0.8 Chapter six: attempting a turnaround, 1988-1992  (Page 3/19)

Programmatically speaking, Debs had galvanized her staff behind the goal of protecting the collections, which was not surprising given the nature of the pub­licity that led to the resignation of the Society's previous administration. In January, the Society announced the opening of two separate conservation labo­ratories, one for books and one for paper and manuscripts. In an article announcing the opening of the two new labs, Debs spoke about the importance of preserving the collections: "Conservation is our top priority. . . . Our collec­tions have to be restored so that they can be accessible to the public."

Working with the advisory committee during this period, Debs and her staff developed a long-term financial and programmatic plan for the Society, which was first brought to the trustees for discussion in January 1989. It should be pointed out that the first steps in this planning process had been carried out by the advi­sory committee. Options that had been rejected by the committee included the possibility of selling or otherwise divesting either the library or the museum, merg­ing with another institution, liquidation, and relocation to less expensive facilities. The committee had determined that saving the Society in something close to its present form was important. In addition, the committee was working on a new mission statement for the Society that would be "re-directed in emphasis, somewhat restricted in content, but not essentially different in kind" and had determined that the Society should remain in New York City in its present building.

Having determined these initial variables, the Society constructed what came to be known as the "bridge plan." It detailed the steps along a three-year path that would lead to institutional stability for the Society.

The bridge plan was, in a word, ambitious. The Society's stated goal was to be "a premier resource for the study and teaching of all aspects of the history of New York City, New York State and the early United States represented in our collections." Emanating from the revised mission statement and opinions expressed by the advisory committee, "the basic premise of the plan [was] that every aspect of the Society [was]considered a part of the whole, that the approach to plan­ning and programs must be comprehensive, and that every activity will be both multipurpose and multifaceted." To be successful, both the staff and the board agreed that the Society had to address three major priorities in its plan: "(1) to gain better control of its collections through comprehensive programs of con­servation, preservation, collections maintenance and management; (2) to more than double its public programming, which entails a reduced schedule of exhi­bitions but renovation of permanent galleries with installations that would demon­strate the Society's new mission; and (3) to raise $10 million in bridge financing to stabilize the Society's financial structure, support the foregoing goals, and enable the implementation of a critical $25 million endowment campaign." The basic elements of the plan were commendable; however, a closer look at the details reveals the enormous challenge that lay ahead if the bridge plan was to succeed.