IBJNews

Arts Commission to share duties with regional groups

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Arts Commission will share grant-making duties with regional partners under a restructuring plan approved Friday.

The commission revamped the way it allocates money out of concern about future state budget cuts, which would further reduce grants available to arts organizations. The restructuring will reduce the state agency's administrative costs by about $344,000, with the savings going back into the pool of grant funds for arts groups.

Following a 30-percent reduction in the state's last biennial budget session, the arts commission's budget is about $3.2 million this year. If state tax revenue continues to drop, the budget could be reduced further in the fiscal year that begins July 1.

Statewide, 10 regional partner groups redistribute Indiana Arts Commission grants and provide other support to artists and organizations in their territories. The central Indiana partner is the Arts Council of Indianapolis.

The restructuring plan would reduce the amount of money that regional partners receive for general programming and technical assistance by 64 percent, arts commission spokesman Rex Van Zant said. Regional partners now receive an average of $27,000 a year for general purposes. 

Under the recently approved plan, regional partners will continue to oversee grants for large arts groups such as the Indianapolis Opera or Indianapolis Civic Theatre. After hearing input from the regional groups, Van Zant said the commission agreed that "it would diminish their profile and influence if they were no longer working with the largest organizations."

The pool of money for those groups would increase by about 53 percent from $337,731 currently to $519,125, Van Zant said. The pool of funds for smaller groups will increase as well, but the arts commission staff in Indianapolis will oversee those grants.

Regional partners also will handle project-specific grants, which often go to schools or libraries, Van Zant said.

As IBJ reported last month, the proposed restructuring raised concerns among regional partners that have counted on a certain level of administrative funding from the state organization. Some regional arts administrators felt the commission was abolishing the regional-partner system, which was created 13 years ago to make arts available in all 92 counties.

Another aspect of the restructuring, which will take effect in 2012, is that other not-for-profit organizations—such as community foundations—will be able to compete for the opportunity to administer local arts grants. Van Zant said that does not mean the commission is abolishing the regional-partner system. 

The new grant-making hierarchy takes effect July 1.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Restructuring state arts funds
    What does it mean that "the commission "agreed that [restructuring] would diminish the profile and influence" of the regional partners? Doesn't the commission care about the short-term and long-term viability of the regional partners as equally as it cares about the "arts groups" who purportedly will benefit from "restructuring"? Or is decreasing "the profile and influence" of the regional partners the ultimate goal?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I never thought I'd see the day when a Republican Mayor would lead the charge in attempting to raise every tax we have to pay. Now it's income taxes and property taxes that Ballard wants to increase. And to pay for a pre-K program? Many studies have shown that pre-K offer no long-term educational benefits whatsoever. And Ballard is pitching it as a way of fighting crime? Who is he kidding? It's about government provided day care. It's a shame that we elected a Republican who has turned out to be a huge big spending, big taxing, big borrowing liberal Democrat.

  2. Why do we blame the unions? They did not create the 11 different school districts that are the root of the problem.

  3. I was just watching an AOW race from cleveland in 1997...in addition to the 65K for the race, there were more people in boats watching that race from the lake than were IndyCar fans watching the 2014 IndyCar season finale in the Fontana grandstands. Just sayin...That's some resurgence modern IndyCar has going. Almost profitable, nobody in the grandstands and TV ratings dropping 61% at some tracks in the series. Business model..."CRAZY" as said by a NASCAR track general manager. Yup, this thing is purring like a cat! Sponsors...send them your cash, pronto!!! LOL, not a chance.

  4. I'm sure Indiana is paradise for the wealthy and affluent, but what about the rest of us? Over the last 40 years, conservatives and the business elite have run this country (and state)into the ground. The pendulum will swing back as more moderate voters get tired of Reaganomics and regressive social policies. Add to that the wave of minority voters coming up in the next 10 to 15 years and things will get better. unfortunately we have to suffer through 10 more years of gerrymandered districts and dispropionate representation.

  5. Funny thing....rich people telling poor people how bad the other rich people are wanting to cut benefits/school etc and that they should vote for those rich people that just did it. Just saying..............

ADVERTISEMENT