North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Kevin Cherry, Deputy Secretary Date: July 15, 2020 To: Members of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources From: Kevin Cherry, Deputy Secretary for Archives and History, North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Re: Feasibility Study for the Creation of a North Carolina Textile Museum Pursuant to Session Law 2019-118, the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources is pleased to submit the report from the feasibility study for the creation of a North Carolina Textile Museum. This study was conducted by the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources’ Office of Archives and History. The Office of Archives and History is composed of the divisions of State History Museums, State Historic Sites and Properties, Historical Resources, Archives and Records, Battleship North Carolina, and Tryon Palace Historic Sites and Gardens. The report reviewed proposed sites in Harnett and Randolph Counties, recommending the latter, and makes recommendations for a phased development approach to the creation of the museum. The report bases its recommendations on information gathered from in-depth site visits, stakeholder interviews, and comparisons with similar museums. For more than thirty years, the Office of Archives and History has attempted to create an institution that tells the story of textiles in the life of the state. Few other institutions had as much impact upon the state as did this industry. The proposal of the Randolph Heritage Association, with its historic factory and nationally renowned textile equipment collection, is the best opportunity ever presented to the state to make a textile museum possible. As much as the department would like to address the lack of a textile museum in its public history offerings, it respectfully asks that the General Assembly not add an institution to the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources without fully funding its operation. Failing to do so would inevitably lead to poorer service provided by current institutions in the department. Estimated expenses are included in the study for each phase of the development. The North Carolina Office of Archives and History respectfully transmits this report on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources on this day, July 15, 2020. MAILING ADDRESS LOCATION 4610 Mail Service Center Telephone: 919-814-6640 109 East Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27699-4610 Raleigh, NC 27601 JLOCANER Textile Museum Letter July 15, 2020 Page Two Sincerely, Kevin Cherry MAILING ADDRESS LOCATION 4610 Mail Service Center Telephone: 919-814-6640 109 East Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27699-4610 Raleigh, NC 27601 North Carolina Textile Museum Feasibility Study 1 Committee Members Dr. Kevin Cherry (Chair) Deputy Secretary and Director, North Carolina Office of Archives and History Jeff Adolphsen Senior Restoration Specialist, North Carolina Historic Preservation Office Dr. Joseph Beatty Research Supervisor, North Carolina Office of Archives and History Dr. Benjamin Filene Chief Curator, North Carolina Museum of History Ken Howard Director, North Carolina Museum of History John Mintz State Archaeologist, North Carolina Office of State Archaeology Brett Sturm Restoration Specialist, North Carolina Historic Preservation Office 2 Contents Executive Summary Importance of the Textile Industry to North Carolina Background and Methodology Charge Committee Selection Methodology General Philosophy for a Textile Production and Industrial History Museum Desired Components of a State Textile Museum Textile Heritage Network Site Selection Consideration of Randolph Heritage Conservancy, Inc. Holdings Consideration of Town of Erwin Holdings Summary Comparison of Sites Further Recommendations Phased Development Staffing Estimated Recurring Non-Staff-Related Costs Textile Museum in Departmental Structure Steps Toward Interpreting Mill Village Life Collecting Now Before It Is Gone Advisory Council Development of Museum within a Natural Setting Conclusion Appendixes A. ASME Landmark Collection Textile Machinery Collection Brochure B. Brief History of ATHM C. Cedar Falls Timeline D. FCAP Report E. Erwin Commercial District National Register 3 Executive Summary It is desirable for the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources to create a museum to interpret the history of textile production using the real property and collections of the Randolph Heritage Conservancy, given the appropriate level of one-time and continuing resources. The North Carolina Office of Archives and History was directed, pursuant to Senate Bill 525 (2019), to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a textile museum to interpret the state’s textile production and industrial history. Specifically, the Office of Archives and History (OAH) was directed to “evaluate the real property and textile collection held by the Randolph Heritage Conservancy, Inc., located in the Town of Franklinville, to determine the feasibility of its use in establishing a State historic site or State museum” and to “evaluate and determine the feasibility of establishing the Erwin Textile Museum, located in the Town of Erwin in Harnett County, as a State historic site or State museum to interpret the State's textile production and industrial history.” The Office of Archives and History has long acknowledged the need for a state museum, historic site, or combination to preserve and interpret the history of textile manufacturing and labor in North Carolina. Since the 1980s, several attempts have been made to establish a state textile museum, although none of these came to fruition, primarily due to lack of ongoing state appropriation. During the same time period, several local organizations proposed or developed their own exhibits and programs, including, for example, the Town of Erwin, the village of Glencoe, the Randolph Heritage Conservancy, Cooleemee Textile Heritage Center, Kannapolis History Associates, and the Kessel History Center at Loray Mill. Many of these have sought to become a 4 part of the Department of Cultural (later Natural and Cultural) Resources or, at least, partner with the department to operate such a facility. The study committee developed criteria to evaluate the two candidate organizations—taking into account their unique collections, facilities, and locations—against the goals of a textile museum for the state. In considering the factors discussed in the attached report, the committee finds that the collection of the Randolph Heritage Conservancy, Inc. (RHC) and its real property located in Cedar Falls, a non-incorporated community just outside Franklinville, in Randolph County, provides a more feasible basis for a state textile museum than the property and collection of the Erwin Textile Museum in Harnett County. RHC holds a large collection of machinery and artifacts as well as a historic mill facility in a location central to the state. The Erwin Textile Museum has an established collection of textile-related artifacts; but its collection includes no machinery and has no facility sufficient to house a state textile museum. The feasibility of establishing this new museum, however, depends upon meeting several criteria. Because none currently exists, the Office of Archives and History would need to create an administrative structure of management, staff, and procedures to operate the textile museum. The museum would not need to assemble a new collection of textile machinery, as RHC holds a unique, national-caliber collection of textile equipment and documents, which formerly belonged to the American Textile History Museum (ATHM) in Lowell, Massachusetts. When ATHM closed in 2016, it transferred much of its museum collections to RHC. This fact could help reduce the cost, labor, and time of creating a new textile museum. Still, the committee recommends that the museum seek out and acquire more signature North Carolina elements for its collection, as well as a broader range of artifacts that would help interpret the life of textile worker families and other aspects of the textile industry separate from manufacturing (advertisements, etc.). RHC owns a 150,000-square- foot mill facility on the Deep River in Cedar Falls in Randolph County. The structure encompasses much of North Carolina’s textile history: its oldest section dates to the 1840s, and its most recent addition was in the 1980s. This mill is located in one of the state’s early textile centers. The very fact 5 that a collection of artifacts of national significance is located in a former mill that itself reflects more than 180 years of textile history and which just happens to be located in one of the state’s early industrial centers is difficult to ignore. The mill building’s physical plant is in need of repair and improvement. It will require a new roof, HVAC repair or replacement, and a range of modifications that would be expected to convert an industrial facility into a public space. Altogether, these improvements would require significant investment in time and capital before the building could become operational within the state system. RHC has stated its intent to transfer this facility and most of its artifact holdings to the state before transforming itself into a support group with some of its own retained operations in a separate, nearby facility, which it owns. The committee recommends a phased approach to creating