Comment
Breaking the cycle
Five and half years ago, Hillier Hall was given a new life. The interior was gutted, a new exterior roof was built, and the interior structure reinforced. New lighting, drywall and paint. Critical to this story is that new rigging points and electrics were also installed to enable theatrical productions in the reinvigorated community facility.
There had been countless meetings held over many months leading up to the renovation. Many delays in getting the project started and then completed. Then, on the eve of the first performance of Conrad Beaubien’s Bridge Street in the summer of 2017, the writer and producer received a letter from yhe County advising him that no performances would be permitted in Hillier Hall. Shire Hall was shutting the production down.
Beaubien and the County hammered out a compromise in the frantic hours before the premiere performance. The play could go on, but firefighters would have to be present during every performance—paid for by the producer after the initial performance. And that is how the rest of the run played out, with firefighters ready to jump into action should flames suddenly engulf the Hall.
While it was never clear why the performance of two-hander constituted a greater fire hazard than the WI’s rousing spring suppers or an unruly euchre party—such was the decree.
Beaubien has been trying to fix this situation ever since. To no avail. This week he is trying again—looking for answers from a new council. Simply put, he wants to know what needs to be done to enable modest theatrical performances to return to Hillier Hall.
It is a Dionysian challenge. Only one or two councillors really and truly care about what happens in Hillier. Others are surely sympathetic, but not so much to go out on a limb. That is because dozens of underused halls, museums and other buildings are scattered across the County. The last reliable count was more than 88 municipally owned buildings.
Council members will listen attentively. They will want to help. But when it is pointed out to them the implication of supporting Hillier Hall upon the other 88 buildings, their enthusiasm will wilt. They will ask staff to prepare another report. And we will be back here in another five years.
Or, we could try a different model.
A decade ago, another County manager challenged residents to support their town halls, museums and libraries. To make them economic drivers in the community. Otherwise, the municipality would consider disposing of these assets—to fund the remaining buildings for which there were no funds or plans to maintain them.
The hue and cry was as loud as it was predictable. The outrage echoed across the land. ‘How dare this bureaucrat talk about taking away our community treasures.’ Yet, the CAO’s tactic worked—for a while. Folks rallied in many communities. Money was raised. Volunteers raised their hands.
Some facilities are still propelled by this energy (read Macaulay House and the Wellington museum as examples). But most are not. We are mostly back to where we were a decade ago. Underused facilities in chronic need of repair. With no money set aside to maintain them. They are shrinking before our eyes.
It seems likely the hangover of Covid will present a new council with a tough set of choices in January. What to do with Shire Hall’s vast portfolio of buildings, halls, and museums should be chief among them.
So, what to do?
Some buildings ought to be sold outright, including both the Wellington and Picton town halls. Neither community suffers from a shortage of halls or community spaces. Both structures require deep re-investment—that this municipality will never manage. Consider, for example, that half of the Wellington hall building—the upper floor—was condemned as unsafe decades ago.
Other buildings, such as Hillier Hall, should be divested to the community. Not a management deal. Not a service agreement. These don’t work and can’t work.
Instead, Council should consider an outright sale, say to the Hillier Hall community corp for a dollar—if such an entity could be formed and established. Shire Hall should facilitate and encourage it.
The municipality may be called upon, occasionally, perhaps regularly, to support the upkeep, operations or special events at the Hall. It can do this via the Rec Committee. These already exist in every ward to support local initiatives and community identity. Rec Committees were the compromise mechanism by which townships, villages and such ceded self-governance to Shire Hall.
It would be relatively easy to revise its rules to provide a funding mechanism for these places. But it wouldn’t own them. It wouldn’t carry the risk. Or the impossible task of giving equal treatment—access, funding, upkeep—to 88 buildings. The municipality would provide funds based on each community’s energy and enthusiasm to keep these places vital.
The community corp would manage, maintain, and fund the operation of the Hall. In this way, it would enable the community to truly assert itself again—for the first time since amalgamation. There would be disagreements for sure—different priorities, different goals—but it would be up to the community to sort.
A fund would be created—at considerably less cost than maintaining these buildings—from which the Rec Committee could draw based upon credible and sound proposals.
If a community is unable to muster the necessary support to make this happen the building ought to be sold and repurposed. How clear a signal can there be?
Comments (0)