Arts funding not elitist; boosts state

It’s time to set the record straight about the realities of state and federal arts funding.

There’s no elitism in arts funding. Our state agency, the Kansas Creative Arts Industries Commission, does not dictate what type of projects should be funded.

The agency’s grant programs are set up by citizen panels, and projects are selected by citizen panels based on citizen-defined educational and economic development outcomes.

Arts organizations applying for a grant must show a plan to meet those outcomes and explain how those outcomes were achieved in a final report before funds are released. All grants must also demonstrate a one-to-one local community match.

Recent KCAIC grants helped support community projects such as a residency by Western music group Diamond Wranglers to perform and interact with seniors and students in Oakley, a percussion group residency for all Hesston Middle School students that used music to teach concepts of physics and acoustics, and renovations of a community art studio in Stafford County.

Kansas is 49th out of 50 states in per capita yearly arts funding at $0.06 per Kansan, far below all states that surround us – including Oklahoma at $0.75, Nebraska at $0.82 and Missouri at $1.25. These heartland states understand that the arts means business, and that public/private partnerships are sometimes the most effective way to boost arts programs in rural communities that lack the resources of larger cities.

Vibrant cultural offerings help these communities recruit new businesses and families and create jobs, and these, in turn, create tax revenue. We’re not talking about multi-million dollar infrastructure and recreation projects here either, but usually grants of less than $10,000 that leverage private dollars and bridge the resource gap needed to make diverse arts programs in small towns viable.

The National Endowment for the Arts has withheld funding from Kansas (maintenance of effort) not because this agency wants to dictate what qualifies as “culture,” but because Kansas does not meet the NEA’s low minimum-funding requirements.

The reality is that the NEA understands the value of local control. The agency wants grantee organizations to depend more on state and locally distributed funds and less on direct federal grants, so it provides states with matching funds to redistribute based on that state’s local priorities. The NEA has a sliding scale of support when states meet a bare minimum of funding, but you can’t be a collaborative partner if you’re not contributing resources yourself.

Arts funding is one example of an ideology that is draining our state of economic and cultural capital. We need new legislative leadership in Topeka that promotes a balanced tax system and recognizes the importance that targeted, outcome-based state and federal funding plays in enhancing our economy and the quality of life of our communities.

This story was originally published September 30, 2016 at 5:01 AM with the headline "Arts funding not elitist; boosts state."