Leather-clad violinists and sex educator clowns might have grabbed the headlines, but they’re just the sideshow. The real spectacle at the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs is happening behind the scenes, where nearly a million dollars in taxpayer money performs a remarkable vanishing act. Our investigation of transactions from January 2021 through December 2024 reveals a systematic pattern of obscuring public spending that raises serious questions about transparency in cultural funding.
When the Daily Mail broke a story about NYC taxpayers funding “sex educator clowns” and BDSM-themed classical music (yes, really), they thought they’d found the scandal of the year. But like a classic magician’s misdirection, everyone was looking at the wrong spectacle. The real show isn’t about leather-clad violinists or risqué poetry readings—it’s about how the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs has mastered the art of making millions of taxpayer dollars vanish into thin air.
The Headline Act
Let’s set the stage: The Lower Manhattan Cultural Council (LMCC) recently sparked outrage by spending $787,000 in taxpayer money on what the Daily Mail described as “controversial art acts.” Among the highlights: a “fetish fantasia” classical music event called ERATO that “explores the homoerotic undercurrent of British musical history,” complete with promotional pictures showing men in leather fetish gear wielding violins.
But while everyone was clutching their pearls over what the Daily Mail called “‘woke’ propaganda,” they missed the real sleight of hand happening in the department’s books.
The Quadruple Disappearing Act
While most of the Cultural Affairs Department’s spending appears transparent, with major allocations to cultural institutions clearly visible in public records, a closer examination reveals a troubling pattern across four specific expense categories. In these financial corners, recipient information consistently vanishes behind “N/A Privacy/Security” designations—a bureaucratic sleight of hand that keeps taxpayers in the dark about where their money is actually going.
Our analysis of the Department’s transaction records from 2021-2024 reveals a pattern far more intriguing than any controversial art project they’ve funded (including City Council member Shahana Hanif’s taxpayer-funded erotic poetry about her “luscious 36 double Ds” in Prospect Park).
A Tale of Four Shell Games
The Department has mastered four distinct methods of making transactions disappear:
- “PAYMTS FR CULT PROGS /SERVICES” (Payments for Cultural Programs/Services): Leading the opacity parade with an astounding 92.7% of transactions hidden—652 out of 703 payments vanish from public view. This category alone accounts for $284,420 in mystery money out of $305,570 total spending (93.1%) since 2021.
- “NON OVERNIGHT TRVL EXP-GENERAL” (Non-Overnight Travel Expenses – General): Following closely behind with 89.2% of transactions classified as private—24 out of 27 payments disappear behind privacy screens. This amounts to $8,988 in hidden travel spending out of $10,168 total (88.4%).
- “PROF SERV OTHER” (Professional Services – Other): Contributing significantly with 75% of transactions concealed—249 out of 332 payments vanish from public scrutiny. This category adds another $104,453 in hidden spending out of $145,902 total (72.3%).
- “OTHR SERV AND CHRGS-GENERAL” (Other Services and Charges – General): Representing the largest pool of hidden money, though with a lower privacy rate. Here, 35.2% of transactions—219 out of 623 payments—disappear into administrative obscurity, accounting for $422,401 out of $2,076,508 total spending (20.3%).
The irony is striking: while the Department openly funds what One City Rising calls “purposes that taxpayers might find objectionable,” they simultaneously obscure 32.4% of transactions across these four categories behind privacy designations. The total hidden spending reaches $821,261 between 2021 and 2024. The real spectacle isn’t the controversial art—it’s the artful way public money vanishes without a trace.
The Special Cultural Programs Conjuring Act (92.7% Hidden)
In the special “PAYMTS FR CULT PROGS /SERVICES” category, the opacity becomes most apparent. A detailed analysis reveals a pattern where certain vendors like Konatee Greg Morris, HONG SEON JANG, and THE LAUNDROMAT PROJECT INC have their transactions publicly recorded, while similar payments to other vendors are marked private. It’s an inconsistent approach to transparency that raises questions.
According to the transaction records, November 18, 2024 stands out with 48 separate transactions marked private in a single day, totaling $23,040. The pattern becomes particularly evident when examining specific payment amounts:
- For $480 payments: A total of 615 transactions, with 572 (93%) marked private and only 43 public transactions with 36 disclosed unique payees
- For $240 payments: 39 total transactions, with 34 hidden and 5 public unique payees identified (including M6D INC)
The Travel Transaction Vanishing Act (89.2% Hidden)
Our analysis of the travel expense data confirms a striking pattern of opacity. Out of 37 non-overnight travel expense transactions, 33 are marked private, with only 2 unique payees listed for the public transactions. This represents $8,988 in undisclosed travel expenses. The pattern is characterized by:
- Consistent use of privacy designations across similar transaction types
- Only two public payees for all travel-related expenses
- 89.2% of all travel transactions hidden behind privacy designations, a figure we’ve verified through direct analysis of the department’s records
The Professional Services Shuffle (75% Hidden)
In the realm of professional services, the Department of Cultural Affairs elevates selective transparency to an art form. Among the 332 professional service transactions, a chosen few–83 vendors like THE GARAGE ART CENTER and LETHA WILSON LTD–bask in the limelight of public disclosure. A detailed analysis of professional services transactions reveals a fascinating pattern of selective transparency in the department’s financial records.
$500 Payments – The Standard Rate
The department processed 229 artist service payments at the $500 level, with an intriguing split: 167 payments (72.9%) hidden behind privacy screens, while 62 are public. The public payments are all marked as “ARTIST’S SERVICES,” with recipients ranging from Hugh Hayden Studio LLC and Jim Hodges Studio Inc to emerging artists. Meanwhile, the private payments have no listed purpose, making it impossible to verify if they serve similar functions.
$503.50 Payments – The Legacy Rate
This oddly specific amount appears in 43 transactions, with 34 private (79.1%) and 9 public payments. Recipients like SLAG CONTEMPORARY INC, ANILA QUAYYUM AGHA, and MISHA KAHN LLC have their payments publicly recorded, while identical amounts to others remain hidden. All public payments in this category are also designated as “ARTIST’S SERVICES” while the private payments have no listed purpose, making it impossible to verify if they serve similar functions.
$1,000 Payments – The Premium Rate
Among 9 total transactions at this level, 5 are private (55.6%) while 4 are public, going to artists like Bayete Kenan LLC and THE BOLT DIARIES LLC and other payees for “ARTISTS SERVICES”. The 5 private payments have no listed purpose, making it impossible to verify if they serve similar functions.
$78.50 Payments – The Minor Services Rate
Of 25 transactions at this amount, 21 (84%) are private, with only 4 public payments split between two recipients: THE GARAGE ART CENTER and LETHA WILSON LTD. A distinctive feature of this payment tier is that every single transaction, whether public or private, uniformly shows “N/A” for purpose – a marked departure from higher payment categories. The pattern of privacy designations peaks on July 11, 2022, when all 12 transactions processed that day were marked private – the highest single-day concentration of private transactions in our dataset.
This payment tier presents a fascinating contradiction in the department’s transparency practices. While public payments at higher tiers (above $500) consistently carry the “ARTIST’S SERVICES” designation, these $78.50 transactions maintain complete opacity regarding their purpose, regardless of their public or private status. This uniformity of non-disclosure at the $78.50 level raises intriguing questions about the department’s varying standards of transparency across different payment amounts.
What makes this particularly compelling is the stark contrast in purpose disclosure across payment tiers. While larger public payments often provide clear service descriptions, the complete absence of purpose descriptions for these $78.50 payments – even for public vendors – creates an additional layer of opacity. This intersection of payment size and disclosure policy suggests a complex and perhaps arbitrary approach to transparency.
The Department’s commitment to privacy reached its apex on July 11, 2022, when a remarkable 12 transactions, amounting to $3,474.50, were designated as private in a single day. This concentrated burst of private transactions, including several at the $78.50 level, exemplifies the department’s selective approach to financial disclosure.
The “Other Services” Smokescreen (35.2% Hidden)
The “Other Services” category provides the clearest window into the Department’s capricious approach to transparency. With 404 transactions laid bare and 219 cloaked in secrecy, they prove their ability to name names when it suits them. Although this category boasts the lowest proportion of hidden transactions, the concealed sums still manage to raise suspicion:
COLE TECHNOLOGIES GROUP’s $1,500 payment for “MFTA MOLD TESTING” boldly basks in the sunlight of public scrutiny. Yet, three identical $1,500 transactions evaporate into the ether, as if mold testing had abruptly become a classified state secret.
HESTER STREET COLLABORATIVE openly receives $10,000 for “BIPOC Mapping & Community Engagement,” their purpose and identity freely disclosed. But six identical $10,000 payments surreptitiously slip into the shadows, their recipients and objectives forever shrouded in mystery.
This pattern plays out on a loop, from inconspicuous $200 transactions to jaw-dropping $10,000 payments. Even mundane parking fees find themselves caught in the web of secrecy. VNO 33-00 Northern Blvd LLC’s $1,000 payment for “MFTA PARKING” sits plainly in the public record, while five identical payments vanish behind the veil of privacy. It would seem that certain parking spots are more sensitive than others.
The Grand Finale
Here’s the kicker: In a city where, as the Daily Mail reports, Mayor Adams is slashing budgets because “the city spent $1.45 billion in fiscal 2023 on the migrant crisis,” we can’t even have a proper debate about cultural funding priorities because more than two-thirds of the spending over the past four years is hidden.
The Department claims “freedom of creative expression is a bedrock value in how we support our diverse cultural sector.” Perhaps it’s time they expressed some of that creativity in their bookkeeping—or better yet, just showed us where that $821,262 really goes.
After all, if they’re proud enough to fund BDSM classical music concerts, surely they can be brave enough to show us where the rest of our money goes.
Written by Sam Antar
© 2024 Sam Antar. All rights reserved.
Methodology Note: This investigation analyzed NYC Department of Cultural Affairs transaction data from January 2021 through December 18, 2024. All figures and percentages are based on this period.