Ann Arbor says goodbye to controversial 'Percent for Art' program
The Ann Arbor City Council gave final approval Monday night to a major overhaul of the city's public art program, eliminating the controversial "Percent for Art" funding mechanism.
Instead of automatically setting aside 1 percent of capital project dollars into a pooled public art fund — like the city has done since 2007 — city officials will decide on a case-by-case basis in the future whether certain projects might be enhanced by having art "baked in" from the start.
"There is, of course, uncertainty because it does rely on staff to conceive and propose interesting and useful and appropriate projects," said Council Member Christopher Taylor, D-3rd Ward.
A newly installed hanging sculpture inside the city of Ann Arbor's Justice Center as viewed from outside late Monday night. The $150,000 installation was funded through the city's Percent for Art Program, which is being replaced with a new public art program.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
Both supporters and critics of the city's public art program agreed the changes made Monday night represent a step in the right direction.
"We are coming to a better place with our public art program," said Council Member Stephen Kunselman, D-3rd Ward, who questioned the legality of the old Percent for Art Program because it diverted money away from dedicated millages and utility funds.
"I think originally when we started this process, I was not too confident there was going to be a concerted effort for change," Kunselman said, praising his colleagues Monday night for the compromise and collaboration he witnessed in coming up with a new solution.
From 2007 to 2012, the Percent For Art Program channeled more than $2 million from various city funds to the city's pooled art fund. Some of those funds paid for a bronze sculpture doubling as a water fountain in front of city hall, a hanging sculpture inside the Justice Center, two orange metal trees in West Park, and a mosaic-style mural at Allmendinger Park.
New ordinance language approved by a 10-0 vote with Council Member Chuck Warpehoski absent states: "Funding for public art may come from private donations of cash or collateral (specific objects of art), crowdfunding for specific art projects, as part of a capital improvement project specifically designated as an enhanced project, or other funds that City Council may appropriate."
Council Members Sabra Briere, Sally Hart Petersen, Kunselman, Taylor and Margie Teall served on a task force that worked out the new plan.
The council took action several months ago to temporarily suspend the public art program while it studied the issue following November's voter rejection of a dedicated public art millage.
Council Member Jane Lumm, an Independent from the 2nd Ward, fought unsuccessfully Monday night to get more than $845,000 in uncommitted public art funds returned to their original source funds. Only Council Members Sumi Kailasapathy, D-1st Ward, and Petersen sided with her.
The bulk of the unspent art money — $451,956 — would have gone back to the sewage disposal system, while $237,314 would have gone to streets, $61,358 to the water supply system, $35,529 to solid waste, $28,492 to parks, $20,844 to stormwater, $6,416 to the airport and $3,120 to energy.
"I can't believe that we wouldn't all agree that we could find very good uses for those dollars with all these priorities — sewers, street-related projects that remain unfunded," Lumm said.
Other council members noted there's going to be a transition period between now and the realization of a functioning public art program under the new model and money will be needed to administer the program. It's possible those remaining pooled funds could be spent on art projects, too.
Briere reported that Craig Hupy, the city's public services administrator, has talked frequently about a potential public art project affiliated with the city's new wastewater treatment plant.
"He's got a concept in mind," she said. "He's described it thoroughly, and he's looked at the money for wastewater treatment as one of the funding sources for this piece of public art. I suspect other people also are looking creatively, but I don't know."
Mayor John Hieftje said he sees the $845,000 in uncommitted public art funds as the basis for future funding for art in the city.
"There are projects that may not have come forward yet," he said. "And I thought when we entered into this process in the beginning, we talked about the fact that we were comfortable with these funds staying in there. At least that's what I heard from many council members."
The council voted in May to approve a two-month extension of the employment contract with Aaron Seagraves, the city's part-time public art administrator.
It's still being discussed how the city will fund administration of the art program after July, and whether the city should have a part-time or a full-time art administrator.
"I would like us really to be able to continue to support an administrator," Teall said. "We had experts that came in to these committee meetings and said that's the one thing that a strong public art program needs — they need a full-time administrator."
While there has been some criticism of the city's art program, Hieftje noted each of the projects proposed came from citizen volunteers on the Public Art Commission.
"Some of those people are professionals working in art, local artists themselves, and I think they've done a fine job moving this along and bringing public art to the stage where it is," he said. "There's obviously been some hiccups along the way and some bumps, but I'd like to see our public art program continue and I don't see how we can do that without a funded administrator."
The scene at this year's FestiFools event on Main Street in downtown Ann Arbor. Some are hoping the city can find a way to fund events like this under a new public art program.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
"The new ordinance will be at least two years — potentially three years — before it starts bringing projects to fruition," he said. "And that leaves the issue of the ongoing projects that are already identified, administering those, and carrying on planning for art in those three years."
Tom Crawford, the city's chief financial officer, said staff's recommendation would be to tap into the existing uncommitted public art funds to get through a two-year period. Hupy said they might look at crafting a program that uses some general fund money to support the arts administration.
Bob Miller, chairman of the city's Public Art Commission, said he's pleased council members and city staff were able to devise a new strategy for incorporating public art into the future of Ann Arbor's capital improvement plan, which he sees as a significant first step forward.
But he said he doesn't yet see potential for funding artistic endeavors outside of city capital projects — things like the FestiFools and FoolMoon community events in April, the Public Art Commission's mural program, and street-related art like temporary chalk art.
He suggested council explore the possibility of a new requirement that private development and new construction contribute to a public art fund.
While she's concerned there's still a mechanism in place for using capital funds to pay for public art, Lumm said there seems to be a greater recognition and focus on the role that private sources and fundraising can play under the new model.
"I continue to believe that if any community can successfully fund a public art program privately, it would be Ann Arbor," she said.
As part of its move to end the Percent for Art Program, the council voted Monday night to stop $326,464 from being transferred to the public art fund in the upcoming fiscal year budget.
Mark Tucker, who teaches art at the University of Michigan and is known as the creator of FestiFools, said the kind of projects funded by the city's Percent for Art Program were heralded by some as culturally forward-thinking and scorned by others as wasteful spending.
"However, there's another type of public art that is a vibrant part of what makes this city so unique," he said. "These are episodic art experiences that have been created by and for our community for the purpose of enhancing the lives of those of us who live in this community."
Tucker encouraged council members to consider the impact that "unconventional public art" has had on the community.
"By unconventional, I mean art that does not fit neatly into a particular capital improvement project and does not have the kind of value that can be easily depreciated," he said. "And I would challenge this council to find ways to support those types of public art projects — be they murals, outdoor music festivals, street art, or any number of new or unique art forms that could come our way."
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.
Comments
easy123
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 8:25 p.m.
How about doint this with the money. Provide the funds directly to the Huron, Pioneer, and Skyline Band and Symphony. As part of the funding - ask them to perform in the city square or outside townhall. I am sure they would do it anyways, but this would benefit the city, the residents, and the businesses. The mayor wants street performers - the Jazz group (if properly funded) would it in a heartbeat. Finally, we know there a lot of kids experimenting in art in the high schools - Show their stuff. More people will come to take a look at it. Maybe we may encourage other kids to experiment
live-learn-love
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 1:46 p.m.
Ridiculous to keep that money in a pot, when Stone School Road between Eisenhower and Ellsworth is falling to pieces, just as Carpenter Road is between Packard and Washtenaw. Are they trying to let those well traveled roads become dirt roads on their own? I don't disagree with public art, but shouldn't public services - like road maintenance, water and sewer, adequate police and fire protection, and local governance - for which the city council exists in the first place to administer for the public good - come FIRST? Seriously. No Public Art funded by city budgets until you can fund the basics. In the mean time, Ann Arbor would very likely be happy to crowd source public art on a project by project basis. I'd be for that!
Carole
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 10:45 a.m.
All of the funds should go back to the original starting point. It should not be kept to faze out the programs and fund an employee.
RUKiddingMe
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 8:09 a.m.
Ryan, would you be able to post all staff members of the Public Art Commission and what they are paid for that service?
RUKiddingMe
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 8:05 a.m.
"Other council members noted there's going to be a transition period between now and the realization of a functioning public art program under the new model and money will be needed to administer the program. It's possible those remaining pooled funds could be spent on art projects, too." $845,000 for ADMIN fees of a failed program. Unbelievable. It's POSSIBLE this could be spent on art? More than 3/4 of a million of your dollars they vote to KEEP in this program, and it MIGHT be spent on art. Is everyone else seeing this? Absolutely insane. How can these people not be sued and jailed?
Gardener1
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 3:10 a.m.
I can not believe someone wants to pay someone to do a job that is being essentially eliminated.
Kai Petainen
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 1:38 a.m.
I realized that many may not understand my reference to the HRWC and the art in front of city hall. If we go back in time a bit... there was a phosphoric acid/oil spill on the Huron River. I thought, that the HRWC would stand up and speak out against the spill -- they didn't. The enviro group that should have said something, didn't. They were silent and they basically told me they were busy on other things. Later on, I realized that they were busy concentrating on art. What the news fails to mention, is that the HRWC was instrumental in that artwork. This is what the HRWC report stated: "Another "good news" event this fall was the installation of a public water sculpture that integrates stormwater into its artwork. It was installed at the Ann Arbor Municipal Center in early October. This is the culmination of four years of my work and that of former HRWC staff member Joan Martin, as well as the efforts of Janis Bobrin, the Washtenaw County Water Resources Commissioner, Margaret Parker, Jan Onder, and present and past members of the Ann Arbor Public Arts Commission. Four years ago we met to discuss and view the portfolio of Herbert Dreiseitl, a German artist known for his groundbreaking work integrating urban planning, stormwater management, and landscape architecture into artistic expression. As we surveyed his work and the way he integrated stormwater into overall site design and elevated much of it to art, we began to develop plans to bring him to the watershed. In the Fall of 2008, we hosted the State of the Huron Conference around Dreiseitl's visit and coordinated meetings with academics, local government officials, planners, and artists. This initial visit generated additional visits whereby Dreiseitl was commissioned under the City of Ann Arbor's Percent for Art Program to develop a piece of art for the entrance to the City Municipal Center. Dreiseitl designed the piece and local artisans manufactured and installed it.
Kai Petainen
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 12:16 p.m.
"you left out Laura Rubin" Good point. She's actually (somewhat) listed in the thing above.. "This is the culmination of four years of my work " Who wrote that? Laura Rubin. So she was busy working on the art for 4 years.
Alan Goldsmith
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:53 a.m.
Oh Kai, you left out Laura Rubin, puppet supporter of the Mayor and past leader of this group. Thanks for posting the 'behind the scenes' words from the HRWC, a group the Mayor has been part of in the past. I've said all along this was worked out behind the scenes and rammed through City Council. Glad this 'environmental group' finally is taking credit for it out in the light of day.
Kai Petainen
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 1:39 a.m.
Source: http://tinyurl.com/ltpzduo
YouSaidWhat?
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 7:29 p.m.
Did any of the council clowns suggest that the money be refunded to the taxpayer?????? Nope!
a2chrisp
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:57 p.m.
Although I oppose money coming from the general budget to support art, especially during a time when the city is cutting back on support both in its services and in its workforce, the main issue that I have with the art fund is that city council has proven time and time again that it can't spend money efficiently. $2 million dollars on 4 art projects? It is insanity. Why not spend $15-$50 thousand per project and support more local artists and student artists that would practically give it away to have it included in the city's plans.
Sparty
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:03 p.m.
It took six years to end this ridiculous program and there's still $845,000 that should be returned to it's source funding. There's still legal questions about the ability to re-direct the money away from the source. Further, the need for a PAID art administrator is ridiculous. Why not volunteer or a Citizen Panel? They're ok paying for an Art Administrator but not for an additional fireman or policeman?
A A Resident
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:57 p.m.
For the wastewater treatment plant, may I suggest a giant sculpture of something iconic and topical, which everyone will recognize? It could become as famous as the water tower in Ypsilanti! By the way, I am a professional artist, and have no idea what the titles for a couple of the art commission members mean. What is a "Designer", and what an "Arts Professional"?
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:22 p.m.
"Briere reported that Craig Hupy, the city's public services administrator, has talked frequently about a potential public art project affiliated with the city's new wastewater treatment plant. "He's got a concept in mind," she said. "He's described it thoroughly, and he's looked at the money for wastewater treatment as one of the funding sources for this piece of public art. I suspect other people also are looking creatively, but I don't know."" Note to Sabra Briere: So what was your reply to Mr. Hupy? I hestitate to speculate from all your past votes to approve so many of the Per Cent For Art fiascos, but you should have said, "Stop right there. I am not going to support any more art that is not easily accessable to the public, much less spend one dime for a project at a water water treatment plant. This would be waste of tax dollars so you need to stop this nonsense immediately." But I'm guessing you just nodded your head and smiled and didn't say a word.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:43 p.m.
"Briere reported that Craig Hupy, the city's public services administrator, has talked frequently about a potential public art project affiliated with the city's new wastewater treatment plant. "He's got a concept in mind," she said. "He's described it thoroughly, and he's looked at the money for wastewater treatment as one of the funding sources for this piece of public art. I suspect other people also are looking creatively, but I don't know."" A lightbulb just went off and I realized that when our city leaders refer to "public art", they actually must mean "public *servants'* art" or "art for public officials". When the wind is going the wrong way along the border to border trail to Parker Mill, the wastewater treatment plant stinks so bad, who is their right mind would want to go anywhere near it to see art?!
a2chrisp
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 7:02 p.m.
It is long past time that you ran for mayor and took heifje out of office. You, unlike the many candidates that have face him before actually could beat him.
DJBudSonic
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:18 p.m.
Maybe he said "public fart" and Ms. Briere misheard him? Sorry, somebody had to say it - in the same spirit of public art engagement as the folks who added the "f" to the ill-conceived bike racks.
golfer
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:11 p.m.
YEA YEA AND MORE YEA. it is about time they did something to art. make it stand on its own. engage the people of ann arbor whom has art background. the uofm has an art school. good by and good riddance to the art commission stupid spending.
A Voice of Reason
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:23 p.m.
Even though Festival of Fools was an amusing event that I attended, seems like they could be part of the many parades we pay to run in town which we are already paying to have police protect them. It is morally wrong for the government to fund art and pick the winners and losers. If it is so great, seems like the Festival of Fools could be funded by the University.
Carolyn
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:08 p.m.
I would vote for Jane Lumm if she ran for mayor. The infrastructure in Ann Arbor is horrendous. The money that remains should be returned to the accounts from which it was removed. And with water and sewer rates going up, the reported intention of Craig Hupy to create a "potential public art project affiliated with the city's new wastewater treatment plant" and that he's "looked at the money for wastewater treatment as one of the funding sources for this" is arrogant beyond belief.
oyxclean
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 9:39 p.m.
At this point I would vote for anyone or anything as long as its not Hieftje!
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:59 p.m.
But how likely is that to happen? There are two layers to politics in Ann Arbor, Democrats vs. Republicans and Council Party vs. non-Council Party. Even if the voters turn over the current council membership, it's still going to be a largely Democratic council, and Lumm, her guise of independence notwithstanding, still takes a mostly Republican approach to governing (old-school Republican, I mean, not the Teapublicans of today). Right now she's often allied with other council members in opposition to the mayor, but there's no reason to believe that that would continue.
Bill
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:41 p.m.
Lumm would not be at odds with the Council if the voters would rid the council of the cronies and vote in new members, like they did with Lumm, who will make a positive difference for Ann Arbor.
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:59 p.m.
As much respect as I have for Jane Lumm, that would be a disaster. She would be at odds with the council on almost every issue. What a mess. I love her as a gadfly, but the city needs someone who can build consensus in a post-Hiefje council.
arborani
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:16 p.m.
Me, too. I'm happy to have my Ward represented by both Ms. Lumm and Ms. Petersen.
Carolyn
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:36 p.m.
"Briere reported that Craig Hupy, the city's public services administrator, has talked frequently about a potential public art project affiliated with the city's new wastewater treatment plant." ????????????
arborani
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:13 p.m.
The mind boggles.
Paehr
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:30 p.m.
Might we consider having a requirement for builders and entrepreneurs to include a piece of public art to their plans when they want to replace, or extensively renovate the outside of a building, in the downtown area? I understand that London owes many of its larger outdoor aesthetic pieces to such a rule.
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:20 p.m.
I am alarmed at the suggestion that public art money should be spent in conjunction with the wastewater treatment plant. The point is to have art where the public will be. How many of the public will ever visit the wastewater treatment plant? As part of the design of the plant, presumably some decorative elements could be included. The current drinking water treatment plant has been designed rather decoratively (I see it through the cyclone fence as I walk by). But that seems adequate.
A2since74
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:52 p.m.
And good looking repaired and resurfaced roads will beautify the city.
DJBudSonic
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 5:11 p.m.
The only extra expenditure even remotely related to art I would consider for the water treatment plant would be a teaching mural - something that explained the water treatment process to interested school kids - something that educates and informs.
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:57 p.m.
Does that mean the art has to be AT the wastewater treatment plant? I don't see that specified anywhere, and I hope not.
arborani
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:12 p.m.
We could provide busses for tourists to view the new art . . .
thinker
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:20 p.m.
Just WHAT did we vote down?
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:56 p.m.
You voted down a poorly (deceptively, even) worded millage to support public art that was connected in some vague way that was never made clear to the Percent for Art program. You can thank Christopher Taylor for that supreme act of muddying the water.
CynicA2
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:08 p.m.
The Hieftjeites are trying to save their jobs - they know another election approaches! But don't be fooled by this half-way measure to appease the reality-based thinkers in this town - the Hieftje and all his clueless minions must be driven from office. Like rats in a cheese factory, they just can't resist the temptation to squander our money, and can NEVER be trusted. Keep them in your political cross-hairs as you head to the polls in August - there is more work to be done.
fjord
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:58 p.m.
Inaccurate headline. We are not merely saying "goodbye" to this program — that's far too polite. More like "good riddance, scram, beat it, get the *bleep* out of here, never come back again."
arborani
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:09 p.m.
As long as the $845K for more art still looms over us, it's hardly "goodbye" - more like "see you again soon."
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:43 p.m.
Kudos to Lumm, Kailasapathy and Petersen for attempting to return the art tax dollars back to the original service funds they were looted from. Apparently others on Council haven't gotten that message yet this is what this issue was all about--stealing from infustructure and city sevices for the 'art' bucket.
Robert Hughes
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:33 p.m.
Sad to see this program voted out. Pity we don't have it in out hearts to send the money to Detroit and call it art. God knows they need the money more than we do.
Robert Hughes
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 8:54 p.m.
Ever visit Detroit? Of course they need the money more than Ann Arbor.
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:52 p.m.
@Robert, they just pink slipped about a gazillion AAPS teachers. They're talking about cutting busing I high school. What makes you think WE don't need the money???
Jay Thomas
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:39 p.m.
Uh... no they don't. Their council voted themselves very generous pay, assistants, and a city car, as if they were members of Congress or something. At least people elected here -- whatever you think of them -- are clearly not in city government for the money. The guy who is most likely to be their next Mayor, Benny Napoleon, just suggested that the DIA collection should be used to satisfy creditors FIRST. The word philistine comes to mind. :(
hmsp
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:22 p.m.
Frankly, I'm bummed. It was such a wonderful way to excite the trolls! (Note to aa.com: Find a way to write at least two stories per week that have "ART" in their headlines. That should help.)
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:50 p.m.
@hmsp, There's always the AAPS BOE. Although the summer will be kinda slow.....
sigdiamond
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:54 p.m.
Don't worry. Something will come along and fill the void. There'll always be stories about local job growth, or people exercising, or eating at Zingerman's, or otherwise enjoying life, for the annarbor.com commentariat to be upset about. As long as they're miserable and other people aren't, water will find its own level. We'll get through this.
JRW
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:16 p.m.
Alan Goldsmith writes: "3. The Mayor knows fully well HE appointed all the Ann Arbor Public Arts Commission members to the group. 5. Surprise, the provision for term limits for the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission membership was deleted too." WHO are these people? Why isn't there a list of names publicly available with their credentials? Come on, AA dot com. List the names and credentials. It should not a secret who made all these terrible decisions. And it appears this group will continue! "4. Voting down returning the unspent Art Tax dollars to their original funds while voting to increase water and sewage rates at the same meeting." Unbelievable. RETURN the unspent art funds to their original funds and FIX THE POTHOLES!
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:51 p.m.
It's hardly a secret. They hold public meetings, have a web presence, and their meetings are covered in detail by the Chronicle. The members of AAPAC can be found with minimal effort by googling. It's actually easier than griping about it on annarbor.com. Here's their site: http://www.a2gov.org/government/publicservices/publicart/Pages/default.aspx And here are the current members: Ashlee Arder, programs coordinator for ArtServe Michigan Connie Brown, Designer Marsha Chamberlin, Arts Professional John Kotarski, Educator Bob Miller, Realtor & Builder (chair) Malverne Winborne, Educator Nick Zagar (not sure how he describes himself) I think Maureen Devine's name (art coordinator for the North Campus Research Complex) has been put forward. I think there's one more vacancy that needs to be filled. Here's their twitter: @AAPublicArt And their Facebook page, where you can gripe away: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ann-Arbor-Public-Art-Commission/125033160845588
foobar417
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:13 p.m.
Google ... http://www.a2gov.org/government/publicservices/publicart/Pages/PublicArtCommission.aspx
Cornelius Nestor
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:10 p.m.
I applaud councilwomen Lumm, Kailasapathy and Petersen for trying to redirect public monies toward those activities proper to government and am encouraged to learn that one of the city councilmen has actually pondered the legality of a government action-- the novelty is refreshing. I suggest that, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, we might dispense with government-supported art: any given example may appeal to a committee flushed with taxpayers' money, but because the artifact needn't appeal to any particular person's taste, it will generally appeal to no one's. The Huronal in front of the "Justice Center" springs to mind.
JRW
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:07 p.m.
The city should not be spending taxpayer's money on any art commission administrator with 40,000 potholes unfilled in the city, and with fire and police services and personnel cut. There is just no excuse for crumbling roads and spending thousands on so-called public "art." Not one dime of taxpayers money should be spent on public art or art administrators. The city can't fix the roads, fill the potholes, remove snow and ice adequately in the winter, and police and firefighters have been laid off. Yet, the nonworking $750,000 "sculpture" sits in front of City Hall, metal trees are placed in West Park, and a hundred thousand dollar metal sculpture hangs in the justice center, well inside the building after the security screening. Not one more dime of taxpayer's money should be spent on anything related to "public art."
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:01 p.m.
1. "Art" at the future Waste Water Treatment Plant? Yet more money spent on something non-accessable by the public. Apparently Council and the Mayor have learn nothing from the public backlash about their past choices. 2. A full time administrator? Is that what this is all about? The City and staff need to figure out a way to do anything in the future with current staff. 3. The Mayor knows fully well HE appointed all the Ann Arbor Public Arts Commission members to the group. To pawn the failures off on them is cowardly. Let's not forget Council has approved each and every fiasco, from the Water Fountain that rarely has water running through it and 'art' there is behind a sercurity check point, protected by armed guards. Once again he dodges responsibility for his actions. Not surprising and a sign of weak leadership. 4. Voting down returning the unspent Art Tax dollars to their original funds while voting to increase water and sewage rates at the same meeting. 5. Surprise, the provision for term limits for the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission membership was deleted too. 6. I wasn't at the meeting but did Margie Teall give a public apology for her continued advocacy in the past for doublnig the One Per Cent to TWO Per Cent? Let's not forget her good works in the past for this disasterous waste of tax dollars.
cibachrome
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:58 p.m.
Now they can concentrate on other foolish ideas to drain off tax money: indoor windmills, a Council meeting food fund (art imitates life), or a city gateway.
JRW
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:57 p.m.
"Funding for public art may come from private donations of cash or collateral (specific objects of art), crowdfunding for specific art projects, as part of a capital improvement project specifically designated as an enhanced project, or other funds that City Council may appropriate." "Other funds that City council may appropriate" should have been eliminated from this statement. Public art should ONLY be funded with private funds and donations. I'm still waiting for a list of the members of the Public Art commission with their credentials that gave them the authority to make the decisions about the public art projects (debacles). Has this group been disbanded? I still see references in the article to "Bob Miller, chairman of the city's Public Art Commission." Is this group over with? Who is on it, if it is continuing, and what are their credentials?
Kai Petainen
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:48 p.m.
Ryan, thanks for the photo at night. So is the art visible at night? Seems to me that the view of it is obscured from the public at night. I'm curious to know if it looks better at night.... and if so.... is it off limits? Which would again imply that it was a wasteful project for 'public' art. "While there has been some criticism of the city's art program, Hieftje noted each of the projects proposed came from citizen volunteers on the Public Art Commission" The expensive water fountain in front of city hall.... that idea came from the HRWC. Instead of fighting against spills in the river, they were busy planning art. They take credit for the idea of that art in one of their reports.
Brad
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:46 p.m.
That photo of the new palace art? That particular angle, at night, is about the only way you can see it from outside the Mahal. Otherwise you have to cough up your cellphone, maybe take off your belt to get through security to look at how your tax dollars were wasted. Excellent plan there. Aug 6.
Veracity
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:41 p.m.
Unfortunately, City Council dealt only with the financing of the Art Commission. Nothing was done to remove the selection of art to be commissioned from one or several of the art commission's members. Therefore, the personal art collection being developed can continue to expand. Also unchanged is the art commission's ability to spend large sums of money on each art project: $770,000 for Dreiseitl's monstrosity, $150,000 for the upside-down lampshade inside the Municipal Building and the pending $380,000 expenditure for art-by-the-Stadium-bridges. The fact that the artists being rewarded with tax payer money do not even live in Ann Arbor did not appear to bother any City Council members but it does bother me. Though City Council did take some action to reduce the wasteful spending of would-be art critics populating the art commission membership, the art commission deserved to be entirely eliminated. Ann Arbor can learn to live with the plentiful art objects already existing on the streets of Ann Arbor and the paths through the University of Michigan.
Nicholas Urfe
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:39 p.m.
Now that council has spent about a million dollars decorating their palace, they decide the rest of the town - where taxpayers live and work - doesn't rate. They could have had 10 art installations at 100K each for what they blew on city hall.
Rod Johnson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:31 p.m.
Anyone who sincerely thinks City Hall is a "palace" has never been in City Hall--especially the basement.
Brad
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:30 p.m.
"there's another type of public art that is a vibrant part of what makes this city so unique," Art-fluff.
Brad
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:29 p.m.
Good job getting rid of the 1%, but the fact that you're keeping upwards of a million in your "bucket" is just one more slap in the face to the voters. Thanks. "There is of course uncertainty" that you'll be reelected. We can only hope. Remember to vote on Aug 6 everyone.
Brad
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 8:49 p.m.
Whatever you say, Joan.
sigdiamond
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:44 p.m.
Yeah, having all those students voting in November would certainly turn the tide in favor of the "silent" "majority" of anti-art, anti-bike, anti-fun, anti-everything crowd that hangs out on this site. College students are notoriously conservative.
JRW
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:10 p.m.
These August elections are a joke. Have all elections in November.
windjmar
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:27 p.m.
I just want to puke every time I see that piece of scrap metal in front of City Hall -- "Council of Fools" it should read. What a total waste of money and anybody calling that piece of crap "art", needs their name right up under the "Council of Fools" sign. It would be super to have a nationwide "Council of Fools" contest because AA's would win every year for paying $750K+ for that piece of junk. I know for sure the "famous artist" is still chuckling over that one! Orange trees is another example -- really environmental in a city name-sake for a woman and her trees , so the AA council puts in fake ones! Natural beauty is gone, let's clutter the city up with some more idiotic garbage to save on the land-fill storage. Let each neighborhood take all their junk and pile it together in the nearest park, weld it together and call it art--make it a State of Michigan recognized foundation so MI people can get an "art donation" credit ... oh wait, the MI Republicans eliminated that deduction. So, better yet, cover the park-art with grass like Romulus did and make mountains for skiing out of it!
tdw
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:35 p.m.
I screwed up giving you a thumbs up.At first I was with you until you had to bring Republicans into the fray.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:10 p.m.
Instead of a taxpayer funded public art program, I propose the creation in Ann Arbor of a rotating public art gallery displaying the work of local artists. The artists would be selected via juried competitions open to all with the winners each getting a four month show. The art would include sculpture outdoors & other arts indoor. Electronic online bidding would occur for the duration of each show for each piece, with payment guaranteed via credit card, so the rotating public art gallery would need a website. The website, quickly accessible via a QR Code 2-D barcode next to each piece of art, would have links to artists & price information with some type of smart phone option that would make it easier for people to shop and purchase work or learn more about the artist. So the website would need an mobile phone app developed. There are many different options for locations for the rotating art gallery. As to locations, City Hall downtown might be a good spot for an indoor art gallery & the pocket park at Liberty Park on Liberty St. & the top of the Garage Mahal. In addition private businesses could get involved with locations like bank lobbies, vacant store fronts & downtown coffee stores. Also local parks could also be involved as sites to display art. We could organize citizens to lobby the city via an online petition that people could sign up to & pledge funds to via a www.kickstarter.com fundraising (the money isn't released unless the total minimum required is raised.). In addition to my day job at the bank, I actually am president & chairman of a IRS approved 501c3 non-profit, & it could form a new fund, to raise the money & administer the program. A committee to make this happen has already formed & if you are interested in getting involved or have some skills to offer the group (especially we need app programmers) that could help make it happen, please contact me at ranzini@university-bank.com.
Thinking over here
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:11 p.m.
Excellent idea!!! GO STEVE!!
Kai Petainen
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:44 p.m.
This is a fantastic idea. Do it.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:01 p.m.
Radius: It's upward and outward sweeping arms symbolize the ever increasing wasteful civic spending which draws into its circle an ever increasing number of individuals damaged by it: the rising souls of heart attack victims who aren't reached in time by underfunded emergency medical services and disadvantaged children from broken homes who aren't properly educated and end up being welcomed into the criminal justice system that Radius beckons you to enter. Also, now that I've had a chance to get a closer look at it, I cannot believe we spent $150,000 on this chandelier!
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:47 p.m.
Chandelier to some, a super sized piece of sports equipment to others. Perhaps Paul Bunyan wants to play badminton?
JBK
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:56 a.m.
This kind of sums up MINE and OTHERS feelings towards the A2 Council. "There is, of course, uncertainty because it does rely on staff to conceive and propose interesting and useful and appropriate projects," said Council Member Christopher Taylor, D-3rd Ward. SO we as TAXPAYERS are left to HOPE that the A2 Council and their minions "conceive and propose blah blah blah.? I AM HOLDING MY BREATH. :)
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:55 a.m.
1% For Art? RIP & Good Riddance! The wasteful expenditure on the Huirinal, a semi-functioning waterfountain built for $750,000, and Radius on which $150,000 was wasted, compliments the ethos of the Rog Mahal and our city leaders nicely! After all, where else would you build a $50 million civic building that houses a data center in the middle of a downtown district at a cost of over $400 per square foot and courtroom space justified as being needed to fit in an extra judge that the state judicial review commission cited as not necessary based on a declining court case load? To put $150,000 into perspective, it is the cost of one and a half teachers for one year (AAPS is firing 50 of them instead of eliminating its $4.5 million discretionary fund) and would pay for two firefighters in a city that is two fire fighters short of the minimum required staffing under the best possible conditions to meet national standard response time best practices for emergency medical services or fires. Yes, I know those are paid from other "buckets" of public money, I am just pointing out the magnitude of the waste for art and meanwhile the full-time art administrator's salary and benefits continue...
Major
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:49 p.m.
I agree with Stephen...kinda off subject but this has to be said... With all the home fires lately in town, the AA fire dept has been OUTSTANDING in knocking them down fast!! I salute you AA firefighters good job!!
sigdiamond
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:32 p.m.
You've got a bright future ahead of you as a politician, Stephen.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:11 p.m.
@sigdiamond: $30,400 a year sounds to a lot of artists like a full-time job. At least they are being honest and saying it only requires at most a 20 hour a week commitment.
sigdiamond
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:56 p.m.
"Sorry I lied and someone caught me!"
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:37 p.m.
@snark12: You are correct! Here are the details: "Hupy said Seagraves' services include providing overall leadership, general management and assistance in daily operations of the public art program, planning and development, public relations, and the coordination of projects with city staff, stakeholders and artists. The city, which has discussed making the art administrator's job a full-time position to improve the quality of the program, first contracted with Seagraves from April 2011 to May 2012. In June 2012, the city entered into a professional services agreement with Seagraves for the period from June 11, 2012, through May 31, 2013, in an amount not to exceed $24,000. An earlier amendment increased the total compensation to an amount not to exceed $24,990. Approval of the two-month extension to Seagraves' contract Monday night brings the total compensation amount up to $30,400 from June 2012 through July 2013." See: http://annarbor.com/news/ann-arbors-public-art-administrator-gets-2-month-contract-extension/?cmpid=mlive-@mlive-news-a2 I should have instead written: "and meanwhile the $30,400 per year part-time art administrator's salary continues..." Sorry!
snark12
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:20 p.m.
I believe the art administrator is part time, on a contract for one more month, and has no benefits. But nice of you to get the pitchforks ready.
motorcycleminer
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:53 a.m.
Don't hold your breath or rejoice too quickly...if they can't get it out of one pocket they'll just dig into another...
DJBudSonic
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:42 a.m.
Not returning money to origin funds, proposing art for the sewage treatment plant!? and raising water and sewer rates, has the percentage for art really gone away?
Laurie Barrett
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:36 a.m.
To me, it's not whether we have art, but whether we have valid art. Lots of what we see in Ann Arbor is decorative, but it isn't art. We should stop calling it art. I don't know what to call it instead--public space decoration or something--and then we won't have to try to pretend we are an art-conscious city and can buy decoration for a lot less than we do and roll over the extra money to roads etc. But good lasting art for the city, art newsworthy to Ann Arbor and beyond, would be worth every penny.
ArgoC
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 7:32 p.m.
I'd like to see a contest for local artists on how to modify or re-decorate those art bicycle stands into something that's not embarrassing. And, possibly, more functional for bikes.
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:44 p.m.
@Richard, of course you see that bikers know better, and chain their bikes to a post or parking sign,while the artsy bike racks are empty.
Richard Fisher
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:27 p.m.
I completely agree. I remember when the new bicycle stands came out in Ann Arbor. They actually had to write the word "art" on them so people would know. After all, as a bicycle rider, I can tell you they are barely functional.
Dog Guy
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:33 p.m.
I agree that a substantial city needs art of substance, but I would not send any of the Ann Arbor City Hall Gang with a blank check to the DIA going-out-of-business sale
DJBudSonic
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:45 a.m.
I completely agree we need to purchase or commission only investment -quality art, or use the money to support local art initiates that benefit more people. Too much already wasted on City Hall.
Arboriginal
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:38 a.m.
Like what may be found at an Art Museum?
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:32 a.m.
How about a "percent for schools" program? Aren't the children the foundation of the city?
peter
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:24 a.m.
I had to read the caption under the photo twice. For a minute, I thought that was a picture of the council meeting.
Tom
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:16 p.m.
You get Best Comment of the Day. Attaboy!!!!
Halter
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:22 a.m.
Wish we just had a "Like" button we could check for each of the news stories --- because this one would get hundreds of them....
tdw
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:21 a.m.
I didn't read the entire article ( ADHD ) so forgive me.I am by no means " artsy fartsy " but why can't the city toss a couple grand to some local artists to make something ? Wouldn't art by locals add " flavor " ?.Heck I have a welder and I have enough crap in my garage that after several adult beverages and burning a big one even I could put something together and call it " art ".I'm pretty good at BS'ing so I could even come up with some sort of insightful "meaning" for it
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 6:41 p.m.
Sorry about that tdw. I do agree with you that local is best! I'd rather see that than astronomical sums spent on artists from out of state. We have plenty of talent here!
A Voice of Reason
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 3:26 p.m.
Well, Ann Arbor people think too much about have the best in the world. It seems to me that with all the museums in town, and university builds that already have art from all over the world, it would be honorable to have local artist have a place to be seen. Art for Art sake vs. Art for Agenda sake--keep it local.
tdw
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:33 a.m.
Trying....I was thinking more in the 2 or 3 grand range.
TryingToBeObjective
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:30 a.m.
This is a couple grand like $5,000 was just pennies to the AAPS BOE.
Halter
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:23 a.m.
A couple grand at local artists would be music to most people's ears --- what we are talking about here is hundreds of thousands to non-local artists when we can't afford to fix our roads or keep other services going....
Susan Montgomery
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:02 a.m.
Ryan - In the FestiFools photo caption - I think you meant "fund" instead of "find."
Kyle Mattson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:47 p.m.
Thanks Susan, we've updated that.
A A Resident
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:53 a.m.
"Some of those funds paid for .... two orange metal trees in West Park." I wince and shake my head every time I see those!
lorayn54
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 4:50 p.m.
AT least the money for those went to a local artist, not one from another country like the water sculpture. This kind of art program can benefit our local economy and local artists, but not when the goal is to bring in the "prestigious" artists from around the globe.
Kyle Mattson
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 2:46 p.m.
More information and photos of the mural that fjord is referring to can be found here: http://bit.ly/10W0eXi The city spent about $12,000 on the project, including a $7,200 grant from the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. It was created by local artist Mary Thiefels, of TreeTown Murals.
mady
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 1:55 p.m.
I agree. I used to live on Miller ave. with West Park in my backyard, and those orange metal trees are hideous!! the park has some beautiful greenery and needs no more ornamentation.
fjord
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 12:51 p.m.
The "mosaic-style mural at Allmendinger Park" is pretty cringeworthy also.
Elaine F. Owsley
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 11:13 a.m.
You can buy nearly the same thing in one of the catalogs I get for something like $39.95 each. And they are the same color.
snark12
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:50 a.m.
This will save the city money but will cost AnnArbor.com precious page views.
JimmyD
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:42 a.m.
"Public Art" and "Waste Water Treatment Plant". Yup, that sums it up.
Bcar
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:41 a.m.
Do our city "leaders" ever drive in this city??? How about we put that $845k towards our OX CART paths! oh wait, I mean our roads... it is amazing how incompetent and self-serving these idiots are...
Greg
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:39 a.m.
Return the unspent money - you have got to be joking. These people never met a dime of somebody elses money they couldn't spend.
Arboriginal
Tue, Jun 4, 2013 : 10:26 a.m.
Do we still have a PAID public art administrator? Hee haw!
BobbyJohn
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 3:50 p.m.
We have a Part Time art administrator, Aaron Seagraves,who is paid over $32,000 year. This is over $30/hour. My daughter has her Masters in Social Work, and $32,000 is her salary for full time plus work. Mr. Seagraves is paid almost as much as Mayor Heiftje.