Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDistrict
I'm all for the supporting the arts and the life it brings to otherwise sterile
environments like an airport or a government building. But $8 million is a
huge pot of cash for such an endeavor... let alone $12 million. It should
probably be kept in mind that the goal is to create an efficient and cutting
edge airport - not necessarily the city's best art gallery.
|
I'm still thinking this one over..
I'm proud of Sacramento's art in public places program. One of the best in the country. I understand the airports argument, but i also think that the airport is one of the first impressions people will have of Sacramento.
Now granted the oustanding design of the new terminal wil have wow factor (so to speak). But I think we can go one further by commiting to the origional 2% forumula. If they start cutting costs before the first shovel of dirt is turned, what will they want to cut next?
Anyway if I were on the Board of Supervisors, I'm not sure how I might vote.
They would have to make a very convincing argument not to stick with the 2% funding formula and I'm not certain they've done that yet.