My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2023 01 10
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2023 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2023 01 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/5/2023 2:52:22 PM
Creation date
5/5/2023 2:22:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
1/10/2023
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />January 10, 2023 <br />Page 6 of 8 <br />the community heal from the collective trauma of the past year. Main Street is a visible, <br />high traffic location where people can engage with the art. The process has included fire <br />survivors and they were an integral part of this process. The Subcommittee feels this <br />location creates the most exposure and engagement for the artwork. <br />Mark Cathcart, member of the LCC but speaking on his own behalf, stated he submitted <br />comments via email for the record as well. He stated those comments outline his <br />concerns with this process and the Cultural Council. He asserted that many LCC <br />members have not yet taken open government training and the appropriate process <br />was not followed. <br />Councilmember Leh asked what process was followed. Schmitt stated the public art <br />process was followed.The jury included 14 people including residents who lost homes in <br />the fire, business owners, and LCC members. <br />Councilmember Most asked who selected the 14 person jury. Schmitt stated the jury <br />was chosen by members of the LCC Public Art Subcommittee and they extended the <br />invitation to business owners, residents who lost homes, and LCC members. Members <br />did disclose any conflicts of interest. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Fahey stated she very much likes the sculpture but feels it is not the <br />correct location. She stated the arboretum would be a more appropriate location as it <br />was in the fire, it is visible from Via Appia, and it would be visible from homes that are <br />being rebuilt after the fire. She added there is parking and accessibility there and Via <br />Appia has more traffic. She also noted this is not just an art sculpture but also a <br />memorial for the fire victims and as such would be more appropriate being in the burn <br />area. She would like to see it put at the arboretum. <br />Councilmember Most asked why the call for entry specified a location in downtown and <br />wondered if that was not in the call if it would have affected the sculpture design, scale <br />and mass. Schmitt stated if the location is changed the LCC would start the process <br />again with a new Call for Entries. <br />Councilmember Dickinson stated he is ok with the location at City Hall, but agreed it <br />may not be the perfect location for all people. <br />Councilmember Brown stated this location was supposed to be a place of honor but we <br />need to be sensitive to everyone. He stated he feels the sculpture is good, but he is <br />uncomfortable with the location. <br />Councilmember Leh stated the process was created to give the LCC appropriate leeway <br />and that process has been followed. He stated it wouldn't be appropriate to approve the <br />sculpture but not the location. This is not likely to be the only Marshall Fire memorial. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.