No great city cuts public art funding
All good politicians have discerning noses. A whiff of anything that could jeopardize their image puts them on alert. And when a controversial issue comes up for a vote, they ask themselves, “How must I vote to be a hero in the eyes of the public? Better still, how must I vote to look like a savior?”
Having worked on eight presidential campaigns, and about 100 regional and local races, I’m like the guy in the Farmers Insurance ads: “I know a thing or two, because I’ve seen a thing or two.”
Most politicians, whether veterans or rookies, want to do the right thing. They want to represent their constituency, and our city, with integrity — as long as they look good doing it.
Let’s take the issue of public art in San Antonio. Not as top of mind as other issues such as drainage, yet it’s an issue that must be taken seriously because it is central to how we express ourselves and what we say we are as a city.
For as long as humans have inhabited this Earth, we’ve expressed ourselves in many ways. Through hieroglyphics and signage. Through stories and writing. And through public art.
Public art endures worldwide because through it, we create beauty. We communicate. We learn. We build. We share. Public art is a natural way of expressing our happiness. Our joys. Our needs. Our fears. Our tragedies. Our pride. And it is for all.
In San Antonio, for more than 25 years, publicly funded art has helped this city emerge as a national leader in cultural understanding and awareness. Thanks to city and Bexar County leaders such as County Judge Nelson Wolff, former Mayors Phil Hardberger and Julián Castro, and, more recently, Mayor Ron Nirenberg, public art has been part of the city and county budget.
But now, just as we are on the cusp of our rightful place, nationally and internationally, as a cultural capital, city bureaucrats are proposing waiving the 1 percent allocation to public art in the proposed drainage/flooding portion of the upcoming bond program. This, after we as voters approved it in the most recent bond election.
So why would we even think of taking away public art funds? Why would we ever go back to the
days when San Antonio was thought of as a sleepy little behind-the-times town? All great cities fund public art. And fund it well. Paris. Rome. Berlin. Los Angeles. Dallas.
And why would we let the city back out on its promise to the voters? Are we to believe that ignoring public opinion is a way forward? That’s not the San Antonio we know. Today’s San Antonio is bigger than that. And better than that.
We ask the city leaders to keep true to their word. To fund public art. Like you said you would. Like we know you should.
P.S. Two suggestions to City Council members as they consider the vote: One, do the right thing and represent your constituency with integrity. Vote to leave the 1 percent for public art in the budget on all public capital projects. Don’t create a bait-andswitch slippery slope by siphoning off public art funds to whatever project seems most popular (or underfunded) at the time. Two, get to work on the next bond issue that includes an adequate allocation that also fixes the more than 100-year-old drainage problem once and for all. You’ll look good doing it.