Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member Sport and Culture

The Cabinet Member Sport and Culture introduced the report which had been circulated separately from the agenda. The report set out the current financial position of the Art Gallery and Museum Development Scheme. The Art Gallery & Museum fundraising campaign had achieved funding commitments of £4,527,800 towards the Development Scheme total of £6.3m - leaving an outstanding shortfall of £1,772,200.

The report explained that the Art Gallery & Museum was working on a second-round bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) for £750k; and further funding applications / approaches for £475k through the Development Trust. The aim was to reach a total of £5,750,000, for construction to start from spring 2011.

The submission of the second-round stage HLF bid was due by the end of November 2010 – and a decision on the outcome will be announced during March 2011. Recent changes with the Heritage Lottery has resulted in the need to ensure the fundraising campaign either secures or underwrites £5,550,000 of which council underwrites £1,022m, – before the second-round application can be submitted.

It is unlikely that the funding level required by HLF will be secured by November. Therefore, Cabinet was being asked to determine which of the options identified within the report it wished to pursue; in light of the changed position of HLF.

The Leader welcomed the members of the public who had attended the meeting for this item. He invited Graham Lockwood as chairman and Margaret Austin as a member of the fundraising Development Trust for the AG&M, to address the meeting.

Mr Lockwood emphasised the importance of the development scheme to the town.   It would attract more visitors to the AG&M by providing improved facilities and would facilitate the development of that area of Cheltenham. The project had received support both locally and throughout the county. He explained that the role of the Development Trust was to access sources of funding which may not be accessible to the council. To date they had raised £2 million which was a major achievement.  However he emphasised that this amount was made up of time-limited commitments of funding rather than the money itself. It was important to secure these existing commitments and to be in the best possible position to secure the balance from the HLF and this was why the underwriting by the Council was so important. A public commitment of support by the Cabinet would also provide greater opportunities for the trust to seek additional funding support from other trusts and individuals.

Ms Austin was also keen to stress the importance of retaining the existing commitments which once lost may never be regained. These commitments had been secured on the basis of the current scheme and there was a risk of losing them if the scheme was changed at this point. She acknowledged that it is a difficult time for fundraising but advised that since the report had been written, the trust had secured another £100,000 of funding and raising additional funds would be easier once people could see the development  happening. The AG&M would boost the economy of Cheltenham and would therefore be good for the town.

Mr Edward Gillespie was also invited to speak as the chairman of the Summerfield Trust.  The trust had made a considerable pledge to the development and had worked very closely with council officers. The Summerfield Trust had made the decision on the basis that the new AG&M would make a big difference to the town.

Another member of the public reminded members of the experiences of Salford and Gateshead where the new art Gallery developments had a real uplifting effect on the community.

In response to a question from a member, the Museum, Arts and Tourism Manager, confirmed that if the HLF bid was successful it would be for the full amount of £750,000.

The Cabinet Member Sport and Culture commended the development trust for their support and enthusiasm and their achievements to date in fundraising for the scheme.  Referring to the options listed in the report, he considered that with option 1, which would close the AG&M from 1 January 2011, there would be too high a risk that it might never be re-opened. He favoured option 2 which would delay the closure until 31st March 2011 when the outcome of the HLF decision would be known. If the trust was able to achieve the fundraising more quickly, than it may be possible to get the bulk of the funding in place in advance of the HLF announcement.

In response to a question from a member he acknowledged that there was a potential risk of losing some of the funding commitments if the Council went for option 2 rather than option 1, but on balance it was still the lowest risk option.

The Leader advised that he had received a letter of support from the Chamber of Commerce for option 1.  He sympathised with their view but it was not possible to for the Council to commit to the underwriting of the funds prior to the budget setting process for 2011/12. In his view option 2 was favourable as options 3, 4 and 5 would all require the current scheme to be abandoned and to start again from scratch.

The Cabinet Member Built Environment felt the development was a golden opportunity to provide a significant community resource and information Centre and increased access to an important mediaeval part of the town in St Mary's churchyard. He was in support of proceeding carefully as close to the original brief as possible in order to secure the funding already committed.

The Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development supported option 2 but pointed out that the final decision on underwriting must lie with Council. He advised that the difficulties in proceeding with the development in the current financial climate should not be underestimated. He commended the funding commitments that had already been achieved but urged the fund raisers to seek wider support from the population of Cheltenham. He pointed out that the summer public consultation on the budget had indicated both positive and negative support for the development.

Other members supported the development and commended everybody involved for their efforts to date in getting the development to this stage.

RESOLVED THAT:

1. Option 2 be pursued as the best option
   
   
2. The Cabinet supports the underwriting of any shortfall to the £5,550,000 up to a maximum of £922,000 and Cabinet recommend to Council that this is agreed as part of the budget process for 2011/12.