My Manifesto

On Tuesday, I will be obliged to vote to give staff direction to proceed or not, with a new  Culture Centre Board agreement.
Under the new agreement:
Two Council members would serve on the board .
Space would be provided for a museum. 
The Board would be required to submit a budget before receiving an operating grant. 
The Director of Recreation Services would receive the budget and recommend the grant to Council. 
Centre staff would,under no circumstances become town staff and entitled to town benefits.
The contract would be subject to  legal requirements of the Board's Articles of  Incorporation 
The Board would be responsible for its own continuity.
The agreement would not be in place until Jan 1st 2014.
It would continue until  the year 2027 .
Subject to what I  hear on Tuesday, I am unable at this time  to support  a new contract under these or any other terms. .
I will attempt to speak to the history. 
The Mayor will use whatever opportunity, he has to restrict the range of my  comments. . 
Challenging the rule of the chair is not something I do lightly. 
Should  the ruling not be upheld, consequences are serious.
At higher levels of government, it means non-confidence and  generally  triggers an election..
Be that as it may, my  reason for not supporting a new contract are simple and basic.  
Church Street school is a town facility. 
It represents millions of dollars of public investment. 
It is maintained with public resources. 
Prior to 2003, it was  managed by the town. 
The Historical Society used  the second floor as a museum.
An annual  grant of $50,000 was provided  for curator services.
Employee benefits were provided to the curator.
Prior to 2003, the Historical Society conducted a fund-raising drive  for renovations.
 $750,000 was raised, including a bequest from the late  Margaret Brevik, a dedicated  supporter of town heritage.
 A consultant was retained by the Society,
Plans were commissioned for a state of the art heritage function. 
A legal agreement was signed  to protect financial interest of the Society and  give them sole right to manage the facility.
Subsequently,  the Society was represented  on an ad hoc committee appointed by the next council in office to plan use and 
management of the facility.
The curator  was staff resource to.the committee.
A grant of $750,000 was obtained from  the Federal Heritage Foundation. 
Curator resigned the  position .
Historical Society withdrew commitment to manage the newly renovated facility. 
Low membership and limited capability were cited. 
The agreement  to protect their financial interest of hundreds of thousands of dollars was surrendered.
Specialty architects plan, commissioned  with a  fee  of $250,000, for a state of the art, heritage facility had been  adopted, constructed and  financed  by the town from the Hydro Asset Fund in the amount of $2.3 million .
Plus  the  heritage grant of $750,000.  
The Historical Society  suggested  funding  for their program on the same basis as the library.board. 
It's not clear where the idea emanated .
No public discussion. 
No input sought from the public. 
No hint of what was afoot. 
A new board of governance for the facility was created with articles of incorporation. 
Legal fees of $9,000. were  paid by the town .First in  the flow of public largesse. 
The town itself, without legal representation to protect its interest.
signed agreements.  
A lease for a building  representing millions of dollars of public funds was signed at an annual rent of $2,
Purchase of  cultural services  for $340,000 with annual increments of 3% was contracted.
Included in the agreement, full maintenance services at  an  estimated cost of $143,000.also subject to annual increase. 
All revenue from the facility accruing to the benefit of the board. 
Charitable donations to the board to be met dollar for dollar by the town. 
Without dwelling on  responsibility for the charade,  nothing in these facts persuade me the interest  of   residents in general  are represented in any  successor to the current  agreements.  
Public  input  was never  sought or given for the concept of  purchasing  arts and culture  at the expense of property taxes. 
In the life of the agreement two million dollars will have been siphoned from the town's treasury to finance the annual  program 
No interest will have been earned by the Hydro Reserve fund from the investment of $2.3 million in the building.
Under no circumstances I can  envisage will I vote to continue  agreements providing  arm's length governance of  Church Street School.
No program  provided in the facility persuades me of  the need to burden taxpayers with  their  cost.