The Art Gallery of Windsor Needs Your Help…

View Comments

• Perhaps they should have stayed in the mall. There was alot of traffic and exposure for them there. Of course they also did not like ordinary people browsing

• Why would you say they did not like "ordinary people" browsing, Oliver? Please explain.

  Also, funding would be needed in the mall, or downtown.

• You'd think the City would be desperate to help - not exactly a wise idea to have a huge building a lot on some of their prime real estate sit empty for the next several decades, which is exactly what will happen if the AGW goes under... no one would be any rush to take over that building for a long laundry list of reasons, but most of all because the economy is dead in Windsor.
  But this is Windsor, where Stupidity is King. Case in point, Oliver's comment, which I'm sure he found to be completely logical despite it being ridiculously stupid.
  If there is a way to do something really dumb here, I have faith in city council and the Olivers of this city to find a way to make it happen.

• There are more important things to worry about in this city than another outstretched hand. I'm assuming Oliver's comment refers to us 'common folk' who have no understanding for art and it's world. Only those snobby enough with a trained eye and appreciation are welcomed..??

• What kills me is the fact that people who complain about "another outstretched hand" usually have no problem with corporations and their bail-out schemes and corporate welfare, because it directly translates into a handful of tangible yet temporary jobs. Investment in arts and culture, despite not being directly linked to a bumper-crop of high paying new jobs, does more for the local economy than those tax-payer subsidized (but fleeting) corporate jobs.

  For every one dollar invested in the arts, Windsor gets a five dollar return on that investment. Show me any other investment that equals that, while increasing the quality of life for everyone in the community, and I'll jump on your bandwagon too!

• I have no eye for art but I can look at something and decide whether I like it or not...so can a 5 year old.
  I never knew you had to have an "eye" for art, I just thought a person needed an eye, or ear or have sensation in their fingers for touch. Silly me and here I thought I was common folk.

• Colin> Is there a sign at the AGW telling you that you, common person, isn't allowed? Or are you projecting your own feeling?

  The autojobs are going, not much seems to be able to stop that. If the AGW goes, the potential for the new economy (however you define it) starts to evaporate too. Kills the arts, you kill any incentive for new money to come to windsor.

• Shawn is correct. Without the AGW and the Symphony the city will be less attractive to potential business, etc. A strong base in culture is a great asset. Unfortunately for years now Windsor has been viewed as a 'lunch bucket' community to outsiders and such images or impressions are very difficult to shed.

• Don't hold your breath. Just take a look at how the city handled the Capitol. They dumped the Clearly Center for a buck. The city is bankrupt from the decreased tax base and all the stupid projects they wasted money on like the bunker, the arena and all the lawyers' legal fees for nonsense like the bridge and tunnel. I don't think it's realistic and it'd be a huge uphill battle to win support. I think the AGW should look at holding more charity fundraisers, charity golf fundraisers, $100 a head banquets, charity casino and bingo nights. The last few bingo halls I checked were packed, so maybe getting a bingo license from the city for certain nights is an option that might work. I'm really trying not to be cynical here, but honestly, by looking at the history of our local government, do you really think that's gonna happen?

• Just to add, maybe you should try to start a petition to get the money from the province, since they are paying $6million less a year in property taxes on their casino. They picked up the tab for the Red Bull races, which doesn't even cover part of the loss.