Archive for Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Kansas Arts Commission supporters fear Brownback will veto funding

April 26, 2011


— Advocates for the Kansas Arts Commission on Tuesday said the fight to keep the commission alive is still going on.

Earlier in the 2011 legislative session, the Senate rejected an executive order by Gov. Sam Brownback that would have abolished the Arts Commission.

But the battle over funding the agency continues as legislators reconvene the session Wednesday.

The Senate has included $698,000 in funding, but the House retains $200,000 in pass-through funding to the Kansas Arts Foundation, the newly created not-for-profit fundraiser that Brownback envisioned would replace the Arts Commission.

A news release from Kansas Citizens for the Arts, a grassroots organization that advocates funding for the arts, said Brownback has stated that he will veto any funding for the Kansas Arts Commission.

“As with all legislation sent to Gov. Brownback by the Kansas Legislature, Gov. Brownback will carefully consider and review the FY (fiscal year) 2012 budget when he receives it,” said Sherriene Jones-Sontag, a spokeswoman for Brownback.

Ann Evans, co-chairwoman of Kansas Citizens for the Arts, said Brownback’s support of rural economic development should extend to providing arts funding in rural areas.

“His plan to encourage people to move to those depopulating areas is admirable, but why would anyone want to live there if there is nothing for them or their families to do?” Evans asked.


DeMontfort 7 years, 1 month ago

I would like to veto Brownback. And Kobach, too.

Orwell 7 years, 1 month ago

False economy. Cutting arts funding would cost Kansas more than it would save.

notanota 7 years, 1 month ago

I believe you meant "false dichotomy," but yes.

Liberty275 7 years, 1 month ago

If you left wingers would spend more cash on original non-schlock art, what brownback signs would be irrelevant. Also, you right wingers need to buy more pictures of the baby jesus on black velvet.

thepianoman 7 years, 1 month ago

I totally agree with Tennessee. As a musician myself, I have NEVER reiled on any type of funding from the KAC. I love art. I love music, but if you ask my opinion....It's not the role of state government to be invovled with arts programs and arts funding. This is something that could be privately funded.

Trust me, the folks who are involved with "the arts" are simply put, "elitists." To this segment of society, it's all about money, status and snobery. Let these rich folks fund the arts. This is their hobby! They love it.

I'd much rather have my tax dollars put toward social services, education, transportation, etc.. How can any of you (who disagree with my statement) justify funding the KAC when other essential services are in jeopardy of being cut even further.

I hope Brownback whips out his pen and immediately line item vetos funding for the KAC. Ditch them. Transfer the money to SRS or Education or some other agency needing that money. I predict he'll veto them, and good luck getting getting the needed votes from the house and senate to override his veto, because, from what I understand, it's going to require more than the "majority" to override it.

Henry Schwaller 7 years, 1 month ago

So, Pianoman, you believe that arts organizations in Ark City, Atwood, Emporia, Fowler, Hays, Liberal, Lucas, Junction City and over 140 other communities are offering programs only to "elitists?" Have you traveled 'round Kansas much? I've not met many "rich folks" when I've visited arts centers in rural Kansas - just people who want a good quality of life in their community. Most community arts organizations would not exist without minimal support from the state.

jafs 7 years, 1 month ago

I've said this before, but he's not cutting arts in order to pay for social services/education, he's cutting all of them.

haggisgirl 7 years, 1 month ago

thepianoman says: "Trust me, the folks who are involved with "the arts" are simply put, "elitists." To this segment of society, it's all about money, status and snobery. Let these rich folks fund the arts. This is their hobby! They love it."

Why should I trust you? I don't know you. And your comment sounds like you are the elitist that caters to the rich folks. The scholarships that the Lawrence Arts Center provides for the children that otherwise may not be able to attend classes and events are not provided entirely by "elitists". They are also provided by some of us working class folks who think all children should have an opportunity to explore the arts. But I don't think we should have to carry the entire burden and therefore the minimal amount of money funding the Arts Commission is important.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid King Sam will have his way. He doesn't really care about anyone.

notanota 7 years, 1 month ago

Mmmmm, NEA matching grants will vanish, as will more Kansas jobs. Heckufajob, Brownie.

thepianoman 7 years, 1 month ago

I just don't understand why people think the funding should be retained when social services, education and so many other vital agencies are needing that funding. The Kansas Arts Commission is not a vital service..Governmnet provides SERVICES vital to its citizens.....Some of these include highway maintainance, funding schools, funding social programs... etc etc....These HAVE to be funded....Again, Government provides services...PERIOD. It is not the role or responsiblity of state government to fund and/or promote the arts....Why does this not make sense?????? Sheesh.

Do you see the United Way or other non-profits getting money from the state???? NO. They raise those funds privately. It could so easily be done, but nobody wants to do it. They want to take the easy way out by relying on the state for funding. Well, I'm afraid those days are coming to an end.

Henry Schwaller 7 years, 1 month ago

All non-profit arts organizations raise private money through memberships and sponsorships/underwriting. An organization won't receive support from the Kansas Arts Commission if the organization doesn't raise money on its own.

I don't disagree that other vital agencies need funding. But I believe that 29 cents per Kansan is not an extravagant cost for the Arts - and cutting it won't solve the state's budget problems. How many jobs are created by the Arts, pianoman?

notanota 7 years, 1 month ago

Actually United Way agencies do get money from the state. They also provide services that would otherwise not be provided. I won't argue that those other areas also need funding, but this is a very small portion of the budget, which gets federal matching grants and provides jobs. Cutting it would further reduce revenue and create the need for more cuts in services.

spankyjo 7 years, 1 month ago

Wow thepianoman..... thanks for having me read an article that didn't follow logic or back up its facts..... I just wasted 10 minutes of my life on that stupidity.....

mloburgio 7 years, 1 month ago

Brownback loves to spend our money! his last 6 months as senator he gave his 43 employees an average raise of $5.557.12 per person.

former senator sam brownback paided his staff of 44 people in washington and ks. $1,278,495.00 from 10/01/2009 to 03/31/10 pay period.

the pay period 04/01/2010 to 9/30/2010 his staff of 43 people was paid

$1,517,451 that's a $238.956 raise. average of $5.557.12 per person.

so from 10/01/2009 to 09/30/2010 the taxpayers paid his staff $2,795,946 not including the rent for at least 4 regional offices in ks. plus sams salary of $174.000 per year.

kevingray 7 years, 1 month ago

This is just another giveaway, so he and his minions can get the corporate tax break through. That and his shell game of switching funds to put money elsewhere. And Tennessee, taxpayers do have too much burden and Brownback's trying to add to the burden with his Houses' bill to lower the corporate tax rate, as well as tax rate of all Kansans. Now, does that make sense when Kansas can't pay the bills right now??? He should be going in the opposite direction by pushing up taxes on his rich buddies!!!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.