Ed Lazere, the executive director of the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute, has an interesting piece in the current Hill Rag analyzing the Mayor’s budget proposal for arts funding in 2007. Noticing large amounts of cash in the budget set aside for repairs and expansion of a handful of private cultural institutions — notably $8 million to repair the roof at the Corcoran Gallery of Art and an additional $5 million for Arena Stage’s expansion — Lazere cries foul at the apparently aribitrary, even mysterious process by which these types of funds seem to be allocated.

The proposed 2007 budget shows $9 million for the Commission on Arts and Humanities, but total arts funding sprinkled throughout the budget adds up to at least $35 million. Most of it shows up in the budget of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. While supporting the arts should be part of a broad economic development strategy, it would be far better to list all arts funding in one place, presumably the Commission on Arts and Humanities. Doing this would lead, I hope, to better discussions about how to set priorities in this area.

He has a point, though we’re guessing that a significant reason for funneling art institution development funds through the Planning and Economic Development office is the fact that it is more adept at handling the financing of large construction projects than the Commission on Arts and Humanities.

After reading the entire article, though, one sees that transparency isn’t really what’s bothering Lazere. Instead he appears to be uncomfortable with the size and nature of D.C.’s contribution to private arts facilities. He argues that public monies should only be spent on public institutions, like, he points out, his “son’s school” or the Commission on Arts and Humanities, which “supports programs for youth, public art displays, and neighborhood-based arts programs.”