A PITTANCE FOR THE ARTS
Tax levy promises little for the arts community
by LYZ BLY
Wednesday, December 24, 2003

The announcement last week that the Cuyahoga County Commissioners approved putting a 0.7-mill levy on the March 2 ballot has left many members of the arts community confused and skeptical. If passed, the tax levy would raise approximately $20 million a year for five years to support regional economic initiatives, which would purportedly include support for arts organizations.

The confusion and skepticism are well- founded, since under state law, the commissioners cannot legally state that arts and culture are part of the proposed levy package (only counties with cities of populations of 500,000 or more can establish an arts district). There is little clarity as to how much would go toward arts and culture, and whether the arts would be supported on a long-term basis, especially after the current commissioners have moved on to other jobs.

Among the questions we directed to County Commissioner Tim McCormack's office was whether the arts would receive the amount of money deemed necessary by the Community Partnership for Arts and Culture (CPAC) — $14 to $20 million — to make an impact on the regional arts community. A representative from McCormack's office said, “The distribution of funds will be split between economic development initiatives and arts and culture. Therefore, it is unlikely that the arts will get the whole $20 million, because the economic development needs must also be addressed.”

This ambiguity over public funding for the arts is ironic, given the lengthy planning process and the millions of dollars that have gone into research, surveys, studies and countless public meetings on the economic and social value of Greater Cleveland's cultural resources. Planning for public funding has been underway for more than eight years. But despite all the planning, money and glossy reports, the arts community is left with a tenuous pledge of public support if the economic development levy passes in March. How could all those efforts and resources lead to a tax levy that nebulously includes the arts? Is the arts community so demoralized that it will accept this pittance from the County Commissioners?

Arts advocate George Nemeth is baffled by the proposed levy. “I am disappointed that [the commissioners] didn't have the language and details worked out in advance of their announcement about the levy.”

Lakewood artist Niko Angelis is not surprised by the levy's ambiguity, but says, “What I am astonished by is the call to artists to rally around a levy that may not provide solutions or clear-cut resolutions regarding what is crucial to their livelihood: the future of the arts in Cleveland.”

In the end, one wonders whether all the money and time could have been better spent creating an endowment and establishing a committee to oversee city funding of arts and cultural projects and events (like Cincinnati's Arts and Culture Committee). Instead, our civic leaders have chosen to remain mired in an endless cycle of meetings, strategies and initiati v es.

Ultimately, despite all this highly controlled planning, the community is left with nothing but uncertainty.

<< return to Lyz Bly writings menu