POLITICS

Ballard vetoes 'percent for art' program

Ordinance will require developers to devote 1 percent of any city tax incentives they receive to public art.

Brian Eason
IndyStar
This larger-than-life mural (38 feet tall) of Kurt Vonnegut, on the east side of a building in the 300 block of Massachusetts Avenue in Downtown Indianapolis, is by artist Pamela Bliss.

Update: Mayor Greg Ballard vetoed the "percent for art" proposal, saying that the business community was not consulted in its creation. An attempt by the council to override the veto at Monday's meeting failed 16-13, needing 20 votes.

Ballard's veto message follows:

"I tried hard to get to “yes” on this proposal.  Conceptually, I am in agreement with the intent.  However, it has been made clear to me that the business / development community, the community most affected by this proposal and a group that I believe would be largely supportive, was not ever consulted.  That is unacceptable.  Not taking into account the views of all those affected is shortsighted and bound to create undue friction between competing interests.

"Also, mechanically, this proposal has many loopholes that could interfere with how resources would be distributed, creating the potential for inequity.

"I hope that the new administration and new council can reshape this proposal into a viable ordinance that takes into account the views of all those affected.  My sense is this is entirely possible in the short term."

This story originally published on Nov. 30.

Earlier: Developers that accept city tax dollars for projects will soon have to set aside money for public art.

The City-County Council on Monday voted 18-9 to approve a "percent for art" program aimed at boosting the city's investments in art without raising taxes. Modeled after similar programs across the country, the ordinance requires future developers to devote 1 percent of any city tax-increment financing incentives they receive to public art.

The sponsor, Council Vice President John Barth, says there are as many as 350 "percent for art" programs across the country, including major cities such as Seattle, Chicago and Philadelphia. He first floated a version of the proposal in 2013, and the idea dates back even further. A public art master plan commissioned by the Arts Council of Indianapolis called for a similar program as early as 2003.

He and other supporters say the program will pay off in the long term as a quality of life investment that will raise property values, encourage tourism and uplift blighted areas.

Although opponents said the proposal was well-intentioned, they questioned whether art should be the city's priority, given Indy's extensive needs in other areas. They also worried the costs would simply be passed on to the general public.

“What this does at the end of the day is put one more restriction on developers,” said Councilman Aaron Freeman, a Republican. "I have no issue with the arts, but the cost of this is going to get passed on. It’s not going to get paid by developers — it’s going to get paid by the people that are going to buy the home or rent the office.”

Proponents, though, said public art will have ripple effects in those neighborhoods that need it most. Republican Councilman Ben Hunter noted that the money can be used creatively in support of re-entry programs for ex-offenders, or to target blight, as long as there is an art component. Barth, a Democrat, also sees it as a way to spread tax-increment financing dollars to neighborhoods across the city.

"It’s important because for so long we’ve spent so much time and effort on TIF dollars in the Downtown portion of the city and our neighborhoods haven’t had the benefit of that," Barth said. "This is an effort to ensure that future TIF incentives are shared more broadly across the entire city."

He said that strict legal requirements on how TIF dollars are spent — namely, that the money is spent on infrastructure within the TIF district's boundaries — will still be followed. He said the proposal gets around those rules by requiring developers to pay 1 percent of the incentive's value into a Public Arts for Neighborhoods Fund.

That money will be distributed through a grants program administered by the Arts Council, driven by input from neighborhood groups. At least half of the grant money must be spent in low-income neighborhoods.

Tully: A push on behalf of public art

Initially, Barth's proposal would have required 1 percent of the total costs of qualifying public projects be set aside for art, but he withdrew that version amid a contentious budget fight in 2013. The revised proposal applies only to 1 percent of tax-increment financing incentives. It also is restricted to projects worth more than $100,000.

Barth acknowledged that the changes reduce the scope of the program from what he initially sought, but he suggested the concessions were necessary to build a consensus.

"My goal is to support neighborhoods in making quality of life improvements," he said. "The best way forward is to get as many people on board as I possibly can."

Developers whose projects include public art can qualify for a credit to reduce or eliminate the amount owed into the fund.

NCAA president 'very pleased' with revisions to Indiana religious freedom law

Call Star reporter Brian Eason at (317) 444-6129. Follow him on Twitter: @brianeason.