VAS Littlecrow:

An argument against public art funding by an artist and the law of unintended consequences.

Flashback to 2008 (Pay special attention to the bolded text.)

I have no problem with voter-supported art funding if a municipality has means to take care of their primary fiscal responsibilities, and have the funds to spare. I lived through the Arne Carlson golden-age here in Minnesota, and I can honestly say that a state can have lower taxes and, shiny trinkets too. However, I do have an issue with using taxpayer money on non-essential services when we are in the middle of a state recession, and millions of dollars are not being used to take care of critical infrastructure issues or vital projects that may remain incomplete for decades after their projected completion date. I won’t even go into the healthcare mess. I have an even bigger issue with initiatives and legislation that bundle together essential matters (maintaining a clean water supply, careful management of natural resources,) with entertainment for the well-to-do. The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment, is a perfect example of statewide pork barrel that follows in this vein. Sure, funding is only three-eights of one percent in extra sales taxes, but then again the Twins stadium wanted 0.15%, MOA wanted $234 million, beautification projects for libraries (that still lack staff, sufficient funds for under-served locations and hours) needed their cut, so on and so forth. I thought that the State Lottery funds were already allocated to take care of wildlife preservation, or has that been redirected somewhere else.

I am an artist and art is my life, but I also think too much and make the mistake of actually reading legislation. It seems that that far too many arts organizations, are working around the clock to ensure every artist in Minnesota is being guilt-tripped into supporting this piece of legislation. Supposedly, if we don’t vote yes for this shiny and well-promoted boondoggle, Minnesota’s environment and arts scene will wither and die, leaving future generations nothing but a gray mass of uncultured misery. I mean, as if the Republicrats didn’t rip enough cash out of our pockets with the bonding bill that was supposed to fix our roads and finally resolve our mass transit woes. I would’ve felt better about the bonding bill if most of the money actually went to fixing roads and getting the promised LRT to Rice before 2020. I guess local stadiums, convention centers, and nature trails look prettier and are worthier of our taxes, right? That darn crumbling infrastructure or little things like ending government fraud are a lot less important than sports, sanitized nature for suburbanites, the arts and “the environment.”

I hate to be the big, black rainy cloud on everyone’s parade, but there’s a reason why under normal circumstances the arts get the shaft when there’s new legislation. It’s non-essential and government-funded art generally benefits the rich! There, I said it.

Nobody can stop the arts. Not oppressive regimes, poverty or taste. Sure, they can slow it down or censor it, but in the underground there will always be brave souls who make art. As long as there are people donned with a creative mind and raw materials like mud or garbage, people are going to make pretty stuff for others to look at. People don’t need to make art, and those who behold it do not need to appreciate it. That won’t stop it from existing. With that said, historically speaking things like the orchestra, museums, plays, et cetera, are the toys of the elite and the upper middle class. Most middle class and poor people are too busy working or indulging in mind-numbing escapist entertainment to dull the sharp knife of their miserable reality.

Sure there are free days at the museum and cheap seat days at the theater. However, if the arts really were a populist pursuit and tax moneys were really for the purpose of making the arts more accessible, then every government-funded art venue would be somewhat spartan in packaging (though not necessarily content,) free to the public and not run by CEOs that earn incomes comparable to small corporations. Hell, even the whole concept of a non-profit corporation is a bit of an oxymoron. If rich snobs want opulent venues, they should bloody well pony up their own dough. These well-funded art-lobbyists should not ask those who least can afford to pay for or enjoy “the arts” to cough up the cash, under the threat that the environment in which they rely upon for their very lives, will be destroyed. Change “environment” to “local economy” and these tactics become practically indistinguishable from those that sports stadium moguls use against state/county/city governments in their quest to build better stadiums without having to pay for them. And, don’t think the stadium owners aren’t going to exploit the park and cultural heritage portion of this constitutional amendment for their own gain.

Make no mistake, if the “Vote Yes” campaign in successful, I will enjoy the resulting benefits to the fullest. I am not an idiot and I am not going to throw away free stuff on the basis of pride alone. I am an artist after all. But personally, I can use my modeling and cartoons career to fund my outsider art/dance hobbies regardless of what happens. That’s right, I treat my art like a privately-funded hobby. I work to support my art habit. Too bad most people don’t get this concept. Personally, I’d prefer to get that LRT that my county paid millions of dollars to get into Rice and maybe see some of those crappy roads widened and in better condition while we are at it.

2011

Stadium diversion was exactly one of the reasons why I opposed and voted against the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy amendment to the Minnesota Constitution. The way it was written was not sufficiently specific, and it did not name detailed exclusions. When it comes to the legal world, that can make a huge difference.

Proceeds from the arts and cultural heritage fund were supposed to “be spent only on arts, arts education and arts access and to preserve Minnesota’s history and cultural heritage.” Unfortunately, the Vikings are technically part of Minnesota’s cultural and historical heritage. Even more egregiously, 14.25 percent of collected taxes from this fund are supposed to be used for parks and trails. A stadium can easily be classed as a park, so there’s not much that can be done about that now, since the amendment passed.

It’s too bad the worst case scenario is coming true, and sadly, I am not sure that from a legal standpoint anything can be done to stop it. There’s a political letter writing action that’s going to try to make a difference.  I hope this action succeeds because, this IS the worst case scenario I assumed would arrive with this amendment to Minnesota’s State Constitution. I’m personally not going to participate because I feel that constitutional amendment was unjust to the poor to begin with. Still, I would rather see the money go towards entertaining rich art patrons than enriching billionaire sports franchise owners.  Art is my line of work after all, and I would be a fool to throw away the money that has been taken from me as a taxpayer.

Remember folks, it’s better to have no legislation, than to have poorly thought out but well-intentioned legislation.

Share/Bookmark