Public Money, Public Art, Public Policy; Bang for the Buck, Bang for the Books

"Penny-wise, pound-foolish."

traditional French proverb

"The man who pretends that the distribution of income in this country reflects the distribution of ability or character is an ignoramus. The man who says that it could by any possible political device be made to do so is an unpractical visionary. But the man who says that it ought to do so is something worse than an ignoramous and more disastrous than a visionary: he is, in the profoundest Scriptural sense of the word, a fool."

~George Bernard Shaw, 

Anglo-Irish Author, Playwright and Critic

1856-1950

from a letter to the Times, 1909

We have in Minnesota, sadly, not only elected conservatives to a majority position in our legislature.  We have elected short sighted, narrow minded fools and ignoramuses.  They are lacking in the very real and necessary vision and understanding required for good government, for success for this state and for this country.

This will hurt us.  No matter how well meaning, THESE SMUG ASSES WILL HURT US ALL, now, and for years and years to come.  They will hurt us as individuals; they will hurt us as groups of individuals who comprise neighborhoods and communities; they will hurt us as units of government at every level from local to state to regional to national.  They will hurt us economically, they will hurt businesses, of all sizes, despite their loud protestations of being pro-business.

These shallow, ignorant conservatives, they will hurt us deeply and profoundly (and yes, even financially) in every aspect of our lives, by their blind arrogance and stupidity and deficient philosophy.

How did this happen?  By a convergence of people voting out of fear over economic hard times, aided and abetted by a large turnout of single-issue fanatic and extremist voters (mostly anti-abortion, some pro-gun).

The genesis of this post was the discussion generated by comments made by Matt Dean in the context of his legislative role as Majority Leader in the Minnesota State House of Representatives. Dean accused a prominent author of being a thief.  He claimed the author was paid an inacurate and inflated salary.  In the conservative blogosphere the speaking engagement is portrayed as a small group of school children attending a multi-thousand dollar lecture; in fact it was attended by 500 people in person, and numerous thousands more were served by it being broadcast over Minnesota Public Radio. The facts matter.

But this is really only an individual instance of a much larger systemic deficiency of understanding and information.

sculpture,state capitol

Dean and his colleagues are trying to defund the public program which recently made a specific expenditure that Dean doesn't like, one where the Stillwater Library paid a large speaker's fee to an author.  So in retaliation, Dean insults the author, and his colleagues try to cut the library funding in punishment.

What apparently Dean and his buddies do not understand is that the reason we spend money on public policy benefiting areas like the arts is that there is a resulting public benefit, usually not just a simple one to one benefit, where for ever spending of a $1 there is a $1 benefit in a good or service, but a multiplier effect, where for that $1 spent, there is multiple times over more than $1 of benefit received.  It can take many forms, but it is quantifiable, and measurable; and at its best, this public investment can also produce less quantifiable but still very qualitative benefits as well.

The numbers get crunched, the bottom line exists, and is analyzed and calculated very carefully for the benefits that derive from making this kind of expenditure.  Books are written about it, classes are taught in it; it is not a secret, it is not a mystery.  Frankly, I'm irritated by stupid, simplistic, and ill-informed criticism of decisions, criticisms which usually misrepresent the policy or specific decisions, and are poorly researched or lack understanding.

Public money is spent on the arts because it has very real public benefits:

"A well-designed public space can boost real estate values and create opportunities for small local business to thrive. Public art in urban environments can also help physically and socially knit together communities.....

"People like living in well designed, carefully thought out urban environments," says Ricardo D. Barreto, director of the Urban Arts Institute at Massachusetts College of Art and Design. "Public art is about more than putting a statue in a corner. It is linked to urban design."

"If one agrees, even just in part, with Richard Florida's "creative class" theory -- that a welcoming environment for creative professionals is the key to helping cities and even countries retain a competitive economic edge..."

 The city of Seattle, at the city level of government on their public arts web page encouraging public art, states this:

"Create a Thriving Business District
Murals, statues and fountains identify a neighborhood’s character and can become landmarks for the district.
BENEFITS

• Increases community pride and identification.
• Creates a landmark that people throughout the city will recognize.
• Provides vibrancy to public spaces.
• Enriches neighborhoods by presenting images of local culture and heritage.
• Brings people from the area together, especially if there is public participation in the project.

http://www.mdva.state.mn.us/memorials/capitol/promiseofyouth.htm

It is the reason that cities like Albuquerque, New Mexico create organizations like their Art Business Culture Leadership Team (awkward name, imho -DG) as a result of a study commissioned by the city which produced "The Economic Importance of the Arts and Cultural Industries in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County" , as part of the "Mid Rio Grande Arts Business Culture".

The Napa Valley, California Chamber of Commerce wrote this about public art, on their web site under the heading NAPA BUSINESS FOCUS in 2008 :

"Public art is a means to transform cities into thriving centers of business and commerce, where the visual landscape enhances the life of a community. Public art is an opportunity for developers and city planners to leave a legacy to a city, a monument that will last for generations.  As Michael von Moschzier, Esq., Chairman of the Redevelopment Authority of Philadelphia, said in 1958, “the glory of Greece, the grandeur of Rome, the beauty of Paris, Florence, Vienna remain as jewels in the crown of civilization because of the great part sculpture plays centuries after dynasties, dictators, and other temporary trivialities have been completely forgotten.”

Looking at other states - and there are 26 states including Minnesota which have similar programs to the one drawing objections from Matt Dean - I found this under the Texas Commission on the Arts, under the heading "Why the Arts Matter - Investment in Economic Development"

"Support of the arts helps stimulate economic development in the state. The availability of cultural resources and opportunities helps attract businesses to Texas, since companies and workers consider quality of life – including the arts – an important factor when deciding whether to relocate to or remain in a Texas community. Additionally, the arts play a role in attracting tourists to Texas, helping tourism, a $60.6 billion industry in 2008, become the state's third largest industry."

Spending public money on public art is DIRECTLY related to the economic viability of an area.  It is directly related to education, to quality of life, to many facets and factors of our state.  But it is also a GOOD expenditure of public money, it is good economic practice, it is good government.  That is true of our public art, it is true of our libraries, it is true of many of the areas for public use and benefit on which we as a state spend money.  Apparently, Matt Dean and the Republican leadership don't get that.  Apparently, they are ignorant of what are normal expenditures, like routine, ordinary speaker fees for prominent authors.

The event to which Matt Dean objected, in the most insulting way, took place at the Stillwater Public Library.  Mr. Dean and his colleagues would benefit by spending more of their time in one of those public libraries; he should be reading books on public policy, including the value of expenditures on public art.

It seems to me that Mr. Dean and his Republican colleagues lack an understanding of the legitimate purposes and role of public government.  In the name of smaller government, the Republicans fail to understand or appreciate what government does and should do.  So far as I can see the only thing which is WORSE, in the senses of being more inefficient and less accountable than public services has been either eliminating them; or alternatively, privatizing them, including sadly, in some cities, libraries.  I cannot find a single example where this has been worth the savings or been an improvement.

Lets hope and pray that Dean and the rest of the Republicans elected to the House were taught to read well enough in our public schools to benefit from -- and to continue to fund -- our public libraries.  Because NOT doing so would cost us far more than the tax dollars they are haggling over; let us hope and pray they figure that out before they irreparably damage the state of Minnesota and those of us who live here.