My favorite season is fast approaching. I love the competition. The high stakes. The last-minute decision-making. I’m talking, of course, about budget season. (What season were you thinking?!)
The debate beginning in August over Indianapolis’ next municipal budget will be intriguing. No doubt, public safety will be priority one, as it should be. But funding for arts programs should not be far behind.
With cities across America facing major fiscal challenges, how can arts funding even be a consideration, let alone a priority? Simple economics.
In a world where smart, talented individuals are placing a higher priority on location rather than job, we need to continue to build Indy’s reputation as a hub for arts and culture. As policy-makers focus on leveraging Central Indiana’s strong cluster of health care and life sciences assets to position our region as a global player, we must keep in mind that the arts could be a deciding factor for that young med school grad looking for a culturally rich community where he or she can settle in and make a difference.
This argument is more than anecdotal. Numbers back up the fact that the arts are becoming a major economic driver (check out this economic impact study that, among other things, shows the arts bring a half-billion dollars into the local economy).
So, fellow bloggers, do you think our elected officials should make arts funding a priority?
Posts
Key to my disappointment with the chaotic city government situation (and it is chaotic) is that city leaders ( both parties) listen to each other and really only report and lecture to the cultural community. There are some amazing minds in the cultural community that should be invited to the table, not to be lectured to and told to “think outside the box” among other cliches…or that we need to be reminded that public safety “is job one” We read the papers, we run businesses, we know. Our lives, private and public might just be more impacted by public safety issues than the lives of elected officials…or that experiences cultural leaders face in dealing with budget challenges, working with the development of new revenue sources, managing the economic climate, constantly adapating programming to respond to a fluid public, etc might just place the leaders of arts and cultural organizations in a more appropriate position than elected officials to help work toward alternatives, solutions and defense of the city’s investment in cultural endeavors and other priorities as well. Elected officials have certainly indicated that they will, in the guise of doing “the hard thing” do the easy thing (cut funding) and use the easy political out of not solving the issue, rather, eliminating it.
Simon, Max, Janet, Joyce, John, Elise, Glen, Helen, Mario, David, Mike, Jeff, and countless others, the city really does appreciate you, love that you’re here and wish you the best, but simply cannot find a way to help you. But we hope you stay and continue to do the great work you do…but with fewer dollars because we cannot find a way to help. Impressive message from our leaders and coming, frankly, from both sides of the chaotic political aisle.
Justin,
You are right on target about the impact of the arts in attracting and keeping professionals in the city. More people attend arts events each year than professional sporting events (which shouldn’t be forgotten in this Super Bowl climate). While I couldn’t agree more that arts and culture need to be a continued priority for Indianapolis, I think the reason should have less to do with economics in favor of focusing on the public safety and civic contributions it provides.
In addition to the economic impact (which intuitively I suspect comes largely from the top 10 institutions of the 63 surveyed), the arts play a role in increasing academic performance, reducing juvenile crime and providing meaningful enrichment opportunities. According to the Arts Council, more than 1.6 million students participate in an arts program each year. National research suggests a correlation between exposure to the arts and increased graduation rates. What’s more, through city funding, many organizations provide programs in juvenile justice centers, correctional facilities, community centers, etc. most of the time for FREE. If funding dries up, many of those organizations will be forced to retreat to their core schedule of performances rather than continue this expensive outreach.
It’s shouldn’t be an either-or arguement. We support public safety efforts because we support the arts, and we should encourage funding for both. Here’s a novel idea - let’s move arts funding into the public safety budget to acknowledge the crime-reducing, community-building and educational benefits it provides.
In a city where we are willing to do the “reprehensible”, increase taxes, in order to fund a new football stadium one wonders about the priorities of not only the government but the people backing the decisions made by these elected officials. I understand that the pot-o-cash by which all of the funding is given is not refilled hourly by a parade of leprechauns toting buckets of gold; however, I personally would rather see funding go to the arts rather than feeding the community of “Peyton Rules” sign toting, white-and-blue belly-painted, fans high fiving over the crack of helmets. I can almost hear the shouts of “Did you see that hit? Man it looked like it hurt. Awesome.” I understand that these fans do buy things…foam fingers, beer, jerseys…but it seems like we, as a city, could have continued the revenue stream of the sports fans with the old stadium, and increased the overall appeal of the city by taking the stadium funding and putting it toward the arts.
What a great topic to think about and spend time discussing! I will take a different spin on this… as a PARENT of young children, I hope that arts and culture remain a priority for our city not only for my sake, but especially for theirs! Indy is blessed with many different outlets to help us expose our children to different arts and cultures and I hope that the budget will reflect the importance of that!
*Starting sarcastic slow clap*
Well done Pam. Way to enlighten the conversation by painting sports fans in such a non-stereotypical light. This is typical of the elitist us-vs-them view of so-called arts enthusiasts. Because people enjoy sports they can’t be educated or informed; they must be cheap-beer-swilling-nacho-cheese-eating-couch-potatoes who can’t appreciate a watercolor or aria because they’re too simple minded. Insults are a great way to bring people into the fold of art appreciation.
The truth is, you can point to your economic impact study (conveniently put together by the arts community) and its $468 million impact but know that number is a mere .7% of the city’s 6o+ Billion total economic activity. Yes the arts are underfunded but perhaps the arts make it hard on themselves by insulting large portions of the population – who happen to be the constituents your legislators have to please to get re-elected. My question is, “Why do patrons of the arts, such as yourself, feel the need to act superior to those who’d rather do something else with their Friday night?”
Pam, with all due respect, sports and Lucas Oil Stadium are not the villains when it comes to arts funding. And please understand that the new stadium is not just a football stadium, but a multi-purpose building capable of hosting conventions, meetings and events, including some that will no doubt be arts-related. And that old stadium needed to be razed so the convention center could be expanded in continued support of the hospitality industry that brings 22 million visitors who spend $3.5 billion annually and produce $800 million each year in tax revenues.
This debate is not about sports versus arts, but creating an evnironment in which both can thrive for the benefit of our community at large.
Without the football team in town, Indianapolis would not be the growing giant that it is becoming. New facilities such as the Conseco Fieldhouse and Lucas Oil Stadium not only help in bringing the regular season basketball and football events, but it also helps attract massive events such as the NCAA Final 4 tourney, the Pan Am Games, large corporate conventions, and now the SuperBowl. These are the things that have helped this area grow and will continue to do so. I don’t think anyone can truely appreciate our local facilities because so many people and business truely benefit from their existance.
With that said, I am very much a supporter of the Arts and feel that our government needs to find that money to continue its’ support(without affecting other important areas). As many readers have already mentioned, people really do consider the culture of the area before they move into areas now, it’s not always about the job location any longer. Growing the Arts will be an important part of the next few years for Indianapolis.
Lisa - Thanks for your very thoughtful response. Your overall point is excellent. It should not necessarily have to be a choice between public safety and funding for the arts. Both are essential components of healthy, progressive communities and both are worth funding with taxpayer dollars.
Also, the role the arts play in the education of our young people is critical — and too often, arts are the first programs cut in tight public school budgets.
Though I did not note this in my blog, the city’s annual expenditure for arts programs is only about $1.5 million. With a budget of over a billion dollars for the city/county combined, arts funding is pocket change, relatively speaking. And the return on investment –the 15,000 plus jobs, $52 million in tax revenue generated — is huge.
A question for Lisa and other bloggers — should we be talking about actually increasing the funding for the arts?
Interesting comments from all on what should be a unifying subject. Regardless of the insults and sarcasm so thick you could cut it with a knife, the issue remains that if we as a community deem the arts as important or even close to as-important as things such as football then perhaps the funding should be appropriately divided. If we are truly defining how funding should be divided by things such as economic contribution toward the city, then what would the % divide be then? Obviously not 50/50 Football/Arts, but I would venture to guess that the gap would be significantly closer. If we are not talking about defining where the funding goes by economic contribution, then what should it be based upon? Passion? I think there is a case for both here. The forum to unify families? Yep, they both win on that. Educational benefits? Some might argue the arts have a leg up (the previously mentioned “elitists”, but I would say they certainly both have benefits. Whether a nacho-inhaling fan or an “I don’t drink Merlot” art enthusiast, we should all agree that the division of funds should be more rational.
Pam, one last time. It’s not about football/arts. LOS is not just a football stadium (10 to 12 dates a year out of 200). Likewise, Conseco Fieldhouse is not just a basketball venue.
And as much as you might like it, young kids are not wearing Mario Venzago jerseys around town (and I LOVE the ISO).
Oh, and the sarcasm began with your post.
Wow! To use a football analogy — which apparently Pam would not appreciate, it looks like there’s an old fashioned pile on underway.
I’ll say one thing in Pam’s defense — the debate over tax-payer funded sports stadiums is one where good arguments can be made on both sides. Unfortunately, Pam’s post deals more with the “sports fan” stereotype and doesn’t really touch on quality arguments that could support her case
But hey, big props for starting a firestorm conversation, which is what we’re trying to do here.
As one of those people who “backed” a government official (Mayor Peterson) supporting the funding plan for the new stadium, I’ll just say this and then try to steer us back on topic.
Lucas Oil Stadium will be one of the biggest-ever economic boons to Central Indiana. As Bill pointed out, you have to look at the two projects (stadium and convention center) as a package. After all is said and done, Central Indiana will see a $2.25 billion economic benefit over 10 years and more than 10,000 jobs will have been created because of the new stadium and convention center. That doesn’t even take into account the $250 million economic surge heading our way due to the 2012 Super Bowl — something that would not have been possible with the RCA Dome.
The stadium is now built and convention center construction is set to begin — thanks to the vision and leadership of our city and state leaders. So that debate, while interesting, is somewhat old news here.
I would challenge Pam and others to really delve into the topic at hand — is it really worth your hard-earned tax dollars to fund the arts? Or, as crime and education continue to be a challenge in our community and other cities across the nation, are our priorities misplaced in funding the arts.
We are seeing all kinds of classes, including art, gym, music and other specialty classes, cut from a normal school day all over the country. These classes serve as an outlet for kids and without those outlets they try to find anything to pass the time. It seems like now they turn to crime, drug use and other adult activities that get them into trouble.
I wish there was funding to save these types of programs earlier and not create the type of society where we give youth no other outlets to occupy their time. Then we sit around and wonder why crime is on the rise. It’s just sad that we often think of the here and now and not how decisions will impact future generations. Cutting art funding may have seemed like a good solution for schools who needed to save money, but at what cost?
P.S. Yes, I realize that the new stadium has and will bring in a lot of revenue to the city. With property tax hiked, many people are struggling to keep their homes. Many have had to put their homes up for sale in an economy that is going downhill, for what? For a stadium they can’t afford to buy tickets at?
You make a good point CW but I think it should go a step further. We don’t simply need to keep funding music and art in school, we need to properly fund education.
Day after day teachers in this country dig into their own pockets, which aren’t filled substantially in the first place, to buy supplies for their classrooms. Classes are overcrowded and underfunded and we continue to wonder why our schools are failing. We’ve dictated success lies in scantron bubble sheets so now curriculum is directed to those multiple choice tests.
I’m lucky in the fact that my children go to a great elementary school in a very good district for elementary schools. But my wife and I are starting to have serious discussions about what to do in two years when our daughter enters sixth grade. Our township middle schools are less adequate and the stories we’re hearing from neighbors with kids in high school are scaring us to death. If this country is to thrive, we have to put our money where our future is, in education. If we do that, we’ll see crime decrease and appreciation, demand and funding for the arts increase.
The question isn’t as easy as sports versus arts, though I agree with Pam and Steven that our priorities as a nation are out of whack. But back to the issue of funding: I’m concerned that Indianapolis, like so many other cities, is staking too much on the combination of sports and convention space. Convention attendance overall has been on the decline for years, as people start to use teleconferencing and Webinars as less expensive ways to “meet.” Plenty of other cities have good convention spaces, too–plus oceans and mountains to add to their allure as a convention destination. Would we as a city rather attract a conventioneer to drop in for a few days, or lure an entrepreneurial scientist to make Indianapolis home for years, and bring his or her company and jobs with them? Sports makes people pay attention to Indy, but culture makes people want to live here. Sports can be a part of that culture, but we shouldn’t bet everything on them.
CW- Your post certainly spells out why arts funding means much more than just jobs and tax revenue. It’s critical to the health and education of young people. And as Lisa mentioned, there’s data supporting the link between participation in the arts and higher graduation rates.
Great post. Keep the comments coming. With all the pro-arts sentiment, I am curious when/if the anti-arts funding bloggers are going to weigh in.
P.S. Not that I am trying to get back to the issue of the stadium (though Pam would really like that), I just thought you and other bloggers should know that not a single penny of property taxes went to fund the stadium. Both the stadium and convention center were funded through a combination of hikes in the food and beverage tax, auto rental and hotel taxes and admission taxes.
Call me old-fashioned, but whenever the city is held hostage to build a new stadium by Jim Irsay (remember when he flirted with moving the team elsewhere?) I have to believe he is the biggest welfare father in the state. Do I like the Colts? You bet. They have been a terrific addition to the city and their economic benefit is undeniable. But public funding of a private enterprise (remember, we the people don’t own a single share in the Colts) just seems wrong. Jimmy Boy didn’t cough up anything other than agreeing to hang around for a few more years and treat us to the occasional solo guitar performance. Oh, and to be completely honest, I help fund the arts and spend a significant amount of my free time creating glass art. My personal view is this needs to be funded by the private sector, not the public. I would much rather have safer streets, roads without craters in the spring, bridges not at risk of collapse, and public schools equal to what I had when I was younger. Confident in the stewardship of my tax dollars, I would be more than happy to increase my funding of the arts.
Setting the record straight: Jim Irsay never “flirted” with any other city about moving the Colts and steadfastly denied any such speculation that popped up in the media. Irsay repeatedly said his only desire was to keep the Colts here. His commitment to Indianapolis is for far more than a few years … I believe 30 is the correct number. Irsay and the Colts also contributed millions to the construction. Without looking up the number, it was way, way more than the nothing you allege. Furthermore, whether you agree with it or not, public funding of private enterprise is commonplace not just in this country, but around the world. I would wager there’s not a large city in the country that has built multi-purpose of sports venues without some kind of public funding mechanism. Totally private financing is rare. Here, we’ve chosen the food and beverage tax as the primary source. I’m happy to put forth a couple of pennies per dollar on my restaurant or bar tab for the benefits our community receives in return.
In my mind, the only proper model for sport or entertainment venues is embodied by the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Not a dime of my tax money goes there or ever went there. Just because everyone else uses a different means of financing doesn’t make it right. And for the record, regardless of what the Colts have put in, we the people have funded the vast majority. Granted, Irsay is not an Art Modell or an Al Davis, but you cannot be so naieve as to believe there was not some serious arm-twisting over a new stadium. Are we better off with a new stadium or better schools? My vote is to let those who will personally reap millions do so the way the Hulman family has — on their own without feeding at the public trough.
Then you better move to the moon and start your own town. The horses are way out of the barn.
And it’s not a question of a new stadium OR better schools. I want both. But you could throw $700 million at IPS and it wouldn’t solve the fundamental issues of urban (or even suburban) education.
Tell me, Ric, just where does this Utopia exist? Where is your model American city where the h.s. graduation rates are 100 percent, entertainment venues are 100 percent privately financed, where the budgets are always balanced, where the streets are always perfectly paved (preferably with gold)?
Where is it, Ric? Let us know so we can all move there.
Bil, easy on the coffee, pal, as you’re getting a bit too agitated for a civil discourse. You also seem to have ignored the one concrete example (i.e., the Indianapolis Motor Speedway) supporting my thesis versus yours of “everybody else is doing it so it must be right.” My point is simply the public funding of a private enterprise with NO direct payback to the taxpayers while the owners enrich themselves is not something which should be a priority when there are many other things going lacking. I believe Dr. White would have a bit of a different take on the IPS problem you so casually dismissed, too.
Bill and Rick have opened the door to exit this figure eight I can’t resist jumping on the chance to speak to the real topic. Educational funding. The arts are without a question important. Boosting the city’s economy is important, but over all of this education should get the most out of the budget. Without a question increased funding will equate to higher quality supplies, teachers, after school programs (and by the way, increased art programs within the school…and maybe even better high school football teams”.
Rk, Dr. White was an integral presenter of the Super Bowl bid, which wouldn’t have happened without LOS. Dr. White also clearly knows that money is not the panacea for all that ails IPS and education in general.
As for IMS, the Hulman-George family is much to be admired. But the auto racing dynamic is quite different than MLB, NFL or NBA. The other posters are bored with our give and take, but you know as well as I the Speedway is a different animal.
Now, Rk, answer my question: where’s that Utopia?
And back to the original question, absolutely arts education and arts within the community should be funded.
The reason we got off course is that Pam, and then Rk, want to cast our investment in sports/multi-purpose facilities as the bad guy. It ain’t so.
Dare I step into this eye of the storm? Being conflict averse as a rule, I’ll just add a few cents (which will likely be slightly off topic). I’ve lived in Indianapolis for a total of 15 years. Interspersed in there I lived for another 5 in another large city, one with a concentration on arts, sports, recreation, and many other things that make it a beautiful place to visit and live. I’ve participated in a program here in Indy in which I’ve been exposed to two days of tours and speeches by city leaders. I go to plays more often than sporting events, but I watch our sports on TV (you can see the 50-yard-line better). I work downtown where the “badge-people” abound.
There will NEVER be enough money to go around, we all know that. And I’m concerned about all the things we’ve talked about here - crime, niche funding, potholes, education… But what I see in my city today is a far-reaching, long-viewed, concerted and constant effort by inummerable proud volunteers and elected officials to turn Indianapolis into both a great destination city and a great place to live. As long as we continue to be deliberate in that effort, and hang onto the causes we all love and support, can we lose?
(And now, I should probably step out of the middle of the road.)
To Karen’s point, when there is never enough money to go around then when does it become important enough to either increase taxes or make things like the arts more important? I’m going to avoid the obvious reference to the stadium taxes to avoid a “firestorm” and rather say, when the appeal of the arts is obvious to draw dwellers into the city, people who will LIVE in the city and contribute to the economy for years to come, will we ever be able to put a number on said appeal? There are so many variables and little all-encompassing research to support what we all know. Being able to make concrete a figure that is not really definable then is it worth pursuing? Will the city ever listen to casual observations? I don’ t think so
Fellow bloggers - This week’s IBJ confirms the city’s investment in the arts is likely on the chopping block with deep budget cuts forthcoming. Check out the link below to this week’s IBJ article.
http://www.ibj.com/html/detail_page_Full.asp?content=18120
It’s clear with the city’s fiscal situation, hard decisions have to be made and there are tradeoffs for every decision. So if funding for the arts is a high priority, which I and most others believe on this blog, then where would you look to make cuts in the city’s budget?
I have a thought, maybe there should exist some sort of a prioritization poll. On the far left there might exist a column that shows all of the options for where our tax money goes, the middle section indicating current allocation, and on the right we could all indicate by percentage what money should go where. I would be curious to see who would decrease $ for things like education and arts when they were the ones in charge. It is easy for all of us to be critics until we have to see what we are taking away from.
As for me, I say keep public safety and education toward the top of the food chain and spread out the property taxes across other counties other than Marion. I don’t live in Marion county, but I still benefit from the appeal of the city (drive on the streets, go downtown for dinner, etc); therefore, I would be happy (okay, maybe not happy, but wouldn’t complain) if I had my property tax increased a bit. I believe that the property tax increase would have been much more palatable if it would have been spread across Marion and all surrounding counties.
RE: Amy’s post about a prioritization poll, I stumbled across an online poll that was put together prior to the 2008 budget hearings (I’m assuming). Take a look: http://survey.indygov.org/cccbudget08. Justin, do you know who this was sent to and what was done with the responses? Based on the conversation here, I find it interesting that leisure and education were one category - at the bottom of the survey. As others have commented, our city (state, nation) seems to pay more attention after-the-fact, re-active solutions rather than to proactive programs that can prevent crime, poverty, etc. Having said that, I don’t know what you can cut ,Justin, without temendous public outcry and potential fear.
I checked out the link that Lisa posted and it is enlightening in that it would be very hard to choose from where to take (or reallocate) the funding; it would even be heartbreaking in some instances to decrease funding in areas noted. I am going to go out on a limb and point out the funding for the Marion County Fair…yes, I know, it would not be nearly enough money unless the funding for elephant ears is more than what my common mind would guess…how about the coroner’s office? Sadly enough, it seems as if this poll designed to make sure that politicians align their policy choices with the masses has articulated that we are already a lean machine. The only option seems to be to raise taxes.
Amy’s post reminded me of an online game I once saw where you attempt to balance the National budget. You get to reallocate in any way you choose and it discusses pros and cons of your decisions. Give it a shot, it isn’t easy. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/features/budget_hero/