Why did you not want the media at the meeting?

To the point of postponing it if they did not leave?

It was never a question of not wanting the media to be there. It was simply that we were taken completely by surprise at the prospect of a fair exchange of views among members being transformed into a public spectacle which might have frustrated any reasonable deliberation. In any event, the media found less obtrusive means of monitoring the proceedings which were entirely appropriate to the situation. There was never any question of postponement, but only of unnecessary delay in attending to the important business on the agenda if the question had been opened for debate.

With your motion defeated, what is your next step?

It is always important to have a Plan B which we do. We are committed to the idea of the gallery being able to manage its day-to-day affairs without having to run to and from the Board or management for approval. We can only say that the new plan takes in to account the continuing operations of the gallery. We are not walking away.

Why are you unhappy with the progress of the WKP Kennedy Gallery Advisory Committee? Why does it not meet the needs of reorganizing the gallery?
There has been no progress. The Chair of the Gallery Advisory Committee conceded that when she stated categorically at the meeting that the Gallery Development Working Group was satisfied with the status quo. It came as no surprise. The working group was composed largely of Board members opposed to any meaningful change. It was not widely representative of the visual arts community as it should have been. The recommendations in the facilitators were exactly the ones which the Board sought from the outset.

The Board clearly has a different model in mind for the gallery which is not in accord with the principles, guidelines and best practices governing other public art galleries. A good example would be that the gallery is soon to become a wedding venue! This is completely contrary to the role of a public art gallery or what the founders had in mind.

I understand there is a plan for a new curator. Are you satisfied about this?
A director/curator is the gallerys biggest and most important investment. He or she must be highly qualified in curatorial experience and related education. A primarily administrative position, or curation by committee, is unacceptable. It should also be kept in mind that public art galleries generally are open to the public without charge. In our case, the Kennedy Gallery does not enjoy the advantage of box office ticket sales. And unlike a private gallery, a public art gallery is not expected to turn a profit.

How do you feel about comments made by Jerry Knox and the city's approach to arts funding through the Capitol Centre?
We were somewhat surprised to see the City take centre stage, something it had earlier indicated it was reluctant do. But the situation on the ground has changed rapidly since, and it is satisfying to have fully engaged the Citys interest. Whatever their approach, we have no reason to doubt that it is anything but sincere. We welcome their involvement. Regardless of the Citys current views, all of the constituent members of the arts community must eventually unite and take the lead themselves by presenting its case directly to those who make the decisions. With or without an official cultural plan, only the arts community has the energy and vision for advancing North Bays cultural life.

Will you bringing the motion back to the table and if so, when can you do this?
In retrospect, our motion was dead on arrival. Although we believe it was absolutely the right approach, DNR is the order of the day.

Any other comments you would like to add?

The Board claimed it had only two days to study our single-page, 6-paragraph motion. That was misleading at best. In truth, the Board had 6 months to study the underlying plan outline which was the foundation for our motion. The Board could have formed the special committee itself months ago which we urged them to do in accordance with rules in the Capitol Centre bylaw. Instead they resorted to a divide and conquer strategy which, as you witnessed at the AGM, enjoyed considerable success.