City council voted to make a change to its commitment to increase arts funding to four local organizations in order to clarify its language Monday night.
This doesn't affect the groups' funding, with the extra $200,000 agreed to Sept. 27 still on its way.
The problem, explained facilities director Andy Beesley, is that council also approved a new multi-year funding agreement policy at that same meeting. Beesley told council Monday that the phrasing made it unclear whether the “big four” arts groups mentioned are excluded from the multi-year funding agreement plan or whether council intended the new policy to include them.
Beesley said the phrase “… on an ongoing basis,” part of Resolution 2024-421, had created some confusion.
The resolution, approved unanimously by council on Sept. 25, states: “Resolution 2024-421 states: “That council approves the request from the Community Arts Council, Prince George Symphony Orchestra, Theatre Northwest, and Prince George Folkfest Society to increase their annual funding by $200,000 allocated proportionally between the four organizations, effective January 2025 an on ongoing basis.”
Clarity is needed, Beesley said.
City staff proposed two options. Option 1 would mean including the big four in the multi-year policy, which would mean that their 2025 funding would remain the same – their current funding, plus the additional $200,000 for 2025. In 2024, the city gave the four organizations $267,528 in total, divided proportionately. The four also received $354,276 from the federal government and $310,160 from the province.
Then the groups would work with city staff to draft new funding agreements.
Option 2 would exclude the big four from the multi-year policy. “What that means,” Beesley said, “is that administration would then need to take back the policy and rethink it, because large portions of it would be irrelevant.”
“The lack of a community arts plan, that seems to be the issue at the end of the day,” said Mayor Simon Yu, adding that many communities have such plans. He wondered if choosing Option 2 would involve making the funding structure more efficient and more clear to taxpayers. For example, in Montreal, one per cent of growth through development funds goes to visual arts, he said.
Coun. Brian Skakun had a question for Beesley: “What would happen if we just kept the $200,000 as a one-off for next year, then tied in the ask to the 2026 funding program with the other charities?”
“Part of the new policy is ultimately to have council make these decisions,” Beesley said. “Council has made it pretty loud and clear that we all support the arts and we like the idea of giving them this additional $200,000 in addition to the funding that these big four are already receiving.”
After some discussion, council went with Option 1 via a motion put forward by Coun. Cori Ramsay, who said she was concerned that the language in the original resolution means that any group that qualified for funding now would not be permitted to re-apply in four years.
“That council amend the section in the policy under the duration of multi-year funding, adding a third bullet that would allow organizations to re-apply for both standing grants and limited-duration operating grants at the expiry of the current term,” she proposed.
City facilities director Andy Beesley said city staff will begin working with the four arts groups to prepare new letters of agreement for the four-year term.
“I think we all want to be very clear. The funding starts, committed, guaranteed, 2025. And what we’re doing tonight is we’re guaranteeing that four-year term tonight,” said Coun. Kyle Sampson. “The intent with the motion two weeks ago was that we support the arts, we want to support them in a greater way starting in 2025, and we want to do so on an ongoing basis. I’ll stick my neck out and say I’m going to approve this on a four-year term when it comes to us.”
