quote:

---

Sun Reporter
Originally published February 6, 2007
The Senator Theatre, one of the last of the nation's once numerous art deco movie palaces and the only one still showing films in Baltimore, is to be sold at a foreclosure auction Feb. 21.

Tom Kiefaber, the Senator's owner, acknowledged yesterday that he is $90,000 in arrears on a $1.2 million mortgage he took out on the 900-seat theater five years ago.



"I'm extremely concerned that I'm about to lose my theater," said Kiefaber, 54, who also owns the two-screen Rotunda Cinematheque and whose family long ago owned dozens of movie houses in Baltimore.

The Senator, at 5904 York Road, with its plush seats, 35-foot ceilings and elaborate murals about the history of entertainment, is on the National Register of Historic Places.

Kiefaber, who has faced financial troubles with his theaters before, said 1st Mariner Bank, which holds his loan, believes the Senator "should change hands."

Eugene A. Friedman, the bank's in-house counsel, said that he would have preferred to avoid foreclosure but that Kiefaber has been in default since summer.

"Mr. Kiefaber is a man dedicated to his livelihood," Friedman said. "He's a very nice person to talk to. We wish it would have gone differently."

Larry Hofmeister, a lawyer retained by the bank to handle the auction of the Senator, said Kiefaber has time to make things right. "We're hopeful that Mr. Kiefaber can reinstate the loan, to make it current," Hofmeister said. "We would be very happy if that happened."

Anyone interested in bidding on the ornate single-screen theater, built in 1939, might take note of the current economics of film exhibition, which dictate that it be centered in multiplexes that attract a steady flow of viewers to several films showing concurrently.

"How would you operate it?" James "Buzz" Cusack, principal owner of The Charles Theatre and the Senator's most avid competitor for independent movies, asked of a hypothetical new owner. "With that amount of debt, that's very difficult."

Either way, he said, the auction of the Senator is "a terrible thing."

"That is not good when something fails like that," Cusack said. "It must be terrible for Tom, personally, although he can usually find a way to bail himself out."

Kiefaber was less sure, but he implied that he might come up with a solution.

"I have not dedicated my life to preserving The Senator Theatre for the enjoyment of future generations only to throw in the towel at this stage," he said.

Still, Kiefaber said, he is battling the tides of modern-day economics.

'Bewildered'
"I'm bewildered by what's going on," Kiefaber said. "I feel like I've been walking a tightrope for 18 years."

Kiefaber was referring to the struggle to remain competitive since he purchased the Senator from his family's theater business, Durkee Enterprises, in 1989. The company was founded in Baltimore almost a century ago by Frank Durkee, Kiefaber's grandfather, and at one point owned more than 40 theaters, at a time when there were more than 170 movie houses in the Baltimore area.

Durkee built the Senator, with a circular upper structure of glass blocks and limestone, at a cost of $250,000. At night, fluorescent lamps behind the glass provided a multicolored lighting effect, according to Robert Kirk Headley Jr. in his 1974 book Exit: A History of Movies in Baltimore.

The theater had gold and silver curtains, damask walls and a circular lobby with terrazzo floors. It opened to the public Oct. 5, 1939, with Stanley and Livingstone, starring Spencer Tracy and Nancy Kelly.

City aid unlikely
City officials, who have come to the Senator's aid in the past, say they are unlikely to do so again.



Andrew Frank, deputy mayor for economic development, said last night that Baltimore Development Corp. gave the Senator a $20,000 grant years ago for repairs that enabled it to showcase special effects in a Star Wars movie.

Later, the city, the state and the Abell Foundation funded a $180,000 payment to the Senator, which sits across York Road from recently renovated Belvedere Square. The city's contribution was a loan that called for repayment from the theater's revenues, and it has not been repaid.

More recently, in 2002, the city, through its development arm, agreed to guarantee half of 1st Mariner's $1.2 million loan to Kiefaber to renovate and reopen the Rotunda, which had been closed for more than a year under other owners, and to help shore up the Senator. Kiefaber also put up the Senator, his home and other real estate as collateral, he said.

Frank said it is unlikely that if the bank fails to cover its loan at the auction, the city will be liable for its share of the loan guarantee, $600,000, given the other collateral available.

"I'm confident that it will not be the full amount, and I'm hopeful that it won't be a significant amount," Frank said.

'Sad turn of events'
In any event, said Frank, 40, who remembers going to the Senator as a child to watch movies, the proposed auction is "a sad turn of events."

"Mr. Kiefaber has worked tirelessly over the years to buck the trend toward multiscreen theaters," he said. "And, largely to the credit of Mr. Kiefaber, the Senator is an institution and an anchor in that community. It's a critical piece of real estate on York Road. It was always a treat to see a movie on the big screen at the Senator, and it still is."

nick.madigan@baltsun.com

---

 

---

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 02-07-2007, 08:42 AM:
 
Steve, Sorry to read the bad news. A lifetime ago (1962) when I was working in Baltimore at the Town Cinerama Theatre I use to love to visit the Senator Theatre. Hopefully, another theatre chain will purchase this house and continue to employ Tom Kiefaber, so the theatre continues.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-07-2007, 09:08 AM:
 
If the Senator is to remain in operation whoever ends up operating it will need to think outside of the box when it comes to the business model. One idea that comes to mind is having the place function as a movie museum of sorts.

One of the worst things that could happen would be some big chain buying out the theater just for its name and then gutting the insides to convert in into yet another unremarkable multiplex. The Senator needs to remain operating as a high end single screen palace. There are too few left in this nation.
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 02-07-2007, 01:53 PM:
 
Does Bill still work there as head of projection? He came to Sginaw many times to run films in our booth for the Great Lakes Cinephile Society festivals. A wonderful gentleman and a true perfectionist.
KEN

[ 02-07-2007, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: Kenneth Wuepper ]
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-07-2007, 05:07 PM:
 
Yes, Bill is still there.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-17-2007, 10:12 AM:
 
In case those have not visited the Senator site. It is www.senator.com

There you will find they are soliciting donations via paypal or checks. They seem to keep it pretty current as to how much money they have raised (just over $62K as of when I posted this).

Steve
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 02-17-2007, 07:06 PM:
 
Unless Mr. Kiefaber changes the operation to reduce expenses, and increases attendance to the point where the he can make the mortgage payments this is just a temporary bail out and of dubious long term value. Maybe he can create a non profit to do a real fund raiser and buy the theatre from him and pay off the bank. Of course to do this he would need to be out of the non profit and probably the theatre operation to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-17-2007, 09:58 PM:
 
Bill,

Personally, I agree (temporary) though I dontated anyway. What the Senator needs despareately is more screens. It needs to be at least a 3-plex to have the best chance at keeping the big theatre filled and profitable.

I know he has looked into non-profit and other avenues but I suspect there is a control thing with him. It is his theatre and he doesn't want to loose that.

BTW...the bank note due to avoid foreclosure has raised to $109K rather than $93K...I wonder what that is all about (probably something dumb like don't forget...the $93K brings you current for your back monies...you have to pay this month's too!).

I'm a bit impressed at the money raised in such a short time. They have topped $73K!

It would seem to me that if they put up the fund raiser about once a month or so...they would have that pesky bank note paid off in no time

Steve
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 02-17-2007, 10:45 PM:
 
People will chuck in a few bucks to help him stay open a couple times but they won't and shouldn't do it if he can't resolve the problem and continues to look for handouts for his private business. Sounds like he's screwed himself. Perhaps after the eventual foreclosure a non profit will materialize to buy the Senator from the bank.
 

---

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 02-18-2007, 04:48 AM:
 
I have to ask... What happens to all the money donated if they don't reach their goal?
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-18-2007, 05:20 AM:
 

quote:

---

BTW...the bank note due to avoid foreclosure has raised to $109K rather than $93K...I wonder what that is all about (probably something dumb like don't forget...the $93K brings you current for your back monies...you have to pay this month's too!).

---

quote: Steve

---

What the Senator needs despareately is more screens. It needs to be at least a 3-plex to have the best chance at keeping the big theatre filled and profitable.

---

Why do you say they need extra screens; there are plenty of successful independent single-screen cinemas in London? There are also some which are struggling, but could almost certainly do better, if they had better programming. Many manage to obtain additional income other than from box office and bar receipts, etc. Also, where's he going to find the money to build, equip and staff extra screens at the moment? He'd have to borrow it, which, in the present circumstances would be difficult, and even if he managed it, expensive. A new owner might be able to put together a business plan which involved building extra screens, but if the present owner does manage to keep the theatre then I think he will need to make a success of the current operation before he would be able to even consider adding extra screens. Has he tried putting on special events, getting private hire work, letting the place out for use as a film/TV location, raising ticket prices somewhat, but then giving a discount to people who book tickets for several films at the same time?

If there was a bit more time I'd send a donation, but I've had a bad month, my bank account is overdrawn by a few pounds, and I don't get paid until Friday; if he can get an extension for a few days, they I will send something.

What he should have done is to try to resolve the problems earlier; he's probably left it too late now. If he should manage to meet the Wednesday deadline, then he must address the real problem, or he will find himself in the same position again.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-18-2007, 07:04 AM:
 
I think he will make his $109K by the due date. I don't think people will donate a few times...not like this. It might be possible to have a fund raiser(s) but people will grow tired of throwing money into the bottomless pit.

I think all agree that the business needs to operate and support itself right now and not talk about how if this or that changes, we will be doing okay. I still cliam that his only way to make the Senator viable from a business stand point, is to add screens like was planned years ago. If he had the Ambassador and the Blue Mouse (they even named the additions) they would be doing much better.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-18-2007, 08:24 AM:
 
In a theatre like this, there could be ways to add screens and not necessarily touch the main theatre. At the Loew's Kings here in Brooklyn, one of the proposals looked into the possibility of utilizing the basement, which was big enough to house a full-sized basketball court, to add three additional screens. It was very do-able. There was a small storage area that would be converted into a 80 seat theatre as well.

Also the idea of thinking outside the box is key -- he needs to market the uniqueness of the theatre -- its remarkable archetecture. He needs to be proactive in offering it as a venue for things like movie shoots which are very lucrative -- The Loew's had commercials shot on its stage, some TV shoots in the theatre proper as well. The idea of a movie museum can be very workable (and lucrative) concept, especially if it is done in conjunction with the local tourist board.

With an auditorium of that cap, it could easily be rented as a space for things like corporate meeting, church services. We have the Police and Fire departments both renting our theatre for their ceramonies, graduations and even their induction process which lasts for three days, three times a year. The publicity along that these create what with the mayor and borough president attending and being key-note speakers is priceless.

And then there are high school graduations -- we rent out theatre for more than 60 graduations every summer. Having a large capacity hall that is probably bigger than most local school auditoria makes it a much coveted venue -- we have schools fighting to get dates in our theatre every June. We run them like a assembly line starting at 8am and stacking 3 or 4 a day, back-to-back.

What about bus-and-truck performances? I don't know if they have a proscenium stage at the Senator, but if there is a stage, there is very little in the way of in-house production costs involved with booking in tourist-trap live shows. We do it all the time (we are not proud of it, but it keeps our doors open -- never under-estimate the drawing power of schmaltz). The company comes in with pretty much everything that is needed to mount a show, save the electical hookup; if it is marketed correctly and depending on the local demographics there, that could be a way to generate big chunks of income. Two a year might be all that is needed to make a big dent in mortage payments.

We have a tie-in with a group called Hospital Audiences -- they basically four-wall the place and bus in their patients for an afternoon "out." We also have MovieTime -- a deal we make with schools where they bus in there school kids during the morning and we run kiddie fair. Get someone to volunteer to create "Study Guides" and you've created a "educational event" that schools eat up. You would be surprised how teachers scrabble to get this on their roster -- they fight to get the schools to approve because, hey, it's a day out of the classroom for them.

And the list goes on; you just need to start being crative about what can be done in this venue.

It seems that Tom Kiefaber's heart is in the right place, but he's stuck in a business model that just isn't working. It is always tempting to do what you've always done, but the reality is that the economics change and you can't run a single screen as if it were 1960. You can't run your theatre like it was run when you were a kid, as romantic as that might seem to be, and so it seems that's what he's been trying to do. He hasn't made adjustments to the changes in the economics of his business. And those changes don't mean just doing what the successful guys do, i.e., multiplexing and thus distroying the one advantage his theatre has over the other multitude of multiplexes -- its aesthetic uniqueness and character -- commodities that he needs to exploit. It means he's got to look past how this theatre was operated when he was a kid; you can't go back there. But you can go forward and incorporate new business concepts that will allow that single screen to continue to run film as a single screen and as the unique theatre that is its soul. But he has to get proactive, possibly bring in one or two other people who can market and promote his beloved theatre.

Then again he can just put in a digital projector and that will fix everything.
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 02-18-2007, 10:39 PM:
 
The exclusive art/old film format obviously isn't working well enough to support a barn that size. The real difficulty is determining what else and how much he can do without pissing off the present audience, or is that audience large enough to be concerned about? Even after the foreclosure and auction sale he'll likely still be liable for the difference if the auction doesn't bring enough to satisfy the note. Don't blame the bank for his lack of business accumen, this is purely business, sentimentality can't change it.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-19-2007, 07:46 AM:
 
Bill, as of this morning he has topped $85K...based on his money/day...he will probably make the $109K by the deadline. If it had stayed at $93K, he would have for sure made it.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-20-2007, 02:22 AM:
 
They've passed the $93k, but are still a long way from $109k. I sent them something last night; paid for it with credit card.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-20-2007, 08:20 AM:
 
They are about $13K away from their goal as of about 3:00am today...so they have about another 12 hours to get the $13K...I think they will certainly do that based on how the money has been coming in.

The question remains...does this just put off the same thing in a years time or less?

I really hope the Senator survives and I too contributed to the "cause" but I really think they need to build the two additional screens as planned quite some time ago (they would be new structures and not cut into the Senator itself. They already own the land.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-20-2007, 03:52 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

They are about $13K away from their goal as of about 3:00am today...so they have about another 12 hours to get the $13K...I think they will certainly do that based on how the money has been coming in.

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

The question remains...does this just put off the same thing in a years time or less?

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

I really hope the Senator survives and I too contributed to the "cause" but I really think they need to build the two additional screens as planned quite some time ago (they would be new structures and not cut into the Senator itself. They already own the land.

---

quote:

---

Children under 5 years of age are not admitted to The Senator Theatre. Tickets are available at the boxoffice beginning at 12:00pm daily.

---

Whats that all about? Thats not good business..I mean cmon, its a MOVIE theater, not a strip club.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-21-2007, 12:11 AM:
 
Oh REALLY? I wholeheartedly applaud the Senator!!!

Nothing, absolutely NOTHING...not Michael Bay or even a really bad presentation ruins a movie as bad as screaming and crying babies. It wouldn't be a big deal if parents would immediately leave the auditorium to calm them down, but in this day and age I see very little good and respectful parenting going on.

If I ran an airline, you can bet it would have the same policy...and I would most probably clean up on it too. Not even those Bose Noise-Cancelling headphones can combat that (trust me, I use them when I fly). I know there are parents here, but honestly who here wouldn't pay an extra $10, $20 or even $50 to be guaranteed a screaming baby-free flight?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-21-2007, 12:29 AM:
 
Yea, who wants to pay $40 bucks for tix and snaks just to hear babies holler and with kids running up and down the aisles, esp if the Senator is trying to get back into the middle to upper class echelon type of respectable operation?

(Now, just gotta do something with celphone users while watching movies...where at times, they're worse than five yr old kids for at least when the kid reaches five, the majority of them are off the binkie and/or security blankets,...)

My kudos to the Senator as well
-Monte
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-21-2007, 01:43 AM:
 
They reached the $109k by 11pm yesterday, not sure which time zone that is. They're still not out of their problems, but at least they stand a chance. There will be another payment to the bank due soon, they must not forget that.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-21-2007, 08:30 AM:
 
The Senator is in Eastern time. They have a no under 5 policy and all tickets are the same price policy too...they don't discriminate based on age (old or young).
 

---

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-21-2007, 02:09 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

...they don't discriminate based on age (old or young).

---

quote: Bill Enos

---

He needs to give it to somebody with a plan.

---

As much as I hate to agree... Bill is 100% correct. No plan... no backing = more future calling for money. People will quickly tire of that and ignore it and the theater will die a death it doesn't deserve. He SHOULD have presented a plan of some sort this time around...



Mark
 

---

Posted by Joel N. Weber II (Member # 3530) on 02-22-2007, 10:22 PM:
 
What would the theater be likely to sell for at an auction? Does the current lack of profitability make the building worth less than it was last time it changed hands, when it presumably was more profitable?
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 02-22-2007, 10:43 PM:
 
Sometimes what saves these barns is that demolition or conversion into something else costs more that the property is worth. I'd bet that the Senator's property without the building would be worth a lot more than the building/lot combination. The issue for a developer is the cost of demolition will be 2 or 3 million dollars, then the cost of the new building makes the whole thing problematic. At auction half a million.
Kind of surprising the bank made the loan in the first place.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-23-2007, 02:17 AM:
 
Agreed with those who say that he needs to do something ASAP to make this place profitable. I sent money this time, but there is no way that he could pull off a fundraiser like this again. This was a once-only event and it has bought them some time. I just hope that the Senator organization takes advantage of it.

What ever happened to the plan for the additional screens, anyway? I thought that this was supposed to happen years ago. Was it an issue of financing, or is there some other reason why they didn't build them?
 

---

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 02-23-2007, 11:14 AM:
 
I doubt the current payments are $16,000 per month on the Senator's mortgage. Its is probably more like about half that amount.

The additional $16,000 which was added on by the bank at the last minute in this case was probably to cover the bank's "court costs". All mortgages require the borrower to pay a financial institution's "court costs" if foreclosure proceedings are started in court. These court costs include: the filing fees, the sale advertising and printing costs, the poundage (administrative fee) of the Sheriff or whoever conducts the sale, and the institution's attorney fees. The fees just get piled on.

Most modern mortgages say that the borrower will be responsible for the institution's "reasonable attorney fees". (And just who decides what are "reasonable attorney fees"? Why the institution who contracts with the lawyer it has chosen!) Older mortgages provide for a fixed percentage of the total face amount of the mortgage as attorney fees (regardless of the amount actually in default). Whatever provision applies, these bank "attorney fees" provide a windfall to the attorneys who represent the bank - who collect hundreds of dollars per hour for preparing fill-in-the-blank word processing mortgage foreclosure complaint and forms (in fact most law firms use a paralegal to do the actual mortgage foreclosure form preparations).

Letting a mortgage go to the point where a mortgage foreclosure is filed and then halting the sale at the last minute is an incredibly expensive form of financing. I am sure the bank's lawyers can not wait for the process to repeat itself so they can collect more fees.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-23-2007, 02:53 PM:
 
Conversely, bringing the theatre to the point the entire world takes notice, especially Baltimore and Maryland will make them decide if it is a property they want to protect or let go.

The lot of land the Senator sits on is right butted up to a residential neighborhood so alternate construction in its spot would probably very difficult or expensive.

I hope it survives but I think it really needs those additional screens to do it as a 1st run theatre. As a non-profit or a state/city sponsored non-commercial theatre (like the AFI/Silver) would be another alternative. I absolutely don't think it would make it as a live venue.

We install and service a great many multi-purpose theatres that do live as well as movies (film and video now). These places can do okay and normally operate as non-profits and often were old time movie theatres like the Senator. One thing that seems to be common with these theatres is that the Movies tend to support the live work, which is more prestigeous. That is, live events are often barely profitable, or sometimes losses. It is much harder to make a go of a live theatre. Movies often "fill-the-gap" between live events in such places. Every once in a while a live theatre can come back from the dead if it is located in the right spot and is programmed properly.
 

---

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 02-23-2007, 04:23 PM:
 
Considering a 1.2 Million dollar mortgage, the payment could be around 16,000. Ten years at 9% would be 15,200 per month. 15 years at 9.00 would be 12,100. Plus all the additonal fees.

Commercial loans are usually at higher rates for shorter durations then a home mortage.
 

---

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 02-27-2007, 11:54 AM:
 
Perhaps the additional money was advance payments so that everyone wouldn't be going through the same exercise in 30 days.

I agree, though, that it doesn't sound as though there is a solid business plan in place to get the theater from near-foreclosure to solvency. They were able to tap the emotions of the general public this time, but that well can only be dipped into once. I can't imagine people would be willing to donate to a business a second time.

That said, there ought to be resources that they can utilize to help get them to running a successful theater. Maybe those resources have already been exhausted, I don't know, but it would be a shame for a distinctive and historical theater to go dark. They're going to need some innovative thinking to make it successful.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-28-2007, 09:24 AM:
 
Tom published on the Senator site that the payment was about $8000/month and that he is set now for the next seveal months and that he has plans on keeping the Senator from revisiting this situation again...hopefully it is all true.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 03-01-2007, 11:45 AM:
 
Is he set because of the bail out or because he now has a viable plan, I'm betting on left overs from the bail out, just because it just isn't that quick and easy to straighten out a mess that big.
 

---

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 03-16-2009, 02:23 PM:
 

It has been 746 days since the last post.

 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-16-2009, 02:23 PM:
 
I can't say I'm sorry to hear of the theater's closing yesterday. I've not been a fan of the over-hyped and mis-managed (my opinion) Senator. Hopefully, this closure will lead to a change in ownership and a much-needed change in business plans.

quote:

---

Senator Theatre shows final film
Announcement on Rotunda's fate coming this week
By Chris Kaltenbach and Meredith Cohn

The Senator Theatre sold its final ticket last night, as owner Tom Kiefaber unexpectedly closed the financially troubled moviehouse less than 24 hours before a town hall meeting to rally support for the 70-year-old North Baltimore institution.

The meeting, set for 7 p.m. at the theater, will go on as scheduled. But it will be the only scheduled activity at the theater, which shut down after yesterday's screenings of Watchmen.

Owner Tom Kiefaber said a plan to preserve the building's interior, however well-intentioned, ultimately forced his decision to stop showing first-run films.

The proposal, by the city's Commission for Historic and Architectural Preservation, would severely restrict any structural changes that could be made to the Senator's interior. In the long-term, Kiefaber said in an interview earlier today, that would affect the building's value by limiting a prospective buyer's options. In the short term, he said, the move scared off an investor whose capital could have helped Kiefaber meet payroll for his 23-person staff.

"This is a very troubling development in the Senator's rich history," said Kiefaber, adding he knew nothing of the proposal until notices were posted on the outside of the building late last week. "And it seems to be coming out of left field."

Last week, 1st Mariner Bank, which holds a mortgage on the property, announced that it would be foreclosing unless Kiefaber could bring his loan up to date; bank chairman and operating officer Ed Hale told The Baltimore Sun last week that Kiefaber had not made a payment in "months." A foreclosure auction has tentatively been scheduled for mid-April.

A closing date for the Rotunda Cinematheque in Hampden, also run by Kiefaber, has not been set, but an announcement is planned for this week.

Kiefaber and Baltimore City officials had been working on a plan to turn the Senator into a nonprofit community center that would serve as more than a movie house, but the transition could not be made before 1st Mariner Bank notified him that it would foreclose.

The city and private citizens have come forward in the past with support for the theater, a showplace for many Hollywood movie openings. In February 2007, when the bank threatened foreclosure, nearly $110,000 was raised, mostly from private contribution. The bank, however, faces its own financial troubles, and officials say it must act now.

At least three members of the community have said they'd be interested in running the Senator and continuing to show movies.

"This was a very difficult decision made after a great deal of soul-searching and deliberation with our key management staff and my family," Kiefaber said in a notice published on the Friends of the Senator Theatre web site (friendsofthesenatortheatre.wordpress.com). "The economic realities are such that the show simply cannot go on at the Senator. The rising expressions of support from the extended community and beyond for the Senator and its future are encouraging, however, the revenue from first-run film in this economy has regrettably made it impossible for me to meet payroll for our loyal staff beyond this point."

---

quote:

---

whose capital could have helped Kiefaber meet payroll for his 23-person staff.

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

Furthermore, anyone that has run a hot single knows how big the staff needs to get during those peak periods

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

They often are running Manager/Operator.

---