Ben,

I think it’s unfair that you attack the arts community without ever looking into the financial picture of the sports/leisure community. And the arts community is much broader than these few key players you cite.

I think neither community needs to be attacked, but if you’re going to *** about the cost of one, you need to complain about the cost of the other, too.

What about the $1.5 million worth of baseball stadium that is really only used by about 400 people, 6 months of the year?

What about the Four Seasons and Aquatic Centre pools, which combine to loose about $1.2 million a year?

What about the CN Centre, Kin Centres, Elks Centre, Coliseum – millions in losses each year.

The difference is the city pays for these buildings and runs them. We pay for them, big time, through general taxes, not grants. When the budget needs to be increased, it is. Should an Art Gallery need more money, they’ve got to sit on the hot seat before council, apologize for things beyond their control, justify their existence, demonstrate the soundness of their financial plans, etc. etc.

If the leisure service manager and other city administrators had to go through the same process each time they wanted more money for their budget, you’d be so busy attacking them you wouldn’t have time to write about “mismanagement” in the arts community.

Maybe we should implement this type of “hot seat” process for budget time. It really doesn’t happen for administrators the same way it happens for groups like the Art Gallery, Symphony, etc.

Shawn Petriw

Mr. Petriw, what part of "Art Gallery bailout" don't you understand in this posting? Meisner has given a VIEW of a specific topic. The fact that you choose to attack the sports/leisure community is obviously grandstanding for your own agenda. Hmmmm lets get to those remarks actually. First off the new baseball park. This park is OWED to the players and fans that have put up with the shotty conditions at Montey for over 25 years. The city has sold the land we play on for development so what would you suggest...not having any park at all? I dont know where you get the 400 people number but a premier facility will bring tournaments, revenue, and plenty of people to this city for years. Just look at what Grand Forks, Trail, or most cities down south have and you will see the results. We are long overdue on this one, and it will sustain itself over time.

Secondly....the fact that you think you can point out any of the hockey rinks in this town is a joke. You forgot to mention the thousands of users and broad spectrum of the community that use these facilities on a daily basis. Their schedules are so packed you cant even get ice time on a weekday until 11pm. We actually need another hockey arena to keep up with demand. I agree with the concept of an Art Gallery and what it COULD provide for a city but obviously it is not being marketed properly. The place is a ghost town half the time. Where is the support? Maybe the four seasons is a bit of a loser but the new aquatic center is the same scenerio as the other facilities, bringing athletes, tournaments and supporters to the community. How you think you can compare sports/leisure to arts in this case is out to lunch.

Janked,

I was not pitting Arts vs. Sports, as you suggest.

You also won’t find a bigger supporter of our sports and leisure facilities than I, especially what they can do for sports tourism (I was on the organizing committee of the 2002 Men’s National Baseball tournament. These large tournaments don’t happen every year).

I was simply giving Ben fodder should he want to attack the sports and leisure communities in the same narrow way he attacks the arts community.

Your post perfectly demonstrates the ridiculousness of his usual narrow perspective on this issue.

I agree that our arts, sports and leisure facilities are very important to a vibrant community. And they cost money, and that money comes from taxes. The price of living in a vibrant, growing, diverse economy, which we all benefit from, is the cost of facilities like baseball stadiums and art galleries and ice rinks and performing arts venues. These things are expensive, and if we only look at them in financial terms, we miss their importance. Also, different types of facilities get used in different ways for different reasons-simply counting the turns of the turnstile is misleading.

It should also be noted that the vast majority of the "arts community" pay their own way, such as dance lessions and music lessons from for-profit schools and teachers. Much of the sports community relies on expensive, tax-supported facilities. That's fine; we need those facilities and we need that participation if we are to have a decent commuity.

But be real when looking at the arts community. Somehow Ben and others don't seem to realize the creative economy, as an industrial sector, is huge, and mostly for-profit. I’d just like some perspective and balance on this issue.

And as for my agenda, here’s a few of my key platform planks from the last civic campaign:

Prince George needs to become a participant's paradise, and a spectator's delight. Though we already have good community involvement and lifestyle opportunities, we can certainly improve. The two primary opportunities are civic facilities and civic promotion.

• Civic Facilities - beyond using what we have more efficiently, we need important new facilities. Specifically we need an indoor soccer and sports complex with a minimum of two fields immediately, and we need a multiple stage performing arts centre located downtown within the next three years.

• Civic Promotion - our facilities need more than simple administration, they need promotion. We need an entrepreneurial-minded group who will bring us the best in sports, entertainment and culture and actively support the bidding and organization of tournaments, festivals, conventions, trade shows, entertainment and cultural events.

Shawn Petriw

Nice regroup on that one Mr Petriw. :) You point out how Ben is being narrow minded but you threw out general accusations about sports and leisure that were narrow without explanation. Good reason why this section is a VIEWS section. The issue put forth was the art gallery and the art community nothing else. Since your platforming brought sports and leisure into it I felt the need to respond since the comments were narrow minded. Thanks for clearing it up though.

One thing I think is off...the number of people flowing through facilities or "turnstiles" like you mention IS a big factor in success and value. You cant down play the fact that these facilities are highly used while the art gallery is vacant half the time. There are plenty of ways to look at it but numbers are a pretty good measuring stick.

On the other hand...bravo on your views and clarification. Good to see someone who is looking at a big picture and knows the value of marketing and promotion. Hopefully these values and views will stick with you if you are elected in some form.

IMO, meisner, you should relax. Can you really be surprised that these donkey's pulled this bs? come on you can't be. lets ckalk it up as another reason to vote some or all of the clowns out in november.

see ya mofos.

It costs $5 for an adult to enter the Two Rivers Gallery. It costs nothing to enter the PG Library and read newspapers, periodicals, books, etc.

It costs $3.8 million to fund the library this year and it will be shortly going up to over $4 million. The library raises about $50,000 through fund raising events which is a pittance.

Although it quite the opposite of the philosophy of those who say "if you want to play,you have to pay", I feel that the library provides a good value for service. Whether it is operated efficiently, I do not know. I suspect it is since there should be standards by which one can compare one library to another.

Why those people who think likewise suddenly put up barriers to viewing works of art by the same population is beyond my comprehension. Surely both are educational for the well rounded person.

I am not too sure how many more people would go to the gallery if it would not cost a family $10 to go but I am relatively sure the attendance would increase just as library use would decrease if we were to charge for borrowing books or reading periodicals in a nice quiet corner of the building overlooking the greener part of downtown.

Equity is certainly a consideration here. I feel some are not comparing apples to apples and that we are mainly observing old prejudices coming out without objective reasoning.

It probably took the library decades to overcome the negative press of the Moffat years. It is obvious that it will take as long for the Gallery to be accepted into this community and you can be sure that if a performing arts centre ever sees the light of day here, it will have a similar decade or two struggle.

It comes with the territory, so those people on the boards simply have to develop thick skins to counter the thick heads of their detractors.

oops .... I lied ... this is my second rant for the day... :-)

Owl,

The Two Rivers Art Gallery has free admission every Thursday from 3 pm to 9 pm. Bring your family. Enjoy.

Shawn Petriw