Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Art gallery staff question whether finances robust enough for new building

August 19th, 2010 · 12 Comments

(Sorry, late posting on this due to sporadic ability to connect from paradise)

A new round of layoffs at the Vancouver Art Gallery has prompted staff and their union rep to speak out even more vocally this past week than the unhappy mutterings I’ve heard for the past few months.

As my story says in more detail, they are wondering how the gallery will fundraise the $350 needed (okay, only $260, subtracting the province’s $50 million and private donors’ $40 million) for a new building when it can’t even keep operations going now without laying off people and running a deficit.

The gallery says the layoffs and deficit are a result of the recession, which won’t last forever. And the money that’s going into advertising, PR, and contract staff to plan the new building are from special money donated just for a new building so it doesn’t affect the operating budget one way or another.

That all may be true, but it doesn’t look good to have this kind of unhappiness within your own staff ranks when you’re out trying to convince the public to give big.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Bill Lee

    “The gallery says the layoffs and deficit are a result of the recession, which won’t last forever. ”
    They said that in 1931 when the first VAG on Georgia was built at 1145 West Georgia Street.

    Hmm.

  • Morven

    The one constant is that the cultural industries of Vancouver, important as they are, are quite adept at holding out the begging bowl to us ordinary citizens.

    While I have no specific knowledge or expertise about the cultural mafia, I get quite irritated by the “too big to fail” optimism that infects this group.
    -30-

  • Gassy Jack’s Ghost

    “The one constant is that the cultural industries of Vancouver, important as they are, are quite adept at holding out the begging bowl to us ordinary citizens.”

    Er, Morven, in case you’ve been asleep for the last 5 years, you might have noticed that corporate welfare has exploded way beyond the pittance in donations arts groups operate on. For example, the big banks held out their hands and got billions of taxpayers dollars to mitigate their own self-inflicted screw-ups, and none of us had a chance to say “no”. If this were a truly free market economy, they would go belly-up just like any other business that shot themselves in the foot and failed. At least when some little arts group asks you for a measly $5 donation, you can politely say “no” to them.

    As for the VAG, if one of the biggest issues is the storage of their collection (or are stories of water dripping, rats and mice, and pot smoke just way overblown to get us to sympathize with their high-priced exit from the old Courthouse?), I think they should simply use a couple of million in their slush fund to build a proper storage warehouse on cheap land somewhere way outside downtown. Otherwise, they are just wasting a huge amount of money to build a large storage facility attached to any new gallery that will be located on primo land. A separate storage facility alone could shave many millions off the price tag of their proposed move.

    And why not team up with the Vancouver Museum, facing a similar challenge with its collection of 100,000 pieces, and centralize the storage of these artifacts in one purpose-built facility? The economy of scale could save both venerable institutions a ton of money in the long run, and ensure that both collections are safe and sound for at least another century.

  • emmy

    I’ve been following the issue of the Vancouver Art Gallery’s move to a larger facility for quite some time. It’s high time that the city pay attention to the recommendations of Tourism Vancouver, and focus on nuturing the arts and culture sector here in our city, especially after years of spending on the 2010 Winter Olympics.

    I suppose the Vancouver Art Gallery’s struggle to expand into a purpose built facility could be worse. Much of the reasons behind their move can be found at their website, http://www.anewvanartgallery.com. Pity the plight of the Vancouver Maritime Museum. In contrast to the Vancouver Art Gallery’s plight to only display 10% of its collection, the Vancouver Maritime Museum can only display 5% of its collection. Coupled with the fact that their facility isn’t even climate controlled, and there’s no “fire suppression” controls within the building, it’s a sad state of affairs not only at Robson Square, but also at Kits Point.

    In contrast, the government of BC spends approximately $500 million to upgrade the roof of British Columbia, with nary a contrary word.

    Perhaps with the struggles seen at the Vancouver Art Gallery and the Maritime Museum, there’s something else at play. Both of these places are civic owned, and their collections are owned by the community, held in trust to be preserved and grown for the benefit of future scholars, visitors, students, and citizens. If there is a persistent reluctance by Vancouver City Council and the community to help out these cultural institutions in their hour of need, what does that say about us as a community and what we value?

    According to the Vancouver Art Gallery’s own internal polling, the support for a new art gallery is higher on the east side. Solution? Move the Vancouver Art Gallery and Maritime Museum to the east side of town. If the impending closure of Guy Carleton Elementary is followed through, there will be lots of land to develop a new amenity for the often ignored residents of the Vancouver east side.

  • emmy

    I’ve been following the issue of the Vancouver Art Gallery’s move to a larger facility for quite some time. It’s high time that the city pay attention to the recommendations of Tourism Vancouver, and focus on nuturing the arts and culture sector here in our city, especially after years of spending on the 2010 Winter Olympics.

    I suppose the Vancouver Art Gallery’s struggle to expand into a purpose built facility could be worse. Much of the reasons behind their move can be found at their website, http://www.anewvanartgallery.com. Pity the plight of the Vancouver Maritime Museum. In contrast to the Vancouver Art Gallery’s plight to only display 10% of its collection, the Vancouver Maritime Museum can only display 5% of its collection. Coupled with the fact that their facility isn’t even climate controlled, and there’s no “fire suppression” controls within the building, it’s a sad state of affairs not only at Robson Square, but also at Kits Point.

    In contrast, the government of BC spends approximately $500 million to upgrade the roof of British Columbia, with nary a contrary word.

    Perhaps with the struggles seen at the Vancouver Art Gallery and the Maritime Museum, there’s something else at play. Both of these places are civic owned, and their collections are owned by the community, held in trust to be preserved and grown for the benefit of future audiences. If there is a persistent reluctance by Vancouver City Council and the community to help out these cultural institutions in their hour of need, what does that say about us as a community and what we value?

  • Dan Cooper

    “the money that’s going into advertising, PR, and contract staff to plan the new building are from special money donated just for a new building so it doesn’t affect the operating budget”

    It’s a shame that the people who donated the money to build the new building refused to agree when asked to allow – money being fundamentally fungible and all – their funds to be used to help wtih the collapsing operating budget, or even protect the collection from imminent rot and ruin.

    I’m sure the VAG administration did ask them!

  • David Allison

    ((Posted this on Facebook the other day. Seems appropriate to put it here too.))

    I’m gritting my teeth and trying not to make comments about media blowing things out of proportion to sell newspapers. As I’m reading it, the Gallery has laid off five employees directly as a result of the huge cuts in government funding for the arts, a fact that is impacting every single arts organization in BC. Another 13 had their hours reduced. My little company, which is a tiny fraction of the size of the VAG, laid off more people than that. Far more, in fact. More than three times as many, if you want the gory details. Almost four times as many. If that’s the extent of the recessionary layoffs at the VAG — 5 people and a few others with a bit of a haircut –the employees are very very fortunate indeed.

    Job losses are always troubling, but I don’t see that this has anything to do with the campaign for a new Vancouver Art Gallery, which is funded separately through the Province’s $50 million and other private donors. It’s two different things, and two different pools of money.

    And, let’s not forget it will eventually result in even more jobs/more revenue for the entire City as a major culture destination and tourism draw. Look at how much MoMa generates for NYC, as just one example. The research I just found with a fast google search using the words “economic impact of MoMA on New York City” shows that between the years 2004-2007 MoMA generated 2 billion dollars in economic impact for the city of New York. Yes the report is a few years old, and I know we aren’t New York, but even if we could generate a quarter of that, we’d more than pay for the cost of a new building…which by the way will be supported by all levels of government and private donors so all that revenue really goes to helping our city become an even better place.

    Hell, one quarter of that outdated number from MoMa can more than cover the cost of the fancy retractable roof on the stadium. We could get another one of those! Woo! Here’s the link I found: http://press.moma.org/images/press/PRESS_RELEASE_ARCHIVE/EconImpactRelease.pdf

    Are staff upset because some of them lost their jobs? Yes, of course they are. And so they should be. Losing your job sucks.

    Is their union representative angry and rattling his sabre? Yes he is, gosh darn it, but isn’t that his job?

    Will some members of the media stop flaming this issue with half-truths and sensationalism?

    I hope so.

  • Emryn Bentley

    I am not saying the VAG is spending their money in the best way possible but if we take that issue aside, I urge Vancouverites to look at a bigger picture. Some think this is an ego trip for current VAG director, some think the current home is the heart of Vancouver, or that we should move our storage to another facility. Some say we should spend money on different issues affecting this city.
    First off, as Emmy stated, how come we can spend millions on BC Place and no one complains as loudly as they are about the VAG? It’s ART!! We cry when our art budget is slashed and yet we don’t support a new gallery? The VAG has simply outgrown its home. It is only showing 3% of what it owns. There are no educational facilities, 20 000 school children were turned away last year, and there is no permanent collection. Go to the VAG on September 7th when two floors will be closed until the next exhibit. If we had a new gallery (and I don’t care if it is an ego trip – so be it! We get the benefit!) there would be room for more collections, room for both adults and children to learn, an outdoor sculpture garden! Then the old courthouse could be another museum – like the Vancouver Museum. Imagine folks: a downtown with TWO museums!!! Like other cities in the world.
    Also, we keep saying this ‘prime’ land that is currently a parking lot. Wouldn’t you rather see it turned into something cultural rather than more condos???????
    Staff may be getting laid off. That sucks. But if we have to renovate the current gallery they will be out of work for three years! A new gallery would bring in more tourism, and more Vancouverites therefore more money to staff. Local artists might get a chance to show their stuff.
    I can’t believe the attitudes of some people in this city. Don’t you want to see more Emily Carr and Group of Seven???????

  • Norman

    I don’t want to pay for a new art gallery with my federal, provincial or city taxes. I want the current art gallery to be modified so it can be used more effectively. If this means acquiring more storage space, developing more of the current property, fine. When we paid for the move to the former courthouse, the same promises were made – “we can’t bring in touring exhibits because we dont’ have suitable space” – yet the little art gallery in Victoria has had some amazing touring exhibits. I wonder if maybe hard work and networking have something to do with that.

  • MB

    This is not just about making an investment in an economic structure to maximize returns, but about investing in our own cultural identity.

    With a region of 2.4 million people with origins from all over the world, and a province of 4.2 million, that’s a lot of culture without adequate outlets for its expression and placemaking in our cities. Our society is so much more than ‘infrastructure’.

    They tutted, moaned and screamed about the expense of the new central branch of the Vancouver Public Library, yet the facility was overcrowded and overused from the the day it opened because of the pent up demand.

    VAG needs the space, and the West Coast, which occupies one of the most important places in Canada, needs more representative cultural institutions.

    There’s lots of money to build them; that isn’t an issue. It’s a matter of reprioritizing funds from a 6 billion dollar freeway system that will prove useless before this decade is through, sports palaces that consume an inordinate share of ‘cultural capital’, and casinos.

  • Bill Lee

    France Bula writes new story Thursday 9 Sept Linkname: Vancouver never envisioned gallery taking entire block
    URL:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/vancouver-never-envisioned-art-gallery-taking-an-entire-block/article1700558/

    2006 report makes clear that gallery was to be part of a new cultural precinct 4:23 PM EDT

  • Bill Lee

    Felix Salmon writes in his Reuters blob
    “Why arts organizations love new buildings”
    …Between 1998 and 2001, expenditure on creative-industry construction projects — theaters, museums, performing arts centers — quadrupled, from a little over $400 million per year to almost $1.8 billion. Here’s the chart, from “Set in Stone,” a major new research project from the University of Chicago’s Cultural Policy Center: [ line chart here ]

    …But was spending those billions good for the creative class, for cities, or for creativity?
    That’s far from obvious. For one thing, the more money you spend on construction, the less money you spend on people.

    One case study can stand for many, here:
    “In Roanoke, Virginia, the art museum embarks on the facility planning process with the humble goal of expanding its gallery space, but over time, and partially inspired by the Guggenheim Bilbao, it decides to build a sprawling $68 million architectural landmark so as to redefine the city’s identity and boost economic development. The post-modernist design proves controversial as well as more expensive than originally anticipated. Once the new Taubman Museum of Art opens, attendance is far below estimates, while the cost of operating the new facility is far above them. To balance its books, the museum is forced into multiple rounds of layoffs and drastic increases in its admission charges.”

    Here in New York, I’ve been following the sad saga of Cooper Union, whose massively expensive new academic building seems to have been the final nail in the venerable institution’s coffin. Essentially, the college took out a monster mortgage to build the project, but projected no extra income that would allow it to make its mortgage payments.

    more at http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/07/05/why-arts-organizations-love-new-buildings/#comments