Centre’s demands on ratepayer unreasonable
Who will blink first? A major stand-off looms between the Christchurch City Council and The Arts Centre Trust, with the ultimatum laid down for a minimum of $1.8 million in annual ratepayer funding.
Arts Centre director Philip Aldridge is unequivocal that without its funding demand being met, the trust will enter insolvency.
Is the ratepayer being held to ransom? It’s a high-stakes, confrontational bargaining strategy. However, since the launch of its “Save The Arts Centre” campaign, hundreds of submissions have already poured in to the council, urging it to open the coffers.
The guts-and-glory restoration of 20 buildings within the centre’s precinct has been one of the greatest post-quake legacy stories. As a hardcore fan of heritage architecture, this Gothic Revival precinct is the undisputed heritage jewel in our city’s crown.
Previous directors Kim Franklin and Andre Lovett, and the ebullient Aldridge, share the honours in skippering and securing that triumphant tour de force. Two Category 1 buildings remain mothballed until future capital funding becomes available, while the Category 2 Student Union building, aka the old Dux site, remains marooned in a depressingly derelict state.
Frankly, given the high-profile position of that site and the overwhelming affection the Dux’s glory days evoke, it’s shameful that the building remains condemned to a long-term state of dilapidation.
Given its prominence, not just geographically but in the public consciousness, reviving that building should have been pursued with far greater gusto and creative problem-solving. And still should be.
The game-changing ReDux proposal failed to find favour with management and trustees, but Aldridge claims “a much better scheme is on the table”, though he concedes to me those plans “are at an early stage. We’re hopeful that solutions can be found.”
No timelines are forthcoming. But what about the broader funding challenge? In 2021, the ratepayer benevolently boosted The Arts Centre with a $5.5m capital grant. But now the entity is asking for an annual council grant of $1.8m-2.5m to remain afloat.
Over the past fortnight I’ve canvassed a vast array of insights from former trustees and current management, from senior council figures, and commercial property leaders - including heritage building owners.
Very few were prepared to go on the record, given how incendiary the funding scrap is in a “village” like Christchurch. But after much consideration, I have concluded the latest demands on the ratepayer are unreasonable and unjustified.
I believe The Arts Centre has “an empire complex”, boxing itself in with a lofty sense of self-importance, but expecting other people to pay its bills, while spurning opportunities to help solve its own financial challenges.
For example, it’s absurd that The Arts Centre is not charging tenants full commercial rents that encompass the scope of its core operational overheads, like council rates, insurance and staff costs.
Does it really need to employ 24 fulltime equivalent staff? The management structure looks top-heavy, with four senior managers collectively earning more than $700,000 annually.
Aldridge has been loath to reveal the size of his salary, but he tells me “it’s well below $300,000”. And he’s adamant that the Christchurch Art Gallery senior managers pocket superior salaries.
Rather than pay hefty insurance premiums for full replacement/total loss cover, given the high standard in earthquake strengthening, why not settle for a far more moderate level of cover? I’m aware of legal advice that supports this.
The Arts Centre could also contract services to enhance its financial health. Why not enlist the likes of Venues Ōtautahi to contract-manage the Great Hall? And why has The Arts Centre not monetised its car parks, like the 55 parking bays off Hereford St? In fact, that space is a potential gold-mine, if it constructed a triple-decker parking building on-site.
As Earthquake Recovery Minister, Gerry Brownlee ushered through a modernised Arts Centre of Christchurch Trust Act. This profoundly enabling legislation empowered the trust board with huge discretion to “develop and maintain a sustainable and financially viable organisation”.
The current operating model is not financially self-sustaining and the management mindset is wedded to ratepayer dependence. I do not doubt the admirable passion of the staff. But The Arts Centre needs an attitudinal overhaul to secure its own future, paved in selfreliance.