Sep 04, 2020 Public Art Committee on 2020-09-04 3:00 PM

All right, you're good, Monique. >> All right, we'll just start with roll. Monet Franklin, I'm here. Michelle Lynn, absent. Nick Baggett, absent. Meredith Buehle, absent. Alicia Egert. >> Here. >> Jodi Ismert, absent. Fred Nicholson. >> Here. >> Terry Nobles. >> Here. >> Ed Steele. >> We can't hear you, Ed. We can visually see Ed, we can't hear him right now. >> Check, check, check. >> Yes. >> Okay, yeah, I'm here. Sorry about that. >> Virginia, and it doesn't. >> Here. >> Everyone's accounted for. Item A, consider approved for the minutes of August 7th, 2020. >> If no one has any changes, we'll need a motion. >> I move we accept the minutes from the last meeting. >> I'll second. >> Monet, could you do a roll call vote? >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Alicia. >> Aye. >> Fred. >> Aye. >> Terry. >> Aye. >> Georgina. >> Aye. >> And item B, receive report and hold discussion and give staff direction regarding the status of following art, public art committee projects. Number one, the North Lakes Dog Park, two G Roll and Vela Athletic Complex, three Tennis Center, four Fire Station, number three, five foundations of our history mural, six MLK Junior Recreation Sculpture, and seven Women's Generation Fellowship Monument Project. Start. For some reason, it's not wanting to start the slideshow. All right. Okay, so the first project maybe is the North Lakes Dog Park project. This project, we've been reviewing artists and submissions with the subcommittee. Unfortunately, the artists that were selected from the pre-qualified list and put on the short list, we didn't have any artists that wished to submit on that project. And so we're coming back to the full committee seeking direction with regards to seeking an alternative selection process. For that artist, if possible, or if that's the committee's pleasure. And then I'll let Gary, if you have any additional updates on that project, add in now. >> This is Gary Pack, and just to kind of give you some additional feedback in regards to alternative steps that we could take, we did get some feedback from purchasing. If we could go back out for a specific RFP for artists, promote the budget, and try to get interested parties from that direction with a specific theme. We would be allowed to go back in and use the existing pool if we wanted to, and see if there's anybody in the kind of round two for the 35,000. Or we could go out if we know of any artists locally and ask them if they wanted to submit. The downside of that, I don't necessarily like that direction because, you know, it's not a clear process in giving everybody an opportunity to chime in. Although they did say we could go in that direction since it's art. So those are three opportunities that we could kind of handle this. Or we could potentially, I guess, reallocate money from another project if we wanted to take money from the tennis center and put it at North Lakes, or maybe even use that for Vela as well, because that's a similar situation that we'll talk about next. I think staff would prefer to go and just redo the RFP and put a budget out there with the theme and see what we could get. We'd need to determine if we want to do it through the formal process or just do it locally, maybe through the Texas Sculpture Association or something of that nature. At that point, I guess, I can open up for discussion. >> Can I ask a question about, to clarify what you just said, Gary? >> Sure. >> So are our options to approach our pre-qualified artists to see if any of them want to submit a proposal or to release an RFP to the general public from scratch, like on Cafe or whatever, that anyone can submit to? And then the third option you said would be to invite specific options? >> Yeah, I guess, or we could increase the budget. >> Right, okay. >> And sorry, Alicia, your earring is hitting the microphone again. >> All right, yes, I was going to say that, too. I'm curious, the artists that were selected initially, were there more than a certain number, looks like you chose certain artists, but were there more that you would have considered? And if so, would that be like a second tier you could reach out to? >> I believe we reached out to all of the artists that were identified by the subcommittee. There were five, and we reached out to all five. >> Okay. >> We reached out to two. >> Oh, to two on the dog park? >> Yes. >> My understanding of what Georgina just asked, and correct me if I'm wrong, Georgina, but did you just ask, I know a lot of people applied to get on our pre-qualified list. Are you asking about the people who didn't get to that pre-qualified list? >> No, I'm asking about the artists that were selected by the subcommittee, and if there were like, these were our top three, but there were then four, five, and six as other options that you didn't go for, could you reach out to that second tier of artists? Like, they weren't the first picked, but maybe they could be asked, you know, as your second set of artists. Based upon what Gary just said, though, if you identify five and only two were approached, would you not want to approach the other three? >> Yeah, that's the option that we could consider. So, there were five, and it was Campbell and Gold that we reached out to in the scoring, and then the other three were Cherry, Enoch, and Sarah, Sarah, Sarah, or something of that nature. So, that's definitely an option if we wanted to try that. You know, we could do that fairly quickly, and then if they weren't interested, then we could go with a Plan B, if you would suggest. >> Yeah, I think at least one or two of those artists that you just named were also being, are also being considered for the Women's Interracial Fellowship Project as well. So, if we found out now that they couldn't be available for this one, I don't know, maybe they would be available for the other, or we would know that they wouldn't be available for the other as well. >> Yeah, I think for this project, the subcommittee had in mind a pretty specific concept, and so there weren't a large number of artists that met the project needs from the, and even from just the general pre-qualified list. It was a pretty very narrow subset. And so, our thought with this project would be that it would benefit us the most to open it up to the biggest group of artists to try and get the concept or the style that we wanted that fit the subcommittee's idea. And so, we can reach out to the three other artists. I apologize, I thought we had, but I think that the issue was that when we narrowed it down from five to the two, was even among those five, there wasn't consensus that that second tier could even meet the concept of what they had in mind. >> Okay. >> Is there a way you can briefly describe that, or is that irrelevant right now, what that concept is? >> I am muted. >> Sure. The subcommittee had an idea of wanting to do a very fun, playful, maybe even humorous sculpture since it was a dog park, and they liked the idea of displaying a human-dog interaction in some sort of kind of playful way. There weren't necessarily artists on the list that had demonstrated to the subcommittee that successfully. So, they thought they might be interested in opening it up to other groups or other artists. >> But Jessica, there are three artists who that subcommittee identified that, I don't know, you're not giving that opportunity to. If you haven't reached out to those three as well, it seems to me, I'm not sure then why their names would have been included in that first pick. >> So, the subcommittee went through and they were scored. The top two were the highest scored ones, and the direction was to reach out to the top two and see if they were interested. >> John did that, and they both came back and said that the budget wasn't sufficient for what they would like to work on. So, at that point in time, we stopped, and that brings us to this point today. >> But I get an understanding, Gary, why we would not want to take the next step and explore those opportunities with the other three. I mean, why were they even included? >> I'm sorry, I'm sorry. >> The subcommittee went through and selected who they felt their top few artists were, and these were the top five out of everybody, and then they scored them from there. John, could you clarify which ones are in the running for the DWIF? >> Yes, thank you. This is John Whitmore, Programming Manager. What we have is, we have five that are now in the running for the DWIF, that would be Craig Campbell, and he was one of the ones that had showed initial interest verbally to do North Lakes, but then said that the timing wasn't really right for him for what he was doing. The DWIF one is, has a much longer time to get it done, so I think he was much more attracted to it. Second one was Jane DeDecker, third is Dina Fisher, fourth is Denny Haskew, and the fifth was Virginia Kistler. >> Okay, so based off of that, Cherry, Enoch, and Cerro, we could still call them if the Public Art Committee would like us to do that, or we could go in a different direction and start over with a new RFQ, or go in a different direction based on what you guys feel. >> I guess I just want to understand why we would not want to pursue those off the top. I mean, we don't have to. I guess I'm just trying to understand why we wouldn't, if we came up with those five, why we wouldn't extend the offer to the other three. I don't know why we didn't reach out to the other three. That's all I think I'm trying to understand. >> Each subcommittee, though, is going through a process, and so they made their short list, and then got together and discussed their concept and their ideas and what they wanted to see in that art piece, and then they narrowed it down from there. So much like the discussion you had with the fellowship committee, there were artists that were eliminated during that process. So even though they had five initially, they went through, and after they kind of fully vetted their concepts, they eliminated three of the five, and then chose to move forward with just two, because they felt those two best represented their concept. >> Thank you. >> Are any of those subcommittee members here now, or is everybody absent? >> Ed's here. >> Oh, Ed. Yeah. So, Ed, I guess I feel like you would be the one that could speak for that subcommittee, right, and say whether or not you think we should go to those other three first, or if we should go to another option first. >> Well, I mean, I can offer my opinion on that. I would hate to override the opinions of the other two subcommittee members. >> I feel like you should offer your opinion, because they're not here, and I feel like that project needs to probably try to move forward, right? >> Sure. Well, it makes sense to me to move to the other three, since they were part of the preselection. So that would be my opinion. That, to me, makes the most sense. >> It also seems like the fair thing to do, since they went under consideration. >> Yeah, well, it would seem as the best and most sound process to work down the list. So, yeah. >> We could certainly reach out to them, you know, first thing Monday, and follow up with an email with the proposal, the scope of work. >> So, if you're looking to me as one of the one subcommittee member who's here, my preference would be to move to the three. My concern is, like the first two, the scope of this project is outside of their price range. The first, that was the issue, if I remember correctly, with the first two. I'm on a couple of subcommittees, so if that, if I'm getting these mixed up, please correct me. If the three that we then go to have the same issue on the email thread, it was mentioned to open this up to CAFE and receive bids through the CAFE process. That, to me, would be the next logical step. >> Yes, that's a similar thing we'll discuss on the next project, the VELO project. We had this identical situation happen where all of the short lists chose not to submit, and so we presented different options on that project as well to the subcommittee. On this one, we had gotten to much more defined scope, and so there, those three, the other three were sort of eliminated in that process of once we kind of got to the defined scope, those other three didn't work in the media that the more defined scope had listed. So, this one was slightly different than the VELO project because there was a very specific vision for this, for this one. But we're happy to reach out to the three, and then if that doesn't work, we can let you know and send out a separate call. >> Yeah, the one thing I would say is that as an artist, sometimes the way you present yourself when you're doing an application for like a pre-qualified list, you know, you're limited in the amount of images you can show. So, just because those artists don't show images of work that seems to fit with the concept doesn't mean that they wouldn't be capable of it. So, it does make sense to at least give them the opportunity to decline before opening up to everybody else. >> All right, we can do that. And then I'm going to go, we're going to have the same, and I apologize, we're having technical difficulties on my end. My screen keeps freezing, so y'all let me know if something, I can watch the live feed and see it's working, but if for some reason y'all lose me for a second, that's what's happening. So, we'll move on to the VELO project. So, similar process for this one, the subcommittee reviewed artists, we did reach out to all of the artists that were on the short list, and we were declined for all of these. We reached out to the subcommittee again with some options, which was going back to the pre-qualified list to see if there were any other artists that they wanted to consider, or did they want to issue a separate call through CAFE, or did they want to see if they could allocate more funds to this project to see if that would generate interest again from the original list, and so we're kind of at the same point on this project that we were on the dog park, just with a little bit less defined. This has a much more open concept, and so there was a lot more kind of, there might be a possibility to go back to some of the artists on the list, take that. When we, if we do decide to do a CAFE open call for proposals, we would obviously share that with our pre-qualified artists, right? So, it would be an opportunity to do that still. >> Yes. >> Jessica, I think based on the subcommittee, I can jump in here, but based off of, I think, Alicia and Ed agreed with her as to draft and issue a separate call for a proposal on CAFE. Is that correct, summarize? >> Yes, that was the subcommittee direction. But no, they're not eliminated from consideration if any of the artists on the pre-qualified list want to submit. They're absolutely welcome to submit, and we can make sure that they're notified that we're putting out an open call. >> Can we also say something, or is this, I don't know what the rules around this would be, but would we be able to say that if any pre-qualified artists did apply, they would be given, like, special consideration since they already jumped through all of those hoops? >> I don't know. I would have to check with our purchasing department on what, how we would score those. >> Okay. Are we comfortable with pursuing the new open call? And then I can follow up with Alicia regarding her question. >> Sounds appropriate to me. >> Okay. I'm going to try to share again. This is where it gets tricky every time. All right. So Tennis Center, I think we can pause on this one for now. We're trying to get some of the other projects that have tighter deadlines done. So this one is going to stay in the upcoming category for now. And the next project is the Fire Station 3 project. Like some other projects, we've had some issues with identifying artists for this particular project. I believe, Drew, if you're there, you had reached out to some artists who had done some fence work before or had some ideas if you want to jump on. So we wanted to give you like three different options for this take for the fencing. I know this is for the fencing at the fire station. So option one would to be, would to go with an artistic fence. I know Chief Boots came to us last time and showed us, you know, his different kind of vision on what the firemen kind of wanted at their fire station with their artistic look at the fence. So that'd be option one. Option two is let the firemen build the fence that they want and add a pedestal to the Fire Station 3 for an art piece. Option three would be to put a cedar wood slat on wood slat fence with a pedestal for an art piece. And then option one, we can have an alternate and add a pedestal also for an art piece there. So I kind of want to leave it up to the committee on the three different options. So option one, like I said, it would be the fence that Chief Boots brought us last time with our artistic look. It's a core 10 steel fence and it has different kind of fire logos cut into it, you know, with a pedestal as an, you know, as an alternate. Option two, let them build their fence on a different, you know, kind of account. And we would have our, you know, the PAC would have an option to put their, to decide on an art piece for a pedestal. And then option three would just be a wood fence for the Fire Station and then an art, you know, an art piece on a pedestal at a determined location. >> Would there be a price differential on those three options? >> Yes, ma'am. So the fence itself is about, the fence that the firemen want is about 30,000. So if for whatever reason, you know, you know, you did, you know, PAC didn't decide that that's the way we needed to go, then we would have to, or help them find a way. And I say us as parks, the city would have to find a way to help, you know, fund their fence. Option two, you know, we would just tile this into one artist to do everything, the sculpture or art piece and the fence. And then option three would just be a sculpture or art piece. So, Gary, forgive me if I'm wrong, how much extra money do we have? I'm drawing a blank at the moment. >> Yeah, let me pull it up. There was, I think it was like $60,000 that we have total. >> Okay. >> Now, and the fence itself is 30, so we could probably put another 30 to an art piece. >> And where is that money coming from? >> There were funds that were identified from, I believe, the central fire station. >> Yes. >> Projects. I don't have the amount off the top of my head, but we were finishing up and closing out projects and in the process discovered that there were funds that were dedicated to that project that weren't needed since it's completed and that we would be able to shift to another public safety project. >> So, if we did the fence and the sculpture, we would have $30,000 for the fence and 30,000 for the sculpture? >> Yes, approximately. And then it, depending on, so we have two bids right now, we're working on a third for the fence and the lowest bid right now is 26, the second one's around 32. So, normally your third bid is either really, really high or somewhere in the middle of those two bids, so. >> But the portion that we would pay for would just be for the artistic, the artistic attachment versus the fence. We're not paying for the fence, we're paying for the art, right? >> If you choose, if you choose option three and the fireman go ahead and want their, their fence that they've helped design, then yes, that'll be the case. >> But the extra money from, Jessica, the extra money from coming from fire, central fire can be spent just on the fence, correct? >> It has to be spent on art. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> If I remember correctly, they had specific security requirements for that fence that was part of their design, is that correct? >> Yes, sir. >> And they have the resources to do that. >> Not necessarily, so this, they have been assuming that the $25,000 that were allocated to this committee would cover the artistic fence installation. >> Right. >> So, that does not have an additional $25,000 to pay for a fence outside of the $25,000 that were allocated to the committee. So, they have not been able, so the fence piece would be a cost overrun on that project if they were to absorb it elsewhere and unfortunately Drew or myself can't make that decision, we would have to go try and identify with our facilities team if there was some way to make that happen. >> Okay. Jessica, I'm going to try to repeat back what I think I heard and what I think keeps bringing us back to this place where we're not sure how to move forward. The way I remember it and Ed, correct me if I'm wrong, the PAC was prepared to pay for the artistic rendering, whatever that was going to be. But we took issue with being charged anything for the fence. >> Well, so it's a bit messy when you think about it because you can have a piece of art that functions as a barrier between different things. But at the point, it becomes a necessary security feature for a building and that emphasis is on security and not on the artistic element, my personal opinion is you're now talking about something that is, performs a specific function for the building and is not a piece of art. >> And that's what you said at that time. >> Right, and that's my opinion. I, you know, I've seen pieces before that functioned as barriers and I also am very familiar with building security. I've done security camera installations and other type of security installations and you're talking two completely different worlds, security and an artistic barrier. So that's where the boggle presents itself. >> I have a question though, I wonder if they're like the fence contractor, whoever would, whoever has given us bids to actually build it, right? If it's possible for them to kind of outline the different parameters within which an artist would have to work within in order for the fence to maintain that aspect of security, so for example, the largest opening or something, like if there's going to be negative spaces cut out of it, they can't be any wider than three to four inches or whatever the actual parameters would be and then obviously it would have to be more of a graphic artist, but an artist could decide on the actual designs that are cut into the fence, right, based on working within those parameters. [ Laughter ] >> Know that we think it's going to be the most talked about fence in Denton's history. >> I'm kidding, I'm still of the opinion that there's two separate things. I made the comment on the last meeting, you don't see very many master locks that have a super artistic element. Yeah, they may have something, some sort of silly, you know, for kids, placement on the front or larger numbers or what have you, but it's still a master lock. It still functions as a lock. What we're trying to do here, just for me, from a design perspective, makes no sense. I think you either have an artistic piece that functions as a barrier or you have a secure fence and you have option three where there is a piece of art that is on display in front of your functional secure fence. I think the path that we're going down on trying to merge these two things, I don't know that, you know, if we had a million dollars to throw at it, sure, we could find someone out there who could come up with the most revolutionary secure piece of art that would function as a fence, but that's not what we're talking about here. >> So I'll do, in my sculpture program, we do a lot of plasma cut steel with like CNC plasma cutters. So I'm really familiar with cutting out patterns and designs into quartet steel and then using those as walls or barriers in different ways. Some of my students have done projects like that. So I don't think it's, I understand your point about how it's very, it could be potentially very complicated, but I think like to create a design that gets cut out of a piece of steel is definitely within the realm of a visual artist. >> Sure, but will that visual artist have an understanding of the necessary security requirements? >> Like I said, I think all they would need to know is like no space is cut out within that surface could be required. >> Well, the surface of the material, I mean, there's a lot of different, when you actually start diving into security documents and requirements, it's a lot more complicated than just, you know, the size of holes cut in it, is my point. >> I think it comes down to two issues. One are the resources to get it done. The fire station needs to add a fence and maybe if we didn't do, if there wasn't an art piece incorporated and they had the, you know, the resources to move forward with creating their fence, then we, they could come back to us with the fence having been created and we be open to adding our artistic piece to that fence or around it or whatever. So for me, I'm still, I'm stuck on whether or not the holdup has to do with the money and not taking on the responsibility as a pat for the fire station building its own fence. Did I make it harder? I hope not. >> No, I think we all understand what the challenge is. I think you're clearly articulating it. There is a financial challenge. This project has existed for a long time and the fire department has been counting on having an artistic fence funded by these dollars that were set aside. I don't know which members were on the committee when that decision was made, but the fire station has been operating with that assumption. So they have not reserved other funds for the fence. That project doesn't have any other funds. >> I was on that original, I was on that original subcommittee and it was Millie Giles and Jerry Veder and at that time, it was they had the funds to build their own fence, but they would like it if we could come up with something that would function as an artistic fence. It wasn't a matter of they didn't have the funds at that time when we originally started. >> That's right, Ed. They did have the funds and they wanted us to contribute that $25,000 to use that for an artistic addition. >> Correct. >> Joe and I have had conversations with them because we thought that the fastest path forward would be the simplest, right? The fence gets built and then the art gets added by the committee separately. We were told that wasn't an option. So we're still trying to fund. >> You were told by whom that wasn't an option? >> That the project didn't have any funds for the fence. >> I swear to you, it's got to be in the minutes. I mean, just like we're talking about it right now so passionately, it was even more passionate at that time and we came to that kind of agreement that they would, yeah, they did have money. >> So I think the simplest thing or the simplest path that we can go forward due to, you know, the circumstances, we did go out and we got a bid for the, you know, the board on board fence. So it would be Cedar Plank fence, just a normal, something that you see kind of in a residential area instead of six foot tall, it's going to be eight foot tall. It's, the cost was, it's not, it's only 60 feet, 60 linear feet of the fence. So you're looking at approximately $3,000. That's something they can probably come up with and then we can, you know, the PAC can say, hey, we don't want to do the fence, but we do want to do an art piece and then we can go through CAFE to get an artist for an art piece. Does that sound like a way we want to move with this? >> That sounds reasonable to me. What do you think, Georgina? >> I agree. >> Okay. >> And then maybe it'll actually happen. >> Yes. >> Instead of trying to design something that doesn't exist. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right, do, Jessica, we need to take, do they need to take a vote on that or do we just need to move forward? >> I don't know that, let's take it to the fire department and make sure that they're agreeable to this solution unless you already know that information and then we can bring it back at the next meeting to formalize. >> Okay, we'll do that. I mean, I think this is simplest because, you know, we haven't been at a, many of these meetings with you, but at the last two that we have had, this seemed to be in, you know, some contention on what this actually needs to be. I think with the fire station coming along and as quickly as, you know, it's going to be up and running, our easiest step forward is just say, hey, we're going to build a, you know, a wooden fence, you're going to build a wooden fence now, the PAC will add an art piece later, so. >> And I think really that is in line with the function of the public art committee. We're not in the business of building fences, we're in the business of public art. >> Okay, then we'll do that. >> Very good. >> I guess the second phase of that, is there any direction or thought in regards to what that art is, is there a look and feel or a theme? Has that been discussed at all or is that for a future discussion? >> It was at the time and there were a couple of renderings that were actually provided, I believe, by the fire department. But I think we would have to go back and revisit it all together. >> Okay, we can do that. >> Okay. Let's go back to the presentation. Okay, so the next project is the foundations of our history mural. And last night, we held the public input meeting and got great feedback in regards to that project. Very, very well liked and everyone likes the idea of preserving and recreating Mr. Hedspeth's fence and then that bridge. I know Monet was there last night. I think Georgina, you were there last night and got to see that presentation and hear from the artist. One thing that we have had is that we didn't anticipate an administrative fee from Union Pacific Railroad to review the application to paint the bridge. We do have to have their permission. That fee costs $1,025 and that is where we are in that project. When we pay that fee, they will start processing the application to paint that bridge. And so, as of right now, the original budget was $11,000 and the Public Art Committee was providing $9,150. If you'll remember, Keep Dittin' Beautiful had chipped in the remainder of funds. And so, with Keep Dittin' Beautiful being absorbed back into the city, there's not a fundraising arm for that committee anymore. So, our request would be, there are some still hot funds left over from this program year. So, our request of the committee would be consideration of using hot funds to cover that administrative fee and get that project going. And so, I will stop sharing so we can talk about that one. I do apologize. I know we've come back twice for additional funds on this project. I know this project has a lot of community support and a community interest and so, we want to make sure that it happens. And so, we just want to present this opportunity to the committee again. >> I'll move the lead. >> I just have a question before we move anywhere. It's just a quick question. So, this administrative fee is to just submit an application and then could they just deny that application? >> It's to review the application. And Autumn, if you're, is Autumn out of the roster? >> Yeah, I think we can. >> It's just to review the application. >> Interesting. >> Alicia, we, Keep Dittin' Beautiful, Autumn and Carly went through the process. On the other mural, so this is, I guess, new. They didn't have to do this in the past. So, I wouldn't anticipate it being an issue since we got approval, you know, a year and a half or so ago for the other mural. So, I don't foresee it as a concern that it's not going to happen. It's taken a while to get in contact with them and get a response to this point. I think they've been trying since this, at least early summer, to try to get in touch with them. So, it's been a process and a challenge. >> I guess it's just a good thing to keep in mind, I guess, if we ever want to paint on any of the other bridges, huh? >> Yeah. We have noted it now for future projects. >> Okay. Now you can do your motions, if people wanted to. >> I'll move to approve it, some of them. >> I'll second. All in favor? Alicia? >> Aye. >> Fred? >> Aye. >> Ed? >> Aye. >> Gary? >> Aye. >> That's everyone. Next, let me switch back, get that shared, all right. So, the other project that we presented last night at the community input session was the MLK Junior Rec Center Sculpture. We have been discussing this project with Madeline and she is ready to get moving on it as well. Last night, we got some guidance on the type of limestone that she'll be using for the project as well as a different location. So, it will actually be the community input, there was positive feedback for moving it closer to the building itself so that people would be able to interact with it more regularly and it would be a focal point at the front of the recreation center instead of out by the road. There were some concern that where she had proposed locating it that it might damage the roots of some of the trees because of the depth of the concrete pad site that was going to have to be built for the weight of the sculptures. And so, we definitely don't want to damage the trees in the process. And so, there's a proposal to move it to a different location. It'll be where the flagpole is for those who are familiar with the rec center itself, but right front and center as you're driving in and see the front of the rec center. And then, Gary, am I forgetting anything on that one? >> No. I'll let Drew, Drew was the point person on that discussion. >> So, I think the conversation in our meeting last night went really well. We did go out, you know, earlier in yesterday to look at the different areas. And like I said, or like Jessica said, you know, we were really concerned where the original idea of where the sculptures were going to go, one, for accessibility, and two, it was going to be in the drip line of the trees. So, installing any kind of foundation for the sculpture, you know, anytime you dig in and around the trees, you risk damaging and hurting those trees and the tree roots, so we picked two different other areas. One of those, being closer to the bus stop, it's kind of hidden. You can't see it due to the trees that are also over there and the bus stop that's there. And so, really just, you know, knowing how much it costs to, you know, install those flagpoles, it seems to us that the best bet is for parks to relocate the flagpole at MLK and then have that area completely redone in the front of MLK 1, so MLK staff can see, you know, what's going on out there. And, you know, the kids sit in that area and wait on their parents to pick them up, or people just kind of like to sit out front and enjoy, you know, just being outside, especially in the cooler days. So, having the sculptures moved to the area where the flagpole is was a consensus and voted, you know, kind of gave a thumb, everyone kind of gave their thumbs up for that location. And then, of course, once the sculpture is in, we would parks within re-landscape that area and beautify it. And that area does have full accessibility with ramps and sidewalks and everything. >> If there are no questions on that one, I'll go to the next. So, I think the last project that we have is the Denton Women's Interracial Fellowship Monument that subcommittee has been meeting weekly or bi-weekly over the past few weeks, making a lot of progress. We're currently down to a short list of artists and have reached out for preliminary proposals or concepts for the subcommittee to review. And we've gotten a lot of positive feedback from artists on that project. Remember that we are partnering with Denton Parks Foundation for additional fundraising. But I'm happy to announce that as of 1/30 today, it's official. The city of Denton has been awarded $28,000 from the Texas Commission on the Arts for that project. And so, we're very excited for that and we had originally budgeted $40,000 for the -- or requested $40,000 for the grant. So, because we were awarded $12,000 less, we had, if you'll remember, set aside funds in the case that we didn't get the grant at all. So, in this case, we just will have $12,000 from our hot funds, either from -- remaining from this project year or a little bit from the 2021 project year, but not nearly the amount that we had set aside. So, we're very, very excited. This project is moving forward. And we're really happy that the Texas Commission on the Arts saw the value of this project. And I know that -- and we have a couple subcommittee members that are actually here today, that there were some really creative discussion and really creative artists and different ideas. So, we're excited to see what concepts we get back. So, I will take this down just in case we need to talk about if Alicia or Georgina want to discuss their work on the subcommittee. That subcommittee has putting in a lot of hours and work, so we're really thankful. They've done a lot of legwork knowing that in the event that we got the grant that we were going to have to move very quickly because the project has to be completed by August 31st of 2021. So, that's not a long time for a major art project. So, thank you. >> I just want to congratulate the city on getting that grant. Congrats. And would love to receive a copy of it. >> Thanks. >> All right. >> Jessica, do you want John to give a little update and kind of where he's at with -- >> Yeah, John, I didn't see you. So, you're still here. >> I'm still here. All right. So, what we've done is we've created the scope of work, and rather than sending out just to a few artists, we sent it out to seven artists so that we wouldn't get in the same situation as Vela and MLK. And we were very fortunate that we had responses back from the five artists out of the seven. One of the ones that did not -- that was on some of the other lists was Enoch and Huther declined to be able to do it. But we have those five I mentioned earlier, Campbell, Dedecker, Fisher, Haskew, and Kistler. And one of them contacted me for just to talk a little bit about it and said that she -- her background actually is very close to as her mom did that, where she grew up. So, she's got a bond to it. So, it'd be interesting to see what people come up with based on that. They're supposed to get their proposals to us by the 21st. And we hope to have the next subcommittee meeting a couple of days after that, and maybe the 25th, so that you have enough time to review what the proposals are so we can talk about it. Any questions? >> Well, congrats on -- I know that everyone provided great feedback as we were going through that grant application process, so thank you to this committee. You guys, we pulled that one together very quickly, but it's a very worthwhile project, so. >> Thank you, Jessica, for your work on it. >> Okay. I think that's the end of our project. Let me just make sure -- oh, I was going to point out the location. So, we've identified this as the location. This is the American Legion Senior Center that's under construction, and based on wanting to have visibility and access and lighting, that this location right here, kind of front and center in the entrance to the park, and next to the senior center, has been identified as the prime location for that project. >> I guess we should probably keep in mind what's happening with the Madeline Wiener sculptures with the trees and the roots and stuff, as this moves forward, huh? >> Yes. So, that area is -- and John can help speak to this, and if you haven't been by there, I'd really encourage you to drive over on Lakey Street in front of, you know, ALH. That area, it looks kind of different on Google, but when you go yourself, it's actually very open, so. >> Baseball field? >> Across the creek is the Fred Moore softball field, yes. >> There's a good distance between the trees there. So, what it'll do is it'll frame whatever the yard is very nicely through there. It's out of the drip line, and we shouldn't have a problem. >> Is that where the old building used to be, if they tore it down? >> There used to be an old pavilion in there, yes. >> I live right in front of it, so I was like, I'm trying to remember. >> Yeah, yeah, there used to be an old pavilion in there, and it was tore out probably five or six years ago, but yes. >> That is the end of the presentation. And so, with that, that covers all of our projects. So, are there any questions or any other information we can provide on those projects? >> It's a lot. There's a lot of projects going on right now. >> Jessica, we could just give a quick update. As of right now, we're trying to get the foundations of our history mural and the MLK sculpture to city council for approval on the design for October 15th. The -- if we can't do that, we'll push it to the 22nd, but we're trying to get approval this month so we can go out and start contracts. >> And start construction. >> All right. All right, that's it on the project updates. >> Item C, receive report, hold discussion against staff direction regarding the meeting dates and times, regular meetings of the PoliDAR committee. >> So, two of our committee members had reached out, and actually it might be three of our committee members had reached out that they are having difficulty meeting during the day due to work schedules, and we're trying to be sensitive to that. So, we wanted to allow the committee to discuss another time that may work for everyone. I will say that in COVID, we're unfortunately pretty restricted on when committees can meet. The instructions that staff has that committee meetings can start no later than 3 p.m. The reason for that is our DTV staff have to cover city council meetings and planning and zoning committee meetings and every single other board and committee meeting for the city of Denton right now because of the remote nature and the meeting production, and they're all being televised. If you'll remember, we didn't have to televised before. So, in managing their schedules, only a few committees are allowed to meet outside of the normal eight to five hours. And so, we know that's a challenge for everyone. So, we do appreciate everyone's flexibility as we've gone through this. But if there's another time between during the day or another day of the week, that might be easier. Some of our committees meet around lunchtime and they tend to just keep it very limited to an hour and very strategically discussing, you know, just kind of the immediate issue. Other committees have taken a break. They're not actually meeting right now. They're allowing their items to go directly to city council and working through either a subcommittee or a task force and then just allowing items to go directly to city council. And we're certainly as staff members open to trying to figure out what works for the most people. But we wanted to be upfront what our limitations were from a staff perspective and what we're trying to accommodate as well. So, with that, if there's kind of discussion or an alternate time or day of the week that might work better for the committee, we can go back and research the committee schedule and see what could work. >> So, what committees other than Public Art Committee meet during the day? >> Just the committees that I manage, the Economic Development Partnership Board meets at 11 a.m. on the second Wednesday of the month. The Downtown TURS Board meets on the third or the fourth Wednesday of every other month. The Downtown Economic Development Committee meets at 8.30 in the mornings on the first Thursday of the month. I know Gary's Parks and Rec Board, I'm not sure if they're meeting right now. >> We generally meet at 6.30 in the evening, you know, before COVID. We've been meeting at 12.30 and I think we met at 2.30, one meeting. So, we've been inconsistent with our meetings. We've only had two that have been online since COVID hit, but we generally meet in the evening on Mondays, the first Monday of the month. >> The reason I ask is I don't feel that it would be fair to place the restriction. If you look at the attendance today based on those who said that they could not attend during the day, and it's also a difficulty for me, I don't know that it's fair to place that restriction on serving on the Public Art Committee that you have to be available during the day when other committees, like Planning and Zoning, the Animal Shelter Board, and City Council all meet after hours. >> I understand, and normally we'd be much more flexible, but it's a -- for us, it's -- we have to have staff available to produce the meeting. >> Sure. >> So, we have to have City Council meetings. We have to have Planning and Zoning Committee meetings. They have legally, statutorily required actions that they have to take. And so, we have to make sure staff's available for those first, and then other committees we're trying to accommodate as best we can. >> Yeah, I don't think there's an issue post-COVID or whenever we get the clearance to meet in the evening, that's not a concern. We definitely could do that. It's just trying to fit in regular meetings in or in between all that during business hours at this point in time. The other option that we -- that Jessica and I chatted about is, you know, if we couldn't meet next month as a group, maybe the subcommittees could spend the time working on the projects next month, and then circle back around maybe in six weeks, just delay that next meeting a little bit, and post it a little bit later, and try to squeeze a date in over a lunch period, if that could work. >> Haven't we always met during the day? >> So, previously -- >> Towards the latter part of the day. >> Yes, so previously the meetings were at four on the first day of the month. Prior to this, I think that there's been maybe some change in work schedules, and we do try and accommodate, and I think that everyone who's on a subcommittee knows I try to make myself available as many evenings as I can for that subcommittee work, since we don't have to produce those meetings that we can meet in the evenings, and that seems to be much more convenient and easy for the most. It's really about the challenge and making sure we have staff to produce the meetings. >> So, the three people who are having a difficult time, would it help if we moved the meeting back to start at four o'clock and end by five? >> I think there's individuals who do not get off work until 5 p.m., so meeting after hours is -- >> But, Ed, we've always -- I mean, our membership -- >> And I understand we always have, but P&Z has always met in the evening. Animal Shelter Advisory Board has always met in the evening. Just because we've always done it a certain way doesn't mean it's the right way. It is the way we've always done it, but we -- if you look at the attendance of today's meeting, we barely have a quorum. >> But I guess we have to continue meeting this way. >> Yeah, I just wondered what changed because we've always all kind of shown up for these meetings, but -- >> And in line with what Gary said, maybe it makes sense to stagger the meetings. Maybe rather than meeting every month, we meet, then we have subcommittee meetings the next month, and then the month after we meet, if that would provide some form of benefit to making, you know, to juggling staff available after hours or when the others can meet. >> If we met less frequently, just a suggestion, I don't have the answer other than I know that, and myself included, there are others who are not present today who have a -- you know, there's definitely a challenge. >> Would moving the meetings back later in the day help, though, like a 430 to 530? I guess we need to find out what would work for those people that it's not working for now. >> So we have a hard stop at 5 o'clock, so that window is from 3 to 5, and so that's the challenge that we're in, unless we did it over lunch. >> I think a lunch -- >> Like a 1 to 130? >> Why don't we -- is there a desire to look for a date or time for October or just go ahead and schedule a month off? >> The reason -- I would hesitate to do that, Jessica, because of all of the projects we just went through, and being able to move them forward and pay attention to them being processed through. >> Well, I think what was mentioned was that the subcommittees would meet, so that progress would still be made. It's just the main pack wouldn't meet until the next month. Is that what you were saying, Gary? Is that what you were -- >> Yes. >> Yeah, so maybe we could meet, let's say, try to meet October 15th, October 20th, somewhere in there, and then we could have a couple subcommittee meetings for each of the sculptures, try to make progress. John will have some feedback on the DWIF. We should be able -- we should have feedback pretty quickly on the Vela and the dog park ones and get those out in the cafe if we have to go to plan B and get those posted. So that would give us time to really get everything out into the process and maybe even have some deadlines before that, and then we could come back to the committee and get something scheduled for that, maybe late October and have some significant progress for the group to consider as a whole. >> And in the meantime, can we do some sort of survey? >> Yes, we can send out something with time blocks. And I know that among all of the many things that are happening in our lives right now that we're asking for incredible flexibility, so know that it's very much appreciated. >> Jessica, Eddie's online, and Eddie's kind of oversees organizing the park board and getting that agenda all set up. Eddie, if you are still with us, is the set timeframe for meetings, is it 1230 to 230? >> Hi, everyone, Eddie Valdez, a management analyst for the Parks and Recreation Department. So we don't have a set time. What I've been doing is to send out the survey because, you know, just like yourselves, our park board meeting and our attendees, you know, they work during those hours. So I would try to plan at least a month in advance. We've got a small little window of what days that we can try to book for a month in advance. But I try to accommodate as much as everyone can try to make it. So I give them a couple options, maybe one day with multiple hours, or maybe one or two days with a couple hours. >> All right. Well, why don't we move forward with sending out a survey, if anyone knows of any hard days, like absolutely no Mondays for you or something like that, let us know so that we can take that into account, and we are going to try and do the best we can to accommodate everybody. And Ed's cat, which is my favorite. Does that count towards a quorum? >> Max has the most intense eyes. He's just -- he's like the Rami Malek of cats. >> Okay. All right. >> Oh, Monet, you're on mute. >> You hear me now? >> Yes. >> Item D, staff reports. >> So one quick staff report, which is something that I sent out to everyone earlier, and is that I'm very sad to say this is my last public art committee as the staff liaison. We are reshifting and refocusing sort of department priorities. And in all of this, Gary has so graciously agreed to take over the public art program. And John and Drew and Gary and Eddie are getting all up to speed on everything related to public art. I have two boxes for him ready to go. I was hoping he was going to be here today. But they're wonderful, and you guys are in very good hands. Unfortunately, though, you are not getting rid of me completely, because economic development is going to stay over the cultural district's programming. And so I will still come see you guys on a pretty regular basis. I just won't be the staff liaison for the committee anymore. But I'll still be involved, of course, with the fellowship project and the ongoing programming for the cultural district. So you still have me. I'll still be here. I'll just be in a little bit of a different capacity. And you guys are in wonderful hands. And in my email, I also noted that Parks is in the process of actually hiring a landscape architect that will be serving as the project lead for helping getting all of these projects cited and coordinated and keeping us all in line on all of these projects. But know that I've had a wonderful kind of past year and a half getting to know and work with all of you and have learned more about art and music and culture than I could have ever imagined. So thank you for at least letting me learn something. >> Well, thank you for everything that you've done for the committee. You've been great. >> Yeah. Thank you, Jessica. >> I think that's it. That's all we have for the staff reports. >> And Gary, we promise to try to not torture you too much, but, you know, fingers crossed. >> Well, that's why we have four or five of us here. >> Yeah. So Jessica is right. We are in the process of hiring a landscape architect to eventually lead this committee. Until that person is hired, John Whitmore and I will be the point people for that. And then the landscape architect will work with us and we'll integrate them in whenever they get hired. Eddie is going to help with setting up the meetings and, you know, the future survey that we're going to have to kind of really work with everyone to make the best time that we can and provide that for you. So, but if you have any questions or need anything, feel free to reach out to us. >> And I promise I'm not going anywhere leaving Denton, so you guys can always reach out to me if you need something and we'll all track Drew down. >> So I guess our next step in the meantime, John will be reaching out to everyone, try to get subcommittee set up once we get a couple of these proposals out and we'll get those organized. We can do those in the evening because those are not recorded with a quorum. So we can get those scheduled next week and get out all these other projects in the works. Looking forward to getting those going and seeing some more art installed. >> Including items? >> So I have a quick question. So just looking ahead to any future public art projects and RFQs that we're going to be doing, and I think we talked about this last time, but I just want to make sure that there's a plan in place for any future RFQs to avoid this, like, problem that we're having recently with a lot of the artists not wanting to do these smaller scale projects, right? >> So that's a good question. Jessica, go ahead, I'll let you, I don't want to interrupt you, sorry. >> So we did in the original, I went back and looked because I heard this question at the last meeting, even though I wasn't here, but I went back and looked at what we put out in CAFE, and it looked like we said that projects would be no more than $50,000, and then we have had, of course, one that, so we did indicate it in the CAFE call, but certainly, I mean, if I was an artist, I'd probably want to be as pre-qualified as possible and then be able to make that determination. So we can definitely look at what we've put in CAFE before and see if we can't make that more clear or if we can do some sort of stratification or something. I think that that's a very fair question, so something that we'll want to make sure we clarify going forward. >> Jessica, as a follow-up to that, in the, of the submittals that we did get through CAFE, did we get, or did we look at the number of local artists that submitted or that were approved? >> I don't think so. I mean, I don't think we went through specifically to say this one's local, this one's not local. I'm trying to think, I think the, Ed, I know you were on the pre-qualification scoring committee. You just received like their statements and their CVs and then the images, but I don't think you necessarily got something that said this person is local, this person is not local. >> That is correct. >> Yeah, it'd be nice to, if we do an RFQ in the future to be able to know that because that will have a lot to do with budget as well. >> So, yeah, we could, if there was some desire in the future, if you wanted to kind of take a step back or if we wanted to try maybe a couple pieces a different route or do it maybe in concert with CAFE where we could reach out to TSA or Texas Sculpture Association or some of the other groups that have promoted them and they'll promote them for free to their members as well. So, and that might get you more of a focused return on people within a drive as opposed to, you know, across the country that increases that shipping costs and that expense to bring it down. So that's another direction that we could talk about in the future. >> Anything else? >> And then another future agenda item two is the paying, I know, like we've had this conversation before, I can't remember where we left off, but there was the paying artists for proposals, right? We talked about the last meeting, that as well as the temporary art program and we didn't put those on the agenda because we were trying to get everybody focused on the sculpture projects that we have and then we'll circle back around maybe in October or November with updates on these projects, try to get those other ones out the door and then we can talk about these for future projects and then we also do have to circle back around on the transportation project funding that we have. So that's another future discussion. >> If there's nothing else, we can close the meeting at 4/24. >> Thank you, everyone. >> Thank you.