Lexington, KY - When situated properly in the public realm, art can make a community so attractive that people will travel for miles just to experience such expressions of its local flavor and character. While close observers of Lexington arts seem to agree that interest in enriching local public art is more intense then in recent memory, there also is a pervasive sense that loose ends remain - that our city lacks some unifying body or authority that would be charged with administering, nurturing, maintaining and financing a truly rich public arts scene.
What needs to happen to lift Lexington to the level of a city that becomes an arts destination? The answers vary depending on whom you ask: Many think we simply need a community-wide master plan. Some jump directly to the need for dedicated funding. And others believe the answer lies in the formation of some sort of oversight body under the auspices of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. All seem valid. But which comes first?
For many years now, Lexington's arts "scene" has been in transition - a sort of research and development stage that has given birth to projects such as the Outdoor Mural Project, Art-in-Motion, and a master plan for art along the Legacy Trail.
What happens next may be critical to sustaining the present level of energy and interest surrounding public art.
Recently, Business Lexington gathered comments from "the three Jims" - Mayor Jim Newberry, Vice Mayor Jim Gray, and LexArts CEO Jim Clark - hoping one of them might initiate a focused planning phase.
What we found is that they too may need to find ways to accept compromise and work more collaboratively - a tall order for Newberry and Gray as they faceoff in the 2010 race for mayor.
That scenario is not going to change. Politics is politics. In the meantime, as we await the outcome of the Nov. 2 election, there are some fundamental questions to consider as a community.
Knowing where we stand
According to Newberry, "One of the fundamental premises of any planning exercise is assessing where you are; doing an inventory is the first step in developing a baseline assessment of where the community is when it comes to public art, and you acknowledge any strengths that that reveals and begin to develop the weaknesses."
An assessment means more than just an inventory of existing artworks; it could include an evaluation of whole projects such as Art-in-Motion (2006), the Lexington Extraordinary Art Project (2008), LexArts' Outdoor Mural Project (2008), the Legacy Trail Public Art Consortium's Master Plan (2010), the Manchester Distillery District, recent proposals by Leadership Lexington (2010) and HorseMania (2000, 2010).
But who conducts this assessment? Who evaluates the successes and failures among them? Each of these programs and so many other temporary public art efforts are rich in lessons learned, which could be invaluable in bringing depth and local relevance to planning.
Many other communities have specifically for this purpose formed their own versions of such an advisory committee.
Choosing the right advisors
Newberry was quick to point out that it takes a significant amount of money to begin even the planning process.
"Nothing has been done in the form of establishing a commission or a master plan, because if you do it right, you need to have the expertise to pull such a document together and that costs money. But right now, our community's plate is pretty full," Newberry said.
An advisory committee of volunteers from various facets of the community obviously would be the less expensive approach to overseeing the processes of inventory and evaluation, and then initiating a planning phase. Would this advisory committee best represent a balance of power and expertise if it were formed anew, as opposed to being carved out of an existing entity like the Urban County Arts Review Board (UCARB) or LexArts?
Such a committee could consider goals and benchmarks, establish a realistic timetable to reach them, and identify and recommend sources of funding to hire the talent and expertise it takes to write a meaningful master plan.
But it can't end there. Without clear recommendations and guidance from an advisory committee, a master planning consultant can spend much time on the clock just working to fully comprehend and appreciate what exactly a community envisions. A regimen of in-person meetings with an array of community leaders, community workshops and the distance of travel can impact a budget immensely.
All of this could be outlined in a scope of work prepared by an advisory committee, volunteer or government.
The workings of a master plan
A master plan for public art could define a system to manage the city's collection, identify and establish a recurring revenue stream, define the structure of an independent oversight organization such as a commission, and recommend
potential sites for public art throughout Lexington.
Of these objectives, the funding and the formation of a commission seem to receive the most play in current conversations around Lexington. But it is also recognized that our city, like so many across the United States, is suffering a revenue shortfall in a tenuous economy - that we just don't have the money right now.
Alternatives to direct public funding
One approach taken by states and cities from Minnesota and Ohio to New York City and Seattle is "percent-for-art" legislation. In its municipal form, "percent for art" typically refers to an ordinance establishing a percentage of the cost of any large-scale development project that must be returned to local government specifically to fund and install public art.
In our current economic climate, the concept raises eyebrows. It's worth considering, however, that the first percent-for-art program was established 76 years ago as a part of the New Deal and during a period of American history when economic hardship was far more severe than it is today.
There have been two attempts (one by former Urban County Councilman Bill Farmer in 1999 and another by former Vice Mayor Isabell Yates in 2002) to pass a percent-for-art ordinance. Each failed because the proposed ordinance called for the establishment of a commission to oversee the program, and at the time, the Lexington Arts and Cultural Council was unwilling to concede control.
That was 10 years ago.
As Gray points out, "We don't presently have the multinational corporations here to offer financial, philanthropic backing for the arts, which is why a percent-for-art program would be so instrumental."
While percent-for-art remains one option, there presently is a call in the realm of public art for new models and creative solutions to this funding issue.
"What we would need is some sort of hybrid program that combines private development projects that require government subvention - perhaps linking a percent-for-art to TIF or to developments that require a zoning change or other public accommodations. We could consider whether private developers would go for a percent-for-art program levied against 'as of right' projects," said LexArts' Clark.
Establishing oversight
A master plan could establish an independent organization to curate and produce new public art. Presently, Newberry is inclined to look to an existing entity rather than forming a new one.
"I would come at it with a bit of a predisposition to see if there is some entity out there that could be modified to encompass the needed functions," Newberry said. "UCARB has a very narrow set of responsibilities right now; (To) create a new entity and continue to have UCARB do its thing would not make good sense."
Clark would like to see this happen under LexArts' umbrella, at least in the initial stages.
"I think it is looking at LexArts as a management organ that can birth out this new entity, or become a division," Clark said. "Ultimately I think that it needs to be a separate organization, because fundraising-wise that will be better. But I think there are ways of providing administrative services - like a bookkeeper who takes care of the public art program is not a specialist. We don't need to be replicating administrative services."
Both the funding mechanism and the formation of a commission could be the outgrowth of a careful planning process, mapped out clearly in any master plan, which would be authored by an independent, objective party, hired by a non-partisan advisory committee.
But no matter how the future guidance and funding for art in the Bluegrass is structured or established, one thing is clear: Lexington, if it is to actually become even more of a place that, by virtue of its very environment, regularly teases, intrigues and stimulates artistic impulse, needs a master plan to get us there.
Your thoughts and comments are welcome.