The Townie is an opinion website. The views expressed in this piece belong solely to the author, do not represent those held by The Townie, and should not be interpreted as objective or reported fact.
Ever since the early 1990s “culture wars” whereby Congress voted to defund National Endowment Funds for individual artists, the value of creatives within any given society has been debated. In my capacity as a career professional in advocating the value of arts exposure and participation, one of my clients, Theatre Forward, commissioned a survey, not polling creatives but corporate executives in totally unrelated businesses. At the time, it was the first national survey not to focus solely on the “value” of creatives in a community from a purely economic standpoint. These executives believe that arts education and engagement in an individual’s formative years significantly improve workforce skills and contribute to career success. To deprive students of access to arts-related skills may also deprive them of an opportunity to develop required workforce skills—an imperative for success in today’s highly competitive marketplace environment.
How does this relate more immediately to Newburyport— the forthcoming election for Mayor? In our school system, sports expenditures play a significant role. Spending on creative skills development is far less. I applaud the Newburyport Education Foundation for leading efforts to establish the High School’s Video Production Lab and Studio. More can and should be done. Regarding creatives within our community and the various arts organizations, there are no direct city funds to support an industry that has contributed significantly to our community’s public profile and economic vitality.
I would advocate increasing avenues for creative expression in schools and supporting the creative community with public funds. And it can be done without impacting the city’s budget, nor raising taxes or incurring debt.
There is one potential source of revenue — the newly created Mayor Andrew R. Curtis Fund. It is a charitable trust established in 2024 to provide annual gifts to the City of Newburyport for public purposes. To make yearly gifts in perpetuity to the City of Newburyport for charitable purposes that will enrich the community. The trust is required to distribute the greater of 80% of its net income or 5% of its assets to the city annually. The initial gift in 2025 was smaller than subsequent gifts because of the timing of the trust’s organization. A seven-member Mayor Andrew R. Curtis Review Committee was created in March 2025 to recommend spending for the annual gift. Any recommendations by the committee need to secure a significant vote from the City Council.
The nominal level, for arts support and development
According to published reports, Mayor Sean Reardon has publicly proposed using between $200,000 and $300,000 annually for five years from the Mayor Andrew R. Curtis Memorial Fund to help finance the new recreation center. He has already built into the working budget the Curtis fund yearly allocation. But to count these funds is premature. Funds are contingent on both the Curtis committee’s recommendation and the City Council’s approval—the Mayor has no direct control over fund allocation(s). Full disclosure: I was interviewed to serve on the committee but wasn’t selected. Selecting members for the committee is the sole prerogative of the Mayor, who has made some interesting choices. For example, Brian Callahan, School Board member for 8 years and backed unopposed in Ward 3, was appointed to the committee by Mayor Reardon who has been publicly supportive of Callahan’s candidacy.
Additionally, he also appointed Stacey DiCicco to the Curtis Fund (note: she was the Chair of the Yes on Rec committee). Aren’t these blatant examples of a conflict of interest? Is this the act of stacking the committee to ensure the Curtis Fund/Recreation Center funding passes, while adding a city councilor’s vote in favor of the allocation? Why should the yearly total allocation be prematurely included in the current budget of the recreation center? During my interview with the Mayor, I raised the allocation of funds, suggesting exploring a nominal level for arts support and development. I wasn’t encouraged by his reply—he wasn’t forthcoming and no outward interest beyond the cursory affirming nod of the head.
Even if just 10% of the annual allocation was earmarked for cultural development in both our schools and a variety of cultural organizations, it would provide opportunities to benefit our youth. Actions speak louder than words —a term that applies to both candidates. Mayor Readon has publicly stated the value of the arts in our community. I applaud the effort, as few in public office are willing to utter the words. But from my experience being part of the Film Festival over the past five years, I can’t recall the Mayor’s appearance, even though he has been routinely invited.
I don’t know firsthand the nature of the support Jim McCauley has given the cultural community. However, I do know firsthand his interest in exploring and conducting the proper due diligence required for such support. As a consultant to the Arts & Business Council of Greater Boston (AB&C), shortly after the Brown School was quietly hearing potential uses for the facility, I reached out to Councilor Preston. As part of the Creative Campus platform, I worked with AB&C to create a combination of affordable artist senior housing and individual below-market-rate studios for creatives. Additionally, we would have allocated roughly 6,000 sq ft — build-out at our expense and designed for use in conjunction with the city’s creative community at no charge. The proposed studios would add to the economy as well as provide opportunities for emerging arts to gain traction. Use would be unrestricted for residents of NBPT and at a below-market rate for other surrounding communities. Councilor Preston organized a walk-through of the building, including the Mayor.
City Hall or its officials initiated no follow-up inquiries—except for one. I did receive a call from Councilor Jim McCauley. We discussed the usage and value to the community that our plan would bring to Newburyport. His questions were thorough, including queries about direct benefits — i.e., financial — and the value to the community.
As a lifetime advocate for advancing cultural policy as part of public policy, and with my professional and personal experiences within the community I have called home for the past 8 years, I would vote for Jim McCauley. He was the only official who went beyond the cursory gesture. If this is an example of leadership, I encourage individuals to join me in supporting McCauley for the reasons outlined in this letter.
Peter B. Carzasty
Public Art Committee member
Newburyport Documentary Film Festival
Passionate about a local issue? We want to hear from you. Check out our submission guidelines.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Leave a Reply