Phone Survey Takes Pulse on PAC
Prince George. B.C.- As part of the City of Prince George Administration review of the proposals for a performing arts centre, a telephone survey has been conducted.
The survey was conducted by Malatest and Associates, a market research company with offices in Victoria, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa and Halifax. The survey cost approximately $20 thousand.
While 250News has requested a copy of the specific questions asked in this survey, City of Prince George Communications Specialist, Mike Kellet says "there may be an issue of whether the actual survey questions are propietary to Malatest" and sorting that out could take some time. In the interests of meeting our deadline requirements, he advises the questions "related to respondents’ past behavior in terms of the types of live entertainment shows they had been to, which they might consider in the future, as well as questions related to demographic information".
We have learned, 450 homes were called and the results will be part of the final package that will be presented to Council in June.
That final report will include a review of the business plan, the proposed size of the facility the estimated cost of construction in 2014 dollar values, and the phone survey which was an attempt at gauging the public support for such a facility.
The last proposal on the facility called for a facility that would house an 800 seat theatre as well as a smaller 250 seat theater, a multi- purpose room and a major public lobby. The estimated cost (in 2010 dollars) was $42.5 million.
The business plan estimated it would cost about $1 million a year to operate the facility, and would garner about $700 thousand a year in revenue. That leaves a $300 thousand dollar gap that the city would be called upon to fill.
250News has asked you twice in the past 5 months if you would like to see a referendum on the City moving forward with this project. In late November of 2013, 1499 votes (57.1%) were in favour of a referendum, while 1128 (42.9%) were not. The bottom line remained the same although the gap larger when we posed the question again last week, 86% said Yes they would like to see this matter put to a referendum, while 14% said no.
Comments
how can calling 450 homes get an accurate idea of how people think about the PAC?
I heard from one person who was called that teh questions were very loaded and bias where no matter how you answered it, expept for a NO on every question the poll ended up being in the PAC’s favor.
Who came up with the list… PAC people?
Lets settle this once and for all…
put a referendum on November’s election, that isn’t slanted or bias and let the people all get our say…..
I am sure a lot of us think a PAC would be niec to have…
but
NOT AT THIS TIME….
and that is the question that seems to be conveniently being ignored… the timing….
I doubt a referendum would have cost 20 thousand dollars either….and got the opinion of more than 450 people whos phone numbers I believed were hand picked to get only the result the polsters were hired to get…
you are right..
I don’t believe it was totally above board…
Roughly 50 bucks per question? What a bargain.
Is the business plan available for the public?
I would guess the questions were no doubt loaded to provide affirmative responses to questions regarding a PAC.
This survey will surely be presented by the city as having the same results as a referendum would have had.
Pretty difficult for city hall to come up with a simple question only requiring a yes or no answer.
So it takes 3 months to total up 450 calls, are you kidding me. Another waste of tax layers money
The question should have been something like
Do you think the present city council should keep there jobs ?
STOP TRYING TO RAISE MY TAXES!!! PAC supporters, raise the money yourselves. The City of PG needs to stop expanding it services until it can get it’s fiscal house in order. Once there is no debt, the roads are fixed, current infrastructure isn’t crumbling and we are no longer classified as one of the most dangerous Cities in Canada, then maybe I will agree to this.
I answered the call at my parents and did the survey. I thought the questions were somewhat vague, and a lot were asking if a certain event was something I’d consider going to in the next year. Of course I’d consider going, but that’s not a definitive ‘yes I’m going to all plays, etc in the next year’
And of course I remembered more about the different things I’ve been to in the last year after hanging up. I think an online survey would have been more accurate.
I would guess the PAC people will get what they want. My vote in the fall election will be based on one question, do you support the building of a PAC? If they answer “yes” I WIL NEVER VOTE FOR THAT PERSON.
I don’t understand how that survey can tell if people want a PAC? I took it and it was about what kind of shows I had seen this year and what kind of shows I would consider going to in the future! it never asked if I would go to a big theatre, im not into that I like small venues. I agree with bcracer it would be nice to have a PAC but we can not afford it now why cant we fix what is broken first then save our pennies for a future pac. who buys pretty stuff when their roof is leaking?
Must be nice to be a PAC supporter and have the wants of a few pushed over the needs of all. Our roads are brutal no matter the season. We are being taxed for runoff because our infrastructure is old and falling apart. No one can answer how when shows cannot sell out as it is, that somehow a new PAC will magically sell out 800 seats for every performance.
Posted by: Boudicca on March 26 2014 8:43 AM
I don’t understand how that survey can tell if people want a PAC? I took it and it was about what kind of shows I had seen this year and what kind of shows I would consider going to in the future! it never asked if I would go to a big theatre, im not into that I like small venues.
—————-
The whole point of the survey was to gauge interest in going to live shows. They would never ask the direct question, “Are you in favour of spending oodles of cash to appease the egos of a few hundred people who think they’re better then you and deserve a posh new PAC?”
Now they can say, “300 out of 450 people surveyed want to see live theatre ergo we need to spend oodles of cash that we don’t have on a posh new PAC…yadda, yadda, yadda.”
Does anybody know what the back-up plan is for the building if it fails as a pac?
P Val, I think the 450 calls, are successful contacts, meaning it may have taken more than 5000 calls to get 450 to talk about it.
Posted by: Hartly 2 on March 26 2014 9:20 AM
Does anybody know what the back-up plan is for the building if it fails as a pac?
In the old days they used to call it a “Poor-House”
otherwise known as the derelict building at the end of the street.
Show us the business plan. Maybe it is a viable plan. If the PAC committee is that confident and want it to be successful, make this business plan public.
There is a lot of smart people out there that will review it.
If it is a subsidy of $300,000 a year. I think it is worth the investment. But is the operating cost only a million dollars???? Is the revenue really going to be $700,000 cash… or is it in kind. Are they relying on renting out retail space to make it viable? if it doesn’t have the foot traffic, its not going to be able to keep the merchants.
Its time for PAC committee to come out and so us the business plan. The counsel candidates has to come out with definitive position or the voters will not support your campaign.
This is a young community, we are looking for cultural development. We are not the same people we were thirty years ago. A lot of university educated professional work in this town. They want what is best for the city.
PAC committee, they need to stop thinking they are the elite, and the rest of the populace are ignorant servants. Show us the business plan, lets see if it holds water.
Axman, you are so right, they take a little bit of info and twist it around so they can get there propaganda campaign.
This is what the populace have to make it clear. this election is about the PAC.
In turn, it will become the PAC, to convince the populace that it is viable. Simple.
If the council that gets in are pro PAC, guess what. there in, and it gets built.
If they can’t, well the populace spoke.
Should it be a referendum, absolutely not. Make the council candidates come forward with their position on the PAC.
I think the populace will vote it down. How do we do it. We have the power, not the candidates. We don’t put in candidates that don’t support your principles.
If the candidates are against PAC, make it be known. If the candidates are for PAC let it be known. If the Candidates can’t come out with a position on it, let that be known. Let the media like O250 get the info out to the populace where each candidate stand. Make it a political football, make it a fun election.
In my opinion PAC needs to do a lot better job to sell us the ‘bill of goods’.
If the City poohbahs were to share some of their enthusiasm for a PAC equally with some actual worthy causes such as the local Hospice Society, then more resources could be dedicated to the care of people in need.
To look at it another way,the Hospice Society actively pursues fund raising initiatives several times each year.
Why can’t the proponents of the PAC do the same? Do they expect the tax paying public to fund the creation and maintenance of a facility that meets the entertainment needs of a few, a few times per year when worthy organizations are left to go begging?
I use the Hospice as an example, there are other places some civic funding would go a long way toward improving the quality of life for many more people than a PAC would.
Very screwed up priorities there.
metalman.
Even saying “you might go” is a YES for the PAC side….
of course if the right things comes to town we ??might?? go… might not either… but a might is a point for them….
He spoke. I understand that.. But still 3 months to tally them seems a bit long. Could do it in 15 minutes on a spread sheet.
Also maybe they called till they got the answers they wanted.
This coming election every candidate should state wether they are for or against the PAC, would make voting much easier
I feel that those out there that want a PAC should be involved in raising the funds for the project. I don’t believe my taxes need to be tapped to support some little “elite” group that wants a facility I may never use. Go hit Enbridge, or some other big sponsor to supply the funds for the project and cover the operational cost. It’s bad enough I have morons on counsel looking at my down spouts and seeing dollar signs with the rain and snow melt.
The people of Prince George (home owners) pay enough taxes and fees for the so so services we receive already. Be seriously another tax hit to fund something that is geared to a “special interest group”, I don’t think so. Geez $20,000.00 for a really piss poor telephone survey, who the hell keep writing these freaking cheques to these idiots. Sorry if I am coming off a bit harsh , but this is out of control, way out of control.
The City mails out a utility bill twice a year. Two opportunities to include a questionnaire asking people ( note: those who pay the taxes ) if they are in favour or against certain planned initiatives, for instance like a PAC. Those who feel passionate enough about the issue can mail it back to the City or drop it off in person!
There. It’s easy. Please send me a certified cheque for 20,000 bucks.
Democracy is such a better way to go! Ask the Swiss.
20 thousand dollars to call 450 homes! Insane!!!! The City of Prince George is definitely not trying to reduce the cost of government here!!!!
I wonder if PAC and council members read this blog, to get a sense of how we all feel about the subject.
The proposal for a PAC and the revenue that will be generated is relying on people attending performances from as far away as Smithers, and the Peace River Country, Valemount etc; This is of course ludicrous, especially in the winter months. I note that they make no reference to winter, and their comparisons are for Cities like Nanaimo, Kelowna, Vancouver, and Jackson Hole Wyoming. So those figures are bogus.
The report by the consultants, also projected an increase in population for Prince George and that the population would be approx. 90,000 people by 2015, and also a huge increase in the Regional District after 2015. Seems these figures are also bogus, as the increase never happened.
Furthermore the telephone survey is as mentioned above, nothing more than a thinly concealed attempt to get positive feedback that supports their position for a PAC.
The cost to the City for operation and maintenance of this facility will be in the area of $500,000.00 per year.
Its the same people who have been raising our taxes stating that the City is in dire need of revenue, that are trying to convince us that we need a PAC and should be prepared to support it to the tune of $500,000.00 per year.
These are the same people who whine about the inability of the City to continue to pay the huge costs attached to the swimming pools, civic centre, etc; and we should be looking at getting rid of some of the facilities.
Will we sell of some of our present assets to find the money to support a PAC. I certainly hope not.
A grader travelling 3 miles per hour at a cost $200/hr. would have cleared 300 lane miles of streets in Prince George this winter for $20,000.00
Think about that when you start spending my tax dollars.
The 20 grand was spent on creative writing for a wishy washy survey. The results should be interesting.
I did not think I would live long enough to say this. “John Backhouse was a better mayor than what we have now.”
There are many factors involved in making this successful Performing Arts Center. The least of it is building the structure.
Is there a need in the community to have this facility? or is it a want?
How many performances will it have every year which it could not be held at Vanier Hall?
What is going to happen to the Playhouse? is it still going to be funded by the city.
Theatre Northwest is the most recognizable theatre in Central BC, and they have already commented of not using the new facility once it is built. I am supporter of this facility. Each show probably sells about 5- 6 thousand tickets at about $25, at four times a year. So is the Performing Arts Centre have a play company in place, and how much are they going to have to charge to make it viable. $60.00 a ticket??? A seating of 800 x 14 days, that is 11 thousand tickets. If they have 4 shows a year. That will mean the this town will be subjected to 68000 seat sales a year. I think this will negatively impact TNW, and the new PAC. That’s not even including the PG Playhouse
The biggest problem is, we are a city of 75,000 people. Drawing from 130,000 in a 75 mile radius. We do not have enough people to support this. People are not going to travel four times a year from Smithers to take in a play, during a shopping trip, year after year.
To true he spoke, people are starting to say that about Rogers too. That’s what happens when you are only wanting to vote someone out and forget to really pay attention to who you are voting for. Green has lowered the bar big time. Having the mayor seat empty would be better than what we have now
I prefer the small and personal venue at TNW that is why I rarely attend the playhouse.
If we don’t get a good candidate for mayor, Eugene is going to win it.
That’s not a bad idea
I think, PAC committee and the council members who support knows it is going to be a heavily subsidized venue. They know it is doomed to fail. But if it gets built, than they can be funded by the tax payers.
A million dollars to operate it.
General maintenance
Pay for Electricity
Pay for heating
Janitorial service
Insuarance
Pay for city utilities and taxes
Pay for Telephone and communication services
Pay for Manager of operation
Pay for assistant to Manager
Pay for people to keep it operating
Annual inspection of facility
Security services
Concession services
Revenue, to raise 700,000 at $5.00 per seat per show going to the PAC. 140,000 tickets need to be sold every year. That is filling the main hall 175 times a year. or at least 15 times a month.
The Prince George Cougars, brought in 58,000 fans into CN Center last season.
I think TNW may have brought in 20,000 fans to see 4 shows. This would mean that PAC will have to do about 2 1/2 times better than a hockey game, and seven times better than theatre Northwest.
I think the business plan must have some pretty fancy dogs and ponies. From a laymans perspective, I don’t think it adds up. Wouldn’t want to hire this person to do any business planning.
Can I phone them? What’s their number?
Am writing “NO PAC” on my utility tax bill this week. Exercise in futility I guess, but that will be my “unsolicited” opinion.
How could the survey questions be proprietary? That is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
The more this government tries to obfuscate what it’s doing with OUR money, the more the distrust and resentment grows.
I hope we have some good alternatives to consider this fall, because right now, if they can fog a mirror, I would deem them more qualified than the current crew.
It is we (us, the taxpayers) who paid for the survey and the questions that were asked, yet we are being kept in the dark?
Was there a direct plain unmistakable question like “Are you in favour of the city’s plans to construct a performing arts center”?
Remember, the next time they will have a four year term!
I agree with Sine Nomine. They do not want to give out any information on this survey/project until June. Then they will give us some indication of the costs, the possible location, where some of the funding will come from, and the result of the survey. In their opinion the survey will be in support of a PAC.
Once Council receives the report in June, they will say that it will need to be studied, and various options will have to be looked at before a decision can be made. They will state that no decision will be forthcoming in 2014, and that the incoming Council will have to deal with it.
Thus they will get off the hook for a referendum this year. They will be able to duck the question during this election year, and then once re elected (those that are) they will then make the decision for or against building a PAC. Problem is, is that the taxpayers who will pay for this project will not have any input as to whether it should be built or not.
We need a referendum on this issue, and we need it on the ballot for the 2014 election. We need our Councilors to stand or fall on the basis of whether they are for or against spending this kind of money, when we are obviously in (as Pierre Trudeau would say) Dire Straights.
Comments for this article are closed.