Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_ARTAB_02.21.2007Arts and Culture Board Members present: Charles Aguillon, Richard Bartko, Nancy Blansett, Addie Busfield, Jane Paden, Penny Plueckhahn, Georgene Richaud, Ruth Roberts Absent: Paul Gaffney (excused) Staff Attending: Eric Lashley, Library Director, Judy Fabry, Library Administrative Assistant Regular Session Call to Order at 2:03 PM A. Call to order and announcements from the Chair Vice chair Ruth Roberts called the meeting to order and made the following announcements: ® She received two copies of the Masterpieces, Inc. proposal and asked whether anyone else did not receive one. Everyone had received a copy. ® Eric Lashley is doing research on a hanging system for the library. The March agenda will contain an item to continue the discussion about hanging art in City facilities. 0 B. Introduction of Nancy Blansett, new board member Ruth announced that the Mayor has appointed Nancy Blansett to take the place of Natalie Dowling. Nancy introduced herself and mentioned her involvement in establishing the Healing Arts Gallery at Georgetown Hospital some five years ago. She is proud that the gallery has become a community gallery, not just the hospital's, and that it showcases the work of craftspeople, students, individuals, and groups of artists. C. Consideration and approval of minutes of last meeting Addie Busfield moved and Penny Plueckhahn seconded the motion to accept the minutes as distributed. Passed unanimously. D. Presentation by a revresentative of the Finance Division about the 2007 -08 budget process Letitia Zavala, City Controller, distributed customer satisfaction surveys to the board members and asked that they fill out the surveys individually up to the last question, but that they reach a consensus and all submit the same answer for the last question. The last question asked for three fiscal priorities that would most affect the work of the Arts and Culture Board in FY 2007 -08, E. Artist's perspective on the muralist selection Monte Cary, who with two associates submitted a proposal, under the name Masterpieces, Inc., for the murals for the children's room, announced that he had laryngitis and was unable to address the board. Instead he passed out printed copies of his comments (attached as part of these minutes). The board members read the comments and Ruth Roberts asked him to point out the place in the panel minutes where the ranking of the artists from first through third was "confusing." He showed her the sentences. After further reading Ruth said that Mr. Cary had made good points and suggestions that should be considered in the future. She thanked him for his input and he left. Eric Lashley then emphasized that contrary to Mr. Cary's initial hopes, the decision about who should be the muralist would not be overturned, but the board does need to focus on improving the process of selection. The group identified a three- member task force to discuss future scoring of proposals. Ruth Roberts, Charles Aguillon, and Rich Bartko will bring a proposal for a new method of scoring to the March meeting. (After the meeting they agreed to meet on Wednesday, February 28, at 1:30 p.m. at the library.) Nancy Blansett offered the City of Austin's method of having an artists' registry from which to solicit bids for future public art proposals. She said such a registry also could be used to find art to hang in rotating displays A brief discussion took place about submitting actual artwork with proposals instead of digital photos. That idea had pros and cons. F. Consideration of and possible action on 1. Invitation to attend free performance at Southwestern Universitv — Ruth Roberts Ruth brought up the invitation that most board members had received by email from the theater department at Southwestern, inviting them to attend a preview theater performance. Attendance at the event was by invitation only. Some board members believed it presented no conflict of interest to attend the performance, others said that any invitation or gift that a board member is offered because they are a member of the Arts and Culture Board should not be accepted. No action was taken. 2. Nomination for Certificate of Excellence .. Judy Fabry No one had a nomination. 3. Report of progress of mural project — Eric Lashley Eric said he wasn't sure what to say. No, the mural is not finished, but he's heard no complaints from the public — the real customers — and in fact he's heard many positive things about being able to watch the progress as Sansevero paints. Only Mr. Cary et al have complained. Sansevero has given no indication of when he expects to be finished, nor has he given any reason why he is not finished. However, he also has been paid less than 50% of the contract. Eric believes future contracts should have a penalty clause for failure to complete on time. Georgene suggested that, depending on the project, perhaps the process of creating art should be a part of future projects. Rich said that he doesn't think a penalty clause would be useful, because we don't have to pay artist s until they finish their work. As long as the City isn't out any money, does it matter when a work is finished? Ruth said that the City has benefited by the extra value Sansevero has given through his interaction with the public. Jane said she never believed Sansevero could finish in the time he'd proposed. Charles said the timeline will be relative to each project. 4. Investigation of rotating art displays in other places — Charles Aguillon Ruth Roberts Charles presented a copy of the Collin County Public Art Policy (attached as part of these minutes), which identified the locations at which art would be displayed and provided very detailed guidelines about the size, subject matter, and installation of selected works of art. Nancy said she didn't think the artist should be required to be involved in hanging an art work, as was required by Collin Co. In her experience at the Healing Arts Gallery, that involvement often caused problems. Ruth asked whether sizes as large as Collin Co. accepted were normal. Nancy said no, but there needs to be a conversation between the artist and the gallery personnel about what will work. Nancy also talked about the security system at the Healing Arts Gallery, which is an integral part of the hanging system, made by the Walker Company of Minnesota. Special tools were required to hang the artwork. Artists who hang their artwork at the Healing Arts Gallery sign an agreement to accept full liability for their work. Nancy suggested that City departments or the Arts and Culture Board could consider purchasing works from a rotating display that the department especially liked. 5. Creation and maintenance of a City -wide arts calendar — Penny Plueckhahn Penny had learned by checking the Internet that virtually every online arts calendar is run by tourism or convention and visitors agencies, just like Georgetown's events calendar. She is encouraged that our Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) has a new intern who is taking care of its website. What Penny believes is the chief problem locally is that organizations must submit their information to the CVB, CVB does not solicit information. Southwestern, GISD, and the Symphony Society are well represented on the calendar, but smaller arts organizations are not. She thinks that the best thing for the Arts and Culture Board to do is to offer to help CVB, not try to do a separate calendar, as had been suggested at the last meeting. Penny continued to say that Bob Horick, an officer of the Symphony Society, is encouraging the CVB to allow electronic submissions to the calendar. Georgene suggested that the intern (Jo) be invited to the next board meeting. Penny said it probably would be more appropriate to invite her supervisor. Rich asked whether the Arts and Culture Board has a responsibility to small organizations to help them publicize their activities. Ruth said she thinks it is a good idea. Penny suggested everyone should look at the CVB's website (visitgeorgetown.org) and also at the Portland Oregon arts calendar, which she thought was the best one she could find. Addie suggested that improving the CVB's arts calendar could be a priority to send to the Council on the customer satisfaction survey. Ad hoc decisions about the three concerns to send to Council: 1. Lack of communication between the CVB and various arts organizations regarding and all- inclusive arts calendar. 2. Need for a multi- purpose outdoor performing arts venue (a bandshell) in San Gabriel Park, 3. Need for promotion of Georgetown as a destination that's a culturally interesting place to be. Jane Paden moved to adjourn at 4:10 p.m. Respe /ctfully submitted, f k Charles Aguillon, Secretary Attachment 1 (2 pages) —An Artists Perspective Attachment 2 (2 pages) — Collin County Public Art Policy Attachment 1(2/21/07 minutes) The middle of this month, some of the losing artists who had applied for the mural project (including myself) toured the new library to see the completed murals. To our surprise and dismay the murals were sorely incomplete. In fact, our first comment to each other when we walked in was, "Where are the murals ?" We were curious as to what had happened, so we contacted Eric Lashley to inquire about the status. He too was disappointed in the progress. At our request he sent a table to help explain the scoring. Needless to say, we were confounded even more to learn that we scored an average of 66 %. When I was in grade school arithmetic was done differently. "How is it that 93 + 100 + 98 + 90 + 85 + 97 averaged together equals 66 ?" In fairness, it was explained as a typo. When the committee members vote, they should place a score of some sort for each applicant, even if it is a zero. If they recuse themselves from voting of selected applicants because they are friends or whatever, then they should not be allowed to judge the other artists either. It is not fair that some artists scores are an average of six and some are an average of five reviewers. The averages should be calculated by dividing the same number into each respective total score. According the minutes of the meeting of the Arts and Culture Board on November 14d', a motion was made and seconded on that day to move Larson and Brock from 3rd and 41h places respectively to 2nd and 3rd place. That one is still a little confusing. Obviously, some proposals were not really read in their entirety. According to the minutes of that same meeting our scores were reduced because we had "no timeline ", "no budget ", and "no references ". This was not correct or fair. It made one think that the proposals were not studied or read completely, because the timeline was addressed at least twice in our proposal. I have highlighted the dates just to confirm. The proposed budget also was specifically delineated, as well. It is also highlighted now too. It is only fair that each proposal be read through at least once and apparent omissions should be double- checked. Why did not one of the other committee members point out the presence of timeline and budget in our proposal when the oversight was made? If references were requested or required, this should have been included in the RFP or applicants should not have thus been penalized for the lack thereof. Although, several well -know companies and organizations were mentioned in our combined resumes, no letters of recommendation or referral per se were included. Certainly, we coup have provided numerous letters of referral had they been requested in the RFP. One such company, Painted Adventures, has commissioned over a hundred realistic wildlife /animal paintings of various sizes from us over the past year or so. Although three different artists are painting the paintings all achieve a consistent style. Furthermore, this company always specifies a deadline - -some sooner, some later. Never, in all these projects, have we failed to meet a deadline. Thus we have become their exclusive source for oil -on- canvas commissions. As I stated in the proposal, we went to great lengths to insure that we could easily complete the project within the time frame. We know our limitations and speed by experience. We have painted several murals for Hill Country Fellowship. Photos were included. As an example, we completed 2 of the murals pictured (40 feet in total length and 12 feet high) and with striking detail and beauty in 3 to 4 days. We were wondering if the "references" from the winning applicant were actually contacted to confirm timeliness of completion. Clearly, he did not adhere to the timeline as he proposed, so that now the committee is forced to address this issue. Did he propose helpers? What were their qualifications? Why did he not contact other artists for help when he was lagging behind? Furthermore, we committed to paint two additional rainforest murals at no additional charge within the proposed budget. No consideration of this was mentioned either. If the Board is to maintain a good relationship with the artists of the community it must be fair in scoring proposals and must read each proposal completely. There is an abundance of local talent in the area and resident artists of Williamson County should be given special consideration over those from other areas. Attachment 2 (2/21/07 minutes) Collin County Public Art Policy I. The Collin County Commissioners Court shall appoint a Collin County Public Art Committee. Members shall consist of two Commissioners Court members, the Facilities Director, one appointment by the county court at law administrative judge and one appointment by the district court administrative judge. II. The Committee shall meet quarterly to consider art proposals for display in the Collin County Courthouse and the University Drive Courts Facility. Additional locations may be approved by the Commissioners Court based on recommendations by the Collin County Public Art Committee. III. The displays are to be located in identified areas which are: Collin County Courthouse: three locations on the 2nd floor hallway, two locations on the 3rd floor hallway, three locations on the 4th floor hallway and one location in the 5th floor hallway. University Drive Courts Facility: two locations on the south wall, six locations in the mid - section of the building off the west courtroom hallway and two locations in the east portion of the lobby. IV. The exhibitor must comply with rules outlined in a contract executed between the exhibitor and county. V. Artwork must be in portrait form, weigh no more than 35 pounds and be no more than five -feet by six -feet. VI. Insurance for all loaned works of art will be provided by the artist. VII. Arrangements for installing and dismantling the exhibit must be made through a designated county liaison and scheduled through the Facilities Department, VIII. The artist is responsible for hanging his/her exhibit with the oversight of an identified Facilities Department employee. IX. The Collin County Public Art Committee must consider specific criteria when selecting art displays. All artwork must meet at least one of the following criteria: a. The art must be historically relevant to the region. b. The art must be a reflection of communities and families within Collin County. Collin County Public Art Application All persons interested in displaying art in Collin County government buildings must submit the following application to: Collin County Public Art Committee, c/o Administrative Services, Collin County Government Building, 210 S. McDonald Street, Suite 626, McKinney, TX 75069. Please include photos, size and weight of all art work you wish to place in the courthouse facilities. The Collin County Public Art Committee meets quarterly and will notify the exhibitor following a committee meeting of a decision. Applicant's Name Applicant's Address Applicant's email Address Applicant's Phone Numbers Art Title Please describe the pieces of art work Does the art work meet at least one of the following criteria? (check all that apply) Signature The art is historically relevant to the region. The art reflects communities and families within Collin County. The art is appropriate for courthouse view, i.e., the art complements the designated area's architectural design. EM