A year of two halves for gallery

Tauranga Art Gallery has warned the council that its second-year financial results may not be as scintillating as the first.

According to the gallery's half-yearly report to Tauranga City Council, revenue for the first six months of the financial year is ahead of budget thanks to increased return from events, exhibitions and retail sales.


Travelling exhibitions have helped to boost Tauranga Art Gallery's income.

The surplus for the six months ending on December 31 is $15,185, with the gallery expecting to post a $16,000 loss for the same period.

Interest and dividends were up slightly, but the biggest unbudgeted increase was in other revenue, which leapt from $61,562 to $125,179.

This includes unbudgeted extras of $2000 or so in venue hire, $17,000 in retail sales, $16,800 in events and $24,000 from exhibitions.

The gallery currently has three touring exhibitions from which it continues to draw income, with the Lynley Dodd exhibition currently touring Australia.

'It is very rewarding for us,” says Art Gallery Trust chair Phillida Perry.

Staff changes during the half-year include the resignations of registrar Toni Edmeades in September, who was replaced by Jo Torr seven weeks later. Exhibition designer Jamie Richardson finished on November 30 and was replaced by Mark Trufitt five weeks later.

Extra costs are expected to surface after the gallery hired business development manager Lee Warbrick in November for a year to identify sustainable revenue opportunities for the gallery.

Lee started on December 1, while former gallery director Penelope Jackson resigned the very next day.

The gallery also needs to replace outdated computer equipment, which will also begin during the 2015 financial year

There is also maintenance required on the building, and the air conditioning filters need to be replaced in accordance with H&S regulations and the Museum Aotearoa code of ethics.

'That is expected to put make the end of year budget unfavourable,” says Phillida.

9 comments

Favouable v unfavourable?

Posted on 18-03-2015 14:46 | By YOGI BEAR

Sorry I am confused here, first 6 months a surplus? Did I miss something? There is over $400,000 of rates money dumped into this outfit in just 6 months, to prop it up. How can there be a surplus?


Put these clowns on notice

Posted on 18-03-2015 16:23 | By How about this view!

Make a "Profit" to keep your jobs! I'll bet that even the cleaners are on above minimum wage. Actually thinking on my feet, that might work..... Minimum wage jobs and a share of the profits generated!


yawn......

Posted on 19-03-2015 05:46 | By Jimmy Ehu

nothing new here, and scintillating is a little erroneous to describe any financial report from this group of sycophants.


Come Clean

Posted on 19-03-2015 09:06 | By The author of this comment has been removed.

Tell us the number of paying visitors per annum, and the total revenue. Surely this prime site could be better utilised by having a sorely needed museum, thereby creating positive cash flow?


They've never been scintillating?

Posted on 19-03-2015 10:14 | By BullShtAlert

Until the art gallery honours the commitment made that there would only be a one-off one million dollars from ratepayers, in my opinion the results will never be scintillating! As far as I'm concerned the art gallery was built on the premise of a one-off grant. That has now turned into a near one million dollars a year annual grant. And what on earth is Museums Aotearoa code of ethics? Probably something that takes even more ratepayers money to "sustain"???


Yogi is stirring, not confused!

Posted on 19-03-2015 11:51 | By Murray.Guy

The Art Gallery is a organisation and facility that, amongst other things, provides a service to our community, the City of Tauranga, and in fact our wider district (WBOPDC). Tauranga City residents, in recognition of that service, contribute funds which are included in the income of the Art Gallery. I'm sure you(Yogi) are aware, as residents/ratepayers we are provided all manner of services and benefits for which we pay (in some cases very dearly) from a huge variety of organisations and companies. Some of these providers keep TCC in the loop as to their activities and financial position. Sports, Arts, Culture, economic related agencies, tourism, etc. and they all have budgets, just as we do in our private lives. Mostly the budgets are 'break even', sometimes a shortfall, and sometimes a small surplus. Of concern is a failure to put aside, provide for, maintenance and replacements.


big ted

Posted on 19-03-2015 18:58 | By How about this view!

"a sorely needed museum, thereby creating positive cash flow?" Who have you been talking with? And do you both take the same medications? User pays please! IF you're so certain that it is sorely needed, pass the hat around.


Murray Guy, I take your point but?

Posted on 20-03-2015 10:19 | By BullShtAlert

The think that peeves me about the Art Gallery are the commitments said to have been made about only a one-off one million dollars from ratepayers and then it would be self-funding from donations, or bequests etc etc. Are you able to remember if that was the case because as a matter of integrity it should be honoured. If this was the commitment there should at least be an apology to the ratepayers of Tauranga. I take your point about ratepayers funding all manner of things. I just happen to think they shouldn't. The council continues on its merry spending way.


BullShtAlert asks ...

Posted on 20-03-2015 18:29 | By Murray.Guy

Yes, in regards the Art Gallery, just as with many organisations, individuals and groupings, promises, assertions in the beginning are invariably conveniently forgotten, and some very quickly. I recall the advocates for 'Priority One' seeking a hand-up to get started (not a hand out) around 2003, with accompanying assurances that they would not be expecting on-going ratepayer funding. The 'Hairy statues, numerous sports codes' and others. The Art Gallery is far from on it's own in regards promises broken. I DO NOT support the funding models and expectations/demands put on ratepayers. We've never seen Classic Flyers in the Chambers seeking to raid the credit cards of ratepayers, choosing to utilise volunteers and a business model that ensures their self-sufficiency and growth - AMAZING! Why not, because there's no council involvement, no CCO, no overpaid CCO directors!


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.