We're against the December 5th, 2024 Arts Commission's grants criteria because it is inequitable, non-community-responsive, and will harm Nashville artists this year and in future years. We recommend amending the criteria to include Arts Equity Nashville's suggestions:

First, AEN recommends a 50/50 split of the $3.2 million allocated to Metro Arts grants. That means $1.6 million to Thrive artists, and $1.6 million to General Operating grantees. This is the bare minimum, since there are 201 Thrive applications (unscored) and 109 General Operating applications (unscored).

Second, AEN recommends that General Operating grantees with a budget of more than $3 million no longer be funded by Metro Arts in FY25 or thereafter. These institutions can apply for national and state grants or engage fundraising departments to cover the tiny fraction of their large budgets previously provided by MA. Small arts orgs and Thrive applicants usually do free programming in the community and so their impact is greater for Nashville residents who fund MA than large institutions that are inaccessible and tourist-centered.

Third, AEN recommends removing the fiscal sponsorship model for Thrive. This model is discriminatory, as Public Arts artists do not have to have fiscal sponsorship in order to receive hundreds of thousands of tax dollars for their arts projects. This double standard also hinders specifically BIPOC artists who may not have connections with large institutions to request fiscal sponsorship. Moreover, the Tennessee Arts Commission has a fellowship for individual artists that does not require fiscal sponsorship. Multiple Southern states also have direct funding models for individuals; Nashville is very behind in equitable, progressive arts funding models. Fiscal sponsorship also is a double standard for working class artists who are now expected to negotiate contracts individually, leading inevitably to disparities. Metro Finance has yet to give Nashvillians a reasoning why fiscal sponsorship is the only model for Thrive to exist. Such regression is also very harmful and undemocratic, as the public has been removed from the engagement process. Requiring fiscal sponsorship is harmful and discriminatory.

The “community engagement sessions” did not have a solid demographic of artists, and the main advocates for fiscal sponsorship are white administrators, salivating for the extra funds. Requiring a fiscal agent presents an extra hurdle for local artists, and can also damage projects/creativity/artist agency and accountability. There are multiple reasons why fiscal sponsorship is terrible and will lead to a major lawsuit for Metro, if bureaucrats continue to dictate and limit the will of the people.

Fourth, AEN recommends an extension to the reporting period. We recommend new contracts allowing retroactive funding for GO + Thrive, as was done with FY24 for Thrive because of bureaucratic discrimination leading to the August 2023 defunding and delay in funds.

Fifth, AEN does not recommend flat funding for Thrive. AEN does NOT recommend “funding everyone at $5,000," nor defunding 153 applications (unscored) who are requesting $20,000 for concerts, events, festivals, programs, workshops to $10,000 like was done in August 2023. This defunding can do a tremendous amount of damage to Thrive projects in particular. It's unfortunate that applications have not been scored, despite panelists having submitted applications since February 2024.

Funds need to reach those who would be left out otherwise and support art that is representative of our communities. Our tax dollars should lift up local artists and platform work that reflects our communities.

We call on Metro Arts to fulfill its mission of equity. We call on Metro government to be democratic and progressive and with the people.