Local bodies to try to help museum

Press, 20 April 1979, Page 4

Local bodies to try to help museum

A joint committee of the : Canterbury Museum’s Trust Board and representatives of the 20 or 30 local bodies that contribute to it financially will be set up to consider ways to improve the museum’s bleak financial outlook.

A resolution to this effect was passed at a “tea party” given yesterday by the board to explain the need for an increased commitment by local bodies to help defray the mounting costs of running the museum.

At present, only six of the local bodies from the Amuri County in the north to Ashburton County in the south that contribute to the museum’s costs help to meet the annual deficit, last year totalling $lOOO. The estimate deficit for this financial year is $28,000, and the board and the local bodies contributing to the deficit at the moment — Waimairi, Heathcote, and Paparua counties, Lyttelton and Riccarton borough, and the Christchurch City Council — want some assistance from the other rural bodies.

The joint committee, which will be composed of the 13 board members, five representatives from the City Council and one from each of the contributing local bodies, will look into ways of reducing the deficit and making the museum a more economic proposition. The meeting was told by the board’s accountant, Mr K. Jensen, that the amount levied on local bodies as their contribution to the museum’s finances was not keeping pace with inflation or the revaluations of properties on which rates were charged. The levies paid are a direct proportion of the capital

value of property in the local-body area. Mr Jensen said the city areas paid more per dollar of capital. Valuations on property were done every five years, and city valuations were falling behind those of the county, and behind the rate of inflation and other rising costs.

The problem of inflation ■ outstripping land values had | not been foreseen by the board, said Mr Jensen, and rises in other costs — mainly [salaries and electricity charges — had compounded the present difficulties. To raise the money needed, Mr Jensen said, the board could ask the Government for an increase on the fixed levy income, or could simply publish the expected deficit “about March” and then ask local bodies to meet the balance.

The Mayor of Christchurch (Mr H. G. Hay) said the City Council would not be slow in facing up to its responsibilities to the “important institution,” but he indicated that local bodies should press for more assistance from the Government. This argument was echoed by Mr H. W. Bennett, chairman of the board’s finance committee, who considered the museum was a national asset. The museum should therefore be entitled to, and given, a slice of the national income, he said. Some local body representatives opposed the raising of the levies they were paving, and thought that only the city ratepayers were reaping the benefits of the museum. Others said the complex might be a little big for the population it served, and another suggested that the board might not be doing

a good job of administering the museum.

In response to criticism of the high costs of salaries paid to museum staff, Mr Bennett said there was no area in the museum that could afford to have staffing reduced.

“The situation is pretty desperate as far as the board is concerned,” said Mr Bennett. "Some areas are understaffed at the moment but we shall not be hiring any more.”

Local body representatives suggested an entrance fee to the museum. At present a donation box is the only form of income from museum patrons. But the chairman of the board (Mr P. J. R. Skellerup) said the idea of a charge had been discarded. The museum would have to close five entrances now in use, would have to employ more staff, and would lose a “considerable amount” from the donations.

It would be unfair to levy an entrance charge on an educational institute, and a lower attendance figure (last year 300,000 people visited the museum) might result, said Mr Skellerup. “The board is conscious of its financial obligations but we have just got caught up in the bad financial times affecting New Zealand as a whole," he said.

Mr I. G. Clark, a local body representative on the board, did not favour imposing a charge. “It is a very poor society that cannot have its cultural institutions available to the public free of charge,” he said. “If we cannot meet the deficit through a small increase in our rates, it is a pretty poor society indeed.”