November 11, 2004
Seattle Budget Watch

The hippie-dippie big spenders on the Seattle Silly Council are falling all over themselves to shell out non-existent money to bail out a fiscally irresponsible entertainment venture:

The Seattle City Council yesterday voted to take on $682,800 in debt for the new McCaw Hall, which the Seattle Opera and Pacific Northwest Ballet had pledged to pay.
Meanwhile the Puccini peddlers are horrified at the Mayor's proposal that the people who actually go to the opera should, gasp, pay their fair share of the cost:
Opera tickets cost $42 to $109, Tweeddale said. Tacking on a dollar or two "would make a huge difference in whether people would buy them or not," Tweeddale said.
"Huge difference", my ass. What a bunch of pissing and whining. I enjoy going to the opera (and even more than I enjoy NASCAR!). Like other people who can afford to spend $109 for premium seats at the opera every once in a while, I can also afford to spend $111. I would gladly pay the fair price either way.

As for the City Council, I thought they told us a few months ago that the city was so broke we had to vote on a special tax increase just to pay for school crossing guards? What a scam.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 11, 2004 11:17 AM | Email This
Comments
1. It's okay to subsidize NASCAR, but not the opera? How about no subsidies to either?

Posted by: Colin on November 11, 2004 01:54 PM
2. Good point, Colin. I believe that public funding, including state bonds, went to both the Opera House and Benaroya Hall. That is not necessarily to defend the City Council's present action, but let's be at least a little consistent.

The state's current capital budget includes $4.5 million for a program called "Building for the Arts," which provide support for various arts projects and facilities, such as, for example, Children's Museum (Olympia), Richland Players Theatre, Seattle Art Museum, Pacific Northwest Ballet, Columbia City Gallery, Western Washington Center for the Arts, Squaxin Island Museum, and the World Kite Museum (which I'm guessing is in Long Beach). Good idea or bad idea? What do people think? How much taxpayer support should there be for these sorts of activities, and under what conditions or circumstances?

Posted by: J.A. on November 11, 2004 03:01 PM
3. I would say NO taxpayer support for these sorts of activities (save perhaps museums to store the historical artifacts of the state. And at that they have to be careful not to go overboard.)

Because, as you point out, once you start doing so, it is hard to know where to stop. Everyone likes different types of art.

However, I do believe Sound Politics has been upset before about the taxpayer financing of NASCAR so he is being consistent here.

Posted by: Sarah Schreffler on November 12, 2004 06:25 AM
4. On reading his post on that, you're right, Sarah.

Posted by: J.A. on November 12, 2004 11:31 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?