The Culture Centre's Audited Statement

I have in my hand  he 2012 Annul Repoirt of the Aurora Cultural Centre.

I have read the audited statement  at Dec 31 2012  and alongside it the unaudited statement up to June 30th 2013.

Italics in the previous sentence mean nothing. I don't know  how they got there so I don't know how to remove them. I pressed everything  saw. Put it in save . Checked comments .Came back to start again.
Italics  are still there.

It's kind of like reading an audited statement. I would not ordinarily depend on my own reading . 
For understanding I would lean on clarification or confirmation from  professional advice. 

There  is information in the document however  I can rely upon and pass along. 

As an elected representative, responsible  for the interest of  the taxpayers, the nature of analysis must be a critique. 

It's easy to criticize  Unless there is a valid point to be made ,it's not  useful. 

Cash flow from the town  to the Centre last year was  $370,000.

The pie chart shows town grant representing  61.9% of revenue. 

Programs  produced  21.8%. in revenue. 


Donations and  fundraising produced 6 %

Grants  ( other)  10.3 %

Revenue is shown as  $576,612. 

Expenditures  are shown at $597,789.

Elsewhere in the report, volunteer hours contributed are noted and the  statement made the Centre 
could not  provide the service without the unpaid assistance of  volunteers. 

No reference is made  to the value of  the one dollar a year  for rent.

Nor the $140,000 plus cost of maintenance and utilities. 

17,500 square feet of space  recently renovated  at a cost in excess of  $3 million  capital .
is not  beyond  evaluation. 

I am not the one to do that either.

Cost of utilities and maintenance  are precisely  accounted .

Hard costs are relevant,

They make the deficit closer to $230.000 than $23,000.

A statement in the report notes the Centre would  not be able to operate without the contribution 
of volunteer hours of service. 

It follows they would not be operate without  free rent and cost of maintenance and utilities borne by the municipalities.

The Nokida   Report  is referenced in the introduction to the  Annual Report .

I was there when the  presentation was made.

The  town treasurer of the day, warned the facility would become a sink hole for tax dollars .

In his view .an arm's length board, charged with operating the facility as a business  was the 
answer to the problem. 

The consultant recommended seed money  to  allow the program to get  up and running.. Fund raising   in the community was  presented as  essential  for self-sufficiency.

It was pie in the sky and I said so at the time. 

Nonetheless the, financial plan  presented by the Consultant was adopted by Council and conveyed to   in turn for public consumption.

The contract signed with the new board  in 2009  gave  scant recognition to the financial plan adopted by Council and conveyed to the public. 

I believe the interim board understood the concept. They were in place until the official opening. 

The new operating board had  the written contract  and possibly other guidance for direction. 

The contract signed by the current Council  effects no change  in understanding.

The Board  is in  the third year of operation 

The Annual Report indicates more staff will be needed to operate in 2014. 

A  Message from the President  starts the  Annual Report, The last sentence of the first paragraph notes the following.:

i am pleased to report  that our centre is poised for  a bright future of continued growth and contribution to  the Town of Aurora ad its surrounding communities. 

Yep !  It's a sink hole .