Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPAAC Agenda Packet 1-7-21 Public Art Advisory Committee Thursday, January 7, 2021 5:30 PM Electronic Meeting ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM AGENDA Call to order Introductions of members and public attending the meeting. Public discussion of any item not on the agenda Consideration of minutes of the December 3, 2020 meeting Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)  An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.  You can participate in the meeting and can comment on an agenda item by going to https://zoom.us/j/94903678135 via the internet to visit the Zoom meeting’s registration page and submit the required information. Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting or webinar ID, enter the ID number found in the email. A meeting password may also be included in the email. Enter the password when prompted.  If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer without a microphone, you may call in by telephone by dialing (312) 626-6799. When prompted, enter the meeting or webinar ID. The ID number for this meeting is: 949 0367 8135   Once connected, you may dial *9 to “raise your hand,” letting the meeting host know you would like to speak. Providing comments in person is not an option.  Project Evaluation Rubrics #2 – Jan Finlayson and Andrea Truitt will present update on proposed rubrics for committee review. Determine date for next round of Matching Funds River Front Crossings Sculpture Pads – discussion regarding schedule for project as well as alternative locations for remaining two sculpture pads. Updates  Artists Database  Kiwanis Park Community Garden art project  Capitol Street Parking Ramp project  Kiwanis Community Garden Art Project  Lucas Farms Neighborhood Art Project  Poetry in Public.  Subcommittee meetings Committee announcements or Committee reports Staff reports Adjournment If you will need disability‐related accommodations in order to participate in this program/event, please  contact Marcia Bollinger, Neighborhood and Development Services at 319‐356‐5237 or marcia‐ bollinger@iowa‐city.org.  Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your  access needs.    1 Minutes Preliminary Public Art Advisory Committee December 3, 2020 5:30 PM Zoom Meeting Platform Members Present: Eddie Boyken, Jan Finlayson, Ron Knoche, Steve Miller, Nancy Purington, Juli Seydell- Johnson, Sandy Steil, Andrea Truitt Members Absent: Dominic Dongilli Staff Present: Marcia Bollinger, Wendy Ford Public Present: Thomas Agran, Loyce Arthur, Dellyssa Edinboro, John Engelbrecht, Donté Hayes, Janiece Maddox, Nicole Shaw, Kalmia Strong, Antione Williams Call to Order Miller called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. Introductions of Members and Public attending the Meeting Committee members and staff introduced themselves. Members of the public introduced themselves. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda None. Consideration of Minutes of the November 5, 2020 Meeting Seydell-Johnson moved to accept the minutes. Knoche seconded. Approved unanimously. Capitol Street Parking Ramp Mural Project – Oracles of Iowa City Engelbrecht began his presentation with images of both murals (“Oracles of Iowa City” - attached), one reading “Black Joy Needs No Permission” and the other reading “Weaponize Your Privilege to Save Black Bodies,” on the Capitol Street Parking Ramp. Engelbrecht said if anyone wanted to publish these images without the watermark, they can reach out to the team at cas@publicspaceone.com. Engelbrecht expressed their excitement for the project and for the committee’s constructive feedback that will enable the project to move forward. Williams said that he is very excited to be working on this project, especially with all of the Black Lives Matter murals in various cities in North Carolina where he is currently residing. Williams said that he and Hayes did not want this project to be solely a BLM mural, but rather one that has current relevance as opposed to just being a symbolic gesture. Each mural will speak to a specific audience – the first mural (“Black Joy Needs No Permission”) speaks to black people who have to navigate white spaces. The second mural (“Weaponize Your Privilege to Save Black Bodies”) specifically talks to the white, affluent, 2 educated audience that occupies that space as well. Hayes said that the murals also speak to people’s pasts as well as to the present for those who live in Iowa City. He said that the importance of the murals’ topography (the writing) will push the future inhabitants of the area in the right direction and away from complacency, and that these murals themselves are not the beginning or the end of the conversation, but rather a means to confront and further the discussion each and every day. Williams said that “Black Joy Needs No Permission” is a direct conversation geared towards black people who are navigating white spaces. It is a skill to navigate these spaces and can cause trauma for those that have to do so. The mural is a reminder that joy, relief, and sanctuary are human rights, and that black people should have the freedom to create those in any space. Williams said that the point of the murals was to create something aesthetically pleasing, but also serve as a call-out for specific audiences. “Weaponize Your Privilege to Save Black Bodies” is talking to white communities within the Iowa City area that tend to have more political and cultural power. Williams said that this phrase means to strategically utilize one’s privilege in society as a means of dismantling white supremacy. He said that the purpose of the language is to create a bit of discomfort, and the focus is to center black life instead of white comfort or the comfort of those who are in power. Williams said that this could be considered aggressive language, but it is bound to shift over time, and he referenced the initial uproar around Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling during the national anthem, the adoption of the incendiary phrase “Black Lives Matter” after the murder of Trayvon Martin, etc. He said that the goal is to get white individuals to acknowledge their privilege and take action within their day to day lives. Williams said that they had considered using the phrase “de-weaponize,” but decided against it because it was more passive and felt like they were encouraging individuals to not do anything, when there is a stark difference between being racist and anti-racist. To be anti-racist is to actively dismantle the system. In regard to the aggressive language, Williams stated that there are many types of violence and that white supremacy is one of them, which includes not only physical violence but also psychological, economic, political, environmental, etc. He said that a current example of a violent act is politicians who write a budget to fund police to buy military-grade riot gear because it can lead to the death of black folks and other marginalized people. In a violent society, Williams said that the goal is to get privileged white people to realize that they have social, cultural, and political weapons (as opposed to literal ones), and to encourage them to use these weapons in a positive and constructive way. He said that, even with the people who might be confused or not convinced by the message, it is still an opportunity to begin a conversation (to take action – to utilize privilege), and those who are skeptical might be more inclined to listen to white folks with social, cultural, and political privilege, as opposed to individuals who might not have access to the same types of spaces. Williams said that is it their goal to make good art, but also relevant art that speaks to current issues of today. Hayes said that this mural is also a call to action and an opportunity to do more. Arthur said there are plans in the works for how people can hear the artists’ voices talking about the mural or visit a website to get more information in order to be able to really contextualize the project. Miller said that he sent an email out (attached) to the committee discussing the potential impacts of and public reactions to the project. He said that he thinks it is beautiful on many levels and very thoughtfully composed for its context, and craftful in how the graphic design illustrates the idea of double consciousness and references the West-African traditions described in the narrative. He said that the poetic juxtaposition between the two statements is very impactful. Miller said that he did not initially understand the use of the word “weaponize” but after doing more research, he is in support of the use 3 of the word as a powerful call to adopt white privilege as a weapon of war against the systemic racism of society. Steil said that she would like to mirror Miller’s opinion of the art, but when she sees the word “weaponize” she feels that it exudes negative energy, and she would prefer to focus on putting positive energy out into the community through the use of a different word (like “utilize,” “employ,” “exploit,” “exercise,” etc.), since most people will not understand the deeper meaning behind the phrase at first glance. Finlayson echoed Steil’s concerns about the word “weaponize.” Seydell-Johnson suggested alternate phrases such as “Iowa City Welcomes You,” “Black Joy Needs No Permission – We Use Our Privilege to Save Black Bodies.” Steil agreed with Seydell-Johnson. Truitt disagreed, and said that this is a message that should be explicitly stated in order for the Iowa City community to avoid slipping into complicity. Agran expressed his support for the aesthetics of the project and his excitement for the context of the murals. He said that there is plenty of other public art within the community whose meaning alludes the “Average Joe,” and that this is an opportunity to recontextualize the word “weaponize.” He said that he looks forward to the committee’s approval of the designs as they are submitted. Purington said that the art is beautiful and powerful but takes issue with the word “weaponize” because of the prejudice that some people hold combined with their prevalence with actual weapons, and fears that its use will incite violence. She suggested to use the word “reinvent” instead. Boyken said that he feels conflicted because it feels wrong for him to edit the words of the artists and to choose their words for them, but as a part of this committee he recognizes his responsibility to serve the entire community. He said that there might be people who feel unsafe or offended by the proposed language, which is an unfortunate aspect, but it is not their place as a committee to create art that caters to everyone. Knoche said that he has concern with the use of the word “weaponize,” and questions how they can build a positive dialogue within the larger community. Engelbrecht said that that is a good and fair question, and that Shaw is coming on to the team to tell these types of stories through journalism, which will provide some more reach to the community. Seydell-Johnson suggested the word “activate” as a substitution for “weaponize.” Steil asked if there was a connection to the Voxman Music Building that the team could use as a way to bring in more positive energy. Williams said that the waves in the background of the second mural (with the word “weaponize”) is supposed to represent music. Williams said that they spoke to (black) members of the Iowa City community prior to designing anything and said that their conversation was very different – they were not talking about positive energy within the community, but rather how they felt as though they are being ignored by the city. Williams said that he and Hayes were trying to figure out how to create a conversation between two groups within the same community who don’t really interact with one another, beginning with drawing people in with something that is aesthetically pleasing and then attempting to have that tough conversation. He said that they are not necessarily looking for something that is overall positive, but rather something that engaging and pushes people to have these difficult discussions with those who 4 are privileged and with those who may not understand. Hayes asked how change would come about if nobody is talking about it. Purington said that what Hayes and Williams said makes intellectual sense, but the use of the word “weaponize” as the first word does not inspire her to save black lives, as it is too loaded and broad. She said that she thinks it is too intellectual for the community as a whole and thinks that it will function as a roadblock instead of as an opener to a conversation. Williams asked what the committee thought would be a good and impactful word that would encourage members of certain parts of the community to stop and engage in a conversation that they already don’t want to have. He said that positivity never brings people to the table to have a tough conversation that involves them giving up certain parts of their power in society. Purington suggested using the word “reinvent” instead, since that is something that she feels would inspire and empower someone on an individual level. Williams said that he does not believe that privileged people need to be empowered, but that they need to be challenged. Miller said that he feels like the word “weaponize” worked exactly how the artists had intended it, and if they had used a softer word, he does not think that the message would have lingered with him as much. Steil said that in a good negotiation, neither party gets 100% what they want. She said that they are not disputing the artwork as a whole, just asking for a negotiation centered around changing one word for the stability of the community. Williams asked, when Steil says “our community” if she really means everyone. Steil said yes, and that there is no such thing as a city where everyone feels as though they belong with everybody else. Bollinger said that she does not see the Public Arts Advisory Committee neither wanting to or able to reframe the artists’ original statement, and she does not want to see the artists’ message lost with any overwhelming barrage of public onslaught, and that she wants to see it succeed. Engelbrecht suggested that the project team reconvene and talk about the feedback from the meeting, and then come back to Bollinger and Ford for future approval. Ford said that there might be a way to cause that same discomfort without the use of the word “weaponize,” by asking a question such as “Am I a Racist if I am not an Anti-Racist?”. Engelbrecht said that he really appreciates the dialogue and the feedback and thanked everyone for their taking on this challenging topic. Purington said that she wants the project to be successful, powerful, and productive for a long time to come. Arthur said that she thinks the suggestions are good ones, and that she had the same initial reaction as Miller but came to the same conclusion. She said that she is not sure if rearranging the words would shift the message, but it is something to consider. She said that she appreciates how the project is bringing the conversation into Downtown. Arthur said that she hears the concerns that were mentioned, and that if a white supremacist decided to take action then they would take that action out on black bodies, which is something to also consider. Boyken said that, while it is important to take into account how the white community in Iowa City will negatively react to this project, it would be a bigger disservice to water down the overall message of the project. Motion: Steil moves to approve the artwork and the language with the exception (and replacement) of the word “weaponize.” Finlayson seconds. Seydell-Johnson offers an amendment stating that the word “weaponize” be considered to be replaced as opposed to requiring it, after other public comment. Miller supports the proposed amendment. Steil rejects the proposed amendment. Miller said that he will not be voting for the motion because he does not want to remove artistic freedom from the hands of the artists. Purington emphasized Arthur’s previous comments. 5 Motion fails with a vote of 3-5. Motion: Seydell-Johnson moves that the project move forward with additional public input about the word “weaponize” and the effects that it will have on the overall community. Purington seconds. Motion passes unanimously. Engelbrecht thanked the committee and said that they are looking forward to the rest of the project. Tools for Evaluating Grant Applications Truitt said that her and Finlayson created a Public Art Matching Fund Program Awards scoresheet by looking at public applications and the scoresheet from the Climate Committee. Finlayson said that it is important to keep these rankings as simple as possible for both the reviewer and the applicant. Purington said that the criteria checklist is separate from the scoring rubric. Truitt asked if they already have a form to use as a scoresheet before deciding on the numerical values. Seydell-Johnson said that this is a two-step process, and the first step has to do with answering “yes” or “no” and evaluating whether the applicant has met the minimum requirements. She said that she would add a question like, “do they show technical ability to carry out the scope of the project being proposed?” and only those that meet these requirements move on to the second round of the process. Bollinger said that she thinks this process would make it more fair for everyone. Determine date for next round of Matching Funds Pushed to the January meeting. Updates - Artists Database Ford said that she meets with Geoff Fruin once a month, and one of the legal concerns with the Artists Database was that the Public Arts Advisory Committee would be linking these artists to for-profit businesses. She said that there are policies that prohibit this, but Fruin said not to worry about that and to just focus on getting the database populated. Ford also said that Fruin was adamant that only Iowa City based artists would be eligible for signing up on it. Bollinger said that there is still some fine-tuning that needs to be done before the database goes live. Updates - Kiwanis Park Community Garden art project Bollinger said that she has been connected with the Ty’n Cae Neighborhood about starting the community garden project, and they hope to do a walk-through after the first of the year. Committee Announcements/Committee Reports Purington said that she is teaching a Zoom art class at 2pm on Thursdays through Movement For All. It is an Elements of Art Course called “An Apple a Day”. Staff Reports None. Adjournment Knoche motions to adjourn. Finlayson seconds. Meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. 6 Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2020 Name Term Expires 3/5/20 4/2/20 4/20/20 5/7/20 6/4/20 7/2/20 8/6/20 9/3/20 10/1/20 11/5/20 12/3/20 Ron Knoche X X X O/E X X X X X X x Juli Seydell- Johnson X X X X X O/E X X X X x Vero Rose Smith 12/31/20 X X O/E X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Steve Miller 12/31/20 O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X Eddie Boyken 12/31/21 X X X X X X O/E X X X X Jan Finlayson 12/31/20 -- -- -- -- X X O/E X O/E X X Nancy Purington 12/31/22 X X X X X X X X X X X Andrea Truitt 12/31/22 O/E X X X X X O/E X O/E X X Dominic Dongilli 12/31/23 -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X O/E Tonya Kehoe 12/31/23 -- -- -- -- -- -- O O -- -- -- Sandy Steil 12/31/23 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- O/E x