The arts community caught a break last week when it was announced that the Huntington Theatre Company will not lose its home at its namesake address, a.k.a. “the Avenue of the Arts.’’ The future of the company had been in doubt ever since it was announced that its longtime landlord and patron, Boston University, was selling the 890-seat theater and two adjacent properties. “The Huntington is here to stay, where it belongs,’’ Mayor Martin Walsh said at a press conference last Thursday.

The mayor’s office was involved “every step of the way’’ in making sure the Huntington was included in any development plans for the site, according to Joyce Linehan, the mayor’s chief of policy. (The property is being developed by QMG Huntington.)

Given the value of the Huntington to the city, it’s no wonder the mayor would jump on the unfolding transaction. The Huntington generates about $19 million in economic activity and supports about 400 jobs. It also reaches approximately 30,000 students and community members through its education programming.

So we should be able to take for granted that the preservation of the Huntington would be a priority for any mayor. But, sadly, in Greater Boston and Massachusetts, the arts are often seen as little more than an optional amenity to civic life. In discussions of public funding to drive social and economic development, the arts are more like your slacker cousin who’s been sleeping on your couch for a month and eating everything in the refrigerator. Why doesn’t that guy go out and get a job?

Consider: Early in the year, Governor Charlie Baker proposed a five-year, $900 million economic development package that included $25 million for capital grants to support co-working spaces and another $75 million in workforce development. Last month Baker announced a $63.3 million investment by the state in life sciences. And of course, there was the GE deal, in which the state offered $120 million in incentives, with another $25 million from the city in tax breaks, for the company to move here from Connecticut. None of these proposals mentioned dedicated funding for the arts.

But the arts have their own compelling data points. A study in 2014 showed that the arts community comprised 6,000 arts and culture organizations that supported more than 45,000 jobs in the state, and that nonprofit arts and cultural organizations boosted the Boston economy alone by $1 billion a year. Local and national studies consistently show that arts education improves student performance across all disciplines. And at least one study has shown that the arts increase property value.

And, of course, one of the biggest subsidies for the arts comes from the artists themselves, who work as waiters, bartenders, and office temps so that they can afford to create art in their spare time.

Yet the proposed budget for the Mass. Cultural Council, the state’s funding agency for the arts, hovers at around $14 million for fiscal 2017, flat from fiscal 2016. (The MCC budget peaked in 1988, at $27 million; the proposed 2017 state budget is $39.5 billion.)

Walsh, at least, has made some moves in the right direction. Aside from shepherding the Huntington deal, he appointed the first-ever Cabinet-level position for a chief of arts and culture, and has designated $1 million for arts funding that will support, among other things, an artist-in-residence program for the city’s Centers for Youth & Families, competitive grants for individual artists, and an artists resource desk at City Hall. But these are small steps, especially when paired with the city’s draft plan from Boston Creates, the cultural planning process spearheaded by city arts chief Julie Burros. While the report spoke well of the value of the arts, it offered alarmingly little detail on how to support them, especially regarding funding.

This is all especially disconcerting given that, according to a report from the Boston Foundation earlier this year, arts in Greater Boston are still badly underfunded on a per capita basis, when compared with cities of similar size and resources, like New York, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.

It will be telling to see the final Boston Creates report, due Friday. With all of the draft report’s talk about limited public resources, some in the arts community are concerned that the city will merely brush off responsibility to the private sector rather than taking a leadership role in creating funding mechanisms.

In the meantime, it’s worth remembering that GE’s favored locale for the company’s big move is the Fort Point Channel area — a neighborhood of once-vacant warehouses that was colonized and made attractive by artists. GE is moving here, in part, because of the arts community. Let’s get serious about supporting it.

Jon Garelick is a member of the Globe’s editorial board. Follow him on Twitter @jgarelick.