Bad impression
Houston’s public arts financing system is a complicated piece of work that needs a fix.
A year ago, the Houston Arts Alliance awarded a nearly $1 million commission to local sculptor Ed Wilson to build a stunning, 60-foot-high mobile of stainless-steel bird and cloud forms for the lobby of the newly remodeled George R. Brown Convention Center. Then, a few weeks later, the HAA abruptly withdrew the commission. Amid outrage from the Houston arts community and the resignation of a top staff member, the HAA — a nonprofit organization that administers the bulk of Houston’s public arts funding — backed down, asking Wilson to reapply for the commission.
The embarrassing incident was merely the latest sign that Houston’s public art financing system is broken. Last year, the city of Houston raised $15.7 million for the arts through a dedicated portion of the Hotel Occupancy Tax. In most cities, that money would fund a department of cultural affairs charged with distributing grants to arts organizations and staging cultural events. Houston, on the other hand, outsources these vital municipal tasks to third-party organizations like the HAA, the Museum District and the Miller Theatre Advisory Board.
The largest chunk of the HOT money, around $6 million, goes to the HAA, which is in the second year of a five-year contract with the city. How well is the HAA doing with Houstonians’ money? It depends on whom you ask. The more than 200 organizations and individual artists who received grants last year are certainly grateful, although many have complained about unexplained delays in the grant-making process. The Folklife and Traditional Arts program, led by the experienced and capable Pat Jasper, has staged innovative events like the 2013 Houston SLAB Parade. And the organization’s overhead costs and staff salaries are roughly in line with industry standards.
But there are also deeply rooted structural problems with the HAA that were highlighted by the Wilson debacle. Much of the power in the organization is wielded by committees made up of art-world insiders—gallerists, collectors, arts administrators and, all too infrequently, artists. It was one of these committees that vetoed the Wilson commission at the last minute, overruling the unanimous recommendation of the HAA’s own selection panel. According to documents later made public, the committee was concerned that Wilson wasn’t a “blue chip” artist. If there had been more artists on the committee, perhaps the focus would have been on the quality of the art rather than the reputation of the artist.
Earlier this month, City Council approved a new Arts and Culture Plan, the city’s first since 1993. One of its recommendations is for the city to “provide increased oversight, transparency and accountability in the allocation of City arts and culture grants.” A good first step would be to demand term limits for HAA committee members, a standard practice in comparable organizations around the country. That would inject fresh perspectives into debates about which organizations and projects to fund. Looking ahead, the next mayor should consider carefully before renewing the city’s contract with HAA.
As for Ed Wilson, after resubmitting his original proposal to HAA and waiting on tenterhooks for months, he was finally awarded the commission in March — this time, we hope, for good. Sometimes the little guy does win.