I’ve been helping my fifth-grader work out some math problems during the past few weeks and doing so has provided me with even more perspective on the work we do at the Arts Council.
Some of the problems had to do with the relationship between decimals and percentages. No matter how often I said the conversion from decimals to percentages was a mere matter of moving the decimal two places “over to the right,” it didn’t sink in until I started putting some examples into play.
Starting with a dollar, I asked her how much 10% was. She immediately responded “10 cents.” And how do you show ten cents? “$0.10,” was the reply. Right, I said, so point 10 equals 10%. See how it’s the same number, only the decimal place has been moved from the left side of the number ten two places over to the right when it’s expressed as a percentage?
“Duh, Dad!” was the reply.
Okay Miss Smartypants, let’s do one that is a little more complicated. Express 546,000 as a percentage of 1,235,740,000.
After a moment of concentrated engagement with her calculator, she said (a little perplexed) “4.418e minus 4…What does THAT mean?”
It means that the result is so small that the calculator has to tell you to move the decimal point over four places to the left in order to give you your answer. Frowning in thought, she returned to the task, and said “Okay, 546,000 is 0.0004418 of 1,235,740,000 or--pausing to move the decimal two places over to the right--.004418 percent. Why this number?”
Why, indeed. Very few people besides me would recognize the ratio—44/1000ths of a percent—as being the Arts Council’s appropriation compared to the State’s General Fund budget.
Yes, our budget is a mere 44/1000ths of one percent of the State Budget. Our requested increase of $103,000 (to meet the required match from incoming Federal Funds from the National Endowment for the Arts) would increase that figure by 9/1000ths of a percent of which most would be spent in communities across the state on local community arts projects.
But it appears that even that tiny increase is too rich for our elected officials in these times of austerity. The House Appropriations Committee has done its bipartisan best to increase our request during the past couple of weeks.
But all of us who lurk about the State house at this time of year keep hearing “there just is no money.” Why, though, am I having a hard time believing it…?
I run an organization. I pay attention to the money we spend. I don’t like to waste a dime. And I don’t focus only on the expense side of the ledger. I look for ways to enhance our revenue—or at the very least look for ways to leverage revenues from other sources to provide financial benefits to our arts and cultural constituents.
Next year the National Endowment for the Arts will give us $103,000 more than it is this year. The State (appropriation) is supposed to match this increase. In turn, the Council is supposed to use this increase to provide grants and services to the field. Of the $206,000 combined increase, we have committed to putting $180,000 out in direct grants. These grants, in turn, require a one-to-one match from local municipal and private sources. When all is said and done the State’s increase of $103,000 will generate an additional federal ($103,000) and local ($180,000) match totaling $283,000. That’s an ROI of 275%!
It’s also the part of the revenue stream that is by far the easiest to measure.
The rest of the revenue stream is what happens when the combined state/local matching funds of $360,000 starts underwriting cultural activities all over the state, such as festivals, art openings, concerts, plays, performances in parks, and local events around the “Art Fits Vermont” project we are about to announce to follow up our wildly successful Palettes Project.
People travel to those events. They eat at restaurants and stay in hotels. They shop for mementos, for clothes, for works of art and craft. They come back. They bring friends and family. They spend money—a portion of which finds its way back into the coffers of the local municipality and into the coffers of the State of Vermont.
The revenue generated by Vermont’s “cultural community” (i.e. the community that tends to look to us for support) is usually captured in the tourism statistics. But that’s usually not what is most significant about our work.
The things that are most significant about our work are the relationships that people form in their communities from shared memories of evenings spent at the lake listening to Mozart, attending a barn dance, or raising money at an art auction for a local senior center. Social scientists tend to call these intangible results “social capital.” Difficult to measure, sure, but no less real than the sales and meals tax collected by restaurants on Church Street right before the Flynn has an event.
The bottom line is this…a $103,000 increase to the Arts Council will result in an immediate $283,000 increase in additional spending in Vermont’s Creative Sector. I can’t believe the State cannot find 9/1000ths of a percent lurking somewhere in some “rainy day funding pot.”
Meanwhile I continue to help my daughter with her math. She couldn’t comprehend 44/1000ths of an inch so I gave her a tangible example. According to the Times Argus, the Bennington Monument is 308 feet tall. If the Bennington Monument represents the State Budget, the Arts Council portion is not quite 1 2/3rds inches of it. About the length of my daughter’s little finger. The requested increase—add another knuckle’s-worth.
Maybe the Senate will find it. Stay tuned…
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
FOSTERING DIVERSITY
This week I attended a diversity luncheon in Burlington hosted by numerous prominent businesses in the for- and not-for-profit sectors. The purpose was to introduce to attendees the concept of planning for and accommodating a diverse workforce.
It was a very good effort. Despite the last minute cancellation of keynoter Ted Childs , one of the foremost experts in the country on workforce diversity, the speakers and hosts clearly seemed to understand the importance of reaching out to new populations, to people of color, and to those who look, talk, and act different from “us.” As Thomas Friedman says in his bestselling book, The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, the world is getting smaller every day and we have to “do business with all of them.”
But the panel of business leaders that was pulled together to discuss strategies for developing and supporting diversity in the work place, completely avoided one crucial issue—and thus made it doubly conspicuous by its absence from the discussion. No one, including me, had the courage to stand up to the microphone and ask the simple question: what are we in this room doing to support our schools’ efforts to manage the issues around diversity? Tolerance for diversity starts in the family and is pretty much cemented in place during the school years.
It’s easy to fall into the generations-old discussion surrounding race relations (or lack thereof) in this country. But the issue is so much bigger. It involves an understanding of religions other than those that are Christian; of governments and institutions that are other than those that are republics; of art forms and cultural expressions that are other than “classical” or “western.” It requires, in the words of Adjutant General Michael Dubie who filled in for the keynote speaker, all of us to be far more “culturally aware” than we are now.
The principal of the Burlington High School did rise to the microphone to say that 27% of her students were “students of color” and that more than 20 languages were the primary language spoken at home.
But as I sat at lunch, wave after wave of frustration passed over me at the thought of how much opportunity we have been allowing to slip past us and will continue to slip past us if we continue to educate our children “the same old way.”
We built our current educational infrastructure in the late 1800s in response, in large part, to the increasing demand for skilled workers in an industrial society. Before then, of course, very few people had any formal education because we were largely an agrarian society that worked almost exclusively with its hands. But during the latter part of the 20th century we moved away from the industrial model—in terms of our workforce needs—but never really changed the methodologies we use to educate our children. As a result we are putting our children through school, expecting them to pop out the other end able to handle the complex relational requirements of a fluid, changing society that by necessity needs to speak multiple languages and multitask in several different time zones.
I’m not too surprised that Johnny can’t read and do math or set up a lab experiment that tests a hypothesis with a control. And it’s even less of a surprise that he also can’t recite poetry, distinguish between Bach and Mozart, or Monet or Vermeer. But honestly I can’t really blame the schools. Why? Because the whole system is set up to do things that are completely out of touch with what society requires of it. Furthermore, our schools, like our legal system, tend to follow precedent far more than they follow the latest research.
In my experience, kids are profoundly curious about everything, but not all at once. They also have different aptitudes at different ages. Research tells us that we should be immersing our kids, through age 12, in languages and the arts (music, drama, drawing, creative writing)—building on the biological synapses that are primed to absorb and retain information in those disciplines in particular. History, Science, Math, and the other core subjects are certainly important in the early years, but there is always time later on to put additional focus on those areas.
But what our schools teach during the primary and secondary years is pretty much what they’ve taught for the past 100 years or more. Why? Because that’s how they’ve always done it! To do things differently they’d have to change all their curricula. They’d have to create an arts and culture-centered focus for all kids through the sixth grade and then play massive catch-up in science, math, reading, social studies, etc. afterwards. They’d have to retrain their teachers how to teach. And after doing all that, there is still NO guarantee that kids would do any better on those pesky tests foisted on us by No Child Left Behind …so why bother?
We should “bother” because our schools are becoming less relevant to our children. Our kids are less engaged in learning than ever (you don’t want to even SEE those statistics!). And we are putting our teachers in the position of parent, social worker, and educator but only barely funding even one of those roles.
Therein lies the problem. We can’t do it all at once and, even if we wanted to “cure the patient,” the patient has to want the cure. Our education system hasn’t hit rock bottom yet. We can continue to function with lowered expectations and dependent on the hyper-achievers among us to carry a heavier load. But it will be harder and harder to get money to sustain our diseased system and one day pretty soon, the whole thing will implode.
Or will it? I am heartened by various new approaches to education, by the work coming out of our newest education graduates who are eager to apply the latest research and help transform our schools into paragons of the 21st Century Learning Environment.
And one of the most effective ways to start this transformation is for every one of the 150 businesses that attended the luncheon this week to rise and demand that our schools start preparing our kids for the 21st Century, not the 19th, and then put some of their money where their mouth is. As an indicator of their commitment, I should have taken a straw poll of the room and asked how many of those in attendance voted to approve their school budgets at town meeting day last week. But like I said, I didn’t have the courage. Shame on me.
It was a very good effort. Despite the last minute cancellation of keynoter Ted Childs , one of the foremost experts in the country on workforce diversity, the speakers and hosts clearly seemed to understand the importance of reaching out to new populations, to people of color, and to those who look, talk, and act different from “us.” As Thomas Friedman says in his bestselling book, The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, the world is getting smaller every day and we have to “do business with all of them.”
But the panel of business leaders that was pulled together to discuss strategies for developing and supporting diversity in the work place, completely avoided one crucial issue—and thus made it doubly conspicuous by its absence from the discussion. No one, including me, had the courage to stand up to the microphone and ask the simple question: what are we in this room doing to support our schools’ efforts to manage the issues around diversity? Tolerance for diversity starts in the family and is pretty much cemented in place during the school years.
It’s easy to fall into the generations-old discussion surrounding race relations (or lack thereof) in this country. But the issue is so much bigger. It involves an understanding of religions other than those that are Christian; of governments and institutions that are other than those that are republics; of art forms and cultural expressions that are other than “classical” or “western.” It requires, in the words of Adjutant General Michael Dubie who filled in for the keynote speaker, all of us to be far more “culturally aware” than we are now.
The principal of the Burlington High School did rise to the microphone to say that 27% of her students were “students of color” and that more than 20 languages were the primary language spoken at home.
But as I sat at lunch, wave after wave of frustration passed over me at the thought of how much opportunity we have been allowing to slip past us and will continue to slip past us if we continue to educate our children “the same old way.”
We built our current educational infrastructure in the late 1800s in response, in large part, to the increasing demand for skilled workers in an industrial society. Before then, of course, very few people had any formal education because we were largely an agrarian society that worked almost exclusively with its hands. But during the latter part of the 20th century we moved away from the industrial model—in terms of our workforce needs—but never really changed the methodologies we use to educate our children. As a result we are putting our children through school, expecting them to pop out the other end able to handle the complex relational requirements of a fluid, changing society that by necessity needs to speak multiple languages and multitask in several different time zones.
I’m not too surprised that Johnny can’t read and do math or set up a lab experiment that tests a hypothesis with a control. And it’s even less of a surprise that he also can’t recite poetry, distinguish between Bach and Mozart, or Monet or Vermeer. But honestly I can’t really blame the schools. Why? Because the whole system is set up to do things that are completely out of touch with what society requires of it. Furthermore, our schools, like our legal system, tend to follow precedent far more than they follow the latest research.
In my experience, kids are profoundly curious about everything, but not all at once. They also have different aptitudes at different ages. Research tells us that we should be immersing our kids, through age 12, in languages and the arts (music, drama, drawing, creative writing)—building on the biological synapses that are primed to absorb and retain information in those disciplines in particular. History, Science, Math, and the other core subjects are certainly important in the early years, but there is always time later on to put additional focus on those areas.
But what our schools teach during the primary and secondary years is pretty much what they’ve taught for the past 100 years or more. Why? Because that’s how they’ve always done it! To do things differently they’d have to change all their curricula. They’d have to create an arts and culture-centered focus for all kids through the sixth grade and then play massive catch-up in science, math, reading, social studies, etc. afterwards. They’d have to retrain their teachers how to teach. And after doing all that, there is still NO guarantee that kids would do any better on those pesky tests foisted on us by No Child Left Behind …so why bother?
We should “bother” because our schools are becoming less relevant to our children. Our kids are less engaged in learning than ever (you don’t want to even SEE those statistics!). And we are putting our teachers in the position of parent, social worker, and educator but only barely funding even one of those roles.
Therein lies the problem. We can’t do it all at once and, even if we wanted to “cure the patient,” the patient has to want the cure. Our education system hasn’t hit rock bottom yet. We can continue to function with lowered expectations and dependent on the hyper-achievers among us to carry a heavier load. But it will be harder and harder to get money to sustain our diseased system and one day pretty soon, the whole thing will implode.
Or will it? I am heartened by various new approaches to education, by the work coming out of our newest education graduates who are eager to apply the latest research and help transform our schools into paragons of the 21st Century Learning Environment.
And one of the most effective ways to start this transformation is for every one of the 150 businesses that attended the luncheon this week to rise and demand that our schools start preparing our kids for the 21st Century, not the 19th, and then put some of their money where their mouth is. As an indicator of their commitment, I should have taken a straw poll of the room and asked how many of those in attendance voted to approve their school budgets at town meeting day last week. But like I said, I didn’t have the courage. Shame on me.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
SHARPEN YOUR PENCILS
Sharpen you pencils, uncap your pens. Limber up your dialing finger. Dust off that keyboard. Sip some coffee; sharpen your mind.
It’s time to take action!
The House Appropriations Committee just began “mark-up;” an annual exercise in which they starting putting numbers into columns and next to names. We want the number next to our name to be increased by $103,000. Here’s why: The National Endowment for the Arts has increased its support to the Vermont Arts Council by $103,000. This increase requires a 1:1 state match. The Governor has suggested $13,000. We need $90,000 more from the legislature.
The Arts Council will spend $180,000 the combined state/federal increase as follows:$90,000 to support community projects associated with our “Art Fits” (Puzzles) statewide community arts project. $50,000 to restore community arts organization project grants support which had suffered cuts from previous years.$40,000 to support Local Arts Service Organization Grant Initiative.
All $180,000 of the grants we award will likewise require a 1:1 local/private match—making the leveraging effect of the legislature’s increased support to the Arts Council amount to 4:1 ($360,000:$90,000). (The remaining $26,000 will just cover administrative increases.)
Here’s how you can help.
Now is the crucial time for you to contact your state representative (with a cc to your state senator) indicating your wish for him or her to support the Arts Council’s request for “$90,000 over the Governor’s recommended increase of $13,000—or $103,000 total.
We strongly recommend you pick up the phone and leave a message for your legislator. If you are not comfortable doing this, snail mail directed to their home is next best—unless your legislator only responds to email (as some do!).
Tell your legislator a story about why the arts matter to you personally. Let them know, for example the impact that participating in “Palettes of Vermont “ had on you as an artist, or an educator, or as a member of your local community organization that participated in it. Let them know you really care about this effort. Let them know what a difference a small grant from us meant to your local community arts organization.
If you are going to email your legislator, PLEASE DO:Identify yourself as a constituentAsk if he/she is aware of the Arts Council’s request for additional funding totaling $103,000Remind him/her that the Arts Council funding request is in response to conditions placed upon it by an increase from its federal grantRemind him/her that all but about 12% of the requested increase will directly benefit communities all over Vermont, especially those that participate in Art Fits (Puzzles) with cash infusions that each will require a 1:1 match—for a total leveraging effect of 4:1.ASK HIM/HER to support the requested increase (and take note of his/her response and communicate it to me)THANK HIM/HER for doing such a hard job under such difficult economic conditions.
Cc your state senator(s)Cc me at aaldrich@vermontartscouncil.org
PLEASE DO NOT:Copy every member of the House/Senate Appropriations Committees, especially the Chairs (they are well aware of our request)Cut and paste this message into your own email; use your own words—they are sure to sound better!Delay. Do it right now, while the inspiration is in you!
If your local representative is on the House Appropriations Committee, he/she has already heard the pitch from me, Steve Ames (River Arts), and Peggy Kannenstine (Center for Cartoon Studies).
If your representative is NOT on the House Appropriations Committee, please ask him/her to support the Arts Council’s request in two ways:By talking with their colleagues on House Appropriations about the request and asking them to support it (this needs to be done within the next couple of days!)By voting in favor of the increase when it comes to a floor vote.
One final piece of advice—
This is a very important legislation for us. Do not argue with your legislator. Just make sure he/she understands that without their support, our federal appropriations increase could be seriously at risk, and our ability to leverage the increased state funds 4:1 to benefit communities all over Vermont would be jeopardized. Take note of their response to these points and let me know what they say.
The fun is just beginning!
It’s time to take action!
The House Appropriations Committee just began “mark-up;” an annual exercise in which they starting putting numbers into columns and next to names. We want the number next to our name to be increased by $103,000. Here’s why: The National Endowment for the Arts has increased its support to the Vermont Arts Council by $103,000. This increase requires a 1:1 state match. The Governor has suggested $13,000. We need $90,000 more from the legislature.
The Arts Council will spend $180,000 the combined state/federal increase as follows:$90,000 to support community projects associated with our “Art Fits” (Puzzles) statewide community arts project. $50,000 to restore community arts organization project grants support which had suffered cuts from previous years.$40,000 to support Local Arts Service Organization Grant Initiative.
All $180,000 of the grants we award will likewise require a 1:1 local/private match—making the leveraging effect of the legislature’s increased support to the Arts Council amount to 4:1 ($360,000:$90,000). (The remaining $26,000 will just cover administrative increases.)
Here’s how you can help.
Now is the crucial time for you to contact your state representative (with a cc to your state senator) indicating your wish for him or her to support the Arts Council’s request for “$90,000 over the Governor’s recommended increase of $13,000—or $103,000 total.
We strongly recommend you pick up the phone and leave a message for your legislator. If you are not comfortable doing this, snail mail directed to their home is next best—unless your legislator only responds to email (as some do!).
Tell your legislator a story about why the arts matter to you personally. Let them know, for example the impact that participating in “Palettes of Vermont “ had on you as an artist, or an educator, or as a member of your local community organization that participated in it. Let them know you really care about this effort. Let them know what a difference a small grant from us meant to your local community arts organization.
If you are going to email your legislator, PLEASE DO:Identify yourself as a constituentAsk if he/she is aware of the Arts Council’s request for additional funding totaling $103,000Remind him/her that the Arts Council funding request is in response to conditions placed upon it by an increase from its federal grantRemind him/her that all but about 12% of the requested increase will directly benefit communities all over Vermont, especially those that participate in Art Fits (Puzzles) with cash infusions that each will require a 1:1 match—for a total leveraging effect of 4:1.ASK HIM/HER to support the requested increase (and take note of his/her response and communicate it to me)THANK HIM/HER for doing such a hard job under such difficult economic conditions.
Cc your state senator(s)Cc me at aaldrich@vermontartscouncil.org
PLEASE DO NOT:Copy every member of the House/Senate Appropriations Committees, especially the Chairs (they are well aware of our request)Cut and paste this message into your own email; use your own words—they are sure to sound better!Delay. Do it right now, while the inspiration is in you!
If your local representative is on the House Appropriations Committee, he/she has already heard the pitch from me, Steve Ames (River Arts), and Peggy Kannenstine (Center for Cartoon Studies).
If your representative is NOT on the House Appropriations Committee, please ask him/her to support the Arts Council’s request in two ways:By talking with their colleagues on House Appropriations about the request and asking them to support it (this needs to be done within the next couple of days!)By voting in favor of the increase when it comes to a floor vote.
One final piece of advice—
This is a very important legislation for us. Do not argue with your legislator. Just make sure he/she understands that without their support, our federal appropriations increase could be seriously at risk, and our ability to leverage the increased state funds 4:1 to benefit communities all over Vermont would be jeopardized. Take note of their response to these points and let me know what they say.
The fun is just beginning!
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
CELEBRATE
In this week’s ArtMail we ask for nominations to receive the Council’s Governor’s Award in the Arts and the Walter Cerf Lifetime Achievement Award in the Arts.
Why do we do this?
Several reasons…
The most obvious is because it provides all of us with an opportunity to come together in celebration of the work of a Vermont artist who has made a lasting impact on the arts, on the state of Vermont, and on some essential aspect of our humanity. There is something viscerally pleasant about being around someone while his or her work and influence is recognized and celebrated.
An equally important, but much less tangible reason we recognize our artists is to make sure that we retain—and even sustain—our connection to them. Recently I was party to a conversation among colleagues where the subject of “elitism and the arts” was raised. It was the same old discussion in which one person argues how “art” is usually something that only highly-educated, wealthy people with leisure time on their hands are able to enjoy. The response is usually along the lines of no, art is for everyone, it is a reflection of the human condition as seen through the eyes of someone who has the facility of communicating through visual means, dance, poetry, and other art forms. Blah blah blah. But then someone else observed:
“It’s not about elitism. It’s not about wealth, or access, or leisure time. It’s not that simple. What creates a separation between “us” (the people) and “them” (the artist and their work), is a sense of reverence for what “they” are able to do with a few brush strokes, a pen, a musical instrument, or an idea.”
Humans are drawn to those expressions like moths to a candle. How an artist’s work speaks to us, we may not quite understand. However, the more I am around great art and artists, the better I understand this sense of reverence that people direct towards them. It’s not an elitism thing, it’s a “wanting-to-be-connected-to-them” thing. It’s a connection that everyone should be allowed to experience often in their lives.
A third reason we recognize our artists is because someone who labors in the arts all their life is likely to get little else in the way of tangible remuneration. I had the pleasure of chatting with Ella Fitzgerald once back in the mid-1980s. She was well into her old age, but still making public appearances and, apparently, still “singing for her supper.” She was in a crowd and when I reached her I suggested we sit because she looked a little tired. She thanked me for my concern and I led her over to a seat and after a few words of small talk, I asked her, what brings you here tonight, performing for this particular crowd? Her answer stunned me:
I still have to pay the rent.
So, on behalf of all the Ella Fitzgeralds out there, please let us know who we should be celebrating. And while you’re thinking about it, make a donation to your local arts organizations or better yet, buy a work of art, or purchase that song you just downloaded from a friend.
Then join us in celebrating our next award recipients, whoever they may be.
Why do we do this?
Several reasons…
The most obvious is because it provides all of us with an opportunity to come together in celebration of the work of a Vermont artist who has made a lasting impact on the arts, on the state of Vermont, and on some essential aspect of our humanity. There is something viscerally pleasant about being around someone while his or her work and influence is recognized and celebrated.
An equally important, but much less tangible reason we recognize our artists is to make sure that we retain—and even sustain—our connection to them. Recently I was party to a conversation among colleagues where the subject of “elitism and the arts” was raised. It was the same old discussion in which one person argues how “art” is usually something that only highly-educated, wealthy people with leisure time on their hands are able to enjoy. The response is usually along the lines of no, art is for everyone, it is a reflection of the human condition as seen through the eyes of someone who has the facility of communicating through visual means, dance, poetry, and other art forms. Blah blah blah. But then someone else observed:
“It’s not about elitism. It’s not about wealth, or access, or leisure time. It’s not that simple. What creates a separation between “us” (the people) and “them” (the artist and their work), is a sense of reverence for what “they” are able to do with a few brush strokes, a pen, a musical instrument, or an idea.”
Humans are drawn to those expressions like moths to a candle. How an artist’s work speaks to us, we may not quite understand. However, the more I am around great art and artists, the better I understand this sense of reverence that people direct towards them. It’s not an elitism thing, it’s a “wanting-to-be-connected-to-them” thing. It’s a connection that everyone should be allowed to experience often in their lives.
A third reason we recognize our artists is because someone who labors in the arts all their life is likely to get little else in the way of tangible remuneration. I had the pleasure of chatting with Ella Fitzgerald once back in the mid-1980s. She was well into her old age, but still making public appearances and, apparently, still “singing for her supper.” She was in a crowd and when I reached her I suggested we sit because she looked a little tired. She thanked me for my concern and I led her over to a seat and after a few words of small talk, I asked her, what brings you here tonight, performing for this particular crowd? Her answer stunned me:
I still have to pay the rent.
So, on behalf of all the Ella Fitzgeralds out there, please let us know who we should be celebrating. And while you’re thinking about it, make a donation to your local arts organizations or better yet, buy a work of art, or purchase that song you just downloaded from a friend.
Then join us in celebrating our next award recipients, whoever they may be.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
THRESHHOLD
Every day we’re hearing somber newscasters forecast dark days ahead. There appears to be much to be concerned about: the “pending recession,” the bizarre global weather conditions, the wars-without-end to which we appear committed, to name a few. A few columns ago I wrote about the Orton Foundation’s “Heart and Soul Community Planning Movement” as a way to provide perspective to individuals wondering what, if anything, could be done about all these huge “macro” issues. In this column, I intend to get even more specific because I believe we are on the threshold of great things here in Vermont.
For the next six months or so, the Vermont Council on Rural Development (with whom we have partnered for the last several years on the Creative Economy/Creative Communities projects) has undertaken a once-in-a-generation challenge: to capture what Vermonters envision for their future. This Council on Vermont's Future has been charged with developing a thorough and accountable way to draw people from all over Vermont into a discussion, a “statewide town meeting” if you will, to discuss critical issues such as the use, protection and preservation of Vermont’s natural and cultural resources, how to responsibly develop Vermont’s economy while protecting and improving its social and educational infrastructure, and a myriad of other issues of concern to Vermonters and their families.
It is IMPERATIVE that you engage in these discussions. In the same way that no one outside your town or village is in a better position to know how to improve the quality of life in your community than you, it follows that the same must be true for the state as a whole. Although we can look to other states for good ideas, it’s up to us to consider them in the context of our unique circumstances.
And while this is going on, an even more specific planning process is under way.
The Arts Council believes that the strongest communities are those in which the cultural sector is actively engaged in collaborating with town planners, local schools and social service agencies on projects that infuse town life with art and art-making. I’m not just talking about gallery tours and music, theater, and dance performances in local venues (although for many that is the heart of it all). I’m talking about designing our public places so that they aren’t just “cheap and practical” but “beautiful and welcoming;” I’m talking about creating opportunities for student performers to “plug and play” at their local farmers markets on a covered stage that will protect their instruments and costumes from the elements; I’m talking about creating opportunity for recent immigrants from Somalia or the Philippines to share their culture in ways that are authentic and respectful, whether that means in a local church, grange hall, or town park.
The Arts Council has begun planning its second statewide community arts project called “Art Fits Vermont.” We’ll give away thousands of wood and paper puzzle pieces for folks to decorate and communities will create exhibits, parties, auctions, and other community-building/fundraising opportunities using the resulting artwork. It’s essentially the same type of project as the 2006 Palettes of Vermont but with a few nuances. First, it is occurring at the same time as the lead-in to and celebration of the Lake Champlain Quadricentennial. For many of you this means there is a ready-made theme to exploit if you want. Second, we intend to create an arts exchange with Quebec, France, and New York using the puzzle pieces as the vehicle. And finally, it is our intention to allow a lot more lead time and (are you sitting down?) financial resources to local arts councils throughout the state, to allow them to create plans that locally engage their artists, their town planners, their selectboards, and other community folks in this wonderful activity.
During Palettes of Vermont, a significant number of local arts agencies were unable to shift the momentum of their programs enough to incorporate the opportunity presented by the project. For “Art Fits Vermont” you will have time to plan, and up to 18 months in which to present your local projects (Spring of 2008 through Fall 2009). We hope this will allow our local arts agencies to demonstrate just how varied, talented, and fun their communities can be!
Best of all, among all the gloom and doom coming out of Washington these days, there is one bright star. The recent budget passed by Congress and signed into law by the President includes a $23 million increase for the National Endowment for the Arts. Due to the funding formula, this means the Arts Council can expect up to $103,000 more from the Feds this coming year. Best of all, this new money will require a one-to-one cash match from the state legislature. The Governor has already recommended a $13,000 increase to our budget for FY 2009. We are asking the legislature for the remainder: $90,000.
This combined Federal-state funding will fuel the “Art Fits Vermont” program—with direct cash grants to community arts organizations, and with enhanced marketing and promotional tools that will encourage visitors from in-state, out-of-state, and abroad to stay and experience Vermont in a whole new way.
We need your help, so don’t be shy about dropping a note to your own state legislator or Senator (a phone call will also do just as well), saying how much you support the Council’s request for a $90,000 increase. Don’t be shy about participating in Art Fits Vermont. The official kick-off is in April. Until then remember—even as we head into the dark days of February the days are getting longer. It’s not all doom and gloom!
For the next six months or so, the Vermont Council on Rural Development (with whom we have partnered for the last several years on the Creative Economy/Creative Communities projects) has undertaken a once-in-a-generation challenge: to capture what Vermonters envision for their future. This Council on Vermont's Future has been charged with developing a thorough and accountable way to draw people from all over Vermont into a discussion, a “statewide town meeting” if you will, to discuss critical issues such as the use, protection and preservation of Vermont’s natural and cultural resources, how to responsibly develop Vermont’s economy while protecting and improving its social and educational infrastructure, and a myriad of other issues of concern to Vermonters and their families.
It is IMPERATIVE that you engage in these discussions. In the same way that no one outside your town or village is in a better position to know how to improve the quality of life in your community than you, it follows that the same must be true for the state as a whole. Although we can look to other states for good ideas, it’s up to us to consider them in the context of our unique circumstances.
And while this is going on, an even more specific planning process is under way.
The Arts Council believes that the strongest communities are those in which the cultural sector is actively engaged in collaborating with town planners, local schools and social service agencies on projects that infuse town life with art and art-making. I’m not just talking about gallery tours and music, theater, and dance performances in local venues (although for many that is the heart of it all). I’m talking about designing our public places so that they aren’t just “cheap and practical” but “beautiful and welcoming;” I’m talking about creating opportunities for student performers to “plug and play” at their local farmers markets on a covered stage that will protect their instruments and costumes from the elements; I’m talking about creating opportunity for recent immigrants from Somalia or the Philippines to share their culture in ways that are authentic and respectful, whether that means in a local church, grange hall, or town park.
The Arts Council has begun planning its second statewide community arts project called “Art Fits Vermont.” We’ll give away thousands of wood and paper puzzle pieces for folks to decorate and communities will create exhibits, parties, auctions, and other community-building/fundraising opportunities using the resulting artwork. It’s essentially the same type of project as the 2006 Palettes of Vermont but with a few nuances. First, it is occurring at the same time as the lead-in to and celebration of the Lake Champlain Quadricentennial. For many of you this means there is a ready-made theme to exploit if you want. Second, we intend to create an arts exchange with Quebec, France, and New York using the puzzle pieces as the vehicle. And finally, it is our intention to allow a lot more lead time and (are you sitting down?) financial resources to local arts councils throughout the state, to allow them to create plans that locally engage their artists, their town planners, their selectboards, and other community folks in this wonderful activity.
During Palettes of Vermont, a significant number of local arts agencies were unable to shift the momentum of their programs enough to incorporate the opportunity presented by the project. For “Art Fits Vermont” you will have time to plan, and up to 18 months in which to present your local projects (Spring of 2008 through Fall 2009). We hope this will allow our local arts agencies to demonstrate just how varied, talented, and fun their communities can be!
Best of all, among all the gloom and doom coming out of Washington these days, there is one bright star. The recent budget passed by Congress and signed into law by the President includes a $23 million increase for the National Endowment for the Arts. Due to the funding formula, this means the Arts Council can expect up to $103,000 more from the Feds this coming year. Best of all, this new money will require a one-to-one cash match from the state legislature. The Governor has already recommended a $13,000 increase to our budget for FY 2009. We are asking the legislature for the remainder: $90,000.
This combined Federal-state funding will fuel the “Art Fits Vermont” program—with direct cash grants to community arts organizations, and with enhanced marketing and promotional tools that will encourage visitors from in-state, out-of-state, and abroad to stay and experience Vermont in a whole new way.
We need your help, so don’t be shy about dropping a note to your own state legislator or Senator (a phone call will also do just as well), saying how much you support the Council’s request for a $90,000 increase. Don’t be shy about participating in Art Fits Vermont. The official kick-off is in April. Until then remember—even as we head into the dark days of February the days are getting longer. It’s not all doom and gloom!
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
CULTURAL FACILITIES COMES OF AGE
A lot of people had fun last Friday morning. Sixteen organizations receiving Cultural Facilities Program funding sent representatives to our grant awards ceremony in the State House’s Cedar Creek Room. They were met by 11 Arts Council staff, two trustees, the Governor, and more than 20 of their elected state representatives and senators.
It was a party. Or, as is usually the case in the State House, it was a “multi-party.” For about an hour Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Progressives set aside their differences over health care, property tax reform, transportation funding and other big ticket issues and celebrated the core of Vermont’s Creative Economy—its theaters, concert halls, libraries, historical societies, grange halls, town hall auditoriums, and even a church facility.
Grants totaling more than $200,000 were awarded for physical improvements that will expand facilities’ capacity to support more varied cultural programs and serve broader audiences. For most, grants will be used to improve physical access for people with limited mobility. Thanks to the Governor, however, one grantee will have a special charge.
In his remarks to the recipients, the Governor registered two eye-popping, hand-clapping moments. The first was his suggestion that some of the grants awarded “weren’t exactly sexy” and referred specifically to the Brandon Town Hall’s grant to fund the installation of a state-of-the-art fire suppression system. When the Brandon contingent stood to receive their award they promised (to lots of laughter and applause) the Governor that theirs would be the first ever, state-of-the-art, sexy fire suppression system.
Hardened State House observers, including the WCAX reporter covering the event, assured me that this was the first time ever that the word “sexy” was bandied about so freely in a formal State House ceremony involving so many elected officials. It is further evidence that, in Vermont at least, the “culture wars” of the early 1990s are truly over.
The Governor’s second eye-popping, hand-clapping moment was towards the end of his remarks when, with no prior indication, he took advantage of the moment to express his commitment to the Cultural Facilities program by publicly stating his intention to recommend continuing to fund the program at its $200,000 level in the FY 2009 Capital Appropriations Budget.
To the untrained ear, this may sound like a non-event. The program is already on the books at $200,000 so what’s the big deal? The Governor is recommending status quo, right?
The big deal is that two years ago the Governor’s recommendation was $0; last year it was $50,000. In both years it was the Senate Appropriations committee that led the charge to increase the program to its current $200,000 level (thank you Sen. Phil Scott and Rep. Alice Emmons). With the Governor’s support at the front end of the appropriations process, not only are the late-session, high-tension negotiations between the House and Senate greatly mitigated (if not eliminated), but we are now able to consider ways to expand the program to include non-traditional venues like farmers markets and other municipal spaces where the public gather. Check out H. 185 submitted by Reps. Botzow, Stephens, et. al. regarding farmers markets. It gained some traction last year, but it will get a lot more if it gets attached as an additional funding stream to the Cultural Facilities bill. Stay tuned.
In the meantime, the Cultural Facilities Program came of age last week and sixteen grantees whose programs and activities serve as the glue that keeps Vermont’s communities so vital, were on hand to celebrate. Congratulations one and all!
It was a party. Or, as is usually the case in the State House, it was a “multi-party.” For about an hour Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Progressives set aside their differences over health care, property tax reform, transportation funding and other big ticket issues and celebrated the core of Vermont’s Creative Economy—its theaters, concert halls, libraries, historical societies, grange halls, town hall auditoriums, and even a church facility.
Grants totaling more than $200,000 were awarded for physical improvements that will expand facilities’ capacity to support more varied cultural programs and serve broader audiences. For most, grants will be used to improve physical access for people with limited mobility. Thanks to the Governor, however, one grantee will have a special charge.
In his remarks to the recipients, the Governor registered two eye-popping, hand-clapping moments. The first was his suggestion that some of the grants awarded “weren’t exactly sexy” and referred specifically to the Brandon Town Hall’s grant to fund the installation of a state-of-the-art fire suppression system. When the Brandon contingent stood to receive their award they promised (to lots of laughter and applause) the Governor that theirs would be the first ever, state-of-the-art, sexy fire suppression system.
Hardened State House observers, including the WCAX reporter covering the event, assured me that this was the first time ever that the word “sexy” was bandied about so freely in a formal State House ceremony involving so many elected officials. It is further evidence that, in Vermont at least, the “culture wars” of the early 1990s are truly over.
The Governor’s second eye-popping, hand-clapping moment was towards the end of his remarks when, with no prior indication, he took advantage of the moment to express his commitment to the Cultural Facilities program by publicly stating his intention to recommend continuing to fund the program at its $200,000 level in the FY 2009 Capital Appropriations Budget.
To the untrained ear, this may sound like a non-event. The program is already on the books at $200,000 so what’s the big deal? The Governor is recommending status quo, right?
The big deal is that two years ago the Governor’s recommendation was $0; last year it was $50,000. In both years it was the Senate Appropriations committee that led the charge to increase the program to its current $200,000 level (thank you Sen. Phil Scott and Rep. Alice Emmons). With the Governor’s support at the front end of the appropriations process, not only are the late-session, high-tension negotiations between the House and Senate greatly mitigated (if not eliminated), but we are now able to consider ways to expand the program to include non-traditional venues like farmers markets and other municipal spaces where the public gather. Check out H. 185 submitted by Reps. Botzow, Stephens, et. al. regarding farmers markets. It gained some traction last year, but it will get a lot more if it gets attached as an additional funding stream to the Cultural Facilities bill. Stay tuned.
In the meantime, the Cultural Facilities Program came of age last week and sixteen grantees whose programs and activities serve as the glue that keeps Vermont’s communities so vital, were on hand to celebrate. Congratulations one and all!
Friday, January 4, 2008
NEW YEAR WISHES
As Jimi Hendrix said on his live recording with Buddy Miles, “Happy New Year first of all!”
In the spirit of the moment, I have put together a wish list for the coming 12 months. Some of them are large in scope (global, even), and some are more intimate—suitable for a state the size of Vermont. Please share with me your own wishes, but above all else, have a safe and pleasant New Year!
I wish …
… to wake up sometime in January 2008 and learn that the proposed increase for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was a typo and that the real figure is $200 million, thus bringing NEA closer into alignment with its 1992 appropriation. For now, we are all well-satisfied with $20 million! Thank you, Rep. Welch, Sen. Sanders and Sen. Leahy. Your hard work and support for the NEA and for the arts in general are well-appreciated.
…to convince, by the end of the 2008 Legislative session, the Governor and a 2/3rds majority of both the House and Senate that the Arts and Cultural sector in Vermont is a profound income-generating sector that far exceeds the cost of the state’s investment in it through us. Not only will the $20 million NEA increase directly impact our program support, but any grant from the NEA comes with a matching state requirement—which for Vermont could mean a significant increase in our state appropriation. Over the years, our own studies have shown consistent, 7-to-1 returns on our own investments in Vermont communities: for every dollar the Arts Council invests in programs throughout the state, the organization receiving our funds generates seven dollars from local and private resources. We are an “income center” to the State of Vermont, not a “cost center.” We need to get better at explaining this to all of our legislators so that they really understand it.
…policy-makers in Vermont allow local investment in the Creative Economy to occur primarily (though not exclusively) in the Arts and Cultural sectors. We already have large state agencies that support (or easily could support) innovation in Agriculture and Commerce/Community Development. Sure, “improvements in technology,” “sustainable and clean energy production,” “affordable housing,” and “affordable health-care” are all crucial to Vermont’s vision of itself in the 21st Century, and established systems already exist to facilitate investment in those areas. However entities that support individual creativity, like our museums, galleries, and performing arts centers, only have us and relative to the growth of the rest of state government in the last 15 years, our budget is 30% smaller.
…the School Boards across the State would recognize that learning in the arts, and learning about the arts are not just words in the No Child Left Behind Act, but crucial investments that not only help kids with certain types of learning disabilities or “engagement issues” stay in school and become productive, but they offer a safe, time-tested means to practice being creative, collaborative, and focused on achieving positive outcomes. As Liz Lerman once said, if anyone in the Bush White House had done theater in high school or college and used the skills they picked up in rehearsals as part of the planning process for invading Iraq, they would have learned very quickly that their script lacked a coherent ending. Arts Education should be the last thing on a school’s chopping block, not the first.
… for Vermont’s creative sectors to seek out the Vermont Council on Rural Development’s "Council on the Future of Vermont" meetings all over the state and play a very visible role in these important, once-in-a-generation discussions. We all have to figure out how to confidently manage Vermont’s unique natural, cultural, and economic assets so as to not destroy them even as we exploit them. Call me biased, but if it’s a conversation about innovation, creative workforce preparation, building community and social capital, improving public transportation, creating more affordable housing and health care, improving access to fiber-optic technology, and managing our energy and environment so that there is some of both in the coming generations—artists MUST be at the table. After all, history has shown that artists’ creative output is consistently the most thoughtful and honest reflection of the human experience. And what is needed most is creative thinking, right?
…Vermont would listen to Sen. Bill Doyle and the Snelling Center for Government and consider a proposed four-year election cycle for the Governor and other statewide elected officials seriously. It helps create better long-term policy and, as an added bonus, makes us pay more careful attention to who we vote for.
…every man, woman, and child in the state of Vermont will participate in Art Fits (our next planned statewide community arts project like Palettes of Vermont), and as a result of their incredible experience, will be inspired to contribute $1 to every one of their local arts organizations, and then—after thinking about how little that is, contribute another dollar! That $1.24 million will sure do a lot of good in communities all over Vermont!
Does anyone out there have any more to add?
Happy 2008 to all of you!
In the spirit of the moment, I have put together a wish list for the coming 12 months. Some of them are large in scope (global, even), and some are more intimate—suitable for a state the size of Vermont. Please share with me your own wishes, but above all else, have a safe and pleasant New Year!
I wish …
… to wake up sometime in January 2008 and learn that the proposed increase for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was a typo and that the real figure is $200 million, thus bringing NEA closer into alignment with its 1992 appropriation. For now, we are all well-satisfied with $20 million! Thank you, Rep. Welch, Sen. Sanders and Sen. Leahy. Your hard work and support for the NEA and for the arts in general are well-appreciated.
…to convince, by the end of the 2008 Legislative session, the Governor and a 2/3rds majority of both the House and Senate that the Arts and Cultural sector in Vermont is a profound income-generating sector that far exceeds the cost of the state’s investment in it through us. Not only will the $20 million NEA increase directly impact our program support, but any grant from the NEA comes with a matching state requirement—which for Vermont could mean a significant increase in our state appropriation. Over the years, our own studies have shown consistent, 7-to-1 returns on our own investments in Vermont communities: for every dollar the Arts Council invests in programs throughout the state, the organization receiving our funds generates seven dollars from local and private resources. We are an “income center” to the State of Vermont, not a “cost center.” We need to get better at explaining this to all of our legislators so that they really understand it.
…policy-makers in Vermont allow local investment in the Creative Economy to occur primarily (though not exclusively) in the Arts and Cultural sectors. We already have large state agencies that support (or easily could support) innovation in Agriculture and Commerce/Community Development. Sure, “improvements in technology,” “sustainable and clean energy production,” “affordable housing,” and “affordable health-care” are all crucial to Vermont’s vision of itself in the 21st Century, and established systems already exist to facilitate investment in those areas. However entities that support individual creativity, like our museums, galleries, and performing arts centers, only have us and relative to the growth of the rest of state government in the last 15 years, our budget is 30% smaller.
…the School Boards across the State would recognize that learning in the arts, and learning about the arts are not just words in the No Child Left Behind Act, but crucial investments that not only help kids with certain types of learning disabilities or “engagement issues” stay in school and become productive, but they offer a safe, time-tested means to practice being creative, collaborative, and focused on achieving positive outcomes. As Liz Lerman once said, if anyone in the Bush White House had done theater in high school or college and used the skills they picked up in rehearsals as part of the planning process for invading Iraq, they would have learned very quickly that their script lacked a coherent ending. Arts Education should be the last thing on a school’s chopping block, not the first.
… for Vermont’s creative sectors to seek out the Vermont Council on Rural Development’s "Council on the Future of Vermont" meetings all over the state and play a very visible role in these important, once-in-a-generation discussions. We all have to figure out how to confidently manage Vermont’s unique natural, cultural, and economic assets so as to not destroy them even as we exploit them. Call me biased, but if it’s a conversation about innovation, creative workforce preparation, building community and social capital, improving public transportation, creating more affordable housing and health care, improving access to fiber-optic technology, and managing our energy and environment so that there is some of both in the coming generations—artists MUST be at the table. After all, history has shown that artists’ creative output is consistently the most thoughtful and honest reflection of the human experience. And what is needed most is creative thinking, right?
…Vermont would listen to Sen. Bill Doyle and the Snelling Center for Government and consider a proposed four-year election cycle for the Governor and other statewide elected officials seriously. It helps create better long-term policy and, as an added bonus, makes us pay more careful attention to who we vote for.
…every man, woman, and child in the state of Vermont will participate in Art Fits (our next planned statewide community arts project like Palettes of Vermont), and as a result of their incredible experience, will be inspired to contribute $1 to every one of their local arts organizations, and then—after thinking about how little that is, contribute another dollar! That $1.24 million will sure do a lot of good in communities all over Vermont!
Does anyone out there have any more to add?
Happy 2008 to all of you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
