An Open Letter to The Dutchess County Legislature
As municipalities grapple with budget shortfalls, arts organizations around the country are often the target of funding cuts. The current economic environment has resulted in projected funding cutbacks that threaten the very existence of many arts organizations, including our own Dutchess County Arts Council. The money allocated to the Arts Council is, in large part, distributed to other local arts organizations including the Bardavon and Hudson Valley Philharmonic. In a recent letter to the editor, I argued for the importance of funding the arts. I received many responses to that letter, mostly positive, but a number were not.
Those who argued against funding for the arts generally took one of three positions, which I have heard many times in the past –
Those who argued against funding for the arts generally took one of three positions, which I have heard many times in the past –
1. Essential services such as fire and police departments need the money more.
2. Funding the arts can result in specific offensive arts projects being funded.
3. Ticket prices should be raised so that people who actually use the services pay their own way.
Many people are unaware of the budgetary realities under which most arts organizations function. Nationwide, ticket sales account for approximately 40% of any arts organization's income, and that is typical at the Bardavon in Poughkeepsie, which also manages the Ulster Performing Arts Center and the Hudson Valley Philharmonic. The balance of the money comes from private donations, membership contributions, and subsidies from federal, state and local governments. In order for the “end user” to fully fund the operational costs of an arts venue, ticket prices would have to be raised, on average, 150%. The result would be that many theater goers would be priced out of the market, specifically lower income patrons and local school children that attend performances at the theater only through subsidies.
Specific programs, which some people find to be “offensive” have in the past caused concern and accusations that tax dollars were being utilized to fund them. I do not recall anything at the Bardavon being cast in that light, but certainly there have been other art exhibits and films over the years that have upset both patrons and taxpayers. To abandon all art exhibits and educational programming because of these few programs would not make much sense to me. To try and qualify each individual program or exhibit for tax payer funding would also be problematic. What someone finds to be “edgy”, someone else will find to be “offensive”. In most cases overtly offensive exhibits in my mind are poor choices. It is also bad manners, and bad business to promote them, but it is a very slippery slope if we try to legislate them. I personally find Roseanne Barr offensive, but that’s just me.
Many arts organization, such as the Bardavon, Hudson Valley Philharmonic, and Ulster Performing Arts Center, all with the encouragement of Executive Director Chris Silva, provide educational outreach programming for local school children. For many of these children it will be the only exposure to music and arts that they receive during the year. These programs are not self sustaining financially; they must be subsidized by someone - some patron or some government entity.
The not for profit arts community has – by definition – never been organized as a profitable business. Unfortunately the only way for it to exist requires a financial commitment from supporters to make ends meet. At the Bardavon / UPAC / Hudson Valley Philharmonic we must raise approximately $2 million each and every year to cover our budget shortfall. This is only our operating budget; all capital expenditures - for a new roof, boiler, etc. - are additional expenses. This money must come from somewhere. We cannot raise ticket prices 150% without excluding many of our most important audience – our school children and others who can least afford it. Someone must cover the balance. Some money comes from memberships, individual patrons, foundations, and some comes from government. Many individual patrons and foundations make “restricted donations”, dedicated to funding specific shows, projects and programs that they wish to sponsor. If we exclude all government funding for the arts we would place the financial viability of the arts community in the hands of wealthy patrons. This problem would be particularly acute at smaller arts organizations that do not enjoy the large supportive membership base that we have at the Bardavon. Becoming overly dependant on a few wealthy donors would ultimately be reflected in the programming that the venue produces. As well intentioned as these patrons are, and as essential as they are for the very existence of the arts community, to depend on them for all or most of an organization’s funding is unhealthy.
Another argument can and should be made for the positive economic impact that the arts have on the community. In addition to the value of the employment provided, the arts generate tourism and ancillary revenues at area restaurants and stores. But that is another discussion.
In past years the amount of money that Dutchess County allocated to the arts community in the county budget was miniscule – less than $1.00 per person. It is a small amount – much too small - but it is vital to our local arts community. It is money well spent.
Joseph C. Steiniger, President
Board of Directors
Bardavon 1869 Opera House, Inc.
Follow North Country Rambler on Twitter @ NCntryRambler
Become a Fan & "Like" Rambler on Facebook @ North Country Rambler
