<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<upm-export>
	<title>The Auroran</title>
	<link>https://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed Apr 8 4:00:47 2026 / +0000  GMT</pubDate>
	<generator>Universal Post Manager 1.1.2 [ www.ProfProjects.com ] </generator>
	<language></language>
	
			<item>
			<title>Municipal Service Board rejected as option to run Library Square</title>
			<link>http://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran/?p=26176</link>
			<pubDate>Wed Apr 8 4:00:47 2026 / +0000  GMT</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran/?p=26176</guid>
			<content-encoded><![CDATA[<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>The question of just how Library Square will operate once
the multimillion-dollar redevelopment project is completed still remains
unanswered, but last week's General Committee meeting went one step towards
clarifying the matter.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Last week, Councillors rejected the possibility of
establishing a Municipal Service Board (MSB) to oversee the operations of
Library Square – which would include 22 Church Street, the approved extension
to the historic Church Street School building, and the gathering space planned
between it and the Aurora Public Library – in a way that is somewhat
arm's-length from municipal operations.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“Under the MSB model, the Town would continue to own the
lands and buildings at 22 Church Street and remain responsible for capital
asset funding,” said Project Manager Phil Rose-Donahoe in his report to
Council, noting that while an MSB model is unusual for cultural institutions
owned by a municipality, it is a model that has been established in St.
Catharines. “Once established, the MSB would become the operator of the
business, responsible for program and service delivery, facility rentals and
bookings, establishing rates and fees, box office administration, financial
operations, marketing and promotion, fundraising and employing and managing all
employees and volunteers. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“Such a governance model would require the Town, through
Council, to create a body that possesses the expertise at an operational level
to implement the Library Square Business Plan and oversee the ongoing
operations and programming of the facility. Council would also need to approve
the criteria and competencies for the MSB and establish broad policies it needs
to follow, thereby controlling the MSB's scope of authority to some extent.”</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Building on his report in Council Chambers last week, Mr.
Rose-Donahoe offered Council a number of pros and cons for this model – and
others – and, as far as the MSB, the cons outweighed the pros.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>On the plus side, an MSB would provide “unified
leadership and centralized direction”, a balance between municipal control and
an independent board, the integration of existing staff and board members, and,
in some cases, lower staff compensation.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>On the other hand, there are
few examples on which to compare this proposal for Library Square, an MSB could
see a disruption to current program delivery, translate into a lengthier
transition period for all employees, and limit fundraising potential.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“In analysing the MSB model, it
has become increasingly clear that this model poses numerous challenges that
make it the least feasible model for the future governance of Library Square,”
said Mr. Rose-Donahoe.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>More feasible options, he said,
are the adoption of a Direct Delivery system where the operations of Library
Square would fall under the umbrella of the Town's Community Services
Department, or a Not-For-Profit/Municipal Hybrid Model, one which is similar to
the Town's current agreements with the Aurora Cultural Centre (ACC) for the
purposes of delivering cultural programming to the community. (See sidebar)</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“If Council agrees that the MSB
model is one that should not be pursued, the next step in the review process is
to continue to work with key stakeholders to further explore the Direct
Delivery and Not-For-Profit Municipal model to determine which one is the most
feasible option for Library Square,” said the Project Manager. “This means
continuing to work with stakeholders during a series of process mapping workshops,
the purpose of which is to undertake a step by step analysis of the
decision-making process for various, real world scenarios that would occur at
Library Square.”</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Council ultimately agreed with
his recommendation, tentatively rejecting the MSB model in a decision that is
expected to be ratified at the end of the month.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Speaking in favour of exploring
the Hybrid model further were Councillors Michael Thompson and John Gallo.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“Since being on Council since
2010, the ACC has done everything Council has asked of them,” said Councillor
Thompson. “They continue to build and improve upon the relationship [between
themselves and the Town] and address issues, and I expect that to continue. I
still think the current hybrid model we have in place…is still the best path
forward.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>On his part, Councillor Gallo
said he agreed with Councillor Thompson's views but questioned the purpose of
the report and the recommendation to reject the MSB rather than to simply pick
one of the three options to move forward. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“I am just saying, let's make a
decision and if it took a little bit more time [for a recommendation] I would
have been okay with that,” he said. “I would have been prepared to make a
decision even before this report, to be quite honest, but I am happy it is here
and it is moving forward.”</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Mayor Tom Mrakas said he too
was prepared to make a decision at the table.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>“I think maybe it is in the best interest to say, ‘You
know what? Let's task staff and say we're going to go for the non-profit
municipal hybrid model and have them just specifically work on that, how they
can update that, how they can tweak that and give us the best proposal when it
comes before us and we can look at that,” said Mayor Mrakas. “I have gone
through this, I have looked at it, I kind of see the one I like and from what I
am hearing around the table, I think everyone is leaning towards one model over
another. Maybe that is what we do and give staff the proper amount of time so
we can have the best solution once the doors open.”</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Added Councillor Rachel Gilliland: “I do like the fact we
have the opportunity to look at all three models and I think you did pick the
right two. What I think we want for the Cultural Centre, if it ain't broke, why
try to fix it?”</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Staff, however, cautioned that now is not the right time to make a final decision on Library Square's governance as more work needs to be done to hammer out just how “the majority of new space” will be used and what the Town's responsibilities might be in the long run.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p> <strong>By Brock Weir </strong></p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->]]></content-encoded>
			<excerpt-encoded><![CDATA[]]></excerpt-encoded>
			<wp-post_id>26176</wp-post_id>
			<wp-post_date>2020-03-12 19:54:02</wp-post_date>
			<wp-post_date_gmt>2020-03-12 23:54:02</wp-post_date_gmt>
				</item>
</upm-export>
