Pooling public art funding a smart step
Since 1977, Pittsburgh has set aside 1% of funding for capital projects to create public art at the site and beautify the city. The so-called “Percent for Art” program, which in Pittsburgh applies to capital projects that cost $500,000 or more, is popular in cities around the country. In Pittsburgh, advocates have for years proposed an alternative funding stream that would pool funds from different projects under a single budget line for a single art project.
On Tuesday, Mayor Gainey proposed that plan to City Council. It’s a smart adjustment that will result in fewer and better funded, as well as more strategically placed, public art projects. The premise is quality over quantity. City Council should pass the measure.
The problem with the current Percent for Art program is that most projects don’t, individually, generate sufficient funds to commission a long-term piece of art. Design, fabrication and installation costs can run tens of thousands of dollars. Currently, a project that costs the city $500,000, for instance, would generate $5,000 for public art that has to be used at that site.
The city’s current capital budget contains nearly $30 million in projects, which would generate nearly $300,000 for public art. That’s a much larger pot of money that could fund a few exceptional long-term pieces.
Not tying funds to specific construction sites will also allow the city to better place public art around the city, including areas without largescale construction projects.
Art matters. It can help define a city’s aesthetic and public persona for generations.
The proposal is a part of Mayor Gainey’s plan to revamp the city’s volunteer Art Commission, which oversees urban design, architectural and landscape features and public art projects. In addition to the changes to the Percent for Art program, he’s also splitting the arts commission into two committees — one for public art and another for civic design — to streamline approvals in both arenas. Both new committees will have professional experts and a community representative.
Three weeks ago, the mayor dismissed the commission’s five sitting members with a vague statement about a “new direction.” The move unnecessarily ruffled feathers in the arts community. Mayor Gainey should have announced the plan sooner, but it’s a good one, nonetheless, and City Council should move it forward.