The Art Gallery of Windsor

...wants a bailout! And although they're "not mismanaged" nor are they terribly in debt, they need some more cash just to operate. What do you think? Here's the article:

"It won't be a pretty picture when the Art Gallery of Windsor comes beret in hand to a cash-strapped city council seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover a shortfall blamed on the plummeting stock market.

Several councillors expressed unease Tuesday with providing direct loans to community or arts groups, especially in these dire economic times.

Others voiced concerns with the gallery's outreach efforts and its inability to secure funding from freeloading Essex County municipalities.

Even though he voted with the majority to bail out the Windsor Symphony Orchestra with a $300,000 loan, Coun. Percy Hatfield said the AGW faced a "harder sell" because it had assets it could hawk for operating cash or use to secure a bank loan.

"The art gallery has lots of art that's been in the vault for 10 years or more that's never seen the light of day," said Hatfield. "Maybe it's time to sell off a few pieces instead of coming to the city of Windsor. As sacrilegious as that may be, these are difficult times."

Gallery director Gilles Hebert bristled at the suggestion, saying any move to sell off the art collection -- which he called a "sacred trust" -- or trim gallery initiatives or hours could jeopardize nearly half a million dollars in sponsorships and grants.

"We've made all of the cuts that we possibly can at this point without compromising our status as an institution," said Hebert. "We're a public institution and we're looking for help from our local government."

The AGW faces a shortfall on a $2.2 million budget because anticipated revenues from a $6.8 million endowment fund -- which shed $900,000 in a tanking stock market last year -- did not materialize. Instead of $756,000, the gallery will receive only $221,000. It is prohibited, said Hebert, from raiding the principle to fund operating costs.

"It's not because we have a deficit and it's not because we're being mismanaged. We had two surpluses in 2007 and 2008," said Hebert. "It's because the revenue source that we depend on isn't there this year."

The AGW, which receives an annual $450,000 operating grant from Windsor taxpayers, has presented the city with two proposals. The first would see the grant upped to $600,000 and an interest free loan of $300,000. The second would see the grant remain the same and the loan increased to $450,000.

"That's a big chunk of money," said Coun. Jo-Anne Gignac, who opposed the symphony bailout. "I have a very difficult time with the city extending loans. I'm watching businesses close left and right."

Councillor Bill Marra also voted against the symphony loan -- and will oppose a gallery loan -- saying it created a "slippery slope and a dangerous precedent." He said the city should only guarantee loans so groups like the WSO can establish good credit.

"We've taken on the role of a financial institution by lending them money and I have a philosophical problem with that," he said.

Ward 3 Coun. Alan Halberstadt supported the symphony bailout and supports throwing a lifeline to the gallery.

"It's going to be difficult to say yes to one and no to the other because they're both cultural icons in Windsor and we're culturally challenged," he said.

Councillor Ken Lewenza Jr. opposed the symphony bailout to send a message that county municipalities needed to fund regional gems like the symphony, a sentiment shared by Gignac.

Councillors Dave Brister and Caroline Postma said the AGW needs to outline a plan to engage residents, especially young ones, as part of a business case that had better be convincing.

"A lot of people in my area see the art gallery as that glass house on the river," said Postma. "They don't feel it is accessible to them."

Hebert couldn't cite attendance figures for the gallery, which employs 30 people, but said they have risen "dramatically" since 2003. He added the gallery worked last year with 156 schools and other groups.

The gallery was good for the loan, stressed Hebert, because it had assets, including a $30-million building and a $60-million art collection. Those assets should be used as collateral for any city loan, said Coun. Drew Dilkens.

Hebert said the gallery was asking the city for a loan rather than a bank because it already owed an unspecified amount of money to a bank. He was vague when pressed for details, but said in a subsequent email the bank loan was a "very good news" story relating to attempts to "green" the art gallery and trim operating costs."

© Copyright (c) The Windsor Star

And here's my favourite comment, from my favourite non-profit gallery creator, curator, organizer, writer and poet, Gustave Morin:

"One of the reasons no one wants to live in windsor -- young people who grow up here vacate post-haste ALL THE TIME, have you noticed? -- has quite a lot to do with the fact that there is NO smart money here to sustain anyone's ideal lowest common denominator of a sustainable, healthy, happy "good life". (for 'smart money' read: money spent on arts, on culture, on the support and encouragement of those aspects of municipal life that not only make a city worth living in, but also a place where others might care to visit, or move to.) so, as long as the fractured but nonetheless committed and resilient creative class in this city is made to constantly squander its time and human resources in waging defensive ideological wars of attrition and propaganda against various of our policy-makers and those vocal, if unenlightened, members of our citizenry who continue to foolishly decry the arts, i see no possible reason why this brain-drain won't continue, effectively and irreversibly turning our city of roses into just another grey ghost town. windsor is at a turning point in this struggle, and it is time that we collectively realize that for there to be ANY life here, there must also be reasons FOR life to be here. one very good way to ensure this is to look after those resources we ALREADY have. the Art Gallery of Windsor is one such resource, and if we don't see to it that it gets the money it needs, it too will die a slow, ugly death. a few things everyone ought to know: 1) it takes 4 taxpayers to pony up one cent towards the arts in the city of windsor. in other words, each penny-wise, pound foolish taxpayer in windsor puts a quarter of a cent into the arts -- and altogether too many seem to think this is already too much? -- too much? how much do you think taxpayers in stratford put into their arts? in other words, you get what you pay for. (and, what's more, here in windsor, because we do the arts so well on a shoestring, you get plenty more into the bargain! this is WHAT HAS GONE UNRECOGNIZED!) and 2) if the city gave/granted the art gallery the 2 million a year that the above commentator has suggested, the federal/provincial government would be in a much better position to match those funds. the reality is that ottawa/toronto regards us as a bunch of jerks who, rather than investing in and protecting what we ought to be proud of, we seem instead intent on watching what our forebears put together fall apart. consequently, they've no interest in investing here as long as such goofy negativity remains the prevailing attitude. and if that's not food for thought today, i don't know what is. good day."

So, what do you think? Blank Artist's blog has a great post that integrates possible outcomes for our creative class. Check the Tasty Nuggets section above.