Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

CITY

City

Museums Struggle to Maintain Programs and Projects


photo (cc) ectasticist
The Temple of Dendur at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The Met is suffering from a 25 percent decrease in endowment this year.

New York City's cultural institutions are accustomed to weathering the ebbs and flows of the economy, but over the past year, the recession has taken its toll on even the most established museums. The city's cultural institutions have fallen victim to the domino effect set off by the global financial crisis. As private and public support has declined, museums have been left with a particularly challenging balancing act -- maintaining a high level of educational programming and noteworthy exhibitions while adjusting to significantly leaner budgets. This transition has prompted museum directors to make a series of difficult decisions resulting in layoffs, furloughs, salary cuts and downsized or canceled exhibitions.

In spite of these tough times, attendance has increased, giving museum officials a reason to stay positive. Modifying their spending and exhibition schedule, cultural institutions are continuing to pursue long-term projects.

Feeling the Heat

Across the board, museums have experienced a considerable decrease in both corporate and public support. Cultural institutions look to different revenue sources to sustain their operating budgets and endowments. Government funding is one slice of the pie, while visitor attendance, membership, and contributions from corporations, private foundations and individuals make up the remaining financial support. The recession has led to losses in most of these areas.

The Department of Cultural Affairs provides significant funding for the 33 members of the Cultural Institutions Group, an organization that is comprised of private cultural institutions located on city-owned property, which receive regular funding from the city. For the 2010 fiscal year, the members of Cultural Institutions Group received a 3 percent reduction in city funding. While this cutback affects all members, its impact varies depending upon the size and endowment of the individual institution.

"In terms of the corporate community, I think everyone has seen a fairly substantial decline," commented Arnold L. Lehman, director of the Brooklyn Museum of Art and chair of the Cultural Institutions Group. "And that decline is perhaps best demonstrated within the sponsorship arena -- sponsorship for major exhibitions and sponsorship for major programs."

Lehman added that, while individual support has remained "fairly solid," there have been decreases in many areas, such as foundation support. "There are certain foundations that have stepped up their funding to try to replace some of the other areas where support has decreased," Lehman said.

The cutbacks affect small and large museums. The director of the Museum of the City of New York, Susan Henshaw Jones, wrote in an email that "private funding, too, fell off in the areas of higher level giving" along with the decrease in funding from the city this fiscal year.

Even museums with sizeable endowments and traditionally solid attendance are being hit hard by the economic downturn. In February, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced in a press release that its endowment value suffered a 25 percent decrease from the previous year. With fewer tourists, membership renewals, and private and public contributions, the Met has had to tweak its budget and re-evaluate upcoming projects.

The Jewish Museum has seen its annual operating budget decline from $16.3 million to $13.7 million in the last year, according to a statement from Lynn Thommen, deputy director for external affairs "During this global economic downturn, the Jewish Museum faces the same challenges as most other cultural organizations," her statement said. She attributed the decline to a decrease in money earned from the museum's endowment and from a reduction in contributions.

In preparation for the challenges the economic downturn might pose, the museum took action. Thommen said, "Trustees and other close friends are contributing to a Stabilization Fund campaign with a goal of $4 million. This will enable us to continue to meet the community's interests through quality programming while being fiscally responsible."

Adjusting to a New Reality

The economic climate has compelled many museums to lay off staff and postpone projects. This has been the case for the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which implemented a hiring freeze in February, cut approximately 357 jobs and shut down 15 of its museum stores across the country. The Brooklyn Museum took similar measures including voluntary separation packages, staff furloughs and increased admission fees.

Several museums are expanding as they simultaneously make cuts. The Museum of the City of New York has increased programming -- adding a Wednesday night event this summer called the "Speakeasy." However, last October, the museum began to cut back on expenses: "This meant the loss of positions through attrition and layoffs in every department of the museum. These positions have yet to be restored," said Jones, its director.

The Tenement Museum has offset the drop from certain income sources through an increase in visitors. Even with the museum's boost in attendance, it did prepare for potential financial troubles. "At the end of last calendar year, we did have a few layoffs, but it was more of a precautionary constriction rather than actually out of the need to do it," said David Eng, vice president of public affairs. "But we were looking ahead at all these projects that we're doing and that whole notion that fundraising was probably going to be down, so we did make some of those changes at the end of last year and now we're fine moving into this next year."

Looking on the Bright Side

While revenues have gone down, the number of visitors to many of the city's cultural institutions has gone up. This uptick in attendance has been partially attributed to the fact that many New Yorkers are staying in the city instead of traveling due to the economy. But interesting public programming and exhibits continue to be an important draw.

The Museum of the City of New York, saw its attendance in the fiscal year ending in June go up by 19 percent from the previous year and had even sharper rises in July and August, according to Jones. "This includes two new programs that were launched, but there were increases in every category of membership," she said.

The Tenement Museum also reported a 20 percent increase in visitors over the past year.

Moving Forward, One Step At A Time

The downsized budgets have encouraged museums to tap into their extensive permanent collections for special exhibitions.

The Brooklyn Museum of Art is about to launch two upcoming exhibitions that come directly from their permanent collections: The Life of Christ, which will showcase the paintings of James Tissot, and Body Parts: Ancient Egyptian Fragments and Amulets, a selection of 35 objects from the museum's Egyptian collection.

And while it is true that a number of museums are putting projects on hold, many also are moving forward -- cautiously -- with their long-term plans. The Met vows to carry on with the renovations of the new galleries for the Department of Islamic Art scheduled to reopen to the public in 2011; the Tenement Museum is building a new visitor center and shop; and the newly renovated El Museo del Barrio will open its doors to the public this month.

"We don't want to do anything that undercuts the essential mission of the Brooklyn Museum of Art," said Lehman. "I can't imagine that we would ever stop doing exhibitions or stop doing education programs for children and for adults. But you have to look at the peripheries of all these and see how you might be able to do things more practically."

The city's cultural institutions might be slowing down the pace a bit and cutting back, but they have honed their survivor skills and continue to pull in the crowds.

Nicole Gates Anderson is a freelance writer based in Brooklyn.

Stated Meeting: Graffiti Cleanup and Rezoning Sunset Park


Photo (cc) GREDELEGRE

 

You want graffiti erased from your storefront?

The City Council on Wednesday approved legislation to make it easier for residents and business owners to have graffiti removed from their properties -– gratis -- by the city.

In addition, the council approved a 128-block rezoning of the Sunset Park section of Brooklyn.

Graffiti Be Gone

In order to remove graffiti from private property now, the city must obtain a waiver from the property owner.

Under the legislation (Intro 1042), which was approved by a vote of 44 to 2, the city will paint over graffiti unless the owner objects –- essentially reversing the current practice. Anyone who wants to keep the graffiti on the property must alert the city within 35 days.

“This system now will help the majority of the property owners in the city of New York get graffiti removed from their property free of charge, but it gives those New Yorkers, who for whatever reason want to keep the graffiti on their property, the option of keeping it on their property,” said Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

Owners who get a letter from the city alerting them to graffiti and who do not respond would effectively be giving the city the go-ahead to clean it up. This way, said Councilmember Gale Brewer, who sponsored the bill, the city can clean up graffiti quickly and more efficiently by painting blocks at a time.

Councilmembers Erik Martin Dilan and Helen Foster voted against the bill.

Sunset Park

Nestled between Park Slope and Bay Ridge, Sunset Park has been the home of row houses, a large Hispanic population and what many call “Brooklyn’s Chinatown.”

Sprinkled with industry, like the Brooklyn Army Terminal, the neighborhood started to feel pressure from developers once its surrounding communities were rezoned to prevent overdevelopment, said Councilmember Sara Gonzalez, who represents the area.

Under the existing zoning, according to the City Council, there was no limit on building heights in much of the neighborhood. Under the new zoning approved by the City Council by a vote of 44 to 2, buildings would be limited to about five or six stories along streets and six to seven stories along portions of Fifth Avenue and all of Sixth Avenue. Councilmembers Charles Barron and Tony Avella voted against the rezoning.

The rezoning also includes an inclusionary housing option, which would allow developers to build larger buildings if they provide affordable housing.

Despite the current limitations, or lack thereof, the rezoning has been controversial. Residents claim it will lead to large luxury developments, which promise to displace the area's lower-income residents and small businesses.

The South Brooklyn Legal Services and the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund have filed a lawsuit on behalf of some residents over the rezoning. The city did not factor in all of the rezoning's effects, including how it could change the socioeconomic character of the community, said Bethany Li, an attorney with the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

“The Department of City Planning hasn't fully revealed the true impact of the rezoning,” said Li. “They don't consider people. They don't consider small businesses in the neighborhood. They don't look at all at the potential change in the socioeconomic conditions.”

Gonzalez says differently.

“Community Board 7 passed this unanimously. The borough president has given his stamp of approval,” said Gonzalez. “This plan is the community's plan.”

Schools and the MTA Communicate

The council also unanimously approved legislation (Intro 951-A) that requires the Department of Education to file student enrollment information with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority so the authority can better utilize its bus routes.

The Next Round


Photo (cc) kate.gardiner

The turnout in last Tuesday's primary probably hit a record low, with only 11 percent of registered Democrats making their way to the polling place. Next week, many experts agree, an even smaller number will vote in the runoff election to select New York's next public advocate and comptroller. No one can be sure, however, who those voters will be -- and what will influence their decision.

The two citywide races share some common trajectories. The tone of the contests, though, has been markedly different: The public advocate candidates lob charges at each other, while the comptroller candidates profess their friendship.

In both, four major candidates vied for the Democratic nomination for a citywide post. In neither case did anyone get the 40 percent needed for outright victory.

As a result, next Tuesday, City Councilmember Bill de Blasio will face off against former Public Advocate Mark Green for public advocate, and City Council members John Liu and David Yassky will compete for city comptroller.

In both races, the outcome "is going to come down to organization and turnout. That was the lesson of [last] week's primary," said Kenneth Sherrill, a professor emeritus at Hunter College.

The winners of both races will face opposition in November, but -- in these races in this city -- the Democratic nominee can probably look forward to four years in the municipal building.

PUBLIC ADVOCATE

One week into the public advocate runoff and it's already getting nasty.

De Blasio slammed Green Thursday for going negative (despite the fact he was very critical of Green during the last few weeks of the primary campaign). Standing outside the municipal building downtown accepting the endorsement of Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, de Blasio slammed Green for attacking him.

"I'm troubled when a desperate candidate comes up with spurious charges, and that's all he seems to have for a campaign," de Blasio said, surrounded by supporters, including borough presidents Scott Stringer and Marty Markowitz. "Everything I've done in public life has been done with a tremendous respect for ethics and the law."

He continued, "Mark at this point is throwing out every stray accusation he can find, and it's unfortunate. People don't want to talk about that. They want to talk about issues, like the future of our schools, like how to create affordable housing, how to create jobs in the middle of a recession."

But, at least for now, that's not what these two candidates are talking about. Two hours after de Blasio's criticism, Green ripped into de Blasio. Standing behind posters that showed de Blasio's name with dollar signs (de Bla$io), Green said a group closely linked to the Working Families Party, which enthusiastically backs de Blasio, had hired de Blasio as a consultant in 2006 and paid him $33,000.

"If a lobbyist for the Working Families Party comes to visit Councilman de Blasio, how can he claim to be independent?" Green asked rhetorically.

A day before, Green had slammed de Blasio for receiving campaign contributions from members of nonprofit groups he had given discretionary funding to at the City Council.

Green wants to paint the race as a contest between a consumer advocate versus a party insider.

"The proper frame of this public advocate campaign is who can voters trust based on their experience, their vision and their ethics?" Green asked. "When you put together his two documented conflicts of interest, participating as he does in the slush fund and getting personal income from a registered lobbyist, I think we have to conclude that he's an ethically challenged political insider."

Frontrunner to Underdog

Judging by Tuesday's results, Green needs to catch up. Surprising some, de Blasio ended up beating Green in last week's primary by more than 6,000 votes -- a lot when voter turnout is anemic.

Turnout for the runoff is expected to be even lower -- about 150,000 voters by some campaign estimates. So with two candidates out and many fewer voters to fight over, the remaining two candidates are racing to the runoff swinging. Each has a couple of weapons in their corners: De Blasio has the ever-organized Working Families Party and their practically impenetrable get-out-the-vote operation, while Green has his history as public advocate and name recognition in every borough.

"De Blasio, he surprised," said Doug Muzzio, professor at Baruch College. "Green was expected to come in first. He didn't break 40 [percent], and Bill beat him. That may signal the name recognition advantage may be topped out."

The Green Team vs. the Working Families Party

Some give an edge to de Blasio. The Working Families Party backing, along with the endorsement of the New York Times, could "probably give de Blasio a leg up," said Sherrill.

While the party endorsed many candidates, its executive director Dan Cantor has described de Blasio as its "marquee candidate."

That enthusiastic support highlights an intricate web of connections between de Blasio and the Working Families Party, which have led to some controversy.

De Blasio's campaign has paid Data and Field Services, a for-profit operation the Campaign Finance Board has said is virtually indistinguishable from the party, more than $90,000, according to the New York Times. In addition, the paper reported, three Working Families staff members started working for the de Blasio campaign in June. Earlier this year, de Blasio made a $10,000 contribution to the party.

The Losers' Blessings

To some, this race will revolve around whoever can snag the endorsement and support of the defeated public advocate candidates, Councilmember Eric Gioia and civil rights attorney Norman Siegel, and whether the "Green Team" can beat the Working Families Party. Siegel did not garner any major endorsements, but he does have a large, and loyal, base. If he decided to weigh in, that could sway those voters.

Gioia, on the other hand, did have institutional support. He had all of Queens County behind him as well as some of the city's major unions, including the Sergeants, Captains and Lieutenants Benevolent Associations and the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. Now all of that influence is in play.

De Blasio has also demonstrated his ability to fundraise. According to the latest campaign finance filings, de Blasio was able to raise three times as much as Green for the primary. He received almost double the amount in public financing as well. Throughout this year's race, Green has struggled to keep up.

On Friday, de Blasio received $443,431 in public funds, while Green got $239,658.

The next time these two candidates are scheduled to meet is for an official runoff debate on Wednesday. De Blasio has challenged Green to a series of 10 debates.

When asked last week whether that would materialize, Green made a yawning motion and said it would be up to their respective staffs to coordinate.

"I look forward to several debates, and then I believe he will be forced to answer questions," Green said. "What do you do with the money?" he asked referring to de Blasio's outside income.

All in all, one bet is safe for this public advocate race: You can say goodbye to the issues and hello to mudslinging.

THE COMPTROLLER

So far, personal attacks have largely been absent from the race to be the city chief financial officer. The only candidate who edged into negative campaigning, City Councilmember David Weprin, came in fourth in last week's election.

That all could change, of course, but for now Liu and Yassky seem to be maintaining their decorum.

"Dave Yassky and I have been friends for a long time," Liu said Thursday. "We work together, and this campaign is about issues. It's about our qualifications and our visions for both the comptroller's office and New York City."

Describing the runoff as "a clear choice between two candidates," Yassky said, "I'm going to focus on talking about the record of accomplishment and the vision of the office that each of the candidates bring."

At least in first few days of the runoff campaign each candidate steered clear of some of the charges that had been raised against the other. Liu did not stress Yassky's support of term limits or his previous unsuccessful runs for other offices. Yassky did not bring up allegations that Liu has misrepresented his childhood and exaggerated his account of working in a sweatshop.

The candidates do differ on some issues. In a debate earlier this campaign season, Liu said he would support raising the income tax on the richest New Yorkers to solve the city's fiscal crunch. Yassky has ruled out tax hikes and said he would cut waste and unnecessary programs. Yassky is open to reducing pension benefits for new city workers by adding a new pension tier. Liu would seek any savings in pension costs through collective bargaining. Liu vigorously opposed the extension of term limits. Yassky eventually voted for the extension. In the council and the campaign, Liu has been more critical of the Bloomberg administration than Yassky.

Their support reflects those differences.

Liu has backing from a number of unions, including the Service Employees, Transport Workers Union, the United Federation of Teachers and the Working Families Party. Like de Blasio, he has given money to the party, but unlike him, Liu has not hired Data and Field Services. He also seems to have made a particular effort to attract backing from black and Latino public officials.

In his bid to become New York's first Asian citywide elected official, Liu has amassed a lot of Asian support. His campaign finance filing shows many Asian names, with people often identified as being owner or president of a business and with many from outside the city.

On a day when Asians won an unprecedented three City Council primaries and Liu got 38 percent of the vote, 84 percent of Asians voted for Liu, according to an exit poll by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

On other hand, as of Friday afternoon, Yassky had no union support other than the freelancers union and the musicians union. He did have support from his former boss, Sen. Charles Schumer, who has appeared in television ads for him, and many Brooklyn politicians. He has fared extremely well with the city's newspapers, picking up the endorsements of the Times, the News and Crain's, which said "his view of city government is closer to that of the New York business community than the other candidates’ positions are." He also received the backing of some weekly papers.

Liu has the backing of the Queens, Staten Island and Bronx parties; Yassky has Manhattan's and Brooklyn's.

Overall Liu has raised more money in individual contributions than Yassky -- $2.9 million compared to just shy of $2 million, but, because so many of Liu's contributions came from outside the city, many did not qualify for the public match. So Yassky did better there: $1.8 million versus slightly over $1 million for Liu. Because the candidate gets an amount equivalent to 25 percent of their previous public match for the runoff, that gives Yassky some additional funds.

On Friday, Liu received $270,044 in matching funds, while Yassky got $448,503.

All that money -- and particularly how it is spent -- could make a big difference, according to Weprin. "There is a lot of money that can be spent in a short period of time," Weprin said. "Let's assume they will spend 1.5 in 10 days. That's a lot of saturation. It may encourage prime voters to come out."

The Power of the Press -- or the Party?

"It will be the New York Times versus the Working Families Party," said political consultant Hank Sheinkopf, whose firm worked for Weprin in the primary. "If Manhattan comes out big, as usual in runoffs, Yassky wins. Otherwise, he said, Liu could come out on top.

As to whether Asian voters could tip the balance, Sheinkopf said, "In a smaller universe overall, smaller universes become more important."

Sherrill sees the Working Families Party as perhaps edging out the Times, although he said, "Those habitual voters who turn out read the New York Times."

Meanwhile, both candidates have rolled out more endorsements. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and U.S. Rep. Yvette Clarke -- who defeated Yassky for her congressional seat in 2006 --announced their backing for Liu on Friday. Gotbaum is expected to declare her support today.

While Weprin has not yet decided if he will endorse Yassky, Liu or neither one, Yassky won the support of Councilmember Melinda Katz, who came in third on Tuesday.

In her statement, she said, "We can count on [Yassky] to bring honesty and integrity to the Office of Comptroller and to be a trustworthy custodian of the city's books. We can count on him to turn over every stone when it comes to shedding light on the waste and inefficiency throughout government. And we can count on him to make smart investments with our pension dollars that catalyze job growth in key industries."

Then, referring to Yassky's conduct during the campaign, Katz said, "Above all else, he was a gentleman."

Now that's a word we're unlikely to hear in the public advocate race.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years