The Committee considered the report of the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Cultural Services updating the position with regard to the remaining risks associated with the Maidstone Museum East Wing redevelopment project; these being the potential failure to secure full match funding from external sources and programme delays resulting in increased costs.  The report covered the funding arrangements, the reasons for the additional delay in the contract programme and the legal position.

Funding

The Assistant Director of Regeneration and Cultural Services advised the Committee that to date £2,576,000 had been secured either in donations or pledges of financial support, including £400,000 from the Council’s Capital Programme.  The H R Pratt Boorman Family Foundation had made a donation of £6,000 to the Maidstone Trust which was helping to secure external funding for the project. These funds were to be used for additional staff resources to assist with fundraising.  In the meantime, the grant making trusts had been approached again and other routes in relation to local Japanese companies and notable people in Kent were being pursued.  The Trust had also organised a dinner at The Carlton Club in London to promote the Museum’s Japanese collections.  It was hoped that this net-working event would result in the development of useful links with the Japanese business and cultural community and lead to donations which would help finance the new gallery for Japanese art and promote its use.

The Committee asked a number of questions of the Officers relating to the approach to fundraising, including the focus on the Museum’s Japanese collections; the possibility of disposing of items belonging to the Museum’s collections to raise funds towards the cost of the project; and the potential to organise a small touring exhibition to stimulate interest in the Museum and its collections.

Delays in the Contract Programme

The Assistant Director of Regeneration and Cultural Services advised the Committee that the anticipated completion date was now in early September.  The reason for the additional delay was related to design issues concerning the ducting, the completion of the lift shaft and the laying of the wooden floor at ground level.  The completion of the work was dependent on overcoming an unforeseen problem relating to the connection of the electricity supply and an amended programme was awaited.  The contractor had issued a further extension of time notice relating to these issues and the Contract Administrator would determine the length of the extension of time and how responsibility for the delay was apportioned between the various parties.

The Committee asked a number of questions of the Officers relating to the risk of the contingency being over spent; the impact of the works on visitor numbers; and the arrangements for the phased opening of the extension to stimulate public interest and generate income.

Legal Position

The Assistant Director of Regeneration and Cultural Services advised the Committee that the current position with regard to the claim arising from surveying errors was that a claim letter had been sent by the Council’s external solicitors to the surveying company.  The company’s insurers had responded asking for more details of the claim and more time to give a full response.  The extra information was being collated and would be supplied.  At that time, a view would be taken as to how much longer they might be given to respond.

The Committee, wishing to ask questions of the Officers relating to the delays in the Museum extension contract programme in private:-

RESOLVED:  That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business because of the likely disclosure of exempt information for the reasons specified in Minute 27 above, having applied the Public Interest Test:-

  Head of Schedule 12 A and

  Brief Description

The Committee asked questions of the Officers relating to the reasons for the additional delay in the contract programme and the likelihood of further claims.  The Committee then discussed the Council’s project management arrangements and the role of the Internal Audit Team, particularly in relation to the assessment and management of risk.

RESOLVED:

1.  That the position be noted and that arrangements be made for Members and Substitute Members of the Committee to have a tour of the construction site as it will help them to better understand the issues behind the programme delays.

2.  That the Committee wishes to continue to receive regular updates on the Museum East Wing project; specifically, the implications of the delays in the contract programme and the legal position.