Charlotte Arts Master Plan

[atlrvr]

I was more generally speaking to the fact that many people who reside outside Charlotte feel that the city offers no benefits to them, and only to its citizens alone.....

It was more tongue and cheek directed at isolantionists.

[ElricSeven]

I was more generally speaking to the fact that many people who reside outside Charlotte feel that the city offers no benefits to them, and only to its citizens alone.....

It was more tongue and cheek directed at isolantionists.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, I was adding to the tongue-in-cheek suggestions with the most obvious one of all. Make the ASC support itself.

As far as commuters, it is worse in Pittsburgh where they don't have annexation. The 'burg is surrounded by a bunch of lower-tax paying boroughs that everyone commutes into downtown from. Pittsburgh proper is actually very small. This means they're always bankrupt from paying for everyone else's civic facilities. They've got some kind of employment tax to make up for it, I think.

[dubone]

How about they just charge for the tickets what it costs to maintain the place?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i think they are planning to do this in some form, as they are needing to take over their operations costs.

the problem is that higher forms of art and culture can never support themselves, and have always required patronage from wealthy entities (either the consolidated wealth of the masses through NGOs like united way or through government, for the actual wealth of wealthy). Arts are intended to enlighten society... but as with all things that are 'healthy' and 'good', people aren't usually willing to pay for it. Just like how poor parents fight tooth and nail against teachers requiring their kids to purchase a literary book (which typically cost less than 5 dollars) to read over summer, but those parents will give their kids 10 bucks many times over to watch summer movies. There is a reason that McDonalds is the most successful restaurant, walmart is the most successful retailer, suburban sprawl is the most successful community type, SUVs are the most successful transportation type, and so on.

Subsidies and patronage allow for healthy and interesting things in our society to survive, even while all else in society spiral down to the most base, boring and banal.

[atlrvr]

So are you suggesting that movie theatres should donate a free movie ticket to any student who buys a summer reading book from the school?

[ElricSeven]

i think they are planning to do this in some form, as they are needing to take over their operations costs.

the problem is that higher forms of art and culture can never support themselves, and have always required patronage from wealthy entities (either the consolidated wealth of the masses through NGOs like united way or through government, for the actual wealth of wealthy).  Arts are intended to enlighten society... but as with all things that are 'healthy' and 'good', people aren't usually willing to pay for it.  Just like how poor parents fight tooth and nail against teachers requiring their kids to purchase a literary book (which typically cost less than 5 dollars) to read over summer, but those parents will give their kids 10 bucks many times over to watch  summer movies.  There is a reason that McDonalds is the most successful restaurant, walmart is the most successful retailer, suburban sprawl is the most successful community type, SUVs are the most successful transportation type, and so on. 

Subsidies and patronage allow for healthy and interesting things in our society to survive, even while all else in society spiral down to the most base, boring and banal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps, though, it is best to let those things sort themselves out without government intervention. Having the government not subsidize cultural venues might lead to us valuing them more and not expecting them as an entitlement. If people don't want cultural activities, we shouldn't thrust them upon them. I enjoy a good movie as much as good theatre and see nothing distinguishing them except for how long the two venues have existed.

[dubone]

So are you suggesting that movie theatres should donate a free movie ticket to any student who buys a summer reading book from the school?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

lol... i wasn't suggesting that, but it wouldn't be half bad.

i think the most fair "tax" to pay for arts would be a ticket tax for all entertainment. The entertaining arts, then, could subsidize the enlightening arts. That way the arena people, the movie people, that rock concert people will help the ballets, the plays, and the symphonies stay in business.

[monsoon]

The problem with that is Art is often in the eye of the beholder. What is art to one is garbage to anoother. There are those elitists who think they are the judge of what art should be and as a result are deserving of taxpayer money. That is expecially ironic since they also consider the average taxpayer to be incapiable of enjoying what they judge to be "art" and that these people are just are too common and too plain to appreciate their choices. This is hardly democratic and it is the very reason that I don't support taxing the people to pay for art under any circumstances.

A couple of cases in point in Charlotte. UNCC paid a quarter of a million dollars of tax money a long time ago (it would be closer to 3/4 million now) to purchase some "art". This turned out to be some aluminium squares painted yellow. The school was so embarrased by the end result, this art has been relagated to a dark corner of the grounds, and has gone unnoticed for more than a decade. How many kids could have gotten an education with this money instead?

We have some shrubs at the old colseum that is considered art. I don't see it myself. There is better looking stuff at Disneyland and nobody is claiming that is fine art. How much city money was wasted on that? At least they did not build that god awful gumby instead.

[atlrvr]

You're right, it isn't democratic, but we live in a republic. Therefore we elect leaders who decide what is the most prudent way to spend our money. If you are not satisfied with your representation, then only vote for officials that most closely share your views.....or move to Vermont and enjoy the democracy of town meetings.

Typically though the opposing minority becomes the voting majority, which is why the arena/arts referendum failed, and I would hope the city would be smart enough to never go through the referendum process again.

[dubone]

Perhaps, though, it is best to let those things sort themselves out without government intervention.  Having the government not subsidize cultural venues might lead to us valuing them more and not expecting them as an entitlement.  If people don't want cultural activities, we shouldn't thrust them upon them.  I enjoy a good movie as much as good theatre and see nothing distinguishing them except for how long the two venues have existed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

governments exist to protect people from themselves. without compulsory education, kids would not go to school. without speed limits and seatbelt laws, traffic fatalities would skyrocket.

In the case of the arts, the primary responsibility is for wealthy private entities to support them, but the government plays a role in it, as it plays a role in almost every aspect of life where general society benefits. If government is involved in pumping up the economic life of a community through subsidies for jobs, etc., then certainly they should be involved in subsidizing the arts and sciences.

(my position in this debate probably sounds a lot more serious than my actual concern for this stuff, by the way , i've only been to the belk theatre once in the 4 years i lived here).

[monsoon]

You're right, it isn't democratic, but we live in a republic.  Therefore we elect leaders who decide what is the most prudent way to spend our money.  If you are not satisfied with your representation, then only vote for officials that most closely share your views.....or move to Vermont and enjoy the democracy of town meetings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Indeed. The people that I have voted for will save the people from this fiasco.

[ElricSeven]

governments exist to protect people from themselves.

[eastsider]

We have some shrubs at the old colseum that is considered art.  I don't see it myself.  There is better looking stuff at Disneyland and nobody is claiming that is fine art.  How much city money was wasted on that?  At least they did not build that god awful gumby instead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The shrubs on the Coliseums' front lawn cost $340,000. I forgot all about the gumby thing, but yeah that was bad.

[dubone]

i think in the social contract that defines our democratic government, we expressly tell them they can't protect us from damnation in the next life, but we want them to protect us from damnation in this life.

I agree that is a lesser calling of government to save our cultural and economic health vs our physical health and safety.... but it is still a calling that we rely on them for. at one time, policing and fire protection were private responsibilities, as were schools, libraries, museums, transit, and even roads. Societies started realizing that if they pooled the resources through the government to invest in those things, the society benefitted greatly, especially the lower classes that would otherwise not have access.

it might be communistic and national-socialistic to heavily invest in culture in order to solidify power... but in a democratic state, we rely on government investments in culture to provide a forum for free expression, and a legal system that protects from improper influence of the government over the content of that expression.

[monsoon]

$340,000 for some shrubs.

I think they would have gotte a better deal if they had built a statue of Darth BoBo.

[ElricSeven]

it might be communistic and national-socialistic to heavily invest in culture in order to solidify power... but in a democratic state, we rely on government investments in culture to provide a forum for free expression, and a legal system that protects from improper influence of the government over the content of that expression.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The issue here, though, is not free expression but subsidization of a particular type of expression. There has to be a dividing line somewhere, that's where I call it. I just think that promoting the public good should end before it reaches the arts. There is just too much choice and tast involved for my comfort.

Is this horse dead yet?

[monsoon]

Is this horse dead yet?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well no. We are still waiting on what the politicians will do. However my guess is the ASC needs to start dusting off their phonebook so they can find some other cow to milk.

[atlrvr]

The problem in my eyes is that they want to do too much at once, and that they want to find just one public source of funding.

This would be my strategy if I were running the show.

Building the Betchler Museum and new Theatre first as part of the Wachovia development and do not include the Mint. A majority of this could be paid for through pseudo-TIFs. The Mint should move when BofA is able to develop the 7th St. block, and a space should be included for the museum.

Discovery Place could have phased renovations over a 5-7 year period. The African American cultural center can be included in whatever Furman is cooking up in 1st Ward, as a TIF deal, but it would make sense that this would become a wing of the Mint. It would seem like it is the lowest priority for a few reasons.

1. There is already a museum Uptown.

2. A stand alone museum will likely not draw a large non-black attendence.

3. It seems that the city is playing racial politics, especially since this new museum would have little to do with black history, and instead discount these works as not being from "good enough" artists to be displayed in a museum displaying artists from all backgrounds.

As far as funding, besides TIFs, I think a lot of the public money could be distributed better.

1. 1 cent increase in Car Rental instead of 5 cent.

2. 5 cent daily fee on all uptown parking spaces.

3. 0.25 cent increase on Uptown Special Tax District.

4. 50 cent surcharge on all event tickets.

That there should be enough to cover all costs if each project besides that Discovery Place was built in conjunction with another project and we allowed a 5-7 year window to start construction. There would likely be enough money with this approach to do an exterior renovation of the Discovery Place and to open 2-3 "suburban" cultural centers......just some thoughts.

The problem is that again politics come into play and the city would rather find on palatable source of income than supposedly raise 4 different taxes.

[MZT]

All the result of over-reach.

If they had submitted a list of funding priorities, the council probably would have funded #1 and #2, and the northern towns would have grumbled a bit and swallowed it.

But the ASC wants the whole enchilada ... did not want to disappoint anyone by saying "your art is less important"... It's like saying we should construct all 5 legs of the transit plan at once.

[monsoon]

All the result of over-reach.

If they had submitted a list of funding priorities, the council probably would have funded #1 and #2, and the northern towns would have grumbled a bit and swallowed it.

But the ASC wants the whole enchilada ... did not want to disappoint anyone by saying "your art is less important"... It's like saying we should construct all 5 legs of the transit plan at once.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tax #1 can't happen with out the NC Legislature. That one won't happen. The local delegation is not united for it and a number of businesses in Charlotte are against it. I think the city is free to raise the rates on the other 3 since they are not taxes. I would be ok with that if they want to tax it off the people who go downtown to see these things and who live there.

[dubone]

i think the idea of doing these projects all together is that it allows the problem to be solved as a unit. I agree with atlrvr that the funding sources MUST be diversified, but i'm not worried that we are solving this political problem as a group, rather than trying to squeeze them in piecemeal over time.

I like the blend of revenue sources because it pulls from different key groups:

- tourists (car rental tax adjustment)

- uptown residents and employers (special district property tax)

- visitors and commuters to downtown (parking fee)

- visitors to entertainment events (ticket fee)

[- increased ticket prices at the arts events themselves (shifting operations responsibility to arts group)]

by diversifying the revenue sources in this way, it eliminates the large impact on any single group. Each of these can be absorbed easily. It keeps much of the revenue burden for these projects onto downtown-related entities, as that is part of the political problem we have in this county, that suburban residents are growing frustrated by all the public projects located downtown. while i think that is highly defensible, i also think it is fair to keep a majority of the burden for the arts downtown, as long as it isn't entirely on the residents, as that could have an impact on growth of residents downtown.

i think the arts task force simply thought they could avoid all political difficulties by getting the revenue from tourists/business travelers.... but that is obviously not going to happen.

[atlrvr]

Tax #1 can't happen with out the NC Legislature.  That one won't happen. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think a 1 cent increase as opposed to a 5 cent increase would gain support. It will be lower than most other municipalities currently. Also, I think that if the public sector money was spread more evenly that the local auto rental lobby would not oppose the increase.

[dubone]

Tax #1 can't happen with out the NC Legislature.  That one won't happen.  The local delegation is not united for it and  a number of businesses in Charlotte are against it.    I think the city is free to raise the rates on the other 3 since they are not taxes.  I would be ok with that if they want to tax it off the people who go downtown to see these things and who live there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i wonder if the politics would shift to allow the 1% adjustment if the overwhelming majority of funding was done through the other devices.

if the rental tax falls out, i hope it can be replaced by another tourist-specific tax/fee, as i think that needs to be at least some portion of this funding, just as it was for the arena, convention center, and nascar HoF.

[monsoon]

The city is generally limited to raising property taxes or selling bonds (which amounts to taxes) to raise funds for new projects in NC. Every new tax requires the Legislature to approve it. As long as the Mecklenburg delegation is not united, the Legislature is almost guaranteed to turn down any request by CLT for a new tax.

[dubone]

yeah... that has been made very clear by Mr. Clodfelter. My speculation was that perhaps if the revenue sources where spread and 4/5 of the burden for this plan is shifted away from the car rental industry, that perhaps enterprise would shift to support it, and then potentially cloddy and others would change their votes.

perhaps as part of this, they can put back on the table the inclusion of more police into this, as that would possibly get the city council back to an almost unanimous position.

[monsoon]

Well actually, the NC Legislature would not approve a 1% or something like that seat tax on all events in Mecklenburg when the city wanted it to fund the Arena and Arts project a few years back. The city threw down the gauntlet and had that referrundum on a bundled ASC Arena package that got defeated soundly by the voters. That debacle did two things. First the ASC spent 100K of their budget to campaign for that package. That proves they are not good stewards of public and donated money.

Second the NC Legislature has seen it all before now, and will be wary of CLT pushing for new taxes to pay for arts. Especially when the voters have already voted against it.