Wednesday, August 06, 2008
And even more...
Do you like this story?
Even more jabbering on the tax cuts, and some heated discussions can be found at the blog, Hoosiers for Fair Taxation. If you want to add a spark to your day and get that fire going, be sure to check out this post and the following comments.
To give you a tid bit of what to expect:
And while Christine is more moderate, our position is that ALL arts funding should be cut at the knees immediately. These are tough times for Indy's residents. Citizens are shackled with sky high gasoline prices, higher property tax payments, a 65% county income tax increase, and inflation hitting our grocery bills.
There is some serious anti Arts Council chatter at work here, sounding as if it come from a feeling of being spited. Along with much talk about being in the Arts Council's "clique". Who is this supposed clique?
In regards to other uses of these funds such as the much talked about crime prevention, look... I am all for more public safety and the reduction of crime in Indianapolis. Afterall, my father is a police officer who has been working the streets for 30+ years. He loves his job. Having seen what he has to put up with on a daily business, I have complete respect for law enforcement. Peterson's merger of IPD and the Sherrifs department was local governments attempt to streamline the citys policing ability, decrease crime rates and save money. This obviously has not happned. Perhaps it will take some time for it all to balance out. Maybe in five years time this merger will finally be saving money. I personally doubt it. My family was firmly against this merger and yet I, personally, was still pro Peterson for his support for the Arts. The proposed cuts in Arts funding would do little to help long term crime control, while arts funding cuts will have an immediate impact on out reach programs, which several studies find that such programs do in fact help prevent crime. Keep the arts. Stop tax payer money from paying for and maintaining sports stadiums.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 Responses to “And even more...”
August 6, 2008 at 2:39 PM
It is not taxpayer money (property taxes) funding the stadium. It is a regional food and beverage tax, a rental car tax, a hotel tax and an admissions tax (and $100 million from the Colts).
It is not a sports stadium, but a multi-use facility that will welcome conventions, trade shows, meetings, concerts, music competitions and much much more ... IN ADDITION TO Final Fours, the Super Bowl, Colts etc.
I would challenge our elected leaders to come up with creative funding solutions for the arts and other under-served causes.
But let's quit with tired sports vs. arts debate. It's not a question of one or the other.
August 6, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I did not know this blog existed until I saw you sent a web hit our way. Thanks. Even though you are an arts blog, I'm going to link you at Hoosiers For Fair Taxation so that our readers can get more connected with the cultural arts scene in Indy.
LOVE FIRST FRIDAY!
August 6, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Thanks for the link HfFT. And anon above you are correct, it's not a question of sports or arts. This city needs both to thrive. I for one was all for the new stadium (well, not the design but that's another story) and the economic benefits it will bring. The fact remains more people will attend cultural events this year than could ever attend a Colts or Pacers game. We need both.
August 7, 2008 at 4:23 PM
One salient point is this:
Sports events do not bring money to the arts. Never have, never will (unless you paint pictures of football, basketball players or race cars.).
It's two separate cultures, existing side by side, and really, I'm OK with that. I have no problem with the sports folks or sports events. However, while one does not effect the other, one sure does get more money aimed at it. But that's to be expected here in wonder Indiana.
Anony-nony
August 8, 2008 at 3:21 AM
Wow - that Melyssa woman has a serious God complex. Who died and made her mayor?
August 8, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Didn't the mayor also want to put money into a Chinatown? Isn't it odd that a mayor would want to take money from one area of our culture and invest it in a cultural area that does not yet exist? Just to suit his tastes? I'm actually a fiscal moderate conservative, but this is weird.
August 8, 2008 at 2:27 PM
I have never heard the Chinatown thing before, if true, that is hilarious. A city conceived and built Chinatown would be as authentic as Las Vegas or Epcot Center. Is this sort of city built cultural neighborhood a common practice in other cities? I was always under the impression that these areas became known for being as such do to the large populations of imigrants in a specific neighborhood. Oh well...
August 8, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Yep - the Chinatown thing was/is a classic. One of the first things he said after being elected. That would solve everybody's problems!
August 8, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I made a public commmitment on the HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAXATION blog to volunteer 40 hours per month to the city to help find solutions, if they will want my time and help.
There are 1000 who signed the petition to save the arts.
That's $1500 each and quite doable.
Who is in to rollup your sleeves and work to find funding from sources other than the taxpayers to save the noble effort of SAVE INDY ARTS?
We have no business forcing taxpayers to borrow more money from the bond banks when our credit cards are maxed out. The bond banks use private property as collateral to secure the loans, thus the sky high property tax bills.
Post a Comment