Here's a note about suburban ransom and an option that was desperately needed given increasing JoCo debate on the quality of taxpayer funded creativity. Checkit:
Roeland Park Decides Businesses Can Donate Money To The City Instead Of Showing Art
In a move inspired by the Aldi supermarket chain, Roeland Park will make changes to its public art program. Aldi has plans to tear down its store at 4801 Roe Boulevard and replace it with a larger, updated store.
Is this revised ordinance a good or bad move? The city of Roeland Park has previously required a company to include placement of its public art on the property no matter how potentially unattractive or unsuitable the art choices. Required? Now they can opt-out.
ReplyDeleteIt's no wonder Aldi wants to retain control of the appearance of their project. And, they should. Letting companies buy their way out of this requirement is a solution but, to me, still smacks of an unsavory choice.
"Now you can choose to pay money or we'll put butt-ugly art on your property"
If, as the article states, this opt-out policy results in no public art anywhere in the city perhaps the art committee might think harder about their future art choices. Is this a new yet questionable approach to generating city revenue?