Madden Says Need to Sell Idea of Performing Arts Center

Thursday, July 26, 2007 04:00 AM

When it comes to planning a Performing Arts Centre for the City of Prince George, the City’s Director of Leisure Services, Tom Madden, says we need to know the full picture "We need a business plan and a development plan , and we need to try and get both done at the same time ."

A new Performing Arts facility is expected to cost between $12 to $15 million dollars, and the plans being expressed indicate that the facility would have about 1,000 seats.

Madden says there was a great deal of discussion about the idea back in the early nineties and it now needs to be communicated to the public in this community.

Asked if the city could support such a facility, Madden says "There are presentations that find the Multi Plex too large, but a one thousand seat venue would be perfect. As our population ages , people like to take in live theatre and there is an opportunity there as well."

Ted Price, Artistic Director with Theatre North West says a facility that holds 1,000 people would be too large for the theatre’s needs. "We at present have 235 seats and 1,000 seats would serve an entirely different need than we have. We are, however, having a look at this thing with our eyes and ears wide open."

Price says Theatre Northwest needs a full time facility and it is provided to their society through an agreement with the Parkhill Center.

Price says a 1,000 seat facility however could attract acts like Ian Tyson, and others, who are content with a facility that size, sort of in between the Playhouse and the Mutli Plex

The Richmond Gateway Theatre Price says holds 548 people but it also is a multi use facility. "We need a place where we can set up shop and operate year round from that location." According to Price, "Medium acts need at least 500 seats for a one night stand and that is where the city could get some support It’s a chicken and egg thing, it boils down to who can afford it and at what price, if it becomes too costly to rent that is where the problem arises."

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2007 04:00 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Gofaster on July 26 2007 5:29 AM

Hey Tom, go talk to Mr Major....he seems to have the city wrapped arround his finger.
He was talking about a show theater, maybe you can team up...
I am sure he can get all the funding you need.

Posted by: Gofaster on July 26 2007 5:30 AM

I for one am going to be a hard sell on this.
If you can't afford it you don't need it...

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on July 26 2007 7:09 AM

"..expected to cost between $12 to $15 million dollars,.."

I wonder what the final cost really is?

Posted by: Andyfreeze on July 26 2007 7:39 AM

1000 seats is too small.
1500 to 2000 would make more sense for the future.
And nothing changes the fact that it is still up to the taxpayers end the end.
No way this kind of money should be committed unless the public has a say.
There are more important issues to be dealt with out there, and somebody has their priorities screwed up.
Will the taxpayers be ok with pumping money into it down the road to bail it out?
Because that's what seems to happen to most of these venues.

Posted by: Palopu on July 26 2007 8:45 AM

So what happens with:
(1) Vanier Hall
(2) Civic Centre
(3) Playhouse Theatre.

Do these facilities sit empty while the new building operates at a loss. I suspect that would be the case.

Would the City sell off the Playhouse theatre property, for a huge sum of money and squirrel it away in general revenues, and pay for this facility with tax dollars???? I suspect so.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on July 26 2007 8:53 AM

Exactly the point Palopu,and nobody should even consider this proposal until those questions have been answered!

Posted by: Harbinger on July 26 2007 9:24 AM

Hey! Why not ask every one if they want to pay for a new centre on the ballot during the next election? Just put the question at the bottom of the ballot? Works in the good ol' US of A. (aka The Great Satan)

Posted by: Andyfreeze on July 26 2007 9:44 AM

There is no reason NOT to have the question on the ballot for ANY major expenditure,other than the time factor that may be involved.
Unfortunately,it isn't done all that often.
Can't imagine why?
That would be the fair way of finding out just how much support there is.
I think it could be a good thing if done properly, but I cannot agree with pounding it down taxpayers throats.
There is far too much of that.
In the end,if the taxpayers support it,then there will be no crying if they have to susidize it down the road.

Posted by: jonnypg on July 26 2007 10:54 AM

That kind of money will buy us a nice bridge!

Posted by: diplomat on July 26 2007 12:47 PM

How great is the REAL need for something if the idea has to be "sold" ???

I haven't heard of a petition signed by thousands of residents presented to the mayor and council, a petition asking for a new Performing Arts Center because there is a real pressing need for one!

Then again, I have seen petitions signed by many hundreds of residents asking that fluoride be removed from the city's drinking water because it is a health hazard - and nothing came of it, it was ignored.

Prince George is one of the few towns left in B.C. that still add fluoride to the drinking water, forcing everyone to get it into their bodies, even if they are trying to avoid it.

As soon as someone at City Hall though picks up the ball of an idea and runs with it: voila, no problem, public support or not.

How about a plebiscite on the PAC at municipal election time???

Posted by: travism on July 26 2007 1:32 PM

before they go to that size they should talk to Theatre North West. They are not trying to expand their seating because actors are paid based on the size of the potential audience. That means more seats equals higher ticket price unless you can guarantee a sell out, something that would be hard to do here. However, the argument that the city subsidizes other entertainment venues is still true.

Posted by: Chadermando on July 26 2007 1:44 PM

I agree with the referendum idea, and I also agree that the fluoride needs to be removed from our water for all the obvious and scientific reasons that most other sane towns have used to remove it from their water.

Possibly the two issues are connected as it is common knowledge that fluoride makes a population docile as per soviet experimentations.

Posted by: Palopu on July 26 2007 4:18 PM

This is how it will work.

(1) The study will come to the conclusion that a 1000 seat PAC is needed.

(2) The City will set the cost (low) at approx $15 Million and state that they will get some money from the Feds, Prov, and reserve funds. This will leave approx $10 Million to be borrowed over 20 years.

(3) The City will have to have an alternative approval process to allow it to borrow the $10 Million. Remember the Alternative Approval Process? This means that 10% of the eligible voters in Prince George must sign a petition stopping the borrowing. This is approx 5,500 people. If the necessary signatures are not obtained then the City can go ahead and borrow the money. If the signatures are obtained, then the City must go to referendum and win by a simple majority.

(4) Once it gets to the referendum stage we will see all the vested interest groups lining up to vote. Ie; Chamber of Commerce, Real Estate, Developers, Contractors, City Hall Staff, Rotory, Kinsmen, Downtown Business Group, IPG, etc; etc; etc;. Much like we had with Teresan Gas. Not much chance of winning the referendum but it is possible.

(5) The key to this type of project is if you want to kill it, you should do it at the Alternative Approval Process, because this stops the borrowing, and forces a referendum, however if the number of people who signed the Alternative Approval Form to stop the borrowing for the Cameron St., Bridge is any indication. (650 people) then it will be a tough sell.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on July 26 2007 4:50 PM

In most cases,formats like the Alternative Approval Process are set up in favor of failing.
Similar to the Recall process for our illustrious politicians.
The chances of it working are slim to none.
And don't think for a second the city doesn't know that.
If it is decided it is going through,it will, and there is not really a damn thing those who do not approve can do about.
The city knows that too,and once the community elite are involved,it's almost a done deal.Political clout works, and there is lots of it in PG.
And by the way,they call that democracy.