Chicago has the Picasso, among others. In Naperville, it's Dr. Seuss. The City Council recently agreed to spend $115,000 to have a "Green Eggs and Ham" statue installed outside the 95th Street Library.
Funding comes from the Special Events and Cultural Amenities fund, which amounted to $2.57 million last year and comes from a citywide 1 percent tax on food and beverages. Century Walk, which is putting up the Seuss statue, received $274,000 in funding total this year.
What say you? Is public art a good thing that enhances the aesthetic value of a community and shows its deeper appreciation for the finer things in life? Or do you think it's not needed, that it's a luxury that should be financed via the private sector instead of by tax money?
I think this 1% sales tax for culture should be eliminated. We had had to many sales tax increases in town and I believe the state had one for another half a per cent a few months back.
It is ridiculous to go downtown and be hit with nearly a 10% sales tax in addition to your restaurant bill. Tack on the high restaurant prices plus a 20% tip and $1.00 cost you a $1.30 plus the new cost of gas which is 40% higher than last year. Suddenly a $1.00 cost you a $1.50. That is 50% more than last year. I got a raise of 3.2%. My purchasing power is just about gone!
Many people build statues voluntarily to promote their own art. Let them build a statue at the library. Many art groups have built pretty statues in Chicago without using taxpayer money.
This statue for $115,000 is a waste of taxpayer money even though it is at least coming out of the cultural fund that was designated for that purpose.
Last time we read about the cultural fund it was being used to pay for police OT at charities to the tune of 100k.
Can you tell us if the city is going to scam the cultural fund again this year, Host Ted, for police OT before it happens and not after it happens this year.
Maybe we can have a boycott at the entrance of the Ribfest this year to protest the police raiding the charities and cultural fund for OT. This would probably embarrass them and hopefully cause them to stop.
Again this is a charity.....the police should be voluntaring their services here...not milking the charities thru a scam from the cultural fund.
Please let us know in advance, Host Ted, if this 100k will be siphoned out again for the charities. We may still have enough time to organize a protest.
Do you know if we need a permit from the Naperville Police to launch a demonstration against them at Rib Fest or the Last Fling this year???
Maybe you can help us with an article about this 100k ANNUAL SCAM so we can get the public interested since they seem in the mood to save taxes this year!
Thanks!
Personally, I believe public art should be supported but not to the tune of $2.57 million per year. I like the statues and other art around town, especially those of historical significance, and I think “Green Eggs and Ham” is a welcome addition. I also like that this new addition will be placed at the 95th Street library as I think most people believe the lion’s share of the Culture money is spent in or near downtown. If that’s true, it’s a real shame as the tax is city-wide.
The biggest problem with the Culture (slush) Fund was that the council created the fund without defining what they deemed to be “culture”. That’s why a large chunk of that money was used to bail out the “private” Millennium Carillon and is used by fests for security costs (yes, police OT).
The Culture Fund should be dramatically reduced with a more defined purpose than the whims of the city council.
T.B.
Public art is a luxury. The Culture tax should be abolished. Statues and the like should be paid for by private donors -- and they can have their name on a plaque next to the statute/art. Hey, how about the elitists that drive around in big SUVs and live in the McMansions would like to fund these art donations. Maybe they'll start to one-up each other on who has the bigger/better art in town?
To Diane G on June 24, 2008 10:04 AM
Re this post:
Hey, how about the elitists that drive around in big SUVs and live in the McMansions would like to fund these art donations. Maybe they'll start to one-up each other on who has the bigger/better art in town?
-----------------------------
Geez, it seems like these blogs can't discuss anything without the "elitists bashers" coming out for a swing. What IS your problem? The jealousy must be eating you up inside.
Taxpayers cannot afford the cultural expense. Have private funds from national groups and local community groups pay for these things. Government needs to focus on essential needs only, not the extras that tie up time of officials. For example, there is a rash of car and home robberies going on, and little is being done about it. We need an all out effort including sting operations to let the criminals know that Naperville is off limits to crooks. Otherwise, criminals are going to get bolder and break into homes with potential harm to citizens. Blowing tax revenues on art is an insult to the victims of crime. Focus of health & safety of our community via police, fire, streets, sewers, power and inspection/permitting. All else is a ludicrous waste.
To How to Deal:
No problem here. Just had an idea that the "wealthier" in this town who like to flaunt it (maybe you are one?) would like to see their names perpetually on a plague next to a piece of art -- instead of the City tax dollars paying for it.
Or, maybe I do have a problem, that being that Naperville used to be a much friendlier town (before the big SUVs and "elitists" moved in). But as for eating me up inside, no way -- I enjoy being an environmentalist, a helpful, straight forward and honest person, who doesn't happen to have a six figure income but that grew up here (like my mother and grandmother).
Maybe it eats you up that you're being called out? Or maybe that people like me are even allowed to live here?
I'm convinced that those of you who think Naperville is a wealthy town have not gone north if I 88 let alone taken a ride along Sheridan Road. Want to see true wealth, hit the north shore. Naperville is just filled with over morgaged homeowners who cry when their tax bills go up. Thank goodness I was raised to stay within your means and make sure you have money put away for the unexpected. Same thing I teach my kids so they don't get caught up with the give me attitude their friends have.
To Diane G on June 24, 2008 8:00 PM--
Looks like I hit a nerve.
You know, it is possible for people with six figure incomes to be environmentalists and helpful, straight forward and honest people, too. Or do you think one has to be below a certain income level to be considered salt-of-the-earth?
I think Naperville is an extremely friendly and courteous town. I've been in Naperville for 10 years. I spent 10 years in the southwest, 15 years in the mountain west, and grew up on the west coast. One thing I've noticed everywhere I've been is that people who live their whole lives in the same place tend to have a narrower world view and less tolerance for change. I have a feeling that's what's really going on here.
It's amazing that so many people with small incomes also have very small minds. I agree with a previous writer who said issues like this always bring out jealousy of those of moderate means. There are always those who resent anyone who achieves more or has more than they....that's life. As for the 1% food/beverage tax, I applaud city officials who finally stepped up to the plate to earmark funds for cultural amenities and events in Naperville. It is estimated that more than half of this money comes from people who live outside Naperville but come here to enjoy the amenities this community has to offer. They don't come here to visit because we have a good sewage system or dependable electricity; they come to see things like our public art, to visit the Carillon, enjoy a trip to the Naper Settlement, etc. People with empty hands and empty pockets also tend to have empty vision. They love to criticize anyone who has more than they have or does more than they do but seldom get involved or do anything to help Naperville be a better place to live. Some of you need to get a grip and live with the fact that there are people who have more than you. If you don't like that, do something about it. If you can't afford to live or eat here, go someplace else!
Um, what? "WAKE UP", I find that it's the "haves" who waste their time bickering about such pressing issues as whether or not we should be allowed to be hanging laundry outside who don't bother volunteering, donating, or generally giving their time or money to those who have less. It's not the other way around. That's an asinine statement to make.
To How to Deal and Wake Up:
No nerves struck here. Yes, it is possible for someone with a six figure income to be an environmentalist, etc, etc. BUT, the person that drives a big SUV and lives in a McMansion cannot. Wasting this planet's resources on gas guzzlers and HUGE homes is unresponsible.
I have lived my whole life with a "grip" that there are those with more money than me (and my family). It's not a problem. I enjoy the things that my lifestyle has to offer me: bike rides, walking with my dogs, attending "free" concerts and events, etc.
Just because I don't have lots of $$ doesn't mean I don't get involved or "do anything to help Naperville be a better place to live." I personally have organized my neighborhood to participate in "National Night Out", volunteered my time and energy to organize a bike safety class for a group of youth, donated clothing and food items to other local charities, and more.
I guess my lack of vision is that I'd like to see more people in this community care about someone, anyone other than themselves and how big their car and house are.
I also think it's time that the City utilize its resources more effectively.
So sorry if anyone felt I "personally" offended them. So continue to "critize" me for giving a hoot about other people and this planet we call home.
To Diane G on June 25, 2008 10:18 AM--
I don't assume that just because someone drives an SUV or lives in a big house means that person does not care about the environment or the town they live in. I DO assume they pay a lot more for fuel and heating/cooling costs than I do, but that's their choice. There are tons of ways to help the environment; everyone doesn't have to live like me to be acceptable. Look at Al Gore's huge mansion (a true mansion, not a Mc), and he's the king of global warming! I don't consider a big house as tantamount to clubbing baby seals.
These very same people do a lot of volunteering, also. They're in the schools, libraries, at Safety Town, Loaves and Fishes, in Girl and Boy Scouts, in addition to a lot of private charities. You're impression that folks with 6 figure incomes are only self-absorbed and don't care about others is inaccurate, as is Anonymous on June 25, 2008 9:56 AM's statements above, which ARE truly asinine. They have contributed a lot to Naperville.
And finally, it's erroneous to think that someone in the 6 figure range is "wealthy". We are, and trust me, we're not. We're comfortable and we can afford some extras, but we have to budget our resources and make choices to afford those extras just like everyone else. We too take family bike rides through the prairie preserves and attend free concerts, such as the Naperville Municipal Band, for entertainment.
Having said all that, I do acknowlege there is an element of pretentiousness and materialism in Naperville. But you get that in every affluent area, Naperville is no different in that regard. I have lived in areas where the conspicuous consumption is a lot worse and the volunteerism and community involvement is a lot less, most notably, the southwest. I think the rampant materialism there has a lot to do with the popularity of Joel Osteen and similar ministries in that area (hope that comment doesn't start a war). Believe me, in the grand scheme of things, Naperville does very well.
By How to Deal on June 24, 2008 10:47 PM:
“… it is possible for people with six figure incomes to be environmentalists and helpful, straight forward and honest people …”
Possible but not very likely. That is why I am happy doing what I am doing and making what I am making. I have worked in the corporate world for almost 30 years. I have worked in senior management for a time and made that six figure income. But I decided that I could not pay the price of my soul to be at that level. To a person, in my time in corporate, six figure income people in senior management are arrogant, merciless, greedy, mindless, and uncaring. I learned early on that in order to have what they have and be where they are I would have to be like them. That is just not a sacrifice I am willing to make. So I remain a little lower on the food chain and am happy for it.
After reading the above some questions come to mind.
1. What is culture?
2. Is the Carillon culture, or does it draw money paying customers into Naperville? It certainly consumes a lot of the culture fund.
3. Should the funds only be spent on things that draw business into Naperville such as booking top bands like Clapton at the N. Central Stadium at $500-$1000 a ticket on weeknights to drive more business at our restaurants and hotels etc..?
4. Besides maintaining the Riverwalk, what part of the fund draws customers to the city?
5. Could half the fund be used to offset the pension deficit for the police while they are moved to a defined contribution plan instead of the current defined benefit plan? The businesses in the city certainly rely on the NPD as much or more than the residents do. All of the businesses in the City would directly benefit from this.
6. Beyond the cat in the hat, is there anyone else of significant stature in Naperville that we need to erect a statue or monument for? Did we miss any significant developer?
6. Beyond the cat in the hat, is there anyone else of significant stature in Naperville that we need to erect a statue or monument for? Did we miss any significant developer?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe a statue of the Napergate Man in front of City Hall reminding them to watch their expenses would be a Statue with Meaning!
City Officials would be reminded every morning and every afternoon as they walked by the Statue that they are being WATCHED!
At least that would have the effect of bringing taxes down.
No one would want that Statue to turn live, so I am sure they would mind the WASTEFUL SPENDING!
To Happy As I Am on June 25, 2008 3:48 PM--
One does not have to be in the corporate world to make six figures. There are many lucrative careers that don't involve what you experienced, especially in the sciences. We've obviously known different people.
To Anonymous on June 25, 2008 5:19 PM--
A statue of the Napergate man would be hysterical! Our city officials would get an ulcer walking past that every day!
May I make the first $5 contributio to the Napergate Man statue?
Diane G,
I will match you with a second $5 dollar contribution.
Where do I send my money...seriously!
That would be great public art with a PURPOSE!
A Napergate Man Statue really sounds like the kind of art that we need to remind our City Council and Officials, it is time to watch EVERYTHING!
Anonymous could not have picked a better location!
Ditto on the $5 contribution! Idea: should the statue have the Napergate man walking his little dog? :)
No, it should not have his little dog.
It should have him carrying a Naperville Sun opened to a Napergate ad while eyeballing City Hall.
Or maybe just pointing his finger at City Hall!
Eventually, we will come up with some good ideas for the Napergate Man Statue.
No problem with the 5 bucks!
But we will need a little help from the cultural fund if we are going to build a large statue that towers over City Hall!
If the statue makes them think of curbing expenses it may pay for itself in a year or two from the savings!
It may be our Statue of Liberty symbolizing our freedom and liberation from high taxation finally.
I think we may be on to something here. . . private people putting up money for public art instead of additional taxation? Anyone have any other suggestions?
Didn't the Carillon start out as Diane G mentioned above, but then when the public money ran dry people cried for the City to save the Carillon? Reeeediculous.
The Carillon does not remind City Hall to save money. The Napergate Statue in front of City Hall would remind City Officials to save money.
A statue is low maintenance...once it is built there will be no additonal maintenance costs.
The Carillon is high maintenace...kind of like a Paris Hilton type of chick. It requires annual maintenance and has operating expenses.
We are talking about 2 different animals here.
One at least sends a message of a "WATCHDOG." Since no one is watching City Hall, a Napergate Staute watching is better than nothing watching.
Our Mayor and City Council are not watching our budget unfortunately. If the police union asked for a starting salary of 200k for a police officer, they would grant it so they could go home in less than an hour. They are not willing to work or stay up late. They are there to collect their own salary and pensions!
Staying up till midnight to fight the unions is something they feel they are not compensated for. It reminds them too much of their compensation and pension.
If Diane G is collecting, I would like to send my 5 bucks too. Give an address Diana where we can send our contibutions and you can be the Finance Director for the statue.
Great idea Diane!
By Anonymous on June 26, 2008 11:22 PM
Didn't the Carillon start out as Diane G mentioned above, but then when the public money ran dry people cried for the City to save the Carillon?
----------------------------
It did. The Carillon started out as a privately funded project, but it went way over budget before completion. The Carillon Committee had tapped out all its private donors, so it was faced with asking the city to bail out the project with public funds or tear the carillon down and having nothing to show for all the money spent. I guess the city kicked in, as it's still there. Did the city use money from the culture fund to save the carillon? If so, some of you may want to think twice about abolishing the culture tax!
By Anonymous on June 26, 2008 11:22 PM
Didn't the Carillon start out as Diane G mentioned above, but then when the public money ran dry people cried for the City to save the Carillon?
----------------------------
It did. The Carillon started out as a privately funded project, but it went way over budget before completion. The Carillon Committee had tapped out all its private donors, so it was faced with asking the city to bail out the project with public funds or tear the carillon down and having nothing to show for all the money spent. I guess the city kicked in, as it's still there. Did the city use money from the culture fund to save the carillon? If so, some of you may want to think twice about abolishing the culture tax!
By Anonymous on June 26, 2008 11:39 AM
By Anonymous on June 27, 2008 7:49 AM
To the two Anons above:
I think a Napergate man statue would be great, except we have to have realistic expectations about it.
It would have to be 100% privately funded, as there's no way the city is going to assist a project which symbolizes it's abuse of power and reminds them of an episode which turned into a gigantic pain in the a** for them.
Also, I seriously doubt such a statue would be allowed in front of city hall, much less a huge one pointing an accusatory finger, like an angry bronze godzilla. That's creepy. A life-size statue in a somewhat non-threatening pose, with narrative plaques explaining it's significance, of course, might work, kind of like the one in front of Naper Settlement. I don't think city leaders could keep it from being placed somewhere around the river walk area like the carillon, it which case then Napergate guy could be pointing towards city hall.
And lastly, it seems like we would have to get permission from Napergate man himself to use his likeness and experience in this manner.
Just some things to consider.
How to Deal,
I kind of agree with your thoughts. I doubt the city would allow it on any property it owns. Yes, it is art and would be funded by private donors but since the city owns the land, I suppose it could veto any art it does not like. I believe they would tolerate any kind of free expression...but Napergate free expression may be a bit too much for them. First Amendment or no First Amendment they will find a way to reject this Napergate Statue.
The city council would certainly not like a statue of the Napergate Man.
Not the current city council! That is for sure!
Maybe in the future if we get a new city council with a perspective and agenda of curbing city waste, they would welcome such a Napergate Statue...even with a finger pointing. They would probably want to have it in case the next election brought back the unfrugal type of council members. Having it there could be a reminder for future generations of city council members.
Statue or no statue, I just hope our city council does something about the 50 million in parking decks and the 50 million in lost pension funds before it bites a chunk of my wallet out.
And if Diana G is taking a collection, I am more than willing to donate. I would be happy to donate 50 bucks. We need something in this city to remind us that money does not grow on trees. City Hall would be a great place for this statue but the current city council would never let it happen.
To Blake on June 27, 2008 4:21 PM--
I thought about that later--the city owns the land, so there's no way they'd allow something like a Napergate guy statue anywhere on it.
All the same, it was a great idea! ;)
First the city is for the people by the people meaning you. If none of you where to pay taxes you would not have this discussion. Find a Senator who is willing to listen. That might cost but since it is for the cause he might be willing to read a petition from so many of the community. This can be accomplished who is the city? City is what you are, the ones who pay for lights, roads and offices etc. to see that in your democracy of voting these things are done by the most experienced an most approved cannidate for the job. If there is a problem it is your American duty to question why. It is a law for you to know what is going on. We know change is a overthrow which is a revolution. If it is time for one let it be. The city is you, all that make it a place where lines are ran gas, electric, water. Other than that who else is going to fork over the money for a once quite country land then a house to having homes because of a nearby store then a small town created by you all into a running city with all the utilities. Express your selves and use your rights that where given to you on July the 4th 1774. You all are the power! The ones in power do not want you to know you are the boss. With out you they are not going to be the one for the job. Gov. Spitzer had no problem on spending $80,000 on hookers from Emperors and transfering money to a private account. So what is worst your tax on a meaningful statue or prostitution.