In a move that has sparked significant controversy, Oakland city leaders recently announced cuts to various departments and programs as part of an effort to balance the city’s budget.
One cut that has particularly drawn ire is the decision to eliminate the position of cultural affairs manager, a role central to overseeing public funding for the arts in the city.
The cultural affairs manager not only manages funds for artists but also plays a crucial role in the Cultural Affairs Commission, a volunteer board that advises the city on policies affecting local artists and cultural organizations.
According to local artists, the role is instrumental in securing outside funding from foundations, which is vital given that Oakland dedicates only about 1% of its total budget to cultural affairs and public arts programs.
Roberto Bedoya, the previous cultural affairs manager, was instrumental in revitalizing the Cultural Affairs Commission and securing approximately $1 million annually through partnerships with various foundations.
After Bedoya retired last October, the city appointed an interim manager while plans were made to find a permanent replacement.
However, the recent announcement that the cultural affairs manager position would be cut entirely has left many artists and representatives of arts organizations disheartened.
Michelle Mush Lee, senior advisor for organization Youth Speaks and a member of the Cultural Affairs Commission, voiced her concerns, stating, “The money that Roberto brought in was money that was harder for individual artists and smaller nonprofit arts organizations to secure.”
The abruptness of the budget decision also caught many by surprise. Vanessa Whang, chair of the Cultural Affairs Commission, expressed her astonishment at the council’s swift approval of the budget.
“I thought it was a very inaccessible time to be having a budget meeting,” Whang remarked, referring to how the city council voted on the final budget weeks earlier than expected.
Whang and other stakeholders had hoped to use the time leading up to the budget vote for greater community involvement.
In 2022, arts and cultural organizations had months to prepare for budget discussions. This year, however, some, like Lee, were informed only days in advance regarding the meetings and the proposed cuts.
This cut was part of a larger set of amendments introduced by a group of councilmembers just before the mayor’s proposed budget went to a vote.
District 4 Councilmember Janani Ramachandran, who co-led the amendment team, explained that this was a collective decision.
Despite having significant personal ties to the arts, Ramachandran indicated that she was forced to make tough budgetary decisions in light of the city’s financial constraints.
“I want to do everything we can to uplift the arts in Oakland,” she said, noting her personal background in art.
Yet artists have begun to raise alarms about the lack of attention given to the arts in the proposed budget, with a sentiment that their voices are being overlooked.
At a recent Finance and Management Committee meeting, several artists expressed their frustration.
Graham Lustig, the artistic director of the Oakland Ballet, criticized the council’s budget decisions, stating, “It’s really scandalous that the arts are not featured in any way in this budget.”
His comments highlighted the sharp contrast between funding for arts and other city initiatives.
Ramachandran defended the budget during an Instagram post, claiming it included over $3 million allocated to the arts, and described the cultural affairs manager position as an expensive managerial role that the city could not afford to maintain.
Public records indicate that in 2023, the previous cultural affairs manager, Bedoya, received a total compensation of $259,000 per year, including salary and benefits.
However, former city employee Raquel Iglesias disputed Ramachandran’s claims of substantial investment in arts funding.
Iglesias pointed out that the cultural affairs budget was heavily restricted, primarily funding facility maintenance rather than available funds for community distribution.
The tension culminated during budget deliberations when Councilmember Rowena Brown proposed using funds from economic activation zones to reinstate the cultural affairs manager position.
Unfortunately for her, there was insufficient consensus among the council to proceed with this plan.
Lee articulated the broader community dissatisfaction with the decision, emphasizing that the cultural affairs manager’s role was vital for advocating local arts.
“The reason why I’m so upset is because, during the last budget cycle, there was room for disagreement, there was room for the community to dissent, to debate and to be heard,” Lee expressed.
Whang echoed this sentiment and highlighted the need for reestablishing the cultural affairs manager role, as well as providing staff with more flexibility in the current budget allocation of $480,000.
She believes that these funds should be utilized not just for events, but directly for supporting individual artists and smaller organizations.
In a broader context, Ramachandran maintained that fundamental services funded by the budget—like public safety and infrastructure—are crucial for long-term community stability, which ultimately supports artists in their daily lives.
“All the artists that I’m connected to in the music and performance performing art space, they’re struggling with the day-to-day of life,” she reiterated, reflecting the ongoing struggles faced by many in Oakland’s creative communities.
image source from：oaklandside
