Thank you for helping to save VCA

For those who haven't heard the recent buzz regarding the outcome of the state budget, the Virginia Commission for the Arts has been spared. The original House bill proposed 50% cuts to VCA in FY11 and total elimination in FY12. The conference committee was able to reach a much more reasonable compromise over the weekend, resulting in a 16.4% cut to VCA. This is in addition to the 30% in cuts VCA previously endured, but is still a huge victory compared to the potential elimination of our state arts agency.

The economy has a long way to go before nonprofit arts organizations return to their pre-recession capacity, but the fact that VCA has been spared is promising news. Why did legislators have a sudden change of heart? There is no question that, politics aside, the public outcry in support of the arts played a significant role in preserving the Commission for the Arts. To everyone who called, visited, wrote a letter or sent an email - THANK YOU! Your efforts truly made a difference.

Part C: Replacing Brahms with Wayne and Underwood, or "Vox Populi, Take the Wheel"

Original post by Bruce Miller on The Barksdale Buzz 3/7/10

If this is your first look at my three-part blog response to A. Barton Hinkle's Op/Ed piece, Picking Apart Arguments for Funding the Arts, published in Friday's (March 5) Times-Dispatch, you may want to scroll down and read Parts A and B first. I would provide a link to Hinkle's original dissection, but I can't locate Picking Apart ... on the Times-Dispatch website. I found the other two Op/Ed pieces that shared a page with Hinkle, but his piece isn't there, at least not as of this writing. If anyone can find it, please provide the web address in a comment. Thanks.

As he gleefully "picks apart" the statements of those of us who believe it would be unwise for Virginia to become the first state in the nation to eliminate its arts commission, as recommended by the Virginia House of Delegates, Hinkle states: "Some arts advocates also imply that the arts in Virginia will disappear without state support. There is no denying that some arts organizations will suffer and might even fold. But it is simply not true that closing the VCA would mean the end of drama, the end of symphony music, the end of gallery exhibits in the Old Dominion."

"Some with a soft spot for Brahms and Bryars, for Tallis and Telemann, may be inclined to snicker at the indulgence which confers the name of artist on the likes of Lil Wayne or Carrie Underwood. But a heart moved by pop music is moved no less because the music enjoys commercial success (all the more reason to doubt claims that shutting the VCA will leave Virginians stranded in a world bereft of uplift)."

So there it is. Hinkle is telling us that eliminating all arts funding from the state budget may bring about the demise of arts institutions that generations of Virginians have dedicated their lives to building. But so what? We'll always have pop culture. Seriously. Hinkle reassures by asserting his belief that there's no real difference between Brahms and Telemann, Lil Wayne and Carrie Underwood.

Are you scared yet?

"This touches on another difficulty," Hinkle continues, "namely the tension between artistic merit and latitudinarianism."

All right. I had to look it up too. Latitudinarianism means "holding or expressing broad or tolerant views, especially in religious matters."

In other words, in the gospel according to Hinkle (and you'll find the same in the playbook of many social conservatives), there is tension between artistic elitists (that's you and me, friends) and our pop culture brethren who express their "broad and tolerant" views by embracing rap music and American Idol.

Call me crazy, but I don't feel the tension.

I admit I'm not into rap, but some of my best friends are. I caught most episodes of Simon and Paula last season, and I've always thought Carrie Underwood was cute as a bug. The first time I heard her heartfelt rendition of Jesus Take the Wheel, it brought a tear to my eye. Seriously. I like that song a lot. As anyone will tell you, I'm as corny as Kansas in August, I cry unapologetically at Hallmark commercials, and I teach Sunday School to boot.

I also subscribe to a dogma that has been passed on to me by my parents and teachers from first grade forward. It's a firm belief, a way of living that I'm also trying to pass on to my own children. And that's where Hinkle nails me.

The dogma says this. There is a unique value to great art. Contemporary society has the wonderful opportunity (obligation?) to benefit from and enjoy the classic works of Beethoven, Rostand, Petipa and Benoist, as well as more contemporary masters like Bartók, Nottage, Bausch and Bearden. It is only through the preservation and presentation of great art from the past that we can truly discover, develop, celebrate and pass on to our children the great artists of our present.

The noble work of the nonprofit arts sector is not to dwell on or live in the past, but it is to offer and entertain new perspectives on great work, should that work be a product of the previous week or the previous century. If we don't, if we as a society rely solely on the more accessible delights of the popular and commercial, we will be failing our responsibility to our children and our heritage, to history and world culture.

That brings us to the core of the ideological argument.

"The demand by the anointed for continued favoritism," Hinkle proffers, "is not necessarily ennobled just because it is dolled up in gauzy sentiment." In other words, I can write these blogs till I'm blue in the face, but it doesn't matter. We can dress up our art all we want, friends, but we can't take it out to dinner.

And when we do dare to ask, plead for, demand our seat at the table, Hinkle suggests, the populists who think that Lil Wayne is all that and a bag of chips have every good reason to drive us back into our ivory towers and cut off the funding that allows us to survive.

A. Barton Hinkle is entitled to his opinion. So am I. It's time to take sides. Which side are you on?

During this statewide debate that will probably last the rest of my lifetime, if we allow ourselves to be overcome by fatique, fear or frustration, and throw our hands up and off the wheel, who's going to drive?

--Bruce Miller

Photo Subjects (top to bottom): Carrie Underwood, Ludwig van Beethoven, Edmund Rostand, Marius Petipa, Marie-Guillemine Benoist, Bela Bartok, Lynn Nottage, Pina Bausch, Romare Bearden, Lil Wayne

Part B: Rolls-Royce and “a Medicaid Patient’s Physical Agony"

Original Post by Bruce Miller on The Barksdale Buzz 3/6/10

After trying to compare, illogically, the arts to scouts, grocery stores, newspapers and places of worship in yesterday's Times-Dispatch (see my previous post, Taking On Those Who Buy Ink by the Barrel - Part A), A. Barton Hinkle moves on to pick apart the argument offered by those who believe that arts funding should stay in the state budget because of the jobs that such funding makes possible.

"Any entity that employs people provides jobs by definition," he states, "and might be said to contribute to the economic vitality of a community. If that is the standard upon which we justify state funding, then there is very little in the commonwealth that would not qualify."

This argument is gratuitous, and Hinkle knows it. He fails to mention the tens of millions that the state spends each year to create jobs in Virginia and to support the creation and sustenance of small businesses. He asks his readers to compare the nonprofit arts industry to Virginia's thriving for-profit businesses, rather than to the new and/or struggling businesses that receive state support, or the libraries and parks that are the more appropriate comparison.

Here's one specific example. Rolls-Royce is certainly a thriving for-profit business. Yet they successfully made the argument to the Virginia legislature that they needed state support if they were to build a new aircraft engine production plant in Prince George County, about 25 miles southwest of Richmond. In fact, the commonwealth put together a $56.8 million incentive package to lure Rolls-Royce to our state, and no arts-eliminator even suggests that a penny of that package be cut from this year's budget.

For the record, I think the legislature was wise to negotiate this funding, and is wise to keep it in tact. Economic development is vitally important. As Hugh Keogh, CEO of the Virginia Chamber of Commerce told the Times-Dispatch, "If you're going to play in the big leagues, you're going to have to come to the field with more than your glove. Virginia has learned that over the past 15 years."

But if you're pro-economic development, and what reasonable person isn't, how can you scoff at spending a measly $4.4 million to support the 20,000 jobs made possible by the Virginia Commission for the Arts while embracing the spending of $56.8 million to support the 140 jobs that Rolls-Royce has promised?

In today's competitive environment, it's sound business practice to offer incentives to lure successful businesses to Virginia. If Virginia didn't do it, we'd lose employers to other neighboring states. Rolls-Royce plans to begin hiring 140 workers now, but they hope to build their eventual work force to 500 Virginians. Still, why exactly does Hinkle think the 140 to 500 Rolls-Royce jobs matter, and the 20,000 VCA-enabled jobs don't?

Perhaps he is uninformed. Perhaps he hasn't interviewed any arts leaders, and so he has no idea that our leading arts organizations are routinely wooed by other states that would be all too happy were we to relocate our jobs to their jurisdictions.

As one example, Theatre IV tours nationally to about 32 states each year. This tour generates just over $1 million in out-of-state revenue that comes back to Virginia, and is spent by our nonprofit company to pay Virginia salaries and rents, and to buy Virginia goods and services. The Maryland Arts Council has on several occasions mentioned that they would like for Theatre IV to consider relocating its national tour to their state. As incentive, Maryland and its localities contribute to nonprofit arts organizations approximately 15% of their expenditures. Were we to move our HQ to Maryland, our $1 million in national tour revenue would likely be matched by $150,000 in state and local funds. In Virginia, our national tour revenue receives zero dollars in state support.

Theatre IV has no desire to move to Maryland. Make no mistake, our HOME is here. But if the Virginia Commission for the Arts is eliminated, costing Theatre IV the approximately $95,000 that we now receive in support of the touring instructional programs we present in about 600 Virginia schools each year, we would be idiots not to consider the viability of a move north. With his disregard for Virginia arts jobs, Hinkle may not care. But I suspect there are plenty of other Virginians who would consider the loss of the nation's second largest children's theatre to be a devastating consequence of ill-advised legislation.

Hinkle continues with the manipulative and deplorable tactic of comparing arts funding to the help needed by "a Medicaid patient's physical agony" and "a teenager with severe psychiatric problems (who) can no longer lead a semi-normal life because (the state) has chosen to fund a ballet instead?"

Friends, there is not a single artist I know who is arguing that the arts are more important than health care or mental health. Hinkle and his buddies are making up this hogwash. We cannot let the ideologues fabricate OUR side of the debate and then put it out there in the press as if we actually said it. It may be their intention to make us look self-serving and ridiculous, but we shouldn't sit quietly by and let them do it.

The point is not that anyone believes the arts are more important than helping those in need. The point is that cutting VCA funding will hurt the state budget, not help it. As I've said before, if you want more money to support the worthy causes that the state is honor-bound to fund, then argue in favor of funding the VCA. It's an economic development argument, not a matter of either / or.

The case we are making for state funding is sound. Please read my previous blog post, The REAL Case for the Arts in VA (Feb. 25, 2010). When these arguments are not taken seriously, and preposterous arguments are put in their place, the debate is no longer worthy of respect. It is politics, pure and simple.

Coming tomorrow – Part C: Replacing Brahms with Wayne and Underwood, or "Vox Populi, Take the Wheel"

--Bruce Miller

Taking on Those Who Buy Ink by the Barrel - Part A

Original post by Bruce Miller on The Barksdale Buzz 3/5/10

A. Barton Hinkle's Op/Ed piece in this morning's Times-Dispatch (Picking Apart Arguments for Funding the Arts) is a classic example of how ideology can trump rational thought and respectful debate. I often hold Mr. Hinkle's editorial writing in high regard because he usually builds his arguments on facts. In this case, as he joins the chorus seeking to eliminate the Virginia Commission for the Arts (VCA), he is either unaware of the facts or he chooses to ignore them.

I appreciate his mentioning that my friend Phil Whiteway "scores a nice point when he notes that politicians are quite happy to trot out the arts ... when trying to court Fortune 500 companies," although Phil's comments were more respectful and serious than A. Barton's condensation.

But Hinkle goes on to say "stripped of the rhetorical filigrees at which the arts community is so adept, the plea reduces to: The arts are nice and do good, so they should get taxpayer support." He misrepresents the position of most arts supporters in an attempt to paint us as frivolous and flighty.

Certainly there are a few in the arts community who have been focusing their defense of the VCA on the intrinsic values of arts in society, and that is their right. But many if not most of us have been saying that the main reasons to keep the VCA in the Virginia budget have to do with economic development, education and tourism. Hinkle, like his ideological cronies, deliberately avoids these more conservative arguments.
Hinkle compares the arts to the "Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts," "health-food stores," "newspapers," and "churches, synagogues and mosques," stating that they also are “nice and do good.” He then reasons, if these nice organizations receive no state funding, why should the arts?

The answers are simple, so it is hard to understand why Hinkle even poses the question.

The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, both of which I support, are membership organizations that admit some and fail to admit others. Fundamentally, they exist to meet the needs of their members. Unlike nonprofit arts organizations, their programs are not open to everyone and they do not exist solely to serve the public good.

Now, if someone wants to argue that not all nonprofit arts organizations put the public good front and center, I'll agree with them in that argument, and together we can go after those slackers. But that has nothing to do with the industry as a whole.

Looking at health-food stores and newspapers, both of which I support, anyone among us can point to entrepreneurs who have made their fortunes owning and operating such businesses. That business model exists in abundance. Nonprofit arts organizations are not owned by anyone. They belong to the public, just like libraries and parks.

I co-founded Theatre IV 35 years ago, but I don't own it. When I retire, there's nothing for me to sell and no financial rewards for me to reap. We can all name grocery and newspaper magnets who have made tens of millions and more, but I challenge anyone to point out to me a person of any wealth whose fortunes came from founding a nonprofit arts organization. Such a person and such a business model simply do not exist.

Considering churches, synagogues and mosques, all of which I support, they are religious organizations. They admit members who share a common religious belief. Fundamentally, they exist to exalt the particular religious belief that is shared by their members, and to serve the community in the name of their God. And God bless them for it. But the reality is this. They have existed for centuries in the United States without public support.

Conversely, there are virtually no thriving nonprofit arts organizations that now exist or have ever existed in our nation without public support from their state government. You will be able to find a few unfunded nonprofit theatres, orchestras, dance companies and visual arts organizations, but it will be impossible to find any that maintain professional standards and thrive without state support.

I'm not speaking only of Virginia. Hinkle fails to mention that if Virginia were to eliminate its arts commission, it would be the first state in the union to do so. Are all the other states just stupid, or might it be that they understand sound financial arguments that the ideologues of Virginia simply don't choose even to consider?

Coming tomorrow – Part B: Rolls Royce and “a Medicaid Patient’s Physical Agony”

--Bruce Miller

The REAL case for arts in Virginia

Originally posted by Bruce Miller on 2/25/10 on the Barksdale Buzz:

At least 150 Virginia arts supporters lined the halls of the Virginia Capitol today. It felt like more, but that's how many stickers saying "Save the Arts" were distributed.

However many of us there were, we packed the place, and certainly made a strong statement in favor of continuing state funding for the Virginia Commission for the Arts.

Everywhere we went, smart and well-intentioned individuals asked something like, "Why should the state support the arts when we can't do all that we should be doing for disabled children, for education, for health care for the poor?"

If there were a true choice between these very worthy causes and the minimal financial support required to save the Virginia Commission for the Arts, I too would pick disabled kids, education and health care. The arts will never and should never win the argument that we are "more important" than these very worthy efforts. The case for disabled children, education and health care for the poor has already been argued and won in the hearts and minds of virtually everyone I know. Especially artists.

But in the real world, there is no such choice. Pretending that such a choice exists is an ideological exercise, lacking any foundation in real world economics.

The one choice is this: should Virginia continue to fund the Virginia Commission for the Arts, cutting it proportionally with other agencies, services and efforts, or should the Old Dominion become the first state in the nation to turn its back on its own nonprofit arts industry.

That is the choice. And as we debate the pros and cons, the only truly germane question, given current budget realities, is this: will spending $4 million to maintain the Virginia Commission for the Arts result in a net loss for the state budget or a net gain. If we all agree that we want more money to go to the aforementioned worthy causes (and who doesn't), the question is not whether or not the state should fund the arts, the question is whether such funding will be a sound investment resulting in more revenue to devote to all the things the state is honor-bound to fund.

The Virginia economy, like any large economy, is very inter-connected and complex. An economic impact study conducted in 2000 documents that the nonprofit arts generated $1.1 billion per year in Virginia a decade ago. Wise leaders recognize that the arts are like roads, libraries and state parks. They are among the quality of life components that attract businesses to a community, that attract top students and faculty to universities, that bring out-of-state money into local and state cash registers.

Gone are the days when a thriving American city or town (or state) can be "art free" and still expect to attract jobs. The vast majority of major employers don't move into cities until they determine that a thriving arts and cultural community pre-exists.

They require a robust arts community not only because they want their employees to have something fun to do on Friday night, but also because virtually all business studies indicate that the most educated work forces, the most creative work forces, the work forces most adept at the skills that 21st Century companies need to compete come from communities that are rich in the arts.

Don't believe me? Check out Richard Florida's (PhD, Columbia University) several best-selling business texts: The Rise of the Creative Class, Cities and the Creative Class, and The Flight of the Creative Class. Follow that with a perusal of Daniel Pink's immensely popular A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future.

As for small businesses ... the Virginia economy is based on small businesses. Every legislator says so, especially those who favor eliminating the Virginia Commission for the Arts. The ironic thing is that arts organizations ARE small businesses, employing over 20,000 professionals in Virginia each year.

Eliminating the Virginia Commission for the Arts (as has been proposed by the House) will not save money, it will cost money. Lots of money. If you truly want to get more money for your favorite worthy cause--and we all agree that education, health care etc are worthy causes--then do NOT destroy the infrastructure that enables and sustains 20,000 jobs and offers a 275% return on investment.

Virginia's arts organizations have already accepted cuts exceeding 30%. We haven't whined. We haven't cried "Wolf!" We understand that we need to tighten our belts and sacrifice just like everyone else.

All we ask now is for the Virginia legislature in its entirety to go with the budget recommendations of Gov Kaine, Gov McDonnell and the Virginia Senate. Only the House budget recommends eliminating the Virginia Commission for the Arts.

All we ask is that the legislature in its entirety think big picture. Save the Virginia Commission for the Arts, and allow our nonprofit industry to continue to provide tens of thousands of real jobs, lure hundreds of thousands or more jobs into Virginia, support education, and increase tourism.

We know the job of balancing the budget is extremely hard. But please, examine the concrete evidence. Think long term and big picture. The voters of Virginia deserve no less.

--Bruce Miller

P.S. For those who are twittering and facebook messaging that the story is over and the VCA is gone, be patient. The battle will not be fought, won or lost until March 5, and we won't know the result until a few days after. March 5 is when conferees from the House and the Senate begin meeting to duke it out, finding a common ground between their two versions of the budget. The Senate budget proposes the same 16% cut offered by Gov Kaine. The House budget (which passed today along party lines) proposes a 50% cut in year one and elimination in year two. Now is the time to work even harder to convince House conferees to consider the wisdom of maintaining the VCA.

Bruce's letter to the editor

Original post by Bruce Miller on 2/22/10 on The Barksdale Buzz:

I'm absolutely heartsick about today's news from the House Appropriations Committee. Here's a letter I've written to the T-D. I have no idea if it will run, so I'm printing it again here. PLEASE call your legislatures tomorrow. Legislator contact information can be found on the web at http://legis.virginia.gov/1_cit_guide/contacting_my.html.

Editor - Times-Dispatch:

The House Appropriations Committee is proposing the elimination of the Virginia Commission for the Arts. I have been the artistic director of Theatre IV, The Children's Theatre of Virginia, for the last 35 years. In an effort to create significant cost efficiencies, the staff of Theatre IV also has managed Barksdale Theatre for the last 8 1/2 years.

As a nonprofit administrator, I have always been trained to speak publicly only of success. With regard to this new proposal, it would be irresponsible for me to pretend optimism when I know first-hand the certain disaster that will follow the passage of such misguided legislation.

Every day, Theatre IV and Barksdale, two of our state's most exemplary nonprofits, deal with the fact that Virginia historically and consistently funds the arts at a level lower than any state in our region. We continue to serve over 600,000 Virginians annually, despite the fact that the legislature eliminated direct funding of arts organizations four years ago, and over the last two years has already reduced indirect funding (through the Virginia Commission for the Arts) by 30%.

In the last 16 months, Theatre IV and Barksdale have eliminated 6 positions and have plans to eliminate 2 more (20% of our lean work force). We have reduced salaries by up to 17%, cancelled company support of retirement plans, and increased the employee's share of health insurance. To adjust to the eliminated positions, many on our staff work an 80-hour work week just to keep our nonprofit companies alive.

The elimination of state funding to the Virginia Commission for the Arts will cost Theatre IV and Barksdale Theatre an additional loss of $190,000 per year. That will mean the elimination of seven more jobs. Despite all our best efforts, we will not be able to operate under these conditions.

What the House Appropriations Committee is proposing is the elimination of the nonprofit arts infrastructure that tens of thousands of hard-working Virginians have taken decades to build. Hundreds of jobs will be lost, and the economic repercussions will not be positive; they will be disastrous.

To avoid causing lasting harm to economic development, education, tourism and quality of life, please ask your legislators to oppose the current proposal of the House Appropriations Committee.

Sincerely,
Bruce Miller
Artistic Director, Theatre IV and Barksdale Theatre
1901 Belleau Drive
Richmond, VA 23235
(804) 513-6775

VCA in Jeopardy

Friends of Theatre IV and the arts,

This legislative alert went out late last night from Virginians for the Arts. The Virginia Commission for the Arts is in jeopardy and action is needed ASAP to prevent a 50% cut of VCA in 2011 and total elminiation in 2012.

Theatre IV has received VCA funding of approximately $100,000 annually. Cuts to and elimination of VCA would be a huge blow to us and to our colleague arts organizations, both large and small.

Read on for further details....


URGENT: CONTACT YOUR HOUSE OF
DELEGATES REPRESENTATIVE
More Info

The House budget plan released by the House Appropriations Committee on Sunday calls for reducing arts grants through the Virginia Commission for the Arts by 50 percent during FY11 and eliminating the Commission altogether at the end of FY12.

An attempt to abolish the Commission in the early 1990s was rejected by the General Assembly and led to the creation of Virginians for the Arts to serve as a permanent advocacy force. This recommendation by the House committee represents a regrettable step backwards to 1990.

It is critical that arts advocates contact House members and ask them to oppose this recommendation on the floor of the House in the budget debate, which will be held on Thursday, February 25.

Faxes and phone calls are recommended before email. Find contact information for your legislator here.

Talking points are available here on the VFTA website.

Alan D. Albert
Legislative Counsel
Virginians for the Arts

Three Days at the Kennedy Center

Anne Murphy Douglas, President of the Board of Theatre IV, and Bennett Fidlow, new Board member at Barksdale Theatre, joined Phil and me for a three-day seminar with Michael Kaiser and others at the Kennedy Center. We returned yesterday afternoon after a highly informative, intensive and fun learning experience. We’re eager to put our newfound insights to good use here in Richmond.

For those who don’t know, Michael Kaiser (who also recently spoke at the University of Richmond’s Modlin Center) is a world-renowned arts leader. Prior to becoming President of the Kennedy Center in 2001, Michael served as Executive Director of the Royal Opera House (the largest performing arts organization in the UK), Executive Director of American Ballet Theatre, Executive Director of the Alvin Ailey Dance Theater (the world’s largest modern dance organization), and General Manager of the Kansas City Ballet.

Spending two and a half days with Michael feels a little like cramming a year of arts administration training into 20 hours. Part of his brilliance is that he is able to speak clearly and simply, boiling down his extensive experience and research into comprehensible two-hour sessions. His focus areas at seminars such as this include Building an Effective and Energized Board, Strategic Planning, and Institutional Marketing. Other senior executives from the Kennedy Center staff spoke from their areas of expertise: Business Management, Development, Technology and Program Marketing.

Phil and I have been in our positions for 32 years, and never have I felt more in sync with a speaker. In point after point, it was clear that Michael knew exactly what he was talking about. And the points he made applied not only to mammoth international organizations (the Kennedy Center has an annual budget of approximately $160 million) but also to large regional organizations like Barksdale Theatre and Theatre IV (combined annual budgets of approximately $5 million).

If you’ve been to many seminars like this, you know that experts can sometimes speak for hours in a theoretical realm, offering little practical advice. Michael knows how to cut to the chase—how to identify the challenges we face and then offer specific suggestions on how to address these challenges. It really was a terrific learning experience, very validating, mind-stretching and informative.

Special thanks to the Virginia Commission for the Arts for funding our participation through their Technical Assistance grant program, and to Anne and Bennett for giving up their time to join us. This is one seminar that I think will pay off handsomely in the futures of Barksdale Theatre, Theatre IV and the Metro Richmond arts scene in general.