Arguing the idea that Fremont folk will not use an arts center is a little Catch-22. It is because we do not have easy access to an arts center (plays, museums, concert halls, etc) that we have let slide our desire for those things. People in SF and Berkeley and Palo Alto go to museums, plays and concerts because they can walk down the street to find them.

But performance arts center stuff can be put off till good times return. I dont want to see my city bankrupt

Projects like Performance arts center do need to be run by city (or by philanthropy organization) just because they create diversity and are not economically viable for any private company to invest in.

As for redevelopment of old Center Theater, the current plans (of what I have heard) do not reflect demographics of Fremont – so it will either become another project like performance arts center (which a city can only have few to fund) or a drain or redevelopment funds. We should let this be a private investment so that it does not drain the city funding in this economic environment.

Also, I may not have been entirely clear that I don’t think that such a program should necessarily be entirely a municipal service; if the City provided the place, couldn’t we partner with a private firm for the services? Don’t we do that all the time with CBO’s that administer drug treatment facilities? I’m with you on the public/private partnership thing, and there’s got to be more market out there for quality child care than for a tea house at the Lake.

Anyway, I’m not married to the idea. What else can we do with redevelopment money that will give us more than bread and circuses? There’s got to be a way to put that money to work on projects that will truly benefit residents.

City officials and management must be responsible to the voters. Fremont can’t become what the residents think of as a “world class city” if their representatives don’t listen to what the residents want. We’ve got a lot of work to do in the areas of fiscal responsibility and trust/communication before we can be what I would think of as a “world class city”.

City also has to look at its finances. A day care facility does not bring any income to the city. A low cost second run theater might. Even the theater should not be subsidized in any way

When cities are already in a budget hole, its not wise to expand social care services

If the idea is feasible, then we should just let private companies build it. City subsidizing it, or taking partnership is a losing proposition I think.

This is especially true for a neighborhood like centerville. A second run theatre fits well with that neighborhood.

Performance arts center if feasible should belong elsewhere, mission, central park…

In other words one family water park does not a world-class city make.

Andy your remark, “Performance arts center will surely have less patrons, esp. in a city with a demographic like Fremont” is just plain wrong.