With the operation of Greater Sudbury’s four city-run museums remaining relatively unchanged since amalgamation more than two decades ago, the issue is now receiving some attention from the newly elected council.
Council voted to pass two resolutions related to the Museum Revilization Business Plan at the Nov. 30 special council meeting, the latest step in the museums revitalization process.
It was a response to the previous council's direction on Feb. 8 to develop the business plan for consideration as part of the 2023 budget process.
The report, by city strategic initiatives, communications and citizen services director Ian Wood, and the planning department’s Linda Harnish, states once again that there is a “clear misalignment between the community’s service expectations and the corporation’s capacity to fill them.” You can find more details on that here.
The city is also seeking the public’s feedback on this plan, and has requested residents to give feedback by Dec. 16.
The plan, representing “a significant change from current and past practice” reads the report, addresses five main areas of concern: staff resources, governance and structure, vision and strategy, site and facilities, and artifact conservation and storage.
The four museum sites include Anderson Farm Museum in Lively, the Copper Cliff Museum, the Flour Mill Museum and the Rayside-Balfour Museum in Azilda.
“As indicated in the February report, staff believe that the museum section has potential to provide an effective service level that is not only generally accepted, but also provides significant community value,” said Wood. “To truly achieve this, however, staff are recommending an increased investment of funds tied to a clearer vision for the services intended outcomes.”
In the report, it’s noted that the operation of four museums have remained relatively unchanged since the 2001 amalgamation that created the City of Greater Sudbury.
This poses an issue against “evolving industry practices that reflect expectations for governance, artifact management and customer service that pre-amalgamation local museum services never had the ability to meet.”
An increase in partner events brings more visitors to the museum sites, notes the report, but also creates additional pressure on staff and budgets.
Wood then put forth two recommendations: one, to approve a term of reference for an advisory panel for Greater Sudbury Museums and the two, a resolution requesting council direct staff to prepare a business case for budget consideration.
But because this report, dated Nov. 8, was postponed a “couple of meetings,” said Wood, the draft business case was also attached to the council's agenda. The draft plan is also posted on the city's over to you engagement page and the results of feedback from the public will be shared with councillors in advance of the budget deliberations. For the draft plan and more information on public consultation, click here.
“The Museums Section has the potential to provide an effective service level that is not only generally accepted, but also provides significant community value,” reads the report. “To achieve this, however, requires an increased investment of funds tied to a clear vision for the service’s intended outcomes, guided by community expectations through a Museums Advisory Panel.”
It is noted once again, however, that should an increased investment not take place for 2023, staff will work to adjust service levels to match available resources, prioritizing services that have previously demonstrated the most public interest and community value.
The recommended Museums Advisory Panel will be joined with the Municipal Heritage Advisory Panel, a move that Ward 12 Coun. Joscelyne Landry-Altman said the community supports.
At the regular council session on Nov. 29, Landry-Altman said putting the two together would be a “natural merger.”
“And I have to tell you that with quite a bit of consultation, it is supported by the community far and wide,” she said.
She continued her consultation in advance of the Nov. 30 meeting, and it only reinforced her belief, she said, as there are “dedicated residents who are valued and very knowledgeable and believe in the importance of heritage as it defines a community.”
“We must take a stand now to preserve and protect the heritage of our built landscape,” Landry-Altman said. “It is not the time to pause our efforts supporting what makes our city unique and what gives us our character. I would invite the counselors who have museums in their wards to please be a part of this; I think it is going to be a very exciting project.”
Council approved an amended resolution to merge the two panels together.
The resolution to approve the terms of reference was amended to include the merging of the Greater Sudbury Museums Advisory Panel and Municipal Heritage Advisory Panel, moved by Landry-Altman and seconded by Ward 11 Coun. Bill Leduc. It carried unanimously.
The resolution to direct staff to prepare the business case was moved by Ward 1 Coun. Signoretti and seconded by Landry-Altman.
Then, it was on to the council appointments to the newly merged panel, a move that deferred from the Nov. 29 meeting to accommodate discussion of the Museum Revilization Business Plan report.
Four council members were appointed to the panel: Landry-Altman, Ward 2 Coun. Michael Vagnini, Ward 7 Coun. Natalie Labbée – who self-nominated noting that the Northern Ontario Railroad Museum & Heritage Centre was in her ward – and Ward 4 Coun. Pauline Fortin.
Jenny Lamothe is a reporter with Sudbury.com. She covers the diverse communities of Sudbury, especially the vulnerable or marginalized, including the Black, Indigenous, newcomer and Francophone communities, as well as 2SLGBTQ+ and issues of the downtown core.
