Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-08 Study SessionDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, April 14, 2008 Council Chambers Minutes of Meeting Vice Mayor Boring called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Present: Vice Mayor Baring, Mr. Reiner, Mr. Gerber and Mr. Keenan. Ms. Salay and Mr. Lecklider were absent. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher arrived at 7:30 pm. Staff members present: Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Ms. Ott, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Grigsby, Ms. Law. Also present: David Guion, Dublin Arts Council; Janet Cooper, Dublin Arts Council; and DAC Board President, Seth Stearns. Arts Chapter -Park & Recreation Master Plan Vice Mayor Boring stated that tonight's study session topic is the Arts Chapter of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. In view of the members absent tonight, especially Ms. Salay, who serves as the Council representative to the DAC, she asked for feedback regarding the process. Mr. Reiner suggested that the meeting proceed, as a quorum is present. Vice Mayor Boring asked if Council would consider referring this matter to the Community Services Advisory Commission so they can research how other communities handle public art. Ms. Ott asked for clarification of whether she is suggesting that the entire Parks & Rec Master Plan be referred to CSAC, or merely the Arts Chapter. Mr. Gerber stated that this is up for debate. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she is suggesting that the public art portion of the Plan be referred to CSAC. She was not present at the last meeting when the P&R Master Plan was reviewed. Her understanding is that there were no changes proposed for the remainder of the Plan as a result of the last review. Ms. Ott stated that Council did not review the entire Arts Chapter at the study session, but suggested having another meeting where the Dublin Arts Council representatives could be present. In particular, there are eight policy statements in the Chapter that have not been discussed in over 1-1 /2 years. Staff believes there is value in reviewing those to ensure they are still consistent with the sentiment of Council. Vice Mayor Boring asked if Council would prefer to proceed with the discussion or refer this to Committee. Mr. Gerber stated that at the previous work session Council began the discussion on this chapter and planned to complete that presentation in another work session, so he would be inclined to hear the staff presentation on this Chapter and then determine haw to proceed. It was the consensus of Council to proceed with the staff presentation. Ms. Ott stated that in the February session, Council reviewed the beginning of the Arts Chapter, including definitions and how artist selections may occur. At that time, Council requested some changes and presented some ideas. At this point, she would like to know if there are additional concerns in regard to the first four pages of the Chapter. Staff would then like to review the eight policy statements and determine if those are still of interest to all to maintain as part of the document. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 2 Vice Mayor Boring stated that she is very concerned with the artist recruitment. Vllhere does the Dublin Arts Council fit in with this? Ms. Ott responded that the DAC can use any of these methods if they choose to do so. This moves into the policy question of how Council wants to fund public art - if all acquisitions continue to be funded through the DAC, then this becomes a list of options that is non-exclusive. If the City begins to directly acquire any works of some scale -small or large -these would be some of the ways in which staff would recommend proceeding with those acquisitions when opportunities arise. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she cannot support this, as she feels strongly that this is something to be handled by the experts, such as the Dublin Arts Council. Therefore, she would prefer to review the policies first. At any of the American Planning Association programs she has attended, the cities that have a strong arts program have that program handled by a separate entity. The government may support it, but they do not become involved in it. She questions the cost of doing so. Will it cost in staff time? She also believes it is dangerous to delve into art. If government were involved, public art such as the "Field of Corn" would not have come about. Mr. Keenan asked if the discussion relates to financing, funding or selection of public art. Vice Mayor Baring responded affirmatively to all of these items. Mr. Keenan stated that he personally does not object to the City relying upon DAC for the selection portion and to provide guidance. He also believes that the City can serve a role in terms of additional funding for public art. There is little funding left for public art after all of the arts programming is done by the DAC. He personally would like to see the City do more public art, and he believes the funding mechanism for that should be the hotel/motel tax. There was a proposal for 1 to 2 percent for the arts, but there was resistance from the community regarding the use of tax dollars for public art, especially in these economic times. However, the hotel/motel tax revenue is generated from visitors to the City, and the money is to be used in very specific ways: to attract visitors, to beautify the community, and other similar goals. The hotel/motel tax revenue is the logical source for additional funding for public art. Not relying upon just $75,000 per year or $150,000 every two years would enable the City to make a bigger impact more quickly. Vice Mayor Baring asked haw this integrates into tonight's discussion. Ms. Ott suggested that Council review the policy statements, as this discussion relates to the policies. Policies, Issues and Strategies: Policy #1: Integrate public art into major public improvements. Issues: • Art is an afterthought in many design processes. • Public improvements follow a rigorous design and construction schedule and art may be viewed as delaying these improvements. Strategies: • Create guidelines about when and how art funding is incorporated into public improvements. • Integrate art early into the design of public improvements. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 3 Ms. Ott stated that the City has some beautiful CIP projects that would be prime candidates. The best time to involve an artist in a CIP project would be during the design phase. Currently, if public art is added to a project, it occurs after the project is completed; it is not integrated into the early design. A good example would be the Emerald Parkway bridge. There are a few significant projects that occur occasionally in the City, where there would be an opportunity to make them special by adding a public art component. The guidelines that have been recommended to accomplish that would need to be reviewed by one of Council's advisory bodies. The funding is one issue, another is making sure the project remains on schedule. Another issue would be having the Dublin Art Council involved in identifying artists that could meet that type of design environment with those types of deadlines. There are collaborative art groups available that understand these processes, but, currently, Dublin is not using them to any great extent. Mr. Keenan stated that, essentially, he agrees with Vice Mayor Boring. He does not believe Council should be making those kinds of decisions. She is also correct -the Field of Corn probably would not exist if it had depended upon a Council decision. He is concerned about the funding issue. He would like to see the City do as much as it can. Each year that passes without additional funding means that much less public art is provided for the community. Vice Mayor Boring stated that Policy #2 addresses the funding issues. Mr. Reiner stated that staff is addressing the policies individually. Is there agreement then for Policy #1, that when a major public improvement is done, that a public art component be integrated into it? Haw frequently would this occur, assuming it is a project such as a bridge? Ms. Ott responded that the type of project that would apply to would probably be defined by the cost. Mr. Keenan stated that there would be a need to define what constitutes a major public improvement. Ms. Ott stated that certain conditions would be in place to identify the projects that would be a candidate for a public art component. Mr. Reiner stated that he believes that City Council should be aware of what major public improvement projects staff is considering. Then, during the selection process, Council should review the line item cost for the proposed public art component. He requested Council members' input. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she objects to the way it was expressed, if he is suggesting that Council would be involved in the selection of the art. Council needs to say they support the policy, but that staff needs to submit the guidelines for selection to Council for review. Mr. Keenan responded that he believes Mr. Reiner is suggesting that Council choose the major improvement project, not the artwork itself. Council could reject a $100,000 small road improvement or roundabout project for a public art component but agree that a bridge project or something larger would be approved by Council. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 4 Vice Mayor Boring expressed agreement with that statement and requested clarification of the line item review suggestion. Mr. Reiner responded that it would be up to Council to set the budget limit for Policy #1. That may depend upon the size and scale of the public improvement. There may be same situation where a very clever idea will warrant special consideration. It may not always be possible to establish the budget beforehand, without knowing what the art is and the object to be embellished. Mr. Keenan stated that it would still be necessary to define what would constitute a major public improvement. Even then, a check and balance would be in place by virtue of the need to obtain Council approval. Ms. Ott responded that staff would anticipate bringing those to Council as part of the budget process. Before an artist or artwork is selected, the funding question would be brought to Council. Mr. Keenan stated that for Council, then, it would be more of a funding issue, not approval of a particular artist or art selection. Ms. Ott responded that a process would be established so that Council is comfortable with letting another body make that decision. Vice Mayor Boring inquired if Council then agrees with Policy #1, that public art should be integrated into major public improvements. Mr. Keenan responded that he is in agreement, subject to defining a major public improvement and subject to Council having a line item veto. If every bridge is defined as a major public improvement, he would still want staff to come to Council and Council would have the right to approve or disapprove that. From an economics perspective, Council will still need to retain a hand on the cash flow for such projects. Mr. Reiner agreed. Vice Mayor Baring agreed and asked if that guideline could be integrated into the policy. Ms. Ott concurred. Is there a need to complete the guidelines so that Council can review them before the Parks and Open Space Plan is adopted? Mr. Keenan responded that as long as there is line item veto, the definition of major public improvement can be defined later. Ms. Brautigam stated that Council always has line item veto. Mr. Keenan stated that he wants to incorporate that into these policies. Vice Mayor Boring stated that the question is whether Council can proceed with approving Policy #1 without seeing the guidelines. Mr. Keenan responded that he could. Vice Mayor Boring inquired if Council is asking staff to return with the guidelines. Mr. Keenan responded that he is. Council can change them later, if they want to do so. Mr. Reiner stated that the policy should allow the potential for retrofitting existing major public improvements. There may be a situation in which Dublin Arts Council would want to recommend a public artwork for an existing major public improvement site. Ms. Ott stated that staff has identified some of those sites as "future focus areas" on the map. Vice Mayor Boring inquired if staff had involved DAC staff in that effort. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 5 Ms. Ott responded that both the City and DAC have looked at possible sites and noted them on the map. Locations identified in the Community Plan have also been included. Mr. Reiner stated that part of the criteria should be that the architecture or site is visually significant, and public art located there would provide much enjoyment to the community. Mr. Hahn responded that would be true from the perspective of retrofitting major public works. However, staff understands that Council believes there should be more public art within the community. It could be something small in scale and budget and not in a prominent location, where the citizen would "come upon it" in an out-of-way place. For artworks of major size and major cost, one of the criteria would also be major exposure. Vice Mayor Baring requested that staff incorporate Council's input into the policy guidelines Policy #2: Pursue funding from income tax and non-income tax revenue sources. Issues: • The community is in conflict on the appropriate level of funding support from income tax revenues that should be earmarked for public art. Strategies: • Seek grant opportunities from organizations that support the arts such as the Americans for the Arts, Ohio Cultural Facilities Commission and Ohio Arts Council. • Develop sponsorship and partnership opportunities for corporate residents. • Dedicate a greater portion of hotel/mate) fund revenues for public art. • Allow for the creation of a line item for public art in the general fund expenditures. Mr. Keenan stated that as he has expressed, he believes the City should use some of the hotel-motel tax revenue for funding some additional public art. It may not be something Council wants to do every year, but the opportunity should exist to do so. This would be one of the easiest and most appropriate funding sources. Public art enhances the community and attracts people to the community. Mr. Reiner agreed that it would be a good funding method. Vice Mayor Baring inquired about the first strategy listed under this policy, "Seek grant opportunities from organizations that support the arts." Could that conflict with the Dublin Arts Council seeking grants? Organizations would not want to give to DAC and the City. She believes that strategy should be reserved entirely for DAC, and should not be included in the City's policy. Mr. Keenan inquired if that was the intent of that strategy -for the City to do that in addition to DAC's efforts. Ms. Ott responded that this strategy recognizes that there is money to support the arts beyond City revenues. There would be the need to look at what whether it would be appropriate to partner with the Arts Council because leveraging the dollars together would go further than each working independently. If Council would prefer that the staff not pursue grant opportunities, this strategy can be eliminated. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 6 Mr. Keenan inquired if there would be value in a joint application for some grants. Mr. Guion, Dublin Arts Council Director, responded that it would be very unlikely that it could be beneficial. Council members concurred that the strategy of seeking grant funding would be eliminated. Ms. Ott inquired Council input regarding the 4th strategy under Policy #2, "Allow for the creation of a line item for public art in the general fund expenditures." Vice Mayor Boring responded that at this time the public is not receptive to that idea, and she would concur with Mr. Keenan's suggestion to use the bed tax revenue rather than general fund revenue. Mr. Keenan stated that it would be easier to fund public art from the hotel-motel tax fund for all the reasons he stated earlier. Although he previously was in favor of designating 1% of the general fund to fund the public art program, that idea was not well received by the community. The consensus of Council was to eliminate this strategy. [Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher arrived.] Policy #3: Establish one advisory body responsible for determining whether proposed artists and artwork meet selection, siting, and donation criteria. Issues: • Current development code requires many potential public art sites to be reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals and, if in Historic Dublin, Architectural Review Board. Strategies: • Amend the City's zoning code to relieve land use advisory bodies from this responsibility and to provide direction regarding who and when public art is reviewed. • Establish a City commission responsible for advising City Council on public art initiatives and for selecting/approving appropriate public artwork. This commission should be a mix of residents, generalists, and technical experts in order to represent a variety of perspectives. Ms. Ott stated that this strategy addresses the conflict regarding whether public art in a PU D should be reviewed. There has been a mixed history of those projects going to the Planning Commission. Council has requested a Code amendment be made to address this conflict. Another issue is - if there is the selection of artwork outside of the DAC's allocation, how would Council prefer that selection be made. Should that decision be made by one of Council's advisory bodies, by Council's direct involvement, by staff, or some hybrid of the preceding? The general practice has been that those pieces selected outside of the DAC's $75,000 annual allocation should not be coming to Council every time. Vice Mayor Baring stated that she perceives this as a problem, as it crosses lines or creates a "gray" area. If Council develops a serious policy, Dublin Arts Council will select the artists. The City would work with them to tell them projects the City is considering. She would prefer not to establish another advisory board, not when that entity already exists. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 7 The Dublin Arts Council has all the qualifications, expertise in soliciting and reviewing artists, and great networking ability with other art entities. She does not believe the City should become involved in those efforts. Mr. Keenan inquired if the discussion is about siting. Ms. Ott responded that the policy statement includes selection, siting and donation. Mr. Keenan inquired if the issue is that some of this is tied in with Planning and Zoning review. Ms. Brautigam responded that there are two separate issues. Currently, to ensure correct placement of the artwork, it is necessary to have the placement reviewed by P&Z, BZA and/or ARB. Staff would like to remove that necessity. A second issue is who will handle the selection, siting, controlling the donation, etc. What are Council's thoughts? Mr. Keenan stated that the siting is a very important issue. It would be important to have their input, as was necessary with the placement of the Jack Nicklaus piece on a median. Those issues cannot be determined by DAC. The City should be very much involved in the siting decisions. Who is "we" -Council, staff? Mr. Hahn responded that with the Art in Public Places program, historically, a memo was presented to Council recommending two sites for a particular year, and Council would select the site. With art donations, the sites have been selected administratively. For instance, it was an administrative decision to place art piece #7 by the Wall Street pond. Mr. Keenan stated that the reason that occurred was the donor wanted it placed there so he could see it from his office. Mr. Hahn inquired if that was satisfactory criteria. Mr. Keenan responded that the donor's preference in a site would be good criteria. Mrs. Boring stated that would be considered a partnership decision. Mr. Hahn noted that approval was not sought because staff did not consider it to be controversial. Therefore, they felt comfortable with accepting it. Mr. Keenan stated that it could, however, be inadvertently making policy for future decisions. Mr. Hahn stated that the last strategy under this policy, ".....This commission should be a mix of residents, generalists, and technical experts in order to represent a variety of perspectives," could be worth considering. Ms. Ott suggested that staff could bring back a few different ideas to give Council an idea of the realm of possibilities. Mr. Reiner stated that he does not see anything wrong with the old policy, which was how the Jack Nicklaus site was selected. Ms. Ott stated another role that the proposed commission would have is reviewing the criteria defined under Policy #1 and making a recommendation to Council. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 8 Vice Mayor Boring inquired why the Community Services Commission could not make siting and donation recommendations to Council. She agrees with Mr. Reiner that the old policy worked satisfactorily. Mr. Hahn stated that he is not comfortable with the amount of influence that he or a couple of staff members have had in recommending a site to Council. Vice Mayor inquired how that would change with the proposed advisory board. Staff would continue to provide the site recommendations. Mr. Keenan stated that he also does not find anything wrong with the existing practice. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if a map of proposed sites could be made available now. Mr. Hahn responded that staff could do so, as long as it is understood the map is evolutionary. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher indicated that a footnote could be added to the map. Government bureaucracy often prevents flexibility that is needed in some areas, such as this. Vice Mayor Boring inquired if it had been necessary to have the on-loan art pieces reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Hahn responded that they did not because it was deemed a temporary siting. Technically, this was within a PUD, and anything of the magnitude of a public art piece should have been reviewed by P&Z. Vice Mayor Boring requested an example of a public art project that had been reviewed by P&Z. Mr. Hahn responded that the Vllatch House project was reviewed by P&Z. Avery and Darree Parks are in straight zoning districts, so it was not necessary on those sites. Mr. Keenan inquired if he could recall any discussions about a parking lot for the VI(atch Tower. Mr. Hahn could not. Mr. Hahn requested clarification of Council's direction. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she would just exempt it. Vice Mayor Boring indicated the last strategy under this Policy has been discarded. Ms. Ott indicated that staff would draft a statement about Council's expectations for the selection process. Mr. Keenan stated that should consist of staff suggesting a couple of sites and Council discussing them. Ms. Ott stated that they would draft some alternative policy statements about the selection process, in particular. Policy #4: The City will maintain an ongoing dialogue and opportunities for resident involvement in the City's public art initiative. Issues: • The Community Art Plan lacks promotion and education of works obtained outside of the Dublin Art in Public Places program. • There are limited means for gathering input from the community. Strategies: • Incorporate information about visual artworks into more City publications. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 9 • Develop a printed and online catalog of City-owned works. • Vllork with the Dublin Arts Council and Dublin Convention and Visitors Bureau to attract visitors and create a docent program. • Encourage residents to interact with artists as they formulate designs. • Hold events that celebrate public art directly. • Celebrate public art indirectly by holding events in existing public art venues. • Spark input by adding an online forum on the City of Dublin's website for residents and visitors. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the issue indicated in Policy #4 is that the Community Art Plan lacks promotion of the City's public art obtained other than through the Art in Public Places program. Mr. Keenan stated that staff has recently catalogued those items. This point would refer to making the community aware of them. Ms. Ott stated that this will be addressed in the Dublin Arts Council agreement. In the last Community Development Committee discussion, Council indicated a preference that DAC be the lead promoter of the entire City collection, not just the Art in Public Places collection. There has been discussion about the funding DAC would need to do so. Mr. Keenan inquired if staff would be proposing an appropriate funding amount to assist with the additional effort required. Ms. Ott stated that the agreement will not contain a specific amount to be provided per year. The agreement has been structured to provide that DAC is welcome to come forward to submit a request with a program. They have the flexibility to define what that amount should be that year. Mr. Keenan stated that the amount should be known. Although it may need to be increased in time, it should be possible to identify an amount for 2009 and 2010. A recommendation should be made to Council that identifies the expected amount of work and proposes funding to address it. That would provide some guidelines. Ms. (~tt responded that staff would pursue this direction with the DAC. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she is curious about the suggested docent program. Does DAC have a docent program now? Mr. Guion responded that they do not have a formal docent program. Mr. Reiner inquired if there would be a need for a formal docent program. Mr. Guion responded that a formal docent program would be great for both the visual art series and for public arts. It would incorporate a virtual tour as opposed to a physical tour and provide much greater accessibility, reaching beyond the borders of Dublin. Mr. Keenan inquired if he is referring to a web guided tour of the collection. Mr. Guion responded that it would also be available through YouTube, My Space, and perhaps a cell phone technology that makes the information available to a person as they walk past the art. Ms. Ott stated that they have been discussing ways to promote the City's collection through new technology, not just the traditional methods. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 10 Mr. Keenan stated that one aspect of this has been discussed before -- that it would be beneficial to Dublin school students to have an audio technology available to them when they visit the pieces so that they learn about the piece, even hear the artist's comments. Vice Mayor Baring requested that the language in Policy #4 clarify that Dublin Arts Council will be a part of the ongoing dialogue and help with the resident involvement in the public art initiative. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that it be simply revised to: "The City and DAC will maintain an ongoing dialogue." Mr. Keenan stated Council's direction to staff is that Council wants to rely on DAC for many of these areas. He does not want to establish a whole, separate overview body for siting, etc. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher expressed total agreement with that statement. Council already has an existing entity, the DAC in which the City invests a lot of money. If the City should need to add money to accomplish that interest as the community is developed, that would be more acceptable than establishing a competing body. She would prefer to work in a partnership with DAC lending the expertise. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Council needs to remain the ultimate approving body but should be engaged along the way in information sharing. People will hold the City accountable for this process due to the fact that tax dollars are the primary support. In that respect, the elected body ends up with the responsibility. Policy #5: Adopt standards for maintenance and de-accessioning. Issues: • Minimum maintenance standards are not incorporated into the selection process. • Art is selected without full knowledge of the necessary maintenance and the resources needed to maintain works as envisioned by the artist. • Some works of art require significant, and unanticipated, upkeep. • Formal maintenance standards are not developed in cooperation with the artist. • There are no established criteria or standards set for the de-accession of an artwork. Strategies: • Create minimum maintenance standards for all works of art to aid in the selection of appropriate art. • Vllork with artists to identify necessary maintenance before acquisition. • Determine criteria and standards for the de-accession of artworks, including but not limited to: instances where the city is unable to keep up with excessive or unreasonable maintenance, artworks are found to be fraudulentlnot authentic, or artworks which hold a physical threat to public safety. Mr. Hahn stated that this is similar to any other capital investment -the City needs to know what it would be getting into, Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this information should be required when a project goes out to bid. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 11 Council concurred with Policy 5. Policy #6: Loaned or gifted art will complement the high quality artwork in the City's permanent collection. Issues: • There is no mechanism to support donation or loan of art to the City's collection Strategies: Create guidelines that establish criteria for evaluating whether gifts or loaned art are of high quality and in line with the goals of public art in the community. Ms. Cott stated that this addresses the need to have a typical process to handle donations, including whether the art piece is appropriate to be added to the community. Vice Mayor Boring inquired about a situation in which someone wanted to donate a deteriorating piece of art to the City. Ms. Qtt responded that this is where the City would have the guidelines and criteria, such as maintenance needs, in place to address that question. Mr. Gerber stated that he doesn't see the criteria would be the same whether the piece is being considered for purchase or for acceptance of a donation, such as, is it something everyone wants, is it economically feasible, is it something the majority of the residents would support. Chicago, New York and similar cities probably already have something in place. It should be possible to copy them. Policy #7: The City, in partnership with others, has the responsibility to increase the availability of art in the community. Issues: • The City's art collection should have more variety in media, context, and location and have additional works added regularly. Strategies: • The City will be a supporter of public art through the continued funding provided to the Dublin Arts Council for art acquisition. • The City will foster a relationship with the Dublin Area Art League for art acquisition. • The City will help give support to attract private galleries to the Dublin community • The City will encourage the Dublin Arts Council to work with area arts organizations, schools and corporate residents to make art available within the public realm. • Create opportunities such as an `art trail' that features art from multiple agencies. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she sees DAC as the body that would be doing this on behalf of the City. The City itself would not need to do this. This was a charge that was given to DAC, and this would be the outcome the City would expect. Mr. Keenan, agreed, noting that the language could state, "DAC and the City, in partnership ,~ Vice Mayor Boring agreed. Mr. Gerber agreed. Council sets the policy that more public art for the City is desired, and the vehicle by which that is accomplished is through DAC and others. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 12 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the strategies listed here might be those employed to reach the goal. Mr. Keenan concurred. Vice Mayor Boring asked about the Dublin Arts Council's relationship tolwith the Dublin Area Art League. Vllhat does "The City will foster a relationship with the Dublin Area Art League for art acquisition," mean? Mr. Keenan asked what kind of art acquisition this refers to. Ms. Ott stated that are times when the members of the Dublin Art League do some fabulous work and there is a desire to have a means to acquire these for the City's permanent collection. Currently, there is not, unless they are gifted to the City. Some of these works are often on display in the DCRC. Staff would like the ability to commission a specific work, or to have the ability to purchase a produced work. Vice Mayor Boring asked Mr. Guion about the DAC's relationship with DAAL. Mr. Guion responded that the DAAL is one of the DAC grantees, which occurs each year. In addition, an exhibition of their work is done through the DAC. This year's will be a combined exhibition with UVorthington, Arlington and Delaware and will be juried. Mr. Keenan stated that the DAAL has submitted ahotel/motel tax grant application to City Council for an arts fair. Is the DAC comfortable with this? Mr. Guion stated that the DAC has had brief discussion about this. There has been no official letter of support generated by the DAC for this. Mr. Keenan asked if the arts fair has DAC's support. Mr. Guion responded that it has not been discussed at a Board meeting. Mr. Keenan noted that this speaks to the whole relationship between the DAC, the DAAL and the City. Mr. Guion noted that there is a great relationship in place; the art fair is only a very recent development in the past three months. The relationship up to now has been with exhibiting their work and supporting their process and programs. Mr. Keenan stated that his understanding is that DAAL has stepped up to do this art fair, as the DAC could not undertake such a program for funding reasons. Mr. Guion responded that it is an issue of funding as well as the locale. Mr. Keenan summarized that the two groups are therefore not in competition. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she understood that the DAAL was an individual artist organization and a venue for artists to develop and share their work among artist colleagues. Mr. Guion confirmed that is correct. It is a membership organization with fee paying members. Vice Mayor Boring asked if Mr. Keenan has a suggestion for rewording Policy #7. Mr. Keenan stated that the suggestion, "The DAC and the City, in partnership ... "would be adequate. Ms. Brautigam asked if strategy #2 should be left in, where it states, "The City will foster a relationship with the DAAL" or should bulletin point #4 be relied upon, which states, "The City will encourage the DAC to work with area arts organizations." Mr. Reiner and Mr. Keenan stated that this discussion has been related to #4. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 13 Ms. Ott clarified that the City does have a relationship with DAAL at this time, as gallery space for them is provided on a regular basis at the DCRC. That is a formalized relationship with DAAL. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated she expects this arrangement would continue. The City should have relationships with all civic organizations and non-profit organizations in the community. Mr. Keenan does not want the DAAL to have a separate independent relationship with the City, and not through the DAC. Mr. Reiner noted that the DAAL is a small, independent group of artists. Mr. Keenan stated that the City does not want to work directly with the DAAL; they want the DAC to continue to work with the DAAL on the City's behalf. That is what he is hearing, consistent with all of these strategies. Mr. Reiner agreed. Policy #S: The City will encourage the incorporation of art in private developments when the art is within the public realm. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for an example of what is meant by "within the public realm" Ms. Ott responded that on Post Road, south side, west of Avery-Muirfield, there is a sculpture that was never referenced through the planning process, but is placed by their pond. There are many other corporations who have done similar things, but they are not visible. They would be encouraged to place these items in the public realm so that they can be seen from the right-of-way. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she recalls discussion about this previously, and that incentives or "points" would be given to developments that would incorporate art in their development. Mr. Hahn responded that atone time, with the "Road to Vllow" program, there was a formula basis used in the review. This program was later dropped. He asked for clarification about "points." Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that it was viewed as an incentive for atrade-off for something else. V1lhether or not it is an incentive, this should be encouraged. Mr. Keenan stated he is interested in hearing what kind of things could be done to incentivize public corporations to do more of that. Perhaps staff can bring some ideas forward . Ms. Ott responded that the question is whether it is a matter of quid pro quo or not. That will help staff frame Council's expectations regarding this encouragement. Informally, Planning staff can do this when meeting with land applicants. Some cities have used a legislative approach to reach this goal. She would prefer to use encouragement versus a strong-armed approach and see how that goes. Mr. Reiner stated that he would like to have staff explore this. He would not want to exchange a setback for a piece of art, for example. This would damage the overall integrity of the community development to obtain public art. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 14 Mr. Gerber stated that some incentive may be by virtue of the fact of more publicity online As a result, the corporation nationally receives more recognition for doing that. Mr. Keenan stated that perhaps a small reduction in the percentage of greenspace required could be done. He would not support anything drastic. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher and Mr. Reiner were not in agreement with reducing greenspace requirements. Mr. Keenan stated that at the current time, some pay fees in lieu of parkland dedication. These fees could be used for public art. Mr. Reiner stated that he has reservations about this suggestion. Mr. Keenan noted that he is simply trying to suggest a way of incentivizing corporations on this. It was the consensus of Council for staff to provide some options for Council to consider in this regard. Ms. Ott asked if the policy statement, as presented, is acceptable to move forward without that additional detail. Mr. Keenan stated that is acceptable. Vice Mayor Boring asked staff to remove the word "financial" under the Policy #8, Strategy 1. The ideas to be brought forward should not be limited to financial incentives. Council Members agreed. Ms. Ott stated that the following page in the document provides ideas, based on discussion between DAC and City staff regarding priority locations for future public art. If Council is aware of any omissions, they should let staff know. Community Art Plan Ms. Ott noted that during the February study session, discussion took place regarding the first four pages of the Chapter. Is Council comfortable with the text going forward in the draft plan? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Council has already discussed the preliminary partnership agreement. Ms. Ott responded that they have not; the priority for this meeting is the Arts Chapter of the P&R Master Plan in order to keep this process moving. Vice Mayor Boring asked if Council needs to continue with the selection of public art and artist recruitment considerations, since Council wants this to be handled by the DAC. Ms. Ott responded that in terms of the selection portion, she would be hesitant to strike that as it articulates the expectations regarding suitability, compatibility of location. It provides guidance regarding Council's expectations for use of that funding. It goes back to the funding outside of the DAC allotment for special projects, if Council chooses to do that - providing guidance for those as well. If Council prefers that be in a guideline document instead, that is fine. She would be hesitant to eliminate this information altogether. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 15 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the information makes sense in terms of selection of public art. She assumes that the DAC would be considering these as relative terms as well. She does not have a problem with whoever is doing the selection using these concepts. V1lhether it is also put in some type of agreement that these will be considered is another question. These seem broad enough, but she would defer to Mr. Guion on this as she does not want to limit the selection for public art. Mr. Guion responded that there are some basic processes to realize public art. Vice Mayor Boring stated that keeping this language in the document protects the City in other ways. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Guion about the five methods of Artist Recruitment, and whether there are other methods beyond these that are typically used. Mr. Guion responded that he would need to review a couple of other documents to respond to this question. Ms. Ott responded that there are others, but they are not as common. This is a general education piece more than anything else, communicating that there is more than one way to select artists. Staff would certainly look to the DAC to do whatever is appropriate for that site, theme or goal of that selection. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that No. 3, "pre-qualified registry" clearly indicates the City's bias toward this model of selection. Ms. Ott responded that this is due to Policy #1 -Integrate public art into major public improvements. The challenge in the design timeline for public improvements requires identification of arts ahead of time that have the capability of working in that environment. That is part of the intent of this statement #3. Staff would use this process internally in conjunction with some other farms of registry. Vice Mayor Baring asked why the DAC would not keep such a registry. Ms. Ott responded that this registry is accessible to anyone in the state. Mr. Hahn added that nothing in the five types of selection processes are assigned to either the City or the DAC. Either can use these. Ms. Ott responded that the first paragraph regarding Artist Recruitment can be modified to state that, "There are many ways to attract artists to participate ..." -and not call out the City or the DAC. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked the name of the group that has apre-qualified list. Ms. Ott stated that it is retained by the Ohio Arts Council. Mr. Guion stated that it is also retained by the Columbus Metropolitan Library - a database of artists. Legal Considerations Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for comments regarding this portion of the Plan. Ms. Ott noted that this was added to reflect the general understanding that a balance is desirable in terms of copyrights. It was the consensus of Council that this section is fine. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 16 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for an update on the stolen public art. Mr. Guion responded that they do not have further information. There was coverage on CNN on Sunday. He noted that two river boxes were stolen and the Blue Steel piece was vandalized. Ms. Brautigam noted that the Police are investigating these crimes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there has been vandalism or theft previously of public art. Ms. Ott responded that the bat at the "Going, Going, Gone" piece has been replaced. Mr. Hahn responded that some of the corn sculptures have been vandalized over the years. The "Vllatch House" has had some graffiti issues. Some of this is unavoidable in view of the public locations of the art pieces. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the level of community engagement and education about public art leads to a decrease in vandalism? Mr. Guion responded that the awareness can also lead to an increase in vandalism. Mr. Hahn added that overall, the City has been fortunate in regard to public art theft and/or vandalism. Vice Mayor Boring confirmed that the section regarding artist recruitment will be redrafted, based on this discussion. Ms. Ott agreed. Ms. Ott asked if it is necessary to bring this revised Plan back to Council before going forward with the P&R Master Plan remaining components. How would Council prefer to proceed? Mr. Hahn added that for the document as a whole, once the final layout of the Plan is ready in draft form, it will be resubmitted to Council. Ms. Ott's question relates to the Arts chapter specifically. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that, personally, it is fine to receive the document as a whole, but she prefers to review the Arts chapter as a draft once the changes have been made. That does not mean that the remainder of the document cannot move forward. Ms. Ott responded that she will incorporate the changes as directed by Council tonight. City of Dublin/Dublin Arts Council Partnership Agreement -Preliminary Outline of 3-31-08 Ms. Ott stated that the attorneys are drafting the agreement and the majority of the points have been worked out with the Community Development Committee. The last meeting regarding the agreement was held two weeks ago and addressed some of the smaller details. Based upon the Committee's recommendation, the document will be scheduled for review by the Council when ready. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the agreement includes percentages in various portions, but there is no budget attached. She would like to see what this would mean in terms of the past three years of hotel/motel tax so that Council could understand what the agreement means in terms of an operating budget for the organization. Ms. Ott asked if she is talking of the entire DAC budget or the City allocation to the DAC through the hotel/motel tax. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 17 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the hoteUmotel tax allocation constitutes the majority of their budget at this paint, although they are working to develop other funding sources. Mr. Keenan noted that the additional funding for the items discussed tonight needs to be incorporated, such as the DAC overseeing the public art collection. Ms. Ott responded that staff has not had an opportunity to discuss that in detail. Mr. Keenan wants to ensure that is covered in the agreement. Ms. Ott responded that staff anticipated the language in the agreement would be more general, i.e. that they would bring requests forward to be duly considered. Vllhat she is hearing is that Council would like the DAC to develop the marketing program so that it could be included in the partnership agreement. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that what she is concerned with is the language. She feels that the way it is being described verbally, it then becomes the option of the City whether or not it will be funded. If the outcomes are articulated in the agreement -the services the City wants the DAC to perform - it is not possible to specify funding until there is a history about the costs for these items. So it must be left flexible, but it must be warded so that there is confidence that the DAC will be given the funding for a reasonable request. Mr. Keenan stated that to a certain extent, Council is looking for a pro forma budget. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she is stating that at the contract signature, that portion of the agreement won't have been completed yet by the DAC. There is not the ability to have this in the agreement the first year. She is not certain about whether there has been sufficient discussion with the DAC to the point where it could state, "not to exceed ..." She would be more comfortable giving the DAC some level of assurance that they will be receiving additional funds to perform the function. Ms. Brautigam agreed. The City does not want to enter into a contract with a lot of vague terms included. Based on some of the additions discussed tonight, the contract will need some more work to finalize the draft. That time is necessary to ensure the agreement accurately reflects the intent of the parties. The DAC will also need time to review the items. Mr. Keenan noted that some of the items can easily be quantified, and he would expect to have a reasonable estimate provided. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff will provide as much information as possible. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked the Dublin Arts Council representatives in attendance. Other Business Ms. Brautigam reported that she received a call today indicating that the persons being appointed to the 21St Century Transportation Task Force will be announced tomorrow. She is one of those being appointed, and it is very positive far Dublin to have representation. Appointment of Acting Clerk Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to appoint Judy Beal as Acting Clerk during the Clerk's absence from April 16-18 and May 19-23. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 18 Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Bicentennial Ms. Puskarcik noted that binders have been provided for this project. There is an outlined framework for Council to consider. She is seeking feedback on some of the concepts. Some items for consideration: • The role of andlor development of a Bicentennial Commission • Council's role with the Bicentennial and staffs role Some key elements for consideration are identified in the binder, but funding has not been identified at this point. Other key elements would be bookend events - a kick-off event and a closing event. Another issue is the length of the celebration - a year long, or a condensed time period. Because the July 4t" is a signature community event, it may be possible to have athree-day event, with a homecoming feel. Another element to consider is revision of the City seal for the Bicentennial. The Bicentennial also could include public art, cultural performances, speaker series, breaking ground for a new City Hall, a memory garden, brick pavers in Historic Dublin, etc. Four areas of influence are listed: celebration, recognition, education and innovation, with the underlying goal of distinction in each of these categories -based on the goal setting discussion. In addition, staff sought information from other communities and learned that some of the aggressive plans required a lot of staff and Council time. Some communities indicated that when the Bicentennial celebration was concluded, there was nothing permanent remaining. If the desire is to leave something behind, it should be a focus at the outset. Dublin is forward thinking and the innovation aspect could be an umbrella for the entire celebration. In Tab 1, there is information about Dublin's Sesquicentennial. An element brought up by some of the older residents is a beard growing contest. There are fond memories of this from past events, so perhaps this should be included. She reviewed the contents of the binder, including laying the foundation for the Bicentennial (mission and vision, objectives, audiences, strategies, tactics); Theme and Positioning; Key Messages. Also included is a list of Key Considerations for City Council. Perhaps Council tonight could address the role of a commission, Council and City staff and the scope and size of a commission. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she had an opportunity to discuss some of these items with Ms. Puskarcik prior to tonight. The notebook is very well done. She has been grappling with the question of the purpose of a Commission. Dublin is still a relatively small community with many of the original residents who remain very active in the community. She can appreciate the desire to have a beard growing contest. However, Dublin is known for innovation and it would be desirable to incorporate both the long-time residents and newer residents. This would create a synergy. Perhaps it would be preferable to have an honorary commission, comprised of individuals who would lend their name to the Bicentennial -they would serve as ambassadors for the Bicentennial. Then a working commission or task oriented group would handle the individual items. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 19 Vice Mayor Boring noted that the Schools have Ohio history classes and the students create wonderful art. Perhaps this could be incorporated. Ms. Puscarcik noted that many ideas were suggested such as essays, poster contests, story telling, a time capsule. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that story telling could be translated into murals for another tunnel. This would provide participation for the students through historical story telling. Both younger and older children could participate. Vice Mayor Boring asked Ms. Puskarcik what is needed from Council tonight. Ms. Puskarcik responded that she wants a sense of direction about how far staff should proceed with a Plan, if there is a desire by Council to establish a Commission. Perhaps the bookend events could consist of an historical event and aforward-looking event. There are many things that can be done internally, and ideas can be brought back to Council. Mr. Reiner asked if there is an actual date of the founding of Dublin. Ms. Puskarcik responded that there is not -only the year. Mr. Reiner suggested that a street party be held in Historic Dublin, closing off the street, inviting the entire community to participate. It would include bands. Another element should be something permanent of value to be added to commemorate the Bicentennial. In addition, the flag does need to be redesigned. Mr. Keenan supports the idea of revisiting the City seal and the City flag as part of the Bicentennial celebration. Mr. Reiner stated that a contest could be held to redesign the flag. Mr. Gerber agreed with having a contest. Ms. Puskarcik suggested that a new flag could be commissioned by the City versus having a contest. It was the consensus of Council to redesign both the City seal and the City flag for the Bicentennial. It was also the consensus to maintain a shamrock in these items. Mr. Gerber noted he supports the idea of a community-wide celebration. He also supports the idea of the ambassador group for the Bicentennial. Ms. Puskarcik stated that can be done in several ways, as outlined in the binder. The goal would be to have across-section of the community involved. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she believes a 12-month celebration is too long, as it is not possible to sustain interest in celebration for that period of time. Perhaps it could be kicked off at St. Patrick's Day, with the July 4t" celebration in the middle. Mr. Keenan suggested that the observance close during the harvest time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher also supports the community party idea with the street closure. Mr. Reiner added that this event could be built upon all year long. Ms. Puskarcik noted that there could be affiliated events with a Bicentennial theme, such as the Emerald Ball, the Classic Auto Show, etc. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 20 Mr. Gerber suggested that there could be Bicentennial news coverage in the paper, and segments on the cable channel about the history. Perhaps along-time resident could share what life was like in Dublin years ago. Mr. Keenan suggested that the contributions made by people over the years could be catalogued for posterity. A video component would be valuable, featuring long-time residents. This would bring history to life, and the video could be looped on the cable channel. Ms. Puskarcik stated that staff is prepared to present many ideas to Council after they have a sense of what Council wants in terms of involvement of the community. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she would like to see a draft budget in the near future with the various options and related costs. She is aware that the City of Vllorthington retained Judi Stillwell to oversee their Bicentennial. If there is an expectation of adding a staff position or a contract position for a period of time, Council should have information about the budget impacts. Ms. Puskarcik responded that staff would bring information back to Council in approximately 30 days including items for budget consideration this year. Mr. Keenan asked if there is funding in the current budget for the Bicentennial. Ms. Puskarcik responded that there was some funding provided in her budget, but nothing significant. It was to cover the costs of research and planning. Mr. Keenan asked about a general estimate of the cost for the Bicentennial. Ms. Puskarcik responded that it is dependent upon the Plan and what Council wants to do. For the July 4th event, which falls on a Sunday in 2010, it could include a Friday event in Historic Dublin, a parade on Saturday, a chicken barbecue, and a Sunday night concert. Perhaps some other groups could be brought in as well, such as the faith community. There is a hope for community contributions to the celebration. Vice Mayor Boring noted that Vllorthington had a Founder's Day service of thanksgiving that was very nice. Perhaps the Sunday services at the Dublin Irish Festival could incorporate this celebration. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Council has provided adequate input. Ms. Puskarcik summarized that staff would look at a celebration to begin at St. Patrick's Day, ending with the harvest time. Another idea was for a grand illumination in Historic Dublin to be held in mid-November. It would end with a laser light show in Historic Dublin. She summarized that the concepts would include book end events as described, adding to the Independence Day celebration, having an Ambassador Group, establishing committees to handle certain tasks, and updating the City seal and flag. Mr. Reiner added that the service of thanksgiving could be done in conjunction with all of the churches in Dublin. Ms. Brautigam summarized that the celebration would be held from March through September. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2008 Page 21 Mr. Reiner stated that perhaps fireworks over the river could be included, with a bridge closure. Ms. Puskarcik stated that staff can provide the framework, based on this input. Are there items that Council would prefer to have a community working group develop? Mr. Reiner responded that he supports the idea of an honorary committee, as the Mayor has described. Staff is very skilled at staging events, based on their experience. He would prefer to have staff do this versus hiring outside consultants. Ms. Puskarcik asked if there are any items that Council wants the community to handle and not the staff. If not, staff will return at a study session with a more detailed plan for Council's consideration. At that point, Council can react to specifics and a rough budget can be assembled. Mr. Reiner suggested that every household in Dublin receive an invitation to this special celebration. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for land acquisition and personnel matters. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Clerk of Council