Commission Report

1. Commission Report York County Culture and Heritage Commission November 1, 2010

2. Background • Executive Committee • Met with Jim Baker on October 8. • Passed resolution asking for a position from the Governance Committee regarding reorganization proposal. • Governance Committee • Also met with Jim Baker on October 8. • Jim Baker asked for GC’s input and assistance by October 15 • Governance Committee met on October 13 to develop response • Also passed a statement of support for Museum staff

3. Governance Committee Response • Statement edited and passed October 13. • Working document shared with staff, Executive Committee and Jim Baker by October 15 • Had to do two things: • Provide feedback to Jim Baker on issues he requested • Take a position on the reorganization (separate from, but related to feedback)

4. Advice on Reorganization: • Statement of support for increased coordination between CVB, CHM and YC Forever. • Feedback on reorganization: • Separate, independent, self-governing board with specialized subcommittees • Independent foundation with separate board and employees • Board: at large appointments, diversity, staggered terms, term limits • Board input into Director review process.

5. Concerns with Reorganization • CHM employees should be held harmless • Any reorganization should not jeopardize: • AAM accreditation • Smithsonian Affiliation • National Heritage Area for the Southern Campaign of the Revolution (Anticipated program with National Park Service) • Ability to host fundraisers, sell memberships, accept major gifts and write and accept grants from private and public sources. • Affirmative Action employer status

6. More Concerns • Ability to retain and attract well-qualified, creative, energetic museum professionals. • Don’t want to “become caretakers of stuffed animals.” • Undue and unnecessary speed. • Need to investigate trends and recommended practices in museum governance world wide before moving forward.

7. Final Position on the Reorganization • “The Governance Committee supports the idea of the alignment of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, York County Forever and the Culture and Heritage Commission. However, the Governance Committee does not want to see the employees and operations of the Culture & Heritage Museums moved under the County. The Governance Committee’s principal concern is that moving the museums under the County will jeopardize their ability to retain and recruit visionary, energetic, talented and credentialed professionals who will lead the organization into the future.”

8. Further investigations • Asked the staff to investigate scholarly and professional literature on museum governance and identify trends • Received initial findings through Email • Met on October 22 to discuss and add this addendum.

9. Findings: Types of Museum Governance Structures • Line Departments • Fully incorporated into local government or university • Not autonomous or independently governed • York County Proposal • Civil Society Museums (Quasi-Governmental) • Partially funded by government or university • Autonomous board with governance, financial, staff oversight and policy responsibilities. • Current CHM Structure • Private or Nonprofit • No government affiliation

10. National Trends • Clearly a movement from Line Department Model to Civil Society Model • Increasing professionalism of museum staff • Cuts in government funding • Need multiple sources of income and flexibility to pursue them • Need to meet contemporary social goals • Need board members with specialized skills and knowledge • Similar trend in nonprofit management.

11. Smithsonian Affiliates • All models represented • 90% are Civil Society (Quasi-Governmental) Model • Contact identified trend away from line departments towardcivil society model

12. Civil Society Model & Combined Departments • Civil Society/Quasi-Governmental Model is used widely in the United States and world wide (France, Turkey, UK, Barbados, Spain) • Staff identified instances where the Civil Society/Quasi-Governmental Model was used as governing board for a combined Parks, Recreation and Tourism organization

13. Staff Concerns Regarding Haste • Precludes ability to compare governance models to determine best structure • Precludes ability to develop a long-term, strategic plan for the new organization • Inability to properly align vision of the three organizations • Fundraising ability and concerns expressed • Loss of unique organizational culture: sense of shared mission and purpose that unites the CHM staff

14. CHC Motion #1 • The Culture and Heritage Commission (CHC) supports the idea of the alignment of the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), York County Forever (YCF) and the CHC. • The CHC believes all CHM employees should be held harmless. • The CHC further states that any reorganization should not jeopardize: • The museums’ AAM accreditation; • The museums’ Smithsonian Affiliation; • The National Heritage Area for the Southern Campaign of the Revolution; • The museums’ ability to host fundraisers, sell memberships, accept major gifts, and write and accept public and private grants; or • The museums’ Affirmative Action employer status.

15. Motion #2 from the CHC • The CHC further recommends that the governance structure of any new organization combining the functions of the CHC, the YCF and the CVB should: • Be consistent with national trends and use a civil society/quasi-governmental governance structure; and • Mimic the existing powers and responsibilities of current CVB and CHC boards.

16. Motion #3 from the CHC • The CHC respectfully requests that York County slow down the current pace of the reorganization to ensure that all relevant stakeholders can adequately investigate the many complexities involved in this reorganization, and determine the best structure for the citizens of York County.

17. Motion #4 from the CHC • The Culture and Heritage Commission goes on record as supporting the Culture & Heritage Museums’ staff, and commends them for their dedication, hard work and professionalism as they fulfill the museums’ mission.

18. References • Bernardi, C. (2006). The sustainability of museum growth: A system dynamics approach. Research Center on the Arts and Cultural Management. www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/2006/proceed/papers/BERNA430.pdf • Hwang, H. & Powell, W. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 268-298. • Koster, E. (2006). The relevant museum: A reflection on sustainability. Museum News: American Association of Museums. • Lopes, M. (2002). Soft systems methodology: An application to a community based association. Fielding Graduate Institute: Action Research Symposium. • Lord, G. & Lord, G. See www.lord.ca for multiple resources. • Lord, G. & Lord, G. (2009). Manual of museum management. http://books.google.com/books?id=MhSeAKthNfMC&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=gail+lord+museum+2009&source=bl&ots=2GkiqW0F_x&sig=GwFK2bniSMLh5U6n-0cFZGXz5M0&hl=en&ei=WHPHTLfCKov89ATNmrTdAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&sqi=2&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=gail%20lord%20museum%202009&f=false • McCall, V. (date). Thinking critically about governance: Exploring museums as organizations that can deliver social policy objectives. • McClusky, J. (2002). Re-thinking nonprofit organization governance. Implications for management and leadership. International Journal of Public Administration 25(4), 539-559. • Merritt, E. (2008). Museums & society 2034: Trends and potential futures. American Association of Museums. • Peacock, D. (2008). Making ways for change: Museums, disruptive technologies and organizational change. Museum Management and Curatorship, 23(4), 333-351. • Strategic Plan – Lake County IL http://www.lakecountyil.gov/CountyGovernment/NewsandInformation/StrategicPlan/Documents/StrategicPlan.pdf