Kern-Rugile: The arts get cut first -- again

Last week brought the dispiriting news that the Huntington Arts Council is facing a significant funding reduction. The nonprofit, one of Long Island's premier cultural organizations, hosts programs that bring music, dance, the visual arts and more to our community and schools.

According to Diana Cherryholmes, executive director of the council, if the town supervisor's 2012 budget proposal is approved, one of the group's most popular events, the Huntington Summer Arts Festival, would become a shadow of itself: Only about a dozen shows would go on, a huge drop from the 44 that thrilled audiences this past summer. But fans aren't the only ones who'll suffer.

"The economic impact to the area would be devastating," says Cherryholmes. "Restaurants, shops, gas stations -- almost every single business would lose money with the loss of our audiences."

A June 2011 report from the Long Island Association backs up that claim. Its study of the not-for-profit sector finds that each dollar in operating expenditures by Long Island arts institutions provides an economic boost to other goods and services on Long Island, increasing our gross regional product.

Yet when it's time to slash spending, the arts are often the first to go. With the economy hitting a sour note, it's difficult to convince business leaders, politicians and other purse-string holders that the arts merit as much consideration as health care, social services and other pressing concerns.

These decision-makers act as if they don't realize that the arts not only bring dollars into our economy in the short-term, they also provide far-reaching financial benefits in seemingly unrelated ways -- helping to reduce teen pregnancy, illiteracy, crime and school dropout rates, to name a few examples.

A May 2011 report from the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities -- a panel that was created in 1982 under President Ronald Reagan, the beloved icon of conservatives who often are the first to argue for cuts to "nonessential" programs -- summed up decades of research that showed "strong and consistent links between high-quality arts education and a wide range of impressive educational outcomes."

Study after study reveals that kids who participate in the arts are more likely to thrive socially and academically. It makes sense that this will translate to success in the workplace, too, which means less reliance on social services, less unemployment -- you get the picture. The dollars we spend now on arts education can pay huge dividends in the future.

But numbers and statistics are just part of the story. The arts not only serve as an economic win and a motivating force for millions of young people, they are also essential to our way of life on Long Island. Our area's rich cultural offerings are one of the main reasons many of us stay here, despite higher taxes, brutal traffic and other burdens.

Theresa Statz-Smith, executive director of the Long Island Arts Alliance, puts it this way: "If we lose public support for the arts, what will happen? The arts, and all the benefits of an artistic experience, will belong only to those who can afford it." It's great to have Broadway and the Metropolitan Opera so close to home, but many don't have the income these days to patronize these pricey institutions.

Leaders on all levels of government face difficult choices, and everyone has to come up with innovative ways to make their money go further. Schools need to look into consolidating services to reduce administrative costs. And, yes, arts organizations also will have to do more with less. But both the economy and something more elusive -- the human spirit -- are lifted up by our involvement in and exposure to the arts. Let's not wield the budget ax so forcefully on these precious resources.

Jenna Kern-Rugile lives in East Northport.