3. MUSEUM SUSTAINABILITY PLAN - FINAL REPORT

PLAN DE VIABILITÉ DES MUSÉES - RAPPORT FINAL

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS as amended

That Council approve:

a) The overall Museum Sustainability Plan, with the operating and capital financial requirements for Council consideration during budget deliberations for each of the next 4 years (2006-2009) as attached in Document 1, which includes the following investments:

a. Funding to individual museums to enhance capacity to improve museum facilities, research, programming, exhibits, publications and visitor services in support of the Greater Ottawa Story;

b. Development of the Heritage Gateway “concept” to coordinate, link and promote the Greater Ottawa Story on behalf of all Ottawa area museums;

c. Formalization of the Ottawa Museum Network (comprised of museum directors from the community and city operated museums) to market, fundraise and coordinate cross-museum services;

d. Funding to extend the collections management software to the community museums;

e. Development of the virtual Heritage Gateway to provide a website to tell the Ottawa Story at a high level and to provide a coordinated link to related websites;

f. Provision for a physical Heritage Gateway within the City’s Long Range Financial Plan in 2010; and

g. Establishment of an interim storage facility and planning for the longer-term centralized Preservation Centre for the cataloguing and appropriate care of the growing inventory of museum artefacts.

b) That City Council petition the government of Ontario to increase the Community Museum Operating Grant (CMOG) funding envelope to allow for new and existing museums to qualify for more funding.

c) That City Council petition the Minister of Canadian Heritage to establish operating funding for local museums.

d) That the City enter into three year purchase of service agreements with community operated museums effective 2007 clearly defining the expectations of the City and the annual reporting requirements.

e) That Committee and Council direct staff to report annually on the status of implementation of the Museum Sustainability Plan.

6. That the Museum Sustainability Plan be amended to include funding for the Workers’ Heritage Museum to phase-in operational capacity according to the following schedule:

2007 $20,000

2008 $40,000

2009 $60,000

conditional on the development of a Service Delivery Agreement satisfactory to the City of Ottawa.

RECOMMANDATIONS MODIFIÉES DU COMITÉ

Que le Conseil approuve :

1. Le Plan de viabilité des musées, assorti de crédits de fonctionnement et d’immobilisation que le Conseil devra examiner dans le cadre des délibérations sur le budget au cours des quatre prochaines années (2006-2009); ci-joint comme document 1, le rapport prévoit les investissements suivants :

a. Octroi d’un financement aux différents musées afin qu’ils soient mieux en mesure d’améliorer leurs installations, leurs activités de recherche, leurs programmes, leurs expositions, leurs publications et leurs services aux visiteurs, pour aider à raconter la grande histoire d’Ottawa;

b. Établissement du « concept » de Carrefour du patrimoine ayant des fonctions de coordination, de liaison et de promotion de la grande histoire d’Ottawa au nom de l’ensemble des musées de la région d’Ottawa;

c. Officialisation du Réseau des musées d’Ottawa (composé des directeurs des musées communautaires et des musées exploités par la Ville) pour la commercialisation, les appels de fonds et la coordination des services entre les musées;

d. Octroi de financement destiné à étendre l’utilisation du logiciel de gestion des collections aux musées communautaires;

e. Établissement d’un carrefour virtuel du patrimoine, c’est-à-dire d’un site Web racontant l’histoire d’Ottawa et offrant un lien avec des sites Web connexes;

f. Établissement d’un carrefour matériel du patrimoine devant être prévu pour 2010 dans le Plan financier à long terme; et

g. Établissement d’une installation d’entreposage temporaire et planification du futur Centre de préservation, qui permettra de cataloguer et d’entretenir de façon appropriée l’inventaire des artéfacts des musées, dont le nombre augmente sans cesse.

2. Que le Conseil municipal demande au gouvernement de l’Ontario d’accroître l’enveloppe budgétaire du Programme de subventions de fonctionnement aux musées communautaires, afin qu’un plus grand nombre de musées nouveaux ou existants y soient admissible.

3. Que le Conseil municipal demande à la ministre du Patrimoine canadien d’établir un mécanisme de financement pour l’exploitation des musées locaux.

4. Que la Ville conclue avec les musées communautaires des conventions triennales d’achat de services devant prendre effet en 2007 et définissant clairement les attentes de la Ville ainsi que les exigences relatives à la production des rapports annuels.

5. Que le Comité et le Conseil donnent instruction au personnel de rendre compte chaque année de la mise en œuvre du Plan de viabilité des musées.

6. Que le Plan de viabilité des musées soit modifié et comprenne le financement du Musée patrimonial des ouvriers, de manière à appliquer progressivement la capacité opérationnelle selon le calendrier suivant :

2007 20 000 $

2008 40 000 $

2009 60 000 $

sous réserve de l’élaboration d’un accord de prestation de services, à la satisfaction de la Ville d’Ottawa.

For the information of Council

The Committee approved the following Motion in conjunction with the staff recommendation:

That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee formally recognize the work of staff and all of the residents of Ottawa who volunteered their time to create the City’s new Museum Sustainability Plan and are confident it is an excellent, go-forward policy and program to preserve and share the City’s heritage from Cumberland to West Carleton, from Lower Town to Rideau.

Pour la gouverne du Conseil

Le Comité a approuvé la motion suivante compte tenu de la recommandation du personnel :

Que le Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux reconnaisse officiellement le travail du personnel et de tous les résidents d’Ottawa qui ont donné de leur temps pour créer le nouveau Plan de viabilité des musées de la Ville et qui estiment qu’il s’agit d’une politique et d’un programme d’excellence pour préserver et partager le patrimoine de la Ville, de Cumberland à West Carleton, de la basse-ville au canal Rideau.

DOCUMENTATION

1. Deputy City Manager, Community and Protective Services report dated 30 August 2005 (ACS2005-CPS-CSF-0012).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 15 September 2005.

Report to / Rapport au :

Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee

Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux

and Council / et au Conseil

30 August 2005 / 30 août 2005

Submitted by / Soumis par :

Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager / Directeur municipal adjoint,

Community and Protective Services/Services communautaires et de protection

Contact Person / Personne ressource : Colleen Hendrick, Director / Directrice

Cultural Services and Community Funding / Services culturels et financement communautaire

(613) 580-2424 x/poste 24366, colleen.hendrick@ottawa.ca

Ref N°: ACS2005-CPS-CSF-0012

SUBJECT:	MUSEUM SUSTAINABILITY PLAN - FINAL REPORT

OBJET :	PLAN DE VIABILITÉ DES MUSÉES - RAPPORT FiNAL

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend that Council approve:

1. The overall Museum Sustainability Plan, with the operating and capital financial requirements for Council consideration during budget deliberations for each of the next 4 years (2006-2009) as attached in Document 1, which includes the following investments:

a. Funding to individual museums to enhance capacity to improve museum facilities, research, programming, exhibits, publications and visitor services in support of the Greater Ottawa Story;

b. Development of the Heritage Gateway “concept” to coordinate, link and promote the Greater Ottawa Story on behalf of all Ottawa area museums;

c. Formalization of the Ottawa Museum Network (comprised of museum directors from the community and city operated museums) to market, fundraise and coordinate cross-museum services;

d. Funding to extend the collections management software to the community museums;

e. Development of the virtual Heritage Gateway to provide a website to tell the Ottawa Story at a high level and to provide a coordinated link to related websites;

f. Provision for a physical Heritage Gateway within the City’s Long Range Financial Plan in 2010; and

2. That City Council petition the government of Ontario to increase the Community Museum Operating Grant (CMOG) funding envelope to allow for new and existing museums to qualify for more funding.

3. That City Council petition the Minister of Canadian Heritage to establish operating funding for local museums.

4. That the City enter into three year purchase of service agreements with community operated museums effective 2007 clearly defining the expectations of the City and the annual reporting requirements.

5. That Committee and Council direct staff to report annually on the status of implementation of the Museum Sustainability Plan.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux recommande au Conseil d'approuver :

d. Octroi de financement destiné à étendre l’utilisation du logiciel de gestion des collections aux musées communautaires;

e. Établissement d’un carrefour virtuel du patrimoine, c’est-à-dire d’un site Web racontant l’histoire d’Ottawa et offrant un lien avec des sites Web connexes;

f. Établissement d’un carrefour matériel du patrimoine devant être prévu pour 2010 dans le Plan financier à long terme; et

3. Que le Conseil municipal demande à la ministre du Patrimoine canadien d’établir un mécanisme de financement pour l’exploitation des musées locaux.

5. Que le Comité et le Conseil donnent instruction au personnel de rendre compte chaque année de la mise en œuvre du Plan de viabilité des musées.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City directly operates three museums: Billings Estate, Cumberland Heritage Village, and Pinhey’s Point Historic Site. The City also provides funding support at various levels to seven community operated museums: Bytown; Diefenbunker; Goulbourn; Nepean; Osgoode Township; Watson’s Mill and Muséoparc Vanier Museopark.

At its meeting of April 23, 2003 Council endorsed the Arts and Heritage Plan but directed staff to "develop Ottawa’s Heritage Gateway after the adoption and successful implementation of the strategy that ensures the long-term, ongoing financial viability of the ten local museums".

During the 2004 budget deliberations the Department was directed to develop a Sustainability Plan to support the City-owned and community-operated museums, to conduct a Competitive Service Delivery Review (CSDR) of the City operated museums, and to submit a progress report by the end of 2004.

At its meeting of August 25, 2004 Council approved the Museums Sustainability Plan Terms of Reference that included the following components:

§ A description of the functions of local museums;

§ A summary of the current situation, challenges and financial implications;

§ A description of best practices, supports and trends in sustainable local museums;

§ The development of an achievable city-wide vision and service delivery model; and

§ Recommendations to improve the sustainability of City-owned museums and community-owned museums.

At its meeting of February 9^th, 2005 staff reported on the current challenges within the local museums in Ottawa. The City’s 2005 operating funding contribution for City owned and community operated museums was $1.66 million in direct contributions and services in kind.

Current funding levels are not sufficient and as a result:

§ There is no museum that tells the Greater Ottawa story as a whole. Each of the museums tells a portion but there are gaps in the story that fall outside the themes of the individual local museums.

§ Many museums having limited or no access to professional resources trained in museology to work on proper documentation, restoration and preservation of the collections, researching the museum collections and stories, and guiding the preparation of meaningful, accurate and attractive exhibits.

§ Eight of the museums lack appropriate climate controlled storage areas to ensure their collections are preserved undamaged for the enjoyment of future generations.

§ Most museums lack adequate marketing resources to develop enhanced revenue opportunities and tell the community what they have to offer.

§ The community-run museums do not have access to modern collection management systems, and their individual budgets are too small to justify the investment required.

§ There are no locations suitable to house larger temporary and traveling exhibits within the local museum.

§ There are inadequate resources to recruit and manage volunteers to achieve the greatest possible effect.

The Interim Report also included a city-wide vision and service delivery model that was approved by Council at its meeting of February 9, 2005 with the following additional direction provided to staff in developing the final plan:

§ Consideration of further investment alternatives to respond to long-term sustainability.

§ Include further City funding necessary to move the present museums to the level necessary to access provincial funding for those museums wishing to do so.

§ Conduct a Competitive Service Delivery (CSDR) Review of the City museums to achieve a sustainable service delivery model for the core museum functions

Preliminary discussion with members of the Association of the Friends of Billings Estate Museum, the Cumberland Museum Advisory Board, and the Pinhey’s Point Foundation resulted in expressed reluctance to take over the direct operation of the museums at this time. Given this response, as well as the current lack of a comprehensive service delivery model, staff recommended that any re-engineering opportunities or alternate methods of service delivery not be explored until such time as there is sustainable funding and service delivery model in place.

On April 27, 2005, Council approved a recommendation to establish a Steering Committee comprised of Councillors and community members, to assist and direct staff in the preparation of a final museum sustainability plan that not only reflected the needs of the community but recognized the financial constraints being experienced by the City. The Steering Committee was comprised of the following members: Councillor Jellett; Councillor Cullen; Councillor Stavinga; Meg Hamilton (Council of Heritage Organizations of Ottawa); June Creelman (heritage consultant); Jean Bruce and Quentin Gall (Arts, Heritage and Culture Advisory Committee); City staff: Colleen Hendrick; Nancy Greenfield and Debbie Hill.

The Museum Sustainability Plan includes a review of the current state of the 10 local museums presently part of the Ottawa Museum Network. The scope of the final Museum Sustainability Plan was to:

§ Identify and create a plan to tell the overall ‘Ottawa Story’

§ Review the existing City and community operated museums to determine their mandates, governance structure and sustainability options and their role in telling the Ottawa Story;

§ Develop concepts and present options for a “Heritage Gateway” including timelines and costing;

§ Develop concepts and present options for a “Preservation Centre” including timelines and costing;

§ Develop an implementation plan including financial impacts and timelines for the proposed options.

This report presents a series of recommendations for action to improve the sustainability of local museums and increase their capacity to tell a part of Ottawa's story. This report recommends adoption of a 4-year $2.3 million operating investment and a $3.9 million capital investment plan, which includes the following components:

§ Increased sustaining operating funding and capital funding for the 10 museums currently supported by the City.

§ Creation of an Ottawa Museum Network supported by the City.

§ Development of a Heritage Gateway, initially as a virtual website.

§ Development of a Preservation Centre, initially in City owned space to address the most immediate needs.

§ Access to the City’s collections management software for community operated museums.

This additional investment will increase the capacity of local museums to:

§ Contribute to the telling of the Greater Ottawa Story

§ Deliver on core museum services to the community (i.e., preservation, research and interpretation)

§ Meet provincial museum standards to become eligible for Community Museums Operating Grant (CMOG) funding

§ Leverage non-municipal sources of funding, sponsorships and partnerships individually and through the efforts of the Ottawa Museum Network

§ Realize economies of scale through the sharing of resources

§ Meet public trust obligations with respect to the care, preservation and management of collections through initiatives such as the collections management software, collaborative emergency preparedness, the Preservation Centre, etc.

§ Attract new and repeat visitors (local residents and tourists) through site specific and joint marketing initiatives, improved and new public programming, school programming, exhibits, site interpretation, outreach activities, the Heritage Gateway, etc.

§ Offer more opportunities for community involvement and support through volunteer and partnership development

In keeping with the terms of reference approved in April, the Museum Sustainability Steering Committee supported, directed and approved the proposed Museum Sustainability Plan.

BACKGROUND

Current Challenges for Museums in Telling the Ottawa Story

The City directly operates three museums: Billings Estate, Cumberland Heritage Village, and Pinhey’s Point Historic Site. The former Gloucester museum is closed, however, City staff continue to care for the collection. The City also provides funding support at various levels to seven community operated museums: Bytown; Diefenbunker; Goulbourn; Nepean; Osgoode Township; Watson’s Mill and Muséoparc Vanier Museopark. The City’s 2005 operating funding contribution for City owned and community operated museums was $1.66 million in direct contributions and services in kind.

Ottawa's local museums are overseen by a small but devoted group of professional staff, supported by an extensive network of volunteers (approximately 640) who contribute 21,000 hours of time for an approximate value of $380,000. Combined, the local museums had an attendance of approximately 86,000 people in 2004; however, all are struggling to deliver on core functions with respect to their current mandate given their existing level of funding.

Billings Estate Museum

The current administrative, collections and programming staff are responsible for Pinhey’s Point and for the management of the Gloucester Museum collection leaving insufficient time to address Billings’ curatorial, exhibits and programming needs.

Bytown Museum

The current funding is not sufficient to provide for year-round programming staff or upgrading of permanent exhibits nor is it sufficient to permit adequate volunteer and business development in a competitive museum market.

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum

The current funding is inadequate to operate and interpret a 100-acre site with over 30 buildings. There are insufficient site interpreters and education staff available to develop and deliver school programs, host events and complete site interpretation. There is minimal capacity to develop exhibits and personal interpretation activities required for a living history museum.

Diefenbunker, Canada's Cold War Museum

There are no capital funds available to undertake renovations required to increase access to the building from the current 60 visitor capacity. Funding for curatorial, exhibit and promotional support is inadequate and prohibits further growth and development.

Goulbourn Museum

Goulbourn has one part-time staff and as a result is unable to support adequate education and curatorial activity for both the museum and the history centre. It does not have sufficient funds to enhance its existing programs or to develop new ones.

Muséoparc Vanier Museopark

The current funding to Muséoparc Vanier Museopark supports one full time staff member but does not allow for program development in compliance with the core functions of museums.

Nepean Museum

Nepean is able to conduct limited educational programming and develop small, temporary displays. The permanent exhibits at the museum require improvements, the museum is in need of improved interpretation and presentation of the collection, as well as additional school programs.

Osgoode Township Museum

The current funding provides little or no capacity to preserve and interpret the collection or to offer regular school programs

Pinhey's Point Historic Site

The current funding does not allow for any full-time, site-dedicated staff or the capacity to develop exhibits, conduct interpretation and participate in educational programs

Watson's Mill

The current budget does not allow for any full-time staff; the volunteer board cannot continue to operate the Mill or develop interpretive programs without full-time staff support

Overall, community museums are currently funded to a level that does not allow them to offer competitive salaries to their staff and, as a result have difficulty attracting and retaining experienced staff. Available funding does not provide the capacity to deliver the core services of a museum.

Methodology

As the first step to developing a sustainability plan for the museums, staff and a consultant assessed each museum’s capacity to deliver on the core museum functions of preservation, interpretation and research.

The aim of the Museums Sustainability Plan is to enable the museums to meet their mandates by providing sufficient funds and resources to:

§ Recruit and maintain a core of professional museum staff to provide ongoing leadership and subject matter expertise

§ Build on museum best practices to become CMOG compliant and leverage other sources of funding

§ Properly house and manage museum collections to meet public trust obligations and provide a legacy for future generations

§ Conduct research on the museum collections, local history and museum audiences to improve museum programming and visitor services

§ Educate museum visitors through site interpretation, exhibits, public and school programming, and publications

§ Interpret aspects of The Greater Ottawa Story in support of the high level overall story

§ Enhance the capacity for site-specific promotion to draw visitors to special heritage events and programming in support of the education mandate

§ Meet the museum’s priority capital and maintenance needs to preserve heritage buildings and enhance public access

§ Enable each museum to participate actively as members of the Ottawa Museum Network which will strengthen the capacity of the museums through partnerships in key areas such as fundraising

§ Develop new sources of revenue and community partnerships both individually and through the network

§ Participate in City-wide marketing and promotion of the museums to increase awareness of the museums and attract more visitation from residents and tourists

§ Encourage greater community involvement in museum operations through volunteer recruitment, development and recognition

Each museum's grant applications for the past 3 years as well as their individual assessments were reviewed with individual museum staff and/or boards. A list of questions with respect to mandates, strengths of the collections and programs and the current and future needs of each museum were discussed as well as potential for the museum to contribute to the Greater Ottawa Story.

The information compiled from those meetings and general consultation sessions held with the heritage community led to recommendations with respect to the funding requirements for individual museums, for the concept and options for a Heritage Gateway, the role that individual museums would play in telling a part of Ottawa's Story, the role of common services such as the Ottawa Museums' Network and sharing collections software and a plan for a Preservation Centre.

DISCUSSION

The individual museum funding requests were developed in consultation with staff and were tailored to the expressed needs of each museum. Subsequently, an overall review of the total needs was conducted with an aim to address individual priorities in the context of the overall needs of the local museum sector. Staff, at the request of the Steering Committee, developed a 4-year plan, which reflects the priorities of the local museum sector in Ottawa. The overall plan has since been presented to staff of the museums, museum boards, stakeholders and the larger community through a number of public consultations held between April and June 2005. There is general support for the consolidated plan.

Recommendation 1a) Funding to Individual Museums

This report presents a series of recommendations for action to improve the sustainability of local museums and increase their capacity to tell a part of Ottawa's story. This report recommends increased sustaining operating funding and capital funding for the 10 museums currently supported by the City. The total proposed investment is $2.3 million in operating and a $3.9 million investment in capital over the next 4 years, which will increase the capacity of local museums to:

§ Contribute to the telling of the Greater Ottawa Story

§ Deliver on core museum services to the community (i.e., preservation, research and interpretation)

§ Meet provincial museum standards to become eligible for CMOG funding

§ Leverage non-municipal sources of funding, sponsorships and partnerships individually and through the efforts of the Ottawa Museum Network

§ Realize economies of scale through the sharing of resources

§ Offer more opportunities for community involvement and support through volunteer and partnership development.

Recommendation 1 b) - Telling the Greater Ottawa Story

According to the Ottawa Tourism's 2002-2004 Summer Pleasures Travel Survey, 7.2 million tourists visited Ottawa in 2003. Cultural related activity (visiting a gallery/museum/historic site, attending a cultural performance or festival) represented 46% of the primary activities undertaken by these tourists during their stay. In Ottawa, cultural travellers ranked 6^th in Canada with museum attendance representing 3.5 million visitors. Authentic cultural experiences were also cited as growing in demand. The study further examined the intention of tourists to visit specific attractions and four out of the ten local museums were cited in the top 27 listing of Ottawa attractions (Bytown, Diefenbunker, Billings Estate and Cumberland Heritage Village Museums).

As one of the oldest and the fourth largest municipality in Canada, the City of Ottawa has a story to tell that encompasses but is also distinct from its role as the national capital. The stories of the many communities that comprise Ottawa have been overshadowed by its identity as the nation's capital.

During the consultations in the development of the Ottawa 20/20 Arts and Heritage Plan, it became obvious that the story of Ottawa as a whole is not being told concisely in one place. Accordingly, it was proposed that a “Heritage Gateway” be developed to create a focal point for local heritage organizations and initiatives. Diagram 1 illustrates the range of institutions, organizations and initiatives that contribute to documenting, researching and telling our local stories.

Diagram 1

The local museums, on behalf of the community, contribute to telling Ottawa's stories by:

§ Collecting and preserving material evidence of our history;

§ Researching our material heritage and stories; and

§ Telling Ottawa stories through educational programs, exhibits and interpretation.

Prior to January 1, 2001, the City of Ottawa had two museums that reflected part of the City’s history: Bytown Museum and Billings Estate Museum. Amalgamation resulted in the consolidation of 10 museums and historic sites (the Muséoparc Vanier Museopark has since been added while the Gloucester Museum was closed) from the former municipalities. The total collection includes approximately 130,000 artefacts ranging from photographs to large mechanized farm machinery. The research base for telling Ottawa’s Story is extensive and includes an ever-growing number of public records, private papers, photographs, art works, genealogical reports and historical essays.

As expected, however, few of the museums are currently telling more than one or two aspects of the Greater Ottawa story. Individual collections can, however, complement a high level, thematic overview of the Ottawa Story that can be told at an interpretive centre or Heritage Gateway.

The Greater Ottawa Story: Heritage Gateway and Museums

The concept of a Heritage Gateway was proposed in the Ottawa 20/20 Arts and Heritage Plan to focus on preserving and interpreting the overall history of Ottawa. An Ottawa Heritage Gateway would have three key purposes:

§ To fill a gap by telling the story of Ottawa as a whole;

§ To refer residents and visitors to the community museums and historically significant sites as appropriate for more details on particular elements of the Greater Ottawa Story; and

§ To provide exhibit space for temporary and travelling exhibits.

An initial thematic analysis was undertaken to identify which parts of the Ottawa story were currently being told and to identify the “gaps” that could be dealt with at the Heritage Gateway.

Themes included: Natural History; Aboriginal Settlement; European Exploration (17^th and 18^th centuries); Early Settlement (1783-1825); the Bytown Era (1826-1854); Emerging City & National Capital (1855-1900); Focus on Growth (1901-1945); and Growth and Transformation (1946-2005).

Clearly there is no single facility that exists at present in Ottawa that reflects all of the themes of the Ottawa story – which is why a Heritage Gateway is required to provide the entire story at a high level, to enhance the interpretation and encourage visitors to see the in-depth and site-specific stories throughout the local museum system.

Not a museum in the classical sense, this interpretive centre is meant to complement the existing network of local museums by interpreting The Greater Ottawa Story. It would house a permanent exhibit that draws on existing artefacts and resources already in the community; act as a springboard to encourage visitors and residents to visit and support local museums, historic sites and other heritage assets; and provide exhibit space for temporary exhibits reflecting specific aspects of The Greater Ottawa Story. These temporary exhibits may be developed by individual museums or by community heritage organizations or groups whose story is not currently reflected in our local museums.

Overview of the Local Museums and their Role in the Greater Ottawa Story

One of the purposes of this report is to further examine the mandates, governance structures, collections, research and interpretation of each of the 10 municipally funded museums (details in Document 3) in light of the themes cited above, to :

§ Identify the essential elements of the Greater Ottawa Story

§ Assess the extent of and how well the story is being told through the existing museums

§ Identify in a preliminary way any potential for each museum to support the future Heritage Gateway by expanding on a particular aspect of the Ottawa Story

§ Identify elements of the story that are not well represented in the existing material collections and educational initiatives delivered through the existing museums.

In an effort to further detail and develop the Ottawa Story, it is recommended that each of the museums expand on a particular important theme in the Greater Ottawa Story. The future Heritage Gateway will encourage visitors to visit the museums to learn more about those particular themes.

The following are examples of how the Greater Ottawa Story could be interpreted at the Heritage Gateway in conjunction with the existing museums and other heritage organizations.

The region’s Natural History can best be interpreted at the Heritage Gateway. Natural history features associated with sites such as Billings and Pinhey’s could be included in this section to provide a link with these sites. The stone used to build the Commissariat (Bytown Museum) and Pinhey’s could provide an interpretive element of the geology story. Other minor elements of the natural history story could also be told at Pinheys and Billings. Orientation to natural history sites and parks throughout the City would also be provided.

Aboriginal Settlement could be interpreted at the Gateway through the use of text and illustrations, complemented by artefacts available through the Canadian Museum of Civilization's (CMC) reserve collection. This theme could be developed in association with aboriginal heritage groups such as Aboriginal Experiences: Turtle Island Tourism Inc.

Interpretation of European Exploration and the fur trade could also be included at the Gateway. The development of the Ottawa River as a corridor of trade could be interpreted using a model or interactive component showing the demographic changes over the years prior to 1855. This theme could also be represented in an interpretive panel on the riverbank at Pinhey’s Point.

For nearly a century, Ottawa's economic importance was as a lumbering town. An exhibit at the Heritage Gateway could provide an overview of the industry focusing on the numerous entrepreneurs and lumber companies, which dominated the industry. Specific aspects of the social and technological history of lumbering could be told at the Bytown Museum, Vanier Museopark, the Ottawa Workers Heritage Centre (Gamman House) or as part of the National Capital Commission's historical interpretation at Lebreton Flats.

An exhibit module at the Gateway entitled The Bytown Era could use interpretive text, illustrations and one or two significant artefacts to introduce the visitor to the story of the establishment of Bytown. This Gateway display would serve as an introduction to a more in-depth, artefact-rich interpretation of the story at the Bytown Museum. This component could include a working model demonstrating the technology of canal construction and operation, and a display of construction tools. Colonel By’s furniture and other possessions could also form part of this exhibit.

A module at the Gateway entitled Early Settlement could deal with the origins of settlers and could use text and illustrations to explain the surveying and allotment of township lots and how this part of rural Ottawa developed through the colonial period to the establishment of villages and towns. This display could orient the visitor to the collections at Goulbourn and Osgoode and to the icon sites such as Billings Estate and Pinhey’s Point. The stories of the original settlers and their origins can also be told at these sites.

Another module entitled Emerging City and the National Capital (1855-1900) could outline the social history themes relating to life in Ottawa, and with the expansion of the city beyond Upper and Lower Towns. It could also include the growth of rural communities, their relationship to the City and the emergence of municipal services. Artefacts could be used sparingly and could be borrowed from the various museums. Links to a recreated shanty at Bytown Museum and exhibits at Billings and Pinhey’s could elaborate on the general themes introduced at the Gateway.

An exhibit entitled Focus and Growth (1901-1945) could deal with most of the themes covering this period. Since this is the period which is richest in artefacts, more representative artefacts could be used at the Gateway than in the exhibits dealing with previous periods. Also, a selection from a list of themes could be dealt with at the museums and sites:

Rural Communities and Agriculture - at Cumberland & Watson’s Mill
Neighbourhoods/Suburbs - at Nepean with artefacts from other museums
Industries - at Vanier with artefacts from other museums
Domestic Life - at Billings
Military Life (two World Wars) - at Goulbourn with artefacts from other museums
Technology - at Watson’s Mill
Transportation and Commerce - at Osgoode with special emphasis on the role of rural communities in “feeding the city.”
Arts, Culture and Crafts - at Pinhey’s and community museums
Personal Adornment - at Billing’s with artefacts from Nepean and Osgoode

Likewise an exhibit entitled Growth and Transformation (1946-2005) could be artefact-rich and would require both collection development and assistance from the museums and sites as well as a variety of groups and organizations throughout the community. This exhibit could resemble those at the Canada and World Pavilion and would celebrate the modern Ottawa and its people. It could focus on the modern downtown, built heritage, the suburbs and rural Ottawa. It could contain a “heroes” gallery reflecting the contributions of Ottawans to their country and the world. The museum and site components could include:

Modern agriculture - at Osgoode
Military/Cold War - “Ottawa’s Cold War Experience” at The Diefenbunker
Fire and Police Services - at Nepean
Arts, Culture and Crafts - at Billings

Although most of the municipal museums have collections dating from the first half of the 20^th century, few reflect the period following the Second World War and none deal with the significant demographic, economic and political changes which have taken place since the 1960's. This part of the Greater Ottawa Story could be best told by a major exhibit at the Heritage Gateway complemented by a series of temporary exhibits reflecting the cultural diversity of "modern" Ottawa.

While each museum has more than one story they are telling, diagram 2 indicates a major part of the Greater Ottawa Story that each museum could contribute to and expand upon. The combination will begin to form a large part of the Greater Ottawa Story.

Diagram 2

Links to a Website/Temporary Exhibits

In addition to the museums, which currently form part of the City system, other heritage groups that have a mandate to interpret aspects of the City’s history can contribute to the interpretation provided by the Gateway. These could include organizations such as the City Archives, the Sisters of Charity, the Ottawa Police Department, the Bytown Fire Brigade and the Ottawa Workers Heritage Centre. It could also include various multicultural exhibits and demonstrations by ethnic and community groups not currently represented by the existing museum collection. This would allow them to showcase and interpret aspects of their programs at the Heritage Gateway in the temporary exhibit space.

Common Services

In addition to financially supporting individual museums to expand their mandate and to deliver their core functions, the community recognized and supports the concept of common services to improve coordination and to obtain the benefits of economies of scale.

Recommendation 1 c) - Ottawa Museum Network

The new service delivery model encourages common and pooled access to some of the critical operational tools and services needed by all museums to build their capacity and generate economies of scale. Museum networks such as the Board of Montreal Museum Directors, and Le Regroupement des institutions muséales de Québec, have developed umbrella marketing plans, a central website, joint promotional materials, tourism packages, joint events, a museum pass, etc. for the museums in their municipalities. This has led to increased attendance and awareness of the museum sector in those communities and across Canada.

It is recommended that the existing informal Ottawa Museum Network be formalized and incorporated by 2007. The Network would function as a non-profit, heritage service organization, comprised of the museum directors of Ottawa’s community and City operated museums. This new organization would be funded through the City's heritage grants program beginning in year two to provide the following services to all City and community operated museums:

Proactive marketing of the local Ottawa museums and the “Ottawa Story” to residents and visitors (e.g. through a distinct branding, advertising campaigns, a passport initiative, etc.)
Secure non-municipal funding and in-kind services through grants, sponsorships, donations, City-wide fundraising campaigns, etc.
Co-ordination of translation services for the museums, websites, exhibits, communications materials, etc.
Professional Development
Collections Policy Development

Marketing

Marketing is an essential component of sustainability because it is the means to enhance awareness and attract people to the museums.

Access to marketing expertise and budgets is limited. Each of the 10 local museums has an inadequate capacity to promote their own museum and consequently there are very limited efforts to promote the collective story. Limited City-wide promotional efforts (such as Heritage Day, Museum Day, joint museum brochures, magazine advertisements etc.) undertaken by the City since amalgamation have yielded benefits by raising awareness of local museums and has directly contributed to increasing attendance (e.g. Watson's Mill, Diefenbunker, Billings). As a result of national museums significant marketing budgets and resources that overshadow local attractions, a collective effort is needed to tell Ottawa’s Story.

It is recommended that a Marketing Plan including a creative campaign be developed to bind the 10 local museums into one story line to increase awareness and participation/attendance for each museum. Increased investment to support a successful City wide/community promotion, and to hire a resource for the on-going efforts needed to increase public awareness, will be necessary. Consultation with marketing experts identified that capital funding will be required to develop the initial marketing plan and advertising tools and a further annual operating investment will be required to provide a dedicated resource and the funds required to support the implementation of a City-wide/tourism marketing plan. Given the importance of marketing to the overall sustainability of the local museums, staff recommend a phased investment to begin in year 2 with the final implementation at the end of year 3.

Translation

The community museums do not have the financial resources to deliver their educational programs, exhibits and communications materials in languages other than English. Staff recommend an annual investment in year 2 and 3 to support translation of materials in French and other languages as appropriate to reflect Ottawa's growing diversity.

Fundraising

Although not the primary source of operating support for museums, a dedicated fundraiser can assist the museums to maximize their access to all sources of potential non-municipal funding. These sources include grants from all levels of government, from the corporate sector and from private foundations. In-kind services can also be proactively sought through partnerships and sponsorships. Finally, City-wide project or capital fundraising campaigns cannot be contemplated without professional fundraising expertise. It is recommended that an annual investment be made in year 3 to start to actively pursue fundraising, sponsorships and partnerships.

Professional Development

The Network will also take on other responsibilities such as professional development and training for museum staff and volunteers.

Collections Policy Development

The Network would be responsible for coordinating the development of a Collections Policy for the City and community operated museums.

Recommendation 1 d) - Common Collections Management Software

The City has acquired and is in the process of implementing an integrated collections management software for the City's archival, art and museum collections. It is recommended that this software be extended to the community operated museums to achieve benefits similar to those derived by any asset management system including:

Standardization of documentation for museum collections
Tracking and updating key information about items (in an overall collection comprised of more than 130,000 items) including ownership records, donor information, assessed values, condition reports, photographs, location, etc.
Facilitating the ability to search across multiple museum collections to support research, exhibit development, and educational programs
Reducing unnecessary acquisitions by having access to a reliable inventory of current assets
Rationalizing collections through the elimination of unnecessary duplication

Staff are proposing that implementation of this project begin in 2007 after the implementation of the software across the City operated museums has been completed.

Recommendations 1 e) and f) - The Heritage Gateway

Development Options for a Heritage Gateway

As discussed earlier in the report, the Heritage Gateway will become a supporting facility for telling the Greater Ottawa Story at a high level. Through public consultations the community expressed concerns that the Heritage Gateway should not replace the existing museums in Ottawa, but rather should supplement and promote the existing network of museums. Staff examined a continuum of options for the development of the Gateway – from a virtual gateway to a bricks-and-mortar facility.

Virtual Gateway

Through the consultation sessions, the concept of a Virtual Gateway or Website for telling the Greater Ottawa Story was strongly endorsed. This website would tell the Ottawa Story at a high level and provide links to other related websites managed by a variety of external partners. Also included at this Virtual Gateway would be a consolidated heritage calendar of events hosted by the City and the community throughout the year. Over time, the Virtual Gateway would be expanded to include other partners (i.e. The Worker’s Heritage Centre, Sister’s of Charity, the Bytown Fire Brigade, the City Archives etc.) to provide additional information on the history of Ottawa. As well, the Virtual Gateway would be developed to eventually contain information to assist teachers in curriculum development.

While the City of Ottawa currently has a heritage website, it is lacking in content and does not meet the community’s vision for the Virtual Gateway. The community indicated their preference to have the Virtual Gateway managed not by the City but through a grant to a not-for-profit heritage organization. Not only would managing the Gateway through a not-for-profit organization respond to the concerns of the community, a not-for-profit organization could also apply for funding through the Virtual Museum of Canada Investment Program and other funding programs sponsored by the Federal Government.

The community, because of its supporting role in telling the Ottawa Story and its marketing capability, saw the virtual aspect of the Heritage Gateway as a high priority. Staff recommend that this investment be considered in year 2 of the 4 year plan. A benchmarking exercise, which looked at 13 virtual heritage gateways in Canada and the United States, included an assessment of content and features as well as interviews with 5 website managers on development/implementation costs, annual operating budget and management. This review indicated that an investment of capital funds would be needed to develop an initial virtual site and additional operating investment would be required to maintain and develop the site annually. It is proposed that this one time and ongoing investment would be provided to an organization tasked with the development and management of the Virtual Gateway. Clear guidelines, expectations and deliverables would be developed with the community and staff prior to the awarding of any contract to develop the Virtual Gateway.

Given the popularity of the world wide web as both a source of information and a marketing tool, the Virtual Gateway will continue to exist to complement a future physical Gateway.

Physical Gateway

In conjunction with the Virtual Gateway, City staff will pursue partnerships as opportunities arise for physical space that could be occupied in the interim to display promotional materials and artefacts related to local museums.

The City’s Economic Development and Cultural Services Branches and the Ottawa Tourism and Convention Authority (OTCA) are currently undertaking a feasibility study for the establishment of an Ottawa Tourism and Culture Visitor Centre and related services. The visitor centre could provide information to tourists and citizens about the sites, events, venues, establishments, activities and history of Ottawa.

The feasibility study will be completed by the fall 2005 and will include the following components: visitor statistics assessment; OTCA member interviews; arts and culture organization interviews; validation of the Visitor Centre’s focus and scope of services; best practices and use cases; location analysis; and partnership identification and development; and business and operating plans.

In addition to the feasibility plan, a number of interpretation centres in Ottawa and elsewhere were examined. A benchmarking exercise, which looked at six municipalities in Quebec and Ontario, included an assessment of their program, relationship to their users, staffing requirements, budgets and assessments of their physical sites. Staff identified a need for space for permanent and temporary exhibits, special events, and receptions, exhibit development and storage space, and office space totalling approximately 28,000 sq ft.

Given that the Gateway will be the entry point to market all of the museums and heritage assets in Ottawa it should be located downtown in close proximity to other cultural and tourist attractions.

While the community endorsed the concept of a physical Gateway, it was not seen as an immediate requirement. A preliminary forecast of the capital costs to build a 28,000 sq ft facility is estimated to be $10 - 14 million. Given the forecasted capital investment and the relative priority for a physical Gateway compared to other priorities in the sustainability plan, it is recommended that the capital investment be included in the LRFP and be considered in 2010. Further refinement of the functions, square footage and costing analysis will be considered as part of the second stage planning of the Central Library and Cultural Complex project.

Recommendation 1 g) - The Preservation Centre

One of the most important core services provided by local museums on behalf of the community is the collection and preservation of our material heritage. Individuals and organizations continue to donate artefacts that must be catalogued and appropriately cared for. This public trust obligation requires that museums allocate resources towards preservation activities and facilities to properly store and process their collections.

Current State

Local museums are responsible for the care of approximately 130,000 artefacts ranging from fragments uncovered during archaeological digs to large agricultural equipment.

Current storage facilities are numerous, scattered and too small to be managed by the limited number of staff. The spaces are poorly equipped and their preservation conditions are below industry standards. Many of the buildings and collections are at risk from multiple hazards. The existing space that has the appropriate preservation environments is very limited and there is little capacity to house growing collections or important artefacts that fall outside of museum mandates such as the LeBreton Flats artefacts.

Interim Preservation Centre

The City has an immediate need to relocate parts of the Cumberland Museum collection stored on site and off-site to a more appropriate interim facility. Because of current relocation requirements and in an effort to store artefacts in imminent danger of damage or loss, staff propose a move to current space available within the City stock. This solution will address some of the most immediate needs while a Design Development study is conducted to identify program and cost requirements for an end state solution. Proposed capital investments over the first three years of the plan will be used to both fit up the new spaces as well as to make improvement to existing spaces. Costs associated with the preparation and move of the affected collections have also been accounted for in the proposed capital budget.

Longer Term Solution

Rather than attempt to address the long term challenges through the use of multiple facilities, the current best practice is to build, buy or lease one city-wide facility that is properly equipped, meets the required environmental standards for the preservation of the collections, and has room to accommodate future acquisitions. There are considerable economies of scale to be achieved by having these functions located centrally instead of being located at each of the 10 City and community museums. One central facility:

· Provides a secure and climate-controlled environment for the safety and preservation of the collection

· Avoids the duplication of conservation lab facilities

· Provides for the common use of space for preparatory work on artefacts and exhibits which will free-up space in the existing museums for additional exhibitions and programming

· Enables the sharing of staff resources for conservation work

· Provides a facility which could attract museum conservation and curatorial

interns to complement the work of paid staff and volunteers.

Examples of such facilities were identified and investigated to varying degrees in Ottawa (the Canadian Museum of Nature), Waterloo (Doon Heritage Crossroads), Montréal (Museum Collections Centre), Québec City (Réserve muséale de la capitale nationale) and New Brunswick (New Brunswick Heritage Collection Centre). Typically, these are industrial buildings, ranging in size from 30,000 square feet to 220,000 square feet. The Montreal facility is 140,500 square feet and was partly funded through a federal capital grant, as were some of the other preservation centres. The centre in Waterloo also received provincial infrastructure funding. In addition to environmentally controlled storage areas, these facilities have conservation labs, isolation rooms, workshops, collections processing space, etc.

City staff has initiated preliminary discussions with Algonquin College representatives who have expressed interest in collaborating with the City in potential development of a Preservation Centre.

Based on estimates provided by the City's Real Property and Asset Management branch, staff recommend that $240,000 be allocated in 2007 in the capital budget for a Design Development Study to be conducted to accurately define the City’s requirements over the longer term and recommend an implementation strategy. Staff can then identify the appropriate investment requirements through the Long Range Financial Plan to support a Preservation Centre.

Summary of Proposed Funding to Individual Museums

To increase the capacity of the existing museums to adequately tell their piece of the Greater Ottawa Story and to become eligible for alternate sources of funding, additional municipal funding will be required over the next 4 years. A proposed Operating and Capital Plan 2006 – 2009 is attached in Document 1.

The table set out below, provides a general overview of what can be expected annually with the proposed investment. It is important to note that each museum is at a different state with respect to their staffing levels, program development, and overall service delivery. As such what each museum achieves annually will be based on the individual increase as well as the specific priorities identified by each museum. Details are attached in Document 2.

Highlights of the Proposed Investment Plan

Year	Community Operated Museums
1	· Hiring of staff to provide curatorial, conservation and programming support where required. Increases to salaries and benefits to be more consistent with the industry in support of attracting and retaining experienced staff. · Adequate signage to enable visitors to find and navigate the sites.
2	· Increased capacity necessary to enhance the care of collections and further develop exhibits · Staff and space to manage the facilities where required. · Staff to enhance outreach programs to schools and other community organizations. · Funds for revitalization of permanent exhibits, develop new exhibits and ongoing preservation of the collection · Capacity to conduct additional interpretation and educational programs. · Construct a second exit at the Diefenbunker to accommodate larger groups
3	· Volunteer coordination to support the extensive need for volunteers · Collection development and interpretation for museums still requiring it. · Additional preservation and research funding for museums still requiring it. · Personal liability insurance for board members. · Further exhibition and education money for museums still requiring it. · Strategic plans for some museums
4	· Business development support · Promotional materials and support for individual museums · Additional supplies for preservation of the collection · Further development of exhibits in some museums · Strategic plans for remaining museums, · Landscape plans and improvements to site accessibility where required.

Year	City Operated Museums
1	· Capacity to develop new events, public programs, site interpretation and school programs · On site support for visitors · Adequate signage to enable visitors to find and navigate the sites. · Improvements to on-site storage/display facilities for collections
2	· Further capacity to complete site interpretation · Events support · Collections and conservation support and some individual promotional capacity · Building restoration
3	· Capacity to further develop the educational component of the museums · Support for conservation and interpretation the collections
4	· Individual museum promotion support · Site maintenance for the larger sites. · Improvement for staff office space.

Year	Common Services
1	N/A
2	· Community access to the collections software · Translation · Development of the Museum Network · Collective marketing plan · Development of the Virtual Gateway · Development Design Study for a Preservation Centre
3	· Further support for the storage and preservation of the collections
4	N/A

Economies of scale have been realized through the operation of the City museums in that the budget requirement recognizes the ability to share resources such as a volunteer development officer, education officer to liaise with schools and research officers.

Recommendations 2 and 3 – Federal and Provincial Funding

The Importance of Municipal Financial Support for Local Museums

Local museums have a limited capacity to raise funds from non-municipal sources. Government subsidy remains the most important single source of support for museums around the world. It’s not unusual for local museums to receive up to 90% of their revenues from public sources.

In Ontario, most of the operating support for museums comes from municipalities. A maximum of 8% of eligible operating expenses may be secured from the Province for museums that meet the provincial museum standards under the Community Museums Operating Grant (CMOG) Program. None of the local museums currently receive the maximum allotment from the Province because the funding envelope has been reduced to the current $2.6 million from $3.2 million in 1980 while the number of museums supported by the Province increased from 150 to over 200. Currently, community museums receive only 4% of their revenues from the Provincial Government. New or existing museums that meet provincial standards are placed on a waiting list. Accordingly, this report recommends that Council petition the Province for an increase in the funding envelope.

For the most part, donations are not a significant source of operating revenues and are usually greater when fundraising is targeted for capital repairs. Earned revenues come from a variety of sources including admissions, programming fees, retail and food sales, and facility rentals. The ability of museums to leverage earned revenue opportunities is also highly dependent on each museum’s situation (e.g. location of the museum, available space in the facility, restrictions due to heritage designations, etc.) and may require capital investments.

Funding available beyond donations, earned revenues and municipal/provincial operating support consists of one-time project or capital funding, again mainly from the three levels of government. The most significant external project funding sources accessible to not-for-profit community and for the most part municipal museums include:

· The federal Museums Assistance Program (MAP)

· The federal Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program (CAHSP)

· The federal Cultural Spaces Canada

· The federal Virtual Museum of Canada Investment Program

· The Ontario Trillium Foundation

Some programs such as CMOG and CAHSP require that the museums have full-time staff, policies and procedures, and strategic plans. The additional City investment recommended in the Museums Sustainability Plan will increase the capacity of the museums to systematically apply to these funders. City staff and the Ottawa Museum Network will collaborate to coordinate these applications, particularly for capital projects such as the Heritage Gateway, the Preservation Center and the City Archives.

A new national Museums Policy is currently under development with the Federal Government. Staff recommends that City Council petition the Minister of Canadian Heritage to make additional federal funding available to support museums outside the network of federal museums. The Canadian Museums Association consulted with approximately 2,500 museums across Canada and recently delivered a proposal that calls for $75 million in new investment to support improved services to the public, research, preservation of collections, endowments and developmental assistance, and projects.

Recommendations 4 and 5 – Three-Year Purchase of Service Agreements and Annual Status Reporting

Accountability Framework

Staff recommend that three (3) year Purchase of Service Agreements should be developed with the community museums. The Museum Service Agreement Program would be modelled on the Arts Service Agreements Program for implementation in 2007. The Program will formally identify and address the partnership relationship that currently exists between the City and each of the seven community-operated museums, creating greater links in communication, accountability and cooperation in moving towards long-term City objectives as approved in the Ottawa 20/20 Heritage Plan and strategies identified within this report.

Similar to the Arts Service Agreement Program, individual legal museum service agreements defining obligations agreed to by both parties, along with schedules clearly outlining services and activities to be provided as well as the amount of City funding to be provided will be developed. The framework will be structured as a stand-alone three-year sustaining funding program with its own guidelines, assessment criteria, assessment process, required documents, reporting mechanism and budget.

Annual progress reporting would be required prior to the annual allocation of funds. Funding availability and amounts would still be subject to the corporate budget approval process.

To measure the progress of the museums, it is proposed that all museums report annually on accomplishments in key areas such as:

Enhancement of the collections data base
New research initiatives
Collection preservation and collections policy

Increase in general attendance
Development of additional education (school) and interpretive programs
Increased student participation in school programs
Increased public participation in interpretive programs
Development of components of permanent exhibits
Development of temporary exhibits
Increase in museums memberships and/or volunteer base
Attracting funding/donations/sponsorships/partnerships for museum activities

The Department will consolidate results and report annually to Standing Committee on the status of the implementation of the Museum Sustainability Plan.

CONSULTATION

Staff has consulted extensively both on individual parts of the Museum Sustainability Plan and on the plan as a whole. In addition to individual meetings with each of the museum's staff and/or boards on the specific needs of each museum, staff also conducted 7 consultation sessions with the general public between April 14 and June 27^th. Over 250 people attended the Museum Sustainability Plan sessions and 28 comments were received in writing both at the meetings and by email. Overall feedback indicated the preference for sustaining operating funding to the museums as a first priority. The common services such as the network, virtual gateway and implementation of software were the next priorities followed by the physical preservation centre and gateway as the final items requiring support. City staff within the Information Technology and the Real Property and Asset Management branches were consulted in the identification of options, solutions and costs associated with the implementation of the collections management software, the physical gateway and the preservation centre respectively.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Operating

The 2005 budget identified continued budget pressures for 2006 and 2007, even after considering rate of inflation increases in fees and service charges and taking into account assessment growth from new properties. Without adding any new programs or capital projects, the 2006 tax increase is estimated at approximately 7%.

As in the 2005 budget, there are basically four means of funding additional program requests: (1) identify new sources of revenue, (2) through offsetting program reductions, (3) increase existing fees, and (4) increase taxes.

This request is not offset by new sources of revenue, by program reductions or by increases to existing fees.

This request will result in an additional tax increase of .0875% and an increase of 7.332 FTE.’s in 2006.

Capital

The capital requests proposed within this report are not available within the envelopes identified in the 2005 budget documents. The majority of the capital requests were not identified in the 2006 -2014 Capital Forecast and have not been included in the Long Range Financial Plan.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 – Operating and Capital Sustainability Investment Plan – 4 Year Summary

Document 2 – Investment Details

Document 3 – Local Museums – Current Mandate and Governance Structure

DISPOSITION

The Community and Protective Services Department will implement the decisions of Committee and Council.

Document 1

Operating and Capital Sustainability Investment Plan - 4 Year Summary
Operating	2005 City Funding	2006	2007	2008	2009	Total Additional
Community Operated	$	$	$	$	$	$
Bytown	131,125	64,000	45,000	23,000	20,000	152,000
Diefenbunker	52,582	60,000	65,000	30,000	10,000	165,000
Goulbourn	29,235	43,000	45,000	22,000	17,400	127,400
Nepean	155,411	57,000	40,000	22,000	21,300	140,300
Osgoode	30,962	43,000	45,000	12,000	20,500	120,500
Watson's Mill	25,239	60,000	43,000	48,000	-2,500	148,500
Vanier	40,000	60,000	45,000	34,500	-1,200	138,300
Total Community	464,554	387,000	328,000	191,500	85,500	992,000

City Operated
Cumberland	520,000	75,000	125,000	77,000	127,000	404,000
Pinhey	96,251	55,000	15,000		-2,000	68,000
Billings	418,027	47,000	37,000		-2,000	82,000
Shared Resources	70,404	136,000	60,000	150,000	52,000	398,000
Total City	1,104,682	313,000	237,000	227,000	175,000	952,000

Common Initiatives
Network			90,000	184,750		274,750
Virtual Heritage Gateway			65,000			65,000
Collections Software				35,000		35,000
Total			155,000	219,750		374,750

Total Operating Requirement		700,000	720,000	638,250	260,500	2,318,750

Capital		2006	2007	2008	2009	Total
		$	$	$	$	$
Community Operated
Bytown		10,000		50,000	45,000	105,000
Diefenbunker		10,000	400,000	80,000	50,000	540,000
Goulbourn		10,000			95,000	105,000
Nepean		10,000		50,000	30,000	90,000
Osgoode		10,000			100,000	110,000
Watson's Mill		10,000	25,000		100,000	135,000
Vanier		10,000				10,000
Total Community		70,000	425,000	180,000	420,000	1,095,000

City Operated
Cumberland		225,000	450,000	505,000	253,500	1,433,500
Pinhey		10,000		75,000	70,000	155,000
Billings		15,000	50,000	125,000	125,000	315,000
Gloucester
Shared Resources
Total City		250,000	500,000	705,000	448,500	1,903,500

Common Initiatives
Virtual Heritage Gateway			35,000			35,000
Ottawa Story Inter./Education
Com. Access to Collections			200,000			200,000
Museums Network			100,000			100,000
Collections Storage and Management		100,000	100,000	100,000		300,000
Preservation Centre - Design Dev. Study			240,000			240,000
Total Common Initiatives		100,000	675,000	100,000		875,000

Total Capital Requirement		420,000	1,600,000	985,000	868,500	3,873,500

Notes: 1) 2005 City funding does not include services in-kind (ie., heat and hydro. etc in City facilities) to community operated museums that equalled approximately $93,000 in 2005.

2) The annual grant to the Nepean Museum includes a lease payment to the City's Real Property and Asset Management Branch of $55,000. The City is currently reviewing its leasing policy to not-for-profit organizations. The leasing policy is anticipated to be completed in 2006.

3) The 2005 capital allocations for City and Community Museums is not included.

4) The shared resources in the 2005 operating budget was allocated for storage costs.

Document 2

Investment Details

Glossary of Museum Activities

Curatorial - activities dealing with a museum’s collection and/or individual artefacts. Includes cataloguing, documenting, cleaning and storing artefacts. Supplies and services for these activities could include special wrapping paper, inks and solutions for identification of objects, shelving and storage components and contracted services for cataloguing and data entry or preparation of storage areas.

Conservation – advanced remediation of artefacts, which can include stabilization to prevent further deterioration, activities in excess of a light cleaning, removal of moulds and rust, and repairs/restoration.

Exhibitions – research, exhibit planning, storyline preparation, text writing, purchase and rights for graphics, building of exhibits components, graphics and translation

Interpretation & Education – school programs/demonstrations that are age and curriculum appropriate, public interpretive programs, guided tours and live animation with staff in period costumes performing. Supplies and services may include interpretive plans, materials for school kits, costumes and props, theatrical services, and volunteer service costs.

Other Programming – special events (e.g. Riverfest, Tea on the Lawn, Crank-Up Days, Col By Day, etc), participation in off-site activities (e.g. Pioneer Days, agricultural fairs, Heritage Fair, Bytown Days, Museum Day, Heritage Day, etc.).

Marketing and Promotions – individual advertisement in local newspapers, preparation, production and distribution of rack cards and other site specific brochures, participation in tourism fairs and familiarization events (“Fam Tours”) for tour operators.

Maintenance - upgrading/retrofit of facilities & utilities, janitorial services, preservation of machinery, accessibility retrofits to meet health & safety requirements and access requirements under the Ontario Disabilities Act, and utility upgrades & costs.

Four (4) Year MSP Investment

Community Operated Museums

Bytown Museum: Operating - $152,000; Capital - $105,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$64,000	Facilitate staff retention and recruitment of experienced museum professionals by increasing salary and benefit packages for permanent staff positions consistent with other comparable municipal museums as noted in the Canadian Museums Association National Compensation Survey for three staff members ($45,000) Additional part-time programming staff 12 months per year to deliver educational and public programs ($19,000)
Year 2	$45,000	Increase base curatorial and conservation budget ($13,000) Site specific marketing & promotional products and advertising ($10,000) Increase base exhibitions budget ($22,000)
Year 3	$23,000	Part-time volunteer coordinator to support the interpretation and education programs
Year 4	$20,000	Part-time business development manager to focus on revenue generation for the museum ($23,000) Increase in anticipated revenues (-$3,000)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for signage to improve profile of the museum; Year 3 - $50,000 for a strategic plan necessary for other government funding as well as planning; Year 4 - $45,000 for improving site accessibility to meet Ontario Disabilities Act requirements and minor facility retrofit.

Diefenbunker: Operating - $165,000; Capital - $540,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$60,000	Facilitate staff retention and recruitment of experienced museum professionals by increasing salary and benefit packages for permanent staff positions consistent with other comparable municipal museums as noted in the Canadian Museums Association National Compensation Survey for three staff members
Year 2	$65,000	Maintenance/Facility manager to oversee the regular and ongoing maintenance and renovations at the Bunker ($45,000) Increase base maintenance budget ($20,000)
Year 3	$30,000	Increase base curatorial & conservation budget ($10,000) Increase base exhibitions budget ($20,000)
Year 4	$10,000	Increase base maintenance budget ($25,000) Increase base promotions budget ($5,000) Increase in anticipated revenues (-$20,000)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for onsite/offsite signage to improve profile of the museum: Year 2 - $400,000 for construction of secondary exit to increase visitor capacity; Year 3 - $80,000 for facility retrofit to provide for more exhibition space; Year 4 – $50,000 for a strategic plan.

Goulbourn Museum: Operating - $127,400; Capital - $105,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$43,000	Increase the current part time Curator position to full time to provide leadership and allow the museums to participate in the Museum Network more effectively ($32,000) Increase base curatorial & conservation budget ($11,000)
Year 2	$45,000	Education and Programming Officer to provide capacity for onsite and outreach programs to schools and other community organizations
Year 3	$22,000	Part-time Collections Assistant for curatorial and conservation of collection
Year 4	$17,400	Increase base programming, promotions, education & interpretation budgets to provide supplies and services to upgrade the exhibits, programs and some site specific promotions ($18,000) Increase in anticipated revenues (-$600)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for onsite/offsite signage; Year 4 - $95,000 for strategic plan ($50,000) and improving site accessibility ($45,000)

Nepean Museum: Operating - $140,300; Capital - $90,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$57,000	Facilitate staff retention and recruitment of experienced museum professionals by increasing salary and benefit packages for permanent staff positions consistent with other comparable municipal museums as noted in the Canadian Museums Association National Compensation Survey for two full-time and one part-time staff member.
Year 2	$40,000	Increase in base budget for exhibitions & educational programs to complete a gradual renewal of its permanent exhibit gallery and yearly temporary exhibits and enhance school programs ($30,000) Increase base curatorial & conservation budget ($10,000)
Year 3	$22,000	Curator of Collections & Promotions to provide part time support to the Director/Curator
Year 4	$21,300	Curator of Collections & Promotions (upgrade to full-time) to provide site specific marketing and enhance public awareness of the museums which will provide additional revenue ($23,000) Increase in anticipated revenues (-$1,700)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for signage; Year 3 - $50,000 for strategic plan; Year 4 - $30,000 for facility retrofit to improve accessibility

Osgoode Museum: Operating - $120,500; Capital - $110,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$43,000	Facilitate staff retention and recruitment of experienced museum professionals by increasing salary and benefit packages for permanent staff positions consistent with other comparable municipal museums as noted in the Canadian Museums Association National Compensation Survey for one full-time staff member ($26,000) Increase base curatorial & conservation budget to enhance the management and interpretation of the collection ($17,000)
Year 2	$45,000	Curator of Collections & Exhibition to assist the manager in developing interpretive exhibits and collections research
Year 3	$12,000	Increase base exhibitions and programming budget to permit production of a yearly temporary exhibit and to develop new programs
Year 4	$20,500	Part time Promotions Assistant for site specific promotion and marketing to raise awareness to increase revenue generation and alternate funding sources ($22,000) Increase in anticipated revenues (-$1,500)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for signage; Year 4 - $100,000 for Strategic plan ($50,000) and improvement of site accessibility & minor retrofits ($50,000)

Watson’s Mill Museum: Operating - $148,500; Capital - $135,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$60,000	Hire a Director to manage the museum on an annual basis.
Year 2	$43,000	Offsite office space for the Director and site administration ($12,000) Increase base maintenance, exhibition and education budgets to make the Mill a key heritage destination ($31,000)
Year 3	$48,000	Curator of Education and Programming to develop school programs, on-site interpretive programs and general outreach activities
Year 4	$-2,500	Increase in anticipated revenues (-$2,500)
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for signage; Year 2 - $25,000 for equipment/facility retrofit; Year 4 - $100,000 for strategic plan and accessibility retrofit.

Muséopark Vanier Museopark: Operating - $138,300; Capital - $10,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$60,000	Base budget for program development.
Year 2	$45,000	Hire a Curator of Education and Programming to develop educational programs and assist in the promotion of the new museum to attract further support for its development
Year 3	$34,500	Increase base exhibition and education budget to produce temporary exhibits and develop school programs ($30,000) Base maintenance budget for janitorial services ($4,500)
Year 4	$-1,200	Increase in anticipated revenues (-$1,200)
Capital	Year 1 -$10,000 for signage

City Operated Museums

Billings Estate Museum: Operating - $82,000; Capital - $315,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$47,000	Convert Visitor Services Clerk position to full-time – 0.3 FTE ($17,850) Additional Seasonal Site Interpreters - .3 FTE ($7,000) Seasonal collections staff to assist in managing and caring for extensive collection - 0.6 FTE ($15,000) Increase base promotional budget to permit production of brochures & advertisements ($7,150)
Year 2	$37,000	Increase base promotional & advertising budget ($24,850) Increase programming budget to purchase supplies ($6,300) Increase base collections & conservation budget ($5,850)
Year 3	$0	N/A
Year 4	-$2,000	Increase in anticipated revenues (-$2,000)
Capital	Year 1 - $15,000 for signage; Year 2 - $50,000 for cemetery rehabilitation; Year 3 - $125,000 for strategic plan ($50,000), site landscaping ($25,000), cemetery rehabilitation ($50,000); Year 4 - $125,000 for site accessibility improvements ($50,000), structural restoration ($55,000), minor retrofits ($20,000)

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum: Operating - $404,000; Capital - $1,433, 500
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$75,000	Increase for seasonal site interpreters wage pool to increase the capacity to interpret and animate the living history site- 3.0 FTE ($75,000 of $200,000 proposed)
Year 2	$125,000	Increase for seasonal site interpreters wage pool – 5.0 FTE ($125,000 balance of $200,000 allocated)
Year 3	$77,000	Increase for seasonal education assistants wage pool – 0.6 FTE ($10,000 of $47,000 allocated) Collections Assistant wage pool – 0.6 FTE ($15,000) Assistant Education Officer - 1.0 FTE – to increase the capacity to deliver curriculum based programming aimed a school children ($52,000)
Year 4	$127,000	Increase base promotional budget ($20,000) Collections & conservation supplies for preventative and restoration treatment of the artefacts ($15,000) Program supplies to deliver school programs and to purchase educational kits and materials ($10,000) Seasonal education assistants wage pool –2.0 FTE ($37,000 balance of $47,000 allocated) Increase site maintenance budget to maintain the grounds and buildings to a public standard ($60,000) Increase in anticipated revenues ($-15,000)
Capital	Year 1 - $225,000 for on-site artefact storage ($100,000), artefacts/structures restoration ($75,000), on-site/off-site signage ($50,000) Year 2 - $450,000 for on-site artefact storage ($200,000), artefacts/structures restoration ($150,000), site accessibility upgrades ($50,000), vehicle replacement ($50,000) Year 3 - $505,000 for program accommodation ($150,000), artefacts/structures restoration ($225,000); site accessibility upgrades ($50,000), strategic plan ($50,000), site landscaping ($30,000) Year 4 - $253,500 for program accommodation ($150,000), vehicle replacement ($68,500), artefact/structural restoration ($10,000), minor retrofits ($25,000)

Pinhey’s Point Historic Site: Operating - $68,000; Capital - $155,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$55,000	Education/Interpretation Officer – 1.0 FTE to provide year round capacity to develop new events programs, site interpretation and school programs to increase the use of the site. This allows for on-site supervision of the summer students and provides ability to respond to visitor issues.
Year 2	$15,000	Event planning and delivery - Riverfest
Year 3	$0	N/A
Year 4	-$2,000	Anticipate increase in revenues
Capital	Year 1 - $10,000 for signage; Year 2 - 0; Year 3 - $75,000 for strategic plan ($50,000), site landscaping ($25,000); Year 4 - $70,000 for site accessibility ($50,000) minor retrofits ($20,000)

Shared Resources among the City Operated Museums: Operating - $398,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	$136,000	Volunteer Development Officer - 1.0 FTE to expand the community involvement through partnerships with organizations and through recruitment and retention of volunteers ($76,000) Education/Interpretation Officer (to expand museum audiences through liaison with teachers, school boards, seniors groups, service clubs and other community organizations, and commercial tourism operators) - 1.0 FTE ($60,000)
Year 2	$60,000	Exhibitions & Research Officer - 1.0 FTE to provide the project management capacity to support the development of new museum programming and exhibits
Year 3	$150,000	To conduct the research, design, and production needed to renew permanent exhibits and develop annual temporary exhibitions for the City operated museums, and to conduct research on museum audiences to improve marketing and visitor services.
Year 4	$52,000	Assistant Collections Officer - 1.0 FTE to improve capacity to care for the Collection in Billings, Cumberland and Gloucester.
Capital	N/A

Common Initiatives: Operating - $374,750; Capital - $875,000
Year	Investment	Benefit
Year 1	0	N/A
Year 2	$155,000	Marketing Officer for Museums Network ($70,000) Virtual Gateway website development and maintenance ($65,000) Part of translation services budget for museum products ($20,000)
Year 3	$219,750	Fundraiser position and marketing and remainder of translation budget for Museums Network ($184,750) Ongoing operations of collections software ($35,000)
Year 4	0	N/A
Capital	Year 1 -$100,000 for enhanced collections management & retrofit of collections storage facility for the city museums Year 2 - $675,000 comprised of Virtual Heritage Gateway ($35,000), community museums access to collections software ($200,000), development of City-wide/tourism marketing plan for local museums ($100,000), retrofit of collections storage facility of city museums ($100,000), Design Development Study for Preservation Centre ($240,000) Year 3 - $100,000 for enhanced collections management & retrofit of collections storage facility for the city museums

Document 3

Local Museums – Current Mandate and Governance Structure

Billings Estate Museum

Mandate - Its mandate is to interpret the evolution of the house and the property, its use by five generations of the Billings family from 1813 to 1975, its long-standing relationship between the Billings family and the surrounding community of Billings Bridge and early pioneer life in general.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - Billings Estate is a 192 year-old designated National Historic Site owned and operated by the City of Ottawa. The Association of the Friends of Billings Estate Museum consists of 8 members who support the City in the operation and development of the museum.

Collection - This collection of approximately 28,443 artefacts consists of a wide range of domestic objects, furniture, building components and archaeological fragments dating from the 1850’s to the 1930’s. A settler's cemetery also comprises part of the estate. This offers an opportunity to interpret the lives of many of the early settlers in the area. The now-closed Gloucester Museum’s collection of 7,612 artefacts is also under the care of Billings’ staff.

Research - Billings House has an archival collection over 12,000 items including family correspondence, business papers, and photographs as well as an extensive library of over 3,600 volumes. This material can be drawn upon for collection and educational research and is available for consultation by researchers.

Interpretation - Visitors are provided with an artefact-rich exhibit describing early pioneer life in the area and rooms furnished to different periods of the house’s history. Billings provides a number of public, school age and general educational programs relating to many of the primary and secondary themes dealing with life in the 19th century. The grounds are used extensively for a variety of pioneer festivals and heritage-related events. Although some of the collection is on exhibit, the extensive reserve collection (artefacts not on display) could also be used to interpret other rural estates (e.g. Sparks, LeBreton, Besserer, McKay, etc.), which provided the base for urban development in other parts of the city during the latter half of the 19th century and early 20th centuries

Bytown Museum

Mandate - This is the oldest museum in the system, dating back to the late 19th century. For most of its history, it was Ottawa’s only museum and as such, it collected anything relating to the city’s history. In later years, it sharpened its mandate to cover the history of Bytown/Ottawa from 1826 to about 1918.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - The museum, operated by the Bytown Museum Board of Directors, is located in an 1827 stone building owned by Parks Canada and rented to the museum for $100 per year. The board was incorporated in November 2003 and is made up of 5 members who provide direction in the operations and program development at the museum.

Collection - The strength of its collection of nearly 15,000 artefacts is material relating to various themes and sub-themes about Bytown (1826-1855), Col. By, construction of the Rideau Canal and the history of early Ottawa (1855-1900).

Research - Bytown has an extensive library of material relating to Ottawa’s early families and all aspects of life in the Ottawa Valley. The Historical Society of Ottawa has published numerous monographs on Ottawa’s history.

Interpretation - Exhibits include a 19th century kitchen, a shanty town exhibit, a Victorian living room and a temporary exhibit space which is used for a yearly schedule of temporary exhibits. The museum offers school programs and kits as well as guided tours and a wide range of summer programs interpreting many aspects of Ottawa’s history. With its interpretive exhibits and programs, it tells a significant portion of the early Ottawa Story and can speak to Victorian Ottawa.

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum

Mandate – The Cumberland Heritage Village Museum’s mandate is to re-create a rural Greater Ottawa village during the Great Depression.

Governance Structure/Facilities Arrangement - This open-air, “living museum” established in 1976, is owned and operated by the City of Ottawa. It consists of over 30 buildings collected on the site. From 1998 until 2003, the museum was operated under a management contract to a private company called Serco that was terminated at Serco's request. The Cumberland Village Museum Advisory Board supports the City in the operation and development of the museum. The board was established in 1984 and is composed of six community members. In addition, the museum is supported by Vintage Stock Theatre, the Cumberland Telegraph Operator’s Club, and the Ottawa Valley Live Steamers and Model Engineers

Collection - There are approximately 25,000 artefacts and the majority is used to furnish the buildings to a particular period and approximately 80% of the collection dates from the 1880’s to the 1930’s. The Cumberland collection represents a wide variety of themes and sub-themes relating to all aspects of rural life and agriculture.

Research -There is only minimal research available on the collection and the buildings. This makes planning educational programs difficult.

Interpretation - Cumberland interprets a rural community during The Great Depression. This is an important era in the development of agriculture and rural life and the changes brought about by technological change and mechanization. The extent of on-site, live interpretation and animation is limited by budget constraints but the site and its collection offers the opportunity to interpret this important era in the development of rural Ottawa.

The Diefenbunker: Canada’s Cold War Museum

Mandate -The Diefenbunker's main themes are the bunker itself and the history of the Cold War.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - The Diefenbunker is a four storey, underground bunker constructed in 1959-61 to house 535 members of the Canadian Government and military in the event of a nuclear attack. It is a designated National Historic Site and is owned and operated by Diefenbunker, Canada’s Cold War Museum Corporation. The board was incorporated in 1998 and is comprised of 8 members who provide direction in the operations and program development at the museum.

Collection -When the Federal Government closed the facility in 1994, they removed most of the moveable furnishings and equipment. The current collection of 22,500 artefacts has been developed by the museum’s staff and volunteers. It consists of furnishings and equipment which would have been used in the bunker over the years. Diefenbunker staff and volunteers pursue an active collecting program.

Research -The development of an extensive and growing library containing over 2800 titles relating to the cold war era has been developed by the museum’s volunteers. This facility is renowned to historians researching the Cold War and to the public in general.

Interpretation -A visit to the Diefenbunker offers an insight into an important era in the development of modern Canada. Public access to the bunker is limited to two-hour guided tours of the building. Where possible, these areas have been furnished with original artefacts or ones which relate to the era. Programs related to the Ontario, Canadian and World studies curricula are offered throughout the school year.

The Diefenbunker represents an important part of Ottawa’s story because it reflects one of the unique themes relating to Ottawa as a national capital and seat of government and illustrates the federal presence in the City of Ottawa.

Goulbourn Museum

Mandate - The museum’s mandate is to preserve and present the historical and documentary heritage of Goulbourn Township both as an independent political entity and now as part of the City of Ottawa.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangement - Established in 1990 as a community museum for the former Goulbourn Township, the building is owned by the City of Ottawa and is leased for $1 to the Goulbourn Historical Society which owns the collection and operates the museum and the adjacent History Research Centre. This board was incorporated in 1986 and is comprised of 9 members who provide advice and expertise in the operations of the Goulbourn Museum.

Collection - Goulbourn’s collection of over 6,000 artefacts is typical of many other local community museums in that its strength lies in its domestic artefacts covering most of the 20th century, with 70% of its collection dating from the period 1901-1955.

Research -The History Research Centre contains a significant collection of important public records and photographs relating to Goulbourn Township. It is open to the public on a limited basis and provides much-needed potential for research on the museum’s collection.

Interpretation - Major emphasis is placed on the establishment of the military settlement in Richmond in 1818 and the subsequent growth and development of Richmond along with the villages of Stittsville, Ashton and Munster. In keeping with its collection, its permanent displays illustrate the history of late 19th and early 20th century township life with special emphasis on family farm life, rural schools and military service. This museum could interpret life in the Townships between 1855 to 1918 through the use of its own collection supplemented by artefacts from other rural museums.

Muséoparc Vanier Museopark

Mandate - Scheduled to open to the public in 2006, the Vanier Museopark will tell the stories of the community of Vanier and the francophone population of Ottawa as well as interpret the natural history of the Richelieu-Vanier forest.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - It is currently housed in a City-owned building and is operated by a community board, Vanier is scheduled to open to the public in 2006. It currently pays a nominal rent ($1) to the City.

Collection -Vanier Museum does not have a collection nor does it pursue active collections for the moment. The museum will borrow artefacts in the possession of individuals in the community and in the collections of other local museums. Archival materials, if acquired will be stored at the City of Ottawa Archives. A future Preservation Centre will address their storage needs for artefacts.

Research - A research program is being developed and research will begin when funds become available.

Interpretation - The museum will interpret various aspects of the Francophone experience in Ottawa, the history of Eastview/Vanier and natural history using exhibits and education programs. The human history interpretation will deal with various domestic, industrial and political themes and sub-themes throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries. It also offers the potential to interpret the urbanization of small communities over the same period.

Nepean Museum

Mandate - The museum’s mandate is to reflect the history of residents of the former City of Nepean “and now, the whole City of Ottawa.”

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - Currently the museum is housed in a City owned facility and is leased to the Nepean Museum Board for $55,000 per year. The museum was established in 1973 as the West Carleton Museum. The board, which was incorporated as the Nepean Museum Board in 1983, is directly responsible for the operations of the museum.

Collection - The collection of nearly 12,000 objects reflects the story of what was formerly the City of Nepean from 1870 to the present. At least 60% of the collection dates from the period 1946-2005. The strength of its collection, nearly 90%, dates from the 20th century and includes domestic artefacts and furnishings, and formal clothing relating to that period. An important camera collection and one relating to law-enforcement artefacts are two of the larger collections.

Interpretation - The museum's current interpretation includes a brief overview of history of Nepean and generic 20th century domestic, communications and transportation displays. Given its collection and its potential for interpretation, Nepean Museum could further interpret the theme of suburban development in Ottawa throughout the 20th century.

Osgoode Township Museum

Mandate - Its mandate is to collect and preserve material relating to the area, which formerly comprised Osgoode Township.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - Established in 1973, the Osgoode Township Historical Society and Museum operate the museum. Its two buildings are owned and maintained by the City and are leased to the museum for a nominal sum ($1).

Collection - The collection of over 5,700 objects deals primarily with farming and all aspects of domestic rural life from the mid-19th to mid-20th centuries. The strength of its collection is in its domestic artefacts and its extensive collection of farm machinery.

Research - The museum’s research centre has a large collection of public records and genealogical records and reports. This collection provides an important research tool for the community and is useful in documenting the museum’s collection.

Interpretation - The display and interpretation of the farm machinery is the highlight of the museum’s interpretation. A smaller display of a wide range of domestic artefacts comprises the other major exhibit. It has an extensive series of education and outreach programs relating to its mandate. The major potential for telling Ottawa’s story is the role of rural communities in "feeding" urban Ottawa. This could include an exhibit dealing with the commercial and social interaction of rural and urban life as well as the technology which enabled communities like those of Osgoode Township to produce the much-needed supplies of food required to sustain the city.

Pinhey’s Point Historic Site

Mandate - Its mandate is to interpret the site and to tell the story of the Pinhey family.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements - Pinhey’s Point Historic site was opened in 1983 and is currently owned by the City of Ottawa and operated in partnership with the Pinhey’s Point Foundation, which owns the collection.

Collection - The most significant artefact is the main building itself. Much of the collection at Pinhey’s is site specific and relates to the building, the 88-acre site and the Pinhey family. The entire collection of about 2,000 artefacts is kept on-site and much of it is on display. It consists of a wide range of objects ranging from books and paintings to furniture and domestic artefacts.

Research - The personal and business papers of the Pinhey family provide documentation for the collection and for site interpretation. The papers provide a wealth of information on 19th century life and the Foundation’s historian has written numerous articles and lectured extensively on topics relating to his research.

Interpretation -Interpretation is undertaken inside the house and deals with the construction and evolution of the building, period-furnished rooms and family and children’s activities. The Pinhey story, based on the extensive documentation and artefact collection, offers the potential to interpret numerous themes relating to early to mid-19th century settlement, particularly 19^th century agricultural practices, using March Township and the Pinhey experience as an example. Pinhey’s also interprets the adjacent graveyard and the walls of St. Mary’s Anglican Church built in 1827. The site, on the banks of the Ottawa River, also offers the potential to interpret various natural history themes, 18th century exploration and the fur trade.

Watson’s Mill

Mandate Built in 1860, it is a restored, operational 19th century grist mill which symbolizes pioneer spirit and technical ingenuity.

Governance Structure/Facility Arrangements -Watson’s Mill is owned by the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority and operated by Watson’s Mill Manotick Inc with no rental charge. The museum is governed by a not-for-profit incorporated board of management, which was incorporated in 1997 and is supported by 11 members directly responsible for the operations and programming at the Mill.

Collection -The collection consists of the mill itself and its component working parts. The operators are not interested in developing a collection which does not relate directly to the history and operation of the mill.

Research -The museum’s volunteers have undertaken research on mills in order to better care for Watson’s Mill.

Interpretation -Current displays relate to all aspects of the milling process. A recently commissioned interpretive plan recommended exhibits which would tell the story of the mill in the context of community, industrial development and agricultural workers form the mid-19th to the mid-20th centuries.

For the information of Council

Pour la gouverne du Conseil

Current Challenges for Museums in Telling the Ottawa Story

Bytown Museum

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum

Diefenbunker, Canada's Cold War Museum

Goulbourn Museum

Muséoparc Vanier Museopark

Nepean Museum

Osgoode Township Museum

Pinhey's Point Historic Site

Watson's Mill

Methodology

Diagram 1

The Greater Ottawa Story: Heritage Gateway and Museums

Translation

Fundraising

Professional Development

Collections Policy Development

Development Options for a Heritage Gateway

Interim Preservation Centre

Longer Term Solution

Summary of Proposed Funding to Individual Museums

Highlights of the Proposed Investment Plan

The Importance of Municipal Financial Support for Local Museums

Community Operated

City Operated

Common Initiatives

Capital

Community Operated Museums

City Operated Museums