Irvine Council Members Weigh Thoughts About Theater

Will they or won’t they build the Irvine Theatre?

As the deadline approaches for what has been called a “now-or-never decision,” members of the Irvine City Council say it is likely there will be considerable wrangling at their public meeting Tuesday over how to get all the funds needed for the 750-seat theater.

Moreover, even longtime council advocates of the project--a joint venture of the city, UC Irvine and the theater’s operating company--have been shaken by the prospect of spending $17.6 million on a facility that seemingly solid estimates had led them to believe would cost $12.2 million.

“Needless to say, it was a shock to everyone when the low bid came in more than $5 million higher than we expected,” Mayor Larry Agran said. “Historically, I’ve been a big supporter of the theater. But I can’t support it regardless of cost.

“The real questions now have to do with financial realities,” he said. “What can be raised? What is the security of the loan? When is the pay-back?”

An informal poll of the five council members by The Times on Thursday indicated that only one member--Sally Anne Sheridan--is certain to approve the additional $1.8 million that the council will be asked to allocate as its share of the increased cost.

The other four, despite their apparent belief in the joint venture, shared varying degrees of doubt about the extra expenditure and said their votes will depend on the details of the financial proposal.

UCI and the theater’s operating company have already pledged an additional $1.8 million each to help cover the $5.4-million difference between the low bid and the amount previously budgeted.

The city has raised $9.5 million to date for the theater, which would be built on a 2.3-acre campus site donated by UCI. The theater’s operating company, which had a $2.7-million goal for its capital campaign (since increased to $4.5 million because of the bid), has raised $1.6 million so far.

“If we let the contract to build the theater, it’s the city that’s on the hook--not UCI or the operating company,” said Cameron Cosgrove, the council member least likely to approve the additional funds. “The fact that we’re all scrambling now shows how vulnerable we are to shortfalls.”

Cosgrove, whose financial judgment Agran cited earlier in the week as crucial to his own decision, said he would vote against borrowing the $1.8 million from the city’s Asset Management Plan, an idea being formulated by Assistant City Manager Paul Brady Jr. The plan was designed to retire a debt of $98 million used to finance such public works as the Civic Center. Brady’s proposal would include repaying the plan by including the amount in a park bond to be put before the voters in November, 1989.

“The theater should be treated like any other public works project,” Cosgrove said. “If it’s the sentiment of the council to build the theater, then we ought to take the money from the Capital Improvements Project.” The project has various revenue sources such as a gasoline tax and is used for parks and roads. “I’m not going to support the project if it puts an unwise burden on the city. Borrowing from the Asset Management Plan is a roll of the dice for the city.”

Even if the theater’s operating company was to pledge repayment of the $1.8 million in the event voters reject the park bond--a pledge that operating company board chairman Richard G. Sim said can not be made--Cosgrove said he would not be satisfied. “I’m not sure, frankly, that they can raise their own $1.8 million,” he said.

For all his reliance on Cosgrove’s financial judgment, Agran said he would be “extremely reluctant” to go to the Capital Improvement Project for the city’s share of the additional funds for the theater because “it would be a very poor precedent.”

Councilman Ed Dornan, a strong arts advocate, meanwhile was predicting that agreement would be reached Tuesday to “push ahead” with the theater through some sort of consensus package. He said he “leans to” Brady’s plan to borrow from the Asset Management Plan (as does Sheridan) but had yet to make up his mind.

“If it doesn’t happen Tuesday, we’re out of a theater,” he said. “It’s not just a now-or-never decision for the council, it’s now or never for the business community and the university.”

The bid by Los Angeles-based Swinerton & Walberg, the lowest of nine, expires Dec. 26. Failure to act now would guarantee a more expensive building in the future, according to Charles Darrow of Jones Construction, the project manager for the city.

Said Dornan: “It may look like we’re breaking the bank now, but 10 years from now the theater will look like a great investment.”

However, he raised a related question about “the hidden cost” of about $900,000 a year needed to operate the theater. Although that would be borne equally by UCI, the operating company and the city, Dornan said “the city would have difficulty justifying an ongoing expense for any length of time.”

“The question is: How do we solve that problem? I think the city needs to look at a development tax that would go for a comprehensive arts program, not just for the theater.”

Dornan said he thinks the question of continuing expenses will come up Tuesday night, further complicating the issue.

Councilwoman Paula Werner said she has not decided how she will vote. “I did not campaign on this issue, so I don’t have a mandate from the people to expend $1.8 million more for the theater,” she said.

If she was to approve a proposal for additional funds, she said, it would have to include “a means of pay-back.” However, she said she does not know how that would be done. She also said that borrowing from the Asset Management Plan “would be setting a precedent that I’m not sure is proper.”

Werner said she will depend on testimony from experts at the meeting Tuesday as the basis for her decision. Equally important, she said, would be hearing what the public at large thinks about the theater.

Chances are she will get an earful.

Sheridan, who has supported the idea from its inception nearly 2 decades ago, said supportive letters and phone calls “are pouring” into City Hall. “What is really unusual,” she said, “is there have been no letters in opposition.”

Sheridan expressed optimism that the council would take action to approve the necessary funds, noting that Agran and Dornan had done so on previous occasions.

“That’s three votes with mine,” she said of the minimum council majority needed to turn Irvine Theatre into a reality.