Consultants not to blame for rejection of arts and culture building grant, council

[ad_1]

Not enough time to prepare construction-ready documents before submission deadline for “oversubscribed” grant program

Last night, a low-key council officially learned that the application for a $14.5 million grant for a $27.5 million arts and culture building project had been rejected by Infrastructure Canada.

Acting Director of Public Works Bill Goulding began an overview of his written report by referencing resident Mike Thomas’ previous comments during the public consultation session. During the public comment session, Thomas shared his opinion that the report lacked details on why the application was rejected.

Referring to Thomas’ comment as a “good take”, Goulding said he wanted the opportunity to explain the response from the Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Program (GCIB) “because the language of the letter could have been interpreted in different ways”. Commenting on his written report in the agenda folder, Goulding noted: “I don’t have the opportunity to clarify the situation because [the written report is being read from the website].”

Goulding quoted the GCIB letter: “After careful consideration of your application to the Elliot Lake Center for the Arts and Culture, we regret to inform you that your project has not been selected for funding for the following reasons.”

Goulding informed the council that the GCIB “simply said that we were unable to provide complete construction documents for this project to be forwarded for review”. He added: “There was no time and it wasn’t even a practical thing to do.”

Although discussed in committee, the cost of the design work was not finally approved by the board until January and the submission to the GCIB was due on February 28.

Given the very short time frame, staff and board agreed that the consultant was a good partner and delivered on their promises.

Councilor Norman Mann commented, “I agree with Mr. Goulding’s assessment of our consultants. I don’t think they let us down at all.

Elliot Lake’s bid did not include construction-ready documents. Goulding thinks it’s likely that other competing grant applications included them. Ready-to-build documents are more detailed, take longer to prepare, and cost more than design concept documents.

Goulding also thinks it’s likely that the grants program was “oversubscribed,” meaning it received more requests for funds than funds available.

Councilor Mann believes there are other reasons as well.

“It’s unfortunate. Last year, when we were also turned down, and – other communities with ‘differing color ridings,’ I believe I said last year – are receiving this funding,” he said.

Councilor Luc Morrissette echoed Mann’s disappointment:

“It’s sad for the community that we won’t be moving forward.” Morrissette wondered, “Is it possible that we can still work on a project learning from our mistakes and maybe make progress for any future grants that might come along and be more ready?”

Goulding mentioned the community fundraising component that was part of the plan presented to the GCIB.

Morrissette asked if there were “any potential groups out there that could help us fundraise. Should we kind of start and maybe have commitments and fundraise and then reapply and have a bigger product to show [in a grant application]?”

Goulding added, “I think we thought a lot about the vision for this project with the previous board. I think to stay within a budget, we made significant changes to it to have our best chance of approval with this funding round. I think with these changes in place, I think we have to know what we want before we ask for it. And I think we also really have to consider what we can properly support as a municipality before asking for something.

Goulding told advisers that an investment of millions of dollars, or about 10% of the project cost, is required to produce construction-ready documents.

Councilor Mann responded to Councilor Rick Bull’s question on what happens if the investment is made for ready-to-build plans but a grant is not given.

“What’s happening is there’s a giant paper tube somewhere in this building gathering dust, which we’ve done many times with at least two arena projects and another building I’ve been to,” Mann said. “They last because they are on paper. However, does the original architectural firm still exist? [about] other changes? Mr Goulding is right, we spend a lot of money to do our best and it’s either a go or no go situation and then we end up with rolls of paper.

“I agree with you, Mr. Golding. Nobody got it wrong here. We have done our best. We were elected to be here and make decisions like this,” Councilor Charles Flintoff said. “What we hope is for the good of the community as a whole. So if we’re not trying here, then we’re not doing our job. So I know you and your staff are working very hard on this. It’s not the best case scenario we have, but now we know where we are and we’re moving on. »

Councilor Merrill Seidel noted how the cost of the project had risen, commenting: “See where our hands are tied here?”

“In the end, it’s quite disappointing. We just discovered it seven days ago. I believe it happened”

said Acting Mayor Andrew Wannan. “A lot of effort has gone into it and a lot of hope has been invested in it. It certainly doesn’t really kill the project, but we still have plans and money budgeted in case it happens.

“But I mean, for the community to come together to raise ’23 million odd dollars,’ that’s what you’re up against.

“I’m sure in the next three years maybe we can get more money,” Wannan said.

[ad_2]