency. They used to recommend individuals, so they
used to make the grants to the individuals. Then under the
new law, the '69 Revenue Act, private foundations cannot make
grants to individuals.
The third area is incorporated charitable institutions
that are Jewish. And all the individual contributions have
to be Jewish. They can't make grants beyond the fifty-mile
zone of San Francisco.
Representation on the Board
Zellerbach: We started out with about $1,100,000, and the fund is valued
now at around $5 million from appreciation of securities and
properties that they had in it. When Tyler died, I became the
president. I've been the president ever since. Can't get
anybody else to take it, so I get re-elected every year by
acclamation. I always say, "Doesn't somebody else want this
job? I've had it long enough."
Nathan: How many are on the board?
Zellerbach: The will provides that the University of California has a
representative, the Stanford University has a representative,
there are two representatives from Temple Emanu-El, two
representatives from Sherith Israel, and then they have
community members of no particular affiliation. Let's see.
There's one, two, three, four. There are four community members,
I'm one of them. I was from Emanu-El, and then when Tyler died,
they put me in Tyler's place as a public member, and Louis
Heilbron succeeded me as a member from the Temple.
I have four committees. One for the universities, one
for the individuals, one for the organizations, and then a
finance committee. We meet probably three or four times a
year at the call of the chair. We have regular meeting days,
but there's not enough business to get them all to come in, so
usually there are two or three meetings. One is usually late
in November or early December, in order to make the final grants
196
Zellerbach: so that we spend all the income. And then we usually have a
meeting in January to elect the new officers and make
preliminary grants for the year, so that the committees have
money to spend. Then we don't have a meeting until we have
some business to attend to. I usually call a meeting around
May, before summer starts. Then I probably won't call another
meeting until maybe October, or maybe not 'til November.
Regulations on Foundation Grants
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach;
Do you find the requirements rather limiting?
way the fund is administered?
That is, the
Well, yes. There's a limit of $5000 but we had a court ruling
that we could spend 15 percent of the corpus and all the
income. When he made his will, he figured that there would
be about $75,000 of income on a million dollars. Which is
pretty good return on a million. Each committee was allotted
$25,000. Today our income's around $250,000 or $260,000. So
we couldn't be limited. Especially under today's law, you have
to get rid of it all.
All the income has to be spent?
Even before, you had to get rid of all the income. So then
we had to go to court to get the court to give us the power
to spend the money. We've done quite a bit of good work,
especially with the universities, and also with the organizations,
They're usually the same.
Foundation Policy
Zellerbach: We hired Sanford Treguboff last year as a consultant, so that
Treguboff would review what we're giving the organizations,
having known all of them. At the end of the year, we had to
give it away so anybody who was around got money. Treg has
straightened all that out for us, so we're in much better shape,
197
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
All the directors are getting a little old. One of them
you heard me talking about was Dan Koshland. Dan sent in
his resignation because he thinks that younger people should
be on the board. Get away and let the young ones get in.
Well, the young ones—that means in their fifties.
[Laughing] Of course.1
I don't disagree with him a hundred percent,
husband disagrees with him.
He does?
Although your
Yes. Of course in business, it's different, but in this area
he feels that they get some of their best men when they retire
at sixty-five. They're still very active and very mentally
alert, and they shouldn't retire just because they're sixty-five
or seventy-two. It's a question of mental agility and physical
ability.
I can see Dan's point. I think if you're on too many of
these things you ought to get off. I've been trying to get off
of quite a few.
I'm on the Laguna Honda Board, but I attend very few
meetings. We got it organized and started and financed. I've
been on too long. Every time it comes up I say, "Please leave
me off," but I can't stay off because of Jerry Simon, who's
the originator and the founder of it. As long as he's alive,
we have to stay on for his sake. That's one.
And the Ballet Guild. I've been trying to get off of that.
I think I'm on the way to getting off it, because now Stephen
is the president. He said, "Now, you've got to stay and help
me." I said, "Oh, I'll stay for a year, Steve, and then after
that I'm getting off. You don't need two Zellerbachs on the
Ballet board. You're running it." It's time he takes over to
do these things.
Then when they get this consolidation of the two museums,
I'll probably get off of that too. I'll hold a few things, like
the Zellerbach Family Fund, and I may still stick on the Art
Commission for a while yet. Just enough to keep me out of
trouble.
198
TEMPLE EMANU-EL
(Interview XI, November 17, 1972)
Zellerbach: Temple Emanu-El, haven't we talked about that before?
Nathan: No, we haven't. Just one allusion to it, but no story about
the Temple Emanu-El part of your life.
Rabbi Reichert
Nathan: You had mentioned that you came on the board of directors of
the temple when Newman was rabbi, and when Irving Reichert
succeeded him. Then after being off the board for seven or
eight years, you came back as president of the congregation.
After Reichert became Rabbi Emeritus, didn't you have something
to do with finding Alvin Fine?
Rabbi Fine
Zellerbach: Yes, we went out looking for a new rabbi. I had scoured around
getting names of all the other rabbis that I'd met during the
first couple of years I was in office. I went to several cities
to hear different rabbis.
Bob Koshland was a captain in the Army out in the Burma-
China area. I was sitting talking to Dan in his office and Bob
was in there and he was listening to the conversation when we
were going over rabbis. He said, "I have a rabbi for you. If
you can get him you're getting the best in the business."
199
Zellerbach: He told us the story of his acquaintance with Alvin Fine.
Alvin was the chaplain of the regiments out there when Bob
Koshland was there. We found that Alvin was the executive
secretary of Nelson Glueck, who was the president of the
Hebrew Union College. I went back and met Alvin and Nelson
and all the rest of them. He, Alvin, came out to talk to the
committee and meet the people. You know his voice and the
way he preaches.
I had a hell of a time getting him because of a lot of
other congregations competing for him, Chicago congregations
and several others. Alvin was, born in Portland and liked the
Pacific Coast. Nelson Glueck was the man who had to consent
to release him, so I got pretty well acquainted with Nelson.
I blame the Hebrew Union College for taking boys in to make
rabbis out of them without those psychological tests to see
whether they want it as a job or as a profession or a calling.
There are a lot of them, as you know, rabbis that are
professionals. They get the job and it pays and once you get
in there you're pretty secure.
We finally got the terms, and they consented to let Alvin
come out to San Francisco. He went to work and he was there
seventeen years. I was the president the first five years
of his tour of duty. I was with him his first few years,
trying to guide him, and of course he won everybody right away.
Our membership commenced to build up and eventually, after I
left, over a period of time we then peaked out at around, I
think, 1200 children in the Sunday school, and we had around 1200
or 1300 members. We had big confirmation classes. Instead of
a confirmation class of four and five we had confirmation classes
of over 100 to 125. And in Sunday school we went up to over
1000.
We raised a lot of money because the temple had gone into
a little disrepair. We needed money to fix the acoustics, which
you know were very bad. Now we've had them fixed. I was in
there for all of that.
My successor was Morty Fleishhacker , Jr. When Morty took
the office, I bowed out. My record still stands and I'm still
respected out there and my opinion is still respected. I'm
still one of the board members. I haven't paid any attention
to the temple except when I see something I don't like, then
I'll tell the president how I feel.
200
Cantor Kinder
Nathan: Did you ever have very much to do with Cantor Kinder?
Kinder?
Reuben
Zellerbach: Oh yes. Oh sure. Robby was a great guy. He kept our temple
together through all the rabbis. Robby was a typical artist.
Music, of course, was his life. When I got in there one of
the problems was that Alvin felt that Reuben was doing too much
of the rabbi's work. He was doing a lot of the Bar Mitzvah-ing
and he was reading the last prayer before you start the end
of the service. The rabbi should be doing that. But he had
been reading it for years. It had five stanzas and he had to
sing them all, and if it had ten stanzas he had to sing them
all. He had a lot of singing all the time.
So, of course, I was in between him and Alvin, and Alvin
was so nice he couldn't tell him what to do. It was my
department. I had to make him stop reading the prayer, I said,
"That's the rabbi's prayer and you've got to stop singing so
much..." And when I took the prayer away from him I thought
he was going to go into a collapse. How could I do it? I said,
"I'm sorry. It's the rabbi's prayer and you know it. The
rabbi wants to do it. So, you're not going to do it. Don't
argue with me anymore." And, of course, I got the kickbacks.
How could I treat him so?
When I was the president they all knew who was the boss.
Rinder had no voice at that time, but he'd sing anyway. If
there was a funeral, he would do it, because eventually he took
the perquisites and put them into a charity fund. But we
accepted Mr. Rinder because he had been doing it for so long
that he couldn't give it up. We had to ask him not to do
funerals and weddings, except with the consent of the rabbi.
It was never anything too serious. But in the last analysis,
I wouldn't get soft and say this was all right, because after
all I was too much interested developing Alvin.
And Alvin with his reputation, I guess today it is sad
that he left the rabbinate, because today he would be the top
rabbi in the United States. That's my opinion; the top or one
of them. He was before he resigned. He had that heart attack
and you know the story. I was past my regime, so that's not
a part of my life.
201
Nathan: During the time that you were president were there a number
of musical events in the temple? I remember hearing some
very good organists, one from Saint Sulpice in Paris.
Zellerbach: Well, that's right. We did all kinds of things there. We
tried to build up the attendance. We put on candlelight
services and always had the children involved with the
parents, and we did all kinds of things to get an audience.
Of course, when Reichert left we were getting 100 and
125 people on a Saturday morning.
Nathan: Would you go and count the house?
Zellerbach: Well, sure. That's one thing I did. I was there every Friday
night, every Saturday morning. I attended all the meetings,
even the auxiliaries; not all of them but most of them. I did
a lot of pastoral work. I spent a lot of time, and I got the
result. So, I feel that if I didn't do anything else I
brought the temple back to its eminence. So, that's my
history in Temple Emanu-El.
I still am interested. They want to appoint me on a
committee. I was just out to a committee meeting, a ritual
committee, because I wanted to register a complaint.
Nathan: Oh did you? What was it?
Zellerbach: These two rabbis were there and they wanted to review the Holy
Day services and what they felt about it. I was on hand and I
said, "Well, I'd like to talk on that subject when it's my
turn." Mrs. Rogers who is the chairman said, "Well, go ahead
and talk." I said, "The first thing I think is we've got too
much singing in that place now. I think we're back to Cantor
Rinder's time. The cantor has taken over and he's singing
away all the time. He's got a good voice but I think we need
something else. I think the rabbi should do more of the reading.
It's not up to the cantor to read, it's up to him to sing." I
was just expounding when the cantor walked in. And, of course,
the rabbi got red in the face.
You know me. I said, "What I said to you I'll say right
now to Portnoy and I have no feeling about it." So, I repeated
it. And then they were telling me--"You may have a different
audience today and maybe they demand these things." I don't
202
Zellerbach: know. There's a lot of Hebrew and I don't understand Hebrew
and I doubt if very many people do. There are a bunch of
services full of Hebrew and with all the singing in Hebrew
and I can't sing in Hebrew. Sometimes when you sing the
hymns are too damned long. Anyway, I had a good time. I
said, "I'm just telling you how I feel and I've heard around
a lot of people have complained for the same thing. You
fellas know what's going on so you'd better do it." The
rabbi came to the rescue.
Nathan: How about the use of assistant rabbis? Did that start during
your term? Or have there always been assistants to the rabbis?
Successive Rabbis
Zellerbach: I did serve on the selection committee for Alvin's successor.
And we had a hell of a time finding one. And finally we got
hold of Hausman. I've known Hausman for seventeen years in
Sacramento.
And he had a voice too, a trained voice, you know, and was
a very nice fella. But he never made another Alvin. He had
a voice that wasn't quite comparable but it was good and his
sermons were good. He worked very hard. He was always available
and I have no complaint about him. So, unfortunately, after
his second year he took sick right after the Holy Days as you
know. He got this virus or something spinal, and he was out
for a year. After he came back he couldn't stand up. If he
stood up he was on crutches. He couldn't do anything.
Nathan: That was sad.
Zellerbach: That was sad so, of course, it was only a question of time that
they'd have to make a change, which they did. And then they
got Ascher. I had nothing to do with Ascher. I was on the
committee but I didn't do much. After all they were running
the temple. I'd done my duty.
203
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Building Membership
Now, I've given you the important points; the rest of it is
all just running the place with a lot of little incidents that
happened. For example, we were out soliciting members,
getting members} you know the old German group were very
Reform. We were getting some people from the Conservative
groups. In fact, Sherith Israel had the big membership at the
time that I took office. They had mostly the Emanuel-El
members over there. So, when I took office, they all started
to come back.
Was that Sol White's congregation?
No, no. Goldstein's. Temple Sherith Israel,
started to go down and ours started to go up.
we got Alvin, then we moved up in a hurry.
Their membership
Especially when
I said to get members, get members. Some of them came
and a lot of the older people when they come for the Bar Mitzvah
of their grandson, were Orthodox and they came in their yarmulkas
and their hats on and prayer shawls and they'd get up in the
pulpit. In deference to his grandparents the boy would have a
prayer shawl on and a yarmulka and all the old Germans would
say, "What! Are we going back to Orthodoxy?" I had to answer
that.
I said, "Listen. This is a temple. It's open to anybody.
If he's a good Jew and pays his dues, if he wants to wear his
hat or take it off or wear a yarmulka or anything else I don't
care. With all the German Jews, their children are marrying
Gentiles and we're losing them all the time because they don't
want to be Jews. As far as I'm concerned if this temple was
to be viable you must have members. And as long as they're
good citizens and good Jews we'll take them." That ended that.
I used to get that kind of stuff all the time, and complaints.
My answer was always the same. I said, 'Veil, how often do
you come to temple? Twice a year? Once maybe you come and you
see your kids getting Bar Mitzvah or you come by on Holy Days
and you see these people wearing their yarmulkas. Supposing
they wear a yarmulka? Is it going to upset you? It is? Well,
I'm sorry."
But that all passed. That was the kind of thing we got
into.
Nathan:
This big change came after World War II?
204
Open Seating
Zellerbach: Oh yes. One thing we did which I think was very significant,
had to do with the seats. When we build a temple we sell
seats. A lot of the oldtimers passed away and left their seats
to the temple. The children weren't picking them up.
As a consequence we studied the whole situation. We talked
about the fact that there were no more seats to be sold. The
temple would own all the seats. The present owners would die
off and nobody would pick up their seats and we would take them.
Now, if their children want to buy their seats or take them over
then you can't do anything about it because they own them. So,
as a consequence we cut out selling seats. And right now I asked
to get a check to see how many seats are owned and there were
very few left. They were talking about open seating. First
come, first served, as they do in churches. Well, I think the
judgment right at the moment, at the meeting I went to, was
that that's a little too soon yet. What I suggested was, why
don't you run this like a theater? If they want seats down in
front, charge them more than the ones in the back. Anyway, I
didn't press that one. I was just giving them a suggestion on
how to get more money.
But anyway, eventually the temple should have open seating.
It takes time but we'll get there. That was one of the reforms
that we put in. I think that's about enough on that subject,
unless you have any questions.
The Rabbi's Job
Nathan: One that may or may not interest you. Do you feel that the rabbi
as the rabbi of Temple Emanu-El should be a prominent person in
the community and should participate in civic events? How do you
feel about the job of the rabbi?
Zellerbach: Well, the job of the rabbi is to represent the Jewish people.
It's his congregation. But inasmuch as Emanu-El is a top
congregation, we want our rabbi to be at all the public events.
And he's the one to do the invocations. Fortunately, being
president of the Art Commission, as soon as I got Alvin, he
was settled and was getting the reputation. I went around to
205
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach :
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
the mayor's office when the mayor had an event where they wanted
a rabbi. I said, "You call up Alvin Fine first." So, that's
what they did. When Alvin went to these things, he really
charmed them all every time he spoke or gave an invocation or
prayer. The Gentiles all around him all said that this was
the greatest person here. Well, he still has that reputation.
He's invited all over.
In a way it's a big demand for a rabbi to be the "shepherd of
the flock" and still do all this public act.
Well, that's right. You see, one of your troubles is to get
the rabbi to do pastoral work because it's a seven day job,
twenty-four hours a day. That was one of the things that Alvin
Kinder used to do all that. When they got the
up to him to do all that. But now they
wouldn't do.
assistant rabbi it was
have a permanent rabbi at Mount Zion.
That does make a difference, doesn't it?
Yes. But the rabbis do come around. When people are there they
usually show up. When I was there they all came. I had them
from every temple.
Is that right? That ought to make you feel very secure.
As soon as they found I was in there, I got them all. Those I
couldn't see left their calling card; I felt very pleased.
You were saying earlier that because of his liberal views some
people were criticizing Alvin?
When Alvin Fine was the rabbi there during the early stages of
his rabbinate he was pretty liberal, and I had some complaints
from some of his members that they thought he was almost a
commie. So, one day I took Alvin to lunch and talked to him
because I had heard him before preach about how religion and
communism do not go together. So, under the circumstances I
knew he couldn't be a communist. Nobody that believes in God
can be a communist. I suggested that he give a sermon on it.
He advertised it, and we had practically a full house. After
he preached that sermon that laid the ghost and there was no
talk about him being a commie after that.
206
Nathan:
DEVELOPMENT RE: PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
(Interview XII, December 8, 1972)
Shall we talk about new developments in the Center for the
Performing Arts?
Zellerbach: Do you know how far we'd gotten the last time?
Nathan: There was some discussion of possibilities and an attempt to
figure out how much in public funds and how much in private
funds were needed.
Zellerbach: All right, we're getting very warm. The latest development
is that the first thing we're going to do is to build a garage,
a parking lot. And that'll be, we estimate, for 1400 cars.
There's one impediment in the way of going ahead, in fact, two.
The first is money. That will always be the prime impediment.
And the second is that there's an old apartment house on the
area we have to use for the parking lot. It's not fully
occupied. We now have an option. We haven't put up the money
to hold the option but there's an old gentleman that owns it.
He recently had a heart attack, but he'd agreed on a price,
so as soon as we can raise the money, we can buy the property.
The urgency is that the faster we get it the better,
because we don't want to take chances of this fellow having
a fatal heart attack. If he does, this whole thing may be
hung up for a year or two while the estate goes through probate.
Nonprofit Corporation to Build a Garage
Nathan :
How do you propose to raise the money to buy the property?
207
Zellerbach: We're organizing a nonprofit corporation that will buy the
property and build a garage, and we have to have the lease
from the City of San Francisco. The board of supervisors
has to approve a lease either for twenty-five or thirty years.
That guarantees the payments on the interest and principal
of the bond issue. But first we have to raise about $430 or
$440,000 to buy this building. We put it up to the mayor to
find the money because at the beginning it won't be city
property, it will belong to the nonprofit corporation. After
the bonds are paid off it belongs to the city.
In fact, this whole thing will belong to the city when
it's paid off, both the Performing Arts Theater and the whole
complex. You know when dealing with the city government or
any government, time with them doesn't mean much. The mayor
is all over Hell's half acre, he's here today and gone
tomorrow, unless he takes the time to really do it. We're
pushing him to beat the band.
I'm leaving on January 4th and will be back around
February 26th, so these fellows will have to do their own
pushing. I'm moving it as fast as I can while I'm here, with
the mayor. We've had a meeting with him and he's all for it.
The feasibility on the garage is satisfactory. In fact, we
ought to have rentals sufficient for the funding of the bonds
and about a third over for profit which we will use for
continuing work on the Performing Arts Center. We need to have
the preparations done and the plans, because when we once start
on the Performing Arts Center the plans will probably take
eight months to do. So, we have to figure timing.
If we can get this garage started, then we're going to
start getting the finances for the whole deal. That's not
going to be as easy as the garage because the garage is feasible
whether we build the theater or not. The last conversation I
had with the mayor was one night at the Opera when we came down
and had refreshments together. That day he had suggested to the
board of supervisors that they use this money that they're
getting from Washington , this extra money--
208
Revenue -Sharing Funds and Public Subscription
Nathan: The revenue-sharing money?
Zellerbach: Yes, the revenue sharing. He's going to put away $1 million
a year for the escrow providing that we get matching funds
for it.
Nathan: Subscribed by the public?
Zellerbach: Yes. So, that was the first act. After the second act, when
he came down, I had some second thoughts. I said to him,
"Mr. Mayor, $5 million is not going to be enough from the city.
You're going to have to double your sights because if you only
put up $5 million you'll never get $12 million out of the
public. So, you're going to have to get another $5 million."
He says, "Next year I'll put in the other million so we'll get
$2 million a year over each five year period." If they do
that, then we go out on the drive, and the city is going to
have to guarantee completion because any public funds that we
get will be escrowed too. It won't work unless we get this
commitment from the city on the Performing Arts Center, that
they will complete it. The present estimates are around I
would imagine--$18 million. But, of course, with everything
escalating by the time we get out bids it may be, could be as
high as $20 or $21 million for what we could buy today for
$18 million.
So, if the city will sub ten I think we can raise $7 or
$8 million from private sources. And that's it. The rest has
to come from the city. The public awareness is such today that
I don't think we'll have any difficulty. That gets back again
to the debacle of the $39 million bond issue that they put up
I think it was about 1965. And when it was beaten, it was
beaten unmercifully. Now a long time has passed. In the meantime
as you know we started the Neighborhood Arts Program. And that
was the result, of course, of the McFadyen-Knowles report that
we take the arts to the neighborhoods, as I mentioned earlier.
So, the beginning was that the Zellerbach Family Fund
financed the start of it and continued to help finance it
through the years. We did this, of course, primarily to get
the arts to the public, to make them aware that there is
something more in life than just food and clothing and shelter,
209
Zellerbach: that they had to have something for the mind. When we got it
started, naturally we made several errors in what was needed.
When we started we thought we'd have to build some structures
in the neighborhoods for their own use.
Local Facilities and Expanding Activities
Zellerbach: When we originally talked about a bond issue we were putting
an item in it for building facilities in the neighborhoods.
But through further examination and further experience we found
that that was unnecessary, that facilities of that type would
not do the work that was to be done. We've since found out
that a f irehouse or an old theater or a school auditorium,
smaller and more facilities are needed. Even going into a
vacant store—that 's proving itself out now.
We obtained the old theater down on 3rd Street. And we
also now have the University of California facilities with the
old teachers' school. We have an auditorium and a big
gymnasium there and they wanted somebody to use it, but they
didn't have the money or the people that could do it so they
turned it over to us.
Nathan: Where is that?
Zellerbach: It's at Haight and Laguna. It's being used by all kinds of
groups, theatrical, music, dance, everything. Every minute is
taken. Then, we have some other facilities out in the
redevelopment area. I think it's out further on Grove.
And then we have different facilities that we use for the
smaller classes. We get into the YMCA's and churches. We're
pretty well spread out now, and we expect to go further. We
have this Inter-Agency thing now moving and the Committee on
Facilities is very aware now that we must provide facilities
for the Neighborhood Arts. They can be of great help because
they're all civil servants, most of them. So, we believe they
can be very helpful in convincing the school department to let
us use the auditoriums in these schools. If we can do that
we're in clover because there are so many of them sitting idle
after three o'clock. This would do the work.
210
Zellerbach: In the meantime we've encouraged anybody that's art
minded or has any facilities or is doing anything in the
arts to get into the act. The more the merrier. It's
snowballing now to the point that again we have to go out and
raise more and more money because the demands on us are so
great that we just can't handle them.
Now they are bringing up the quality of the work. This
is like a school, you know. Like the universities, they only
take the top twelve-and-a-half percent. Well, we're trying
to make it a little more competitive from the point of view
that we want the better people that know how to work. We
don't disregard the others, but this is what we're working
towards because in that way we get better results.
And then you have the Symphony you see, because in the
schools during the summer vacation they have seminars for
teaching. They're doing a good job. And then you have the
Western Opera Theater that has performances for the schools.
Then all of the museums have their classes and they're bringing
children to the museums and they're sending works of art to the
schools with the people from the museums to explain to the
children what each picture is.
There's a lot more going on than I can tell you. It's
come a long way. We feel that the reaction of the people
as we get further into this is that we'll have a more favorable
image from the general public than we did when we had the
last bond issue. They are now part of it. If we can do this
by a nonprofit corporation it will be a lot simpler. But,
I'm just saying that if we have to go to a public bond issue
it'll be the same amount that we go for with a nonprofit
corporation. If we get $10 million out of the city we have
to go for about $8 million from the public, at present figures.
That's the situation now with the Performing Arts. It's on
the move.
On the very day that you see the announcement in the press
that the nonprofit corporation is formed for fas building of
the garage and we have a lease from the city, we're on the way.
Because the minute that's announced, this then stimulates a
push to get this Performing Arts Theater going. And there's a
lot of nervousness around that since Lurie has passed away
maybe the real estate on the Curran and Geary theaters is going
to be so valuable that they can't afford to hold them. If
they let them go, you won't have any theaters in San Francisco.
211
Zellerbach: In fact, there are practically none available here now because
even the Lurie theaters are used practically continually, the
Geary by ACT and the other by the Civic Light Opera. You'll
notice there are very few outside attractions coming into the
town.
And you know what's going on with the Zellerbach Hall in
Berkeley. They're showing all the dance troupes, they're
getting everything else because they can't come in here.
Performers would probably go over there, or even if they did
come in here they'd probably go there and perform too. Instead
of just a few performances they'd probably be in here for a
week or two. There's no place for them to go. There's no
question of the urgency of a theater.
Nathan: When you speak about a theater for the Performing Arts, would
there be one theater, or more than one?
Musical Acoustics
Zellerbach: There's to be one theater and it would primarily be for the
Symphony. The acoustics will be musical acoustics. I say
that advisedly. I haven't the last word, but I think that's
what it will be because based on the studies of the outside
attractions that we're using, most are light operas or ballets
or outside orchestras or singers, and if they go in there with
a play or two, the acoustics will have to do. If they're
ballets, they have music, and if they have singers it's music,
and so I think that this is the answer. I never knew that you
had to have two kinds of acoustics, one for speaking and one
for music. When they built Zellerbach Hall [on the Berkeley
campus] it was 60-40, as I understand. And the acoustics
weren't so good for music, they were better for speaking. So,
we had to go in and spend another $75 thousand to cure it and
turn it into music acoustics.
The same situation holds I guess, in Philadelphia. We
just had a meeting with the director of the Zellerbach Theater
in Philadelphia at the university there and they've made the
same mistake. They have 60 percent for speaking and 40 percent
for music and it should have been reversed. In fact, it should
have been for music and the speaking should have been second
because with all your loudspeakers and electronic devices you
can get the voice over easier than you can a hundred musicians.
212
Zellerbach: So, these are some of the problems that the Performing
Arts Center faces.
And then comes the question: If this thing does come
through, I'm sure you'll find the Opera wanting to expand
its season and sooner or later somebody will build another
theater here. We're expecting one to go into Yerba Buena
and one is supposed to go down here in the Embarcadero Center.
But it won't be built specially for live performance, it will
be built more for movies. So, you might find some developer
that will come along like they were doing in New York and put
up a big building like this and put a theater in it. But
these are thing I'm not going to worry about now. We have
this one to worry about. If I ever get this completed before
anything happens to me this will be my last big push.
Nathan: Then you'll have to stick around and enjoy it once it's been
built.
Zellerbach: I'd like to be able to see it finished and people start going
to enjoy it. I've been working on this since 1966 when the
last bond issue was over. But I have a lot of assistants doing
most of the work. They still look to me as the key.
Nathan: It takes leadership to get something like this going.
Zellerbach: When anything goes wrong, then I get the phone calls. And
then we have meetings and we have to make decisions and I
help them make the decisions. In fact, we had a meeting about
what we should do about the garage. We came to the conclusion
that as long as the garage was feasible we'd do that and then
we'd scale down the price of the building. Instead of putting
all of the facilities in at the beginning, we'd put in shells.
If they want a rehearsal hall to seat four hundred people
we'd put in the shell but we won't finish it. If they want
practice rooms, a certain number may be in and just enough to
suit the Symphony and any outside productions, but not enough
to do all the things they really wanted to do. The Opera wanted
a storage place so they didn't have to move this stuff, and
they wanted rehearsal halls so they could have the rehearsals
going on without taking the stage of the opera house. Well,
that's fine. But then we get into a building that gets up to
around $25 million, and I said, "Nothing doing." That can
come later.
213
Zellerbach: The main object now is to put up a theater that would
serve as a concert hall and have all the facilities for that
and have the facilities for outside attractions without any
of the furbelows and things that are needed (I don't say they
are not needed , it would be very nice to do the whole thing) .
We just can't take the same risks that we did the last time
and go out for a bond issue of $15 million or $20 million and
have the thing kicked and defeated.
Nathan: It's exciting to see the way it's developing.
Zellerbach: You're telling me it is. I feel very good about it. At least
I can put that down as an accomplishment.
213a
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR GEORGE R. MOSCONE
San Francisco
PROCLAMATION
Whereas, Harold Zellerbach, recently-appointed President Emeritus of the San
Francisco Art Commission, has served the people of the City and County of San
Francisco for many years, in a variety of exemplary, creative capacities, and
Whereas, these generous donations of time and energies have included 28 pro
ductive years as President of the San Francisco Art Commission, work with the
National Endowment for the Arts for the benefit of San Francisco, contributions
of almost $500,000 to the San Francisco Neighborhood Arts Program through the
Zellerbach Family Fund, initiation of the Family and Child Crisis Project for
the Westside Community Mental Health Center, and many other worthy endeavors,
and
Whereas, Harold Zellerbach has also contributed greatly to the national appre
ciation of the arts, through his participation in the Rockefeller Panel on the
Performing Arts, and through his promotion of the concept of the Inter-Agency
Council on the Arts, and
Whereas, Harold Zellerbach has, through his many achievements, notably enriched
the quality of life in our City for all San Franciscans,
Now Therefore, I, George R. Moscone, do hereby proclaim Sunday, September 12,
1976, as Harold Zellerbach Day in San Francisco, and urge all San Franciscans
to join with me in honoring this fine citizen.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set
my hand and caused the official Seal of
the City and County of San Francisco to
be affixed this twelth day of September,
nineteen hundred and seventy-six.
George R. Moscone
Mayor
214
LACUNA HONDA VOLUNTEERS
Nathan: Now we'd better give you a chance to talk about the Laguna
Honda Volunteers.
Zellerbach: Jerry Simon retired from the millinery business. I don't know
how he got himself involved in the Laguna Honda Home for the
Aged, the City Home, but he did. Everytime we were at the
[lunch] table [at Trader Vic's] he was always talking about the
Laguna Honda Home. He used to come and tell me his woes, that
he couldn't get this and he couldn't get that for the poor
people out there. They were putting on a Christmas show for
them. We used to get all the acts to perform there.
He was talking to me and I said, "Well, Jerry, let's start
an auxiliary, and if we get an auxiliary started they can
furnish the things the city won't furnish." All the city would
furnish was their home, a few terrible clothes, and care and
food, and that's all. No amusements, no nothing. Just the
bare essentials of life.
One day we had Harry Ross, who was the Comptroller, and he
knew about it and he was interested, and we got Phil Ehrlich [Sr.]
and I forget who else. We had a couple of others, and we all
went out there for lunch one day to see it. I don't know if
you've ever been in the place. It's much better now, but we
went in there and here are all these old people sitting on
benches or sitting on chairs, just sitting, waiting, waiting for
death. We went into the wards and they w.re lying there, nothing
to do, no amusements, nothing.
So, poor Phil Ehrlich seeing it, got so upset he couldn't
eat. It affects you. It can't help but affect you. That was
the beginning. We started to get some women interested and
215
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Jerry used to take them out and show them the place. We
organized a nonprofit Laguna Honda Home Auxiliary, and then we
went out and raised money, and the women appointed committees.
Jerry did a great deal of the work. He'd go out and find
women that were formerly hairdressers and ask them to volunteer
to come in so many times a week and fix the old people's hair,
wash their hair and make them feel good.
Then we started to get decent clothes for them. We
provided television sets and they organized sewing bees and
carpentry and pa in ting --any thing to keep them amused, and
keep them with the will to live, something to live for.
They used to have solariums and
in them, nothing. We had some of the
volunteer; one took one solarium and
the old people could go out there and
We used some of these areas to put up
the sewing room. And we used to give
they never got before, and magazines;
magazines and books. We did what the
About when did this all start?
there was no furniture
interior decorators
then furnished it so that
they were in a nice room,
the shampoo stuff, and
them ice cream, which
we gathered all kinds of
city wouldn't do.
Oh, you always give me those tough questions. It was in 1957.
I've been a director since it started but I don't go to the
meetings any more because I've been on long enough and I stay
on because Jerry wants me to stay on. Otherwise I would have
been off.
It's a going concern?
Oh yes. They have meetings--! don't know whether it's once
a month or every other month—at Trader Vic's. I haven't
been to a meeting in a couple of years. Well, I wouldn't say
that. I went when Jerry got into a jam with some of the women
so Ehrlich and I and some of his friends went up to the meeting
to get the thing cooled off. The work that I did was completed.
It's up to the women. Jerry calls me up once in a while when
he needs a little money on the side. He'o afraid to ask them
because they won't give it to him, so he calls me and I put up
my share and I call Phil Ehrlich and I tell him to get the money
up to keep Jerry happy.
Nathan:
It's very worthwhile.
216
TRUSTEE, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Zellerbach: You've got Laguna Honda, now what else do you want?
Nathan: Would you like to talk a little about the University of
Pennsylvania? Does it have financing problems?
Zellerbach: The University of Pennsylvania is having that problem. All
these private universities are in that position. They have
some public support from their research departments. Some
states do help them by giving substantial numbers of scholar
ships. Or they may have an organization for financing
buildings at low cost. But when it comes to giving them
money, some may be given, but it's a drop in the bucket.
Pennsylvania I think gets $12 million from the State of
Pennsylvania. They were almost going to lose that, because
one of the legislators back there said that that's not their
business to help finance private institutions, even though the
university is open to everybody. It's not sectarian. But
they take the attitude that it's private and they have no
control over it. Anyway, they still get that funding, but the
university's total budget I think is now, oh, about $180 or $190
million a year.
Learning to Specialize
Zellerbach: I think the private universities are really going to have to
shrink their enrollments or they'll have to get rid of some of
their different colleges, the different courses, at which
they're not top flight. One of the problems with the universities
is that they have to have every science, and every history
217
Zellerbach: department, and every language department. Some of them are
pretty bad. All the universities have some great departments.
Top. And a lot of them are not good. There's a movement on
foot I know among some of the Eastern colleges; their presidents
are now commencing to talk of working it out so that each
college will have so many departments at which they're tops.
Nathan: Oh, specialize, then.
Zellerbach: Specialize. And then to exchange students, to let the students
go to the different colleges and they would get credit, on
some financial basis, I guess, for so much a course. In that
way, you see, they could substantially reduce their costs of
operation.
Nathan: It might be a little like the Claremont Colleges.
Zellerbach: That's what they're doing down at UC Santa Cruz, you know,
experimenting with different colleges, like the English
methods. So this, I think, is going to become a trend here,
unless they can get a lot of money. A number of these private
schools have gone public, you know. The University of Pittsburgh
became a state college. They went busted, so they became a state
college.
Nathan: I see. Now can we talk about the dedication of the arts center
and the "Voyager" statue?
Zellerbach: My activities as trustee, didn't we talk about that?
Nathan: We talked more about your going to the University of Pennsylvania
and the Wharton School. But not so much later about your work
as a trustee.
Zellerbach: Did I tell you how I first got on there?
Nathan: No.
218
Alumni Society in the West
Zellerbach: I graduated in the Wharton School at the University of
Pennsylvania in 1917. In those days it was the only under
graduate business school in the United States. There was
the Harvard Graduate School, and the graduate school at
Dartmouth.
When I was at the University of California at Berkeley
for my first two years of college they had nothing pertaining
to business except economics. So, I went east.
After I graduated I came back here and then went to see
whether there was an alumni group there. There was a small
alumni group, but the members were mostly graduate students
of Pennsylvania, primarily from the medical school or from
law or one of the other professions. At the time there was
myself and Brunn Livingston, who was in my class. He and I
and a couple of others were asked to get the alumni society
moving out here.
I found out who was president and encouraged him to have
a meeting. As a consequence I became secretary of the alumni
society and eventually I was the president. I did all the work
and got everything organized and had meetings. We tried to get
students to go back there, doing the usual thing, but it was
very slow work because at that time if you went to Pennsylvania
from out here that was a five day trip on the train and when
you got there you stayed there. You couldn't fly home for
Thanksgiving or fly home for Christmas. We took the railway,
and in those days there were no air-conditioned cars.
Being active in the alumni got me acquainted with some
people back at the university. And then finally I got out of
it. Then they started at the university to have trustees from
the different areas. In the Pacific Coast area, they had an
elderly man, I think he was an ex-professor, but he didn't do
anything. Eventually, there was an election and his term was
over. I knew the boys down in Los Angeles. Rex Hyman was the
secretary and a good friend, and I knew some of them from up
in the northwest. I kept moving around. So, they nominated me
for trustee.
Nathan: Who names the trustees?
Zellerbach: The west coast alumni, the specific group.
219
Trustee from the West Coast
Nathan: Oh, each area recommends a trustee.
Zellerbach: Yes, they each recommend their own. And then, if your
investigation passes muster, you get elected. In those days
your term of office was ten years. So, when I was elected
it was for ten years.
I was a very steady trustee. I showed up for practically
every meeting.
Nathan: Did you go to Pennsylvania? The meetings were there?
Zellerbach: Yes. In Philadelphia. Three times a year. In the beginning
I was taking trains, and to come all the way on a train just
for a meeting, they couldn't understand it. I took part in
the different activities there from the point of view of what
I was interested in: curriculum and athletics.
You always had to report on what you were doing in your
own district. Therefore, when I went back to my district I
always sent out a letter of what went on at the trustees'
meeting to all the alumni on the Pacific Coast, so as to keep
them informed. I always asked if there was anything I could
do back there that they wanted, and I did it. I think I was
the only alumni trustee that ever did that, keep their own
people informed. I suggested that to the secretary of the
alumni society back there but he wasn't a very workable person.
He thought it was great and he did it once or twice and then
he quit.
I became very well acquainted with everybody there and I
still am. I think my term of office ran out about four or five
years ago. Then Walter O'Malley succeeded me.
Nathan: Should I know who Walter O'Malley is?
Zellerbach: You know who Walter O'Malley is; he's owner of the Los Angeles
Dodgers. He only served for about three years and they made
him a term trustee. And then Billy [Zellerbach] was elected.
He's on his first year. Now the alumni trustees' term is only
five years, so they think they can be re-elected.
220
A Building Fund and a Contribution for a Theater
Zellerbach: When I was a trustee they started a $70 million fund for
buildings. The trustees had to be the bellwethers. For my
first contribution, I think I contributed $60 thousand.
I thought at that time that was pretty good for me. In the
meantime, my wife and I had been building a fund --she was in
it, but I put all the money in it. [Laughs] Of course, under
the Community Property Act it ought to be half hers, but
practically all my securities went in there. So, we built the
Harold and Doris Zellerbach Fund.
They knew I was interested in the arts because I had
been president of the Art Commission out here for years. The
business of this theater came up. So, Sweeton and the trustees
started to work on me for half a million dollars, and "...it
would be very nice to have the theater named after you..."
At that time Billy was a graduate and my grandson Johnny, I
think, was a student. So, that was three generations of
Zellerbachs. Then I got to thinking that the fund was worth
$6 or $7 hundred thousand. And all I was doing was spending
the income. I wasn't giving away any of the principal. This
was the Harold and Doris Zellerbach Fund.
So, I said to my wife one night, "Why don't we do something
while we're alive? (The Zellerbach Family Fund had already
started Zellerbach Hall in Berkeley.) And we can see the result
of it instead of leaving this money here for the kids to give
away. We can give it away ourselves. That's what it's for."
So, she and my children all thought it was a wonderful idea.
Then I said that we'd go ahead and make the grant. We could
pay it over a term of years.
Before I finally said yes I had talked with Walter Annenberg
who had put up most of the money for the Annenberg Center. The
$500 thousand didn't build the theater, but it helped a great
deal. I talked to him one day at one of the trustees' meetings
and I said, "Walter, they've asked me to make this grant, and
I've considered it favorably but I'm not ^oing to make it unless
it's satisfactory to you. Another theater would be named after
the Zellerbach family and if you want to keep this to yourself,
it's fine. I won't do anything unless it's 100 percent compatible
with you and your family." So, he said, "Harold, I'd just love
to have you do it. It's perfect. It's wonderful. It couldn't
be better. I'm delighted. Go ahead and do it."
221
Zellerbach: I made the contribution and I paid off $200 thousand
and in January will give them another fifty, so I'll be down
to $250 thousand. I could always liquidate enough to pay
them off overnight if I wanted to, but as long as I don't
have to I'll just let it work along and pay them off so much
a year. If anything happens to me it's a commitment of the
funds so they have to pay it anyway.
That's how I got into the theater and I've been interested
ever since.
The Problem of Athletics
Zellerbach: I used to needle the hell out of the athletic trustees. I'd
been watching the athletic department. Our athletic department
was a blank, practically. When I went there we used to get to
the Penn-Cornell games like the Cal-Stanford game. Every
Thanksgiving they used to fill the stadium. They'd get seventy
or eighty thousand people, or whatever the stadium held. This
was the biggest thing of the year.
And then they had a little trouble, long after I was there.
I didn't pay much attention after I left. Their athletics
went downhill like most of the Ivy League colleges because the
presidents were more interested in the intellectual side of
the college than they were in the athletics. They didn't care
whether they had any athletics or not. There was a time that
Chicago quit all athletics.
So the Penn football team played, but they used to get
maybe three thousand, four thousand, maybe ten thousand at a
Penn-Cornell game. I used to get to see the statistics and
when I went back there I would needle these guys. I said,
"This is a disgrace. A university of this size and with its
reputation to sit by here and see this place go to wrack and
ruin without any kind of a drive to get your athletics someplace
where they're competitive. This university gets a lot of
publicity from athletics and it gives you a reputation. It's
the one thing that keeps the alumni together, especially the
football team." I used to bombard them with the Buck-of-the-
Month Club literature. You know about that, don't you?
222
Nathan: No, I don't.
Zellerbach: Don't you know about the Buck-of-the-Month Club?
Nathan: No. Tell me about it.
Zellerbach: That's Stanford; they collect from the alumni for athletic
scholarships. This started some time ago, I don't know how
long ago. I just got this report (showing it).
Nathan: I see. This is a directory of those that have given. (Reading)
Stanford Buck Club Directory.
Zellerbach: Yes. Now a letter accompanied that last year. In '71-'72,
they raised $460 thousand and there were 4500 names in here.
Nathan: Fantastic.
Zellerbach: Now, you know why they went to the Rose Bowl. [Laughter]
Nathan: Yes. That is clever.
The 'Voyager" and a Dedication
Nathan: I see in this picture that your university has a magnificent
sculpture.
This is the "Voyager" statue by Seymour Lipton? This was
in honor of your birthday in 1971 and was presented by your
family, wasn't it?
Zellerbach: '71. It's not what I'd call a big birthday, but we had all the
kids up to celebrate my birthday and they presented me with
their picture and the Voyager.
Nathan:
They gave you the picture before you ever saw the statue?
Zellerbach: Yes, I didn't know anything about the statue then. It was a
well kept secret.
Nathan:
And the statue is at the University of Pennsylvania?
223
Zellerbach: Yes, it's in the foyer of the Zellerbach Theater. All my
children and grandchildren gave it to me, which I thought
was quite wonderful and was a beautiful thing.
Nathan: It certainly is. About how tall is it? The pedestal itself
looks tall .
Zellerbach: Well, they say they can't reach the top. They did that on
purpose because they didn't want kids climbing around it.
I think it's probably around ten or twelve feet.
Nathan: And is that cast bronze?
Zellerbach: I guess it is, yes.
Nathan: It's really a marvelous work.
Zellerbach: Oh yes. That's a real work of art. It's beautiful. It makes
the theater. It's a real work of art.
Nathan: It must give a good focal point for that whole entrance.
Zellerbach: Oh yes, sure.
Nathan: So, you saw it when the theater was dedicated to you?
Zellerbach: Yes, when it was dedicated. I went back there and it was the
first time I saw it. They had all my friends come in from
all over and it was quite a do. It was very wonderful. They
came from Detroit, Chicago, Boston, Washington, Cleveland,
and the family were there and it was very, very nice.
Nathan: That must have been a very sentimental occasion.
Zellerbach: Well it was. It was very nice and it was well done and we all
were very pleased.
224
Annenberg Center and the Zellerbach Theater
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan :
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach;
Since the theater has been open I've been trying to find out
how much use they've been making of it. They put out their
bulletin of events, I always look it over to see what's going
on. I can never find the Zellerbach Theater mentioned. So,
when I was back there I told them, "What is this? A monument?
I thought this was for use like the Zellerbach Hall in Berkeley?
I see programs all the time and I never have any comment on
what you're doing."
Harold Prince put on a couple of big shows there just
a few months ago. I guess it was in October. It was too
bad I couldn't stay for them, but they occurred a week or so
after I was there. That was the only thing I've heard that
they've done. Everything was at the Annenberg Center. Well,
that's true. The complex is in the Annenberg Center. So, I
said, "Does anybody know there's a Zellerbach Theater there?"
"Oh yes." 'Veil," I said, "I don't see it. All it says is
the Annenberg Center. Well, now if this is Annenberg 's then
that's fine. Give me my money back. If it's the Zellerbach
Theater then I think it's only proper that when you make
announcements, you should say that it's the Zellerbach Theater
in the Annenberg Center." So, that's what they're doing now.
Yesterday the head man was out here,
got his name here, George Girvner.
That professor, I've
He says that they're showing that they're doing more than they
had done before in the Zellerbach Theater in the Annenberg
Center.
This is the first program that I've ever seen come out.
It says, "Zellerbach Theater."
Certainly. That's after the hollering.
It looks very nice.
Of course their problem is money. When I liquidated the Harold
L. Zellerbach Art Foundation there remained about $50 thousand
in it, and so I sent it back to them. I told them that they
could spend the income plus ten percent of the corpus per year,
you know, for doing something.
225
Zellerbach: I asked the professor what he was doing with it and he
said he only could get two or three thousand dollars a year
out of it and he said that it wasn't enough to do very much.
I said that it was at least something. And then the Zellerbach
Family Fund is putting in some more money for the events for
keeping the thing moving, because the university has to put
up the money to maintain it. I think the Annenbergs are giving
$100 thousand a year for the maintenance. I don't know.
Anyway, they're not going the way Berkeley is going.
But at least we know now it's being used, and that's the main
thing I was interested in. I want to know how many students
are coming and what's the reaction? Is it doing the thing that
it was built to do? Keeping the kids on the campus?
226
THE SAN FRANCISCO BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU
(Interview XIII, March 30, 1973)
Nathan: There's also the question of your other community interests,
if any of these are something you would like to talk about?
The Better Business Bureau?
Zellerbach: Well, there's the San Francisco Better Business Bureau. I
was a member of that, on the Board of Directors. I don't know
how many years I spent on it, not too many« That was when I
was very active in my own business. They do a very good job,
and like a lot of other things the more money they have the
better job they do.
Nathan: Who supports the Better Business Bureau?
Zellerbach: The business community supports it. I imagine they still do,
but I don't know whether they have any outside money. They
take all these complaints over the telephone, and I suppose
they investigate them all. They have so many complaints that
we had a staff at that time that would select the important
ones and do away with the rest that we didn't have time to do.
227
THE SAN FRANCISCO COMMERCIAL CLUB
Zellerbach: I was on the Board of Directors of the San Francisco
Commercial Club for two terms. I think I helped them by
the advice I gave them. When I went on the board they had
their depreciation money, you know, for rehabilitation; they
depreciated their furniture and fixtures because they were
in a leased place and all their money was in fixed -income
securities and in industrial bonds.
That was just at the beginning of this inflation. So,
I prevailed upon them to hold the amount in the common stocks
in order to protect themselves, which they did. And when
they were ready to do the rehabilitation their portfolio had
doubled in value. If I hadn't done that they wouldn't have
been able to do the job. I think that was my main contribution.
Nathan: Tell me just a word about the Commercial Club, is it a social
club for business people?
Zellerbach: Yes, it's a lunch club. It's been in existence for years, as
long as I can remember, probably sixty years. I think it
formed right after the earthquake and fire. I remember their
first place was at a loft here on Sansome Street. That was
before I was in business, but my father used to take us over
there for lunch. All the paper men ate at the same table. I
think they still do.
228
THE SAINTS AND SINNERS MILK FUND
Zellerbach: The Saints and Sinners Milk Fund was Jake Ehrlich's pet
charity, supplying milk to the school children who couldn't
afford it. Each year they had a drive, and they had weekly
lunches at which Jake was always the toastmaster, and Tommy
Harris was the foil and the comedian.
Nathan: Did Tommy Harris have an eating place?
Zellerbach: Yes. That's the same one. He was in show business. A long
time ago he had this eating place [Tommy's Joynt] . After he
got out of show business he went into the eating place. He
used to have a night club on Sutter Street. All the places
around town, I used to go to them all the time. He was very
good entertainment. He always needled all the members there,
especially about their private lives.
I suppose you needed a strong skin when they were making
fun of you. I always came in for quite a bit. I would always
laugh. Nothing bothered me. He always wondered what I did
with all my money and all that stuff.
But anyway, we raised well over a half million dollars.
Then, we used the income and some of the principal for supplying
the milk.
Nathan: That was for San Francisco schools?
Zellerbach: San Francisco schools, and also the parochial schools. I was
the chairman of the Board of Trustees in the Milk Fund. The
Milk Fund was a charitable corporation. The Saints and Sinners
was just a voluntary thing, no tax deduction attached to that.
That paid for your lunch and whatever else they needed to
carry on.
229
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Once a year they had a big drive for the Saints and
Sinners Milk Fund.
Is that still going on?
No.
There are other lunch programs?
No. The Saints and Sinners died when Jake Ehrlich lost
interest in it. He got too busy. There is still money left
in the Saints and Sinners fund. But it was turned over to
the Security Pacific National Bank to administer. They're
still doing it, I presume.
Before Jake died I used to try to get him to liquidate
to get us all out of this. He always promised to have another
meeting, but he never did it. You know, you get to the point
where if he didn't do it, he didn't do it. I wasn't going to
get sick over it. I've got other things to do.
Just one more question about the Saints and Sinners,
these mostly San Francisco businessmen?
Were
They were businessmen, bartenders, policemen, firemen, everybody
was in it.
They took the name literally?
Yes. We had quite a cross-section of the male people in the
community, entertainers, everything. There were businessmen
there, too, people active in business. It was a group that
you don't find very often, a wide cross-section. It worked.
I enjoyed it. We had a lot of fun at the meetings that put
me in touch with all the gang that knew the seamy side of the
city. After being there I was always kind of protected.
There was no one who wasn't a good friend of theirs, so
I was never bothered by anybody.
You never had your hubcaps stolen or anything like that?
No. It was good for that. There were some damned nice guys.
After all, you can't run everybody's life. We aren't out of
the same mold and the same pattern. I met some that were
230
Zellerbach: pawnbrokers, boy, I met everything. At the top there were
people that would have big luncheons, and there would be an
attendance of a hundred or more. Sure.
Nathan: How did people join? Could any man who wanted to, join?
Zellerbach: He got proposed by a member, and that's how you would know
who was who- -and you paid for your lunch. That was that.
Where do you want to go now?
231
FIBREBOARD
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Nathan:
Zellerbach:
Would you like to say anything about your interests in Joseph
Magnin?
I've got to skip back a little further. Joe Magnin came later
than the others there. Fibreboard, I was on that board. That
was a joint venture between Crown Zellerbach and the Paraffin
companies. We merged our Fibreboard interests, our plants for
theirs. So, I was one of the members of the Crown group
representing the Crown Zellerbach Corporation and went for it.
I was on the board until we sold our interests to the
Paraffin Company at the time that we purchased the Gaylord
Container Company, which was in the same line of business. In
order for us to acquire the Gaylord Company we had to dispose
of our interests in the Fibreboard under a ruling by the
Justice Department. So, we sold ours back to the Paraffin
Company and we got out. That was that.
Was Fibreboard in the prefab business?
They used to make wallboard and paints. They're still in
existence. Their stock is listed. Paraffin went out of
business. They sold their paint company. All the rest was in
Fibreboard, and they took over what was left; primarily
Fibreboard was consolidated into Paraffin, and then they
changed the Paraffin name to Fibreboard,
And Fibreboard is still, then, associated with lumber?
They have very little to do with lumber. They have mostly
waste paper mills. They have one pulp mill up at Antioch. In
all the rest they make cartons and corrugated boxes. I haven't
been too intimately acquainted with what they have been doing
in the last years, but I imagine they still do the same thing.
232
RAYONIER
Nathan: There is one other that I don't have on your list, Rayonier?
[Rayonier, Inc.]
Zellerbach: Oh, Rayonier, yes.
Nathan: You were a director of Rayonier?
Zellerbach: And how I was a director!
Nathan: Tell me how you were a director.
Zellerbach: Rayonier is an independent company, which was founded by
E.M. Mills, who was the Executive Vice-President of Crown
Zellerbach. He's somewhat of a promoter in his own right.
The start of it was when Mr. Mills made a deal with
the Simpson Logging Company up at She 1 ton, a small town right
outside of Olympia, Washington, a new type of operation.
Rayonier built the pulp mill jointly with Simpson. Simpson
had a saw mill, right there. We put the mill up along side
of it. We had the advantage of using their power plant for
our power, and then we used their slabs, and we made chips
out of the wood that they couldn't use. They supplied us with
the logs and we got outside logs. We prepared the logs for
making pulp, and we made sulfite pulp up there to begin with.
We did pretty well there.
Then we went up to Hoquiam where Mr. Mills made the same
kind of a deal with the other lumber mills up in that area.
At that time they had big burners that burned up the slabs.
It was his idea to use what they were burning and make pulp
out of it, which we did.
233
Zellerbach: At Hoquiam we made a deal. I was instrumental in taking
the Hammermill Paper Company in to put in a paper machine.
Then, also, they could ship some of the surplus pulp back to
their own plant, which they could use. They came in as one
of our partners in that role, and that made it feasible.
In our group, as we took our share and later on financed
our bonds, the convertible preferred stock and the common was
a bonus. The common was just a sheet of paper when you got
it. The idea was to build the value of the common stock up
by earnings. Much later it became very valuable.
From Wood Pulp to Synthetic Fibers
Zellerbach: Then, next we put another mill at Port Angeles. On that we
made a deal with the S.T. Warren Company. They took our pulp.
We didn't put the paper machine in there; down at Hoquiam
they had the machine running. So, we had a deal with them,
and they gave us a contract for forty or fifty thousand tons
of pulp a year. That, also, was the key to the feasibility.
Then, the surplus pulp we sold on the market. All these three
mills were sulfite mills.
After that the next mill we built was down at Fernandina,
and that was also a sulfite mill. The last mill we built was
in Georgia; that was a kraft mill. Then, we got the idea,
Mills did, that instead of making pulp for paper we converted
all these plants into dissolving pulp for the manufacture of
rayon and synthetic fibers.
In fact, all the lumber plants today are making nothing
but synthetic fibers. I was on the board, and we had some
very interesting experiences on that one.
One was when Mr. Mills passed away and we had to get
somebody to run the operation. We got a man by the name of
Bartch. My brother was running it with oue hand and Crown
with the other one. What was always in the back of my head
was that someday we could consolidate the two companies. But,
we waited too long and the anti-trust bill came along, so we
couldn't do it.
234
Zellerbach: Bartch came in as president. He was a banker. He came
out of some big bank in New York. He was vice-president in
charge of the West Coast business. My brother got real well
acquainted with him. My brother always loved bankers.
Nathan: This is J.D. Zellerbach?
Zellerbach: J.D., yes. In fact, he looked like a banker all the time.
Nathan: [Laughs] I'll have to take a look at those pictures.
Shifts on the Board
Zellerbach: Charlie Blyth was interested, too. Blyth did all the financing
of the bonds. Charlie Blyth was on the board originally, and
my brother, and my father. I didn't go on the board until my
father passed away in 1945. Then they put me on in his place.
In the meantime, Bill Reed took over the Simpson Timber
Company for his father. His father passed away and he was the
sole heir, so he bought a substantial interest in Rayonier, a
very large interest with the idea that eventually he would get
the majority and take it over.
We found he was no good, and we had to get rid of him.
That was quite a task. I was right in the middle of that fight.
And we finally got rid of him. We bought him out. Then, of
course, we arranged to give him a pension for a certain number
of years.
Then, we had Goddseman, who had a brokerage company selling
pulp. He also had an investment company, and he was pretty
smart. He put a lot of money in these paper companies whose
stocks were low, and he thought he could make some money. He
always had enough stock, so he had representation on the board.
We were always tangling with the Hammermill interests because
they were on the board, too.
One day we woke up, and Hammermill had made a deal with
Goddseman to sell a substantial part of their interests. He
had a very large holding in Hammermill. He was working on
trying to eventually put the two companies together, because
Hammermill didn't want any part of this kind of business. So,
they sold him enough of their stock.
235
Nathan: That's enough of the Rayonier stock?
Zellerbach: Yes. Hammermill had two seats on the board. Part of the deal
was to give up their two seats to Mr. Goddseman.
Nathan: How many seats were there on the board, altogether?
Zellerbach: Twelve, or so. I don't know. That was a big shift. Then,
he put in his own man, Clyde Morgan, who was the secretary-
treasurer of the S.T. Warren Company, who I knew very well.
And he took charge.
Bill Reed, at that time, was chairman of the board. He
was about ready to run the company. After that meeting,
instead of his running the company, this gang had the majority
and so he was kicked out of office [laughs] and had quite a
shake-up.
Nathan: The primary antagonists, then, were Goddseman and the Zellerbach
interests?
Zellerbach: No, no. There was no one who was antagonistic, but we thought
that we were double-crossed by Hammermill. Because here
Hammermill had a very large trust in the paper company. We
were very close to them. I had put them in Rayonier in the
first place. I sold them the deal. I thought we were double-
crossed, and we were. I let them know, too.
After that we were friends, but I wouldn't trust them.
And they knew it. So, anyway, we got along. Bill Reed got piqued
and quit and sold out. I was on the board for quite a few years
after until I had to get off the board. The Federal Trade
Commission went after me.
Nathan: Why did the Federal Trade Commission do that?
Zellerbach: They went after me because under the law you can't have inter
locking directorates of two companies producing the same
line of merchandise. After fighting around with them for
a couple of years my attorney decided ths'c there was no way
I could stay on, so I might as well resign and get off, which
I did. We kept our representation by putting Stanley Dollar,
Jr. in to represent our interest.
236
Zellerbach: I used to go back there and have lunch with them after
the meetings, and I was still very close to it, even though
I wasn't on the board.
Nathan: Was Stanley Dollar affiliated with the Zellerbach interest,
or just a friend?
Consolidation and Cooperation
Zellerbach: Just a friend. He was an outstanding young man, he still
is. In fact, he's a member of the Zellerbach Family Fund
board, and a very close friend of mine. [Mr. Dollar died in
1975.]
Then subsequently Rayonier consolidated with International
Tel. and Tel.
Nathan: So, it's part of ITT now?
Zellerbach: That was a good deal. We got all our money out of it in
preferred stock, plus the fact that our common stock was worth
a lot of money. But we had a substantial interest and I got
a pretty good chunk of ITT.
Nathan: Very interesting. You were talking earlier about bringing
different companies together so that one could use what the
other one didn't use and share in the power produced and the
division of the pulp. Was this process something that you
were interested in?
Zellerbach: That was in the original mill, up at Shelton. We had no
partners except for Reed. Reed, at that time, had an interest.
As I say, they were supplying the power, they sold us the site
next to them, and that made the thing viable.
Nathan: How do two companies find each other in a way that is acceptable
to both of them? Are you scouting around all the time for
opportunities? How do you get together with them?
Zellerbach: In this instance Hammermill needed a mill that could make bond
paper, sulfite bond, and make it good and cheap. They had a
high cost mill in the area.
237
Nathan: But how did you know that?
Zellerbach: Because I was running the Zellerbach Paper Company and trying
to sell millions of dollars worth of paper from the area. I
knew what their problem was. They were non- competitive in
the lower grades of sulfite bond. They had to make themselves
competitive.
Nathan: Did you approach them?
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. And the same thing with S.T. Warren. In the matter
of running the Zellerbach Paper Company, they were importing
and buying a lot of pulp. They didn't have any steady resource.
Of course, they had some bad experiences after the war in
getting pulp, and this became a permanent supply.
Nathan: You try to know what the problems are of other companies?
Zellerbach: Well, when you're around them almost twenty hours a day, day
after day you begin to know what your problem is going to be.
If you don't you must be pretty stupid.
Nathan: That's very interesting. You know what people need and how to
put them together. Is that it?
Zellerbach: Well, sure, as long as the government doesn't interfere. So,
that was the end of my end.
238
NIANTIC
Nathan: Did we get to Niantic yet?
Zellerbach: No. The Niantic was a real estate company, family-owned
50 percent by the Levy family. Niantic started way back with
my father and Alex Levison. The company used to be the
Zellerbach-Levison Company. They were partners in real estate.
Alex Levison had a printing company, and he did the buying and
ran the thing. He bought cheap properties and he ran them
cheaply. It didn't do my father too much good.
My father left his interests to my mother, so she was
the half owner. (The Levison family was subsequently Levy.)
My brother said that I had better take over. By that time
Levy was running the Levison half. So, I took over my mother's
interest to run that.
Levy did all the buying and he used to buy securities.
He pursued the same tactics as his father-in-law. He wouldn't
hire lawyers, and he wouldn't have the title changed because
he didn't want to spend the money. But, anyway, Louis, that's
his name. Louis Levy.
He has one son, Donald Levy. The first thing we did was
to make them change the name. We changed it to Niantic because
we owned the Niantic Building over there on Sampson Street.
239
Zellerbach: Then my mother passed away. She left half of her estate
to the Zellerbach Family Fund. In my father's will he said
that his Niantic interests had to be disposed of, but he wanted
it sold as a unit, sold in the whole interest, not split up.
Nathan: Why was this?
Zellerbach: Because he was smart enough. He was a fifty-fifty partner.
If your estate starts to be sold off, selling 5 percent to this
guy and 10 percent to the other guy, it would be a double-cross
on your partner.
In order to avoid that we decided that we were going to
sell the estate's interest in Niantic to the Zellerbach Family
Fund, so that it would be kept in a unit and wouldn't be
divided amongst the heirs and my mother. She divided the rest
of her estate to her three children. That would have made it
just as bad. We decided, or I decided as an executive, that
we sell it to the Family Fund, which we did.
In the meantime my mother's estate was still under appraise
ment. We had to have all the real estate appraised before we
could settle it, or finish it up. We didn't do anything about
it; we just kept our interests. Then, after the estate was
settled and we paid our taxes and we could liquidate it, we
decided that we wanted to sell our interest or divide it.
They take half and we take half; we go down the middle.
After months of negotiations we finally reached an agreement
where Niantic bought the Zellerbach Family Fund interest. In
payment they gave us certain pieces of property, well over a
million dollars worth of securities in there, so we had all of
that, and everything that was liquid we took.
They wanted to stay in the real estate business, so we got
a few pieces of real estate to make up the difference of the
selling price. We're still partners on the BART Building, down
on Mission. We're trying to settle that one.
We thought we had it leased again, then we had three f
partners. We had Levy, the Fund, and the Hertzka-Knowles .
Then the deal fell through. The thing has been standing empty
n9w for almost a year. After six months negotiating with the
school board, then the school board decided that they would
build their own building, so the deal was off. There we were,
240
Zellerbach: and we were putting up most of the money and Levy wouldn't
put up anything. He was not interested. He wanted to sell,
but he wouldn't do anything to promote the thing. So, we
were stuck for most of the expense.
After this was over I called our counselor and real
estate advisor and said, "Now you fellas are all through
spending any money unless our partners come in equally. We're
paying them monthly stipends to manage the building, to look
after it. Let them see what they can do."
They've been trying to lease it. Hertzka-Knowles has been
doing most of the negotiating and otherwise, I think, if they
don't get it pretty soon they're going to sell the property
and divide it. That's what I'm urging, so that we can be rid
of the problems and rid of the lease. That would be the end
of that.
241
JOSEPH MAGNIN
Zellerbach: I have one left and that's Joe Magnin, Joseph Magnin. I've
been retired, although somewhat active around here, and I've
always been good friends with Cyril. And as for Joe Magnin,
it's a family affair. They own the whole business.
Depreciation and Financing Expansion
Zellerbach: They started to expand, but they didn't have enough money.
They couldn't create capital fast enough in that kind of a
business to open new branches.
Every time they opened a new branch it was a million or
two or three million dollars of their stocks and their book
accounts, payrolls. It was almost the size of the store. In
a business of that kind it's all liquid. You can mark down
your dresses and things, but that's taking an actual loss
because you paid for them. Your book accounts are either good
or you write some of them off. But they have very few
depreciable assets. As a consequence they can't generate cash
by depreciation, such as our company can.
For example, the amount of cash we generated this past
year, 1972, we generated from depreciation and other ways of
generating cash, like capital gains and timber and things of
that kind. We generated $100 million.
Nathan: When you speak of depreciation, this would be on buildings
and machinery?
242
Zellerbach: We already spent the money. So, we depreciate the buildings.
You can write off so much a year on your buildings. Well,
that comes back to you in cash.
Nathan: But a retail store can't do that?
Zellerbach: A retail store, what can they depreciate? They can hang a
dress up and keep it ten years and depreciate it, but what do
you do in the meantime? We put in a paper machine and the
paper machine is making money. If you have a dress and you
try to depreciate that and it stands there, you don't make
any money on it. You have to sell it. But, you see, the
paper machines and the timber lands and all that, that's investment
like in real estate or anything else which you can depreciate.
Yes, if they owned their own real estate they would have
some depreciation, but it wouldn't be enough to finance an
expansion. So, that decided them to go public. One of the
things that their underwriter insisted is that they have two
outside directors. The board of directors at that time was
nothing but family.
One of the underwriters' partners was one of the outside
directors, and Cyril asked me if I would go on the board, as
a favor to him. At that time I was getting off of things. I
was getting along, anyway. Ehrlich didn't want me to do it.
Nathan: This is Phil Ehrlich, Sr.?
Going Public
Zellerbach: Yes. He said, "Do you want to take that responsibility?" I said,
'Veil, he's a close friend of mine and he asked me to do it as
a favor to him and his family. I just can't refuse." So, I
went on the board.
Having been in a family business when I first started and
then went public, I knew a few of the ins and outs of running
a public institution. They still had five members and the two
outside, that was seven.
243
Nathan: When a family-owned business goes public, do you always have
to have outside people coming onto the board?
Zellerbach: Well, you don't always have to have outside people. But it
makes sense because, after all, the public needs representation.
In a family-owned company, the family will still control the
company.
Nathan: When they go public, can the family still keep 51 percent of
the shares?
Setting Meeting Days
Zellerbach: They kept more than that. They wound up with 68 percent of
the common stock. So, they controlled the business because as
long as you have over 66 2/3 percent, you control. It
substantially was a family-owned business when they first got
together and when they went on the board they were still running
it like they always did.
They called directors' meetings at any hour. They would
call you up and say, "We're having a meeting." Of course, I
got pretty annoyed at that. I was a trustee and a stockholder,
and severely objected. I said, "If I'm going to be on this
board, I want to attend the meetings and I want to know what
you're doing, and I want sufficient notice so that I can be
there. I don't want any of these secret directors' meetings
where you fellas decide something on a policy matter, or a
large expenditure that's not on the ordinary course of your
business." Now, in running the business, that was their job.
I had to teach them a few things . One was to set meeting
days: the first Monday, or the second Tuesday, or whatever it
is, and then stick to it. That's fine. They did it. Then,
Cyril would go out of town and they would postpone the meeting,
see?
Nathan: [Laughs] I see.
Zellerbach: Of course, that left me high and dry because I set aside the
time and I managed to be home so I could go to the meeting.
I had to cure that. I said, "This company is not dependent on
244
Zellerbach: one director. If any one of you directors go out of town,
that's too bad. If it's a meeting day, we have the meeting,
and that's it. Let's not fool about it."
It was these little things that I had to do to make them
feel that they were living in a fishbowl. This wasn't a family-
owned company any more. It was public, even though they had
the majority of the stock, and they could do anything they
wanted. But they have to publish a statement now, formally.
They thought they were a family-owned company and they didn't
have to publish anything. They did what they pleased. They
took out whatever money they wanted, and that was their business,
But when they went public, then we saw what they were
doing. It's all right to sell dresses at cost, but nobody
should put their hand in the till.
Over a period of time, I was kind of the schoolmaster,
you know. Luckily, it was very good. They did a good job
and they expanded. After the first financing, they financed
again to get more money to open more stores, and they made
lots of money and they were doing very well.
After they expanded the conglomerates (you know, that was
the days of the conglomerates) were making offers for them to
sell out. Every time they got an offer I explained to the
young ones, the children, that when you once sell out, even
though you hold 25 percent of the stock or anything less than
51 percent, you don't own the company, and "I want you to know
that."
"In the meantime, if your new owners want to throw you out
they can throw you out tomorrow. If you want to maintain
your position, my advice to you is to think twice before you
come to this decision." Well, they had another situation there.
When the father died and left his stock, he also said that if
they sold they all had to sell together.
Nathan: That was Cyril Magnin's father?
245
The Amfac Offer
Zellerbach: Yes. Old Joe Magnin. Because he wanted them to continue to
hold control. If they sold control they would all have to
sell out, and it's all in a trust. So, having three children,
they were afraid that if anything happened to their father,
then if they get into an argument with someone--! think one
of them wanted to liquidate the trust, and everybody take his
own stock. The only way they could do it was to sell out.
Finally, they got an offer from Amfac. They received $50
a share for stock that was worth about $25, with 70 percent of
it in cash, and it was liquid in convertible debentures. That
was a hell of a price. They figured they couldn't afford not
to sell. Two of them were a little unsure--didn't know, and
their father convinced them to grab the dough while the going
was good. It would make them all independently wealthy and
secure, and they could invest the money where they wanted to.
They went ahead with the consolidation. I had several
thousand shares of stocks. I had no complaints. I doubled
my money in about six or seven years. All I did was lose a
job at being a director, which was all right.
When the deal was made, they gave the kids, all the
officers of the Magnin group, each an employment contract.
Nathan: An employment contract?
Zellerbach: Yes, sure. They were to be left in control of the management
of the business. Six months later they threw out three of
them. The only one they kept was Ellen. She was a stylist
and she was very clever [Ellen Newman] And Cyril. Cyril
was a director of Amfac. Cyril was the chairman of the board
of Magnin, and just within the last six months they made Ellen
a director of Amfac. Ellen's husband works for I. Magnin.
The other son went into the business of souvenirs they sell in
stores. He has a couple of floors up in our building on Sutter
Street.
Jerry went into the restaurant business, he's the baby.
The Station down here, that's one of them. He has a couple
of them down in Los Angeles.
246
Zellerbach:
But Amfac had to dump them after six months. I saw them
and I said, "Well, boys, I told you what could happen to you,
and it did." Of course, they had a good settlement. That
was the end of my regime in Magnins.
Nathan:
That was a very good story. I'm glad we got to that,
all your stories are really fascinating. Thank you.
In fact,
Trancribers:
Final Typist:
Jane West, Marilyn Fernandez
Keiko Sugimoto
247
INDEX - Harold L. Zellerbach
Adler, Kurt Herbert, 115, 140-141, 147
Albert, Agnes, 76
Alioto, Joseph, 45, 54-57, 62, 70, 75-78, 107, 172
Alvarado School, San Francisco, 93-94
Amfac, 245-246
Annenberg, Walter, 220
Annenberg Center, University of Pennsylvania, 220, 224
art councils, 95-96
Arts Councils of America, 95
Associated Councils of the Arts, 53, 87, 95
Bay Area Arts Council, 87
Art Foundation, Harold L. Zellerbach, 224
Asawa, Ruth, 69, 76, 78, 93-94, 180-181, 186
Ascher, Joseph, 202
Bartch, 233-234
Earth, J. and Company, 59
Baruh , Mr . and Mrs . J . Y . , 7
Benvenuto, Elio, 112
Bierman, Arthur, 87-89, 124
Black Light Explosion Company, 99
Black Writers Workshop, 98-99, 125. See also San Francisco Neighborhood Arts
Program
Blumenthal, Louis [Jewish Community Center], 59
Blyth, Charlie, 234
Blyth-Witter, 157
Boas, Roger, 54
Boone, Philip, 96, 125, 142
Born, Ernest, 69, 79, 81
Breyman, E. A. [Gene], 160
Brown, Edmund G. "Pat", 23-29, 33, 49
Bumbry, Grace, 134
Burton, John, 51, 55
f
California Beaches and Parks Commission, 23-26, 32-34, 50, 118
bond issue campaign, 29-31, 117
California Fish and Game Commission, 30, 34-35
California Packing Corporation, 155
California Park and Recreation Commission, 30, 32, 34, 117
California State Fair, 27
Candlestick Park, San Francisco, 178
248
Capricorn Asunder. See San Francisco Art Commission, gallery
Caver ly, Joseph, 80
Chamberlain, Selah, 119
Chavez, Cesar, 58
Christiansen, Lew, 115-116
Christopher, George, 49, 62, 64, 70, 75, 127
Civic Design Committee, 79, 81-82, 183. See also San Francisco Art Commission
Cloud, Archie, 2
Commanday, Robert, 66
Community Chest, 88
Cook, Ransom, 68
Cranston, Alan, 52
Crown-Willamette, 155
Crown Zellerbach, 20-21, 29, 153, 155, 161, 168, 231-232
customers, 169
Curran Theater, San Francisco, 210-211
de Guigne, Chris, 43
de Turk, Charlie, 23, 32
De Young Museum, 175
Di Grazia, Lori, 68
Dobbs, Harold, 54, 97
dock strike, San Francisco, 1971, 20
Dollar, Stanley, Jr., 235-236
Domingo, Placido, 132
Dorn, Camille, 2
Dripps, Robert Dunning, 193
Dudley Stone School, San Francisco, 1
Dunn, June, 86-87, 89, 104
Duval, Franca, 146-150
Dyer, Joseph, 63, 76, 85-86, 118, 146, 148
earthquake, San Francisco, 1906, 5
ecology, 130, 137
Ehrlich, Jake, 228-229
Ehrlich, Phil, Sr., 214-215, 242
Eisenhower, Dwight D., 41-46
Englander Drayage and Warehouse Company, 7
Ets-Hokin, Jeremy, 70-75, 123
Ets-Hokin, Mr. and Mrs. Louis, 70-72
Farley, James, 44-45
Federal Trade Commission, 235
Fibreboard Corporation, 155, 231
Fiedler, Arthur, 65, 146-147
Feinstein, Dianne, 54-55, 97
249
Fine, Alvin, 198-205
Fish and Game Commission. See California Fish and Game Commission
Fleishhacker, Herbert, Sr., 61-62
Fleishhacker , Mortimer, Jr., 199
Folies Bergere, 149-150
Foote, Gil, 24
Ford Foundation, 130
Fox Theater, San Francisco, 127
Francois, Terry, 50-51, 101
Frankenstein, Alfred, 64-66, 110
Fried, Alexander, 66, 134
Friedman, Mike, 48, 193
Fuld, Ed, 8
Gabel, Julius, 194
Cans, Fred, 2
Gay lord Container Company, 231
Geary Theater, San Francisco, 210-211
Gedda, Nicolai, 132
General Services Administration, Federal, 92
Ghiringhelli, Antonio, 147-148
Girvner, George, 224
Glueck, Nelson, 199
Goddseman, 234-235
Goerner, Fred, 54-55
Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, 6, 79
Goldman, Eva Soline, 144
Goldstein, Morris, 203
Gould, Charlie, 29
Haas, Elise [Mrs. Walter A.], 120
Haas, Walter A., 68, 82
Hale, Prentis Cobb, 119-120, 122, 131
Hammermill Paper Company, 233-236
Hanks, Nancy, 52-53, 91, 95, 123
Harris, Tommy, 228
Haslett Warehouse, San Francisco, 24
Hauser, David, 144
Hausman , Irving I . , 202
Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio, 199
Heilbron, Louis, 195
Hertzka-Knowles , 239-240
Herz, Alfred, 143
Heubner, Solomon, 10
Hoffer, Eric, 69
Hornby, Robert, 122, 126
Howard, Bob, 111
Hsieh, Tom, 70, 76
250
Hutchinson, Karen, and family, 151-152
Hyman, Rex, 218
International Telephone and Telegraph, 236
Jackson, Henry "Scoop", 53, 57-58
Jacobs, Allan, 180
Jacobs , Les , 8
Javits, Jack [Jacob K. ] , iii-iv, 38-40, 46-52
Jenkins, Becky, 89
Jewish Community Center, San Francisco, 59-60, 144-145
Jewish Family Service Agency, San Francisco, 195
Jewish Orphan Asylum, San Francisco, 6
Joffe, Lenore, 144-146
Johnson, Lyndon B., 41, 56
Jordan, Frank, 35-36
Joseph & Feiss Company, 13-14, 156
Kahn, Ira, 59
Kahn, Sydney, 59
Kalamos, Leon, 117
Kennedy, Charles "Pop", 64, 71-72
Killion, George, 36-37, 44
Kimball, Raymond, 82
King, Ray, 31
Knowland, Joseph, Sr., 25-26
Koshland, Daniel, 2, 197-198
Koshland, Robert, 2, 198-199
Krips, Josef, 143
Kuno, Yoshi, 9
labor unions, 18-19, 21, 72, 89
Cutters, 18
Farmworkers , 58
Musicians, 64
Teamsters, 18
See also dock strike, San Francisco, 1971
Laguna Honda Home, 197
Laguna Honda Auxiliary, 215
Laguna Honda Volunteers, 214
Lauter, Robert, 71
Legion of Honor, San Francisco, 175
Lehmann, Lotte, 134
Levison, Alex, 238
Levy, Donald, and family, 238-240
Lilienthal, Sally Hellyer, 77
251
Lipton, Seymour, 222
Livermore, Norman, 32
Livingston, Brunn, 218
Loewe, Emma [Mrs. Louis Blumenthal], 59
Look Magazine, 57
Los Angeles Opera Association, 135
lottery, Metzger & Franklin, 4
Lowell High School, San Francisco, 2
Lower, Elmer, 43
Lurie, Louis, 75, 92, 123, 210
Lynch, Tom, 50
Magnin, Cyril, 241-245
Magnin, Jerry, 245
Magnin, Joseph, 245
Magnin, Joseph [business], 241, 242-246
Magnussen, Warren, 58
Marshall Plan, 44
Martinez, Anita, 76
Mauser, Henry, 6
May, Dodie, 2
Mayes, David, 69
MacArthur, Douglas, 44
McAteer, J. Eugene, 26, 48-50
McCarthy, Leo, 49
McFadyen, John, 91-92
McFadyen-Knowles Report, 123, 208
McKenna, John Fenton, 87
Mendelsohn, Robert, 54, 101
Merola, Gaetano, 99, 135, 140
Metropolitan Opera, 135, 147
Milhaud, Darius, 78
Mills, E. M., 232-233
Molinari, John, 106-107
Monteux, Pierre, 143-144
Morgan, Clyde, 235
Morris, David, 160
Moscone, George, 49
Mott, William Penn, Jr., 32-34
Mount Zion Hospital, San Francisco, 143, 193, 205
Music Corporation, 147
National Endowment for the Arts, 49, 52, 58, 92, 95, 100, 104, 125, 136-137
National Paper Trade Association, 38
Neighborhood Arts Program. See San Francisco Neighborhood Arts Program
Nel, Carlo, 149
Nelson, DeWitt "Swede", 26
Newhall, Scott, 29, 97
252
Neylan, Jane, 119
Neylan, John Francis, 36
Nilsson, Birgit, 136
Nixon, Richard M. , 20, 41, 53, 97-98
Nourse Auditorium, San Francisco, 121, 173
Oakland Symphony Orchestra, 142
Olson, Culbert L. , 36-37
O'Malley, Walter, 219
opera
in Europe, 130, 136-137, 147-148
See also San Francisco Opera
Orpheum Theater, San Francisco, 127-128
Orrick, William, Jr., 131-132
Pacific Heights School, San Francisco, 2
Palace of Fine Arts, San Francisco, 173, 179
paper:
book, 156-157
coated, 169
newsprint, 154, 157
towels , 156
uncoated, 169
paper companies :
Champion Coated Paper Company, 16
See also Zellerbach Paper Company
paper mills:
Carthage Mill, 16, 156
Fernandina, 233
Port Alice, British Columbia, 157-158
Port Angeles, Washington, 155-158, 233
Port Townsend, Washington, 155
Shelton, Washington, 236
Stockton Mills, 171
Whelan, British Columbia, 157
Patten, Simon, 10
Paul, Joe, 66, 176-177
Pennsylvania, University of, 10, 193, 216-217, 222. See also Wharton School
Phleger, Herman, 42-43
Porter, Julia, 68
Portnoy, Joseph, 201
Portsmouth Square, San Francisco, 83-84
Price, Leontyne, 132, 134
Prince, Harold, 224
Rayonier, Incorporated, 232-235
Reagan, Ronald, 32-33, 41
253
Recreation Commission, California. See California Park and Recreation Commission
Reed, Bill, 234-236
Reichert, Irving, 198, 201
Reuther, Eric, 104, 190. See also San Francisco Art Commission
Richardson, Friend, 35
Rinder, Reuben, 200-202, 250
Robinson, Elmer, 61-62, 70
Rockefeller, David, 109
Rockefeller, John D., Ill, 91
Rockefeller, Laurance, 91
Rockefeller Brothers' Fund, 52, 91, 95
Rockefeller report, 87, 95, 109, 130
Roosevelt, Franklin D. , 18, 40-45
Roosevelt, Franklin, Jr., 40
Ross, Harry, 84, 127, 214
Roth, Bill [William M. ] , 174, 180
Russell, Helen Crocker [Mrs, Henry Potter], 120
Sachs, David, 42-43
Sacramento Bee, 27-28
Saints and Sinners Milk Fund, 228-229
Samish, Artie, 49-50
Samuel, Gerhardt, 140
San Francisco Art Commission, 23-24, 51, 59-112, 116, 119, 146, 173-176, 179,
182-192, 197, 204, 220
budget, 100-107
gallery, Capricorn Asunder, 111-112
interim committee, 126
members of, 66-67
San Francisco Art Festival, 109-110
San Francisco Art Institute, 119-120
San Francisco Arts Resources Committee Report, 90
San Francisco Ballet Company, 88, 99, 114, 121, 125-128, 141-142, 179
Ballet Association, 173
Ballet Guild, 114-118, 197
financing of, 115-116
reorganization of, 115
San Francisco Better Business Bureau, 226
San Francisco Board of Supervisors, 78, 84, 92, 100-101, 105
finance committee, 101
San Francisco bond issue, 1965, 123
San Francisco Chief Administration Officer, 101-105, 125, 172, 177
San Francisco Chronicle, 64-66
San Francisco Commercial Club, 227
San Francisco Conservatory of Music, 151
San Francisco Examiner , 81, 134
San Francisco Foundation, 104
San Francisco Inter-Agency Council of the Arts, 172, 174, 188-192, 209
San Francisco Municipal Band, 64, 86
254
San Francisco museums, 99, 126, 172, 192, 210
San Francisco Neighborhood Arts Program, 76, 86-87, 90-108, 112, 124-125,
173-174, 179-180, 187, 208-209
San Francisco Opera, 131ff
San Francisco Park and Recreation Commission, 62, 79-83, 90, 173, 182, 184,
189-190
San Francisco Performing Arts Center, 122-123, 125, 129, 206-213
San Francisco Planning Commission, 83, 179
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, 178
San Francisco Senior Citizens' Center, 79, 182-184
San Francisco Spring Opera, 135
San Francisco State University, 87, 124
San Francisco Symphony Orchestra, 65, 88, 99, 109, 115, 124-126, 139-140,
172-173, 177, 192, 210-211
Symphony Orchestra Association, 142
Schurr, Lester, 147
Security Pacific National Bank, 229
Shelley, John F., 49, 62, 64, 70-77, 90, 123
Shorenstein, Walter, 68
Siegrist, Louis, 110
Sierra Club, 96-97
Simon, Jerry, 197, 214-215
Simpson Logging Company, 232, 234
Sloss, Joe, 193
Snipper, Martin, 76-78, 85-89, 104, 112, 174-175. See also San Francisco Art
Commission
Sotomayor, Tony [Antonio], 69
Stanford University, 195, 222
Steinhart, Jesse, 59
Stevenson, Adlai, 43-46
Sutherland, Joan, 133-134
Taliaferro, Ray, 184-186
Tadich's Cold Day Restaurant, 35
Tanforan Race Track, 62
Tawonga, Camp, 59
Taylor System, 13
Temple Emanu-El, San Francisco, 113, 195, 198-205
Temple Sherith Israel, San Francisco, 195, 203
tidelands oil funds, California, 26
Tobriner, Matt, 36
Tommy's Joynt , San Francisco, 228
Trader Vic's, San Francisco, 86
Treguboff, Sanford 196
Truman, Harry S, 41, 43-46
Tunney, John, 58, 98, 117
Tyler, Colonel, 194-195
255
United Bay Area Crusade, 88
University of California, Berkeley, 8, 120, 218
University of California Medical School, San Francisco, 193, 209
University School, San Francisco, 2
Unruh, Jesse, "Big Daddy", 41, 49-50
Unti, Gloria, 89
Vane, Leroy, 182, 184
Van Heusen, 13
Von Beroldingen, Dorothy, 101-103
Wallace, Bill, 68
War Memorial Board, San Francisco, 178
War Production Board, U.S., 18
Warren, S. T. Company, 233, 235, 237
Western Opera Theater, San Francisco, 135, 210
Weston, Julian, 8
Wharton School, University of Pennyslvania, 10, 153, 159, 217-218
White, Ian, 175
White, Llewellyn, 104
White, Sol, 203
Willits, Joe, 10, 12
Witter, Dean & Co., 157
Woods, Gurdon, 119
Young, C. C., 36
Young Men's Hebrew Association [YMHA], 59
Yuill-Thornton, Alec, 69, 79-80
Z'berg, Edwin, 31
Zellerbach, Anthony, 1
Zellerbach, Bill [William J.], 14, 114, 132, 161, 167, 219, 220
Zellerbach, Claire, 1, 5
Zellerbach, Dave [J. D.], 1, 5, 8, 12, 44, 234
Zellerbach, Doris [Mrs. Harold L.], 12, 161
Zellerbach, Gary, 9, 161
Zellerbach, Harold L.
education:
elementary ^ 1-2, high school, 2; college, 8-10
family, 1, 3-8, 14-15
marriage, 12
leadership posts: [partial]
Art Commission, 23
California Beaches and Parks Commission, 23
Fibreboard Corporation, 231
Joseph Magnin, 231
256
Laguna Honda Home, 197
Newhouse Foundation, 194-195
Rayonier, 232
San Francisco Ballet Guild, 197
San Francisco Opera Association, 131
Young Men's Hebrew Association, 131
Zellerbach Family Fund, 197
Zellerbach Paper Company, 162
observations concerning:
artists' attitudes, 114-116
budgeting, 116-117
business support for the arts, 138
commission policy, 187
cultural enrichment, 100, 130
mayors, 40-41
politics, 51-54, 191
appointments, 71
electioneering and endorsements, 98
pressure groups, 97 /
San Francisco mayoral election, 197
recycling, 170-171
temple membership, 203
unions, 18-19
Zellerbach, Isadore, 1, 14-16, 34-37, 113, 162, 169, 234, 238
Zellerbach, Jennie [Mrs. Isadore], 1, 5-8, 88, 113, 238
Zellerbach, Johnny, 220
Zellerbach, Merla, 55, 71
Zellerbach, Rollie, 14, 132
Zellerbach, Stephen, 14, 71, 114, 118, 132, 161, 197
Zellerbach, Theresa Mohr [Mrs. Anthony], 1
Zellerbach Family Fund, 87-92, 99, 103-104, 110, 113-114, 125, 128, 131, 188,
197, 208, 220, 225, 236, 239
Zellerbach Fund, Harold and Doris, 220
Zellerbach Hall, U. C. Berkeley, 128, 211, 220, 224
Zellerbach-Levison Company, 238
Zellerbach Paper Company, 16-17, 37, 61-62, 153, 157, 161-162, 168, 236-237
credit control, 164
export department, 153-154, 158-159
merchandising and control, 165-166
personnel department, 159
profit centers, 166
sales system reorganization, 163-165
Salt Lake Division, 17
San Francisco Division, 160 r
transportation, 166-168
Zellerbach Theater, University of Pennsylvania, 211, 223-224
Zirpoli, Alfonso, 49
Harriet Siegel Nathan
Graduated from the University of California,
Berkeley, in 19^1 with an A.B. in Journalism.
Was assistant women's editor and managing
editor of The Daily Calif ornian, then known
as the Monarch of the College Dailies.
Prepared President Sproul's biennial report
to the legislature, 19^2-hU; wrote advertising
copy; edited house Journpls; served on local
and state boaras ox* tae League of Women Voters ,
primaril. in the fields of local and regional
government and publications.
Returned to U.C. for a Master of Journalism
degree in 1965.
Wrote for the University's Centennial Record.
Now doing research, writing, and editing for
the Institute of Governmental Studies, U.C.,
Berkeley.
J
U. C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11