I think the PAC people are in a dream world…(tax payers come up with 75% of the cost) I don’t think so…

having said that I am more than prepared to pay the ticket costs to attentd a function… I dont think the rest of the city should be paying out of their pocket so i can go..
then again i am not self centered either.

Who is the equity partner… the city of PG
How about generating a whole lot more money first then approach council for help on the last of it, or a deal on the land, not free , a deal
How about they utilize the facilities they have first….until they can come up with more of the money.
They seems to go like crazy for a month or two and then nothing……

“The request for a Performing Arts Centre has been on the books for the City since 1991.”

How quickly we forget. The request has actually been on the books since before the construction of the Playhouse and Vanier Hall which goes back 30 years further than 1991.

I am not 100% certain how Vanier Hall came about. I believe that the province came up with the money to build that theatre which they initially were not going to do, even though most high schools in Canada had theaters as part of their facilities in those days. For instance, my high school was constructed in 1957 for a school population of about a 1,000 students with an “auditorium”, as they were then properly called to seat half the student population. It had a fly tower, large stage, large behind stage storage and green room spaces as well as a loading dock with overhead door. All new high schools in Ottawa since that time, till I lost track of such construction in the early 1970s, were built with full theatres, gymnasiums and cafeterias.
Prince George was simply a second class city when it came to those kinds of developments.

The next project that was “on the books” of the City was the competition for a comprehensive design competition for the cultural district, the winner of which was to be given the commission to design the new library … the one Harold Moffat called the book warehouse. The plan included the retention of the swimming pool, the removal of the old civic centre which was soon to be condemned as structurally unsound, the building of a new civic centre, a new art gallery, and new large multi-use theatre seating over a 1,000 people, plus onsite parking AND commercial space to provide activity in the civic building precinct. That was in the late 1970s ……

Just trying to keep things in perspective of where we came from and where we are going. So, in fact, we are looking at 50+ years, and we never received a facility that was adequate when non-experts gave something to us that that they figured would appease those hillbillies up north who think living in arctic tundra is fun.

As for the presentation on Monday night.

Those against the PAC can rest assured that there is an interesting indicator there as to the pecking order of the PAC society these days as opposed to the days when the city, through IPG, send out a hint that they would like to see the establishment of an independent society to research and promote the notion of a PAC in PG.

At that time the Society was given money to do the work of the City. The society reported to the Council and followed the same protocol as Committees of Council which report their objectives and activities direct to Council during the reports section of the agenda. On Monday, the Society will be making their presentation as an outside delegation.

I have looked at the power point they will be presenting. It appears that they will hand over the work of getting the project re-activated off to the City. I totally agree with that position since it is a City project and that these project are mostly handled through City-led building committees. The PAC Society can then take on their proper role of advocacy in the community and holding the City’s feet to the fire.

There are a number of errors in the report. The cost, for instance, has not been updated since the City sent off a proposal to the Feds. It was lean, in my opinion, at the time and it is leaner now, and will be leaner by the time that construction might be reasonably contemplated. BUT, the Society is asking the City to take care of setting a project budget.

The other key one is the timeline for the project. I do not know what the members of the Society have been smoking recently at their meetings, but to give a year to come up with a revised estimate, an actual site, other than the lousy one, in my opinion, next to City Hall and an updated and currently reasonable business plan at a time when City Hall Administration is obviously busy re-arranging their deck chairs is ludicrous. In addition, these kind of complex building take about two years to build, similar to the PAC-like structure we are building for the RCMP instead of the one year shown in the proposed timeline. The Commissioning of the building, which includes “tuning” of the spaces for musical performances also takes at least twice as long as suggested. They propose a 3.5 year timeframe from declaring the project a priority to a “soft opening” and 3.75 years to start of theatre season. Again, they have lost all understanding of the realities of such a project.
But the “action they wish the City Council to take today” is “To declare that The Prince George Regional Performing Arts Centre as the city’s priority capital (large) project and to instruct city administration staff to refine the project’s budget and establish a timeline towards construction.”

So, with that, the whole background that the PAC Society presents is actually moot.

I think the best those who are for a PAC can expect is for this to be turned over to administration to come up with an action plan of where this goes from here. That means it will be bogged down for another 2 years before the project might be declares a go or be shelved for 5 years or more.

As others sometimes write, time will tell. Based on past actions, I think it is easy to tell guess what will happen.

For those interested to know where the sites were that were discussed in private session, take a look at the artist rendering at the end of the report. Most people familiar with the City would be able to recognize the site depicted.

It won’t surprise me at all if Green and company says great idea but it’s too small! I want the biggest PAC in Canada. Double the taxes and lets get this built for the opening ceremony of the winter games! We will call it the Prince George Prince George Center in honor of Prince George. I’ve already invited Will and Kate to the Grand opening. So we better hurry!

Put the money towards our so called failing infrastructure and maybe clear them a spot to set up a tent…. Circ style.

That the request for a PAC has been on the books since 1991 is a moot point. Past promises of politicians are as fleeting as fairy farts. I still don’t see a swimming pool in College Heights and the residents of the Haldi area are still waiting for city services that were promised long ago.

I would like to see the business plan that is referenced in the power point. As gus mentioned on an earlier thread the grant to TNW should be rescinded and redirected to the PAC. I would suggest that the same be done for any funds directed to the PGSO(sink or swim time). It would be pretty easy to imagine that within a year or two that the building is without a couple of cornerstone tenants, a theater troupe and an symphony.

The presentation mentions that the operating grant will be in the range of $300k per year unfortunately that does not include the debt servicing and repayment costs. I would guess the true costs to the bottom line would be more like $500k- if the revenue projections are accurate. Rosy projections said the university sports center was supposed to be self supporting-OOPS.

One other point on the $300k…that is the amount of money that is required for a couple of years to complete the shear strengthening of the Foothills bridge, a project that was started in 2006 and has gone nowhere since other than the “Unfunded Future Projects” list.

At this time we can not afford the PAC but I find it strange that people say we can not afford it, yet they wanted a new ice rink, they think it is okay for the City to put major money into keeping the Cougars in town. Under Kinsley sports received major funding and the arts peanuts.

We have a PAC. It’s called Vanier Hall. It could be refurbished for a fraction of the cost of a new PAC. You’re welcome, taxpayers of Prince George.

I don’t really care either way but this is the type of thing that should/could be built in the CN Centre/Kin Centre complex. A nice PAC would look a heck of a lot better than a hotel in front of CN Centre.

Let’s hope financially responsible people get elected to council in the next go-around.
Here we have a present city council wanting to tax the homeowner for rain water. If there is a major climate change can cloudy weather and sunshine be far behind.
Preaching to the public that infrastructure is crumbling and in need of massive repair costing 10’s of millions of dollars and in the same breath talk of taking on 40 plus million in additional debt and yearly maintenance cost of 1/2 million is a non starter.

They’re taxing sunshine in Spain now. Many a true word spoken in sarcasm. (Used to be spoken in jest).

And they aren taxing rain water in PG.
Cheers

And they aren taxing rain water in PG.
Cheers

Graymare. Multiplex went to referundum so taxpayer got to choose to go into debt. Cougars pay rent for nights city couldn’t rent out multiplex for more. If someone approached the city and offered more than cougars the city would turf the cougars but no such tenant currently exists. Its true anything to do with sports seems to be an easier sell. PAC doesn’t want to go to referendum so they’re looking for a backdoor way to get this done. Next election city should hold a referendum and let the taxpayers choose if they want to go 42 million in debt. After all interest on 42 million is only 1.5 million first year. Chump change. About 20.00 a year per citizen including kids. Of course there’s the principal on the loan. Only another 2 million a year for 20 years. I’m sure seniors would love to pay another 50.00 a year in their taxes

When is comes to the Performing Arts Centre, we are being led down the path. Here is what has basically taken place so far.

1.Performing Arts Centre, financed by IPG and the City is tasked with determining if a PAC is a desire and need in Prince George.

2. The Society made up of people who support the building of a PAC, report back to the City, that yes indeed there is a need.

3. They are then tasked with coming up with a design and location, and some semblance of an idea as to the cost. Which they do.

4. Initial funding from the other levels of Government were not immediately forthcoming.

5. The City passes a bylaw that allows them to transfer money from the sale of land on Highway 16 West to the Capital Projects Fund.

6. The City sells the property that the Tennis Court was located on and some other property, and relocates the Tennis Court, and does some upgrading to the PG Golf and Curling Club. One presumes that whatever money was left over from the sale of this property went into the Capital Projects Fund.

7. Well known but barely mentioned is that the City will tear down the Playhouse Theatre and sell the property. One assumes that this money would also go to the Capital Projects Fund.

8. The PAC Society will go to City Hall next Monday and ask the City to make the Performing Arts Centre the next Major Project for Prince George.

9. The City and the PAC society will downplay the actual cost of operating this facility, and will use less than stellar statistics to make it look like it is a viable project.

10. The City will take the PAC presentation and refer it to administration as mentioned by Gus, and will not make a specific commitment until after the next election and the Winter Games.

11. In 2016 the project will be a go, and we the taxpayers will need to fund the $450,000.00 annual operating costs through yet another tax increase.

12. The City will argue that funding the project with cash from land sales, is the best way to go, and in fact will save us money because we would not have to borrow. In actual fact it allows them to build the project with tax dollars, without any input from the citizens that have to pay for it.

13. The City on a number of occasions stated that fixing roads, sewers, etc; with money from land sales was not a good idea, because it was not sustainable, however it seems its just fine for PAC’s.

14. We need to have a referendum on the PAC, and this could easily be done at the next election, with little cost to the City. This would give every citizen a vote on the project and settle the issue once and for all. Will any Councillor suggest this at Mondays meeting. Somehow I doubt it,.

15. Watch the performance at City Hall on Monday, it will be better acting than anything that you will ever see at the PAC .

As much as this might be a nice dream and a beautiful addition to the downtown, the truth is there is no money for such a project. Even Quesnel couldn’t get any money out of the Provincial and Federal Governments for their Arena/Arts Centre and that was after five years of heavy lobbying.

The only way this project could proceed in any shape or form is if there was $20+ million available from the city. There are no such funds put aside and the city’s debt load is continuing to grow. That means they would have to borrow the money.

Making a flowery statement that its the next major project for the city doesn’t accomplish anything.

The answer is simple, put it on the ballot as a referendum question next fall during the municipal election. Those in favor can make their case and a democratic vote can be taken and a decision one way or the other will be made.

The question is, does anyone on council believe in democracy any more?

So if you pay all 4 taxes (which I do) then as a taxpayer you are being quadruple-dipped for this white elephant. And then of course you can just pile on more with the annual upkeep of this money blackhole.

Would be interesting if they could align the PAC with UNBC to serve musical and cultural education programs. I could see it being a good revenue source and develop culture into PG. I think PG has really benefited from the medical programs that had integrated with the hospital.

PACs are becoming hard to run these days. 30-40 years ago, people didn’t have the entertainment variety that there is no. They weren’t competing with 200+ TV channels, video games, home theatre systems etc.

Prince Rupert has a very nice theatre that gets under utilized. The Centre for the Performing Arts in Vancouver was recently sold and is now a Church. There wasn’t enough in it to keep it going.

I’m not sure PG can sustain the operation of one.

But I am curious…. where was all this high volume squawking when the art gallery was built? Now THAT is a boat anchor that serves nobody body but a very select few.

oops… variety that there is “now”…

How well are established PACs doing?? They always compare PG to other communities, so the questions needs to be asked. Do other communities with active PACs get away with a measly $300K per year subsidy? Are the people in those communities more ‘cultured’ now than they were before the PAC was built??

There must be some return on the investment you would think.

Vanier Hall is NOT a performing arts center!!!!!!!!!

Vanier Hall is NOT a performing arts center!!!!!!!!!

The PAC supporters have requested everyone for this, to show up at city hall Monday night.

I think everyone against it, should show up Monday night!

Enough is enough.

It is looking better and better to move into RDFFG!

“Vanier Hall is NOT a performing arts center!!!!!!!!!”

Ummm, do they not have artsy type people doing performances there?

Screw a PAC for PG. I think they should move the PGARA track back to where the Superstore is. I think BC’s Northern Capital needs to back to its redneck roots and stop with all this big city wannabe nonsense . . .

The City of London, ON is looking at building a PAC. They have theatres, the same as we do. BUT, theatres are not PACS

Here is an article that looks at some operating costs. I could throw in a few others which might bring the thing a bit closer to the type of operation a PG PAC would be.

There is a good cross section from private operated with no public funds (are ye listenin’ TNW?) to city contributions of over a million $.

http://www.lfpress.com/2013/10/06/for-arts-sake-what-others-did
As well as this one which looks at the political drama going on in London.

http://www.lfpress.com/topic/performingartscentre

There are duelling performing arts centre proposals:
•The Grand Theatre isn’t seeking any money from city hall, but wants it to engineer three land swaps with adjacent property owners. It also wants $50 million from Ottawa and Queen’s Park.
•Orchestra London is seeking $10 million from city hall. It also wants $30 million from the province and feds.

— — —
GUELPH
River Run Centre
How funded: Donations, sponsorships, grants, city funding, ticket sales, service fees.
Who manages: Public facility, owned and operated by the city.
Types of performances: Everything from music, dance comedy, theatre, community groups and touring artists.
Annual city contribution: $500,000

BURLINGTON
Burlington Performing Arts Centre
How funded: Public-private partnerships, including money from each level of government and a fundraising campaign.
Who manages: Non-profit corporation called Burlington Theatre Board Inc., an independent board with city representation.
Types of performances: Live music, live theatre, dance, family shows, world music.
Annual city contribution: More than $800,000.

WINDSOR
Chrysler Theatre (formerly the Cleary Auditorium)
How funded: Originally a city-owned building, it was funded through provincial and city cash, with the city subsidizing the venue until eventually selling it to St. Clair College for a downtown campus several years ago.
Who manages: St. Clair College.
Types of performances: Live theatre, live music and other shows, such as ballets, comedy tours and illusionists.
Annual city contribution: No city contribution, the Chrysler Theatre is now a for-profit venue linked to St. Clair College.

TORONTO
Roy Thomson Hall
How funded: Public-private partnerships, including funding from all levels of government and a public fundraising campaign.
Who manages: A non-profit corporation, the Corporation of Massey Hall and Roy Thomson Hall.
Types of performances: Home of the Toronto Symphony Orchestra, but shows by other artists, including classical and world music; also holds Toronto International Film Fest red carpet galas, corporate events and National Geographic speaker series.
Annual city contribution: No annual city contribution.

I think the PGSO is sitting quietly by watching all the drama unfold locally and being glad that they may be in the black again.

There do not seem to be too many supporters on Council for the PGSO. Council prefers TNW and their donations show it.

Hey, maybe that’s actually not a bad growth strategy. PG could strive to be the first city in Canada with a population over 100,000 that caters solely to a demographic of people that refuse to do the things that need to be done to actually grow to a population of more than 100,000.

Maybe Mr. PG should be replaced with a mock up of a moose hanging in a garage. Sorry, I’m just being silly now, LOL.

http://kanatatheatre.com/kt/default.htm

Certainly smaller in scope than what is being discussed for PG, but I found this interesting:

“After years of fundraising, Kanata Theatre was able to open its own facility, the Ron Maslin Playhouse, a modern 350-seat theatre situated in the south-west of Kanata, which itself is on the west of Ottawa.”

“Kanata Theatre does not receive operating grants from any level of government. Its income is from ticket sales, membership fees and donations.”

Kanata has a little over 100,000 people living in it. I hate to generalize and stereotype, but I would also suggest that the average person living in Kanata would be more open to the arts and all types of entertainment. I think that tends to flow from having a diverse population.

Another PAC (I say that, because Vanier Hall is already here) isn’t going to cause a boom in population.

They said that sort of thing about the Art Gallery to sell it, but that hasn’t panned out to anything in terms of population growth, and all it is is a costly ‘boat anchor’ that serves a few (as someone put it).

I still think Vanier Hall could go through an overhaul and live up to PAC supporters high expectations without having to build a new structure.

JB… I know where you’re coming from with regards to renovations of Vanier Hall.

As someone who was involved in the performing arts in PG I can tell you that this has been discussed as an idea ad nauseam.

SD57 does not like play nice when it comes to that facility. The only entrance is through the school and they want access to the facility at their pleasure.

Placing an entrance, foirer and box-office on the other side would take away valuable parking space, as well as the ability to load and unload theatre production gear.

The wings on the stage are very shallow and the green rooms are a complete and utter joke.

The seating is need of replacement. They’ve been replaced once before (roughly 20 years ago) but that was done through private donation. You can see who paid for the seat if you attend a show.

First of all, thanks for keeping the discussion civil. So many posters have a problem in this area.

All it takes is someone will the political will and backbone to stand up to SD57. I realize those are in short supply! I don’t think SD57 is its own sovereign government, they are accountable to the taxpayers as far as I know.

In terms of parking, if they locate the PAC at the old Norgate property, there’s no parking down there as far as I can tell, unless you count a nearby parkade.

And Pylot, all of the items you mentioned could be addressed with a refurbishment for a fraction of the proposed $50 million dollar price tag, not to mention the ongoing operating costs. I think this is a far more prudent way to go.

JB… you wouldn’t have gotten any argument from me. I too think it’s a natural.

But SD57 owns the facility and they call the shots. Might need to have a back room chat with them. :)

This is the list of arts oriented facilities from the City of PG website. Vanier is not even listed there.

• Playhouse
• Studio 2880
• Two Rivers Gallery
• Railway and Forestry Museum
• Prince George Public Library
• CN Centre and Civic Centre

The Performing Arts Centre in Vancouver as sought out by the church that bought it. It wasn’t even for sale when the owners were approached by a mega-church that made a great offer. The sale had nothing to do with bookings.

Have you ever attended a performance at Vanier with a basketball game happening in the adjoining gymnasium? How about when the doors to the hall open for intermission, and the audience pours out into hallways already jammed with teenage basketball players and game attendees?

We do our symphony a complete disservice offering them this as our best venue year after year.

The real shame? When the latest pursuit of a PAC began around five or six years ago, there was some momentum. The public came out in force to support the idea. People wanted to fundraise. It was thought that if ‘we’ could build UNBC, ‘we’ could build a PAC.

At the most well-attended public meeting, several city councilors assumed leadership roles, promising tJo move this forward. One claimed there was no need to start a public fundraising campaign because they were going to ‘take it to a higher level’, and build the PAC in the same way ‘they’ built the Jago sports centre at UNBC.

So city council gave this group money – thousands of dollars to move the PAC project further. That money went to a New York consulting firm for a study. Money was also spent to visit other performing arts centres to see what they had built.

A complete waste. Lost momentum. Now the winter games. What happens if this group appears before council, and council says ‘no’? Unfortunately, this last go-round has so far been a complete waste of money. There’s a lot riding on council’s endorsement (something that should have been solidified YEARS AGO). What if council says no?

true: “Have you ever attended a performance at Vanier with a basketball game happening in the adjoining gymnasium? How about when the doors to the hall open for intermission, and the audience pours out into hallways already jammed with teenage basketball players and game attendees?”

A renovation could change all of that.

“We do our symphony a complete disservice offering them this as our best venue year after year. “

They did themselves a disservice through financial mismanagement.

“The public came out in force to support the idea”

LMAO, that’s a gooder!

Two weeks after paying off PG’s $111 million dollar debt IMO, would be a good time to talk PAC. But NOT until then.

The PAC has approx.600 members. Much less if you only count *active* members. So lets not pretend that this means they have lots of support. My experience in talking to people is that this project is not needed nor wanted.

In fact the reason it was last on a long list of facilities to be built in Prince George was because very few people wanted it.

If we go to a referendum this next election we can settle this issue once and for all.

Using money from the sale of land to build a PAC while increasing taxes for everything else just doesn’t seem to be a smart thing to do. Especially if you want to get re-elected.

To suggest that building a PAC will attract people to Prince George is a joke.

Jobs has always been what attracts people to Prince George, and when the job is gone so are the people.

The population from 100 Mile House to Ft St John to Prince Rupert, and all points in between including Pr George is approx. 305000 people. People in the outlying areas will not likely travel to Prince George in the Winter to attend a PAC performance. The PAC would have competition for available dollars.

1. Bars.
2. Gambling
3. Swimming
4. Hockey (Two Teams)
5. Shopping.
6. Northern Sports Centre
7. Skiing

I have a problem seeing any large number of people going out in minus 20/30 to watch the dance of the sugar plum fairy.

Having said all that, the City and the PAC people will keep pushing this project, ignore the many to satisfy the few, and build a PAC.

What the majority of people think in Prince George is of very little or no concern to the elitists who think that we need them to make the **right** decisions, because we are not **worthy**

Gus. I doubt very much if TNW would state early on, that they intend to move into a PAC. What would happen to their rent, or lease, if the owner knew they were planning to move???

Once a PAC is built Im sure they will re-consider.

Who will run the facility??? Judy Russell is presently running the Playhouse Theatre for the City, will she just continue to run the PAC, or will they farm it out to someone else, say, TNW?? Who knows.

I agree with Harbinger. I would not likely take in any event at a PAC myself but would support tax dollars subsidizing it after we have our debt paid off. We subsidize rinks, pools, libraries, soccer fields et cetera. so I guess it would only be fair that we subsidize people wearing tights prancing around a stage. oh – we have an art gallery??

TNW will never go to a PAC. They have a generous sponsor for their venue, their improvements have mostly been accomplished through donations and volunteers.