News -> INDReporter MON, JUN 4 11:34AM by Walter Pierce

Short-sighted solons gut arts funding

Unable to see the tax revenue for the tourists, the Legislature has signed off on a state budget for the coming fiscal year that further reduces support for Decentralized Arts Funding and Statewide Arts Grants by about a third. House Bill 1, the roughly $25 billion state spending plan for the 2012-2013 year, included a Senate amendment that slashed state support for arts and culture by about $500,000, reducing the already paltry pickings to just under $2 million combined for DAF and SAG.

The proposed funding in HB 1, which will likely be signed today by Gov. Bobby Jindal, represents a steady and dramatic erosion in state support for arts and culture, which as a combined economic engine accounts for millions of dollars annually in tax revenue through tourism and other forms of cultural commerce. In 2009, before Jindal and state lawmakers blew a $1 billion budget surplus, combined funding for DAF and SAG was about $5 million.

The funding cut means that regional grant-distribution agencies like the Acadiana Center for the Arts will have about one third less revenue to distribute in their areas. There are nine such hubs for distributing state arts funding, the AcA included, and those agencies will have to make some difficult choices moving forward; namely, whether to distribute fewer grants or the same number of grants but in smaller amounts. Either way, one third less is one third less, and some small-town museums, festivals, community theater groups and other arts/culture agencies will no doubt be shuttered.

Gerd Wuestemann, the AcA’s executive director, says he anticipates two things as a result of the cuts: “Some of the smaller organizations that do good work, especially in the more rural areas, may have to close doors,” he says. “And I think it will result in fewer [a/c] projects and less income to the communities and less vibrancy in our lifestyle, and I think that’s a shame.”

A sham(e), indeed.

The current state of arts funding represents an unyielding assault on Louisiana culture by JindalCo, which annually proposes draconian cuts to a/c. The proposed funding level of just under $2 million is where the governor has envisioned state support for the arts. In 2009 the AcA distributed more than $230,000 to arts/culture producers in the eight-parish Acadiana region. By 2010 that level had fallen by about $30,000. But Wuestemann says even then the AcA’s distribution of arts grants made an impact: “In 2010, we distributed $200,000 that resulted in 1,500 activities — performances or shows — and employed 1,000 local artists and were seen by 200,000 people. So, if you think about that, it’s $1 per person to have access in rural areas to cultural activities. That is a phenomenal return on investment — it feeds local economies; it produces tax money for local coffers; it produces social profit and quality of life, oftentimes creating the only access to arts and culture in local parishes.”

In the coming year Wuestemann anticipates the center will have about $120,000 to spread among the many a/c groups. Proponents of robust state funding for the arts argue that such support has a significant return on investment — 7/1 by most estimates, meaning for every dollar the state invests in arts/culture it earns $7 in tax revenue from the cultural economy, tourism primarily. Unfortunately, myopic lawmakers often see arts and culture as a luxury.

“I have a feeling that with this cut we will further weaken the cultural infrastructure of the state,” Wuestemann predicts. “And I think that’ll reduce our ability to attract tourists, our ability to keep our best and brightest talents here, and in the long run I think it will endanger our communities because in my opinion culture is not just something you do in Louisiana, it’s very much more the fabric of communities; it’s our greatest tourist attraction, one of strongest export articles and I think it feeds us financially in the state.”


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (14)add
...
written by Marsha Miller , June 04, 2012 - 06:18 pm
Jindal's motto seems to be, Give me a chicken plucker over an artist any old time..."
...
written by Barbara Guidry , June 04, 2012 - 06:27 pm
my guess is that they think tourists come here to dodge drunks on our highways. Or they think tourists come here to join the drunks at the local bars.
...
written by Nicholas Bouterie , June 05, 2012 - 12:08 am
Sure, to heck with the actual State Government OBLIGATIONS (Higher Ed, health care, State Highways), let's keep full funding for a bunch of WANTS instead.
...
written by Michael A. Moss , June 05, 2012 - 12:09 pm
They have to fund the orginizations that have big pension benefits and salaries for their friends. What don't ya'll understand about that? The only art they (politicians) know is the ART OF PISSING AWAY MONEY!!
...
written by Walter Pierce , June 05, 2012 - 04:15 pm
Nicholas,
Your response is exactly what I expected: characterizing arts/culture as a "want" rather than an economic driver.
If it's true that for every dollar the state spends on arts culture it realizes a $7 return on investment through tourism, etc., how is a/c a want?
Do corporate tax subsidies offer an ROI even close to that?
...
written by Patrick Mould , June 05, 2012 - 05:20 pm
You nailed it Walter....and until the naysayers get that arts programming is also an economic engine for this community the battle will go on.
It takes a combined stream of private and public dollars to support arts efforts in our community not to mention free festivals like Festival International and Festivals Acadiens et Creoles.
These events not only contribute significantly to the economy they are also quality of life events in the sense that they bring our community together if even for a weekend to celebrate our way of life.
For a town the size of Lafayette we have as much to offer in the way of arts as a town 10 times our size and that in my opinion is worth any amount of funding that can be scraped together. It's not as much a "want" as it is a "necessity"!
...
written by Nicholas Bouterie , June 05, 2012 - 08:33 pm
Walter:

I don't agree with subsidies to businesses.

I do agree with tax breaks. I'm fine with arts groups receiving tax breaks. Many already do, whether due to non-profit status or if they fall under one of the "culture" qualifications in the state tax code.

I do not agree with subsidies. One is government actively taking public tax dollars and handing it out to prop up a business or service. One is government simply taking less of what an individual or entity has earned.

So chicken plants being handed millions in cash by our state government, I am against, just like I am against an arts council receiving millions to build a building.

Artists being exempt from paying income taxes on certain kinds of culture art they sell, I am fine with. Businesses receiving tax breaks on certain investments in Louisiana, I am fine with.
...
written by Walter Pierce , June 05, 2012 - 09:05 pm
You're consistent, Nick, and I respect that.
We'll have to agree to disagree on a/c funding. I just wish 51 percent of the Legislature agreed with ME. ;)
...
written by Nicholas Bouterie , June 05, 2012 - 11:01 pm
Over the past few years, I have come to a personal opinion that the way one views tax breaks vs. subsidies makes up much of what determines if that person is to the left or right fiscally.

Fiscal leftists view subsidies and tax breaks all in the same light.

Fiscal rightists view them as two completely different things.

Subsidies involve government handing out money it has taken from the income another individual or entity has earned in order to pick winners and losers in the market and/or to prop up a favored business/service.

Tax breaks are when government takes away less from what an individual or entity has earned from the fruits of their labor and/or personal devosion.

If government is going to take away less of an artist's earned income, I think that is wonderful. If government is going to take the taxes it forced said artist to pay from his/her income and hand it over to prop up the work of another artist, that is wrong.
...
written by Walter Pierce , June 05, 2012 - 11:18 pm
Nicholas,
I've heard the "pick winners and losers" line ad nauseum. Clearly it's a favorite on the right, because I only hear conservatives use it.
I pay city, parish, state and federal taxes for services I will never use, roads I will never drive, bridges I will never traverse. I pay taxes for wars I oppose and policies with which I disagree. Government contracts are awarded and paid for with my tax dollars to companies whose business practices I might find morally objectionable. But I pay the taxes. Money I earned is given through government to others. It's the very nature of taxes.
Two million dollars, which state a/c funding has been whittled down to, will buy about two miles of four-lane highway. To me, investing in a/c is a wise use of my money because of the revenue it generates via the cultural economy (tourism especially) for the state to cover the very obligations about which you are so worried, not to mention the financial boon to small, locally owned businesses.

...
written by craig spikes , June 06, 2012 - 11:15 am
Walter:
Your problem is, (at least one of them) is that you have no faith in people. You think that for anything to thrive and succeed, it needs governmental assistance. Arts and culture is extremely important in this area and can succeed quite well with private donations, corporate sponsorships and the occasional tax break or incentive. Beucause of the very subjective nature of what constitutes art in the first place, the private sector, not my tax dollars, should be the avenue for its success.
...
written by Nicholas Bouterie , June 06, 2012 - 12:32 pm
Bingo, Craig. You would have made a fine councilman.
...
written by Walter Pierce , June 06, 2012 - 02:48 pm
So, Craig, you don't want your tax dollars funding arts/culture. That's your prerogative and I respect it.
I would rather a greater percentage of my taxes go to arts/culture and less/none to the rural roads and bridges in Lafayette. I never use them and my taxes are basically subsidizing the lifestyle choice (living in "the country") of people who must by necessity drive a lot more on a daily basis and thereby make a greater-than-average contribution to air pollution.
Fortunately we make choices about how our taxes are distributed in a democratic fashion, not as individuals, and underwriting the arts is a choice this community, state and nation have long made. I wish the funding levels were higher, but they are what they are and they'll rise and fall according to the will of people and their elected representatives.
Slashing arts funding locally or by the state won't affect me much here in the city, but it will mean diminished access for those -- children especially -- in poor, rural parishes where there is no private-sector support for the arts.
Don't hate the poor children, Craig and Nicholas.


...
written by Michael A. Moss , June 06, 2012 - 11:38 pm
Walter, I like it when you stand up to the followers of the Pied Piper!!
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it