Historical Commission Agenda and Packet 2016 08 03 SP

Home Browse Search

The Business Plan contains a great deal of helpful information that is pertinent for the Museum's future operations and funding sources, and it sets forth a proposal for one possible way in which the City of Louisville could set up funding for Museum operations based on examples from a sampling of other U.S. museums, though it is recognized that there are also other possible paths. The City will no doubt want to balance a number of different interests when the time comes to make decisions about the Business Plan recommendations. At this time, these issues are still up for discussion. The Historical Commission, Foundation directors, and City staff discussed the Business Plan and its recommendations at a Commission meeting on May 4, 2016, and individuals stated what they liked about the plan and what they didn't care for or thought might be unrealistic. It was noted that the Commission, by accepting the Business Plan to be part of the Museum Master Plan, would not be weighing in or passing judgment on the actual recommendations contained in the Plan. There was a general acknowledgement that whether many of the recommendations can be carried out will be based on future decisions to be made by the Louisville City Council and on how other future events unfold, including whether City Council will write the ballot language of a proposedthe Historic Preservation Tax extensionrcncwal to allow for funding for Museum operations and whether Louisville voters will approve of the renewal. The attendees at the May 2016 Commission meeting weighed in on the following interesting Business Plan recommendations in particular: • Those in attendance liked the Business Plan's vision of the Museum becoming an official visitor and civic information center for residents and tourists, for it to be a key anchor for the historic downtown and Arts District, and for City events to begin and end at the Museum campus. Along with enthusiasm for an exciting growing role for the Museum in the civic life of Louisville and the opportunities that this presents for the City is concern about whether the current level of staffing and operations can sustain such increased activities that some people may come to expect even before there is additional operational funding, if it transpires at all. Some expressed that the City administration should ensure that there is adequate operational funding in place before the time when staff would be expected to significantly raise the level of programming and the Museum's profile in the community and the region, and certainly before there would be a new building. • The Business Plan recommendations are based on there being on a certain level of funding for Museum operations from the Historic Preservation Fund, which is not currently permitted. It is still an open question as to whether the City Council will decide to write the ballot language for a proporsedthe Historic Preservation Tax extension renewal so as to include approval for the Fund to be used to help pay for Museum operations. If it is written to include such language, when it would go to voters has not been decided and it is not known whether voters would approve the ballot issue. Although the Historical Commission members and Foundation directors who were present at the meeting indicated that they strongly support the inclusion of Museum operations in the tax extensionrcncwal ballot language, it was acknowledged that the City and the community cannot assume that the language will include this provision or that the renewal will pass. • Whether it makes sense for the Louisville Historical Museum to start to charge an admission fee for visitors to access some buildings on the Museum campus after the hoped-for campus changes 32