Arts
Ads for Arts Sake
In the eye-for-an-eye department, the Beautifulcity.ca Alliance has launched the Beautiful City Billboard Fee (BCBF) campaign with the aim to democratize the city's public space by funneling a proposed tax for billboard advertising into Toronto's art funding. The thinking: Why pollute our visual landscape with giant ads that offer no significant returns? (Here's looking at you, Joe Camel)
The Alliance, along with artists, activists and city council members is steadily preparing their case to take to Town Hall.
For a rundown on Saturday's BCBF meeting, Devon Ostrom (local curator, arts advocate and founder of the Beautifulcity.ca Alliance) invited me around to the ROM, where he is guest curator for the multi-platform Housepaint Exhibition. Earlier that day, he conducted the Sketch component, an exercise on issues of homelessness, built into the ROM's Kids program. Devon's schedule would leave even the most aggressive arts admin flat out and consequently, one of the problems he cites when talking about Toronto's arts funding is how time consuming the depleted system can be. "I spend most of my time hustling. I'm a curator. I should be working with the artists. There's just not enough money in the pot."
In projective terms, the Alliance expects to be able to net approximately $18 million annually from billboard advertising taxes (or annual licensing fees) creating an "historic" inflation in our arts funding. That's more than enough to double the number of individual artists receiving grants, or to fund hundreds of art projects around the city. Devon also notes the importance of intensive arts funding to marginalized communities and youth art projects.
So far, the BCBF initiative is backed by several city councilors, 40 organizations and over 1400 individual signatories on its way to becoming being accepted. But according to Devon, there is still a long way to go and more policy-makers to win over. "It's almost certain that the tax will go through," he says. It's the final destination of those taxes that's up for debate.
The next step: taking it to Town Hall. "The Town Hall will give people an opportunity to network and have their voice in the process," says Devon. "It will be an place where we can get the public, press and councilors all on the same page."
The proposal is slotted to go to Executive Committee on June 2nd and Council by early July 2009. Asked about how he feels they'll fare against other such proposals, Devon shrugs but assures me that BCBF supporters are a fairly rowdy bunch who know how to take care of business.
Mark your calendars for Tuesday, May 5th at 6:30pm where BCBF members, supporters, city councilors and media will meet up in Committee Room 2 to open discussions. Or to view and sign the petition, go right to the source.
Photo by Xenomancer.
Discussion
28 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
That's how I would rephrase that sentence.
http://www.toronto.ca/signbylawproject/pdf/third_party_sign_charge_april09.pdf
We are proposing something a bit more mid-range for art. With revenues of 18 million per year the following would be possible:
• A historical 53% increase to the annual municipal funding available to all artists, festivals and arts institutions,
• Close to $100 000.00 dollars for public realm improvement for each Toronto ward, every year -- for projects such as greening,
• Over $300 000 annually for each of the 13 priority neighbourhoods to fund accessible youth arts programming, and
• Hiring 17 dedicated officers to enforce the new billboard bylaw.
"Why pollute our visual landscape with giant ads?" (period)
Yah I can identify with that -- but there will always be billboards in Toronto. A ban is not feasible in a city like Toronto. What is possible is that we can be compensated for our attention (like most other forms of advertising) and make sure the resources are there for enforcement and the new bylaw to end the 'wild west' situation that currently dominates public space.
More at 11
More at 11...
From the new revenue tools consultations -- the Deputy City Manager and Chief Financial Officer recommend that: “In conjunction with the development of a new City sign by-law, DCM Richard Butts be directed to consider and report back to the Executive Committee on the potential application of a billboard or public signage tax, specifically for the purposes of raising revenue to administer the by-law and raise revenues for City beautification, arts or cultural initiatives;” (Staff Report, June 11th) This action was later passed by the Executive Committee (Executive Committee Item 10.1, June 25th)
As we move towards the vote, there seem to be a few Councillors that do want it to go into general revenue. We think it should go to art for the following reasons:
• Most other forms of advertising give us informative or enjoyable content in exchange for our attention.
• Healthy public space is a dialogue and reflection of who we are. If only the biggest and loudest voices be heard, what does that say about our city?
• An Environics Poll found that a large majority (7/10) of Toronto voters want the city to "introduce a tax on billboards with revenues directed to public art through the Toronto Arts Council.”
• A Council for Business and the Arts study states that "for every dollar of public arts funding in a regional economy, eight dollars are generated."
• According to a report from the University of Pennsylvania "Low income neighbourhoods with higher cultural participation are four times more likely than average to have low delinquency rates. Neighbourhoods with an active arts scene are nearly three times more likely to see their poverty rates decline and their population increase."
• Toronto spends less on arts and culture than other major North American cities. We spend only $13 per-capita, while Montreal spends $32, New York is at $54 and San Francisco allots a whopping $80 in per-capita spending.
• Funds are needed to enforce the new bylaw and take down the illegal billboards / remove the wild-west situation that currently dominates Toronto’s shared spaces. According to Environics, 8/10 people want the city to remove billboards that violate bylaws and implement fines to a level that discourages future infractions.
• According to the Martin Prosperity Institute, “the fact that average cities around the country have expanded their cultural expenditures by more than 4 times as much as the City of Toronto has put Toronto on the low end of competitive growth.”
Okay okay...I don't know how much you get currently from where to give anything accurate, but judging by the fact that the city only currently spends 15 million on the TAC and the Majors...and staff published up to 50 million in potential revenue yesterday -- you could gain considerably...
Presumably, then, you'd be fine with funding arts entirely through billboard taxation and diverting the $15 million to other worthwhile projects. That is something that I might be agreeable to (perhaps). Asking for a billboard tax AND money from the city coffers is just being greedy.
I don't see the connection to the second part. Why would anyone advocate for the status quo?
As I said, this is just something that is irking me and maybe the other’s looking over this thread have found your comments useful rather than overstepping. It is the comments with the bullet points that I find the most odd. I think if it is information important enough to be in the piece then it would have been in the piece. I’m guessing and hoping that this is all information I could find on your site which is linked in Alana’s post.
Regarding the second part, I wasn't sure if you were looking to maintain the $15m that the City currently spends on TAC and the Majors plus receive additional funds from the billboard tax. Or if you were looking to replace the City's funding with the billboard tax.
For the second part no, I would not look to replace the TAC and Major’s funding with billboard revenue but augment it with something that matches what other cities are spending. Not even our silliest city Councillors would support that.
"Toronto spends less on arts and culture than other major North American cities. We spend only $13 per-capita, while Montreal spends $32, New York is at $54 and San Francisco allots $80 in per-capita spending."
"According to the Martin Prosperity Institute, “the fact that average cities around the country have expanded their cultural expenditures by more than 4 times as much as the City of Toronto has put Toronto on the low end of competitive growth.”
I'm all for a billboard tax, a punishing one. But I would direct the funds to the general coffers of the City and let it be allocated through the normal budgeting means. There are many worthy public projects out there that could use a $50million injection (who might not have as vocal a lobbyist as yourself).
And if some 'curator' thinks he's got it bad because he has to work for a living, he should thank god he isn't in a Toronto hospital at the mercy of an ever dwindling public health care system. People like that who are so obviously out of touch with the economic realities of this world do nothing but emphasize why public money is better spent elsewhere.
I find it just mind boggling that people listen to these self-promoting 'artists'. If you were RELEVANT you'd make money.
I don't buy any of the arguments given. I don't buy these people's self appointed status as "guardians of autonomous Canadian culture". Who are you? Does anyone else think you know what you're doing? Is that why you need a hand out?
I don't buy any of it. Give it to hospitals, where it will save lives.
I never said 'deserve' more along the lines of good idea. I also stated that:
A) That we invest and subsidize all kinds of industry, why not art?
B) There are multiple proven / empirical 'public goods'
C) Culture is communication
Re: Ad Hominem & Public Health
Wow this is a bit personal...I never said I had it bad and I am not sure why I have scare quotes next to my job title? (Something I have a MA in and been doing for quite a while.) I also have a lot of friends and family in or advocates for the hospital system. I also did extended Post Secondary program in Non-profit & Voluntary Sector Management where I learned closely with health care folk over a number of years. A lot of the work I do is with institutions such as prisons, hospitals and other public infrastructure. My experience is that anyone with a basic understanding of health knows that humans need both 'bread and roses.' (As a side note, I would have to say that the health care system already gets most of our taxes. Even more money will not help unless devoted to new systems, less pills, less focused on life extension and way more on quality of life and prevention).
I would also note that if you want that kind of hard evidence about 'life saving' read this: 'According to a report from the University of Pennsylvania, "Low income neighbourhoods with higher cultural participation are four times more likely than average to have low delinquency rates. Neighbourhoods with an active arts scene are nearly three times more likely to see their poverty rates decline and their population increase." '
There is lots of this kind of data around. Art can be put into all kinds of boxes and measurements to defend it, but at the end of the day it is not an either - or question…
Re: Relevance and Economic Sustainability
A lot of the more conservative thinkers realized quite a long time ago that the market alone was not a good generator of culture (but forgot to send out a memo.) The main problem is the tendency of mass commerce to towards cheap glam and sentimentality (think porcelain collectables?:P ) Additionally, the market’s tendency is almost always to think in the short term, hence we have artists dismissed in their lifetime – celebrated years after death. I consider it a form of market failure when over 50% of artist hold other jobs to support their creation and are the best educated but least remunerated labour category. Also a failure of the market where people are willing to spend 60.00 on a Ikea print but not the same amount buying a local artists work that is a higher quality.
So I am troubled by arguments pitting arts against hospitals. We co-exist and always will.
Yes - we are tragically under funded, but every dollar spent on arts has a profound, beneficial impact on our community.
Have not been to an art show in the past year? Sorry no extra organs for you.
*neener neener*