Contents

1 Acknowledgements/Editors remarks (JG)

2 Contents
3. Introduction (with comments on structure of document).
(BD)
a. General (national) overview. National Identity Crisis.
Devolution threat to cultural funding (Canada
Council).
Status of the Artist; national bodies impacted only implications for provinces. The real status of the artist
`vis a vis cultural impact of the arts (Sidebars re Calgary
survey and IFAVA conference). Success of Quebec artists
and why. Comparison of Quebec situation vis a vis
Canada and Canada vis a vis US.
b. Problems specific to Alberta; Provincial policy vis a vis
Status of the Artist. PC cultural policy; NDP cultural
policy; Liberal cultural policy.
c. Problems specific to Calgary. Municipal funding
CRAF; how much and who gets it. What else can the city
do?
d. Factual sidebars (e.g. FAVA conference and Calgary
survey).
4. Summary of proceedings (with flagged quotes, attributions
and page numbers). (BD & JG)
5. Recommendations. (Committee)
6. Transcripts. (JG)
7. Misc. photographs.

ArtScape/CityCore
the cultural producer in the inner city

Centre for the Performing Arts

Calgary,Alberta

February 14, 15 & 16, 1991

ArtScape/CityCore The cultural landscape offered by local
producers in the inner city. How well does it fit into urban life?
Is it an integral part of the infrastructure or is it uncomfortably
squeezed in wherever a temporary, affordable niche can be
found? Does it serve the producing artist? Do artists adequately
serve the local community? Are local artists respected
professionals working in a demanding range of disciplines, or are
they occasional providers of amusement or distraction?
The ArtScape/CityCore conference will focus on these and
other questions, addressing national and local contexts related to
cultural production and the socio/economic value of the arts.
The conference will begin with a keynote address by Tom
Hendry, Director of Arts in the City in Toronto, who will set the
scene for discussion on subsequent days, and inform the local
situation with a broader philosophical perspective. We will be
investigating these issues in a series of four panels spread over
two days.

The federal government has introduced long-awaited

legislation on the status of the artist in Canada. The
document has been praised by the Canadian Conference on
the Arts but does not embrace all of the Government Task
Force's recommendations. The paper addresses questions
related to professional status, employment, taxation and
UIC benefits. Is it enough, and if not, what's missing, and
how will it affect you?

We will also be looking at the positive economic and

social impacts that art production brings to a city. Cultural
industries employ thousands of people and inject millions of
dollars into the national economy, and consistently run in the
top ten industries, nationally. These are significant figures.
They are particularly significant when comparing the
diminished value of primary cultural production to the
media's absorption and filtering of art's innovation for a
consumer oriented audience. Are you being undervalued?
Are you being exploited? Is your contribution adequately
acknowledged, socially and financially?

There has been much discussion about the revitalization of

the inner city, but if this revitalization is going to take place,
local cultural producers will play an important part. What are
the needs of local producing artists in terms of best serving
the inner city? How could local and provincial governments
best contribute to local production and help minimize the
operating stresses that negatively effect non-profit cultural
groups?

Where should we be looking for examples of multi-level cooperation? What positive experiences have other centres
to offer in resolving this problem? We'll be looking at ideas
from Calgary, Winnipeg and Vancouver.

ArtScape/CityCore
the cultural producer in the inner city
Calgary Centre for the Performing Arts,
February 14 - 16, 1991
Program
Thursday, February 14

Saturday, February 16

5:00 - 6:00 pm

Registration

6:00 - 6:30 pm

Welcome and Opening Remarks

Bev Longstaff, City Councillor, Ward 7.

6:30 - 7:30 pm

Keynote Address
Tom Hendry, Policy Advisor to Toronto Arts
Council, and Director of Arts in the City.

7:30 - 9:00 pm

Participants' get-together

10:00 - 12 noon Panel 3

Revitalizing the downtown:
What do cultural workers need to help
make it happen?
This panel identifies Calgary municipal policies
for leasing of City-owned space to the arts,
including positive aspects as well as
contradictions and inconsistencies, and
identifies the needs of local producers in this
context.
Panel members:
Brenda Polegi, City of Calgary Parks and
Recreation Department.
Jack Long, Calgary architect.
Stephanie White, Calgary architect.
Michael Green, One Yellow Rabbit Theatre.

Friday, February 15
10:00 - 12 noon Panel 1
Establishing Our Credentials
The Status of the Artist
This panel presents information to, and
provides a forum for, local cultural producers
on the implications of the proposed status of
the artist legislation, recently tabled in
parliament.
Panel members:
Adam Ostry, Director, Arts Policy,
Federal Department of Communications.
Clive Robertson, the Association of National
Non-profit Artists Centres (ANNPAC/
RACA).
12:00 - 2:00 pm

Lunch

2:00 - 4:00 pm

Panel 2
Getting the Message Across
Advocating the Positive Economic and
Cultural Impacts of the Arts.
This panel will demonstrate that cultural
producers are not the marginal group they are
generally assumed to be, but are major
economic generators and contribute
extensively to our quality of life.
Panel members:
Denise Roy, Edmonton Professional Arts
Council.
Hazel Gillespie, Donations Officer, PetroCanada.
Glen Buick, Assistant Deputy Minister, Alberta
Culture and Multiculturalism.
Murdoch Burnett, Calgary poet.

12:00 - 2:00 pm

Lunch

2:00 - 4:00 pm

Panel 4
Revitalizing the downtown:
What's been done before?
This panel presents examples of innovative
and co-operative cultural projects from
Calgary and other Canadian centres.
Panel members:
Michael Gordon, Senior Planner, City of
Vancouver.
Herb Reynolds, Hammerson Properties Inc.
Gilles Hbert, Artspace, Winnipeg.
Jim Anderson, City of Calgary Land
Department.

4:00 - 4:30 pm

Break

4:30 - 5:30 pm

Summing up:
Tom Hendry will give a summary of each
panel session, including discussion periods,
and make closing remarks.

9:00 pm

Dance
Victoria Park Community Centre.
"African Moon" featuring Monkeys of Eden
and Dabatram.

When the houses of the great collapse

Many little people are slain.
Those who had no share in the fortunes of the mighty
Often have a share in their misfortunes.
Bertolt Brecht.
There is an oft-made sociological distinction between organic
communities and inorganic societies, that is evinced in the
development of the modern city from its feudal counterpart.
The revolutionary transition from one mode of production to
another, also marked a radical shift in the political power base
and in the worldview of the newly empowered bourgeoisie. This
shift in ideology divested human creation of individualized identity,
transforming creations into commodities. The uniquely identifying
element surrounding the work of art that Walter Benjamin
termed its aura, withered in a transactional environment where
the work of art had been reduced to a simple exchange value.
Correspondingly, while commerce, mediatized communication
and the efficient administration of government developed
immeasurably, so did the technologies of mass social control and
the repression of ideological dissent. The capitalist idealism of
laissez-faire gave way to a cult of conformity and the regime of
unfreedom in which we now live. Artists, artisans and producers
have been displaced from their authorial orbit and consigned
to the anonymity of the production line and the impoverished
shelter of the garret.
Historically, the artist in Late Capitalism, has inhabited an hostile
environment within the inner city. At best, it has been an uneasy
peace within an inimical ecology of censorship, bureaucratic
patronage, and the struggle to attain corporate recognition.
Notwithstanding the ability of the arts to generate significant
revenue, artists have been effectively marginalized with respect to;
(a) The legislated recognition as being employed and eligible for
basic benefits such as, UIC, CPP, etc.
(b) fiscal provision for the fluctuating income of most artists, and
(c) the unionization of artists in order to negotiate a living wage
from government arts agencies.
However, the disenfranchisement of the arts with regards to
such specifics pales by comparison with the real crises that
are being played out on the broader political and economic
fronts. As the successive conservative governments continue
to bankrupt the nation with financial mismanagement and the

pursuit of white elephants, the arts together with other vital social
programs, are seen to be increasingly expendable in order to
preserve the excessive and indulgent lifestyles of the few. A line
has already been drawn in the sand and the artist must cross it.
This line demarcates the disenfranchised from the privileged; the
homeless from the propertied and the overpaid sinecures from
the unemployed or the under-employed, whose indigent state is
further penalized by a purblind bureaucratic state machine.
The average artist with an income ranging from between
$11,000-$18,000 has always been, at least to some degree, part
of the larger segment of dispossessed of society. While City,
Provincial and Federal, planners claim to spend unprecedented
millions of dollars on the arts, annually, this spending has had
very little impact upon the lives of individual artists. Instead, the
spending has supported the construction industry and a top-heavy
administrative structure. Central planning of the inner city has
now more than ever, become the ideological prop of repressive
class interests.
While every member of the cultural community vents his or
her spleen and decries the mounting hostility of an indifferent
socioeconomic system, there is ultimatel a sense of quietude
and hopeless resignation surrounding this predicament. Centuries
of the bourgeois aesthetic of disinterested satisfaction has paid
off with rich dividends for the consumers of art. While there is
indeed an acknowledgement of a politically conscious aesthetic,
this acknowledgement has been for the most part, regional or
tokenistic. The North American cultural community has largely
failed to identify its role within the class struggle. The need for
an organized, progressive and vanguardist cultural movement
has never been more urgent. A program of community based,
grassroots cultural activism, the exploration of alternative models
for artist run centres and the creation of a closer level of solidarity
between artist, community and class must be high priorities on
the agenda of artist/activists and cultural militants. The role of the
artist living in the age of technological unfreedom should be not
only to chronicle the struggle of the individual psyche, but also to
militantly advocate the aspirations and empowerment of his or
her class.

Keynote Address
Tom Hendry
Tom Hendry has worked as a writer/producer for film, radio and televison. He has been instrumental in developing many cultural initiatives for theatre
in various Canadian centres, including Winnipeg, Banff, Toronto and Stratford. He has been Policy Director for the Toronto Arts Council since 1983. In
1986 he served as Chairman of the Federal Task Force on the National Arts Centre, and co-founded "Arts and the Cities/Les arts et la ville" in Toronto
in 1987. He has received recognition for his contribution to the development of Canadian theatre, including the Toronto Drama Bench Award (1982),
Barker Fairley Distinguished Visitor in Canadian Culture, University of Toronto (1986), and was granted honorary membership in the Association for
Canadian Theatre History in 1986.
Introduction
4
This conference has been convened to talk about:
1. The Status of the Artist;
2. The Economic and Cultural Impact of the Arts;
3. Revitalizing Downtown what do the arts need, and whats
been done before.

of business, housing, recreation, shopping, arts, etc. However,

the city ceases to be a useful, pleasant, and safe place to live
when it divides itself up into a series of ghettos, and we get the
downtown work ghetto, the sleep ghetto in the suburbs, and so
on.

I will first give you a summary of my views on these issues, and

the rest of talk will be a commentary on them.

Unfortunately, most of our North American cities were designed

with the automobile in mind, and the automobile was supposed
to make it as easy to go from area to area as walking from room
to room in a house. Alas, it hasnt worked out that way and now
many city planners are changing their views, thanks to the ideas
of Jane Jacobs and others, who feel that cities should be made
up of districts and neighbourhoods in which people can live,
work, shop, sleep and eat, be entertained, etc., without making
desperate journeys of miles and miles. This concept of mixed
uses of city districts and of individual buildings is now thought to
be a useful idea.

1. The status of the artist in our society is such that the artist has
almost no status. We have nowhere to go but up, and its time
to get going.
2. The economic and cultural impacts of the arts are hard to
measure and intangible, but completely obvious to anyone
with half a brain.
3. In revitalizing any downtown area you have to order your
affairs so that:
lots of people live downtown;
lots of artists and arts organizations live downtown.
To bring this about you have to arrange things so that in any
downtown:
there are lots of spaces in which people can live;
there are lots of spaces in which artists and arts organizations can
live.
There are plenty of examples all over North America and Europe,
where people and the arts live downtown in great numbers. Ask
how they did it and youll know how you can do it. There are no
new ideas, there is only applied research.
This is the end of my speech. The rest is commentary.
Context The Role of Cities
A city is like a house. A house has areas for work, sleeping,
recreation, eating, etc. This division works well, because
everything is close together and the various functions tend to
overlap. People eat in the TV room, snooze in the living room,
and do their income tax on the dining room table. Its handy that
way. Likewise, a city works best when each of its parts is a mix

In discussing the material to be presented at the conference over

the next few days, I think we should bear in mind a particular
context: all over the world, the day of the city is coming again.
Historically, as you know, there were once great cities which were
the centres of their cultures. Later on, nations developed, and
with them, the need for self-defense against other states; in order
to finance themselves, the nations began to take possession of
the wealth that cities were producing, and so the power of the
cities declined.
However, last year when I was in Europe, I saw that provincial
and national territorial concepts were beginning to disintegrate.
They are being replaced by new units of human groupings:
productive heartlands dominated by great cities, which are
providing leadership in economics, education, and culture. It is
possible that this can happen in Canada, but before it can be
accomplished, our cities must become more human, more livable,
and more satisfying for residents and visitors.
What are some of the barriers preventing Canadian cities from
achieving this leadership role; what are some possible solutions to these
constraints; and what other steps should cities be taking in this area?

5
1. The dependent nature of cities they have relatively little
political power because they are seen as delivery systems
of wealth for provincial and federal agendas. There is an
inequitable split of tax revenues: cities get property taxes, and
the federal and provincial governments get sales and income
taxes. This results in cities having a weak image in the face of
other branches of government, when in fact, the provinces
and the federal government couldnt exist without the wealth
generated by cities. In addition, because of these tax-based
constraints, cities tend to avoid large scale thinking with
respect to exploiting opportunities and solving problems.
Therefore, cities must develop a new vision about their role and
implement the means to carry it out. They must see themselves
as significant engines of economy and wealth, and gain control
of appropriate slices of the taxes generated by the wealth they
produce.
2. Cities are weak in strategic policy development. They tend
to look in the rearview mirror for inspiration, e.g., What
did we do last year? Its kind of like reverse Alzheimers
they cant stop remembering the past. In a similar way,
theyre like generals who keep planning for the last war
they tend to meet past needs instead of trying to meet
future needs. And they often avoid involving artists in the
conceptual and planning processes. This is tragic, because
artists are in the imagination business they can see into the
future. Incidentally, thats why Im very pleased to see that this
conference has been organized by the artists themselves, on
the basis of their concerns about their community.
The solution to this rearview problem is that cities have to
develop futurist outlooks. They must use the past only as
experience to inform their vision of future policy. They can be
daring cities can come up with creative solutions to problems,
and in doing this they must significantly involve their artists in
planning, so that as much imagination as possible goes into the
process of preparing for the future.

Other Steps That Cities Should be Taking

1. Cities must learn that humanity does not live by bread alone,
by infrastructure alone, by lawns and picket fences alone.
A satisfying neighbourhood life involves a complex mix
of answers to material and spiritual needs. Cities have to
understand that a district without a resident arts presence is
culturally dead at its centre. We must have producers not
just consumers.
2. Cities must begin thinking in terms of how much they should
spend to solve problems and exploit opportunities in the arts
not how little they can get away with.
3. There have to be more partnerships between cities, other
levels of government, and the private sector, in order to bring
about a more vibrant arts community. And it is important
to involve more of the smaller private companies instead of
constantly going to the same few giant corporations.
4. Cities must learn that the preservation of old buildings is as
necessary as the care we give to the well-being of old people.
Without these buildings, we lose the possibility of knowing
who we are and where we came from. They are vital to a
citys sense of self and self-respect.
The Status of the Artist in the City
The city should be working hard to keep its resident artists here,
and make an effort to attract new artists, just as it does to attract
large corporations.
The responsibilities of the city with respect to the status of the
artist are:
1. Space for the Arts the provision of affordable living and
work space for resident artists and arts organizations.
2. Funding in order to support and strengthen the status
of the artist, cities must develop funding programs for their
resident artists, who are at the very centre of the creation
of culture, as well as for the arts organizations which employ
artists and disseminate works of art.

6
1. Space for the Arts a responsible city policy:
a. Insists that arts spaces studios, theatres, concert halls, etc.
which are lost to development and gentrification must be
replaced by those who destroy them.
b. Stipulates that the citys stock of arts spaces must be
consistently added to as the population grows.
c. Acknowledges that just as city planning takes into account
the need for an appropriate presence of schools, parks,
and libraries, so also must planners bring forward a vision
incorporating an appropriate arts presence into the new
and revivified districts they conceive. In this process the arts
recycling of older buildings is particularly vital to heritage
considerations and the living arts. Unused and disused old
buildings can be integrated for artists and arts facilities.
d. Planners must embed the arts in our neighbourhoods by
providing spaces either freestanding or incorporated into
neighbourhood community centres in which local and
visiting artists can present plays, readings, dance works, music,
and visual art. Such neighbourhood centres should have
space for the teaching of art, so that talent and interest can
be discovered and nurtured, and so that citizens can have an
ongoing experience of art at the neighbourhood level.
In this context it is worth remembering that:
Jane Jacobs said that arts facilities should be like the cherries
all through the Christmas cake arts spaces should be found
throughout the city and not concentrated in one area.
New York City, through its housing policies, such as rent
subsidies etc., took steps many years ago to attract artists.
These policies were significant in making New York both a
visual arts capital and the most energetic arts critical mass in
the world.
2. Funding for the Arts cities must develop artists funding
plans:
a. To provide some measure of security for arts organizations.
b. To attract individual artists and enable them to devote more
working time to their art.
c. To create a pool of practitioner-consultants available to the
educational and neighbourhood community centre systems.

This allows professional artists to work with non-professionals

in order to extend their horizons and expertise in the arts.
d. That are based on the principle of peer panel review in
deciding who gets what in the way of financial support.
Downtown Revitalization and the Arts
1. In planning downtown revitilization schemes and programs,
cities must:
a. Conduct arts impact studies, just as they conduct noise
studies, traffic studies, shadowing studies, and so forth, e.g., if
old studios have to go down, new ones should go up. Artists
should be invited to contribute to planning and interpreting
the results of these studies.
b. Recognize the need to plan for and make possible a vibrant,
accessible, resident arts presence in all parts of the city.
c. Recognize that one of the primary goals of revitalization has to
be the enlargement of the citys resident arts community.
2. Cities are in the business of enhancing the quality of life within
their boundaries. They must develop expertise in:
a. Envisioning desirable but not-yet-attained norms of activity in
the arts.
b. Developing policies to help the resident arts community attain
and surpass these norms of artistic activity, and then carrying
out the policies in the knowledge that they will be building a
precious asset which is absolutely vital to the development of
a full and satisfying quality of life.
c. Determining how much will be necessary to get the job going,
and settling for not one penny less. Artists should be a part of
this decision process.
3. In return for taking a responsible, proactive role in the building
of an appropriate resident arts community, cities get a lot of
benefits:
a. They take control of an important aspect of their destiny
which was previously controlled by others or by chance.
b. They become more prepared for life in the twenty-first
century a time when cities will emerge all over the world
as great centres of power, influence, and sources of both

7
tangible and intangible wealth.
c. They gain a vital arts community dedicated to the task of
celebrating and immortalizing their city and its people.
d. They create the conditions for immeasurable enhancement of
the quality of life within the city.
e. They create, through the arts, healthy channels of
communication among the diverse cultural communities that
make up the citys population.
f. Their support of the arts industry contributes mightily to the
economy of the city and to tourism.

of close to $140 million, plus earned revenues of over $75

million;
d. at least twenty-four million hours of arts participation by
audiences composed of residents and visitors.

Impact of the Arts

1. In terms of the capital costs involved, continuing arts
employment is one-third to one-sixth as expensive as service
industry jobs.

Cities have found ways to bring schools, parks, libraries, and

sports arenas to the people. Now we must get on with the
task of bringing together the arts and the people. The arts are a
crucial and neglected area of municipal service delivery, mainly
because, like other newcomers such as daycare, their indispensible
contribution has been slow to be recognized.

2. The arts stimulate spending in other areas, and can produce

a national economic impact as high as four times the amount
expended on them, and a local impact of up to three times
that amount.
3. The arts are capable of bringing resources from other levels
of government into the economy. Studies through UNESCOCanada have shown $1 in municipal arts funding can generate
up to $20 in new funding from other sources.
4. Mark Schusters studies at M.I.T. have demonstrated that the
quantity of resources brought into a community by its arts
organizations and artists depends most importantly on their
number in the community.
5. Cities are all different, of course, but some figures may be
useful. The citizens of the City of Toronto, with a population of
580,000, will spend in 1991 over $12 million in cash subsidies
to the arts. Although this is only 40% of what Toronto should
be spending, it will get in return:
a. about 250 active arts organizations;
b. a national economic impact of close to $1 billion;
c. resources from other governments and the private sector

But economic arithmetic tells only part of the story. The essential
thing is the arts contribution to our spiritual environment, and this
cannot be quantified. It can only be experienced, and the closer
the artists are to their fellow citizens, the more compelling and
important this contribution will be.

In closing, Id like to stress once again how significant it is that the

artists themselves conceived of this conference, and have made it
happen.

Panel 1
Establishing Our Credentials - The Status of the Artist
Speakers:

Adam Ostry, Director, Arts Policy, Federal Department of Communications, Ottawa

Adam Ostry holds degrees in political economy and political science from the University of Toronto and Laval University, and is a graduate of L'Ecole
nationale d'administration in Paris. As Director of the Arts Policy Division, he developed the federal status of the artist legislation which the government
introduced into the House of Commons in December, 1990. His responsibilities also include the development of strategies for funding the arts in
Canada. He has held various positions in the Department of Communications since 1985 and wrote the original cabinet submission on cultural
sovereignty during the Free Trade negotiations. Mr. Ostry joined the Public Service of Canada in 1981 and worked in the Federal-Provincial Relations
Office and the Department of Justice before joining the Department of Communications.
8

Clive Robertson, National Co-director of the Association of National Non-Profit Artists' Centres
Clive Robertson was involved in the development of Parachute Centre for Cultural Affairs (which later became Arton's), the first multi-disciplinary artistrun centre in Calgary. The centre's newspaper, Centrefold, later became FUSE magazine, which is now published in Toronto. He is currently National
Co-director of the Association of National Non-Profit Artists' Centres. He is also a writer, musician, and a media and performance artist.

Moderator:

Tim Buell, New Works Calgary

Tim Buell is a member of New Works Calgary, a group dedicated to presenting contemporary music by local composers. He currently teaches in the
Faculty of General Studies at the University of Calgary.

Adam Ostry

The Federal Status of the Artist Legislation

Before I begin, I want to say that I am extremely pleased to
have been asked here, because this is the first time a group in
Western Canada has invited an official from the Department of
Communications to speak on the status of the artist legislation.
Ive been on the road for about nine months when I wasnt
busy working on the legislation itself trying to explain the bill,
but my travel has been restricted to Toronto and Montral. So
its very gratifying for me to be here, and what Id like to stress is
that Ill tell you about the legislation, but at the same time, I want
to keep my presentation short, because what Id really like to hear
are your questions and comments. I want to know what you think
of the legislation, and how you think it might be improved.
This bill is the culmination, but not the end of a long process. It
began with the Royal Commission on National Development
in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, better known as The Massey/
Lvesque Report of 1951, which was the first attempt in this
country to deal with the socio-economic status of the artist. The
issues that were raised by the Massey/Lvesque Report were
taken up time and time again by other groups and during the
1980s alone, they were the subject of at least four parliamentary
committee reports. In addition, there have been at least two

federal studies. The first one was a report that was produced and
then shelved in 1978, and the second one was the Paul Siren/
Gratien Glinas report in 1986.
Then, in 1988, the Minister of Communications went before
the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications
and Culture and requested that they issue a report with
recommendations concerning the socio-economic status
of the artist. The Committee did this and in 1989 they
produced a document with eleven recommendations. The
first recommendation from which all of the others followed
was that the Government of Canada recognize, in legislation,
the importance of the contribution by artists to the social,
economic, and cultural development of this country. The other
recommendations dealt with a variety of issues: the training needs
of artists; the financing of public awareness campaigns in order to
stimulate greater interest in artistic production; access by artists
to unemployment insurance, pension plans, and private social
benefits; the tax status of artists; and the right of self-employed
artists to unionize.
Regarding the last two recommendations, a debate had been
going on for some time within the arts community related to

9
the notion of dual status. The artist was more often than not,
whether a performer or creator, a self-employed individual, who
at the same time wanted the rights and privileges that most
employees in this country have with respect to taxes and union
organizing activities.
And essentially, the government recognized that these are
legitimate concerns and tried to act on them within the the area
of federal jurisdiction. So this whole process started in March
of 1990 with the issuing of the Standing Committee report.
In May of that year, the government issued a response to the
report, and this provided for the development of the present
legislation. I worked with several other people during the summer
of 1990 drafting the legislation, and the communications minister
introduced the bill into the House of Commons on December
19, 1990.
The number of the bill is C-7, and it is available from the
Department of Communications in Ottawa, or from any of our
regional offices. Basically, the legislation addresses two of the
recommendations that were outlined by the Standing Committee.
First, it recognizes in law, the fundamental importance of the
contribution of Canadas artists to the countrys identity and
growth. As a mechanism to entrench this recognition, the bill
creates the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, which
the communications minister announced on February 4, 1991,
in Montral. The chairman of this council is the noted Canadian
actor, Albert Millaire, and the rest of the membership of the
council will be announced shortly.
So thats the first thing the bill does. Secondly, it establishes for
the first time at the federal level, a labour relations scheme for
self-employed artists. This is the only group of self-employed
individuals in Canada that now has the right to unionize.
Incidentally, the reason that the bill is so lengthy is that it
establishes this scheme technically. The plan borrows heavily from
the Canadian Artists Code, which was the document produced
by the Canadian Advisory Committee on the Status of the
Artist. It also incorporates elements from various federal and

provincial labour codes, but it is tailored to recognize the specific,

professional working conditions of self-employed artists.
The bill will also create The Canadian Artists and Producers
Certification Tribunal, whose mandate will be to certify
associations of self-employed artists, for the purposes of
negotiating collective agreements. These artists associations will
have the exclusive right to bargain with producers for minimum
rates of pay, working conditions, scale in the performing arts
sector, etc.
That is essentially what the bill does and I will come back to it in a
minute, but first, I want to talk about the other recommendations
that were contained in the Standing Committees report.
As I mentioned, there was a government response to the
report in May of 1990, and its a public document [The
Government Response to the Report of the Standing Committee on
Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist]
which is available from the Department of Communications.
This response, as well as laying the groundwork for the present
status of the artist legislation, also sets out the action that
the government will take on the Standing Committees other
recommendations. For example, with respect to the tax status of
the artist, the government, in the next budget, will likely amend
the income tax act to allow artists who are salaried employees
to deduct expenses totalling $1000, or 20 percent of their
artistic incomes. This will give employed artists a tax status very
similar to any self-employed individual in this country. As you
know, those who are self-employed can deduct any number of
expenses incurred in the process of earning income. And now
for the first time, artists who are employees will be able to make
deductions from expenses incurred in gaining income from artistic
employment.
The other tax change that the government has promised it will
introduce is the right, under the Culture Property Import and
Export Act, of visual artists to donate from their inventory to
designated institutions, in exchange for a tax credit equal to
the fair market value of the work donated. In the past, it was

10
only collectors who could do this kind of thing, because the
Department of Revenue refused to recognize an artists inventory
as capital: they refused to treat it in the same way they would if
it had been owned, and then donated by a collector. So thats
where the tax status stands.
Another issue addressed in the government response to the
Standing Committees report is the access by self-employed
artists to private social benefits. If youre an employee, you have
access to Unemployment Insurance and Canada Pension Plan,
but if youre not, and youre also not a member of an association
to which you contribute toward an RRSP, or whatever plan
the association has, then youre basically out in the cold. If you
combine this with the fact that artists incomes are egregiously
low, the result is that it is very difficult for them to plan financially
for their futures, as most other Canadians are able to. So the
government stated in its response that it would ask the newly
created Council on the Status of the Artist to study this issue
and to report back. This document should be made available by
December of 1991.
The government response also addresses another issue of great
importance to artists, which is the problem of fluctuations in
artistic income. Artists can go literally for years without having
any significant income, and then all of a sudden they get a hit
tune, or they sell a painting for a great deal of money. But the
problem is that the tax system doesnt allow artists to average
out their incomes so that they can have a more stable tax
planning process during their careers, as well as being able to
plan for their retirements. So, even though, since 1984 there
have been significant changes to the income tax system, and to
the pension schemes with the introduction in January 1991 of
the new RRSP plan, which is a form of income averaging the
government has decided that it will continue to study the issue
to see if there is a special need for artists to have some form of
income averaging. You will recall however, that the government
did away with these averaging mechanisms for farmers and
fishermen two years ago but nevertheless, the Council on the
Status of the Artist will study this, and is scheduled to make its

report available by May of 1992.

And thats essentially what the government undertook in May,
1990, as outlined in its response to the recommendations of
the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture. Id
like to return now to the current status of the artist legislation.
It is important to emphasize that the proposals in this bill are
restricted to artists working for those producers who are under
federal jurisdiction. So for all intents and purposes, this bill applies
only to the broadcasting sector, to the National Arts Centre, and
to the National Film Board.
Therefore, because the vast majority of contractual relationships
between artists and producers, engagers, and galleries fall within
provincial jurisdiction, it is basically up to the provinces to
introduce legislation concerning labour relations in the artistic
community. Contract law falls under provincial jurisdiction in this
country and at this time, only Qubec has legislation similar to the
federal bill I have been discussing. Qubec has Bill 90, which deals
with the performing arts sector, and Bill 78, which deals with the
visual arts sector.

Clive Robertson
11
Introduction
I have written a response not to what I thought Adam [Ostry]
would say, but a response based upon a long history of
relationships between, on the one hand, artists and associations
from what is known as the creative sector, and on the other
hand, various levels of government; and I am sure that Adam will
disagree with almost every fact and opinion that I present.

that the government failed to fulfill in the tabled legislation, and

I will discuss this later. Regarding the legislation itself, Ive taken a
very journalistic, as opposed to technical, approach to it, because
as Adam rightly pointed out, it is, as it has to be, in very legal
terminology with regard to collective bargaining.

Just to review the chronology before I begin, the first conference

that dealt with issues of the status of the artist was the Kingston
Artists Conference in 1941, which is having a celebration this
year to mark its 50th anniversary. And if you go back and read the
document that came out of this conference, it is very interesting,
because in some ways it was the first Canadian conference
organized by artists, and it dealt not only with the status and
economic issues of artists, but also with continentalism. There
was a lot of participation from the U.S., and there was extensive
reviewing of the types of national cultural institutions which were
then in place.

Federal Status of the Artist Legislation and Mismanagement of

Social Opportunity and the Economy

Then there was the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee,

which was sort of like a Spicer Commission for artists, and a great
deal of energy was put into it. Hopefully, the Spicer Commissions
recommendations wont be ignored to the extent that the
Federal Cultural Policy Review Committees were.
But what were really talking about here are two things. Firstly,
there is the Canadian Artists Code, which came out of the
Canadian Advisory Committee on the Status of the Artist.
This committee was made up of artists and their elected
representatives from associations and unions. Secondly, there
is the present status of the artist legislation currently tabled in
parliament, which Adam has just discussed.
So the two things to technically compare are the Canadian
Artists Code and the current tabled legislation. The document
that Adam mentioned the governments response to the
report of the House of Commons Standing Committee on
Communications and Culture contained a number of promises

So the paper I am going to read is called:

In 1986, at a Vancouver artist-centre conference called Strategies

for Survival, I gave the keynote address, in which I suggested
that visual artists should unionize, because economically we
had become part-time employees of the state, and therefore
we should negotiate directly with the states arts agencies for
a living wage. This was also the substance of a proposal by the
Independent Artists Union [IAU] in Ontario. The proposal
received a mixed response both inside and outside the artistic
community, but some of the IAUs other work on the economic
and social status of the artist is still viable. I am referring in
particular to recommendations that were presented during the
IAUs collective appearances before the Commission of Enquiry
on Unemployment Insurance and before the Siren/Glinas task
force.
Before getting to the specifics of what the government promised
in its response to the Standing Committee in May 1990, and
then failed to deliver by December 1990 in the tabled legislation,
I want to give a more informal and wider perspective on the
give and take of this issue as it affects artists and their respective
associations and unions. In other words, the amount of what we
are legally being given, and the rate and substance of what is being
taken away. The latter is certainly going to change the relationship
between provinces and municipalities and their respective cultural
sector economies.
Two of the major organizations behind the drive for status of
the artist legislation have been the Alliance of Canadian Cinema,

12
Television, and Radio Artists [ACTRA] and the Union des Artistes,
both of which negotiate contracts for their self-employed
members. Prior to the present status of the artist legislation, this
practice legally contravened the Competition Act, which restricts
collective bargaining to unions where there is an employeremployee relationship as the basis for employment. So the tabled
legislation now simply makes ACTRA legal.
Several weeks before the legislation was tabled, the government
announced further cuts to the CBC, which is a major employer
of ACTRA members. As well as these announced job losses,
the CBC also made significant cuts to the number of free-lance
positions available.
The organization I work for is called the Association of National
Non-Profit Artist-Run Centres [ANNPAC], which shares a
related membership with: Canadian Artists Representation/le
Front des artistes canadiens [CARFAC] and its provincial bodies;
with the Independent Film and Video Alliance (IFAVA); and
with Le Groupment and ADDRAV in Qubec. These visual
arts associations, together with their counterparts in theatre,
publishing, music, dance, writing, etc., are able to exist because
of federal and provincial subsidies. For artists organizations that
are national, e.g., CARFAC and ANNPAC, most of the money
comes from federal government agencies and the provincial
governments of Ontario and Qubec.
The creator, as opposed to the industrial side of the cultural
sector, is complicated and diverse, working simultaneously in a
non-profit and for-profit environment; the above mentioned
artists representative associations mostly came into being to
make it easier and less expensive for the various federal and
cultural agencies to do their jobs of maintaining a dialogue,
gathering information, and servicing their clients.
Even with the current arts subsidies in place, there is a wide
and telling gap between total revenue generated and individual
revenue earned within the cultural sector. In l985, the cultural
sector was the ninth-largest manufacturing industry in Canada and

earned more than $12 billion. This sector is also the fourth-largest
employer. However, average annual net income for artists has, at
its high end, $18,000 for musicians and at its low end, $11,000 for
authors.
Within the context of the recent re-confederation debate, we
hear from a number of sources that even as the status of the
artist legislation is being debated, the federal government is
considering eliminating federal cultural spending altogether. The
options being considered are transfer of monies or tax credits
to the provinces. Because the infrastructures of art production
and distribution in all disciplines rely upon tiered funding, such
a move, or even a partial move, could wipe out what has taken
some thirty years to build: namely domestic magazines, theatres,
orchestras, dance companies, galleries, book publishers and so on.
So there are some major contradictions and head-on collisions
between opposing elements of federal government policy. The
Standing Committee on Communications and Culture report on
the status of the artist sub-committee recommendations included
the following: A confident, mature society has an obligation to
nurture its identity. It also has a responsibility to support its artists
who play a large part in cultivating and reflecting that identity
creation is a handmaiden to economic development and growth.
Moreover, the works of artists form the foundation of the cultural
industries.
This report was signed by its Chair, Felix Holtmann, who made
a public name for himself last year by attacking the purchase of a
painting by the National Gallery, and once in the media spotlight,
he couldnt stop himself from undermining his own committees
efforts. As he said to the Globe and Mail: Lord help us if the
Canada Council gives Pierre Berton another cent. Unfortunately
for Holtmann, Berton is one of the countrys few long-term selfsupporting writers.
One way in which we can discuss the current status of the artist
legislation is in the context of a race for time: how many national cultural
institutions can the government dismantle before the next election?

13
It was the Secretary of State who cut $3.5 million from the
Native Communications budget which, while not directly
precipitating the events, did nothing to avoid Elijah Harpers
rejection of the Meech Lake Accord, as well as the subsequent
Oka crisis, which cost the Qubec government $40 million.
One of the telling clauses in the Canadian Artists Code which did
not make it into the House of Commons Standing Committee
recommendations, appeared under the heading, Fundamental
Principles, and states that: Indigenous artists will receive the
same treatment and support as artists from other communities,
including the right to professional development opportunities.
Similarly, Secretary of State program cuts were made to womens
centres and to their communications projects. These government
moves further encourage social de-stabilization at a time when
the country is going through its mid-life crisis. The government
has chosen to ignore the electorates wishes on Free Trade and
GST, and culture is definitely back on the table for part two of the
tri-lateral Free Trade discussions.

deficit. The poll was contsructed so that the areas considered

were agriculture, job training, economic development in the
poorer provinces, welfare, pensions, unemployment, transfer
payments, arts and culture, and defense. Given only these options
it was inevitable that the two areas Canadians wanted cut were
arts and culture, and defense. The CBC journalists who drafted
the questionnaire, together with their colleagues at the Globe and
Mail, had their wishes granted.
It remains to be seen how far deficit-cutting, and this years
most frequently used term, international competitiveness can
go, before the government decimates large components of the
countrys economy. France, a country Marcel Masse [federal
communications minister at the time] has often used as a model
for culture policy, is undoubtedly competitive internationally, but
still chooses to determine a need for its national government to
provide subsidies for rock n roll.

It is obvious that future federal governments, if they are unwilling to

call the bluff of Canadas financial institutions and corporate cartels,
will not be able to re-launch any major social or cultural structures
that are now being axed, or that soon will be. It is ironic that one of
the recommendations that is part of the current tabled legislation
is the establishment of The Canadian Council on the Status of the
Artist, which among other tasks includes the defending and public
promotion of the professional status of the artist in Canada.

The issues involved in the status of the artist are much

broader than whether self-employed artists can get access to
unemployment insurance and pensions, or bankruptcy protection
from businesses that have artists property on consignment. The
entrenchment of runaway monetarism is now causing headaches
for economists, who can no longer find alternatives that would
better allow for capitalist growth and social stability to co-exist.
Lets not forget that the federal job creation programs of the early
1970s were put in place primarily to get the disaffected off the
streets, but as a side effect, they encouraged cultural projects and
provided seed monies for artists facilities.

As I documented in an article called Bad Press, Bad Government,

Bad Strategies in The Canadian Conference of the Arts Bulletin,
1990 was a bad year for the publics education by the media
about the significance of artists contributions. There were two
pre-federal budget national polls published in the English mass
media: one made by the CBC/Globe and Mail; and the other by
the CTV/Toronto Star.
In the CBC/Globe poll, Canadians were asked for their opinions
on which federal subsidies should be cut in order to reduce the

In this current political climate, it is not surprising that federal

and provincial ministers of communications and culture have
relatively weak powers within their respective cabinets. Even in
Ontario, where the NDP government is committed to social
justice and cultural democratization, the signal being sent out by
the provincial cabinet is that cultural spending is not a high priority
during the recession. That said, adequate status of the artist
legislation in Ontario is inevitable given the size of the organized
cultural sector there.

14
In an urban setting, life without radio, movies, magazines, TV,
newspapers, and videotapes, is unimaginable. The fact that over
two-thirds of this material is imported, is at least consistent with
our countrys foreign policy. And it may well be, as Alvin Tofflers
new book condones, that we are not very far from having multinational corporations as members of the United Nations.
So to come full-circle, government cultural subsidies are seen
to be expendable. Our allies at the Globe and Mail are always
willing to print the latest wisdoms from the fringes of the business
sub-culture, as in this gem from the National Citizens Coalition
[NCC]: This welfare for arts communities is forcing taxpayers to
do what they wouldnt do voluntarily. Subsidies subsidize people
that cant make it. Anne Murray didnt need subsidies. Of course,
according to the NCC, Anne Murray had such a naturally loud
voice that she never needed to be carried on public radio or TV.
The Tory caucuses in Ontario and Qubec have lately been
recommending to Michael Wilson [federal finance minister at the
time] that he must make substantial spending cuts in order for the
Conservatives to have a chance of being re-elected. However,
the present status of the artist legislation prevents the federal
government from keeping existing economic promises. The
Standing Committee on Communications and Culture agreed
with a Department of Communications [DOC] study which
stated: Creative artists earn the lowest net income from their
work and have the highest expenditures necessary to produce
that income.
Also, the DOC suggested a private group plan for the estimated
ten thousand creative artists in Canada, that would include life
insurance, long-term disability, medical coverage, and a dental plan.
The costs per artist would be $1,000 per annum. The Standing
Committee wrote: If the demand exists, the government
could be asked to provide the employers share, at $500 per
participant. This would amount to a maximum of $5 million a
year. This recommendation does not appear in the present
tabled legislation, and the Canadian Conference of the Arts and
other artist associations are carrying out an actuarial study on this

benefit plan, but are presently having to haggle with the DOC
over the costs of the study.
The arts community is receiving the present status of the artist
legislation with a response that at one extreme is polite, and at
the other extreme is dissatisfied to the point of wanting to throw
the legislation out. The Writers Union of Canada has pointed out
that the legisation contains no recognition of public lending rights,
in spite of numerous recommendations supporting this. Neither
are there bankruptcy guarantees in the present situation, if
a commercial gallery goes bankrupt, artists lose not just their
royalties, but the full value of their work. After ten years, many
are wondering why we are paying bureaucrats for their lack of
economic sense, and politicians for their lack of political will.
Does the deficit-cutting war have to reach some absurd point of
escalation as in, Why not save money and privatize the entire
government public service, if not the politicians themselves?
Im sure some artists and Burger King employees would gladly
take over from real estate consultants and lawyers, and run the
government at half the cost.
Political roadblocks are to be expected: we have long suspected
that the majority of politicians dont consume Canadian culture
they have never seen the installations of Carol Moppett, or
heard the dub poetry of Juno Award winner Lillian Allen.
While I take no joy in impuning my fellow panelist [Adam Ostry],
there is an arrogance and uninformed smugness within the
Department of Communications itself. It is not that we expect
the department to have recreational familiarity with individual
artists, but the present situation is that the DOC is unaware of
the economic realities of whole sectors of artists, despite the
proximity and contact between the Canada Council and the
Department of Communications, as well as shelves full of pastcommissioned documents and reports.
For example, just weeks before the appearance of a draft of the
present status of the artist legislation, representatives of the DOC,

15
during a discussion about engager contracts, did not know that
individual video artists have had such contracts for over fifteen
years. Neither was the department aware of the extent to which
individual artists have a professional fee schedule which, although
it is not written in law, is honoured throughout the country.
In a federal cabinet of predominantly male ministers who have a
hard time keeping their sexist, racist, and homophobic comments
out of the public ear, communications minister Marcel Masse
cannot help, with his library of 20,000 books, being a moderate,
and is considered by many in the cultural sector to be a true
friend of the arts. But for those of us whose memories extend
all the way back to 1985, the dismal shortcomings of the new
legislation come as no surprise. As Minister Masse then said:
What do these artists want? Its not my job to fight for them at
cabinet level.
Artists who regularly put their own jobs on the line may be asking
too much if they expect any cabinet minister to do the same.
However, given his rumoured imminent change of portfolio, if
Minister Masse had resigned over this gutted status of the artist
legislation, it would have nullified his 1985 comment, and would
have been a contribution to public principle.
Structurally and politically there are always lessons to be learned.
Historically, public funding for artists and their organizations
came first from the federal level, and then depending on
the province from provincial, and finally, municipal sources.
In terms of grass roots politics, it should have been the reverse.
Given the amount of work and research already done, a number
of provincial governments are being asked to introduce their own
status of the artist legislation.
Whatever is said negatively and publicly about subsidies always
requires further examination. The City of Toronto, relatively small
in the context of Metro Toronto has, according to an ongoing
study by the Toronto Arts Council, an injection of $200 million a
year in hard cash from the non-profit cultural sector alone. The
value of this as investment is worth an estimated $900 million,

and the total economic contribution of the cultural industry in the

City of Toronto is projected at $9 billion for 1991.
For those interested, I have a useful publication titled Provincial
Road-Map for the Status of the Artist Legislation, written by Keith
Kelly, who is National Director of the Canadian Conference
of the Arts [CCA]. I am sure that the CCA would be glad to
provide any participant with a copy of this, as well as a copy of
the Canadian Artists Code.

Summary of Questions and Discussion

16
Q (to Adam Ostry) Is the Department of Communications
contemplating any kind of policy on guaranteed annual incomes
for artists?
Adam Ostry The short answer is no, but I guess that whenever
this has been discussed at the bureaucratic level, the consensus
has always been that If we were to move towards any form of a
guaranteed income, the government would do it for everyone.
Q (to Adam Ostry) You said in your presentation that the
status of the artist legislation will only apply to areas of federal
jurisdiction. Do you have any suggestions as to what kinds of
things we could talk to municipal and provincial governments
about?
Adam Ostry This question is difficult because its really not
my place to say. A lot of the things under provincial jurisdiction
such as the protection of artists works after bankruptcy, the
lack of contractual relationships between artists and galleries,
and the right of self-employed artists to unionize and negotiate
collective agreements are extremely important. And since
the federal government has no jurisdiction over those things,
thats what, if I were an artist, I would be talking to the provincial
government about. But this wont come as any surprise to the
provincial governments. I was in a meeting a couple of weeks ago
with my provincial counterparts and they know all this.
Q (to Clive Robertson) What would you like to see addressed
on a municipal or provincial level?
Clive Robertson Well, part of the legislation of the status of
the artist all those words about cultures relationship to
society and identity and so on are intended to get some
economic recognition. Some money. So I think that provincially
and municipally a lot more can be done in terms of what might
be called loaning equity. Theres a lot of property owned by
provincial and municipal governments that can be used on a
ninety-nine year lease basis by arts organizations, in order to save
money that is coming in as grants and going out as rent. There are
many things that can be tried in terms of a transfer of equity.
Another issue is that Canada Council, as well as granting
agencies at the provincial and municipal levels, could be seen

by arts associations to be employers. But it is unlikely, given the

relationship that we have, and the complexity, that we would ever
take that route; or that Canadian Artists Representation could be
organized enough to make contracts with the Canada Council.
Its been suggested before though, because its one of the ways
that people have looked at to get Unemployment Insurance. We
once went to the Ontario Arts Council and said, Pay U.I. on the
grants. There are legal precedents for this in many European
countries: freelance journalists and writers have actually gone to
court and claimed the state as a part-time employer, and this is
one of the possibilities weve looked at.
Adam Ostry The problem with the notion of grants being
treated as income for the purposes of U.I. is that legally the
Canada Council doesnt grant you money for subsistence; it grants
you money to create a product. Now, I know what everyone
uses the money for, but legally the granting organizations are not
paying you a salary, theyre granting you money to produce a
product.
Clive Robertson The Canada Council has never said that they
give you money to create a product. Their position is that they
want to be as flexible as possible about the funds they grant.
Adam Ostry Aside from the question of grants to individuals, the
arts organizations are certainly given grants to produce a product.
Thats the definition of a grant.
Tom Hendry One advantage of being old is that youve been
through everything. A time when this country was really broke
was the 1930s, and among the broke people was a group who
were a structurally disadvantaged part of our society: old people
and they were given welfare. Eventually that was done away
with and old people were given a guaranteed annual income
by law. Its called the Canada Pension Plan. Such structurally
disadvantaged groups being given a guaranteed income is a
characteristic of the whole Western world, so you cant say,
Nobody gets a guaranteed annual income, because these
people do.
But as I was saying, in the 1930s everybody was very broke,
including the government, but even more broke than the

17
government were the farmers, who were a lot like artists, because
they were fractured into different organizations this pool and
that pool, and so on. But eventually the farmers got enough of a
voice together and they said something had to be done about the
situation. And the government came up with a very imaginative
solution.They created, at a time when they had no money and the
country was falling apart just like now, just like always the
Canadian Wheat Board, which went out and bought all the
product from the farmers, and graded it and paid for it according
to quality. Therefore, since we were able do that for a lot of
people in a time of great national financial shambles, and with a
far more complex problem because the government had to
sell the stuff internationally it seems to me that its possible to
come up with solutions to complement what the Canada Council
can or cant do.
Adam Ostry Do you want a marketing board for art?
Tom Hendry No, Im just trying to illustrate that when people
really decide to put their heads together and solve a problem
to figure a way out of an awful situation then good things
can happen. But I suppose Clive is right a lot will have to be
done at the municipal and provincial levels, with maybe some
kind of tone-setting from the federal government saying, If you
do such and such we wont be mad, and well even help. And
certainly there are lots of examples of that sort of thing being
done, like the National Endowment for the Arts in the U.S., and
its policy regarding public art etc., which is like a Wheat Board
arrangement.

Panel 2
Getting the Message Across :
Advocating the Positive Economic and Cultural Impacts of the
Arts

Speakers:

Denise Roy Parks, Recreation and Culture Advisory Board, City of Edmonton

18

Denise Roy graduated from the University of Alberta in Recreational Administration. She has worked for the Cultural Affairs Branch of the Government
of Manitoba, and was Administrator of Catalyst Theatre in Edmonton for ten years. She served as Chair to the Edmonton Professional Arts Council and
is currently the Chair of the Arts Administration Program at Grant McEwan College.

Hazel Gillespie Donations Officer, Petro-Canada

Hazel Gillespie has worked for Petro-Canada since 1978. She has been Community Relations Co-ordinator (Social Affairs Department),
Communications Co-ordinator (Public Affairs Department), and is currently Corporate Donations Officer. In this position she is responsible for the
development, implementation and administration of policy, procedures, and budget for Petro-Canada's national Corporate Donations Program. She is
currently on the Board of Directors of Lunchbox Theatre, and works as a volunteer at the Rockyview Hospital.

Murdoch Burnett Poet

Murdoch Burnett is a Calgary-based poet. His published work includes three collections of poems, three chap books of essays and short lyric poems,
and many articles for various independent journals. He has worked in film, video, theatre, dance and radio. For the past ten years he has collaborated
with composer Scott Willing. Their current projects include a collection of songs called New Hymns for Pagans and a long prose poem entitiled
Centre of the World.

Glen Buick Assistant Deputy Minister, Alberta Department of Culture and Multiculturalism
Glen Buick is presently heading a special review of funding for the arts in Alberta. He has been Assistent Deputy Minister of Alberta Culture since
1982, and previously headed the Cultural Development Division. He has been active in amateur theatre in Regina, Ottawa and Guyana, and with the
Yardbird Suite, an Edmonton jazz society. He served as Canadian Ambassador to Chile (1978-82) and in Diplomatic Missions to Brazil, Ireland and
Guyana. Before coming to Alberta, he was Director of the Latin American Division with the Department of External Affairs in Ottawa.
Moderator:

Peter Hoff Director, Dancers' Studio West

Peter Hoff co-founded Dancers Studio West with Elaine Bowman in 1980. He currently serves as President of the Dance In Canada Association. He
also served on that Executive from 1979-82, and has served on the Board of Directors of Seniors' Performing Arts Canada and the Calgary Centre for
Performing Arts.

Denise Roy

I intend to talk specifically about the Edmonton experience, in

the hope that what weve been through there is relevant to
whats going on in Calgary. I realize that the funding structure in
Calgary is different than Edmontons, but I still think there may be
something in the efforts weve made that could help you here.
Before I start, Id like to explain the way in which Ill be
interpreting the meanings of a couple of words, because I think
theyre important to our efforts here today. The extent to which
the terms lobbying and advocacy have entered our vocabulary in
the last five or ten years is very interesting to me, as is the way

many of us throw them around with only a vague sense of what

they mean.
To me, advocacy is first and foremost a process of education a
deliberate, sustained effort to raise awareness and generate public
support. Lobbying, on the other hand, is when youre trying to
change something quite specific. For example, if you wanted a bylaw changed, you would lobby to make it happen; or you would
lobby if you wanted to increase your grant support.
One of the biggest problems for those who work in the areas of

19
advocacy and lobbying is that there are now lots of us who are
skilled and creative planners, but when we set out to educate
people with regard to an issue, or to change government policy,
we often throw our planning skills out the window and we try
and do things like raise public support. Now, I dont know about
you, but to me this is a very amorphous kind of objective, and I
think that its necessary to be much more specific in order to be
successful.

arts and recreational sectors had always split the available civic
cultural monies between them. However, much of the mayors
support at that time came from the ethnic community, which had
previously received no funding at the civic level. So the mayor
had a task force report prepared which suggested a new system
for grant allocation with equal representation from the arts,
recreation, and ethno-cultural communities, i.e., it was a proposal
to split the available funds three ways instead of two.

So we need to look carefully at what our goals are. Are we

advocating for something or are we making a lobbying effort? If its
a lobbying effort, we have to ask what were seeking to change,
and we have to make sure that the desired change is achievable,
manageable, and has a specific time frame; because all too often
we find ourselves working very hard and feeling that weve made
no tangible difference. Its important to know how to direct our
efforts.

Of course, we got quite panicked about this report, and the

action that the arts community took resulted in the beginnings of
EPAC. Due to our efforts, most of the recommendations of the
mayors task force were not adopted, but the important thing
about this issue was that it brought the arts community together.

Another problem is that sometimes were not clear about

who were trying to reach. We tend to focus our efforts on
government bureaucrats or the public at large. Well I suggest
to you that there is no such thing as the public at large. Ive
never met them and I dont know who they are. There are
school principals, advertising executives, etc. specific segments
of society. In order to be effective, you must first ask who is
involved in the issue, what has to be changed, and who needs
to get information. You have to think about who you are trying
to communicate with, because the kind of message that would
influence a bureaucrat is very different from the one that might
influence a mum who has kids in playschool, and wants them to
have some outlet for creative expression.
Turning to the main part of my presentation, Id like to give you
a little background on the Edmonton Professional Arts Council
[EPAC], the group with which Im involved. It was organized in
Edmonton about five years ago, and came out of an experience in
which our mayor inadvertently did us a favour.
The issue revolved around funding, and the situation was that the

And there was another positive outcome to our efforts. Arts

grants in Edmonton are given out by the Parks/Recreation
and Culture Advisory Board, which is made up of volunteers
appointed through the mayors office. Prior to the abovementioned task force report, majority membership on that
board had consisted of ex-hockey players and other athletic
types. However, after we organized, and as part of our work in
response to the report, we succeeded in getting a by-law passed
so that EPAC which was really nothing more than a group
who went to the bar together or met for coffee and got angry
together was now able to nominate three people to sit on the
Advisory Board.
At the time, this was a major breakthrough. It also gave us a reason
to solidify and to carry on as an organization, because each year were
asked to suggest three people to sit on the advisory board, and this is
one of the activities with which Im currently involved.
So, now EPAC is incorporated as a non-profit society. In order
to become a member you must be a so-called professional
arts company willing to support our by-laws, which basically are
to promote the arts. Membership groups pay $100 per year,
we meet on a monthly basis, and we have existed, with lots of
ups and downs, since 1986. The staff is not paid, the executive

20
is elected from the membership, and each organization sits as
a single voting member. No provision is made for individuals to
become members, although this issue is hotly debated.
Now Im going to talk about one lobbying project and one
advocacy project that EPAC has been involved with. The lobbying
project happened in 1988. We looked at the amount of civic
grant money allocated to the arts, decided it was insufficient, and
set ourselves the goal of trying to get it doubled within a year.
The first thing we did was a bit of research to see what artists
in other cities were getting, and we were really glad to find that
Calgary seemed to be more generous than Edmonton, because
one thing that really gets them in Edmonton, is when you say that
Calgary has a better hockey team, or that Calgary gives more
money to the arts. They said, Well, that cant be true. And we
said, Oh yes it is!
So we got ourselves a meeting with the mayor and we requested
an appearance before the City Council budget committee. We
succeeded in this because the mayor was relatively supportive. In
addition, one of the councillors agreed to front our campaign, and
she became a very valuable ally.
We were also able to spring a little money from inside the city
administration, which I think was another stroke of luck. This
funding came from the corporate studies branch of the City,
which decided that in order to disuss the case some statistics
were needed comparing arts funding in Edmonton to that of
other Canadian cities. They did some fantastic charts showing that
the city of Edmonton was much lower relative to other cites in
per capita funding, and of course that helped us enormously.
We then got our staff and the boards of directors of our member
groups together and organized a campaign to visit each of the
city councillors. And we came up with a simple idea that really
seemed to work. First, we had a number of workshop sessions
to bring our board members up to date on the issues, and then
we put together small teams of people, e.g., a board member

from a large arts organization and a board member from a smaller

organization each of them representing different disciplines
and one of our staff people. Each team of three would be
assigned a city councillor. They then went to the councillors
office with the background material we had prepared, and argued
our case. We supplemented this with action from individuals and
our membership organizations, who did all the regular postcard
and phone campaigns, etc.
The result was that we finally got to make an appearance before
the budget committee. When we went, we took the famous Joe
Shocter, who is the man behind Citadel Theatre and who has a
great deal of power at the civic level.
People said to me after the meeting that it was the first time they
had heard him speak in favour of anything other than his own
organization, and the councillors were astonished by this. We felt
that strategically it was very important to involve a man like Mr.
Shocter, and to get him to come forward and speak on behalf of
the arts.
But, in the end, after all of this, nothing happened. We thought
the whole campaign had died. As I have said, we got a lot of
unexpected support from one councillor, but the rest of city
council balked. Basically they said, We cant support this unless
you can show us where we can find the money in the budget.
Now this was a pretty difficult task for us, because we didnt
have that kind of expertise.
However, we eventually did get the money, and what finally
shook those dollars loose was that the councillor who was our
ally, found that there had been some funds allocated that couldnt
be spent for another three years, and the money was just sitting
there collecting interest. She calculated that this interest would
be roughly $200,000 a year, and on a day when a bunch of
councillors were asleep at the wheel, put a motion to council to
allocate the interest to the arts, and got it passed.
Therefore, in the end, although we didnt achieve our original goal

21
of doubling arts funding, we did get an extra $200,000 a year for
three years. Im sorry to say the three year period is about to end,
and since we think the money might end too, were presently
organizing again.
So that was one of our lobbying efforts. The next example Id like
to mention is some work weve done in the area of advocacy. As
I mentioned earlier, I use the word advocacy to mean educating,
or raising awareness about an issue.
What Im going to talk about is an event called The Mayors
Luncheon for the Arts. We got this idea from a number of cities
down east. Basically, its a kind of fancy luncheon. We hold it at
our convention centre and the mayor acts as host and sponsor.
The purpose of it is to provide an opportunity for people from
the corporate sector who have been supporting the arts and
those who should be supportive to come out, learn a little bit,
and rub shoulders with artists.
We thought this was an interesting idea, and the first year we
tried it we figured that if we got 100 people, it would be a good
start. Well, 350 people came to the first one, and 250 of them
bought their tickets in the last two days!

question whether were seeing tangible results. My point of view

is that this is an advocacy effort and that to expect immediate
material results is a mistake. It will pay off in lots of small ways.
However, were presently trying to figure out how we can get the
corporate people to rub shoulders with us in a way that will show
more concrete benefits.
Now Ill mention some of the difficulties weve had with EPAC. Id
be lying to you if I said that our members get along all the time,
that everyone comes to meetings, and that anytime we want to
generate money we go to city council and it happens. We have
some of the same problems that all volunteer organizations have.
For example, if we set up a committee, people tend to sit back
and think that they dont need to do anything because someone
else will take care of it. There is a need for strong leadership,
because our members all have other work to do, in addition
to the volunteer time they give EPAC. So the fortunes of the
organization have gone up and down depending on whether or
not weve had individuals capable of providing leadership.

Now, in our fourth year, we generally expect an attendance

of about 650, with tickets costing in excess of $40 each. What
happens at the event is that people eat, drink a little wine, arts
groups put displays out and circulate information, and we have a
guest speaker. Last year we had Patrick Watson. This year were
having someone from the Royal Bank.

We also have frequent difficulties when we try to develop

positions, respond to briefs, or take actions on specific issues. You
can imagine the tensions that exist between the big organizations
and the smaller ones. There is also tension among the various
disciplines, and between the organizations that are well funded
and the ones that arent. What weve done about this is to try
to find points of compromise, but what often happens is that we
end up with positions that are quite watered down. In spite of
these problems, we have the ability to move forward with a large
coalition, and this pays off in spades.

We feel that the impact of this project, in terms of media

coverage, general visibility, and the good will that is created
with both politicians and the corporate sector, has made it all
worthwhile. The downside is that the Luncheon has turned into
the event that ate the organization. Its become huge. Our annual
budget at EPAC is $3,300, representing thirty-three member
groups. The Luncheon budget is now $33,000, so theres a lot
of energy and manpower involved, and understandably, people

Another area of difficulty is that whenever our goals get vague we

tend to just sit around and talk and we dont do anything. After a
few of these kinds of meetings, attendance starts to drop, and then
we get on a downward spiral and we think, Why are we doing
this anyway? So weve found that we have to have some kind
of campaign or activity going all the time, or people simply dont
come. They have too many other things on their plates, and there
has to be a sense of going forward that action is happening.

Hazel Gillespie
22
So even though there are problems, Im really keen on the idea
of alliances and coalitions. Our experience in Edmonton has
proved to me that the concept works, and Id like to share a few
more suggestions based on what weve learned. First, I think that
research is essential. People get hung up about it, saying they
dont have the proper facts and statistics, but there are a lot of
things that you can do quickly. We generated the statistics for our
first campaign in one afternoon on the phone. Four or five basic
questions to member groups generated the data that produced
some incredible figures, and nobody ever really questioned them
because they had no statistics of their own to argue against ours.
Another thing is, I think its essential that you form ongoing
liaisons with important people in the community, whether they
be government or whatever. One of the things we do in EPAC is
invite people like Glen Buick [Assistant Deputy Minister, Alberta
Department of Culture and Multiculturalism] to come once or
twice a year and have an informal chat about where things are
going, and thats an activity that weve found member groups to
be very interested in.

Petro-Canada and the Arts in Calgary

Ive structured my talk around the five questions that the
conference organizing committee posed to me when they
described what they would like to see in my presentation.
Basically, these centre on Petro-Canadas cultural funding policy,
with an emphasis on how it relates to Calgary. I was asked
specifically:
1. To describe our companys commitment to the community,
particularly with respect to arts funding;
2. To explain why Petro-Canada feels that it is worthwhile to
invest in the community to this level;
3. To describe the range of our funding to various organizations;
4. To give you some insight into the importance of an events
profile in terms of our consideration for its support;
5. And lastly, to talk a bit about Petro-Canadas commitment to
support small-scale experimental work by local artists.
Let me begin by imparting some of our companys philosophy
to you. A basic premise underlying all of our operations is that
a strong reputation for corporate responsibility contributes
significantly to a companys business and financial success.

Also, its important to remember that your coalition or alliance

does not replace individual action. When EPAC is involved with
an issue we always tell our individual member groups that they
should be advocating their own positions they should be
making phone calls and getting their members involved, because
that adds fuel to the fire, and allows them to communicate
concerns that are specific to their organizations.

Petro-Canada is the largest Canadian-owned petroleum company.

In many ways, we are the same as any other oil and gas company
we are commercially driven, with a need to earn profits in
order to compete in the marketplace. However, we are also
unique, because we are Canadas national oil company. This
creates added expectations for our performance.

The final thing I would like to say is that when you are in the
midst of all this lobbying and advocational work, dont forget that
youre artists. You may be told that you have to write letters,
prepare briefs, and communicate in bureaucratic language, but I
feel that artists have a lot of creative ways that they can use to
express themselves. These alternatives should be explored, and
although you may still have to write those briefs, remember that
when you do something big, bold, and splashy, it can really attract
attention.

While I just said that we are commercially driven, our corporate

contributions program is not. Our donations are not directly tied
to the sale of our products. Our company recognizes that many
of the charitable contributions we make are strictly philanthropic
in nature. The return on these expenditures comes in the form of
a healthier society for us all. They are expected of us as a good
corporate citizen. Respect and a good corporate image are the
by-products of our philanthropy. And this may or may not result
in increased product sales.

23
Petro-Canadas charitable contributions are drawn principally from
the national corporate donations budget. This budget is divided
roughly into thirds: 33 percent each for arts and culture, health
and welfare, and education.
We have been a strong supporter of the arts for a long time
now. As I mentioned, close to one-third of our donations budget
is focused on arts and culture. Statistics from the Institute of
Donations and Public Affairs Research which many of you will
know as IDPAR show that this compares to a range of 3 to 21
percent for other oil and gas companies in Calgary.
Our companys support of the arts is diverse. Each year, our
contributions go to a wide variety of groups. As is the case with
other companies, though, we contribute only to organizations,
and not to individual artists. These include the visual arts, dance,
theatre, and music. We endeavour to balance this support to
include many different types of groups, from impressionist local
dance companies and fringe theatres, to large art galleries and
symphonies.
As this is a national program, the pie must also be cut so that
our contributions are balanced geographically, with the heavier
weightings in communities where we are most active. And since
our head office is here, Calgary receives a higher percentage of
our total budget than any other city.
The local arts community is an important industry. Weve heard
some hard statistics at this conference to substantiate that. The
impact to local and regional economies is great; this is an industry
that must be sustained and that must continue to thrive.
But frankly, thats not why Petro-Canada supports the arts. While
the economic contribution is a very meaningful one, its the
investment in Canadas cultural growth that is most important to
us.
And, weve been known to take risks. We helped to support a
basement-run operation several years ago; this has now grown

to become The Vancouver International Comedy Festival, a very

successful and large-scale event which we continue to sponsor.

We direct our funding to both large and small profile events. For
example, in Calgary and in other cities, our contributions to music
include childrens choirs and small chamber orchestra societies,
as well as the opera and symphony. Just upstairs from this room,
were currently sponsoring a play called The Land, The Animals.
As you all know, One Yellow Rabbit presents some of the best in
innovative and bold new theatrical works, and were proud to be
associated with these smaller but excellent productions.
Our emphasis on the development of Canadian talent has been
a deliberate one. We frequently select Canadian-commissioned
works rather than the tried and true. Petro-Canadas Stage One
play workshops at Lunchbox Theatre ensure the development
each year of eight new one-act plays by Canadian playwrights.
Some of these productions have gone on to garner well-earned
national and international acclaim. We affectionately refer to
these successes as life after Lunchbox.
Also this year, were partially underwriting the cost of the Interns
Program at Alberta Theatre Projects. After confirming this
sponsorship with ATP last month, I received letters from three
of the interns thanking us for our support. Its very rewarding to
know that we may actually be making a difference in some young
artists life.
Id like to talk for a minute or two now about the visual arts.
Petro-Canadas greatest contribution in this area is its in-house
art collection. Our original arts policy of 1979 committed PetroCanada to a small collection of two-dimensional works by living
Canadian artists.
Since then, our collection has grown to include about 1,500
works from all regions in Canada. Many of these are created by
young artists just entering the market. This artwork is displayed
in Petro-Canadas lobbies and offices in Calgary, Edmonton,

24
Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Halifax. Pieces from
our collection are also loaned to public galleries throughout
Canada.
In Calgary, art from this collection, as well as group exhibits by
Canadian artists, can be seen in our downtown gallery on the
third floor of the Petro-Canada Centre. This facility opened in
1984, and we now receive about 2,000 visitors a year.
So what is Petro-Canadas commitment to the local arts
community? As I hope Ive illustrated, it is significant. However,
like everyone else, we are bound by budget constraints. There is
only so much that we can do. Times are tough and competition is
fierce. As a donations officer, my job is extremely rewarding, but
also very frustrating.
And the frustration comes from having to say no and quite
often, I might add. I receive about 3,000 funding requests a year
from across the country. Last year, we were able to provide
support to approximately 550 organizations working in the
areas of arts and culture, health and welfare, and education.
Unfortunately, that leaves a great many we had to decline.
And this year, were adding an environment category, which
means our dollars will have to stretch even further. Incidentally, I
was pleased to see that One Yellow Rabbits current play has an
environmental theme. I think that people learn through traditional
teaching approaches, but there is no more powerful teaching
combination than learning combined with entertainment. It seems
to always leave a lasting impression.
And thats the power of the arts. They have the ability to teach
and entertain, to provoke thought, and to heighten the senses.
Petro-Canada will pursue its strong support of the arts, and we
will continue to do this in a carefully balanced way. We recognize
that as a supporter of the opera and the symphony, we gain high
exposure, whereas our profile might be smaller, but not less,
when we support local grassroots events. We try to blend both

of these ends of the spectrum in our donations program.

For me, the arts represent a haven, perhaps an escape. But we all
need to escape from time to time. The worlds of theatre, music,
dance, and visual art help us to put things back into perspective.
They make us realize that we can continue to create even as
things seem to be coming apart all around us. We can build
through our art forms and thats a very powerful force. Artists in
Canada have the talent and creative drive to enact their dreams
and make them become reality; I remind you of the Vancouver
International Comedy Festival years ago it was someones
dream, and now its everyones reality.
But it is true that economic times are tough now and thats
always hard on the arts community. Twenty years of consistently
spending more than weve taken in is rapidly adding up, and I
think we can all expect increased pressure to try and reduce
Canadas deficit. This will mean belt tightening for all of us. And
it might be that companies currently assisting smaller arts groups
will be forced, as budgets tighten, to withdraw their support from
some of these groups. This is a very real possibility, and only time
will tell whether or not it actually happens.
If I could leave you with just one thought today, it would be to
keep on keeping on. Theres a lot of talent and ability in this
room. Collectively, you are building the Calgary arts community
into one of the best in the country. As a Calgarian, Im pleased
about that and Im also very grateful to be working for a company
that recognizes the value of a strong arts community.
Petro-Canada will continue to contribute financially to the arts,
to the extent that we can. And we will continue to look to you,
in return, for your creative contribution to our community. Thats
certainly a fair exchange in our eyes.

Murdoch Burnett
25
Getting Our Message Across
You may think it odd that a poet has been invited to present
an analysis of the economic and social impact of the arts. Poets
are not normally associated with the real world of statistics, but
as an American poet once observed, You dont have to be a
weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
I have lived within the reality of the statistics of the arts economy
for twenty years long enough to know that any way you look
at them, the numbers dont add up. You will excuse me for stating
the obvious, but without artists there would be no art and no
arts economy. This being the case, who can justify the fact that
independent self-employed artists are second only to pensioners
as the lowest paid national occupation classification? It is for this
reason I will speak today on behalf of the independent artists
in Canada, to continue to try to get our message across about
improving the conditions under which we work.
I know my colleagues listening here today, or reading this
presentation in its published form, will forgive me when I describe
a situation they know only too well. They will forgive me because
they know we must exploit every opportunity to correct the
enormous imbalance in the arts economy that currently exists in
this country.
I am not particularly in favour of referring to the arts as an
industry, in spite of the impressive figures that can be toted up
when they are viewed this way. According to a Canada Council
research paper published in May 1990, the arts, in terms of annual
revenue rank tenth in the manufacturing sector, at more than
$13.7 billion. But all these billions cannot measure the actual
impact that artists have, nor do they reflect the living conditions
of the artists who generate these huge sums.
Any manufacturer who tried to get a highly skilled and highly
motivated work force to live well below the poverty line
would be laughed out of business. The social contract that
exists in industry is relatively simple, and compared to the arts,
relatively stable: the worker enters into an explicit and formal

agreement with the employer, which often lasts through the

workers retirement. The relationship that exists between artists
and society however, has except in short term and mostly
low-paid instances no such explicit and formal contract. We
work, and from our work come enormous and easily quantified
benefits to the country. Much less easy to quantify, is what is lost
when the artist in poverty is forced to rely on survival strategies
antithetical to the making of art. What Canadian artists make is
miraculous. What Canadian artists could be making with proper
support from governmental and private sector sources is truly
beyond comprehension.
At the moment of its creation, art is not an industry. It is an
alchemy a metaphysical tension between what is and what
might be. It is a process as old as humanity itself, and evidence
that art has existed in every society since the Pleistocene would
indicate that it is as fundamental to our survival as food, clothing,
and shelter. And the health of the arts in any given society is the
way in which that society is measured, known, and remembered.
The health of the arts depends on the health of the artist, and
everyone is aware that poverty is bad for your health.
Do not hold us hostage to the fact that we love and venerate our
jobs. Do not continue to take advantage of the fact that we will
continue our work regardless of the level of support. Continue
to share with us the miracle of creation, but on more equitable
terms. It is a miracle that happens every day across the country.
In spite of economic disenfranchisement, Canadian artists turn to
their work, and this work is known around the world. But imagine
for a moment how much better this work would be if artists
could have their fair share in the bounty they create.
Throw into the garbage or recycle into something useful the
sad and deceitful little myth that the artist must suffer poverty
in order to create. The artist will suffer in the act of creation
birth pangs, primal and ancient fears, crises of confidence and will.
Artists will suffer long hours in a state of heightened emotion, and
experience terrors and delights unseen in the smooth beauty of
what has been made. But pretending we need to suffer poverty

26
in addition, should be repugnant to thinking people.
We are living during a time of intense national debate and
unprecedented global upheaval. During such times it is crucial that
independent creative thought and expression be nurtured and
consulted. To keep artists on the economic margins of this society
is to carelessly squander yet another valuable resource.
We can calculate the direct and quantifiable contribution of the
arts through production, consumption, employment, and capital
investment. There is a formula to calculate the indirect impact
of the arts on income, design and marketing, urban renewal, and
tourism. We can even plot, to an extent, the influence of art on
invention and innovation, diversified industrial structures, and
volunteerism. Ultimately, what cannot be plotted or graphed is
the impact of art on the quality of our lives, because it permeates
all human endeavour. Art is not a luxury item.
There must be a restructuring of the arts economy. This
restructuring should start at the top at the federal level and
reach throughout the system as it currently exists.
1. First, independent artists in Canada, after serving lengthy and
rigourous apprenticeships, must receive a guaranteed annual
income from a fund created by a joint initiative between
government and private sector sources.
2. The main recipients of current levels of funding, such as
symphonies, museums, ballet and theatre companies etc.,
must begin a much more serious attempt at nurturing new
work and new artists. A classical and neo-classical repertoire is
a national treasure only when it is constantly refreshed by new
ideas.
3. Artists should stop administering artist-run centres. Trained
administrators must gradually be phased into the operation of
each centre, and work on a consultative basis with artists in
the community. I have seen the best minds of my generation
destroyed by filling out grant applications.
Finally, I would like to speak directly to the artists working here in

Calgary. We face all the problems that artists everywhere have,

and a few uniquely our own, but regardless of our problems, we
must acknowledge that at present, the net impact of our work
on this city is not as great as it could be and should be. Our
community of artists, artist-run centres, private galleries, and arts
organizations is fragmented and ineffective. We have allowed
ourselves to be placed in competition with one another for
media attention, grants, performance space, equipment, and most
importantly, audiences. If we were to form an interdisciplinary
union, with a mandate of creating the most efficient ways of
getting our collective message across to government, the private
sector, and the public, we might see more results from our
efforts.
Id like to leave you with some thoughts about regionalism that
have come to me during my research into the history and culture
of the plains. This work has taken me from central Texas to
the treeline and from the Rockies to the 100th meridian. It has
occurred to me that Calgary artists and Calgarians in general,
have a second-class image of themselves. We look at Paris and
New York, and say, Well never be like that.
But if we think of ourselves in terms of the region we inhabit
which is the plains were huge. Theres Tulsa, Oklahoma
City, Denver, Kansas City, and ourselves. Calgary is a giant in
this regional group of cities. So lets think in terms of a big,
interdisciplinary plains union. With this concept in mind, we have
to start talking to art boards and panels in the other cities Ive
just mentioned, so that when we have a show in Calgary, we also
have the possibility of doing it in Tulsa and Kansas City. Artists
on the the plains have a unique world view and hold much in
common. Think of the possibilities of open dialogue in our bioregion. Speaking together we could better speak to the world.

Glen Buick
27
Well, Im from the government Im here to help you (laughter,
applause). I want to say thank you to Syntax for organizing this
conference and letting me be a part of it, and to all of you for
being here this afternoon.
In the little more than eight years that Ive been working for
Alberta Culture and Multiculturalism, Ive done a fair bit of
thinking about why government is in the business or even
whether it ought to be in the business of supporting the arts.
Its a reasonable question for taxpayers to ask, of course
whether anybody other than direct consumers ought to support
the arts financially. However, its pretty clear from the amount
of federal, provincial, and municipal support given in Canada that
governments do consider that there is a lot of benefit in this
direction of public spending.
We seem to accept the proposition that the arts are of major
value. They define whats good and distinctive about our culture,
and diffuse these values to increase our societys self-knowledge
and cohesion. The arts also communicate and project our culture
beyond national borders to an international level.
Its also largely accepted that the arts are a good in themselves,
and are therefore worthy of support. I think this is partly based
on what Ive just said that the arts have a beneficial effect
throughout the population, and thus on the development of
our society and partly based on the recognition that the
skills involved in practicing the arts have a broad application to
society beyond their artistic benefits. For example, just as a fitness
program has been shown to increase health and productivity,
thus lowering costs of some services, so the skills of visual artists,
writers, dancers, musicians, and actors, may benefit both the
individual practitioners as well as any agency or company for
which they may eventually work.
And finally, theres been a lot of attention paid in recent years to
the economic importance of the arts, and thats been mentioned
this afternoon several times the importance of the so called
cultural industries.

I dont have any doubts that the arts are an important economic
activity, but I think its very dangerous to put too much stress
on their economic value. One of the many federal studies that
have been done, the Neilson Task Force Report on Government
Organization, was correct when it stated that the economic
benefits of arts activities are not great enough in themselves
to constitute a justification for those activities. Economic
benefits have never been the reason why the present provincial
government has supported the arts, and its certainly not the
reason why most of you are making art.
At this point, let me say a couple of things about what it is that
we at Alberta Culture do in the way of providing assistance to the
arts. Im sure that most of you are familiar with at least some of
the information Im going to present, but a quick overview may be
helpful.
First of all, of course, we provide financial assistance. And the
government of Alberta does it in a fairly complex way at the
moment. It provides some of that assistance from the general
revenue fund, partly through the Department of Culture and
Multiculturalism, and partly through a program called the
Community Recreation/Cultural [CRC] Grant Program, which is
delivered through municipalities, and which provides capital grants
for building and equipment, as well as planning and operational
support.
Increasingly, however, the government of Alberta delivers financial
support to the arts through lottery profits, and it does this in
a variety of ways. It delivers funds first of all through three arts
foundations: the Alberta Art Foundation, the Alberta Foundation
for the Performing Arts, and the Alberta Foundation for the
Literary Arts.
It also distributes some lottery monies directly to client
organizations. In addition, a substantial amount of this money
is delivered through a program called Community Facility
Enhancement, which provides capital grants for either improving,
or in rarer cases building facilities, some of which may be cultural.

28
There is no requirement that any portion of this program has
to be applied to cultural purposes, but some of it has been, and
some of it will continue to be. However, in the vaguely similar
program that I have just mentioned, the CRC program, there
is a 25 percent minimum of funds that are set aside specifically
for cultural purposes. I must say that the CRC program has had
one beneficial effect, in that one-third of the municipalities in the
province of Alberta now use 30 percent or more of that money
for cultural purposes, and a substantial number of them use more
than half of their money for these purposes.
We also do direct programing and provide consultative assistance.
Ever since the Department of Culture was formed in 1975, the
Cultural Development Division has had three branches devoted
to the arts: Film and Literary Arts, Performing Arts, and Visual
Arts. However, in the spring of 1991 this structure is going to
change, so that there will be one arts branch which will have five
individual sections, or focuses of activity. These will be: marketing
and audience development; cultural literacy and education; artist
development and organizational support; cultural industries
development; and communications and government services.
A lot of what we do will remain the same within this new
organizational structure, but there will naturally be some changes.
The fact that you give people different bosses, that you put them
in different offices, and in some cases different buildings, and that
you give them a different set of small scale organizational goals
regardless of whether the overall goals of the division remain
the same all these factors are going to affect the work that
people do. And one of the effects that I would like to see is a
broadening of outlook to some of our programs. While I hope
we will continue to give as good service as we have in the past, I
hope too, that well be better structured to prevent groups falling
through the cracks, just because their request or their type of
organization doesnt exactly fit the discipline-based structure that
weve had up until now.
The last thing I would like to mention is that I was fascinated to
hear Denise Roys presentation on the Edmonton Professional

Arts Council, because Ive had the privilege to talk to this

organization a couple of times and I want to say how convenient
it is, and maybe how tempting as well, for a bureaucrat to have
a credible umbrella organization to consult with. Of course, it
shouldnt take the place of talking to the people who are out
there making art, but I tell you, if youre in a hurry to produce
a response for the minister, reply to letters, or generate
information, its handy to have a group whose ability you have
faith in, that you can phone up and say, look, heres what I have to
do, or what I want to do what do you think?

Summary of Questions and Discussion

29
Q (to Hazel Gillespie) Id like to know why its so difficult to get
arts funding from business, and how you think business fits in now
that theres a more depressed economy.
Hazel Gillespie I know Petro-Canada is out there in the lead
on arts funding, and Im not quite sure why. It may be a question
of balance we dont fund sports, for example, but other
companies do. Its really a matter of focusing on where you want
your dollars to go, and I think the fact that companies pick and
choose areas of support is probably good for everyone. I think
that corporations are beginning to recognize more and more
though, the importance of the arts community. Our donations
budget has increased this year, and deliberately so.
Denise Roy Despite the fact that we have wonderful
representation from Petro-Canada, we know that corporate
donations across the country, as a percentage of pre-tax profits,
are going down. Ten years ago they were in excess of 1 percent
and now its just 0.8 percent. And if government funding also
decreases, the pressure is really going to be on arts people.
I mean, if one more person says to me, Youve got to go to
private business Some days I feel like puking, because they
dont have any money either. But I think the untapped gold mine
is smaller businesses, who generally are not supportive. The large
oil companies give support, using a fairly sophisticated donations
system, and in many cases they give more than the average 0.8
percentage share to the arts. But there are a lot of companies
out there who dont give anything. And they dont know anything
about the arts, so we have to use our talents to really find a way
in there, otherwise were going to lose out.
Hazel Gillespie I think companies are starting to recognize that
the arts are a valuable marketing tool for them, and I have some
reservations about it. I mean, I dont want to see us selling lube
oils at the theatre, and I think some of that is starting to happen,
because competition is so fierce out there. I see three thousand
requests a year, and in a lot of those I see very competitive
sponsorship benefits packages, but I think there has to be a point
where we stop competing. We dont always want Petro-Cans
name to be in lights on the marquee, and we dont want a gas
pump outside Alberta Theatre Projects. But there is an untapped
market there, and companies are starting to latch on to it, and I

think you have to be aware of that and of how far you want to
compromise your values.
Glen Buick One of the interesting things thats happened is
the shift in private support from just being a donations activity
to being a sponsorship activity. Its very difficult for many small
organizations and for most individual artists to get at those
sponsorship funds. And its next to impossible for individual artists
to get donation monies, because they cant give a tax receipt. The
other thing is that its easier for big companies to do something
thats relatively safe and therefore much easier to sell from a
sponsorship point of view, and thats one of the reasons I think
that government must continue to be a major part of the action
because there is at least some hope that money coming from
government, whether its direct or through an agency financed by
government, will take risks that private industry may be unwilling
to take.
Peter Hoff You know I really cant help but wonder how similar
this process is to what must have happened before health
services and education were funded by tax dollars. I keep hearing
justification for art. Well, whats the justification for libraries,
education, and health? Universities are subsidized to a level of 80
percent because the product they offer is not affordable to the
average person. At some point society has to make the decision
that an activity is important enough to be subsidized. It is not
the artist that is being subsidized, its the audience, and were
not getting that message across. Artists arent even core funded
none of us is taking home an honest salary. So the discussion is
confusing to me because were talking about all these peripheral
things things which make it possible for us to do our work
and were still at a point where were wondering whether
society wants to subsidize art. The National Ballet is subsidized
to something close to $100 a ticket. Now, you have to be in a
certain income bracket in order to be able to pay $65 to see
the National Ballet. And the people who can afford $65 are
being subsidized $100 a seat. Its not the dancers who are being
subsidized. Its not the artists who are being subsidized its the
audience. And thats the one thing I didnt hear today.

Panel 3
Revitalizing downtown:
What do cultural workers need to help make it happen?
Speakers:

Stephanie White, Architect

Stephanie White has practiced architecture in Europe, the United States and Canada. As a recipient of the Canada Council Barcelona Award in
Architecture, she recently travelled to Spain, where she did research work related to the Spanish Civil War. She currently teaches in the Faculty of
Architecture at the University of Calgary.
30

Jack Long, Architect, The New Street Group

Jack Long moved into the historic Major Stuart House in 1970 and started the New Street Group. He has won many awards for housing projects and
has restored several of Calgary's older buildings, including the Alexandria Centre, the Deane House and the Cross House. He was involved, with other
architects, in the development of the Calgary Planetarium. He juried for the Canada Council Explorations Program for many years, and from 1980-83
he served as City Councillor for Ward 9, an area which includes Inglewood and the East Village. He is currently involved in a stewardship role with his
community, which includes the preservation and enhancement of the community's social and architectural fabric.

Brenda Polegi, City of Calgary Parks and Recreation Department

Brenda Polegi is a Grants and Lease Co-ordinator with Parks and Recreation. The Grants and Leases Section provides assistance to non-profit groups
regarding grants and land use for cultural and recreational activities. In her eight years with the Department Ms. Polegi has also been the Program
Supervisor for the Olympic Plaza, the Ethnocultural and Festivals Co-ordinator, and Public Relations Supervisor. She has been interested in issues
concerning arts groups in the downtown since her time as Public Relations Officer for Theatre Calgary in 1978/79.

Michael Green, Co-Artistic Director, One Yellow Rabbit Theatre

Michael Green founded Ikarus Theatre in 1976, which developed several Calgary innovations including the concept of "secret" performance. He cofounded One Yellow Rabbit Theatre in 1982 and has directed and/or produced many presentations, including Lives of the Saints, Exit the King and
the annual High Performance Rodeo series. With his co-artistic director, Blake Brooker, he was the 1991 recipient of the Harry and Martha Cohen
Award for sustained and significant personal contribution to theatre in Calgary.

Moderator:

Gae VanSiri, City of Calgary Parks and Recreation Department

Gae VanSiri has worked for Parks and Recreation in various capacities for ten years. She is currently Acting Supervisor of the Plannng Section. She
recently returned from a leave of absence, during which she studied Community Planning at the University of British Columbia. Her Planning interests
focus particularly on the inner city.

Michael Green
Introduction to Panel 3

Before we get going, I want to try to outline some of the

housing and space problems facing artists and arts organizations
downtown. Then, Ill listen to what the other panelists say, take
notes and, playing devils advocate or not, comment on what
they have said. That is to say, if what were going to hear from

Stephanie, Jack, and Brenda is the meat of this panel, then perhaps
Im the bread on either side that might make the sandwich,
because its almost brunch time.
When I got a list of needs and problems from the different arts

Stephanie White
31
groups on the conference organizing committee, it was clear that
the same difficulties kept coming up over and over again, and they
sounded so familiar to me that I realized were all in the same
situation were really carbon copies of each others problems.
Generally speaking, the number one problem is putting a roof
over the artists who make art happen in this city. Its currently
a situation where artists are left to their own devices: first they
find a warehouse with a leaky roof, no plumbing, inadequate
security, and an outrageously high rent; next, they have to go in
there without adequate resources, try to get a building permit,
and somehow bring the place up to building code, so that when
the police and fire departments finally catch up with them, they
arent shut down on the spot; then, as soon as the artists have
done all this work and have given some credibility, some kind of
excitement to the area in which they live, the landlord who
never gave them a lease in the first place, because he knew
thats exactly what they would do kicks them out in favour of
someone who can pay more, and they have to start all over again.
My own groups situation reflects this pattern. I know that a lot
of people think One Yellow Rabbit will survive because were in
the Centre for Performing Arts, but Ill tell you, the cycle Ive just
outlined is repeating itself, perhaps in more subtle ways. When
we moved into the Centre, the landlords were happy because
lots of people started coming to the bars and restaurants situated
in the building. And then, two years after we moved in, they
renovated the area where this conference is taking place [directly
underneath One Yellow Rabbits theatre] so they could have a
nice banquet and party space. And now, because of the noise,
we may not be able to continue here and we might have to look
for another place. Were going to have to start all over again and
well end up feathering a nest for someone else.
And that, in a nutshell, is the situation that is faced by most of
the arts organizations in this city who are trying to run their own
facilities.

I liked the man yesterday who said, This is where I stand

and proceeded to outline an extremely unfashionable point of
view. Everyone snickered, of course, but I thought it was very
straightforward of him and I wish that we all made our positions
so explicit.
So, my position is: I work within the discipline of architecture
and I am increasingly involved with theoretic projects. Im selfemployed, have no fixed income, and Ive received two major
Canada Council awards in the past two years. I do not see grants
as handouts a term that came up yesterday as I find that
they take a lot of work to apply for, and are rather hard to get. If
they were easy to get, we could all have them, and then maybe
we could start to think of them as handouts. I do not see artists
as people deserving different treatment within the city simply
because they are in the business of improving the quality of life
in our culture. I see them as people with needs, ambitions, and
extremely low incomes.
In the discussion yesterday, we were told that lotteries and
gambling are a fact of life, here to stay, and that to agonize over
the morality of creaming off money from the poorest section of
our society in order to fund the arts, was beside the point. Well,
I have old fashioned morals when I was a child, lotteries were
illegal, and then all of a sudden they became legal, and now Im
supposed to view them as great entertainment and a source of
funding for the arts wheres the truth in either position?
I do not think moral objections are out of place in a conference
such as this one. Our sense of morality defines us as a society;
as a society we take a position vis--vis the arts. If we support
lotteries, casinos, and guns, we probably get the arts we deserve.
Im more and more coming to the understanding in my own
profession that the work is only as good as the society its in. This
is perhaps why, in Barcelona, where I spent last year, there are
fabulous buildings on every street. Every young architect has a
job, no matter how small; its expected, and the society demands
it. And this is also why Calgary doesnt have any buildings of real
note. Because nobodys asking for them.

32
Id like to begin the formal part of my presentation by clarifying
two of the terms I will be using: we here in this room are
all convinced of the need for legal, social, and administrative
tolerance towards artists, but we are also the society that we live
in, which is not so tolerant, and not so sure of the rewards that
come from the presence of the arts. So when Im using this word,
it will be in the larger, societal sense.
The city can be thought of as city hall as an administrative unit.
It can also be thought of as the individual city of Calgary, with its
own unique history and topology, its own psyche. As well, the city
can be seen as the culture of cities, as an organic urban body. All
three of these levels are populated by us the personal us and
the general us.
It is convenient to heap abuse on city hall, or on Calgary, as a cow
town or boom city. As long as we keep our critiques at these two
levels we do not have to accept the responsibility for initiating
change. Therefore, it is perhaps more optimistic to look upon
the city as an organic entity with a complex dynamic that we can
seek to influence. We could think of it as a cultural event of our
society, and the physical ills of the city not enough space for
artists, too many cars, etc. are only manifestations of a social
condition made by us, maintained by us, and able, I should think,
to be altered by us.
The two physical entities of the city that I am going to talk about
are housing and working space, and their scarcity throughout
North America has resulted in a crisis situation which affects
not only artists and non-profit groups, but everyone who has an
extremely low income.
Also affected are those with low to middle incomes who find
it necessary to live and work within the same place. This group
includes mechanics, woodworkers, welders, accountants, and
artists, as well as those who must work at home in order to care
for children, the elderly, or animals. These occupations divide
into what is perceived as clean desk work and dirty shop work.
Clean work is allowed within a residentially zoned area: computer

consultants, writers, designers, and copy typists are all able to

work out of their houses. Dirty work raises objections to smells,
noise, and visual mess things that should be located away from
view, in Bonnybrook and other industrial areas.
This way of thinking is a major obstacle to using our cities
intelligently: as a society we believe implicitly in the twentieth
century modernist concept of segregation of uses, upon which
our zoning regulations are based. Canada is a very middle-class
country we have put in place a whole series of zoning laws
which are founded on the premise that the nasty bits in our
world should be hidden from view: the factory at the end of the
street is for the working classes the middle classes dont want
to be reminded of it; workshops arent allowed in residential
areas, and were not allowed to live in industrial precincts. Thus,
the group of artisans and craftspeople I have mentioned the
small time menders and fixers in our society must either live
and work illegally within a single space, or pay two rents.
Of those who are in this situation, it is the artists who are used
as the front line of the gentrification process, because they are
seen to be clever, and they can think bravely and alternatively
about how the city might be used. A basic precept of twentieth
century art is making something of nothing: it is a line that runs
from Duchamp through Warhol. Artists, because of economic
necessity, are forced to look for buildings or areas in the city
where they can afford to work and live. The spaces they find are
often empty or obsolete they are useless; they are nothing.
As artists products are used by the gentry and as gentrification
is tied up with patronage, the Victorian role of patron of the arts
is sometimes adopted by civic administrations: they throw artists
a little City-owned building for a while, and then its taken back
again if the City doesnt think the artists are using it properly; or
sometimes the City allows artists to settle particular areas, but
only for certain periods of time.
A clear and relatively early example of how the gentrification
process works is the case of Londons docklands. In the

33
late 1960s and early 1970s, artists began using many of the
abandoned warehouses in that area as free theatres, painting
studios, collective workshops, and film studios. The artists hadnt
been invited to do this and it wasnt made easy for them. If they
intended to live in the buildings, they first had to occupy them in
order to obtain squatters rights, or they simply took over empty
and derelict buildings and put them to use. Then, they managed
to form arts groups, and gained enough political savvy to pressure
the Greater London Council into accepting mixed-use buildings
in industrial areas, thus legitimizing a combination of apartments,
studios, workshops, and offices within one building. But because
this kind of zoning was now acceptable for one group, it became
acceptable for all groups, and the way was paved for the kinds
of mega-developments still based on the mixed-use concept
of living and working within one physical envelope which
presently characterize the docklands. And now, artists cant afford
to live there anymore.
Artists, because they can form a cohesive front and are often
able to use political channels more so than the next group I
will mention have in the past, drawn attention to previously
overlooked areas in our cities as viable places to live and work.
But artists are used largely as pointers, not as serious residents.
So far Ive been speaking of people who actually work, yet have a
difficult time finding somewhere affordable in which to operate.
The very poor, called the hard-to-house in a recent city hall
document, have, unlike artists and craftspeople, low self-esteem
and are not clever about how they live in the urban environment.
They are rarely able to form politically aggressive coalitions
and they simply filter through the city, like sand through rough
fill, to rest in the humblest neighbourhoods. The opposite of
gentrification, they actually devalue the areas they occupy. They
too, are pointers to the parts of the city that are expendable.
For example, the demolition and redevelopment of Calgarys
inner city began forty years ago, first in the east downtown,
followed by what is now called the East Village, then Eau Claire
and finally, Victoria Park all these areas were once vital, lively

neighbourhoods. Before their eradication they were occupied

by the hard-to-house, but now, no one can live there no matter
what their income.
Of the people who have very little money in our society, there
seems to be a distinction made between those who are artists
or craftspeople, and others. Perhaps art can be commodified,
while simple poverty cannot. The artist who occupies a small
warehouse on 10th Avenue S.W. is upgrading the property,
while the chronic welfare case sharing a rental property on 10th
Avenue S.E. is downgrading it. The artist has work to do. The
hard-to-house seemingly have not.
Both these groups, however, share a marginality which allows
them to be used as litmus papers, or as canaries in a mine shaft,
in that artists and the hard-to-house are used as tools by the real
estate industry, which prepares the ground for the development
industry, which dictates planning decisions in the city.
Because of this process, we have come to accept severe
limitations on ways of living. Our cities have a bias toward
individual occupancy and are generally against ill-defined
occupation of buildings. Artists spaces could be created in the
inner city by rezoning commercial space to include residential
occupation, i.e., mixed-use options per rentable unit, rather than
per building.
It is, however, precisely the inclusion of residential use in
commercial space that becomes dangerous to the market, for
what is then to prevent the occupation of an empty industrial or
office building by the hard-to-house, bringing along with them
a loss of control to the real estate valuation of the building? To
legislate the qualifications of occupants of these premises, e.g.,
artists in the buildings must have attended a post-secondary
institution, or must prove that they have linseed oil in their
studios, is ridiculously bureaucratic and ultimately totalitarian,
although no more so than our present zoning by-laws.
The Barron Building on 8th Avenue and 5th Street S.W., one of

34
the downtowns most significant post-war small office buildings, is
standing two-thirds empty. Since the lower floors of a building are
always much harder to lease than the upper floors, what would
be the problem with allowing any of the first six floors to be used,
for example, as two live-in studios, four apartments, a communal
co-operative unit for three single parents with a collection of
children, a small lodge for young people with multiple sclerosis, or
as a carpenters shop? Fire separation between floors is already
there, as are multiple exits, loading docks, and elevators. The
elevators and stairwells could be security keyed. There are really
no logistical objections to this kind of use. Where then, does the
resistance lie? For there is obviously resistance, otherwise this part
of the conference would be unnecessary, and Id be living in the
Barron Building with my dog and cat.
The opposition comes from the perceived impropriety of mixing
trades with professions, the fit with the unfit, the haves with the
have-lesses. There is a powerful lack of confidence, especially
in this city, that makes us unable to accept the visible presence
of un-success in conventional terms. Artists should be neatly
packaged away, upgrading their warehouses; the urban poor
should be sent out to Forest Lawn or other low income areas;
and the hard-to-house should, to paraphrase a recent City of
Calgary planning brief, be kept away from conventional residential
areas.
If we didnt have this unquestioning belief in segregation,
separation, and zoning; if we were a more tolerant and confident
people, then we would be developing a city culture in which
many, many people could live with some sort of grace, regardless
of whether or not they had money and talent. As it is, we let our
zoning policies defend the indefensible: the exclusion of whole
groups in our society from viable city life and the economic
ghettoization of marginal groups, including artists.
So what can we do? Im afraid that I feel art must be political
and nasty a thorn in the side of the city. In terms of living in
the inner city, I think we must cease being manipulated by real
estate values and developers ambitions, become militant about

establishing tenure in the city, and not accept refugee status one
step ahead of the bulldozer. At least one-third of Calgarys office
space is standing empty. It will never be filled because it is in
buildings that have become obsolete for the purpose of providing
offices. If we were able to move into these spaces, it would
release grotty apartments and houses that artists now live in and
make them available to those less fortunate than us, and it would
save the squandering of our existing resources in the downtown
core. No one is going to invite us to do this we have to
make it happen; we must form a good working relationship with
the owner of the building, clean out the space, get the money
together, buy the building, be forever there.

Jack Long
35
Im an architect, but Im not going to talk as an architect. Im going
to be speaking as a citizen who found that in my profession, I had
to go further than just designing buildings and new communities. It
had to do with the survival of old communities.

work out, we lost all of the options except the one for the Gasp
Lodge, which we presented to city hall. They didnt evidence any
interest at the time, and we were disappointed, but believe it or
not, four months later the City had purchased the property.

Years ago, when our architecture/planning firm moved its office

into the community of Inglewood, we restored an old house as
an example of renewal and conservation, and right away we also
got involved with some very real problems there. The City had
written the community off as a place to be redeveloped with
the encroachment of transportation routes and industry, and the
closing of schools, it was as good as gone.

The Gasp Lodge was once a house of prostitution, and it

was off limits to the military in World War ll. A lot of people
remember that. It had its problems, there were murders it was
a notorious place. Anyway, the City got the property, probably
for a song. The first new tenants there were a group of artists
called Dandelion Gallery. The community strongly supported their
tenure. The group used it well, and it was a going concern
studios, a space for exhibits, a gathering place a contribution to
the community.

Our involvement came through architecture and planning, but

we could have been lawyers or social workers. We joined the
community in a program where we were the professional talent
placed at their disposal. Our goal was to help them to help
themselves, and it worked. We had lots of fun and frustration,
and it was also an intensive, dynamic period. We discovered that
in our roles as responsible professionals in the community, we
provided an essential service to its survival.
The community came to a mutual awareness of its problems.
We became a real and perceived critical mass that was able to
deal successfully with City Hall. We taught ourselves and the
community what the planning process was all about, and if it
meant a form of civil disobedience why not? One of our
great democratic societies allowed for it in its constitution. But
its important to know when to be militant and when not to be.
Remember, that was in the early 1970s, when a lot of protest
had already happened in the United States. Grass roots elements
began to prevail and third world countries were getting a voice.
An example of one of our early planning activities was that a
group within the community took out refundable options on
properties at the confluence of the Bow and Elbow rivers as an
initial renewal project. One of the options was the Gasp Lodge,
which is now called the Deane House, a well known heritage
site and restaurant. When the kind of program we wanted didnt

Eventually, however, the City did some renovation, raised the

rent, and the Dandelion group had to move; they couldnt
afford to stay there. But the City wanted to get rid of the group
regardless, because city council had been advised that Dandelion
was damaging the building. When I was on council I tried to have
that advice corrected, because it was in error. The group had
actually sustained the building kept it going, kept it from being
vandalized and gave the space an interim presence, so that
it could eventually be restored and rehabilitated as an historic
resource. This was a natural evolution of things, but it was wrong
to have put the stigma on the artists that they had severely
damaged the building. That was inexcusable, because the artists
were the ones who had kept the building alive.
But in spite of that, I think the process worked the finding
of an old place, working with it, giving it an interim use until it
is designated for something else. This type of evolution isnt
so bad if theres fairness involved all the way down the line.
Unfortunately, I dont think this process could happen at present.
The difficulty is that the City has an administrative grip on a
lot of property, and has an enforcing by-law system which is
the strongest that Ive seen in all my years in Calgary. Its an
administrative power trip that has to do with control, and it really
keeps nice things from happening.

36
Im going to move on now, and talk about the city at large,
because I think Calgary today is a paradox. On the good side,
firstly, is volunteerism. Its always been much more important
in Calgary relative to other North American cities. Next, I think
that one of our present city commissioners is an advocate and
supporter of the arts. I also think we have a good mayor. Hes
young, he wants to do the right things. He has empathy for your
efforts. Then theres the Calgary Region Arts Foundation, which
administers a grant program. A lot of cities dont have that.
Finally, I think the current level of public awareness towards the
environment, conservation, and the arts, is running high.
But, you know as well as I do that none of this constitutes a basic
understanding of your needs or desires as local artists. Its not
probable that your arts network can expect strong administrative
support. Maybe that kind of co-operation exists at city hall, but I
dont think its much in evidence at this time. It seems to me that
the city administration, or any corporation for that matter, has a
life cycle that can be observed and described. In the beginning, its
enthusiastic, full of discovery, wanting to do the right thing; and
then it reaches a crest and starts down the other side, where the
management section takes over. I think thats where city hall is
right now with its administration. Theyre not on a creative bent.
They say they are, but I question that. I think theyre in that part
of the cycle where administration is paramount the control,
the management heavy duty stuff that takes away from
creativity and real wisdom of governance.
But I dont really understand why we ever expect governments to
lead, or to initiate. I dont believe thats the role of government.
In ancient cities the legislators did not decree legislation, they
administered it. Legislation was decreed by kings, priests, dictators,
or by the people through a process called democracy.
Now, we like to think we live in a democratic society, but current
governments at all levels think its their role to rule, to control,
and they forget that it is often the public who can lead the way.
This is a double-edged sword, because we who are a part of
the public forget, or dont know how, to play the role of being

pluralistic leaders.
So I think its important that you develop the network youre
creating with this conference. The arts must be an integral part
of the city and its future. In ancient times the greatest cities rose
from humble beginnings and as they grew, they became hotbeds
of change. They allowed debate, they were inventive, and they
were creative places for artists, scientists, and social reformers.
There was a lot of civic strife and there were creative revolutions.
They sought inherent freedoms and the forces at work were
dynamic. I hope in my lifetime Ill see Calgary start to acclaim
these good features. It aspires to be a great city, but it wont be
unless it lets people like you, as well as a lot of other people with
common goals and just causes, function and flourish in this city.
Right now we dont have that, but I think your efforts will help to
change Calgary for the better.

Brenda Polegi
37
I guess I should have worn my black hat, although perhaps its not
necessary, because you can already see what colour weve been
painted. I would like to begin by saying that the city administration
is not the grey monolith that people think it is. It consists of
many departments which all have quite different approaches to
their various functions. So we should be seen not as one large
administration to be battled with, but as individuals who can work
with you to help you achieve your ends, while also assisting the
City to realize its goals.
I represent an arm of the city adminstration called Parks and
Recreation. Our mandate is to encourage and promote social,
recreational, and cultural groups, in order to enhance the quality
of life within the city. We work with these associations and assist
them in their roles as providers of leisure experiences. There are
several other arms within the administration, including the Land
and Planning departments, and of course I dont presume to
speak for them.
Ive been asked to talk about my departments Social/Recreational
Lease Policy, whereby non-profit organizations can obtain land
and buildings owned by the City for their groups' uses. Id like
to start by explaining that its the Land Department which is
responsible for acquiring and managing all land and real estate on
behalf of the City Corporation. Any land that it acquires which
has a recreational component is transferred to our department,
and becomes part of our inventory. It is this property that is
available for use by non-profit organizations through the Social/
Recreational Lease Policy. Land in the downtown, as you can
appreciate, is at a premium, so Parks and Recreations main
interest in this area is to obtain land for open space and parks,
because there is quite a shortage.
So first of all I should point out that Parks and Recreation does
not have much land in the downtown and inner city that is
available for organizations to lease. Generally we have land rather
than buildings, which we make available to those non-profit
organizations which offer cultural and recreational opportunities
for Calgarians. We lease the City-owned land and buildings, when

available, at preferential rates to these non-profits (a) if they are

incorporated, (b) if their mandates relate directly to that of Parks and
Recreations cultural and recreational policy, (c) if the organizations
provide at least 50 percent use of the facility to the general public,
and (d) providing that the organizations do not discriminate on the
grounds of race, religion, or ability to pay to participate.
There are only two buildings in the downtown I can think of that
fall under this policy. One is the Pumphouse Theatre and the
other is the Calgary Multicultural Centre. Both buildings came
into our inventory rather recently, and were obtained through the
Land Department by the organizations that currently reside there.
The buildings were run-down, and were renovated by the tenant
groups on a fifty-fifty cost sharing basis, with one-half coming
from the groups own resources, and the other half coming from
the Major Cultural and Recreational Grant Program and the
Community Recreation/Cultural Grant Program.
According to our policy, we are prohibited from giving a
preferential rate when the group or organization has direct
competition in the commercial market. So, just as we would not
give preferential lease rates to golf courses and curling clubs, we
would not generally do so for facilities such as art galleries. The
policy supports long-term leases of ten, fifteen, and twenty-five
years, depending on the value of the improvements made. The
rent is based on a formula that starts at $150 per year /per halfacre, and rises in small increments per half-acre parcel of land.
Building rent is 1 percent of the assessed value of the building and
improvements, or $1000 per $100,000 of assessed value.
The rent may be adjusted according to other factors, such
as the contribution the organization puts into renovating the
building, or whether or not the group is providing a service
that would normally be provided by our department. The rent
may also be adjusted according to the organizations ability
to recover revenue. All maintenance, repair and utility costs
are the responsibility of the renting group. The City requires
that groups carry insurance to cover replacement cost of the
building and public liability. There are also other conditions. One

38
that I mentioned was 50 percent public use. This requirement
can be met in a number of ways, e.g., by offering instruction,
performances, etc., to the general public so that they can benefit
from the resources of the organization.
So thats a thumbnail sketch of what our departments Social/
Recreational Lease Policy offers. However, the Property Division
of the City Land Department takes a different approach. Its
mandate is to manage all lands and buildings acquired by the
City for future municipal purposes. One of the main differences
between them and Parks and Recreation is that they are
holding property on a short-term basis for future development,
transportation needs, municipal buildings, and so on. The land
we hold is specifically for parks and recreational use. When the
Land Department does lease property, its mandate is to realize a
maximum return, consistent with market conditions, until such time
as the propertys intended use is implemented. Their leases are
usually short-term, under a thirty, sixty, or ninety-day vacate clause.
The Land Department has no mandate to treat the non-profit
sector any differently from the private sector, although it has in
the past. An example of this is when non-profit associations get a
proposal together and sell it to city council, which is the political
arm of the civic government. The chances for succeeding in this
type of endeavour, are of course higher when no commercial
value has been assigned to a building. This is how the Youth
Drama Society obtained the old Pumphouse Theatre at the end
of 9th Avenue. They put together a proposal to take over the
building, renovate it, and operate it for the publics benefit.
All Land Department leases require approval of city council,
whereas our departments leases are approved at the
administrative level. So, oftentimes the Land Department has
more flexibility in terms of what it can present to council, because
council may change recommendations, or recommend different
uses for a particular space.
But all this said, basically the Land Department is looking for the
best business deal to protect its assets, which are purchased

with tax dollars and maintained with public funds. If it can meet
this mandate and contribute to the quality of life of Calgarians,
it will try to do that. Some of you are aware of the Archie Key
Memorial Arts Society and what they are trying to achieve
with the Ravins Building. They want to take over three unused
floors of the building for rehearsal, office, and studio space. So
opportunities do exist where groups can get together and present
solid proposals for using such spaces.
Groups with their own buildings and those which have City or
private sector leases can offset some of their renovations costs
through the Community Recreation/Cultural Grant Program. This
program is funded by the Province on a per capita basis and is
administered by Parks and Recreation on behalf of the City. Onehalf of the available funds are allocated to the City and one-half
are available to community groups. Groups are eligible for up
to 50 percent of their capital budgets through this program, and
they must raise at least 25 percent from their own resources.
In addition, the organizations have to demonstrate need, public
support, financial stability, and good management. Its a long
process, so groups have to be well organized. This program has
been used for renovations, capital equipment, and construction
costs. It is scheduled to end in 1991-92 and we havent heard from
the Province as to what the replacement grant program will be.
In closing, let me try to outline the important qualities, that from
Parks and Recreations point of view, groups should possess in
order to access some of our leases and grants. They have to
demonstrate: strong organizational abilities; proven financial need;
strong public and political support; the ability to plan for the
future; sufficient financial resources for managing a facility without
continued municipal assistance, and; assurance that the public will
use and benefit from the facility. To be blunt, they need political
support from the mayor, councillors, senior bureaucrats, the
business community, and the cultural establishment all must
be brought onside. Groups need to work with the administration,
to involve us from the beginning, and Im sure many of you know
individuals in our department who are available to help you and
work with you.

Michael Green
39
In the ten years that One Yellow Rabbit Theatre [OYR] has
been operating, we have never been able to get our foot inside
a City-owned building its been impossible. Theres a neverending litany of reasons why arts groups are seen by the City as
unsuitable tenants: they think we wont be able to pay the rent;
that our operations wont be suited to the zoning, plumbing or
electricity of the building, etc. Or sometimes its not a physical
roadblock so much as an administrative one. For example, Truck
Gallery is now in the City-owned Ravins Building, and their
problems seem almost like comic relief after listening to Brendas
talk [Brenda Polegi]. I mean, here we go: the City has no security
in the building; they dont issue receipts for rent paid; they wont
let Truck put a small sign on the front door saying theyre even
there; they treat the co-ordinator in a patronizing manner; they
have given Truck very tenuous permission to use the elevator
permission which could be withdrawn at any time; they turn
away all inquiries from other arts groups about the floor below
Truck, which has been vacant for at least three years; and the
gallery must pay 2.5 times their municipal CRAF [Calgary Region
Arts Foundation] grant in rent back to the City each year. So
obviously there are lots of problems big problems.
One of the most valuable things to OYR, and I suspect to the
other arts groups in the city, is the CRC [Community Recreation/
Cultural Grant] program. At one point, OYR was able to get a
CRC grant and what we really wanted to do was make a home
for ourselves. We wanted to use the money to make some of
the simple, but very important changes needed to make the
space functional and bring it up to building code. But you cant
use the money to upgrade a facility unless you have a lease, and
you cant get a lease for love nor money. There is not one single
organization among those Im representing today that has a lease.
It cant be done.
Like most groups, OYR has gone directly to the corporate
landlords, and Ive had enough experience with them to be able
to summarize their point of view: They need to make money to
justify keeping the building open, and they want either to make
money or tear the building down. Thats the bottom line. Theres

nothing quite so horrifying to landlords as seeing historic plaques go

up on their buildings, because then theres nothing they can do.
However, the business sector and city hall are our partners in
the community. And with the Citys help, in terms of funding
and policy making, we form a triangle of interest groups that
can service each other. And artists do need to form a group,
because when we approach the corporate world individually, they
often see us as being extraordinarily clownish. Were classically
unorganized and we have hare-brained ideas. The corporations
will listen to us with their tongues in their cheeks and nod their
heads and say, Yes! Yes! Wed love to have a theatre company
that specializes in naked musical reviews on the third floor of
our office building. Its a fine idea! Of course, in order to do that
youd have to meet a number of building specifications and that
would require a lot of money, and to justify that you need a long
lease, but we dont want to give you a lease because in three or
four years this district will be revitalized, and it will be time for
you to get out so we can open a disco. Its a vicious circle.
But if we could rise above this clownish aspect that we seem
to wear like a mantle, then people would treat us differently,
because our money is the same colour as everybody elses. What
we have to do is form an umbrella group, the likes of which I
havent seen in Calgary. Ive seen little ones come and go, but
I havent seen a coalition with the power or political clout to
make a difference. With such an organization we could say to
a landlord, Okay, we want the whole building. Thats music
to their ears. And if this umbrella group submitted a big grant
application to the CRC program, what a difference we could
make. We could have a facility to live and work in. It would be
ours and we wouldnt be thrown out on the street next time
they decide to host another Grey Cup, or a Worlds Fair. The
building wouldnt accidentally burn down you know?
So thats whats required. If we could get a group together, we
could go to city hall and maybe get some policies changed. There
are few affordable parts of Calgary left and now were told the
CRC program is going to end. But, when Alberta Culture was

Summary of Questions and Discussion

40
reorganized and became Culture and Multiculturalism, we saw a
lot of facility development for the benefit of multicultural groups,
so maybe we could stretch the meaning of multiculturalism to
include artists. Then we would be eligible for a facility, just like any
other voting constituency.
We have to present a united front to the City and the business
community, and say, This is who we are and this is what we
want, and when we get it were going to line your pockets with
a little bit of lucre. Thats whats going to have to happen. Civil
disobedience is fine, but if the only facility you have consists of
a few tin can lights in the ceiling and youre only allowed two
electrical circuits because otherwise youll knock the power
out of the bicycle repair shop on the main floor then you have
to do what the landlord says, however unpalatable, just so you
can keep a roof over your head, and this is really an intolerable
situation. Is there anybody here who can take my suggestions
forward and help turn them into reality?

Jack Long Part of the federal Neighbourhood Improvement

Program was the Residential Rehabilitation Program. This program
gave low interest loans or forgivable loans to homeowners to
upgrade their premises. The program had a very strict by-law
interpretation which, if applied, would have condemned many old
houses and put a lot of old-timers on the street. But one man,
Bob Johnson, who worked in the City Planning Department, bent
the rules and took a humane approach, and thats what I love
sometimes about some civil servants. They allow things to happen
because they know the intention is right. With all due respect,
when I criticize the city administration, its not those individuals
who want to do good things, or the few good policies that work.
Im talking about the hard line. How do you deal with the one
exception that cant quite meet the regulations, even though its a
good idea? It needs some slack, and when I dont see that slack, I
know the administration does not have the required compassion
and political will. Regulations should be rewritten so that they
arent so inflexible. They pretend to be helpful but in fact they
dont help at all.
Brenda Polegi It is certainly true that the city administration
moves faster when there is political support behind a request.
Another way of getting that flexibility is finding the Bob
Johnsons, bringing them onside and having them with you from
the beginning. The flexibility is in the individuals within the
administration and the political process.
Laurie Cormat (Burns Visual Arts Society) I think it would be a
good idea to organize something where City officials, and some
of the more interested councillors could visit studios such as the
Burns Visual Arts Society in the Nielson Block, Truck Studios in
the Ravins Building, and artists in the Grain Exchange Building.
They would be able to see what were accomplishing, and that we
arent the bogeymen we appear to be that were occupying
these buildings, maintaining them, and like Jack said, were keeping
them alive.
Michael Green It seems quite clear to me why there isnt a large
and powerful umbrella group representing the interests of artists:

41
we work such long hours for so little money, and we usually
have others jobs as well, to make ends meet. Finding time on
top of this so we can get together seems almost beyond human
ability. The ideal thing would be for an altruistic society to be set
up Friends of Calgary Artists, or something. But maybe not,
because artists are very independent people and the notion of
someone else taking care of us is abhorrent. I know why landlords
are surprised when they come around and see how neat and
tidy we are that we arent partying all the time, with people
passed out all over the place. They expect that kind of behaviour
because they recognize instinctively that part of us which is a
child, a free spirit, which they remember from their own teenage
years, and they expect us to be only that. We can help to dispell
this illusion by being strong and united and having annual tours
of our studios.
Gail Pierce (Alberta Printmakers Society) I dont know if this is
feasible, but what about the idea of artists becoming landlords?
Co-operative purchasing of space gives you control over what
happens to the building. I think it would be in the Citys interest,
through Parks and Recreation, to become a partner in that kind of
thing. If you put 50 percent of your money here, and 50 percent
there, you have twice as many buildings than if you put 100
percent into one. It seems to me that something like that could
be worked out.
Michael Green There are lots of precedents for that in San
Francisco. Project Artaud was an old canning factory which was
taken over by squatters. Eventually they bought the building and
turned it into an extraordinarily beautiful facility.
Stephanie White Every time you work with someone else,
expecting them to give you money, they give you a list of things
you have to do, and thats intolerable to live with. Its patronizing.
So you forfeit a lot to get that 50 percent, which I think erodes
your ability to be an artist.
Gail Pierce It seems were giving that up to be renters. Why not
give it up to be owners?

Stephanie White Why give up anything? Everybody wants to live

in a gorgeous turn of the century brick warehouse, somewhere
downtown, near the tracks. We have a city that is fourteen miles
long by eight miles wide. There are buildings standing empty
throughout the southeast as well as the downtown, but theyre
not trendy or fashionable. The places that artists think they ought
to be in are very marketable now, and most artists cant afford
them. But there are less fashionable areas of the city to occupy
that arent expensive. You shouldnt have to give up anything just
for money.
Laurie Cormat Were always expecting our landlord to tell us
we have to get out, and weve looked for a new space weve
looked at old warehouses in non-trendy areas and we cant get
anything. Its either a financial problem, or the owner wont allow
us to divide up a big space with partitions.
Stephanie White This goes back to how tolerant the zoning is,
because I know in Vancouver, which has developed a more liberal
attitude to artists studios over the past few years, they allow
things to happen in old Safeway buildings, for example. So the
issue is not to target high-return places like the Neilson Building,
which is either going to be torn down for new development
property or turned into an office space. You have to find
something that doesnt have that kind of financial requirement
built into it.
Laurie Cormat Weve tried all that. Weve looked at Crowchild
Trail, and the southeast, but we seem unable to turn anything up.
There are so many restrictions.
Francine Bremner (tapestry artist:) As artists we have a
passion, a desire, a drive to create, which I think we have to use
productively to become less dependent on grants and landlords,
because when you become dependent you lose your creative
edge. We have to become our own landlords. But I also think
that the City should be more flexible instead of always sticking by
the rules. We both have to come closer to the middle to find a
solution.

42
Michael Gordon (Senior Planner, City of Vancouver) In
Vancouver we still have a long way to go, but weve made some
progress. A few reasons why things are going well are: First, we
had a crisis where the City was evicting artists from their studios
because they were firetraps. Some very important changes came
out of that crisis, and hopefully Calgary might have a similar crisis
where it will be able to nudge some of the bureaucracy along
in terms of legislation. If you have a crisis I suggest you get city
council onside, so that they will make it a priority to provide
affordable and appropriate studio and performance facilities.
Another thing to do is find out who your friends are within the
bureaucracy because youre going to need friends and
perhaps get city council to set up something similar to a group
we have in Vancouver called the Artists Studio Implementation
Committee. This has been a great thing, because instead of
dealing with bureaucrats like me, one at a time, you get us all
engineers, building inspectors, planners and lawyers in one
room and you say, Okay, we have a problem here. Youre telling
the artists in this building that they have to be out of here in one
month. What the hell can we do about it? And lo and behold,
we can come up with a solution we relax a few regulations
here and there, and we give an eight or nine month extension
instead of rigorously enforcing fire codes. Maybe we put some
sprinklers in, or an extra exit, or an extension to the fire escape
but you save the situation so artists arent in fear of losing their
spaces.
Finally, you must get a coalition of people together. And as your
issue develops a higher profile you will identify people in the
community who are altruistic. In Vancouver were not all driven
by market and commercial ideals. For example we have a Hong
Kong millionaire who wants to put money into renovating an old
warehouse for artists. We have a couple of people who have
given over a warehouse on the edge of the Expo lands. They
could have held on to it for development, but now its got thirtysix studios and two galleries in it and its going to be there for a
long time.

Jack Long The city government is a paradox now. Its so uptight

administratively that it wont let go. And damn it, it has to change.
But it wont change from within the administration. I dont
think the grassroots employees will make it happen, and I dont
think the professionals will, either. I think it has to be a public
movement a movement that deals with the arts and social
change, with bettering the human condition and with improving
inner city areas. Change the laws that are wrong, whether theyre
in the educational system, the arts, or urban development.
Change them through a public movement, because it takes strong
public pressure to make change.
Tom Hendry I agree with Michael Gordon on the need to
ascertain a crisis and publicize it in order to get something to
happen, because city governments tend to be reactive in this area.
I did a study in 1984 of artists problems in Toronto, and found
that the main difficulties were due to a lack of working capital and
working space. We addressed these problems by increasing the
grants budget sixfold over five years, and by looking at artistdriven ideas of what should happen regarding space. What they
wanted was exactly what Michael talked about, a friends of
the artists group that would be a focus for their concerns. So a
group was spun off from the Toronto Arts Council, called Toronto
Artscape, which included artists from several disciplines, as well
as architects and developers with an interest in recycling older
buildings. The City gave the Artscape group an old building on a
twenty-five year lease and found $250,000 working capital. With
this money they went to the federal government and got more
money. Then they went to the Province, and over a long time
they got the rules changed. The building has now been subdivided
and parcelled out to artists on the basis of fairly lengthy leases.
Artscape is the main tenant, and since it knows something about
the kinds of needs artists have, the situation works. But it started
very small, with some artists, architects, and developers forming
a board and going to the City. When you create a magnet for
good work like that, it tends to generate opportunities. We didnt
even know the building or the working capital were available. The
City told us about it when they saw we were serious about doing
something about what we had identified as a problem.

43
Brian Dyson (Syntax Arts Society) I just want to make a
comment that you might want to add to, or comment on
yourselves. I keep thinking about what Peter Hoff said yesterday
at the end of the panel on advocacy. He pointed out that society
was prepared to make an investment in delivering certain services
to the community because there was an acknowledged need for
those services. He specifically mentioned health and welfare, and
education. Hospitals dont have to apply for grants to buy drugs
and equipment, nor libraries to buy books. Society recognizes
the need, and the government puts policy in place to deliver
those services, and provides a good standard of living for people
working in those areas of the economy. Peter said that this wasnt
happening in the arts, but I think it is. Its just not happening in
a way that benefits the artist. This building were in now [the
Calgary Centre for Performing Arts] cost more than $80 million
to build, so there is obviously a strong degree of commitment to
the arts. I think the problem is that its the local cultural producer
who is being undervalued and whose contribution is not being
recognized. How do we avoid building these extravagant buildings
which are of little value to the local producers and move
to a different set of priorities? The space were using cost $1000
to rent for 2 1/2 days, and that was discounted because were
a non-profit group. How can centres like this operate on such
an inflated economic scale while local artist-run groups are
continually facing economic crises? Facilities such as this and the
Glenbow Museum are probably absorbing about half of the
annual Calgary Region Arts Foundation grant budget. The local
producers of culture have to go begging, while these centres are
providing well-paid jobs primarily for administrative and support
staff. They provide very little in terms of appreciation and financial
support to the local producer, which means they are doing next
to nothing to encourage and sustain a local cultural expression.
Michael Green You talk about the state of the local producer.
This building was built for Theatre Calgary and Alberta Theatre
Projects, and they dont even have a lease here yet. They could
be out soon, too they almost were over the Olympics,
because the landlords wanted to program their own Olympic
events in those theatres. Pretty soon theyll probably want to put
a cocktail lounge in One Yellow Rabbits space.

Anon Was this building built with grant money or corporate

money?
Brian Dyson It was built with a combination of Provincial and
corporate funds. The Province has a policy that will match every
dollar raised in the commercial sector. I think this complex
raised only 25 percent of the total budget from the commercial
sector, so even with the Provinces matching grant they were 50
percent short of their goal. Then, the Minister of Culture gave a
discretionary, unconditional grant of about $40 million, breaking
all the departments guidelines, all their rules, and all the policies
that we have to follow, and it was a fait accompli. Thats how it
got built.
Jack Long Does the City have an available inventory of public and
private buildings?
Gae VanSiri (City of Calgary Parks and Recreation) No.
Jack Long Thats one thing that would be useful to people,
isnt it? an inventory of buildings with square footage and
descriptions. Could that be made available without much trouble?
Gae VanSiri I would say it would be difficult. It doesnt exist, so
someone would have to sit down and make it.
Jack Long I think that an inventory of public and private spaces
in the urban core is something you ought to have. It would be a
good working tool. Maybe people could request the City to do
this, although even if youre a professional making a request, it can
take months, even years, before you have enough of a dialogue to
get a decision. None of us lives long enough to make a deal.

Panel 4
Revitalizing the downtown: What's been done before?
Speakers:

Jim Anderson City of Calgary Land Department

Jim Anderson is the General Manager of the Calgary Municipal Heritage Properties Authority, which is responsible for maintaining and preserving Cityowned heritage properties.

Herb Reynolds Hammerson Properties Incorporated

Herb Reynolds is employed by Hammerson as the General Manager of Bow Valley Square, the location of Lunchbox Theatre. Hammerson donates space
in Bow ValleySquare for Lunchbox Theatre and the presentation of its programs.
44

Michael Gordon Senior Planner, City of Vancouver

Michael Gordon is a Senior Planner with the City of Vancouver. He is responsible for developing planning policies to guide development in neighbourhoods
outside the downtown peninsula. He has been a planner for the City of Regina, the Ontario government, and has worked privately as a planning consultant..
In addition, he has taught planning at the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology. His interests are neighbourhood planning, affordable housing, heritage,
urban design, culture and the city, Italian Renaissance art and architecture, and music.

Gilles Hbert President, Association of National Non-Profit Artists' Centres

Gilles Hebert is a Winnipeg artist. He is also active as an arts administrator, curator and advocate. He is Co-director of the Winnipeg Film Group and
is working with CARFAC (Canadian Artists' Representation) Manitoba as Co-ordinator of the upcoming national conference "Artists Analyzing Markets."
He has just finished a four-year term on the Winnipeg Arts Advisory Council and is in his final year as President of the Association of National Non-Profit
Artists' Centres.

Moderator:

Nowell Berg President, Calgary Society of Independent Filmmakers

Nowell Berg is a filmmaker whose work includes Passion for Philanthropy and Bodies and Pleasures, which he co-produced with Douglas Berquist.
He is currently completing a documentary on the 1990 National Liberal Party Convention, which was held in Calgary.

Jim Anderson

I am going to talk about a building called the Armour Block, which

is owned by the City of Calgary. Its actually two buildings the
Armour and Reliance Blocks joined at the main floor, that have
been transformed into thirty-four low-rent living units. Originally
the building consisted of basic unserviced accommodation on
one side, and was totally derelect on the other side. On the main
floor was a low-cost office furniture store, which is still there.
The building had initially been acquired by the City for the
Transportation Department. However, there was a change in
plans and it was no longer required, although it may be still be,
so I suppose the building has an uncertain future. But whats
significant about the Armour Block is that its position with the city
administration was typical in that it was not regarded in terms of
its merit as a building, but was only perceived in terms of the civic
value of the land.

My perception is that this attitude prevails among some of the

owners of the older buildings in the downtown area they see
the value of the building only in terms of the land it occupies, and
they are simply maintaining the building for interim revenue until
the big payoff comes, when the land is sold for redevelopment.
In the case of the Armour Block, it was not perceived by the City
that there was a potential sale to a developer; however, there
was the intention to ultimately use the building or the land for
some civic purpose. Consequently there had been no attention
paid to the maintenance of this building for a period of fifteen
years. As a result, it was quite run-down, and a catastrophe arose
in that the boiler was condemned. This meant that the City
was looking at the prospect of paying $50,000 for a new boiler,
and thousands of dollars more to revive the electrical system to
accommodate the new boiler. And then it was discovered that

45
the roof was in terrible condition, so the general position of the
administration was that the building should be torn down.
Interestingly, the nineteen residents in the building were artists.
They had rented the space because it was literally the cheapest
place in town, with rents of $185 and $200 per month. It
provided both residential and studio space for the tenants, who
were low-income artists trying to make a living from their art.
What we were able to do was approach the federal government
for what is called a Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program
[RRAP] grant. At that time, three or four years ago, a landlord
could obtain a grant of up to $17,000 per unit to rehabilitate
rental accommodation. We were awarded the grant, and the
restoration followed the guidelines of this RRAP program, which
meant that the units had to be self-contained in terms of services.
At that point, none of the units were, because there were
communal bathrooms. So what we did was to expand into the
derelict part of the building, and create thirty-four self-contained
units where there were once nineteen.
One of the interesting arguments that arose was that the artists
felt there was a community value in having communal washrooms.
There was a certain social life which related to the shared use of
washroom facilities, and they didnt want to see them removed
to provide self-contained accommodation. Besides, I think they
wanted to retain the living space that the bathrooms were going
to take up. However, an essential requirement of the program,
as outlined by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation,
stipulated that we had to provide units which were self-contained,
i.e., including bathrooms. One artist, a couple of years later,
introduced me to her mother, saying that I was the person who
fixed up the building, and the mother said, I want to thank
you for the bathrooms, because now I can come and visit my
daughter and feel safe. So I think they are all satisfied now that
bathrooms were a good idea.
One of the conditions of the grant, and it sounds awfully
generous, was that the landlord had to rent at 50 percent of

market value, and that turned out to be almost exactly the same
as the rents charged before this renovation. So the result is that all
of the artists now get a fairly small self-contained unit, and they pay
roughly what they did before the renovation.
The total budget for the work was $600,000, which was made up
of $550,000 from RRAP. The entire residential area was redone,
as were all the major systems of the building, and its now a very
satisfactory place. Its a pity that the RRAP program no longer
exists, at least for landlords, because I think that the Citys financial
requirements are not that much different from those of a private
landlord, and the City now makes more money on this building
than it ever did before, even though the rents were not increased.
All I can offer with respect to what this means in terms of
revitalizing downtown is that I believe the attitude of the city
administration towards its ownership of these buildings is not unlike
the attitudes of private owners in that they are not perceiving the
significance of older buildings. I function as the general manager of
the Calgary Heritage Properties Authority and we have renovated
about ten buildings so far. When we began work on them they
were all derelict, and now they look quite interesting. However, the
City imposes a guideline on our operation, which is that they are
willing to donate the property in its derelict state, but they wont
contribute tax dollars to the operation of the buildings. So we have
been proceeding along these guidelines, and although we have
obtained a certain amount of grant money from Alberta Culture,
this is another grant area that has been severely set back.
In future, all of these revitalizations, including those done by the
City, will operate on the premise that they are going to have to
pay their own way. However, my perception is that society accepts
that there are other things more important than profit margins and
value of assets. Personally, I think that the value of these buildings is
enormous.

Herb Reynolds
46
Id like to start by reviewing Hammerson Properties involvement
with Calgarys cultural community. Hammerson is Englands third
largest property development company with international assets
of $14 billion.
Firstly, we are very proud of our support of Lunchbox Theatre,
which advertises itself as the most successful lunchtime theatre
in the world, and I believe it. The company, under the direction
of Bartley Bard, has been operating since 1975. Since then, it has
occupied five different locations in Bow Valley Square, and has
put on 136 productions which have played to more than 500,000
people. We provide 3,300 square feet of space for offices, box
office, and rehearsals, as well as a theatre with a seating capacity
of 191.
Other theatre companies had approached us before Lunchbox,
but Bartley Bard was the only one who said that all he wanted
was free space. Everyone else who approached us wanted a
contribution to operating costs. Bartley said he would cover
these costs through ticket sales and cultural funding agencies. This
impressed my predecessor, and thats how Lunchbox came to be
a tenant in Bow Valley Square. Hammerson won a Financial Post
award in 1984 for its sustained contribution to Lunchbox.
We also maintain a commitment to the visual arts, and
Hammerson has commissioned several wall hangings for Bow
Valley Square over the years. In sculpture, our most important
relationship has been with Toronto artist Sorel Etrog. We own
five of his sculptures, this being, Im told, the largest collection of
his work outside of the Smithsonian Institute.
Our third involvement is with groups of musicians, who entertain
our resident tenants during the Christmas season.
So why do we do it? Do we get any benefit out of it? We think
so. Of prime importance to us is the entertainment value, and the
warm ambience the arts provide for our tenants. We believe that
we should offer more than a first class office environment: shops,
retail services, a food court, wall hangings, sculpture, theatre all

these things make our tenants feel good towards Bow Valley
Square and, we hope, Hammerson.
Do we get our moneys worth? Well, we probably do. It is very
difficult to quantify anything of this nature. Its no different than
trying to assess whether or not money spent on advertising is
a viable investment. Maybe we can get five cents more in rent
per square foot because Bow Valley Square is perceived to offer
more than other complexes. We do know that in the kind of real
estate market weve had in the past ten years, where brokers and
landlords are continually after each others tenants, that tenants
in Bow Valley Square show extreme loyalty to us, and maybe our
involvement in the arts community has contributed to that loyalty.
Theres also a direct benefit, and it comes in the form of
concessions available from the City at the time of development
or redevelopment. These concessions are given for certain public
amenities such as contributing art if they are included in a
development. Generally the concessions involve an increase in
Foot Area Ratio. This ratio defines the amount of square-foot
space a building can occupy on a given property. Contributing
space for theatres, visual art, etc., can gain Foot Area Ratio
for a developer, because the donated space does not count
as buildable area, and therefore does not subtract from the
amount of space available for development. For example, if
we are permitted to build 200,000 square feet of office space,
the inclusion of a theatre in the space would not reduce that
allowable amount.
We have recently been involved with the City in working out a
plan whereby we would dedicate two of our Etrog sculptures in
exchange for concessions to a redevelopment plan. This is one
example where rules have been used by the developers and the
City so that everyone wins.
In closing, I would like to emphasize that Hammerson is pleased
with its association with the cultural community, but it would
be unfair of me not to point out that some of the benefits do
have a cost, and often the cost imposed by the system and

Michael Gordon
47
youre part of the system is too great. What I mean by that
are holdups in development approval process because of the
inflexibility of the authorities, or because of the length of time it
takes the arts community, in some cases, to review a proposal.
Demands for amenities can cause a developer to throw up his
hands and say, Forget it. Theres no sense in wasting time. We
want to get on with our development. We havent got time for
the politics that often surface when dealing with both the City
and the cultural community.

A Vancouver Perspective on the Role of the Arts Community

in Creating a Vital Downtown.
One of the reasons why I am a city planner is that through my
work I want to provide a home for artists in the city a place
for them to work, live, and play. And through the policies of the
City of Vancouver, and city councils actions and investments, I
hope were moving toward that. Weve got a long way to go,
and certainly the arts community is being critical that were falling
short, but were a lot further ahead than we were ten years ago.
Vancouvers downtown has a reputation of being a vital, lively
place the sidewalks on Robson, Davie, and Denman Streets
are crowded with pedestrians, cafes spill out from numerous
storefronts in the warmer months, the streets are congested with
traffic until ten or eleven oclock at night, and there are theatres,
nighclubs, bars and discos throughout the downtown. Other cities
in North America, such as Montral, New Orleans, Toronto, San
Francisco, and New York offer a similar pattern of places to see
and be seen. Regrettably, these types of cities are remarkably few
in number.
This presentation will attempt to:
1. outline the contribution of the arts community to creating a
vital downtown Vancouver;
2. suggest some of the key features of a downtown that will
ensure a vital arts community;
3. explain the City of Vancouver planning policies and social
planning policies which directly and
4. indirectly impact the arts community, and note the views of
the arts community on these initiatives;
5. offer suggestions for a strategy involving the arts community
in the revitalization of downtown Calgary.

1.

The Contribution of the Arts Community to Creating a

Vital Downtown in Vancouver
There is little doubt that artists embrace urban life, and by
their active presence play an important role in creating a

48
vital downtown: musicians find an audience in the passing
pedestrians; theatres and bars provide live music and venues
for other performing arts; the visual artists with their gallery
shows and public art projects add an important visual
dimension to the downtown; and artists choose to live in the
city centre, thereby playing an important role in revitalizing
rundown areas. In summary, artists contribute by:

creating ambience on the street by the presence of

street musicians and other street performers;

filling Vancouvers many galleries with art;

creating lively nightspots through performance;

providing live theatre;

increasing the visual diversity of the downtown streets,

as a counterpoint to the presence of predictable, out of
scale, modern architecture;

creating art that can be sold to tourists and residents;

living downtown, and thereby joining the elderly, gays,

and singles who make up the majority of downtown
population.
2.

3.

Key Features of a Downtown That Ensure a Place for the

Arts Community

pedestrian-oriented streets this is a lesson Calgary

must learn you need lots of retail, with no parking
lots between the pedestrians and stores; these kinds of
streets offer opportunities for the creation of aauthentic
public life, e.g., through street performers and the sale
of art from street vendors, etc., and City officials should
restrain the regulatory impulse to limit street activity;

performance facilities and not just more large

theatres, but smaller venues for local productions;

gallery spaces for exhibiting art;

artist live/work studios and low-cost housing for artists;

public art, in order to support local artists, and to

provide variety and surprise as part of the downtown
experience.
City Policies With an Indirect Impact on the Arts
Community

These policies are as important as those which have a direct

impact. Some examples of indirect policies follow.
3.1. Recognizing and planning for a variety of downtown
neighbourhoods: One reason for the vitality of Vancouvers
downtown is that the neighbourhoods all have different
characters, e.g., the high-rise West End district; DowntownSouth, which is full of bars, discos, and prostitutes;
Chinatown; Gastown, the Downtown-Eastside, and; Granville
Island. All of these areas have a variety of places for artists
to live, play, create, and show their works. This gives the arts
community a lot of choice in terms of homes, venues, and
facilities, as opposed to being limited to one or two parts of
the downtown.
3.2. Restraining land values: Nothing drives out the arts
community faster than high land values and rents. During
the past fifteen years, the City has placed a number of
restrictions on development which have indirectly assisted
the arts community by keeping rents low. For example,
zoning in the Downtown-Eastside has curtailed most
development, except for social housing, with the result
that there are many low-rent older buildings available for
studios, galleries, and performance spaces. Government
landownership can also play a role, e.g., Granville Island, an
area of markets, galleries, and studios, offers low rents to
artists.
3.3. Zoning regulations that protect and create pedestrian streets:
As I have already noted, pedestrian streets play an important
role in ensuring that there is both public interaction and a
place for artists. Pedestrian areas, controlled by corporations
and patrolled by zealous security guards usually smother
the inspiration and spontaneity of arts activity. The zoning in
downtown Vancouver supports the principle that a network
of streets in the city core should be pedestrian-oriented. This
has been achieved on a selected number of streets by:

requiring store frontages to be at the sidewalk and

preventing parking lots adjacent to sidewalks;

49

limiting the frontage of new development to fifty feet;

limiting heights to forty feet;
requiring awnings for weather protection;
requiring retail on certain streets;
limiting underground and overground pedestrian
connections between buildings;
supporting street beautification;
a 1975 city council policy eliminating downtown malls;
the Citys insistence that when architects design a
building, they place it in the context of its surroundings
and think through how it will be used and experienced
by pedestrians.

4. City Policies With a Direct impact on the Arts

4.1. Major redevelopment projects in Vancouver: We have come
a long way in ensuring that the arts are a part of major
redevelopment projects in Vancouver. The City of Vancouver
is responding to the demand for housing that is close to
the downtown by rezoning lands that were originally zoned
for commercial or industrial purposes, or which are vacant.
However, unless there is provision for accommodating arts
and culture, the rezoning of these lands may preclude the
development of a strong cultural component within these
new communities.
The first of these rezoning projects, plans for the
redevelopment of the Expo 86 lands, on the north shore of
False Creek, provided limited recognition to the importance
of providing a place for the arts and the arts community. The
arts community has expressed disappointment with how the
development policies have addressed arts and cultural issues.
The only initiative related to the arts will be a requirement
that a certain amount of each new developments budget
be invested in public art. This program is discussed in more
detail later.
The second project, the redevelopment of the Coal Harbour
site, offers an expanded number of opportunities for the
arts. These are: a performing arts facility; artist live/work

studios; and on-site public art.

Regarding the Coal Harbour project, some members of the
arts community have expressed a preference for a complex
of smaller theatres rather than one large theatre. Others
have expressed disappointment with the proposal for artist
studios, which is limited to the provision of five or six studios
for visiting Masters. They believe that a greater number of
studios for local artists is a higher priority.
Soon, we shall initiate a third project, the redevelopment
of the Jericho Lands, about two kilometers beyond the
downtown. We are looking at ways of involving the arts
community as part of the design exercise.
4.2. Artist live/work studios: In the past, City of Vancouver
policies often discouraged the provision of appropriate and
affordable artist live/work studios, for the following reasons:

artists often live in industrial areas, where they can

secure loft spaces, although zoning does not permit
residential uses in these areas;

building by-laws often do not recognize the needs of

artists for spaces that are minimally renovated and have
lower -menity standards;

parking standards are often unrealistically high, given the

number of artists who have cars, as well as the limited
opportunities to provide parking in warehouse areas;

artists often have insufficient links with politicians and

civic officials who can advocate their special needs for
housing and work spaces.
In 1988, the City responded with the following initiatives
regarding artist live/work studios:

amendment of the zoning by-laws to permit live/

work studios in all commercial, industrial, and historical
areas;

substantial relaxation of parking regulations for artist

studio developments;

amendment of the building by-laws to apply different

50

standards to artist studio developments, recognizing

their special character and the needs of artists;
leasing out City-owned buildings to artists for
renovation into artist studios;
establishing the Artist Studio Implementation
Committee, which is comprised of key civic officials and
representatives from the arts community, whose
purpose is: to receive development and building permit
applications; negotiate special relaxations of by-law
provisions; and negotiate and defer the closure of
studios which are under enforcement action because of
sub-standard conditions.

The best opportunities for artist studios have been

warehouses or storefronts which have vacant or under-used
upper floors. The above-mentioned initiatives have had the
following benefits: ensuring living and working premises for
artists; renovation of heritage properties; and reducing the
risk of fire by up-grading firetraps. There have also been a
variety of specific projects:

the conversion of a storage warehouse to contain

thirty-six artist live/work studios, offices, and two
galleries.

the approval of several smaller developments

containing from one to four studios, in various historical
areas and downtown south;

the renovation of two City-owned buildings into eight

artist studios;

the review of three projects which originally did not

proceed due to financing difficulties, or in one case, the
loss of the building to fire.
Currently, the City is reviewing three project proposals
which would provide about fifty artist live/work studios.
However, Vancouvers development boom negatively
affected the economics of development by increasing land
values and making the properties attractive for high-rent
activites.

Members of the arts community have also been concerned

with the rents of privately initiated projects $400 to
$1,000 a month for lofts which are 600 to 1,000 square
feet. In the absence of subsidies or the use of municiaplly
owned land, I believe these rents are quite reasonable in
the Vancouver market today. However, privately developed
projects will not address the needs of lower income artists.
Accordingly, the following initiatives should be considered:

offering developers floor space bonuses in return for

the provision of artist live/work studios;

further reducing parking requirements;

the use of City-owned lands and buildings for artist

studios;

permitting buildings containing a number of artist live/

work studios in residential areas at the present time,
permissibility is limited to homeowners using a second
building on the property, e.g., a garage, for a studio or
other uses.
4.3. Public art program: In 1990, city council adopted a program
that sought to increase the amount of public art, involve
artists in civic planning processes, and ensure the quality of
public art by using an arms length selection process. To this
end, council resolved that a public art program would have
the following components:

1 percent of the construction cost of civic projects

would be spent on public art;

$1 per square foot of privately initiated projects

achieved through residential, commercial, or industrial
rezonings would be spent on public art;

the review of the adequacy of $1 per square-foot levy

every twenty-four months.
The public art program will raise the profile of art and
the arts community, and enrich peoples experience of
the downtown. The commitment to involving the arts
community is particularly important in ensuring they play a
role in planning the city.

51
4.4. Cultural grants program: The City supports the arts
community by giving grants for the operation of arts facilities,
a variety of theatres, and other artistic endeavours. The
City also supports the many festivals that occur throughout
the year. It has established a festival committee that brings
together civic officials and the arts community to plan
events together. Similar to the initiatives under the public art
program, this joint planning is crucial to ensuring that the arts
community plays a mainstream role in civic affairs.
An important dimension of the cultural grants program
is the support of arts advocacy organizations such as
the Vancouver Cultural Alliance, and Artists for Creative
Environments [ACE]. The Vancouver Cultural Alliance links
up the large number of arts organizations, attempts to
develop a common front on issues, organizes all candidates
meetings on arts issues during municipal elections, and
advocates for the arts community. ACE plays an important
role in addressing issues regarding the need for affordable
housing and studios for artists. In addition it liaises with
civic officials when individual artists are threatened with the
closure of their studios due to non-compliance with city bylaws.
4.5. Amenity bonuses: The City of Vancouver has offered
developers floor space bonuses in return for the provision of
floor space for cultural facilities such as theatres and galleries,
and the provision of office space for cultural groups.
Suggestions For a Strategy Involving the Arts Community
in the Revitalization of Downtown Calgary
I offer the following suggestions for giving arts and culture a
role in the revitalization of downtown Calgary:
5.1. Involve the arts community in planning the downtown and
in running festivals and other cultural activities. The arts
community may already be integrated in your planning
processes, but I suspect that its role can be broadened.
How many civic committees involve artists? Are artists in
your advisory groups involved with commenting on the

preparation of plans and civic development proposals?

5.2. Public art program: How satisified is Calgary with the public
art in the city? Can artists play a role in developing an
improved program for the review and development of public
art?
5.3. Artist studios: Keeping artists in your city will be a lot
easier if the City shows it is committed to the provision of
appropriate and affordable live/work studios. Existing zoning
and building by-laws are likely a major hurdle for retaining
and developing new studios.
5.4. How can the City ensure that the arts community has a
place in Calgary? I suggest that you look at the opportunities
for accommodating artists in the areas immediately adjacent
to Calgarys central business district. The areas east and
west of this district remain under-utilized. Do the plans for
these areas speak to the needs of accommodating artists and
cultural facilities? The warehouse district in the south of the
downtown offers opportunities, as does the 17th Avenue
area. Does the City help or hinder the flourishing of cultural
facilities and artists in these areas?
5.5. Support for arts advocacy organizations: Do not underemphasize the importance of cultivating and supporting
advocacy organizations. A well-run, energetic organization
will offer many returns in the nurturing of culture in the
downtown.

5.

5.6. Bring more festivals downtown: Think up ideas for festivals

and other celebrations and mount them in the downtown.
5.7. Continue civic support and seek corporate support for
theatres and other venues: The City already supports the
arts through grants and should keep doing this. Calgary is a
head-office city, and arts groups should continue to approach
corporations for support.

Gilles Hbert
52
Artspace opened in 1986. The objective of the project was to
rehabilitate vacant and under-used space in a Winnipeg heritage
building, in order to make it available to the citys visual and
literary arts communities. It was part of a program called the
Winnipeg Core Area Initiative, and the project has to a great
extent been successful. Today, Artspace houses resource centres
and facilities for photography, the visual and literary arts, video,
and film. There are also galleries, and studios for individual artists
and writers.
The Winnipeg Core Area Initiative was a $196 million agreement
between the municipal, provincial and federal governments,
designed to improve economic, social and physical conditions
in the heart of Winnipeg. Between 1983 and 1991, $13 million
was spent on the revitalization of Winnipegs historic Exchange
District, through a program called the Historic Winnipeg Area
Development Program.
Prior to the establishment of the Core Area Initiative, public
hearings were held to solicit comments from the public as to the
nature and objectives of the tri-government agreement. Many
individual artists and art organizations made interventions. It was
clear at the outset that the historic area of Winnipeg was going
to be included in revitalization plans, and the cultural community
feared that the artists who had long worked in the area were
going to be dislocated in the process of gentrification. As a result
of sustained lobbying, these concerns were addressed by including
a provision for arts accommodation in the Historic Winnipeg
Area Development Program.
The plan of the Core Area Initiative was to provide
accommodation for some members of the citys art community
as part of a larger strategy. The inclusion of this cultural
accommodation was seen by all three levels of government as
a means to attract new private sector investment to the historic
area. This notion of economic spin-offs was promoted by the arts
community in a bid to secure the desired considerations from
those who designed and implemented the development program.

The board of the Core Area Initiative organized an arts

accommodation sub-committee. The committee was made up of
representatives from the Core Area Initiative, the arts community,
and from the three levels of government. The first action of this
committee was to engage an architectural firm to produce a
feasibility study on arts accommodation in the historic area. The
study included: identification of heritage buildings suitable for arts
use; identification of potential arts user groups; and development
concepts and costing for the heritage buildings which were
identified.
After much lobbying and an impressive show of cohesion
within the visual and the literary arts groups, a recommendation
was made by the arts accommodation sub-committee to the
management board of the Core Area Initiative to proceed with
a visual/literary arts centre. In February, 1984, the management
board granted a newly formed arts coalition called Artspace
Incorporated seed money to put an option on the Gault
Building, to secure options to lease from the interested arts
groups, to refine capital and operating cost budgets, and to
identify additional funding sources.
The Artspace board decided that the Manitoba Centennial
Centre Corporation was the most desirable owner for the
building. This corporation, which is a part of the provincial
government, owns arts facilities but allows independent boards
to manage all aspects of their operations. Additionally, facilities
owned by the Corporation are exempt from property taxes.
The provincial government at the time was a major supporter of
the Artspace project and agreed to assume ownership without
hesitation or condition.
A building management committee was formed, consisting of
representatives from each arts group that had submitted an
option to lease in the renovated building. This administrative
structure ensured that the project would proceed according
to the needs of the tenants. A project manager was hired to
oversee the renovation of the building. His job was to ensure
that the specifications of the tenant groups were met, and to

53
implement a fundraising program aimed at the private sector.
Just over a year later Artspace opened, and the tenants began
to move in. The building provides its tenant organizations
with administrative offices, exhibition and production facilities,
and resource centres, all of which were built to the occupant
organizations specifications. In addition, artists and writers
benefit from individual studios maintained by The Winnipeg
Photographers Group, Canadian Artists Representation, The
Writers Guild, and The Manitoba Association of Playwrights.
In terms of the success of the Artspace Project, I would like to
begin by pointing out that the financial benefits for the tenant
organizations are undeniable. The Winnipeg Film Group, for
example, has an air conditioned cinema with refurbished antique
seating for 130, a reclaimed tin ceiling, and a raked floor, for a
monthly rent of $583.
At the outset, Artspace tenants created a list of objectives which
I would like to comment on. In preparing for this conference,
I canvassed several individuals working within Artspace, and Ill
draw from their comments as well. The objectives were:
1. To provide a focus and continuity for the visual and literary
arts communities in Manitoba.
One often gets the sense upon entering Artspace that it is
one giant organization made up of a series of departments
with names such as Video Pool or The Writers Guild. Without
overstating things, it sometimes feels as though the individual
groups have traded in their identities for a new homogeny.
2. To provide adequate space for the exhibition, production,
programing, and administrative facilities required by the
various groups.
There seems to be a big emphasis on administrative facilities.
Although the entire sixth floor and portions of the fifth,
fourth, and third are devoted to production, It is possible that
individual artists could have been better accommodated.

3. To foster cross-disciplinary collaboration and activities

within the arts community.
It would be difficult to attribute any increase in this type of
activity to the existence of Artspace. The original plan for
the building called for a pub and restaurant to be established
to help encourage this kind of communication. However, no
suitable restauranteur has materialized, and an art supply store
is currently renting the space.
4. To facilitate the dissemination of ideas among artistic
disciplines.
Artspace as an entity does not have the capacity to facilitate
it is an organization of organizations, with no arts
service functions beyond maintaining itself, and providing
administrative support in the form of equipment such as
postage machines, fax machines, etc. The dissemination
of ideas remains the work of the individual artists and
organizations.
5. To provide facilities for professional programs of the highest
calibre.
These would include workshops, lectures, visiting artist and
exhibition programs, and literary readings, all aimed at making
the contemporary art world accessible to the public. The
Artspace facilities are excellent for these purposes, and have
been successfully utilized to raise the profile of the visual and
literary arts communities in Winnipeg, and therefore I feel
Artspace is meeting this objective.
6. To document Artspaces programing by producing
catalogues, explanatory materials, archives and resource
libraries which preserve and record regional arts activities.
There are two resource libraries in the building. One is
operated by Visual Arts Manitoba and the other by The
Manitoba Writers Guild. In both cases, the available resource
materials exceed the scope of the activities within the building.
However, because there are nineteen groups under one roof
who all maintain records, it can be said that to some extent
this objective is being met.

Summary of Questions and Discussion

54
7. To promote and circulate work by Manitoba artists and
cultural workers to other centres within and outside the
province.
Again, this depends on the effectiveness of the tenant
organizations. Artspace does not program, and the board
meetings concentrate on the maintenance of the facilities.
In the visual arts, two Winnipeg organizations which do the
bulk of this activity are Plug In and Ace Art, and they are
not tenants of Artspace. Still, this work can be said to be
happening in Artspace; but it is a stretch to indicate that it is
the result of Artspace.
Finally, I would like to add that Artspace, despite its problems, is
an excellent example of what can happen when nineteen groups
with very different needs and agendas co-operate. Artspace
functions very well, and in terms of the economic spin-offs
which were the goal of the Core Area Initiative there is
definitely more activity in the historic Exchange Area of Winnipeg.

Q Would there be a way of designating certain spaces in Calgary

for artists use through a licensing regulation?
Jim Anderson: You could license spaces for artists use, but I dont
believe you could restrict those spaces to artists only. An owner
could request a license for some other use and you would be
hard pressed not to give that person a license.
Michael Gordon In Vancouver, we tie the license for an artists
studio to that space, so someone cant come and say, Okay, I
want to have an office here, or if a dentist wanted to move in
you would say, Well Im sorry but the space isnt licensed for
that. So you can do things to make policy serve the cultural
community.
Jim Anderson I think you could link a development permit to a
license in Calgary, but I havent seen anyone do it.
Q The Barron Building here in Calgary is one of a kind in this
city. Its a beautiful building, and Ive talked to the people that
lease it, and theres a one-year demolition clause on it. They say
its more expensive to renovate than to tear it down and build a
new building. Maybe theyre hoping the market will pick up and
theyll be able to sell the land, and there will eventually be a new
building there. What can cities do to encourage them not to do
that? The Uptown Theatre is completely empty. Its unused, and
there are lots of people who need theatre space, but you cant go
in there because they will only give you a one year lease. Theres
no point in going in if youre going to get kicked out in a year.
This has been the situation there for three years now. What did
Vancouver do, and what could Calgary do to encourage the use
of buildings that are dormant?
Jim Anderson It boils down to the issue of what a building owner
is thinking of, and they do have this enormous development
expectation. I think Michael Gordon mentioned that Vancouver
has ways of taking away the development expectation by having
a land use policy that allows both social housing and industrial
usage. That kind of policy, which de-emphasizes the value of
the land, and emphasizes the building, would cause an owner
to maintain a building and maximize whatever revenue stream
was available to him. Interestingly, a lot of these kinds of activities
can generate a reasonable amount of revenue with relatively

55
little alteration to the building, and owners should normally be
interested in that.
I suppose that another way of doing it would be to have
someone other than the Chamber of Commerce write a report
on the development potential of downtown Calgary, in order to
dampen all these expectations that just around the corner there
will be another surge of activity that will enable a parcel of land to
be sold at a high price.
Herb Reynolds That, to my way of thinking, is doing the exact
opposite to what you want to have done. First of all, if a landlord
changes a use of a building, he has to completely sprinkler it; hes
going to have to upgrade his elevator system and his heating
system in order to meet the current codes. The way to get
around that is to guarantee the landlord that any time he wants
to take advantage of a turn in the market and realize whatever
profit potential he envisioned when he originally bought the
property, he will be allowed to do that, and that he can expect
some relaxations to the code. If there isnt profit potential and
profit runs all of it, whether its your activities or mine people
are not going to participate in the way that you want them to.
Jim Anderson Any condition of the building code, within the
umbrella of heritage buildings, is open to discussion with the
provincial government. So its not necessarily the case that just
because there is a change of the use of an old building, the owner
will be burdened with unbearable costs. There is a certain amount
of openness to this type of thing.
Michael Gordon Id like to comment on a few things here. First
of all, as a planner I feel a responsibility to property owners,
because they have built up a lot of equity; they have put a lot of
money into their property, so you have to move very lightly into
the idea of down-zoning or devaluing peoples property. Before
anyone moves into a building I like to have a sense that its a winwin situation for the owners, for the City, and for the people who
will be living there.
Secondly, it will be with great apprehension that property owners

will buy into the notion of reducing the height limit, or whatever.
If you walk up Robson Street in Vancouver you will note that the
buildings are still no more than thirty or forty feet high, and thats
because we put in zoning, and bought out the property owners
who wanted to put in high rises. Now we get complaints that
property values have zoomed up so much that taxes are too high.
So you dont have to have skyscrapers to make a lot of money.
Another example of where the City of Vancouver down-zoned
property was for the purpose of view protection. Vancouver
views are really important to the residents. Despite a lot of
property owners coming forward and saying their property values
would be reduced, city council passed the legislation, because
there was the widespread feeling that residents wanted their
views protected. So that comes back to the point where youre
going to need a certain amount of popular support. Politicians and
civic officials arent going to dive into something they feel doesnt
have a lot of public sympathy. As Jim [Anderson] said, you have to
look at code relaxations, because it's so expensive to build. But in
fact we're reviewing our zoning by-laws. In some of our expensive
residential districts we find it is less costly to put up a duplex
rather than renovate a big old house, and were looking at why
this is, and exploring putting in-fills in the back, or maybe adding
on extensions. So you have to be equitable in this. You cant just
march in and say, Well, sorry, youre down-zoned.
And lastly, timely decisions are really important. Whenever a
project comes forward that I feel will be good for the city because
it supports the arts and culture, Im quite willing to bring the right
people together to make a decision. For example, we did that
last week on a couple of projects in Gastown. Were willing to
go out to the various advisory groups to advocate the project so
it doesnt get bogged down in committee and so forth, and to
track it as it moves through the administration, so we can give a
development permit within three months. We have something
called the short process. It started as the social housing and rental
process, because those kinds of projects were really important for
the city. I added arts and culture facilities to that process, because
I know how tenuous the economics are. So what we do is we

56
fast-track: any file folder that has anything to do with an arts and
culture facility, a social housing project, or a rental housing project,
has a big green sticker on it, which means it gets dealt with
expeditiously.
Jack Long (architect) That was a beautiful message, that
last sentence. Calgary could use that one a big stamp that
gets things moving. Jim, you mentioned that the Residential
Rehabilitation Assistance program [RRAP] is now depleted. Was
that program federally, provincially, and municipally funded?

death issue in relation to the residence/studio issue for artists, but

it is a life and death issue with respect to affordable housing. The
production of privately-owned rental housing across the country
is virtually dead and its not likely to be revived, so there are going
to be a lot of people living in the housing that already exists, and
it was the rental portion of the RRAP program that gave the
potential of looking at all of these existing buildings, and looking at
how to make them better places to live, so it is unfortunate that
the program has been discontinued.

Jim Anderson In this part of the world it was a federal program

only. It had been in existence since 1973, and for the life of the
program the amount of assistance available to landlords was
relatively small. But there was a growing realization over the
years that the major area of sub-standard housing conditions was
in rental housing, so there was a period when they allowed a
landlord to apply for up to $17,000 per unit, and the City applied
under that program. However, the program was eventually closed
to applications from municipalities, because apparently they were
never intended to be allowed to use it in the first place. And then
the program was closed to landlords; I guess it consumes a large
amount of money and it doesnt meet the political objectives,
because they dont have a lot of grateful owners, they have
tenants, who dont necessarily understand where the money
came from.

Q (to Gilles Hbert) Gilles, in your description of the building in

Winnipeg, it struck me as an internally organized building from the
doors on in. There was an active community within the building,
but outside the doors I had no understanding of what it was like.
Is the building in Winnipeg isolated from everything around it, or
is it part of a community? More generally, is there a consideration
by planners for allowing for neighbourhoods and street traffic
around these buildings?

Jack Long The reason I wanted to raise the question about the
RRAP program is because these kinds of programs really help the
arts community, and those who need social housing. It was the
best seed money that any level of government ever spent, and its
slowly being dwindled away now. The programs were vital to the
rehabilitation of older landlord owned-buildings; they could get
some money to help provide housing, and these programs are
not going to come back unless the public responds and demands
them. So when you think about electing anybody federally,
provincially or municipally, put that on your agenda and make
them put it on their platform.
Jim Anderson I dont know if the RRAP program is a life and

Gilles Hbert Basically, all of the Winnipeg arts organizations

operate within four blocks of Artspace. When they decided
to revitalize the area they realized that all of the buildings had
high ceilings, which made them very attractive places for artists
to live. There are also many other kinds of people living in the
area, including Native, Philippino, and disabled groups. So, yes,
there is a community there. But the area is divided by a five-lane
highway called Main Street, and on the east side, near the river,
gentrification is happening, so there is a lot more street activity
there than around Artspace.
Michael Gordon Pedestrian streets are really essential to having
a vital area and ensuring that artists have a profile. Were looking
at a project now in Gastown where were going to have four or
five storefronts in each building, where someone will live in the
back and produce their artwork in the front. These are high-traffic
areas. We already have this in Kitsilano, where old abandoned
storefronts have been bought by artists. So whenever you do a
project, the more of a public face you can give it and ensure that
people will walk by, the more power it will have.

57
Herb Reynolds Well, I want to come back to whether its natural
or not. Of all of the artwork that weve sponsored, none of it has
been done through these amenity benefit programs. Weve done
it because its natural for us to do it. But Calgary is a new city; we
dont have many old buildings and theres a new population here.
Theyve tasted the California lifestyle and theres a very suburban
California community here. I dont think its natural for Calgarians
to want to live downtown. But if its natural, people are going to
do it, and developers are going to provide that kind of housing.

ArtScape/CityCore was funded by:

Canada Council and City of Calgary Parks and Recreation, Cultural Division
and organized by:
Syntax Arts Society
Brian Dyson Project organizer
John Galloway Research and development & proceedings editor
Anne Loree & Laura Parken Publicity and promotion & general assistance
Development Committee:
Mary-Beth Laviolette Artichoke Magazine
Nowell Berg Calgary Society of Independent Filmmakers
Peter Hoff & Fiona Stewart Dancers' Studio West
Dan Evans Decidedly Jazz Danceworks
Ian Reid EM/Media
Lance Olsen Live Arts Theatre Alberta
Rose Scollard, Nancy Cullen & Alexandria Patience Maenads Productions
Nelson Hendricks & Sandra Tivy The New Gallery
Tim Buell New Works Calgary
Grant Burns One Yellow Rabbit Theatre
Cindy Boisvert & Noland Dennison TRUCK Gallery