$50k public art project is worth it, despite economy
Terry Plumb
Issue date: 2/19/09 Section: Opinion
|
Why spend money on art, they ask, when people are worried about whether they'll have a job next week?
On the contrary, I think the city should have stuck to its agreement.
Compared to the $13.5 million total cost of the waterworks expansion, $50,000 isn't a lot of money. If the proposed installation were included in the project's overall cost, it would amount to less than three-tenths of one percent: That's a fraction of what many state or local governments set aside for art when public projects are put out for bid.
Moreover, $50,000 would be four-tenths of one percent of what the city itself spent upgrading Cherry Road, including burial of utility lines and extensive landscaping.
Why shouldn't the city spend money to correct an eyesore created - albeit unavoidably - through expansion of its water treatment plant?
Some citizens would argue that money spent on day lilies and new trees on Cherry Road itself was a waste of money. Nevertheless, the portion of Cherry Road improved through tax-increment financing is far easier on the eyes, and those enhancements also helped lure major private investments - most notably the Super Bi-Lo and a project on the former Celanese property that city officials predict will produce more than 10 percent of the city's tax base.
This isn't the first time the city was lambasted for spending money on "frivolities." Some improvements for which Rock Hill today prides itself most were vehemently criticized when they were proposed, among them: Cherry Park; Gateway Plaza; and the removal of Town Center Mall, the design nightmare that once enclosed several downtown blocks. Even Glencairn Garden, the city's crown jewel, currently undergoing a major makeover and expansion, was ridiculed as "Hardin's Garden" when Mayor John Hardin proposed it 50 years ago.
The cost of the waterworks installation would have been less than half what businessmen spent on "Loom," a work by acclaimed sculptor Thomas Sayre, which graces the entrance plaza at the Old Cotton Factory. Surely, a community that expects entrepreneurs to build aesthetically pleasing buildings ought to practice what it preaches.
City officials needn't apologize for supporting "public" art. Contrary to what critics claim, by definition, public art is accessible to all citizens - not the exclusive purview of salon elitists.
Be the first to comment on this story