That the folks in the room didn’t assume my humor really does speak to the hyperbole that regularly occurs in these kinds of conversations. I am confident in my leadership of the DC Advocates for the Arts.  But I do still regularly question it, and have it questioned for me, and I don’t think that’s a weakness. I almost wish I was like a Luddite, or Randian protagonist, interested only in my own success, but in fact, I am not.  I hope that my leadership is a part of something larger than myself, and if it is, my leadership is replaceable. To me that is not in conflict with my confidence, professionalism, commitment, or leadership, but it does temper my self-promotion.

In one of those informational meetings a few months ago a staff member for DC Councilmember Cheh suggested I contact Janet Fries, a dc-based lawyer. He mentioned that Janet had been reviewing the DC Bar materials relevant to the arts, and had found that there was a hole in the code regarding gallery transactions. I had no idea what he was talking about, but I followed up with Janet and she explained it to me. I brought the issue to the DC Advocates for the Arts board, and with Janet’s help we’ve created a petition asking the council to address our specific concerns.

DC needs to amend the Commercial Code so that artists’ property isn’t taken by creditors if a gallery goes through bankruptcy. When they overhauled the business laws a few years ago they stripped out sections governing consignment transactions — which is what it is when an artist gives their work under contract to a gallery. There is no lose in this for anyone. We know with community support we can get this done. If you haven’t signed the petition yet, please click here and sign now!

The Safety Net for the District’s most needy was a major issue in last year’s budget deliberations, and it remains a major concern this year. The budget fight happening in the District is mirrored in similar fights across the country. The Americans for the Arts are tracking budget debates nationwide, and they recently shared an article which noted,

“Children’s welfare supporters faced off against art advocates in Sacramento because of a proposal to spend a half million dollars on new exhibits at the future Crocker Art Museum…. ‘We’re in a crisis. We’re in a situation where kids are going to die,’ child advocate Bob Wilson said.”

That terrible crisis occurring within California’s budget battle highlights two things: that the most important social service politicians can provide – long term – is sound fiscal policy; and that the biggest mistake arts advocates can make right now is to turn a blind eye to the most needy. Arts advocates must speak out to preserve arts education, arts investment, and public art. But we should also be fighting for affordable housing, meals for the homeless, and education. Because we are in a down economy, it is critical that arts advocates take the time to inform themselves, and participate in these discussions intelligently. As Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, “We’re each entitled to our own set of opinions, not our own set of facts.”

The proposed FY 11 budget includes a 10% cut for the arts this year, which is in line with general reductions in development spending. Due to no fault of their own, many city Safety Net programs have been decimated by the economic decline, including, as an example, low income housing. The Housing Trust Fund, which supported affordable housing for the most needy in the District, had grown over the last decade based on a dedicated appropriation allocating15 percent of deed recordation and transfer taxes (from sale of real estate) to the fund. But when the market crashed, and people stopped buying homes, the fund also crashed, and money for low-income housing projects disappeared.

Policy-makers have to find new revenue streams because money for existing programs has disappeared. Last year, the council took a number of steps, including: DC’s general sales tax rate was increased from 5.75 percent to 6 percent; The Cigarette tax was raised from $2 per pack to $2.50; The Gasoline tax was raised from 20 cents per gallon to 23.5 cents, matching the rate in Maryland, and revenues from the tax were moved from DC’s highway trust fund to the city’s general fund. With all of the things they did do last year, there were a number of things that they considered, and did not do. One example is a tax on live theater performances.

In some ways, a ticket tax would make sense. Last year, Ed Lazere, Director of the DC Fiscal Policy Institute, wrote a post in Greater Greater Washington, suggesting that the city should impose a theater ticket tax. He noted, “If you go to an event at the Verizon Center or a Nationals game, the ticket sales tax is 10 percent. Movie tickets are taxed at the basic rate of 5.75 percent. But people who buy tickets to theater performances — plays, musicals, opera, dance, etc. — don’t pay any sales tax at all.” Ed was one of the people responsible for securing the housing trust fund appropriation mentioned earlier, and is a respected voice in public policy considerations.

When the DC Advocates for the Arts visited with Councilmember Kwame Brown last year protesting arts funding cuts, his staff discussed the possibility of a dedicated tax for the arts generated from a ticket tax. Before the bill could even be introduced, however, arts businesses, already completely strapped by the down economy, were successful in convincing policy-makers that the proposal would actually reduce total revenues. (A tax would effectively make ticket prices more expensive, and this could affect number of tickets sold.) This year, again, council members want to raise revenue so that they can save programs. So again this year, a lot of ideas are being floated, including the same theater tax idea. Given that it’s election season, it’s unlikely that arts interests will be completely ignored to raise a small amount of tax revenue. The DC Advocates for the Arts will keep you informed as the budget debates proceed, and we hope that you will participate to whatever extent you are able.

“Transparency is key to keeping legislators, agencies and politicians in line. But there are two types of transparency:

1. Transparency after the fact.
2. Transparency before the fact.

Transparency after the fact is something we have to some degree in the US.  For example, we know about the final versions of laws that are passed, after they have been passed. Well, that is better than nothing. However, the law has been passed and it is too late to reverse it.

Transparency before the fact is something that hardly exists at all at the state and congressional levels. Transparency before the fact would mean that the final, final version of the bill is available to everyone several days in advance of the vote.

Now, that is real transparency! This provides a way for citizens to find out about legislators who are serving special interests before the law is passed. This provides us with the opportunity to get our voices heard before the law is passed.  Now that is a much better form of transparency.

Imagine if each government agency was required to display to the American people their final, final versions of rules and laws and budgets many days before they were allowed to make them official.

Transparency before the fact creates and inspires community activism and unity. It also helps to increase proper representation and accountability.

Transparency after the fact helps in those areas and is needed, but it also contributes to apathy and is less important than transparency before the fact. — because it is already too late — the damage has been done.”

I think that transparency is an arts issue because the numbers really are where the rubber meets the road. We should know where the government is planning to spend our money, as well as where they have spent it.

–James Madison, letter to W.T. Barry, August 4, 1822