Another wish list item from the zero liability downtown supporters that want your home tax to pay for their entertainment....

This is just like an untreated venereal disease, it keeps coming back....
They can't fill the venues they have now....

$51,300,000.00 is how many potholes?

this thing can burn in hell

I can see it 10 years from now: The performing Arts Center, a shining beacon to attract more doctors, etc. with a parking lot full of dusty vehicles because by then we will obviously be back to gravel roads in PG. It's so comforting to know that city council hears the voting public/taxpayer and takes their needs to heart. NOT!

During his campaign, Rogers said he would put it to referendum. Let's hope he keeps his word & we get to vote this BS down once & for all people.

They just don't get it. There are thousands of potholes, cracked and lumped-over sidewalks with no sloped corners for proper access, whole long stretches of residential heavy traffic streets that needed to be re-paved years ago, but they haven't been done, busted curbs, crazily leaning stop signs, etc, etc.

We need a Mayor and councillors who actually visit some of the satellite areas (like the Hart) which are paying big time annual taxes too!

Shelve the grandiose idea for now! We have many facilities already which often are not filled nearly to capacity!

Give us a break! When is the next municipal election?

"Phase five will see the finalization of a site, development of a detailed business plan, design concept and illustration . . . The Society may also take a next step of finalizing sources of funding as well as confirming the estimated construction costs"

Sounds reasonable to me. I certainly wouldn't support committing any amount of taxpayer money towards this project if these steps WEREN'T undertaken first. Would it not make sense to establish the details and THEN decide if we want and/or are able to support it?

Or, should we just get worked into a frenzy about a plan we no nothing about? Come to think of it, that sounds about right for how things normally go in this town, LOL.

The funny thing is the P3 part as well. P3's just end up costing more for getting less. Recent construction in Alberta that was P3's revealed that the schools built were 30% above the cost if it had been built directly by the government. P3's are just a way for big business to gorge us even more.

I think the governments in this country will soon be getting off the P3 kick. I have not heard a thing about P3 and the RCMP station here. Wonder if anyone is considering that?

Sort of like global warming.

Lunarguy is right! Forensic accountants went over P3's here in BC and came to the same conclusion - they cost more. They are good for politicians friends though; as they fill their pockets with tax payer monies!

"They are good for politicians friends though; as they fill their pockets with tax payer monies!"

As I said, sort of like global warming.

The issue of whether P3 is the way to go with a project or not has absolutely nothing to do whether the friends of politicians fill their pockets with tax payer monies.

It seems many on here have trouble with keeping things separate. You really did not do well on all those segments on the Sesame Street progams which asked the question "which of these things do not belong?"

The thing I understand about these P3 things is that if it goes over budget, the taxpayers are the ones on the hook. I guess it really doesn't matter with this because it is we the taxpayer that is on the hook for this $50,000,000.00 farce. Dan made a personal promise to me that this would go to referendum and I will remind him of that. I still have the email stating so. If it doesn't I will have to try other actions I guess. It is just plain stupid to even think about spending that kind of money right now. It may bring in another 5 or 10 doctors and lawyers but can we afford it for that few people?

The reality is that the City of PG will be unable to spend 40-50M on this project on their own, so why not wait until we have a detailed account of how the funding for the project would be raised before considering whether we want to support it?

Are we so paranoid of the arts in this city that we're willing to discount anything to do with them before even knowing what we're being asked to commit to?

I guess we will have to look at the detailed business plan, however these plans when made up by these so called societys are not worth the paper they are written on.

They always make the business plan look good, and after the project gets approval and gets built, then they come up with the excuses as to why it is not self supporting, or why it is losing money.

Case in point. The original plan for the Charles Jago Sports Centre, clearly stated that revenues would be approx $900,000.00 per year, and costs would be approx $900,000.00 per year, and that the taxpayers would not have to pay for running the facility etc;

In actual fact this plan went all to hell, and they came up with plan number two sometime after the project got the go ahead. Plan two, was to get $300,000.00 per year from UNBC and $300,000.00 per year from the City (By setting up a dummy Co., with two shareholders ie; the City and UNBC) These two shareholders would each pay the Northern S;port Centre this money on a yearly basis for services rendered to the University and the City. I think they have referred to this arrangement as ((Creative Accounting))

In any event the facility actually costs taxpayers and UNBC $600,000.00 per year to run.

The same people who worked on the Sports Centre Project, are members of, and working on the Performing Arts Centre, so in my opinion you can expect the same results., A huge GAP between the business plan, and reality. The same huge GAP exists for the Cougers Franchise, and the Runway Expansion.

None of these projects have come remotely close to generating the revenues or business that they were originally planned for, and the PAC will be no different.

As usual this is more about building buildings, giving out lucrative contracts, etc, than it is about wants, or needs of the taxpayers who have to pay for it all.

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail, and we will be able to throw this stupid idea on the scrap heap, and continue to use the many facilities that we presently have in Prince George.

1. Theatre Northwest
2. Vanier Hall
3. Playhouse Theatre
4. Civic Centre
5. CN Centre.

Lets not forget that we are a City of some 75000 people, and that most of the population have no interest in a PAC.

We shouldnt be building $50 Millon dollar facilities for a very small group of people. The facilites we have a present are more than sufficient.

That very small group of people is more powerfull than any number of "commoners" you can muster up. It shall be built.....oh yes.....build it and they will come.

NMG, whether it is city, provincial or federal dollars that fund all or part of this PAC, it's still our tax dollars and we're not interested in spending tax dollars on it.

"Let’s not forget that we are a City of some 75000 people, and that most of the population have no interest in a PAC."

Most also have no interest in a swimming pool, a museum or two, skateboard park, softball fields, tennis courts, soccer fields, city horse stables, ice arenas, etc.

We do know that there is a relatively good support for the CN Centre and its popular music presentations with tickets in the $50 to $90 per person range.

------------------------------
Look at the first one on that list of 5. It is a very interesting one. TNW is professional theatre. It receives grants from the Canada Council as well as Gaming Commission.

It also receives a grant from the City. It was $72,000. Just jumped up by over 60% to $118,000 for three years. It has 3,800 season pass holders. There are two seasons. If they increased the pass holder price by $15 each, the city would not have to provide a grant.

http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/20090625199239/local/news/tnw-changing-behind-the-scenes.html

Nothing wrong with TNW. It is a great little theatre company.

However, if supporting a small single purpose theatre, no matter how good it is, is going to stand in the way of the City getting a performing arts centre which would give a considerable larger variety of performing arts events then my vote will certainly be to increase the ticket price right across the board and allow the City to put the money towards annual support of a larger facility which will not only benefit a few paid professionals but hundreds and even thousands of dancers, musicians, actors, speakers set designers, lighting and acoustic technicians who enjoy volunteering to learn and to present their art to their families and friends and anyone else who wants to watch and listen.

PaysHisOwnWay. I agree that this group has all the right contacts, and the support of those in business, politics, etc; who will benefit the most from the project, however in this instance I think they have pushed the envelope to far.

Taxpayers in Prince George can stop the City from borrowing this money by coming up with approx 5000 signatures on a petition. When the Terasen gas proposal was forced to a referendum it required 2500 signatures. The Government has since raised the required number from 5% to 10% of the elegible voters. Wonder why??.

So 5000 signatures are required to force the City to go to a referendum and get the ok from the taxpayers of Prince George to borrow the money to build the PAC.

This is an extremely high number considering that only about 16000 people voted in the last election. If we only needed 10% of the number of people who voted, it would be a different story entirely.

So 5000 signatures are needed. Guess what?? They give you 30 days to come up with the signatures, otherwise it is considered approved, and they can borrow the money.

What needs to happen is people who are against this proposal should start talking to anyone interested, and get them on board, so that when the petition is available at City Hall they can immediatley start signing.

I dont have a lot of faith in people getting off their duffs and actually doing something about this, but who knows, stranger things have happened.

"NMG, whether it is city, provincial or federal dollars that fund all or part of this PAC, it's still our tax dollars and we're not interested in spending tax dollars on it"

If Provincial and Federal dollars were contributed towards this project, you can bet that it would be from a pot of money that is already specifically earmarked for projects like these. The difference with a local PAC is that the money that you have already paid through taxes would be returned to PG and not some other community in Canada. Personally, I'd rather fund a PAC in PG than some city I'll never live in.

I agree with gus on this one. There are LOADS of things in PG that most people have no interest in. I don't swim, I haven't played ball in years, I don't play soccer, etc. That being said, I do recognize that these sorts of things do contribute to making the city a nicer place and in those regards, I don't mind having my tax dollars go towards them.

Palopu's list is indeed interesting. The first item has been addressed by gus and if push came to shove, the city SHOULD cease the grants given to TNW and put that money towards the operating budget of a would be PAC. That's a no brainer IMHO. Venues 4 and 5 (the Civic Center and CN Centre) are quite simply NOT the same type of venue as a proper PAC.

The Civic Centre is a general multi purpose facility, built primarily for conventions, meetings and the odd large gathering like a grad or trade show.

The CN Centre is first and foremost a hockey rink. It can also house other larger scale events and it does a reasonable job as that. One thing it is not, however, is a PAC. Anyone who has sat through a concert or performance in a proper facility and then gone to a show at the CN Centre would see the differences immediately. Either that or they would be blind and/or deaf.

Vanier Hall and the Playhouse are the only facilities on Palopu's list that could reasonably be considered viable facilities for the arts and it goes without saying that a modern PAC would be a SIGNIFICANT upgrade to those facilities.

Palopu's statement that most people in PG also have no interest in a PAC is certainly open for debate. Who are these people? Regular posters on Opinion 250? University students? Loggers? People that travel to other centres to see performances that don't come here because we don't have suitable facilities?

I still think the business case needs to be reviewed. If we can get considerable funding assistance from other levels of government and perhaps even the private sector, I think it makes the project that much more viable. If it does go ahead, then I also think we need to channel all current funding from the City to the arts and shift that over to the new facility. No more money for TNW, no assistance or money for the Playhouse, etc.

Whether it goes ahead should still be based on the business case and the cost to the City, however, I just don't buy into the argument that "nobody wants it". Obviously there are healthy numbers of people in PG who already utilize the current facilities and attend the events they put on. Common sense would also dictate that a better facility will attract better events, which would also increase the useage of the facility. It will also increase the attractiveness of the City and despite what many on here think, that is critically important to attracting new business/residents and growing the city. We need to start thinking beyond what would fit PG in 1980 and start thinking about what PG will need in 2020.

"When the Terasen gas proposal was forced to a referendum it required 2500 signatures. The Government has since raised the required number from 5% to 10% of the elegible voters. Wonder why??"

Did the terasen gas proposal pass the referendum? I believe it did. Of course that would have nothing to do with raising the required number of signatures.

So, if that would have nothing to do with raising the number so that government is not forced to do something that may be frivolous by a relatively small number of people what is your theory?

NMG, I sometimes wonder whether some are afraid that if the city is geared up for a 2020 economy rather than a 1980 economy, that there will be too many people with your kind of thinking that will come to this city and it might actually grow to its full potential both qualitatively and quantitatively.

"Playing with public money for personal amusement"
C Monty Burns

In reference to Vanier Hall...

This place is big enough for the needs of this city, but it has needed upgrades well over a decade ago. So you might ask why not spend money upgrading a facility that is already established.

You can ask School District 57 that question as they own that theatre. They don't have enough money to run classes properly, so obviously no money for theatre upgrades.

There have been groups that have offered to pay for such upgrades in the past but SD 57 refuses to give up any of the control of the facility. So there it sits, getting older and older....

Maybe the PAC can be built on the site of the Hart Mall. I was up there the other day. It's worse than downtown. How sad.

Why not put the PAC into the Community Gaming Center?