Re: "TransLink's art budget is obscene," the Now letters, Sept. 3.
I usually object to a lot of anti-TransLink stuff for the sake of being pro-transit, but I am in objection to this particular letter, not because it's harsh on TransLink, but because it's pushing a straw man argument.
Public art is a part of what taxpayer money goes into because it's part of enriching people's daily lives and more. Research has shown public art makes a contribution to the public's perception of the quality and value of places, which is an important factor for rates of vandalism.
TransLink is not acting wildly outside its mandate by investing in public art, and it certainly isn't the only authority in Metro Vancouver that does so. The city you live in and pay your taxes to has invested a ton of money on public art this year, worth at least $800,000, which you'll see in places like the new, upcoming city hall. I haven't ever seen any outrage over that.
Daryl Dela Cruz, Surrey
© Copyright 2013