On March 11th Council will be presented with yet another Art Gallery Feasibly Study. If my memory is correct this is the fourth study in the last five years. The combined cost of these feasibility studies is starting to become significant. I recall the study presented November 16, 2022 by G.M. Diemert Architects determined that building that would be required to house the Gallery’s growing collection and expanding staff would be in the range of 35,000 to 38,000 square-feet at a cost of $22 to 30 million. This current study is now reducing that cost down to only $16 million.

Council just rejected any possibility of increasing council compensation arguing that taxpayers wouldn’t appreciate them spending the few thousand dollars to adjust their compensation to a level that would no longer be a barrier to residents that didn’t have six-figure household incomes. Yet, here we are just one council meeting later considering spending $16 million on a service that less than 8% of the population uses according to the last community survey.

A few years ago when the Art Gallery ‘Not-for-Profit’ experiment failed, the Art Gallery came back to the city with a very large debt. I recall Ian Boddy telling us at the time, not to worry because the Art Gallery would pay the city back for this debt. Since then the Art Gallery has been paying the city back at a rate of $50,000 per year.

That is until this year when the mayor reneged on his promise and this same council, who saved taxpayers a few thousand dollars by foregoing a possible pay increase, voted to cover the Art Gallery’s $50,000 annual debt payment from the 2023 operating surplus. This will certainly give the illusion that the Art Gallery is doing better. However, is it really doing better?

The Membership line item in the 2024 budget shows revenue of $7,500. This is down from the $9,500 this line item showed in 2023 and down from the $15,500 in Membership fees budgeted in 2022. Why is this Membership line item in steady decline if the Art Gallery is doing so well? As well, the revenue from the Gift Shop is budgeted to be only $3,650 in 2024. This is down from $9,650 in 2023 and down from the over $20,000 in Gift Shop sales in 2021 and 2022.

The steady decline in revenue from Memberships and the Gift Shop is a clear indication that traffic at the Art Gallery is down. This suggests that the number of residents that said they often visited the Art Gallery in the 2022 survey is likely now significantly less than the 8% it was in 2022.

So why is our council even entertaining the presentation of this latest feasibility study, and why is this council allowing the Art Gallery to continue to waste money on more feasibility studies? Owen Sound is not a wealthy community. Like the Airport, taxpayers cannot afford to continue to support this service that is appreciated by so very few in the community. And most importantly taxpayers certainly cannot afford to spend $16 million on a new building. Any member of council who thinks that it is appropriate to spend $16 million on a new Art Gallery Building is completely out of touch with the majority of Owen Sound residents.

If the Art Gallery supporters want to keep the Art Gallery open, then the only viable solution is to donate the collection to the County. After all, the art collection was acquired from Regional Artists as opposed to City Artists and as such should not be exclusive property of Owen Sound taxpayers.

-------------------------* * * -------------------------

Click Here to: Email All Members of Council with a single Click

Take the time to leave your comments on this site. I know that there are Councillors
and/or staff that frequent this site so I'm sure they will read your comments.