Two weeks ago I got an email from an angry busker in South Carolina about a street performance ordinance the city of Columbia is currently trying to pass:
I went to that city hall hearing tonight and the ordinance was struck down, thankfully, with another hearing scheduled for next week. It will be an exploratory hearing, or possibly there could be another vote on a new ordinance, depending on how fast the jerks put one together. The ordinance was a piece of crap. You can read it here.
Columbia has never been the most busker-friendly city. Or, at least, street performance hasn’t traditionally been one of the things people think of first when SC’s state capitol comes to mind. But, there’s been a lot of talk recently about the growing presence of street performance in the city and what to do about it, how to ensure its health and protect its artists, but also how the city can capitalise on it, and how (if need be) it can be regulated.
C. Neil Scott, Musician and Busker in Columbia
Over the past couple of weeks, mayor Steve Benjamin and City Center Partnership held a series of meetings. Natalie Brown, a local performer and founder of Alternicirque, a circus group in Columbia, attended the meetings along with street performer and founder of Columbia Hoop Troop and Luna Trix Performance Group, Gina Wolfe. Musicians Matt Falter and Neil Scott were also there, and all artists came away from the initial meetings with mixed feelings.
Natalie Brown says busking in Columbia has never officially been defined. It’s never really been clear whether or not it was allowed. There have always been laws against panhandling, but clearly, street performance is different than standing on a street corner shaking a coffee cup for spare change. Still, buskers in Columbia were being carted off by the police.
Over the past few years, though, through the success of groups like Alternacirque, Luna Trix, and Fire in Motion, and with the growing popularity of First Thursdays on Main, the city of Columbia started to take notice of the street art scene and decided it might not be a bad idea to give street performers incentive to stick around. Buskers bring pedestrians into commercial areas, they beautify the city, add culture and art and a sense of community. So, why not figure out a way to legally protect them? CCP decided it would be good to pay them to perform? Sounds like a good idea, right?
But legitimising busking in this way requires laws and regulations. And writing a busking ordinance that everyone can agree on is a difficult thing to do.
Natalie says this about CCP’s efforts to subsidize busking in the city:
“So CCP took their idea to the city legal department and the licensing department, and the city beancounters tore it to shreds. For the first time, they were looking at the legality of busking, and the way it came back, buskers were about to get hosed: if you were performing in any way for money on the streets, you had to have a business license, which starts at $60 if you live within city limits, and goes to $120 if you live outside city limits; then they freaked out over liability and decided that you could only perform if you had insurance or were performing for an organization that would cover you under their insurance; then they decided that tipping was illegal anyway under panhandler rules.”
Luckily, discussion about busking and how to legitimize it in the city didn’t end there. A year and a half later, the idea of a permit system had emerged. Permits would cost $15, and could be obtained through an application process. CCP would essentially be granted quality control. They’d be able to decide what kind of performances occurred and when.
But what about travelling buskers? What if an artist is just passing through? Would she have to jump through red tape just to be able to perform on the sidewalk for one afternoon?
And there was still the idea of CCP paying buskers for their performances. With a real wage and permits, no one could argue with a performer’s legitimate right to be on the sidewalk, doing her thing. But, fifteen dollars an hour was the suggested rate and no tips in addition to the pay would be allowed. Most talented buskers can make more than fifteen dollars an hour on a good night. And only those granted permission to perform under this ordinance would be allowed to do so. Independent busking would still be illegal.
And then there was the 10 o’clock curfew.
Gina Wolfe, an active busker in Columbia who uses lights as part of her show, is especially affected by the curfew. She says,
“City officials were worried about noise levels in residential areas and that is why they wanted to shut it down at 10. As a busker in this particular city though, I know the crowds aren’t out until AFTER 10pm. It would also compromise any type of LED light performance as it doesn’t get dark in the summer until after 9:30pm.
All of these ideas were written up in a tentative ordinance and presented at yet another formal meeting with CCP, Mayor Benjamin, and a number of Columbia’s street artists.
Natalie Brown says the city’s overall attitude was one of support.
“City Council started addressing the CCP ordinance by itself, but then the mayor pivoted and opened up the conversation about a wider busking ordinance. He broke the rules and allowed me to come up and address the council, and I politely told them that the CCP ordinance by itself would screw over the busking community at large, and that a busking ordinance with reasonable boundaries was needed to settle everything. Three members of city council–Mayor Steve Benjamin, Leona Plaugh and Belinda Gergel–were outspoken in their excitement and support of busking. They grilled the city legal representative for a while about the roadblocks he was throwing up, and they decided to talk about a real busking ordinance on Tuesday, April 17 at 2 PM at an Arts and Preservation Committee meeting.”
Dave, Fire in Motion
So, Tuesday rolled around and the debate continued. At the meeting, concerns about the curfew, permits, restrictions on types of performances, and the official way in which buskers are allowed to ask for money were discussed.
Gina says,
“They agreed that a busker may ‘passively’ request contributions of money or property at a performance, provided that no sign requesting contributions shall exceed 12″x18”.
Issue from my stand point: Define “passive”.
Answer from counsel: no verbal component, box/ hat/ etc. only.
I explained the busking process by which we build and maintain an audience, create our set, and then form a pitch which asks for money. The pitch is important. A verbal cue for the audience that the show is complete or building to something fantastic. I explained we will not be hounding people or chasing them down. Anyone is free to walk on. The busker doesn’t leave their station. Another community member in the gathering suggested the terms Active verses aggressive for the revision and it seemed to go over very well. It is my opinion that council will change passive to active in the draft and include a line about what defines aggressive. (ie chasing or hounding the by-passer.)”
And because of her work with Fire in Motion, Gina was concerned about restrictions on “dangerous materials.”
“The one issue which is still very cloudy is the use of dangerous objects and fire. As it stands, the council has ruled them out entirely. Questions were asked and a variety of types of compromise were spoken of. Ideas were discussed. We are hoping to continue these talks of fire and other “dangerous” arts being allowed in certain areas, maybe through a second system of management. Ideas included possibly having a system by which the busker could prove insurance and safety record, maybe a peer review for permitting, rules set for regulating a safety zone, and of course, fire code requirements. None of this was resolved but we weren’t shut down immediately on the request either (a good sign for now). It helps to have a Blacksmith on the council who understands working with fire can be done safely. We are keeping our fingers crossed for future positive results.”
Gina Performing in front of Columbia Museum of Art
So, even if the city and buskers seem to be moving closer to a resolution that the majority can agree on, there are still a lot of concerns. Musician Neil Scott recently reminded us that At this point in the draft of the ordinance, playing without a permit is a maximum fine of $500 &/or 30 days in jail!!!
And Matt Falter, a drummer in Columbia, is still worried about the innovativeness and spontaneity of Columbia busking. Too many rules can kill the magic.
Natalie Brown tends to agree. In her recent blog post about the activities surrounding the CCP ordinance, she writes,
I would like to see newcomers, kids and unknowns get a shot at exposure and experience, but as independent artists in control of their own destiny. I’d like to see inspiration, innovation and knowledge bounce from street corner to street corner and back again, as performers grow chops and push each other to get better.
C. Neil Scott and Matt Falter
So, Columbia has a long way to go before the perfect compromise is reached. At least the arts are healthy enough in the city to garner the attention and enthusiasm of the authorities. Let’s just hope that attempts to establish street arts in the city don’t end up doing more harm than good.
Also, here’s an article in the Free Times about the recent events.
Here’s more about Columbia Hoop Troop and Luna Trix.
And here’s Fire in Motion‘s facebook page.
See this link for info about Alternacirque.