Cultural Council Agenda and Packet 2023 02 16

Home Browse Search

Cultural Council Agenda DATE Page 5 of 11 Mark says "it ("Community Resilience" sculpture) was already going to get tabled" (by City Council) and that in making his statements to City Council, "all wanted you to do is issue agendas and minutes." Grace notes that meetings were noticed and minutes were issued for every Public Art meeting that had more than two members in attendance, as required by City rules. The only meeting that had more than two LCC members was the first meeting - and that meeting was noticed. JR notes that Mark's "actions as a citizen called into question the integrity of the public art process..." "and generally, the LCC". He notes that the public art process, as put together by this subcommittee, is far beyond anything the City has done before; "the process itself was the best we've ever done". Mark states that calls for public art "have always been done through that (CAFE)". JR counters "no, they haven't". Mark and JR disagree on this point and move on with the discussion. Mark refutes this two additional times; JR moves on. JR notes that the jury process "was beyond anything they (the LCC) had done before" with 14 or 15 jury members including artists in the community, therapists, fire survivors, and members of the LCC. Mark agrees with this. JR states that Mark "brought criticism to a process that didn't deserve it". That the process was solid, even if there were some decisions made that Mark doesn't agree with. JR says the LCC needs to work together and needs to have solutions — and that it is important to talk about the public art process, and this disagreement, in order to move forward. "I want to go on record I think it (Mark's comments to City Council) were detrimental to us and called into question the integrity of the process." Mark continues to question of the public art process. JR notes that in the 2022 LCC meetings, "nobody dissented, so you (Mark) approved" of the project throughout the process. Beth notes to Mark that the process that was followed "was better than we've done in years past". She notes that it would have been better if Mark brought his concerns to the LCC so the LCC could move forward on his thoughts, rather than bringing his complaints directly to the City Council. "you're also a member of the LCC and that's how City Council saw it as division and incompetence that the LCC couldn't figure out our own problems."