Loading...
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