Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLGL-006-16Legal Services Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Municipal Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102. Report To: Council Date of Meeting: October 11, 2016 Report Number: LGL-006-16 File Number: Department File #L2030-06-17 By-law Number: Report Subject: Clarington Museum and Archives Board Recommendations: 1.1 That Report LGL-006-16 be received; 1.2 That Council pass the by-law attached to this Report (Attachment 6) to amend the current Clarington Museum and Archives Board By-law No. 2012-093; 1.3 That staff be directed to explore the possibility of the Museum Board amalgamating with the Library Board; and 1.4 That the Clarington Museum and Archives Board Members and the Clarington Library Board be advised of Council’s decision. Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report LGL-006-16 Report Overview This Report provides Council with options regarding possible governance and operational changes to the Clarington Museum and Archives Board. 2. Background 2.1 The following resolution (#C-222-16 as amended by #C-223-16) was passed by Council at its meeting on September 19, 2016: That the minutes of the Clarington Museums and Archives Board, dated July 5, 2016 and July 27, 2016, be received for information; That the Clarington Museums and Archives Board members and staff be directed to provide access to financial records up until August 31, 2016; That Staff report back to Council regarding possible options of dealing with the Clarington Museums and Archives Board including, dissolution; takeover by the Municipality of Clarington; any other recommendations by Staff; and That the Financial records be opened to the internal auditor. 2.2 The Clarington Museums and Archives Board (the “Board”) is a municipal service board that has been set up to control and manage museum and archive services and activities in Clarington. It is a local board established under what is now section 196 of the Municipal Act, 2001. 2.3 The Board in its current form was established in 2002 following a comprehensive review undertaken by the Community Services Department of the cultural services that were being offered by the Bowmanville Museum, Clarke Museum and Archives, and the Visual Arts Centre of Clarington. Council established the “Clarington Museum Transitional Board” to facilitate the merger of the Bowmanville Museum Board and the Clarke Museum and Archives Board. The transition board ultimately became what is now the Clarington Museum and Archives Board. Report CSD-07-02 dated March 25, 2002 (Attachment No.1) and an Addendum to that Report dated April 29, 2002 (Attachment No. 2) provide additional background to the merger. Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 3 2.4 In 2007, the Corporate Services Department undertook a review of the Board. Report COD-02-07 dated January 22, 2007 (Attachment No. 3) and an Addendum to that Report dated June 8, 2007 (Attachment No. 4) presented Council with the option of either continuing to have the Board operate as a Board of Management or be converted into an advisory board that operated as part of the Municipality’s overall corporate organizational structure. Council opted to keep the current Board structure with some changes to its governing by-law. 2.5 In December 2012, the then Executive Director of the Board appeared as a delegation to Council and asked for an endorsement of a new governing by- law. Council received the delegation and approved By-law No. 2012-093 through resolution #C-374-12. The current powers and duties of the Board are set out in this by-law (Attachment No. 5). 2.6 The resolution passed by Council on September 19, 2016 essentially requests that Municipal staff provide an analysis of the museum’s governance and operations, and provide Council with advice regarding possible changes to both in order to improve service delivery. 2.7 Even though Council’s resolution is broad enough to suggest that all alternative service delivery methods should be evaluated, this Report will only consider direct (i.e. in-house) delivery of museum and archive services and delivery through a municipal service board. It will focus on governance and operational issues impacting both. Other possibilities including an independent not-for-profit corporation (similar to the Visual Arts Centre) have not been considered. 2.8 This Report does not address Council’s request for access to the Board’s financial records up until August 31, 2016 because, at the time of writing of this Report, those records have not yet been reviewed. The Finance Department will report separately to Council when such review has been completed. 2.9 Given Council’s requested turn-around time for this Report, no formal input has been sought from the current Board or from any other stakeholders. 2.10 Nothing in this Report is intended to influence or in any way impact the Board’s statutory requirements under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 in relation to the recently certified union. 3. Discussion 3.1 As noted above, Council has reviewed the manner in which museum and archive services are delivered to Clarington residents on several occasions. As with all Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 4 such reviews, the object is to determine the most appropriate way to deliver the service. 3.2 The starting point for any current review of museum services in Ontario should be the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s “Standards for Community Museums in Ontario” (the “Standards”). The Standards represent the Ministry’s view of minimum requirements for the operation of a good community museum. 3.3 The principal goal of the Standards is to provide museums with a guide to good practices, but they are also referenced in Ontario Regulation 877 which governs the allocation of operating grants to Ontario's community museums. Eligibility for a provincial Community Museum Operating Grant (“CMOG”) is contingent on museums meeting the requirements in the Regulation as well as the Standards. Governance 3.4 The Standards provide that “a community museum must be … governed by a publicly accountable body” with “a written mandate, which may take the form of a constitution with by-laws, an act, a municipal charter, etc. … that establishes its legal, non-profit status and purpose, and its objectives.” 3.5 The Standards further provide that "[t]he governing body of a museum may be an elected or appointed Board of Trustees or Directors, or a Management or Advisory Board or Committee of municipal officials. Whatever its formation, it is the legal entity that is accountable to the public and to the museum community for the policy, financing and administration of the museum." The governing body must be “solely responsible for the operation of the museum” and it “cannot have a mandate that includes other municipal entities (e.g. libraries, tourist offices, or recreation centres)”. 3.6 Given that the Province has provided the Board with CMOGs in 9 of the past 10 years, it is clear that the Ministry is satisfied that the Board meets the Standards. The museum has received an annual CMOG of $25,161 every year since 2006 with the exception of 2012 when it received nothing due to non-compliance with the Standards’ policy requirements. Options 3.7 Having regard to the Standards, the following governance options should be considered by Council: (a) in-house delivery; (b) merger with Library Board; and Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 5 (c) status quo (maintain the current Board). (a) In-House Delivery 3.8 Bringing museum services in-house to operate under the auspices of a Municipal Department would not be in keeping with the Standards and would therefore jeopardize the Municipality’s ability to obtain a CMOG. However, if the service is overseen by a “committee … that advises council”, CMOG funding would still be available. 3.9 There would be some benefits of bringing the service in-house, most notably better financial controls and more direct links to existing in-house services such as tourism. However, staff do not recommend a structural change that would bring the service in-house. A committee of Council would effectively replicate the existing Board’s structure but without some of its benefits – i.e. involvement of Board members from different parts of the community with specific knowledge and expertise; strong volunteer base; and more expeditious decisions. In the opinion of staff, these losses would outweigh any benefits of moving the service to an in-house committee. 3.10 Given the fact that there is currently no collective agreement for museum employees and there are no similar positions or services within the Municipal structure, the labour relations and financial impacts of bringing them in-house has not been examined. (b) Merger 3.11 A second governance restructuring option that Municipal staff have considered is consolidation of the Board with the Clarington Library Board. It is important to note that this option has only been discussed amongst Municipal staff. Neither the Museum Board nor the Library Board has not been consulted or even made aware of the discussion. 3.12 Libraries, museums and archives are natural partners for collaboration and cooperation because they serve the same community in similar ways. They offer universal access, support for life-long learning that enhances community development, and act as gathering places for social interaction and engagement. 3.13 With respect to both operations and governance, there are many opportunities to create synergies by linking these types of organizations. The internal operations are remarkably similar. Parallels include the following: Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 6 Collection development – acquire, store, preserve and offer a wide range of materials for access by the public Public education - via special programs, unique displays, and individual research assistance Technology – hardware & software to track collections and provide public access; networks, pcs, wifi, and online resources to offer digital service; resources to create unique digital content Governance - independently appointed boards that provide governance and oversight while permitting operation at arm’s length from the municipality Policy – similar policies (e.g. governance, personnel, collections, financial) are enacted to ensure consistency, equity and transparency S taffing – transparent policies and procedures to meet legislated requirements and operational needs with due consideration given to the framework of collective agreements Legislation – observe requirements of provincial Acts such as Occupational Health and Safety Act, Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, Employment Standards Act, Ontario Human Rights Code and Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act Provincial Grant Funding – the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport offers annual operating grants to both museums and libraries. The Ministry’s qualifying requirements and mandated reports are very similar for both agencies Key Performance Indicators – collect, collate and analyze a wide variety of statistical data for monitoring and reporting purposes Financial accountability – bookkeeping software for day to day operations and an annual audit to ensure accuracy and transparency Multi-branch – accustomed to operate multiple branches distributed across a wide geographic area Tax Donations – tax donation receipts can be provided 3.14 One of the challenges in terms of this restructuring option is the risk of losing the CMOGs. It may be possible to avoid the loss of grants through a board structure that has cross-appointments to 2 separate but closely related boards. Other municipalities in Ontario have done this in ways that have preserved the provincial grant funding. 3.15 Even if the provincial grant money is lost because of a governance change, the benefits of restructuring may outweigh the loss. Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 7 3.16 Staff believe that, in the short term, the existing Board structure (i.e. the status quo) can work well, however, the option of merging the Museum Board with the Library Board should be considered as a possible long term solution. (c) Status Quo 3.17 Staff feel that the existing governance structure can be improved. There are two governance changes that should be made to By-Law No. 2012-093. 3.18 First, as a result of recent resignations, there currently are only 7 Board members. In the opinion of staff, this is the appropriate number to have on the Board. The current by-law permits a maximum of 12 members. The reduction from 12 to 7 can be achieved by eliminating the reference to 1 member being a representative of the Friends of the Museum (because it no longer exists) and by reducing the number of members from each ward from 2 to 1. 3.19 Second, By-law No. 2012-093 should contain a provision that a member of Council must sit on any finance committee or executive committee established by the Board. Recent experience with this Board and other municipal service boards suggests that Council members need to be made aware of all financial risks (including those relating to human resource issues) given that the Municipality is ultimately responsible for the finances of municipal service boards. 3.20 The specific language required to effect the changes described in section 3.17 and 3.18 above are set out in sections 1 and 2 of the draft by-law attached to this Report (Attachment No. 6). Operations 3.21 The Board’s operational policies meet the Ministry’s operational Standards (of which there are many). However, that does not mean that operations cannot be improved upon. 3.22 For several years, concerns regarding Museum operations (mostly related to financial record keeping) have been identified. Over the past several months, specific operational concerns have been identified through a review of Board meeting minutes and discussions with current Board members and Board staff. As a result of these concerns, senior Municipal staff (Director of Operations, Director of Corporate Services, Treasurer, Municipal Solicitor and Municipal Clerk) have met with Board members and Board staff, attended Board meetings, reviewed Board policies, and reviewed some of the Board’s financial records. Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 8 3.23 Staff’s recent review of the Board’s policies concluded that, generally speaking, they are acceptable. They are not as wholesome as those of the Municipality, but they do not need to be. The financial management policies are appropriate. The specific policies dealing with expense and travel reimbursement are clear. In the opinion of Municipal staff, any existing problems are not the result of poor policies – the problem lies in how the policies are being interpreted and applied. The recommended changes to the governing by-law described in sections 3.17 and 3.18 above are, in part, intended to address these issues. 3.24 One operational policy that Council may want to consider amending is in relation to hiring. The current by-law empowers the Board to process and make all hiring decisions. Consideration should be given to having Municipal participation (staff and/or Council) in the process. 3.25 Staff do not recommend any changes to the operational provisions of By-law 2012-093 other than housekeeping amendments to codify the existing practices regarding property maintenance and to clarify that meetings can be closed to the public under specified conditions (sections 3 and 4 of the draft amending by-law). 4. Concurrence 4.1 The Director of Corporate Services, Director of Finance, Director of Operations, Municipal Clerk, Director of Community Services and the Library CEO have reviewed this Report and concur with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion 5.1 For reasons set out in this Report, staff recommend that Council pass by-law attached to this Report (Attachment 6) to amend the current Clarington Museum and Archives Board By-law No. 2012-093 and also recommend that direction be given to further explore the possibility of a merger with the Clarington Library Board. 6. Strategic Plan Application 6.1 The recommendations in this Report reflect and promote Strategic Priority 2 in the Strategic Plan: Demonstrate good governance and value for the tax dollar.” Specifically, they are in keeping with section 2.2 of the Plan which requires staff Municipality of Clarington Report LGL-006-16 Page 9 to “[i]nvestigate putting in place an ongoing evaluation process in which specific services are identified and systematically reviewed to determine the most effective and efficient way to provide them.” Submitted by: Approved by: Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO Municipal Solicitor Interim CAO Staff Contact: Andrew C. Allison, 905-623-3379 ext. 2013 or aallison@clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 – Report CSD-07-02 dated March 25, 2002 Attachment 2 – Addendum to Report CSD-07-02 dated April 29, 2002 Attachment 3 – Report COD-02-07 dated January 22, 2007 Attachment 4 – Addendum to Report COD-02-07 dated June 8, 2007 Attachment 5 – By-Law No. 2012-093 Attachment 6 – Draft Amending By-Law