Art and politics are an odious combination. I say that for several very good reasons.

There is an article in the CDA Press today, Cd’A looks to define art plan. Apparently the City has more than enough money for fire, police, parks, streets (but not sidewalks), and other basic services that they can easily afford to spend your tax dollars on art. This wrong for so many reasons.

Before listing the reasons, understand that I am an artist. I write, and writers are considered part of the arts community. (Just ask Hollywood what happens without writers: nothing.) I helped successfully run the Lake City Playhouse for 6 years. I have a BA in Art, and a minor in Theatrical Design. I understand and appreciate the value of art in a community. Taxing a community for art is wrong on so many levels:

• The judgement process in art is political anyway. What happens over time, and what we’re seeing in CdA, is favoritism. Ask yourself, if it isn’t fair or equal to everyone, is it something that government should be doing?
• Rather than keep our art tax money in the community, you see grants given to out-of-state artists when local artists produce works just as good. It’s what I call the “Not From Here is Better” syndrome. I’ve seen it in theater as well: producers get all excited over hiring some singer from out of town, say, Portland. Folks, just because a singer can’t find work in Portland doesn’t make her any better to sing here. Some thing for artists. We have plenty of local talent, why wasn’t a local artist chosen for either of the two $50,000 projects at the CDA Library? Answer: Politics.
• Music, dance, singing, and the all of the performing arts are cut out of public arts financing. Is that fair to all involved?
• Art does not fall under the definition of what I believe government must do. Government should do only those things that the people cannot do for themselves. If business or charity can do the job, then let them.

Like other issues in town, this one is not about art. It’s about control.

The City could have new construction dedicate the 1.33% art tax toward private art projects. But no, that would mean someone other than City-appointed frown-meisters would get to approve the “public” art.

Yet, public art continues to be lauded. That’s because, apparently, our elected leaders prefer a pretty ceremony over open, responsible government. The Art Tax gives those attention-starved public officials a forum where they can feel important, while it angers those who do not benefit from this special-interest pork barrel. Ask yourself, is that good for the community?