The Baltimore Sun reports on a move in the city to promote welfare, call it mandated employment if you will, for artists.

"City officials hope to add to the conspicuous and sometimes not-so-conspicuous structures with a proposal that would require all publicly funded city construction projects to set aside 1 percent of costs for public art, a concept that is widely used around the country and that thrived in Baltimore decades ago."

There is apparently a 1 percent rule on the books, but it's more of a suggestion than anything else. The new idea is take away the "optional" part of the rule.

This reminds me of the campus where I took my graduate degree. There must have been a similar requirement in place. Outside the building that housed the mathematics department was a four-foot tall "0," as well as a "3," and I don't recall how many other numbers. So the numbers do provide a visual clue, but at what price?

While two recent projects in Baltimore City come in at under $70,000, an ironclad requirement could lead to a "how do we spend this money" problem. "With the case of the $301 million publicly funded Hilton convention center hotel, 1 percent would amount to a whopping $3 million."

Given the state of art these days, I'm reluctant to see what $3 million will buy. "I paid taxes for WHAT?" may be the cry of many city residents.