Loading...
09-13-2016CITY ART BOARD MEETING September 13, 2016 The City Art Board met on Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Las Cruces Parks and Recreation Conference Room, 1501 E. Hadley Ave., Las Cruces, New Mexico 88004. CITY ART BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. George Griffin, Chair; Ms. Kathleen Squires, Vice -Chair; Mr. John Northcutt, Secretary; Ms. Rebecca Courtney, and Ms. Susan Frary. ABSENT: Mr. Ricardo Gonzales (Excused) and Ms. Josephine Morillo (Excused). OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Garland Courts, Las Cruces Museum of Art; Ms. Leticia Soto, Las Cruces Museum of Art; Jennifer Robles, Las Cruces Museum of Art; Mr. Robert Caldwell, City Art Board Liaison; and Ms. Marina Montoya, Recording Secretary Meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Chair Mr. George Griffin. He recognized a quorum. I. Approval of Agenda Mr. Northcutt moved to approve the agenda, as amended. Seconded by Ms. Squires. Motion passed. II. Approval of July 12, 216 Meeting Notes Ms. Courtney moved to amend the first sentence under Publicity and CLC-TV Prospect on page 3 to read, "Ms. Courtney stated that she had recently brought up the possibility of inviting personnel from the City's Public Information Office to document the East Mesa Safety Complex art installation." Seconded by Ms. Squires. Motion passed. III. Art on Loan Proposal (Susan Frary) Mr. Griffin provided a handout that outlined the context of the Art On Loan discussion. The Ordinance establishing the City Art Board requires that the board make a recommendation on the Art On Loan program. Ms. Frary, in her presentation, suggested forming a committee to work on the Art On Loan program that would include members of the community and a City staff person. Ms. Frary identified five other cities' art on loan programs, which exhibit a wide variance in scope and scale. Most cities, Ms. Frary noted, use outdoor art on loan and usually provide a stipend to the artist for loaning their art for a year. Ms. Frary suggested Las Cruces could designate the spaces for public display beginning with City Hall. To use and manage the designated areas, she suggested soliciting bids and proposals from art organizations, schools, individual artists, and various groups. Each participant could possibly use a designate area/wall, provide a display case, and would maintain the area with rotating art, with signage identifying the group(s). Display security would be principally up to the participating group(s). Another consideration in City Hall could involve using hallways that have large windows and columns that would be great to add art. Since there is so much sunlight in those areas, only certain types of art would be appropriate. It was originally discussed [in the post -ad hoc loaned art prospect] that only original art would be accepted, but if it would be in an area where it could be damaged by sun, a print would be the way to go and the artist would know that when the piece on display is returned it would be sun -damaged, but would have been seen publicly. Mr. Griffin asked Ms. Frary if she has her statement in written form. Ms. Frary stated she does in a draft. Mr. Griffin wanted to summarize her art on loan program issue areas as including: an inventory of spaces to show art; security; funding; community participation; and designating or matching the art mediums appropriate to the available spaces. Ms. Squires asked about community participation, suggesting that the board does need to determine the arts community willingness to participate in an art on loan program, given the weak response to the ad hoc pilot program. Ms. Frary speculated that the board had far better artist's participation in the first two rounds possibly because the program was new. Ms. Frary observed that the Art Board -sponsored Art On Loan calls for artist participation were "minimalist". No money was spent, and there was a very "short turn around' relative to how such programs are normally run. Ms. Frary believes the program was "short changed." Ms. Squires stated she thinks the availability of space in City Hall may have impacted participation because it is difficult to hang or show art at City Hall where it can be seen. Mr. Griffin stated that he honestly does not know why there should be an Art on Loan program. Ms. Frary stated the Art On Loan program, based on her proposal, could provide quality visual art to the public, education about local art, display and honor local artist work, encourage the arts industry and support economic development, and beautify the environment. Mr. Northcutt stated the original ad hoc committee Art On Loan pilot program, was a carryover from the "old" City Hall, where there was a panel that featured an artist of the month. The attempt to carry over this practice to the "new" City Hall was designed to decorate the walls. Display rails were bought and placed on the first and second floors by Public Works and may still exist, he stated. The lack of response from artists in the city is what led to the death of the Art on Loan Program. If the project was to go forward within city -owned buildings a timeline for the display of loaned art should be shortened from the one year to possibly a 2-month cycle. Ms. Courtney stated she does have experience with art work that is available for check out at the Thomas Branigan Memorial Library through the Progress Club. She noted that when the City of Las Cruces started to decorate their walls, some of the artwork was 2 taken and several donations given by local artists disappeared. Art work had not been accounted for and administrative responses were unsuccessful. If it is decided to rejuvenate an art on loan program its pieces should be monitored and cataloged very carefully. Mr. Caldwell stated that the first step, stated in the Council ordinance, is to consider whether to re-establish the program. The most important discussion is the determination of whether to have the program and then what it will look like. Mr. Griffin suggested that everyone put to paper, not more than five pages, a sketch on what an Art on Loan program should look like and the reason(s) it should be formed, and proposed language to use on either setting up a review committee and/or recommendations to Council. Mr. Caldwell asked Ms. Frary whether her presentation was written. He noted that administrative constraints do not facilitate verbatim reproduction of her presentation in the formal meeting notes. Anything she would like to include on it please send to include on notes. He asked if this item is on the agenda for October will it be for action? Mr. Griffin stated that he would like to put the item on the October agenda as an action item. IV. East Mesa Public Safety Campus Project Semi-finalist Site Visit Mr. Northcutt confirmed that the three semifinalists were informed of their selection and they have returned their information for stipend disbursement purposes. Two artists have asked for a site visit. In response, the site supervisor is willing accommodate site visits with each artist, but with ten days lead time. Mr. Caldwell stated the site visits can be done with a ten-day lead time. He reported that the City Architect stated that the artists will be looking at an incomplete building and a facade potentially different from early renderings. Mr. Griffin asked Mr. Northcutt to give the dates to the artists for the site visits and they have a choice on which one they would like to use. Semi-finalist Presentation Mr. Caldwell advised the board that the October 31 presentation date might require adjusting based on the projected delay of the building's completion. Mr. Northcutt moved to change the East Mesa Public Safety Campus Artists presentation date of October 31, 2016 to Friday, November 7, 2016. Seconded by Ms. Squires. Motioned approved. Mr. Caldwell asked if there were specific hours for the semi-finalist presentations? Ms. Frary opined that the presentation should be an all -day exercise. Mr. Northcutt agreed. Las Cruces Public Information Office Involvement Ms. Courtney provided a presentation outline handout. Mr. Caldwell stated that Ms. Courtney's presentation was exactly what he needed to contact PIO about the City Art Board's request. Board members offered other suggestions for the PIO to consider. Mr. Northcutt suggested possibly an interview on the process of how the committee selected the artist. Ms. Frary suggested that the artist might take snapshots of their work and the place where the art is fabricated. Mr. Griffin stated that there are probably other pieces of publicity that must be discussed and would like to add it as an agenda item for the next meeting. V. Staff Update Camino Real Sculptures Cost Estimate & Scheduling Status Mr. Caldwell stated that there are no changes to the cost estimate and scheduling status has not been updated. Council has directed the Parks and Recreation Department to be involved with the Herbicide/Pesticide pilot project so the repositioning of the Camino Real Statues project will be pushed back. Mr. Griffin stated that he is concerned that the lag time will literally harden those statues in place and the City and the City Art Board will be viewed in a bad light in the end. Mr. Caldwell stated that when the City Landscape Architect made the presentation to the board, the Parks & Recreation Director stated that it would need to fit into all other pending projects and she stressed there are several projects that could get in the way. The board does have a commitment from the Director to have this completed, Mr. Caldwell continued, but as of now there is no date to complete the removal and corrected placement of the sculpture grouping. of New Mexico Arts in Public Places Larae-Scale Art Inventory for Regional Aquatic Center Mr. Caldwell stated he received an email from Ms. Naomi Gibbons, the NM Arts Project Coordinator for Large Scale Art selection projects. She wanted to schedule a presentation on the large scale art pieces in the state inventory, when the board is ready. Mr. Griffin stated that the next big project would be the Las Cruces Regional Aquatic Center and suggests maybe waiting until the building's second phase is complete. VI. Board Comments Rebecca Courtney: None Susan Frary: None 0 John Northcutt: Had concerns that the board, established to advise Council on upcoming public art projects. The board must be informed in a timely fashion about what projects are going on. There are currently four bronzes at Veterans Memorial Park and the has not seen any drawings or maquettes for these projects. Mr. Northcutt urged that the City Art Board must make its presence known and explain what the board is charge to do. Mr. Caldwell stated that Veterans Park was built and set aside for any entity to put in their memorials. He noted that there is a separate advisory board (The Mayor's Veterans Advisory Board), with members appointed by the Mayor. There are very few veteran's projects where Council had input. veteran groups have the say on what veteran's memorial pieces will look like. Ms. Frary asked if Veterans Park is a monument park and whether the memorial works are listed in last year's art inventory? Should the veteran memorials be listed? Mr. Caldwell stated veteran memorials was not listed on the inventory. Ms. Frary asked who maintains and who oversees the Veterans Park installations? Mr. Caldwell stated he does not know, but will look into it. George Griffin: None VII. Next Meeting Next City Art Board meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 11, 2016, at 10 am in the Parks and Recreation Conference Room. VIII. Adjournment Mr. Northcutt moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:00 p.m. Seconded by Ms. Frary. Motion passed. Mai . Montoya, Recording Secretary 5