HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PAC-2002 PUBLIC ART COMMISSION 10/10/02 AT CAP
Meeting notes submitted by Martha Frommelt
Present: Terry Plater, Susan Blumenthal, Richard Driscoll, Leslie Carrere, Alan Nemcek,
Gary Ferguson, JoAnn Cornish, Sally Grubb, Martha Frommelt
AGENDA
1. Terry reviewed terms sheet. Address and contact information was updated.
2. Update on 9/18 Planning Committee Meeting and Follow Up:
Susan Blumenthal updated group on discussion at Planning Committee meeting.
much time was spent at the Planning Committee meeting on a few concerns
landscape art and its definition). Susan followed through on one concern re: banners
which was raised during the meeting. She suggested that language regarding the
review of decorative items be added to the public art guidelines.
language such as "art, including but not limited to, decorative art
such as banners" was proposed by Terry.
The Commission agreed. The issue of whether the Commission should be offering
design advice on these matters was also discussed. Commission members agreed that
offering advice was appropriate for the Commission, but that decisions on aesthetic
matters would remain with other decision making bodies. Susan brought up another area
- the "design" portion of the Commission title. After much discussion,the group voted to
change the title to the Public Art Commission. The notion was that design
recommendations could be part of the ordinance as one function of the commission.
3. Martha's presentation re: work to undertake and process of working:
Martha passed out a draft outline of plan contents and process of working. Martha
will provide information for the Commission to digest, do some "homework" then
come together for working sessions at the meetings. Initial reactions to plan contents
list was positive, with some suggestions --- look at geography as a way of defining art
for a place (e.g. commercial area has this, park area has that) - site typing, make sure
the plan has some specifics but recognize that other areas will have to be general,
explore the stance that the city is already doing public art. The Commission
will continue to reflect on the draft content list and offer other ideas later.
Discussion followed about time for meetings. Will we need additional time? Martha
Propose a work outline though there was strong feeling that we could look at really
coming ready to work and respond in our meetings. One hour will be time for next
our next meeting but we may need to expand the hour in future time slots.
Other suggestions: Look at Providence's program. Contact Micky Roof regarding her
research paper on cities. See what connections we can make to the Downtown
Partnership's upcoming Public Art Panel. Martha will meet with Gary.
Martha passed out homework. Please review and do before next meeting.
4. Next meeting : Friday, November 8 at 12:30 - 1:30 at CAP. Call Richard with
lunch orders. Try to get there by 12:15 so we're ready to work at 12:30. Main agenda
item- discussion of role of public art.
Homework: Role of Public Art sheet - read the sheet as food for thought and identify
your top three reasons for public art. Key Informants/Key Partners - list the individuals
and groups you think we should connect with regarding this plan. Questions - Look at the
questions raised in the 9/18 meeting and list other questions. The dumb ones and smart
ones. What questions are out there about public art that we should answer.
PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
MEETING NOTES
DECEMBER 9, 2002 4-5:30 P.M. IN CAP OFFICES
Present: Gary Ferguson, Barbara Mink, Richard Driscoll, Susan Blumenthal, Joann Cornish,
Terry Plater, Martha Frommelt
Martha reported on IDP workshop on public art(good ideas presented by panel, some difficulty
with time issues and an irate audience member), Dec 16 artist meeting (notices went via email
(500) plus mailed invites to non-email sculptors and Art Trail folks, plus calls to John Snyder, Bill
Benson, Jeff deCastro, Micky Roof), and noted that task timeline will change somewhat(probably
need a subgroup to work on writing feedback in Feb/March).
The need for new commission members was discussed. Susan noted that we must have seven
members according to the ordinance. They must live in the city. Various names were suggested.
Finding someone who was"new blood" and involved in a neighborhood seemed a good place to
start, according to Richard. Names discussed—Annemarie Zwack, Greg Page, Ann Reichlin,
Andrew Magre, LeeEllen Marvin. Susan will contact Andrew, then Annemare, then Ann to
determine their interest. There will be an update at our January meeting. Martha talked about the
need to clearly define the commission membership process for our plan. We talked about the
allocation of"spots"for certain categories. Commission members felt it would be better to
maintain broad goals for balanced membership. Martha will work on drafting language for the
plan re; membership and nominations (press release, timing, how to, etc.).
Our"role of public art" discussion was continued from last meeting. We looked at the ideas we
had brainstormed. The importance of public art for the community was pointed out as a key idea
in that brainstormed list. The main public art plan pieces—acquisitions, donations and on loan art
—were discussed. Do we want different goals/criteria for each plan piece? Martha handed out a
draft description for discussion. Much discussion followed. The acquisition piece of the plan is
more complex and potentially more expensive. Implementation of this is more complex, too,
involving approval of a percent for art legislation. Commission members want to move forward on
all these pieces but be able to present plan pieces we can do now. For example, under the"on-
loan" program,we could partner with IDP to implement a City as Gallery Program and have local
artists work in many businesses. Other partnership ideas were discussed—bus shelter art,
Cornell Council on the Arts partnering, buying works from established groups/activities such as Art
Trail/Ithaca Festival. Martha will work on further drafting language to describe these things.
Commission members should brainstorm ideas for partnership within the donations and on-loan
portions of our public art plan.
We reviewed the administrative model sheet handed out at last meeting. Members discussed
the passive or active implementation approach. The feeling was that the Commission would like
to take the active path—present the ideal, including things that would be long term goals. This
discussion will continue. Areas needed to discuss—staffing, how art is chosen, notion of a
consulting agency.
Answering our questions list was tabled until the January meeting.
There was a brief discussion of the Dec 16t artist meeting. Its main purpose will be to listen and
gather ideas. The artist ideas will inform and potentially change some of our existing notions.
Martha will take notes and forward to commission members. Susan will present the history and
ordinance to the artists. Terry will lead solicitation of ideas from the artists.
Meeting finished at 5:30 p.m.
NEXT MEETING; TUESDAY,JANUARY 14, 4-5;30 IN MURAL LOUNGE
HOMEWORK; THINK ABOUT CITY AS GALLERY NOTION AND POSSIBLE CONNECTIONS.
THINK ABOUT THE ROLE OF ART DRAFT SHEET.
PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
Meeting Notes 11/8/02 in Clinton House Mural Lounge 12:30 -1:40
meeting notes submitted by Martha Frommelt
present: Susan Blumenthal, Gary Ferguson, Terry Plater, Alan Nemcek, Sally Grubb,
Richard Driscoll, Joann Cornish
Meeting began with Susan's sharing of revising ordinance and guidelines. Common
Council adopted these at their November 6th meeting. There was no discussion at that
time.
Other updates -Terry mentioned NYFA workshop, Martha asked if we should mention
art for County Comprehensive Plan, the Cayuga Green parking garage was mentioned
and Joann has asked about art there and will continue to pursue it.
We went on to brainstorming ideas re: role of public art. Martha will categorize the ideas
listed and identify common threads for a "role" statement. We also looked at the
definition of role from the artist/taxpayer(community)/government/larger community
perspectives.
The "question" assignment was reviewed. We talked about various questions that exist
about public art. Martha will group these questions into categories and begin
"answering"them -they will be brought to the commission for a full discussion. The
idea is to answer these questions to help lay the groundwork for the report and for
approaching the community. Terry called it "oppositional" planning ala "West Wing".
Key informant names were passed along. Martha will compile list and ask you to add to
it. We will use this list to draw on for future meetings and community input.
Martha asked for permission to call an artist meeting. The purpose of the meeting
would be to do similar brainstorming work with artists. December 16, 7:00 - 8:30, in the
Mural Lounge was chosen. Terry, Susan, Richard and Martha will be there -- any one
else is welcome. Artists will be invited through CAP listserve and other outreach.
HOMEWORK: Read Tilted Arc book excerpts. Review administrative model sheet.
Check email for role sheet, question sheet and key informant sheet.
NEXT MEETING: MONDAY DECEMBER 9 4-5;30
City of Ithaca Public Art Commission
Subcommittee Meeting with Artists
December 16, 2002
7:00 -8:30 p.m. in the Clinton Hall Mural Lounge
present: Terry Plater(commission chair), Susan Blumenthal (commission), Martha Frommelt
(facilitator for commission), Ben Sherman, Katrina Morse, Sally Dutko, Rob Licht, Annemarie
Zwack, Victoria Romanoff, Frank Robinson, Dan Burgevin, Leslie Carrere (commission)
The meeting began at 7:10 after time to sign in, get refreshments and name tags and look at
copies of the recently passed ordinances.
Martha discussed the purpose of the meeting—gather ideas and listen to concerns regarding the
new ordinances and the City's public art projects. Artists and commission members introduced
themselves and their backgrounds.
Susan led the group through a review of the ordinances, including a brief history. In 1999 the City
had an Advisory Committee on Public Art and Design. There was a desire to move forward on a
comprehensive public art plan, thus the creation of these ordinances. The ordinances were
recently approved by Common Council in September and November. The intention is to
incorporate guidelines and clarity regarding how the city is to handle public art. The ordinances
state that Common Council has authority to acquire art work. The Public Art Commission acts in
an advisory role for siting of works, purchase, donation and loaning of art. Susan noted that the
section B#3 deals with artists rights, modeled after VARA(Visual Artists Rights Act). She
mentioned the notion in 4C of representing a broad variety of tastes.
Rob asked questions regarding the removal of artists work. What does removal mean? Where
would works be stored? There is a need to clarify the language and procedure to protect the art
and the artist.
Terry introduced the next portion of the agenda. The discussion would focus on gathering artists'
key concerns and issues regarding the acquisitions, donations, on loan and siting parts of the
ordinance. This discussion would be brought to the full commission for consideration in the
comprehensive plan. Someone raised the question of who is the commission. Terry talked about
the specific members, the need to add two new members and the notion of inclusion of multiple
voices and backgrounds on the commission.
The group listened to ideas and concerns.
Katrina talked about the need to have a schedule for buying works. Develop a timeline so that the
city stays on track and art is actually acquired. She also discussed the importance of education,
that the general public often needs more information about art to build appreciation and
understanding. She mentioned the need to spell out 4B more clearly—"art suitable for all
audiences" needs specific criteria.
Victoria asked whether this is for inside or outside art. The program would be for both. She
mentioned the lack of proper siting of works. The art needs more focus, the atmosphere needs to
be carefully planned. Much of the works on the Commons are not well sited. She mentioned a
Site Advisory Group. In 5C of the ordinance, she worried about the multiple groups involved in
decision making and the problematic nature of that. Susan clarified that the other identified
boards and commissions would be asked for comments on specific concerns, eg. DPW-mowing
and snow removal, and that the Commission would solely deal with the aesthetics issues of the
art work.
Ben continued discussing problematic issues with siting. The maintenance groups need to be
informed and educated, too. He talked about problems with snow plow scraping works, bird
droppings, grass clippings, college students turning works over. He also saw how works were