Item 8 Supporting Document — original pdf

Backup

LMF PROPOSED GUIDES 2025-2026 PREPARED BY SCOTT STRICKLAND, CITY COMMISSIONER, SECRETARY MUSIC COMMISSION D8 STATEMENT OBJECTIVES 1. CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES 2. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENT EXIST 3. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THOSE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED ACCORDING TO OUR TAX CODE Definitions as outlined in sect.001 of Sect 156, 351, 352 CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES ACCORDING TO OUR TAX CODE Definitions as outlined in sect.001 of Sect 156, 351, 352 CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES ACCORDING TO OUR TAX CODE Definitions as outlined in sect.001 of Sect 156, 351, 352 CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES ACCORDING TO OUR TAX CODE Definitions as outlined in sect.001 of Subchapter B, 351.101.4 CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES ACCORDING TO OUR TAX CODE Definitions as outlined in sect.001 of Subchapter B, 351.101.4 HOT funds must be used for exhibition/performance. Period. CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES EXAMPLES BASED ON COMMUNITY FEEDBACK 2 musicians that received funding from the 2023 grant used the money to make an album, and have yet to make it out of the studio. One musician who received a grant in 2023 rented a venue, and had a few friends come out to the release after self-producing the entire record from home from preproduction to mastering. One musician who received 30k said it “was way too much money, but we’re going to figure out a way to spend it.” Several musicians and “independent promoters” do not live in Austin and received respectively 15 and 30k in funding from LMF 2024. CLARIFICATION GUIDES AND HOT STATUTES PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST MISUSE AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF HOT FUNDING ALLOCATED TO NON - PUBLIC FACING PROJECTS PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST MISUSE AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF HOT FUNDING ALLOCATED TO NON - PUBLIC FACING PROJECTS NO RESIDENTIAL VERIFICATION OF APPLICANTS APPLYING FOR LMF PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST MISUSE AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF HOT FUNDING ALLOCATED TO NON - PUBLIC FACING PROJECTS NO RESIDENTIAL VERIFICATION OF APPLICANTS APPLYING FOR LMF INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC-FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC- FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES 2023 STATS @ 3.5 MILLION DOLLARS 660 APPLICANTS 20% INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 132 INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 368 AWARDED APPLICANTS 77.8% MUSICIANS 514 MUSICIANS 56 % FUNDED PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC- FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES 20% INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 132 INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 368 AWARDED APPLICANTS 77.8% MUSICIANS 514 MUSICIANS 56 % FUNDED 2023 STATS @ 3.5 MILLION DOLLARS 660 APPLICANTS 2024 STATS @ 4.5 MILLION DOLLARS 1013 APPLICANTS 14% INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 132 INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 137 AWARDED APPLICANTS 78.7% MUSICIANS 514 MUSICIANS 11 % FUNDED 120 AWARDED AWARDED MUSICIANS / IND. PROMOTERS MUSICIANS AND INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC- FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES 20% INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 132 INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 368 AWARDED APPLICANTS 77.8% MUSICIANS 514 MUSICIANS 56 % FUNDED 2023 STATS @ 3.5 MILLION DOLLARS 660 APPLICANTS 2024 STATS @ 4.5 MILLION DOLLARS 1013 APPLICANTS 14% INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 132 INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 137 AWARDED APPLICANTS 78.7% MUSICIANS 514 MUSICIANS 11 % FUNDED 120 AWARDED AWARDED MUSICIANS / IND. PROMOTERS MUSICIANS AND INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS 77 VENUES APPLIED 17 VENUES FUNED 22 % VENUES FUNDED PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC- FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES THRIVE 2024 FY 25-26 7.7M 155 APPLICANTS 23 % FUNDED 120 DECLINED 35 AWARDED ELEVATE 2024 FY 25-26 7.7M 263 APPLICATIONS 104 AWARDEES 40 % FUNDED NEXUS 2024 199 AWARDED 45 % FUNDED 248 APPLICANTS PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST INEFFICIENTLY SIZED GRANTS FOR THE INTENDED PUBLIC- FACING EXHIBITION PROJECT(S) AS OUTLINED IN HOT GUIDELINES THRIVE 2024 FY 25-26 7.7M 155 APPLICANTS 23 % FUNDED 120 DECLINED 35 AWARDED ELEVATE 2024 FY 25-26 7.7M 263 APPLICATIONS 104 AWARDEES 40 % FUNDED NEXUS 2024 199 AWARDED 45 % FUNDED 248 APPLICANTS LMF NEEDS A MINIMAL EFFICACY RATE OF 22 TO 23 PERCENT. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST NEWLY PROPOSED GUIDELINES BY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT DIVISION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST 5K AND 20K GRANTS Awarded to EMERGING and ESTABLISHED artists based on…. PROJECT Artists after determination of status has project evaluated for HOT guidelines/creativity. ARTIST Using credentials as a first means of determining whether an artist is going to receive a difference of 15k based on what? YES/NO PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST The emerging vs established artist category will create an us versus them dichotomy in our Austin Music Family. Full stop. The only way to actually (and legally) divide this artist into two categories to determine two different buckets of funding is to change the tax code to reflect the applicants. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST QUESTIONS CONCERNING ACCESSIBILTY. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST QUESTIONS CONCERNING ACCESSIBILTY. Why are artists given additional points on their applications for having an accessibility portion of their event/program/project? PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST QUESTIONS CONCERNING ACCESSIBILTY. Why are artists given additional points on their applications for having an accessibility portion of their event/program/project? You are not rewarding artists for having accessibility features in their programming; you are simply penalizing those who don’t have these same ideas in mind concerning their applications. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST QUESTIONS CONCERNING ACCESSIBILTY. Why are artists given additional points on their applications for having an accessibility portion of their event/program/project? You are not rewarding artists for having accessibility features in their programming; you are simply penalizing those who don’t have these same ideas in mind concerning their applications. There will be projects where accessibility isn’t a main component or simply doesn’t apply at all. These artists, with everything else that has to be maintained, doesn’t need another hoop to jump through, just to be a successful artist in Austin, or the ETJ. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST QUALIFIED CENSUS TRACT A Qualified Census Tract (QCT) is a geographic area defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) where at least 50% of households have incomes below 60% of the Area Median Gross Income (AMGI) or where the poverty rate is 25% or higher. All questions concerning QCTs, location of residence, except for verification of residing in Austin or ETJ (extraterritorial Judiciary) should be removed for the following reasons.. • Penalizes and marginalizes people of color who do not live within a QCT. • Nowhere in HOT Guidelines 156, 351, or 352 does it state that QCT information is required for a successful application. PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST SOLUTIONS SOLUTIONS WE KEEP IT SIMPLE. SOLUTIONS SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED WE ABIDE COMPLETELY BY HOT GUIDELINES MAKING SURE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS ARE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROJECTS THAT IS IN AN EXHIBITION FORMAT SOLUTIONS SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED WE ABIDE COMPLETELY BY HOT GUIDELINES MAKING SURE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS ARE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROJECTS THAT IS IN AN EXHIBITION FORMAT SOLUTIONS WE CREATE THE MOST EQUITABLE GRANT PROGRAM - THIS YEAR - GIVING HUNDREDS OF GRANTS TO MUSICIANS INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED WE ABIDE COMPLETELY BY HOT GUIDELINES MAKING SURE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS ARE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROJECTS THAT IS IN AN EXHIBITION FORMAT SOLUTIONS WE CREATE THE MOST EQUITABLE GRANT PROGRAM - THIS YEAR - GIVING HUNDREDS OF GRANTS TO MUSICIANS INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS WE GO BACK TO A PROJECT-BASED APPLICATION THAT IS PEER REVIEWED IN ADDITION TO BEING SCORED BY AN ALGORITHM. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED WE ABIDE COMPLETELY BY HOT GUIDELINES MAKING SURE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS ARE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROJECTS THAT IS IN AN EXHIBITION FORMAT SOLUTIONS WE CREATE THE MOST EQUITABLE GRANT PROGRAM - THIS YEAR - GIVING HUNDREDS OF GRANTS TO MUSICIANS INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS WE GO BACK TO A PROJECT-BASED APPLICATION THAT IS PEER REVIEWED IN ADDITION TO BEING SCORED BY AN ALGORITHM. WE UNDERSTAND THAT DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION IS ALREADY BAKED INTO THE DEMOGRAPHIC OF INTENDED APPLICANTS. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION WE DON’T NEED IT. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION (we don’t need it) Benefactors by priority White Women Latino / Hispanic Americans Asian Americans Native Americans Veterans LGBTQIA + African Americans Work Cited “Who really benefits? DEI Programs Face Scrutiny Amid Leadership Disparities | LINK SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION (we don’t need it) Applicants of LIVE MUSIC FUND 2024 White 39% Hispanic Latino Americans 21% African Americans 16% Multiracial 8% Asian American 3% Prefer not to say 6% OUR BELOVED COMMUNITY IS ALREADY DIVERSE ENOUGH. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED PROJECT NOT MERIT-BASED APPLICATIONS Applicants of LIVE MUSIC FUND 2025 ARTIST Verification. 2 forms of identification that prove the artist is who they say they are, and that they live where they say they live. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED PROJECT NOT MERIT-BASED APPLICATIONS Applicants of LIVE MUSIC FUND 2025 ARTIST Verification. 2 forms of identification that prove the artist is who they say they are, and that they live where they say they live. PROJECT What does the artist want to do? The project can not just be a studio project. There must be an exhibition component to the work. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED PROJECT NOT MERIT-BASED APPLICATIONS Applicants of LIVE MUSIC FUND 2025 ARTIST Verification. 2 forms of identification that prove the artist is who they say they are, and that they live where they say they live. PROJECT What does the artist want to do? The project can not just be a studio project. There must be an exhibition component to the work. PROOF OF WORK What has the artist done to qualify them to receive funding for the project they want to create? SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED PROJECT NOT MERIT-BASED APPLICATIONS Applicants of LIVE MUSIC FUND 2025 ARTIST Verification. 2 forms of identification that prove the artist is who they say they are, and that they live where they say they live. PROJECT What does the artist want to do? The project can not just be a studio project. There must be an exhibition component to the work. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED PROOF OF WORK What has the artist done to qualify them to receive funding for the project they want to create? Record of Sustainability What have they been able to do so far independently in their career and advance themselves without LMF. Use the project-based applications to fund 3 different types of projects depending on need and demonstration of artist tenure. micro-grants at 5k small public facing projects that promote tourism and are impactful for tourism in Austin intermediate sized grants at 10k for more ambitious projects, i.e. small festivals/ music releases with video component/mixing/mastering/merch/ pressing/distribution expanded grants at 15k for more expanded projects that may require a component of a release, heavier production, touring, etc SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED Using an equitable distribution method assuming we have 1000 + applicants 4.5M BUDGET 1M MUSIC VENUES 17 VENUES AT 60K EACH 3.46M MUSICIANS INDEPENDENT PROMOTERS SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED Using an equitable distribution method assuming we have 1000 + applicants 4.5M BUDGET 3.46M MUSICIANS 115 micro-grants at 5k small public facing projects that promote tourism and are impactful for tourism in Austin 115 116 346 Funded applications intermediate sized grants at 10k for more ambitious projects, i.e. small festivals/ music releases with video component/mixing/mastering/merch/ pressing/distribution expanded grants at 15k for more expanded projects that may require a component of a release, heavier production, touring, etc SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED GRANT RECIPROCITY SHOULD EXIST. Because of the large applicant pool of musicians applying for funding, Nexus and Elevate should also be considered for reciprocity. Cultural Arts and Music Entertainment should work together to streamline their grant processes. One application for multiple grant programs. If a high-scoring applicant is denied LMF, because of the lack of exhausted funding, they should immediately be considered and moved to the front of the line for Nexus and Elevate grants. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED VERIFICATION, QUALIFICATIONS, AND PROVISIONS OF LMF APPLICANTS/AWARDS SHOULD BE TIGHTER. Verify that applicants live where they say they live. Independent promoters should have tighter requirements when applying for grants, meaning that musicians shouldn’t be able to apply as independent promoters just because they put on a few shows a year. Music venues should be required to pay local artist guarantees if they receive LMF funding. These guarantees should reflect the standard city rate of compensation for musicians. Accessibility should fall to the onus of the venues because they already have to comply with city code to open their doors. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED Let’s create the most equitable guidelines for LMF 25/26. And let’s recommend those guidelines to the council so they get done exactly the way we are recommending them. SOLUTIONS ON HOW THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE FIXED Questions?