Hearts and minds

Columnist’s note: Council’s unexpected decision on Tuesday night to forge ahead with the proposal by the Save Picton Hall group has rendered the premise of this column out of date. Unsatisfied with both expressions of interest council had earlier decided to start the process again, this time adding some precision in what it was seeking for this property. Eighteen deputations in support of the Save Picton Hall campaign persuaded a majority of council to reject the deferral and instead try to work something out with the volunteer organization.

More to come.

When last tallied, the County had 88 buildings. Some arena-sized, some as small as a public washroom. Most of them are old, expensive to maintain and lack any real plan, or pot of money, to rebuild when that day comes. Or when time simply ushers these structures back to earth.

But time is a fickle force. In time, such buildings make history. Memories are moulded. Rites established. They become the backdrop to our best moments.

In this way public buildings, especially our town halls, have become secular churches. Sacred places in which to gather. To celebrate. To honour. And remember. Our fondness for these places grows out of cherished experiences and a profound desire to ensure they can be the same thing for our children and their children.

Time makes these places both valuable and feeble at the same pace.

It is why many council members were so anguished by the choices before them at the end of February. When asked to choose between competing bids for the former firehall in Picton, they could either go with their heart or their mind—but not both.

While council managed to defer this painful choice for a time, it remains unclear the right answer will reveal itself in the interim. Or whether they have merely prolonged the ache.

Two bids emerged from a request for expressions of interest for the hall. One is a cash transaction, offering $775,000 ($525,000 for the building, $250,000 donation to the Picton Library expansion project) to the municipality for the property.

The other proposal envisions a community group assuming management of the facility with the goal of reducing the County’s operating costs to zero. The municipality would retain the hall and its value appreciation.

Both bids were strong and well presented.

Council members’ hearts value the opportunity to keep the hall in public hands and to perpetuate its current role in the community. Their minds tell them to take the cash.

Certainly, among the arguments made for a new firehall in Picton earlier this decade, was that the proceeds from the sale of the old hall would help to offset the significant cost.

But this is no ordinary firehall. For decades, this was the seat of local government for Picton. After amalgamation, the second floor became an elegant meeting place. High ceilings. Tall windows. Hardwood floors. So necessary to the community—a chair lift was installed to ensure this space was accessible by all.

Yet it is a plain fact the County can’t afford 88 buildings. Either we choose which ones we let go and on what terms—or we allow time to take the decision out of our hands. Councillor Jamie Forrester is surely correct when he observes that many of the County’s buildings are money pits—that their age and fragility renders their restoration much more expensive since they require specialized skills and materials.

It is not as though the County has money set aside for restoration. Every year our municipal infrastructure—roads, sewers and bridges—degrade a bit more, simply because we can’t afford to maintain them. So, Forrester is correct when he says we aren’t taking care of our basic needs.

Yet, perhaps, this isn’t the crossroads at which council suddenly discovers its fiscal backbone.

It was prudent, therefore, that council chose to step back, and reconsider what it wants from this transaction.

But let’s propose some brackets on this exercise.

It must divest itself of this building. Enact rules and covenants that preserve its architectural heritage and even its role as a public meeting space, if possible. But at the end of the day, the municipality must let this building go.

Continuing to own this hall, and several of the other dozens of buildings the County owns, makes as much sense as the hoarder who can’t part with the clutter barring access to the front door. Unfettered nostalgia can become debilitating.

Retaining it means massive restoration costs. If not today, then one day. It is a risky bet that capital appreciation on this structure will keep up with the pending restoration bills.

It is fair to note, also, that the County is investing the better part of $2 million this year (through direct funding and development fees) into the expansion and modernization of the Picton library, including expanded meeting spaces. Far better to invest our few dollars here than spreading them thinly over 88 buildings we know we can’t maintain.

So take some time. Consider how best to maximize the value of this property—financially, architecturally, culturally and socially. Know there will be trade-offs required to strike the right deal. But ultimately a deal must be made and the property divested.

The bottom line is this: Any bid that proposes municipal ownership of this building beyond next year must be disqualified by the terms of the request for submissions. Everything else is on the table.

We simply don’t have the means to do otherwise.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca