pages: PublicArtCommission/2007-09-27.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicArtCommission | 2007-09-27 | 3 | community speaking through the ad hoc committee be able to discuss and consider all components of the program in an open forum. This committee is committed to holding monthly meetings in tandem with the PAC so the arts community can participate in the final version of each component of the program without delaying its progress. He asked that a timeline be given so they can respond to steps taken. He wanted input from the Commission on what role they would play in evaluating the program components. He was interested in their preferences. In closing, he asked that the Grant Program reflect the needs and desires of the art community. Pat Colburn mentioned the current amount that the Commission has and suggested that a portion of the fund be used to hire a grant writer. Her idea is that it takes money to make money and if all the money that is currently in the fund is given out, there will be no more. Therefore, a portion of the fund should be put towards soliciting more money to grow the art fund. Mike Sheppard, President of the Frank Bette Center for the Arts observed that despite the urgency to get the program up and running, people are still learning how to work together. He mentioned some conversations he has had with different people nationally to get more information on how to structure the program. He pointed out some misunderstandings and miscommunications and mentioned that one of the objectives is to open up the program as much as possible, to get as many voices in as possible. In addition, he wanted to clarify that the brainstorms and ideas are not formal proposals. Mr. Sheppard questioned a couple of items in Mr. Vu's presentation. One was that grants must be matched dollar for dollar and that there was a cap. He was surprised by these new elements. He also asked about an overlap when it falls under the public art fund and if it is public art. He also expressed concern that grants go to individuals as well as organizations. He addressed the community and invited them to participate in the steering committee. Carol Burnett, president of the Alameda Art Association, started with a history of the organization and their purpose of helping artists present in many venues regardless of their medium. She mentioned that they want to use the money for an arts center for classes and workshops. But her main concern was having the developers give a percentage to local artists. She felt that there should be an amendment to increase the amount that developers give as public art and to artists. Chair Huston gave a last call for speaker slips to the public. Ms. Woodbury responded to a couple points to clarify. The graffiti issue will be forwarded to the appropriate department. In response to the questions of who receives a grant, she clarified that the program is not even developed yet. There is nothing in place and it is not known who will get grants. The amounts that Mr. Vu mentioned were examples of what other cities are doing. She mentioned that this grant fund is supposed to be $50,000 over a two-year budget cycle and clarified that there is a dollar for dollar match, which was discovered upon review of the City Council direction. There were several responses and questions as to what exactly a dollar for dollar match is. Ms. Woodbury responded by clarifying that it can be matched by providing funds, receiving another grant and getting sponsors. 3 | PublicArtCommission/2007-09-27.pdf |