Upon learning of Mayor Todd Gloria’s proposed funding cuts for the arts, and as a professional ballet dancer based in San Diego, I found myself musing over actor Timothee Chalamet’s comments last month that “no one cares about” opera and ballet. Our mayor seems intent to prove Chalamet right.
While Gloria is framing these cuts as a matter of fiscal adjustments, arts leaders need to argue that the arts have a value that goes beyond economic impact.
The mayor announced his budget proposal on April 15, proposing to cut arts funding by $11.8 million to alleviate the city’s $148 million deficit. The remaining $2 million for the arts will only be enough to keep the Cultural Affairs Office open to administer state grants.
Many prominent cultural organizations would be affected by these cuts, including my employer, City Ballet of San Diego, as well as the Maritime Museum, the Museum of Contemporary Art, the Old Globe and many more.
The mayor has made clear the need for fiscal restraint in order to fix the city’s serious deficit issues. Not unreasonably, he wants to focus on the priorities of policing, public safety and infrastructure. (One would hope that these priorities translate to a cleaner, safer downtown, but time will tell). It’s difficult to fault a city budget for prioritizing things that are no doubt essential. But are the arts and culture not also essential?
That the cultural sector would be on the chopping block is unsurprising. Politicians often treat the arts as the dessert rather than the main course of an economy, a luxury rather than a necessity.
Make no mistake that cuts will negatively affect the affordability and accessibility of arts and culture programming in San Diego. Organizations will struggle to adapt, courting more private foundations and individual donors. As if San Diego weren’t expensive enough, the budget cuts may force organizations to raise programming fees to generate revenue.
Additionally, some organizations may have to scale back their programming, leaving artists with fewer weeks of work and San Diego residents with little choice but drive up to Costa Mesa or Los Angeles to see high-quality performances. And many people will choose to do that because to them, the arts are a necessity.
Proponents of arts funding are fond of pointing to the economic impact of the cultural sector. The 2023 Arts and Economic Prosperity report by Americans for the Arts calculated that San Diego’s cultural sector generated $1.2 billion in total economic activity in 2022, provided 16,900 jobs, and generated $276 million in state and local government tax revenue.
Many proponents note that the arts also generate revenue from tourism. According to the same report, 15.2% of attendees came from out of town and 35.6% of nonlocal attendees reported that that was the primary reason for their trip.
These facts are important, but they offer an incomplete argument for arts funding. The economic reasoning is misleading, because it assumes that the city’s economy is static when, in fact, it is dynamic and ever adapting. If certain organizations disappear, those dollars would migrate to alternatives in one way or another.
Another issue with the economic impact argument is that the arts should not be treated as any other product. As cultural economist Michael Rushton notes, “‘economic impact’ makes [the arts] no different from cranberry farming, stock car racing, petrochemical production, or any other sector, since they all have ‘economic impact.”’ But the arts are different.
When a couple goes on a date to see a ballet company perform at the Balboa Theatre, it’s true that by having dinner before the show at the Operacaffe, drinking after with fellow patrons at a cocktail lounge, and staying the night at the U.S. Grant Hotel, they contribute to economic growth. But they are also connecting with others over an elevated experience and exploring all that the city has to offer. The experience of going to shows, concerts or museums gives people more reason to live in or visit San Diego.
A dispassionate economist might suggest that the couple could easily spend money on other things, perhaps on trendy coffee shops and athletic wear in Pacific Beach. Who’s to say that that’s any better than a performance? While economists like to be value neutral, human nature compels us to admit that there are some things that are intrinsically more worthwhile, that edify and uplift.
It’s not simply that ballet companies or the arts in general have an economic impact, it’s that the arts have an intrinsic value. The arts connect us with our traditions, encouraging us to reflect, connect and challenge.
San Diego is not just about beaches, strip malls, tacos and craft beer. It’s a city with immense cultural value that should be available to as many people as possible. Even if one believes that governments have no business funding the arts, the proposed funding cuts unfairly take away a lifeline from organizations that rely on the city’s grant support.
Fiscal responsibility is important, but cultural organizations should not pay for the past mistakes of the city government. Why not show Timothée Chalamet that San Diego can find another way?
Robert Steven Mack is a company artist with City Ballet of San Diego and an award-winning filmmaker. His writing has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The New Criterion, City Journal, Fjord Review, Law and Liberty and other publications. He has a master of public affairs degree and a B.A. in history from Indiana University Bloomington and a B.S. in ballet from the Jacobs School of Music.
Want to submit a letter to the editor, guest column or opinion piece? Find our guidelines and submission form here.
Hence then, the article about opinion the value of arts funding goes far beyond it s economic impact was published today ( ) and is available on Times of San Diego ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Opinion: The value of arts funding goes far beyond it’s economic impact )
Also on site :