Council approves new Arts, Science & Culture governance structure; debate over $2M grants and RFP timeline continues

Charlotte City Council voted Feb. 10 to participate in a new governance structure for arts, science and culture funding that will bring city, county and private (Foundation for the Carolinas) appointments together to oversee grant-making and long-term strategy. The move passed with two council members recorded in opposition, who said the proposed appointment structure and grant process reduce direct public accountability.

The recommendation came to full council after the Jobs and Economic Development Committee reviewed governance options and voted 4–1 in committee last fall. Committee materials and staff presentations described an ecosystem approach that combines the city’s roughly $11 million annual arts allocation (about $9 million in “hardwired” recurring support and $2 million for discretionary grants) with county funds and philanthropic investments, producing about $21 million a year in the agreed model. Under the proposal, the Foundation for the Carolinas would play a coordination role and new boards would make grant recommendations; city and county appointees would sit on the governing body and retain final approvals for certain actions.

Several council members supported the approach as a way to secure long-term collaboration and oversight across public and private funders. “This is a legacy issue we have worked on for years,” said a committee representative who brought the item to the dais. Supporters said the structure is intended to implement recommendations from the city’s cultural plan, expand grant-making for individual artists and small groups and bring more private-sector commitments into the pipeline.

Opponents singled out two issues: (1) the appointment process and what they described as an additional layer of decision-making that could move decisions farther from direct council control and (2) the outstanding distribution of about $2 million in city-authorized discretionary grants for individual artists and small creative groups, approved in the prior year’s budget but not yet distributed. Councilmember Victoria Watlington said she would not support the recommendation because the proposed process “is getting too far away from the voters” and raised concerns about the relationship between recommending bodies and the final grant-making board. Councilmember Renee Johnson said she shared concerns about the appointment and accountability structure and asked staff for a firm timeline.

City Manager Marcus Jones told council that $9 million of the city’s allocation is committed to recurring, long-term support, and $2 million remains for discretionary grants to artists; he said staff had paused an earlier, ad-hoc plan to use Charlotte Is Creative in order to run an RFP as requested by council. Jones said the RFP for the $2 million was being drafted and that staff expected to distribute the grants after the selection process; he also said that if council had chosen not to adopt the new governance structure the city could still pursue an alternate pathway to distribute the $2 million in the current fiscal year.

Council voted to approve the Jobs and Economic Development Committee recommendation to participate in the new governance structure. The vote passed with Councilmember Victoria Watlington and Councilmember Renee Johnson recorded opposed; the rest of the council voted in favor.

Councilmembers and staff requested follow-up: a timeline for the RFP and grant distribution for the $2 million allocated to individual artists, a list of organizations that have been approved in prior budgets but have not yet received funding, and annual performance reporting from the new governance structure once it is operational. Manager’s office staff said the Foundation for the Carolinas will serve a coordination role and that the structure will include grant-making, venue assistance, education grants, and efforts to implement the cultural plan’s remaining pillars.

Council members said they would hold appointments to the new board—and the board’s operating rules—to close review when nominations are brought forward in accordance with the council’s appointments process.