Public Art Commission hopes to complete 4 new art projects in Ann Arbor within the next year
Ann Arbor voters might have shot down a proposal to tax themselves for an expanded pubic art program, but that isn't stopping several city art projects already under way.
Admittedly uncertain of its future, the citizen-led Public Art Commission that oversees the city's art program is pressing on and hopes to complete a handful of art installations in 2013.
Aaron Seagraves, the city's public art administrator, gave a report at Wednesday's Public Art Commission meeting on at least six projects in the works.
Aaron Hammer feels the new mosaic mural at Allmendinger Park during its recent dedication. Hammer lives across the street and appreciates the public artwork and thinks it connects the community.
Daniel Brenner I AnnArbor.com
Seagraves said potentially four of those projects — with a collective price tag totaling nearly $700,000 — could be done within the next year.
A $150,000 hanging sculpture is slated for installation in the Justice Center lobby in either March or April, he said, and the $23,380 rain garden artwork could be done by July or August.
As for the more expensive artworks planned in conjunction with the Stadium bridges and Argo Cascades, Seagraves said, those could come to fruition by the end of 2013.
"I don't think public art in this city is a dead issue," Commission Chairwoman Marsha Chamberlin said at Wednesday's meeting. "We are doing a lot and there's a lot in the pipeline."
The commission recently dedicated a new mosaic-style mural at Allmendinger Park. Other art projects completed in the last few years include sculptures in West Park and in front of city hall.
Future of art program uncertain
Nearly 56 percent of Ann Arbor voters rejected the public art tax the city placed on the Nov. 6 ballot. The tax would have created a new public art fund and would have suspended the city's Percent For Art Program, which redirects 1 percent of city capital project dollars toward art.
Now that voters have spoken, the Ann Arbor City Council is reassessing its efforts around public art and is considering setting up a task force to study where to go from here.
Different council members have floated proposals ranging from complete elimination of the Percent For Art Program to suspending use of art funds while the city reevaluates the program.
Members of the Public Art Commission spent a large portion of Wednesday's meeting talking about how they can ramp up their public relations efforts and do a better job of communicating with the council and the public about the value of public art and the commission's broader vision.
Chamberlin floated the idea of forming an ad-hoc committee or holding a retreat to talk about those ideas in more detail, but other commissioners said more urgent action is needed with the City Council poised to make decisions about the fate of the public art program as soon as Monday.
John Kotarski, one of the citizen volunteers who make up the Public Art Commission, said he doesn't think the commission has adequate resources to administer a multimillion-dollar public art program, nor does he think it's doing a good enough job communicating its vision.
"I'm not so sure the vision of the Public Art Program in Ann Arbor is that clear to others, and that really is our task," said Kotarski, rattling off a list of questions the commission should address.
"What are we going to do with the schools? Do we imagine a partnership with the schools and how?" he said. "What are we going to be doing with private business?"
In terms of long-term strategy, Kotarski said the commission has spent the last year talking about a lot, but he's still not sure where it stands on doing a major "gateway" project or an "art park."
"People want results and they want to know when and what," he added. "And if we can't do that, we need to explain who can or what we need to do."
This $150,000 hanging sculpture is slated for installation in the Justice Center lobby in either March or April.
Courtesy image
"I could spend time at this point, especially in these two months while everything is kind of up in the air, trying to get out more information," she said.
Multiple commissioners noted more than 22,000 voters in Ann Arbor — representing about 44 percent of votes cast on the issue — were in favor of the proposed public art tax.
"And if we can change that number over the course of two or three years to make it bigger, that's part of what we as a commission are charged with doing is creating awareness and visibility for public art," Chamberlin said at one point during Wednesday's meeting.
At another point in the meeting, Chamberlin acknowledged the uncertainties around the future of the public art program.
"We don't know if we're going to exist as a commission and what kind of funding we're going to have," she said.
"We shouldn't be distracted by what's happening on City Council," Kotarski said. "We need to keep our eye on exactly what we've got and work efficiently and dutifully on what we can."
More public art on the way
The commission is seeking qualification statements by Dec. 5 for a $360,000 public art project at the site of the Stadium bridges. The stated goal of the project is to raise awareness of multi-modal transportation methods, encourage their safe use and further connections between neighborhoods.
A handful of locations have been identified where public art can go near the Stadium bridges, including a fence at Rose-White Park, another spot where White Street ends on the north side of Stadium Boulevard, the underpass and pedestrian staircases at South State Street, and both sides of the bridge itself, including abutments, sidewalks and railings.
The commission is asking artists for proposals by Jan. 10 for the art project at First and Kingsley. The rain garden is expected to be installed in the spring on a 0.15-acre corner lot that's in a floodplain. The city wants an artist to work with a landscape architect to integrate art into the design.
"It must contribute to the purpose of the rain garden, which is to prevent/minimize flooding in the area by increasing the potential for stormwater infiltration," the request for proposals states, asking artists who work with natural materials and have experience creating "lasting earthworks art" to apply.
The commission plans to hold a pre-proposal meeting Dec. 6 and hopes to conduct interviews in late January and then have an artist selected for the rain garden project in February.
City Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, said council will be discussing the future of the city's public art program on Monday, but she's not sure how that's going to turn out.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
City Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, attended Wednesday's meeting and spoke with AnnArbor.com afterward. She said council will be discussing the future of the city's public art program on Monday, but she's not sure how that's going to turn out.
"I do know that some feel very strongly that there should be no Percent For Art Program," she said.
Noting the city had a Public Art Commission before it had a Percent For Art Program, Briere said she doesn't think it should be a question whether the commission should continue to exist. But that still leaves the question: Should there be a Percent For Art Program?
"And the third question, of course, is if we want publicly funded public art, where do we get the money if it's not the Percent For Art Program?" she said.
Briere said many people can't seem to separate the Percent For Art Program from public art, but they're really two separate issues. She also said it seems there are many people who simply aren't convinced that public art isn't something that's wasteful and elitist.
"And yet, if you were to ask the members of the Public Art Commission, they'd say, no, this isn't wasteful, and this isn't elitist," she said. "It enhances public space, it brings a more robust economy in all these different ways, and we really want to involve the public."
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
JRW
Sat, Dec 1, 2012 : 3:21 a.m.
DISBAND the Art Commission! Who are these people, and what gives them (an unelected bunch) the authority to choose how to spend thousands of dollars of taxpayer's money, that was earmarked for other purposes? If the "sculpture" by city hall is an example of their choices, then they are doomed to fail in the future. STOP scimming off funds from other parts of the city budget such as road maintenance!! DISBAND this group! Stop the public art in A2 using taxpayer's money!! How about fixing the potholes? How about hiring back some of the police and firefighters that were laid off? This is NOT an economic climate that can support elitist (and bad) choices for so-called public art. If private donors want to fund "art", then that is a different matter. I would still argue for public input into the selection process and a vote on the final selection (since it is PUBLIC art on city property), and not have a bunch of the mayor's unelected cronies making decisions the residents of the city have to live with, regardless of who is paying for it. DISBAND the Art Commission. FIRE the city's art administrator, and HIRE MORE POLICE! The voters have spoken. Get over it. This bunch is sounding like the library losers who blame the loss on "wording."
Townspeak
Sat, Dec 1, 2012 : 2:53 a.m.
City should not be paying for art in this economic climate.
katmando
Sat, Dec 1, 2012 : 12:50 a.m.
All this is that it's the teachers fault but the students they try and teach. You can send a child to school but can't make them learn.
Roger Kuhlman
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 10:18 p.m.
Art in public places should be funded by voluntary contributions. It is wrong that all taxpayers in the city of Ann Arbor are forced to contribute public art projects through taxation.
Jenny.McK.
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 12:35 a.m.
How long would you stay sane without art? Look around you. Everything you own that was made was designed by an artist. A world without art is not worth living in. Of course we must keep funding art in Ann Arbor.
Roger Kuhlman
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 10:20 p.m.
The issue being discussed is not whether or not art is a good thing or even if there should be art in public places in Ann Arbor. What's at issue is whether all taxpayers in our city should be forced to pay for it.
lorayn
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 3:13 a.m.
thank you. public art is not in competition with the other needs in our city in the way that many other posters are suggesting.
say it plain
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 11:51 p.m.
Anybody who regularly drives the *horrific* roads in Ann Arbor will tell you--art, my behind, sore as it is from the bone-rattling it endures traversing the rutted potholed disgraceful streets of this artsy town; *first* *fix* *the* *roads*!!! Even the spiffy new bridge we waited forever for so as to get FedBucks to cover it... nice, but, couldn't the city pick up the tab to fix the rutted joke of a stretch of concrete that leads to it from S. Main Street?! Just enough already. Under our art-loving Mayor this last decade the city has become so much worse for wear, we apparently can't afford to take care of critical infrastructure. I know, I know, bike paths have been put in, so I guess the bikers will enjoy the new art installations. I come to any new art jaded by the knowledge that money has been skimmed from the buckets that must be too empty to fill those damned potholes!
Brian Kuehn
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 8:27 p.m.
How about soliciting ideas from the business community? Perhaps partner with local property owners who want to create public artwork, like Mr. Carver. Let the property owner propose a project and for acceptable projects agree to split the cost. I don't support the way the Percent for Art program siphons off money from the funds for roads, sidewalks and sewer/water. If council scaled back the extent of the capital projects from which the % is collected, more of us might be supportive of the idea of funding public art. Partnering with property owners would stretch the lower amount of money available from a scaled back program.
Brian Kuehn
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 8:11 p.m.
A simple question but one for which I can't seem to find an answer. Does Aaron Seagraves, the city's public art administrator, have other duties within the city government or is that a full time position? If public art administration is one of many duties, what are the other duties? Anyone know?
Classof2014
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 6:16 p.m.
What will it take to make them listen?!? Most people voted down the Percent for Art Program but the council and the Art group wants to convince more people that there should be a percent for art program. The losing votes are still a major talking point of discussion. THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. LISTEN TO THEM!!
C'est la vie
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 5:58 p.m.
A quick way to save ~$149,900 of the $150,000 for the hanging sculpture slated for the Justice Center lobby: Hang Sabra Briere's colorful necklace up there instead with a plaque commemorating the taxpayer $ saved.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 5:11 p.m.
Simply trying to drive safely though Ann Arbor is sufficient for "awareness of multi-modal transportation methods". I suggest that we encourage pedestrians and cyclists (human and engine powered) to adopt very artistic reflective clothing, so that they can assist everyone in being able to see the "multi-modal transportation methods" in use around us. As for city-sponsored transportation related public art I strongly suggest good design of roads, sidewalks, and intersections/crossing points. We have some really ugly work out there.
StopCrying
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:51 p.m.
I want a giant rubik's cube that is functional. If you cannot make that happen then I want NOTHING!
Peter Eckstein
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:01 p.m.
"The commission is seeking qualification statements by Dec. 5 for a $360,000 public art project at the site of the Stadium bridges. The stated goal of the project is to raise awareness of multi-modal transportation methods, encourage their safe use and further connections between neighborhoods." I'm not making this up, and I assume that Ryan wasn't either. The approaches to the Stadium bridge have yet to be repaved and are very, very bumpy. Maybe we could pay some artist a few bucks to select a pretty color for the paving material so we could call it art but still spend most of the $360K for a smooth roadbed. As for me, I would rather keep my eye out for other cars and for pedestrians and not be distracted by some artistic installation that somehow raises my "awareness of multi-modal transportation methods" and encourges "their safe use and futher connections between neighborhoods." I've already seen enough of my tax dollars go for expensive portraits of AATA officials telling me how great "The Ride" is and that the "Smart Plan" is my plan.
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:40 p.m.
The polling results on this site, and the comments, rarely if ever match how people actually vote in this town. Hence the impression that the vocal minority who comment here do not reflect the actual majority of constituents.
Brad
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4 p.m.
My comments exactly match how I (a "people") actually vote in this town. And the recent rejection of the art millage seems to match the poll and the majority of the comments here.
Veracity
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:39 p.m.
The Ann Arbor Public Art Commission should not have been created until at least the following four key questions were answered: 1. How much public art does Ann Arbor already have? (A formal inventory should be available to the public with individual art listings with each one's location and cost when known. The University of Michigan has done this for its own public art: http://public-art.umich.edu/the_collection/) 2. How would the amount of money to be spent on each art project be determined?(Presently, the Public Art Commission appears to set the price for new art even before determining the type of art or its appearance.) 3. How much public art will be enough public art? (Does the Public Art Commission want to cram art into every nook and cranny of Ann Arbor? Why?) 4. Why are the appointed members of the Public Art Commission most capable of determining what art Ann Arbor needs and should have? (Why not have panels of art experts from the University run public competitions and allow citizens input into the selection process, since tax payers will be purchasing the winning entry?)
Brad
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:28 p.m.
The last time council discussed this they feigned a lot of confusion over what the millage vote actually meant. I suggest that everyone take a minute to e-mail them and let them know in an unambiguous fashion what your votes meant, and your feelings on the continued existence of the "1% skim" program. Let them know before their upcoming meeting on Monday. Council e-mails: http://www.a2gov.org/government/citycouncil/Pages/Home.aspx
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:09 p.m.
Some will always argue that there will always be something more important, more essential than culture. And with that mindset, we might as well sell all the park land to fund those "essentials". We're doing okay with the roads - drivers need to slow down. Smooth roads don't enrich your life in meaningful ways. There are countless cities that prioritize against art and greenspace. Interestingly, their roads tend to be lousy. How often do you hear people saying "let's go to xx - they have really nice roads and sidewalks!" The culture is more important to Ann Arbor, and its future, than accomodating the all mighty automobile.
Living in A2
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:55 p.m.
Until the roads are fixed in this City, and sidewalk gaps are fixed, how can certain City Council members and the Mayor go to sleep at night knowing that they are helping to continue to pay for luxuries (i.e. "Art") we can't afford and that the citizens voted against?
StopCrying
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
Agreed, the roads are atrocious in this city. Who do I send my auto repair bill to?
conairaa
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:54 p.m.
The poll, although not scientific, pretty clearly shows that there is very limited support for public art programs. It will be interesting to see if our elected officials pay any attention to their constituents' feelings.
Roger Kuhlman
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 10:28 p.m.
I thought there was an election recently where by an overwhelming majority of the voters in Ann Arbor rejected a public art millage. Was I mistaken?
pegret
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:59 p.m.
"It will be interesting to see if our elected officials pay any attention to their constituents' feelings." Why start now?
Brad
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:32 p.m.
Same here. Voter and constituent. Reminds me of the people who say that the commenters are all from outside Ann Arbor. Absurd.
Veracity
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:23 p.m.
Ron Granger- And how can you be certain of this? I am a member of this forum and a voter and a constituent of Ann Arbor.
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3 p.m.
As has been shown clearly in past elections, the people in this forum are not the voters and constituents of ann arbor.
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:46 p.m.
Given the somewhat also-rans art to date, I am beginning to think their whole process of commissioning art for production is flawed. I think we might get *much* better art if they just went out and purchased already completed pieces on the open market. Oh, to think of the multiple cool pieces that $850K could have bought! There is also the strategy of borrowing great pieces long-term, and using art funds to maintain the installation. There are people like Paul Allen, with amazing collections, who already do that. I don't think the current charter allows that. I would support modifying it for long term installations - say 10 years or more - but not open-ended for temporary stuff like festifools, art fair, etc. The tedious bureaucratic process that they currently use for proposals and production will exclude a vast number of great artists who just won't be bothered with it. I'd argue that the best artists, or most interesting, will not waste their time on such tedium.
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:36 p.m.
Have they figured out how people are going to view the art in the justice center without going through invasive security that violates the charter of the program? Or has that conveniently been forgotten, in the interests of decorating the taj mahal?
Ron Granger
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
Looking through a window is not public access.
aabikes
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:21 p.m.
the enormous street-facing windows.
Linda Peck
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:34 p.m.
So, does this mean the new downtown library will be built, too? Just wondering.
Dog Guy
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:32 p.m.
Lacking artistic sensibility, the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission should be finished within the next year.
lorayn
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:30 p.m.
I am glad that projects are going forward, but I do think that our decision making process for our current 1% program is really problematic. There has been no real communication with the public about what the program is, how it benefits the city, or how citizens can participate in decision making. The fiasco with the water fountain piece in front of city hall is an example. Why did this commission go to an artist from outside of our community. A good public arts program (think of the WPA arts program during the depression) also stimulates the local economy with jobs for local arts and crafts people. I am not against or current 1% program and I voted for the millage, but there is something seriously wrong with the administration of the current program. I'd like to see the arts commissions benefit local (michigan) artist, crafts people, contractors, etc. and not people from outside the US.
lorayn
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 3:09 a.m.
I am distinguishing between a policy and how it's being implemented. there was nothing in the milage bill that specified the same decision making structure that has been used. I am all for public arts, as long as the funds are used effectively.
Veracity
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:19 p.m.
If you voted for the millage you were not voting for the 15-for-art fund but for 0.1 mill that would replace the 1%-for-art fund. Your listed dissatisfaction with the operation of the Public Art Commission should have formed a basis for your voting against spending public money for art.
pegret
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:26 p.m.
There is no way a city that destroys existing art for a few parking spots (for themselves, no less) is ever going to make me believe in their "vision", no matter how much I happen to enjoy public art. Parker and friends refuse to listen to the message that a majority (yes, majority!) of voters have sent them. Are they so surrounded by their own that they still don't understand how badly their boondoggle at the Justice Center has hurt the public's opinion of the Commission? Get a clue, folks.
lorayn
Fri, Nov 30, 2012 : 3:06 a.m.
i remember that -- nice mural. i'm sure "they" didn't consider it public art. too bad.
pegret
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:02 p.m.
There used to be a very cool mural of an underwater scene on the side of the wall of the old Tios building facing City Hall from the early 90's until a couple of years ago. You could see it from the office windows at City Hall or coming east up Huron St. The mural was bulldozed along with the building, and in its place now is a small 7-place city parking lot.
lorayn
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:32 p.m.
where did they destroy existing art for parking spots? what happened to the artwork? there are laws on the books that should have prevented this from happening if the work was created after around 1989.
Janet Neary
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:17 p.m.
In case the City Council truly doesn't understand what the voters said: It is a simple matter of priorities. If I recall correctly, under the Per Cent for Art misappropriation from dedicated project funds, about $1million has already been spent, and there is still $2 million in the art fund. How anyone can believe that that is a correct prioritization of money when we are told we must close two fire stations, can't hire enough fire or police personnel, endure potholed roads, have no leaf collections, etc., etc., etc., is beyond me. (And please don't start talking about separate pots of money making it all right.)
lorayn
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:31 p.m.
have you ever heard of a line item budget?
annarboral
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:12 p.m.
Whooosh!!!! There goes more tax dollars being flushed down the toilet while critical services are ignored.
aabikes
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 2:02 p.m.
I think these are all really great, high exposure locations for public art.
aabikes
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 4:22 p.m.
no
Veracity
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 3:13 p.m.
Are you being sarcastic, I hope?
LXIX
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:47 p.m.
"Noting the city had a Public Art Commission before it had a Percent For Art Program, Briere said she doesn't think it should be a question whether the commission should continue to exist. But that still leaves the question: Should there be a Percent For Art Program? " Noting that some City Council members were around before the Public Art Commission, maybe after its dismemberment, those in the 44% minority won't think it should be a question that their ward Reps continue to sit on City Council, either.
golfer
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:44 p.m.
dump the commission. they will spend the money before any action is taken.
a2grateful
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:38 p.m.
@badgerboy: The reason they don't stop is that they are self serving. Who are they? They are the mayor, council, and their crony friends. Pure fraud. Pure pork. Percent for fraud and pork. Self serving vs citizen serving. We know the difference. They do not. Very sad, City of Ann Arbor!
badgerboy
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:22 p.m.
*face palm* What a waste....they just wont stop will they? So much for voting against something.
motorcycleminer
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
Just like the feds and the council these da's don't understand the word " NO " ....kick their butts out and disband this boondoggle ...long overdue....but then again this is OZ... good luck getting the hogs off the trough...
a2grateful
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 12:20 p.m.
Message to mayor and council: 1) Immediately halt the % for art program. 2) Return unspent and misappropriated dedicated millage funds from your folly "art funding" account, back to the dedicated millage accounts. 3) Reimburse dedicated millage accounts for the $2million + funds stolen from them, and already spent. Solicit private donations for reimbursement for the folly fountain, as well as the "Just Ice" chandelier. The latter is "just icing" on the cake for interior decorations on behalf of municipal employees. 4) Apologize to the citizens of Ann Arbor for your gross misconduct, fraud, and stupidity in using dedicated millage funds for frivolous non-dedicated use.
vivian
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 12:13 p.m.
You have a rather chortle-inducing typo in your lead. You might want to fix that.
pegret
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 7:20 p.m.
Maybe they should change the name of the Commission to match it.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 5 p.m.
That lead refers to illegal performance art.
pegret
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:58 p.m.
Made my day, and made me laugh out loud. Thanks vivian, I LOVE it!
Barzoom
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 12:04 p.m.
Spend the money quick...The voters are going to take it away.
Alan Goldsmith
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 11:56 a.m.
For those of us opposed to the world class incompetence and mismanagement fiasco that has been the Ann Arbor Public Arts Commission, maybe I suggest Marsha Chamberlin and Margaret Parker continue to be the public spokespersons and faces for the program. It's their arrogant misreading of what voters would support that has led the program over a cliff. As someone who wants the Per Cent For Art tax abolished, I couldn't ask for any better partners insuring that will happen. Keep up the good work.
Carole
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 11:46 a.m.
We are laying off firefighters and Police staff, and paying a salary for an Art Director. I do believe that the citizens of Ann Arbor have spoken and it is the safety of the citizens. Art is absolutely marvelous if there are funds to support -- but that is not the case. The voters have spoken; please listen.
RUKiddingMe
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 11:31 a.m.
"Multiple commissioners noted more than 22,000 voters in Ann Arbor — representing about 44 percent of votes cast on the issue — were in favor of the proposed public art tax." The fact that these (losing) votes CONTINUES to be a major talking point for these people is a HUGE indication that this whole commission needs to be disbanded. I mean seriously. "And if we can change that number over the course of two or three years to make it bigger, that's part of what we as a commission are charged with doing is creating awareness and visibility for public art," The fact that this commission sees selling itself and ensuring its continued existence as a major focus is a HUGE indication that the whole thing just needs to be disbanded. "Now that voters have spoken, the Ann Arbor City Council is reassessing its efforts around public art and is considering setting up a task force to study where to go from here." More task forces, more committees, hey, how about a consultant or two. End this very expensive and useless farce please. You gave it a shot. You did poorly. Accept that, and do the right thing. The end of the public art commission is not the end of public art. In fact, public art is much better served without this commission giving it a bad reputation with its wasteful spending, foot dragging, staff increases, and mismanagement. Public Art inside a building where you have to remove metal objects and cell phones and be security screened to enter? You can't even say your heart's in the right place with this one. End it. Disband. Stop.
John of Saline
Thu, Nov 29, 2012 : 1:57 p.m.
If the art tax had passed, I'm sure they would have said "THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN" and would have completely ignored any percentage of the votes cast against their pet issue.