Library Board - Regular Meeting

The meeting is now called to order. The time is 06:01PM. Yeah. Alright.

So we currently have zero. Zero. Okay. We have well, we have one guest, so that's us. Sorry. Okay. We currently have zero remote participants. For remote participants, please make sure that you are using the most current version of Zoom or an updated web browser. Certain functionality may be disabled if the app or the browser is not updated. You must register using the link at the top of the agenda.

Click raise hand when you wish to speak on an item or click unmute once you've been called to speak. You may also submit written comments by emailing me, Jackie Kelii AA@jkeliiaaatAlamedaCA.gob. Comments submitted during the meeting before the conclusion of public comment section will be read into record, and my email address is also on the meeting's agenda. If a remote participant is having difficulty, I suggest you call using the number +1 (669) 444-9171. Meeting ID, 89642081044.

This information is also on top of the meeting agenda, and people participating via telephone have to press 9 to raise their hand and 6 to unmute. For in person participation, a speaker slip must be submitted to speak on any item. Speaker slips are located on the chair over there with pens. If a commissioner would like to speak, please physically raise your hand, and the chair will acknowledge your request. The chat function has been turned off. Oh, we have one we have do have one caller participant right now.

And the other one is us?

Yes. Yeah.

People call.

Call to order. The meeting is not called to order. The time is 06:03PM.

Commissioner Liz Rush? Present. Present.

Commissioner Robert Ferguson absent. Commissioner Platzluner? Present. Commissioner Lisa Martin? And commissioner James Martin? Present. Staff Jackie Lidia, present. Staff Dwayne Dolan? Present.

Comments from

the audience may concern matters either on or not on the agenda, but must deal with matters subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Arts Commission. Comments will be limited to three minutes. Comments concerning matters on this evening's agenda will be heard when that item is called. Felipe, do you have any items to read into the record?

I do not.

Alright. Raise your hand if you'd like to provide public comment unrelated to an item on the agenda. Raising my hand. No.

Alright. So that begins with item three a, which is the to approve the draft meeting minutes. The first draft meeting minutes is from 04/14/2024. That was a majority was a circle of training. Do we have

any motion to approve? I have a motion to edit.

Oh, you've been editing anything. A motion because

It says I was there, but I was not.

Oh, sorry about that. I will remove you from it. Once we make that edit, is there any other edits or questions folks have about those particular minutes? No. Okay. I'll remove Lisa Martin from there.

Motion to approve 58.

I second that.

Motion to approve.

Then second by Liz Rush. Okay. And then for the second set of meeting minutes from April 28 was which was the deliberation of the twenty twenty five public art applications. Any edits? Or

have no edits.

Alright. Do you have a motion?

Moved. Minutes.

Okay. I second it. Alright.

Lisa Martin. Motion. James Martin second. Okay. Great. And that brings us to our regular agenda. So we're gonna move this around. We're waiting for one of our speakers who'll be here next. So we're gonna actually start with, that'll take us to item four b for now, which is the recommendation to select a physical art site within Washington Park and review the proposed RFQ timeline. So I will, bring up that presentation now, and then that will be presented by Jack. Do you mind doing the first presentation? We're just waiting on doughnut. Yeah. And it's this one. Right?

Okay. Let me get a

look at it for you. Good evening. So there's not too much. I'm Jack. The city's public art fellow. And, yeah, we have quick presentation and some time to deliberate at the final location selection for physical public art in Washington Park. So we had our PAC special meeting walk

through. We looked

at these four locations within Washington Park that the Reckon Park staff had suggested as suitable locations. We looked at all of them, discussed the pros and cons of each with you all and the staff and Reckon Park, and we essentially narrowed it down to those two sites that are one by the playground and then a gateway location update the central intersection. The next so these are the two being considered at this point that I I just mentioned. We can I think it's it's you know, there's not too much more to add? There's we can go back and talk about the things we talked about when we walked to the park.

There's, you know, there's two presentations, two different agenda items, but they do move to each other a little bit. So there might be some crossover in these discussions. But, yeah, I think we can the the next bit of this is about the timeline, which we can kind of blend into it as well. But I think this is the main moment is that these these are the two being being considered, and we can kind of talk about how we're feeling about these two sites, decide on which two to select. And then once we selected that, the the timeline starts at that decision.

So if we wanna deliberate now and then move on to the timeline section, I think that could be

K. So, just a reminder of the process. It's, number one, clarifying questions. Number two, public comment. Three, close public comment, and then commissioner discussion and feedback. So any clarifying questions on this?

Let me

make sure I just realized I'm not sharing my screen. Apologies.

Go ahead, Peter. I have that one.

Claire had a question. The presentation says sites two and three. The agenda item says site one and three. One.

Yeah. The I I meant to change that on one of them. I had so one and two can you go back to the slide?

Yeah. Let's go. Let's go back.

Just make sure we can

So

but so three is obviously three. Four is obviously four. Two and one were discussed originally as different locations. One is more within the the trees there. I moved it to two because I think it there's this this graphic is a little confusing because there's two kind of path smart when in reality, there's one path that would that's closer to two.

So I originally had said one because I thought it was next to that path, but that path that goes straight, to the corner doesn't exist. So number two is the is that corner's entry pathway, which is which is being considered. So we can change that wherever it says one.

It's basically the two stars of the site? Starred locations. Okay.

Within this location okay. Sorry about the location. Within this location, does it mean that the artist has has or can make a suggestion where exactly to put it, or are we are we defining it now to a point that it's very clear. We also had a discussion with there's if it could be an heart rate or expand. So there's a whole bunch of different options as far as I can help with the.

Yeah. My understanding is that we wanted to narrow it down as best we could, but until we have, you know, until the end of the RFP process where we know exactly what ours is gonna look like, we're not gonna know exactly how big the concrete pad is gonna be, how far it has to be away from the electrical to if it meets that, those kind of things. So this is you know, we have discussed also leaving two sites and letting the artist decide, but I think we've decided that we're gonna choose one just so we have Mhmm. As narrow as we can get it before before. So we're, like, roughly, like, a 10 by 10 area. So I should kinda be envisioning.

Well, it could be 20 by 22. Yeah. It's it's really remains to be seen, but the scope well, I don't wanna interrupt your presentation. But sort of the the preliminary site preparation costs were all based on 20 by 20 pad. And that 20 by 20 pad going three feet deep to support potential art could be less than that, but then also having, like, a a a pad that's only a couple inches deep, Like, a walk path. Yeah.

That is a great question, which was the site prep costs, those estimates of 20 by 20. How are those functioning as maximum parameters, or is that just a way to get it? Or both? Yeah. It is. Are

we discussing this now? Because that's the next part of No.

We're not. We're only asking questions right now.

Yeah. I mean, I think it's it's part of the the discussions are intertwined, but we the that was, I I think, kind of a a maximum. We don't expect it to be

significantly bigger than that.

I guess the reason I'm asking and this is merging into discussion is that I wouldn't want us to unintentionally constrain something at this stage that we aren't aware of that being a constraint. Oh, we agreed to 20 by 20.

Right. So let's

We thought that was just an estimate.

So Right. So let's discuss that when we get to our discussions. Any other questions? Okay. Go.

Okay. Are the site prep costs taken on by the city, or are those part of the cost that artists will bear? I should probably know this for, like, So

the it's it's we're taking into the total cost, the total spend, and it would be the grant go into the grant essentially to cover site preparation costs, which is why we're asking for that dollar amount to be inclusive of those costs. And they're just estimates, and they're probably a little bit more they're not very conservative. We would rather overspend than underspend. It's something we learned during our most recent commission where we did not account for approximately $40,000 in site prep. And that was not included in the original grant, and so we're really trying to do our due diligence now to scope out those costs in advance so we have a better idea.

But it is clear that costs are going to be slightly more for, number two, which is the start site just because of its location to irrigation and electricity, etcetera.

I I know that this is hard to separate, but this this first little presentation is about,

I mean, yeah, it's hard

to separate from from the cost because it's so important, but choosing one location. And then the next is about total budget.

I do have one more clarifying question. There was a general discussion at the presentation in the park, and I don't think all commissioners are far left is that it will probably make more sense that one of the sculptures would be more archery gateway sculpture while the other one track the park piece. Is that still is that still the fault?

Yeah. I think so. The the location kind of changes the potential.

K. Any other

questions? We good?

Alrighty. How about any public comment? Are I don't know anyone No. Raised hand. K.

Great. I don't have anything on here in terms of chat, but let me just double check.

I don't see any

comments. Nope.

No. Okay. Okay. We'll close the public comment then. Oh, let's open it up for commissioner discussion and feedback.

Commissioner Martin. Nope. That one. Okay.

One second. Okay. Alright. Alright. Good. I'll start it off. I find that trying to pick a location, I understand that it would be more expedient to pick a location, but would that be limiting the artist by saying you have to be here? So it it would be awesome if we did not have to pick one of those locations. Barring any issues from wreck and car on those locations, which I assume you guys have cleared.

Yeah. They recommended So Yeah. We've talked to them about the locations because we wanted to see what their park use was and ensure we weren't stepping on it, but complementing the existing park So there were other sites we looked at. They were like, oh, this is where the garlic balloons, brews, and barbecues is we can't like, this is where we use. That's a primary space. So they did share that they're not as excited about Site 2, which is the northmost site and really thought the opportunity at Site 3 was good because it complement the nearby playground. But, yes, we did walk through several times with Reckon Park about these locations.

So perhaps their objection to Number 2 is that it's too close to the road. Did they give a

I think they thought it was competing with the already existing introduction sign that's there and that it might it might have more utility, and people would enjoy it more if it was closer to the playground. But that was just a a couple thoughts we got from the record park folks. Okay.

Think the site you pick will naturally imply what kind of art you're asking for. So if we are looking at the near the playground site, that will give us proposals that are different than issues number two. If we leave them open as chair is suggesting, then we have more variety. And I think it's still specific enough that you're not running into that issue that you would have had prior of a free for all of, oh, any site in the city. Totally.

Yeah. We can't do that again.

That then.

We learned our lesson. Yes.

Yes. I I'm not a regular cop at all, I I agree with Jefferson Rush that I see a benefit to offering up as many sites in the park that wreck at parks.

Yeah. There's a few things

that are trying to meet the location and the art itself, and we'll have the same discussion, I think.

I wouldn't wanna go to

park out the other way. Just have the free for all, but some options are gonna be nice.

So you're saying that we should perhaps pick a site?

I think so.

Staff is recommending and requesting that pack pick a site one. It just makes the RFP a lot easier when you do a call because we're gonna be evaluating different applicants with different skill sets and have different sites.

It just might make the

it just make make it more complicated process. But you're our commission, so let us know what you

I was in there for

the walk through day.

I I'm definitely preferring Site Number 2 over Site Number 3. But, again, I wasn't there.

That'd be perfect.

I I think Site Number 3 is just a big open site where you could sort of spread out. 2 felt a little tighter to me, although it was a lovely entrance to the park.

Yeah.

And, honestly, I think that their signage for the park could be improved, and perhaps that sculpture could incorporate some signage to that park.

Yeah. I

like I like the entrance to the park on the corner. It's kind of just, like, right out there. Three feels a little bit cramped into the playground and the tree right there on

the keys. But

It's more spacious than it looks.

Yeah. I think it's true. It's true. Scoot. It's it's probably, like, 50 by 50, but we were just pulling 20 by 20 as, like, a this is a Yeah. Median amount of pad. It could be smaller. It could be bigger. But, yeah, Wreckard Park did say that this space is open for opportunity.

Commissioner Plask, come on.

And first of all, I'm I'm still sticking to to what I said in all the meetings before that I'm not happy with this with the site selection in general. The reason for that is that what we're doing here is not just putting our RPs down, but we're also doing place making. And this is a place that is very active already where a lot is happening already or a lot of families coming, and I just don't see when we're spending essentially a third of our overall brand money Mhmm. That we have to put it somewhere where already a lot has happened, which is also the reason for me. Like, if we if we have to, then this would also be the reason for me why I would prefer number two or site two slash one to number three.

Because what's the point in in adding a decorative element to a playground that is already full of decorative elements? Like, we're we're we're stacking things on top of things while the rest of the island has nothing. Additionally, I'm I'm flabbergasted by the by the side prep costs, like a concrete pad of $25.20 for sculptures. Isn't it? Well, how

how did it go to the?

Can you hold your comments, Becky? What comment?

We'll we'll give you. Okay. I've I've now managed about 200 sculptures. A pad of 20 by 20 that is three feet deep would would be an incredibly like, let's make it easier. Let's just look at the exhibit one of the next of the of the next agenda item.

There's free free suggestions for different sculptures. All the paths that are there are are close to three by three feet, which in my mind is realistic for a sculpture that that has this site depending on how it looks like. So I wouldn't be that stressed about the the site preparation costs. They're certainly high. But if I if I compare it to the site preparation costs for the that we're discussing afterwards, so we're talking about a complete path.

It's $50,000. In the budget, I feel like that I would hope. I would say that way that this is a more realistic scenario that we're that we're ending up with. The same is true for the electricity. Like, as much as I would love to see an electrical or or lights or whatsoever, I'm not sure if this was part of the discussion that I know I asked during the site visit.

I'm not sure if this is part of the discussion. Like, the the Brexit Park is usually not lighting up sculptures in the middle of the night because they don't wanna have people going there, which is funny because we're putting public art somewhere that people go there. And now we're putting it somewhere where people aren't supposed to go with it because we're closing it. But there's a lot of costs in it that are the absolute maximum, so I wouldn't be super stressed about that at this point. We'll purely focus on on the selection the site selections. From that point, I'd stick to two if we have to pick one. If you don't have to pick one, I would.

Yes. Commissioner Barth.

I agree with commissioner Plattsmomer when it comes to the overhaul site selection. As I mentioned before, think Washington Park has not going on, so I'm not gonna repeat everything. So I agree 100% on that. I do wanna push back on the cons of site 3. I think if you think more broadly about our maybe maybe what we select or the subcommittee the selects is a proposal that contains a functional artwork that could be used as a stage.

Therefore, it's adding to cultural arts programming as as well as being this is a hypothetical. Okay. So it doesn't have to be a sculpture that sits on a three by three pad. You know? It it could be anything at this point. It could be literally anything. So I don't wanna limit it to two or three. I think three could work if the proposal works with that site near the playground. But, yes, to this not being an ideal site. I'm not excited about. No. I understand.

Keep in mind that if we were to reject Washington Park, this would push the grant process back. We only meet so often. And I I understand the concerns about spending money in in an already busy park. I get that. Our goal is to put Sculptor out there, do it in a timely manner, so we do have to take that into consideration.

I also understand the concern of taking a spot because it does open up a lot of options for people. Perhaps the person who picks Site 2 doesn't have the best sculpture. Site 3 has a great sculpture, but it's lacking in some way in the RFP. So how can we pick a great site and pick the best design for that site. It could get a little complicated, so I understand that part.

That being said, we we I don't know if we could all vote. There's only four of us here. So Well, we do

have a quorum. So you are deciding body and you have

a quorum. So you can you can make a motion to

Well, what I see right now is there are two people who prefer two or three one or two, and they have they have two of us who would prefer to keep it open after two sets. Okay.

I'm more of a keep it up person.

So is the recommendation to have two sites for the RFQ? Is that what you're asking, or are you asking for all four sites

for the RFQ?

No. No. I was just asking how

I think any of us is saying all four because we wanna go by what parks and breakfast that's given there. So I'm happy with two and three myself.

Maybe I have one thing. My one problem with the number with Site 3 is, like, at the end of the day, wanna have art that is being seen,

which to me means to be closer to to larger

or to where there's more traffic, which to me means to putting it as close as possible to Webster. The values except for because it's just that was In Central. We've seen

no. But and people

are coming from Webster Street. They're going this direction. They're on on Central. It just feels like it's more visible for more people than than set free. That's that's They're integrated in the park, and I appreciate that. But then we're adding to as said before, stacking things on top of this.

Yes. Okay. Site three.

So just in talking with Pat, with Park, we were sort of just chatting out loud and throwing ideas about what this potential arc could be. And there was a thought like, oh, would this be something that is sensory? Would this be something that children of other abilities could potentially utilize that's separate from the kids who are able to use the existing playground? We had looked at some other types of art. There's sound based sensory art. And so there was this idea that that could open up an opportunity for other abilities. But, again, just a thought. And what it basically, what I'm saying is that it's it's pretty broad, and what it could be is is something that I encourage us all to sort of think openly about.

If we do that, the cost for for a playground consultant, the cost for an ADA consultant, does that mean you come out

of the budget for the

of the artist, or is that separate?

No. That would be because I have trade

about a $100,000 on other policy.

Yeah. I talked to I talked to our risk management team, and our policy covers everything up to $2,000,000. So they were not concerned with us having to get a special additional consultant. I don't but what city were you working in where you purchased that?

Well, an ADA consultant isn't here for liability reasons. It's here to make sure that that everything is, like, accessible as possible and there's specifics for Mhmm. For states when it comes to distances between walkways and distances, like, the art would have different parts. Mhmm. And with with playable sculptures, all of them need to be accessible or a specific amount of pieces need to be accessible. Like, as soon as it's something that goes towards an interactive art piece that where accessibility is an issue, usually pulling an ADA consult. Right? Mhmm.

We also do have an ADA a newer relatively newer ADA staff member who that's their purpose is, and their role is to implement ADA policy. So there that might be something we can pull into this process down the road.

K. So to focus on-site location here, are we we're throwing out some items to to vote on?

We have two choices. So two

We need three for our core.

Three for both sides. Yeah. Three. That's where we are.

Did it already pass? Yes. We did. Okay.

Did I?

I shall We can open it up with master.

I think

there's one person that's gonna come in. But

I just wanna Yeah. Yeah. Do

you wanna do you wanna vote separately for each of the locations, or do you wanna because I feel like we have to quorum for the upper one. We don't have to quorum for the lower one right now. I'd

like to be a little more casual than that. I'd like to just say, let's, you know, what's your opinion, and then let's just pick one instead of being so, you know, tight enough. Stick with Robert's point of order

to the end of the degree.

No. I don't. No. I'd like to put a little more casual than that.

Who would who would vote yes for two and three? I'm not looking at Jackie.

She's gonna

give me the people line. No. I won't. I you guys

who would vote I would vote

for two. Casually.

So two.

I would go for two or three.

Anyone else up for two?

Yeah. He goes for two.

Just two. Two two and three. What about just three? They went for just three. They've already voted. I think three is that. Yeah.

We need Robert. I know. Unfortunately, he was gonna make it.

You wanna table the decision for the next meeting?

I think so. I think we could.

We have one in July, so it's about less than a month ago

or month ago. You think it's okay? Everybody okay with that? Motion. Okay. We have motion to table that for our next meeting. And I can go back to public comment if somebody wanted to comment.

Here's your your slip. Yeah.

And if

you don't mind coming up here because folks are also watching, we like to make sure people joining us remotely are also able to share the public comment. Don't if you thought Sure. And then I'll say something

that is already been addressed. Okay. Where is where

is this supposed to?

You you can speak right there. You have three minutes.

I I was just gonna say that I think I haven't been to the site. I would be nervous if I hadn't gone to the site and checked it all out. I think maybe a sculpture that's, you know, that's a pretty busy intersection, And I'm not sure that I I would be leaning towards something that is gonna attract the driver's attention, like looking over at something while they're driving. I think that's something where people are walking around and and they can experience it. It's probably a safer bet for traffic than something where it's it's really amazing.

You drive by, and everybody's, like, drive by. I'm like, oh, look at that sculpture. It's another thing to pull driver's attention. And and, really, what you want people to do is get out of the car, walk around, enjoy the park on the feet, and walk all the way around the sculpture. And so I think I would be I think I would just be careful not to motivate yourself to look for a site that is, you know, visible from the street and and try to prioritize something that would encourage people to enjoy the park.

And the other thing I would say too is try to make sure you have a site that has good lighting, not for the nighttime, but during the day. Like, don't pick a site that's in the shade or something like that because you need to have a site with good good light, and it's not buried in trees where where you're gonna ask the margaritas to do something or fight in the shadows and stuff like that. But, again, I have been there. We're looking at little pictures on the on the screen here. So both of these sites look pretty wide open in that respect.

And I guess the last comment I know if my time clock is You're fine. You're fine. My last comment is so that I think if I was, like, one of the people that was doing responding to the RFP, I think I would feel that going around there and maybe having a few different options for where I could place something with the type of artwork that I could possibly do in the different locations would feel like there'd be some good op it would feel good to have some options optionality. And I think you guys would get a better selection of overall possible artwork if it's a little bit more open in terms of what things could be where, because I think you may get a variety of different things. And something will hit you guys and say, hey.

We love this thing. You know? And you just have a little bit more options if you if you have if you let the artists come in and around the spaces and do a little work themselves to figure out what they think would make sense where.

Thank you. Who's second in the motion

table? No one has principal.

I'll second.

I I could actually read it back what he just said, so I'm. I mean, to be honest, both are hidden behind trees, so it doesn't matter. What about the trees? Yeah. They both suck.

Well, I mean, if you're looking at a point on that map, yes. But if we look if we were to redo the bird's eye view and have it be, like, areas that are marked,

that I think would be

more helpful than a star.

I I think where I where I thought where I agree with this, like, if the sites aren't good, then we need to give the artist more options Mhmm. To figure it out. And from that point of view, I think we need to go.

I think we might have three to

one. Okay.

Which would mean we would have to go for.

So what is the like, what's the emotion?

To motion motion to is it what does it suggest to the are are we approving, or what are we doing?

Well, we we just did a motion to table.

But we're all resending that.

We're sending it.

No. We couldn't. No one

sent them.

Oh, she just second seconded. I did. Oh, yeah. Okay. We okay. So what would you what what what are you motioning then, commissioner?

Right. In that case, that that's the question. Like, would I motion to suggest that that the city goes forward in these two locations? Yeah. Okay. With the RFQ. Let's do that.

Okay. Any second? I second that. Okay. So alright. So we'll be selecting two locations to confirm. It's two and three.

Correct. Right. Yes. According to the math.

Right. No. I but I'm just confirming what,

two and three. Okay. Here are all those in favor. All those in favor?

Aye. All those against? So three to one.

K. So we'll be doing two sides for the upcoming RFQ. Great. Alright. We still have the other piece to discuss, which is the estimated RFQ timeline.

So this is, yeah, a preliminary look at the timeline. Obviously, nothing to change, but this is the RFQ and RP process. Helps understand what's coming up or what to kind of we're working on this summer. So the the goal would be that the open call for RFQ review panel participants would be in August. We're building that panel.

We review panel participant applications. October, we'd select those and mark it to get the RFQ, and they go to launch that November. They're staying for eight weeks due in January 2026. We reviewed, and the the panel would confirm a shortlist of artists. We'd have eight weeks then to develop mock ups, see those in April, and outreach in the parks, Washington Park, and do community feedback, see what they like.

Berkeley recently had a design scrapped because not a fan. So those things are very important. Then the review panel in July would select public art grant awardee, and August would begin design development. September through November would be fabrication, and then all the installation would be 2027. And, yeah, this is just you know, I I think if there's anything hugely glaring, we can definitely talk about it, but it's mostly just to to have Sure.

Y'all's eyes on it and see what see what we're thinking kind of based on what's been going on regionally, timeline wise, and and all that stuff.

So anyone else clarifying questions? No. To go through that again.

Oh, well, just I mean, yes. Clarifying question. Commissioner Black Clover.

And in general, I'm I'm totally fine with this timeline. This sounds this sounds reasonable. The thing that I'm really, really concerned with with the selection of ZARC work in general and spending money on the ZARC work is that as far as I understand, the aquatic center starts in January 2026. It's supposed to be built over that year, so it ends roughly at the same time. And there's still no decision made by the city council if they would waive the the 1% for art or not, in which case,

I would

They're probably not going to because every municipality is required to abide by the public art.

No. They can waive it for for public buildings. Since the since they're right now about 5,000,000 over budget, I would expect that these discussions gonna happen. In which case, I'm really terrified that the idea is that this culture is supposed to be paid out of the of the avant garde grant to sculpture at the quality center, which would mean that we would have two sculptures at the same time with roughly the same budget and essentially eat up 2% or two thirds of our budget within within a year. So that that's my one concern. And I

Are you calculating two thirds?

Because we're talking here, we're talking now about 300,000 in all reality with all the side preparation costs. The other one is supposedly right now at 340,000 if it's if it's 1% of 34,000,000, which is which is roughly 700,000, then it's, like, a significant chunk of of harm. So my concern right now is to make a decision before the decision of the city council regarding aquatics. Was not very that was not very clarifying. So do you have any more information about that? I'm sorry.

Oh, yeah.

So to to the question about municipal development. So there is a public art ordinance, and it requires that municipal debt developments and private developments, $250,000 or more to pay a 1% fee, which would go towards public art in the city. Either you can commit to it yourself and do on-site art, which we'll get a presentation about that very soon, or you pay into the fund. To my knowledge, we have not received a waiver for any municipal building, meaning they've all paid the 1%. So my expectation is that they will pay the 1%.

I am not speaking for Wreck And Park. I am not Reckon Park. Ultimately, that would be a decision that would be made. But once they actually get those development permits in, that triggers a call from planning to say, hi, Jackie. We've triggered the $250,000 valuation. Now you have to start that conversation. That conversation hasn't started yet because they haven't started building. But it's we're going to bring that up, and history shows that they've all paid. So I would assume based on the past that that might happen. But it is a large project. It is a priority for the community, and, you know, that's that's we will cross that bridge when we get here.

At what point so are we obligated to choose one of

the applicants once the RFQ goes out?

Once the RFQ goes out, there's gonna be a panel, and that panel will make the ultimate decision on, number one, who gets to submit to the RFP. So it's the RFQ process first to review the qualifications of the artists. And then thereafter, once that shortlist is identified, then those two, two, three, or four artists go out and make a mock up, and that's what was reviewed. Sorry.

But it it's happened I don't know if it's happened in Alameda, but it's happened where you put an RQ out and it doesn't the review panel says this wouldn't get None of

these work terms. Yeah. I mean, I

guess that's why, yeah, what point in the

timeline can we say we're

choosing none of these? I I think all of commissioner concerns are totally valid. Mhmm. At what point can

yeah. Would it would it be I mean, your your initial deal is the RFQ review shortlist confirmed by the review panel. So

February 2020.

The time to say, okay. Well, we've we've review tabling this, and now in nothing. Nothing.

So We can

say we don't like the you guys can say you don't like the other things.

This is actually

a different question. This is about you're asking about if we have economic issues that preclude us from going forward with this, but this is more like aesthetically, the review panel does not like any of the options. Oh. So are both of those

Well, I guess Those are both possible. Same. Mhmm.

Those those outcomes are both possible. We can pull out

the. What? RFQ isn't being so much about this.

The RFQ is just about qualifications of the artist and their past experience. Okay. So but you can all say, hey. We don't like any of these. We wanna table this and do do do the RFQ in the spring. You know? Which which would mean

which would mean, theoretically, that would happen at the time when the building when they already started to construct.

Perhaps you'll have more information by then. So

And then we send this stuff.

Okay. Any other clarifying questions?

I was curious how the review panel process works.

This is this will be my first time convening one, but I am working closely with Amanda Gerke who used to manage this program. We're hoping to have a member of the Rec and Park Commission join just so we since we're building there, it makes the most sense to also ensure that we're bringing in someone from the Rec and Park group. And then it would be great. We'd like to put an open call out to, like, a neighbor who lives in that neighborhood to also be on it and then a member or two from the commission to be on it. So we're imagining a panel of a diverse sort of cross section of folks representing different interests in the neighborhood, the department, as well as the commission.

And, probably about five people is what we kinda thought. But, again, we're convening this this panel. Yeah. Well, we have to put the effort into calling the people in, interviewing, that kind of thing. Don't approve it. But you well, we're gonna have to get two members of the pack to be on the panel.

So usually held not as a one of our regular

It's separate.

It's a

separate thing.

Yeah. But, I

mean, it's true. We should we should approve the panel.

Yeah. But we still what I'm saying is staff is convening. Staff is doing the open call and collecting people and making that happen. And then we'll have the panel confirmed. Once that's confirmed, then they'll be part of the evaluation processes for the RFQ and the RFP.

Okay. Okay. In this case

And you're done.

I will put in a motion to accept the timeline.

Hang on. We have to do public comments. Oh, I'm sorry. You're good. Any public comments? Alright. Yes.

I wonder if if you could

just walk through the timeline, and I heard you say RFQ and RFP. Oh. But I don't see RFP on there necessarily unless I can't see it. But you're gonna first you're gonna first figure out who's qualified in in August.

Then make mock ups. And then and

then at what point are you gonna contact Artis and say, hey. You're qualified. Give us your concept.

That's here, the mock ups.

Mock ups.

Okay. So this is where the RFQ is reviewed. Okay. A shortlist of, hey. Here's the three people we love. Yay. And then we go, here's your budget because we're also giving them funding Right. To make the mock up, and we're giving them time to make the mock up, then they present it. But, yeah, that's where we want their design and concept.

So that that they're gonna turn that into May? April. April? Mhmm.

So you've completed

that. Enough time for when when you've

We give them eight weeks.

To to develop the concept.

Yeah. And then And money to do so.

And then when you award it in July, they could really start working on the on producing the piece.

Yeah. I mean, that's when the that's when the award is granted.

What's what's design development in August?

I think that's the working of

That's the

work of the piece. Yeah.

Yeah. They're working on the piece. Okay. And there's fabrication in September, November, which is also working on the piece.

So you might as well say August, September, November.

Was actually the fabrication design. Yeah. So, like, the the fabrication planning and stuff as far as I understand it. Okay. Then production. I

imagine design development is also working

The schematics and everything. Like, once yeah.

Why a mock up? Like, are we talking about Vendrix too? Are we talking about a physical model?

Yeah. Physical model. Yeah. This is something we've done in the past. We have several physical models in our office. The mosaic Mhmm. Walk spinners. We have a cool dragon that never came to be.

We actually have the public come in and review.

Yeah. That's the idea is the public would be able to look at these. That way

We'd go to

the already says this sucks. Well, the the public will say it. If you could suggest another way to do it, I would suggest doing that. But Yeah.

There are several opportunities to pull the rip cord if you guys don't like any of it. It just means that it also lengthens our process because we start the process again. Correct.

Yeah. K.

Is that it for public comments? Yes. Yes. Okay. Close the public comments. Commissioner, discussion and feedback on the estimated RFQ timeline. Any additions, any changes in there?

I'll move to accept the timeline. Give me a second. I second that.

Okay.

So that brings us to we're gonna actually rewind and go back to our first topic, which is our on-site art application.

Do want me to pass it later?

I just wanted to get him I my goal was to get him in and out. But Yes. Because I imagine the budget's gonna be a lengthy discussion. Mhmm. If you guys are up or okay. Yes. That's fine. Okay. Alright. So let me pull up that app presentation. One moment. So I'm going to do the presentation, and then I'll have our artist come up and speak for his artist statement. And then, Joe, did you also bring samples of your materials?

Oh, I did bring samples. Yes.

Okay. Great.

But I do have something to say about that. Okay. I guess I'll see you later.

Do you mind if I try to look? No. Okay.

Yeah. If you don't mind, just one just one moment. Because I'll give you I'll yes. You'll also be asked to speak, and I'm kind of doing a quick overview of your application, basically, Jonah. One second.

Okay. So that brings us to item four a, recommendation to approve the attached resolution and conditions approving the making waves public art proposal. And I'd like to introduce Jonah Hendrickson, who's the developer for Storehouse Lofts and also the artist behind the making waves sculpture. And so I'm gonna go over briefly the application, and then there'll be an opportunity for Jenna to speak more about the proposed artwork and also show some materials. Okay.

One second. I know. This is hard because I have to also do the share. I wanna make sure people that are we have one person remote that's watching, and I wanna make sure they're able to see the presentation.

Okay. Alright.

Okay. Making waves proposal. Alright. To start, the background on this project is that Storehouse Lots development. The valuation is is a $150,000 for their contribution. It's a 274,234 square feet commercial live workspaces in Historic Building 8 in Alameda Point. And, again, the public art requirement is a $150,000. Here's a picture of the site, and just over to the corner there is where the proposed artwork is set to be developed. Alright. Here's a larger picture of the making waves proposal.

It's a bronze sculpture that captures Marilyn York at wave, women accepted for volunteer emergency service in the act of hand propping an engine as a naval air mechanic serving in America's World War two stateside efforts. The act represents a powerful and vivid image connecting service, strength, transformation, initiation, and momentum all in one gesture. It is most, in its most literal interpretation, Maryland's action of propping up the engine celebrates and honors women's bravery and success in filling roles traditionally filled by men on our national stage and scale. Making waves is also a powerful metaphor symbolizing and celebrating the initiation of a powerful wave prevailing forward women's access and transition into America's workforce and the realization of greater recognition and equity. So Marilyn's name will, and the United States Navy waves will be casted into the concrete for this artwork.

Alright. This is another picture of it. This is a close-up of the art. Guests, residents, well as passerbys will be captivated and engaged by the larger than life sculpture at a main entry of the building. The bronze sculpture is five by eight wide and is standing of 15 feet tall, will be permanently installed on a 10 by six by three foot high concrete pedestal near the corner of Saratoga and West Ranger, east of the dog park at the main access to the storehouse lofts, and eight and a half feet away from the street curb.

Conveniently, there is a red zone in front of it ensuring its view will be unobstructed from the right of way. There will be a six foot minimum of unobstructed walking space 360 degrees around the sculpture for it to be viewed from all sides. The sculpture will also be viewable at a great distance, including from the neighboring park across street and the former site of Building 114. And at this time, I would like to bring our artist up, Jonah. You're invited up to provide a statement on your proposed artwork.

The truth is that was my statement. I wrote that. We just read it word

for word. I did read it word for word. But you said it great, so I wanna make sure I

Well, it's it's just the idea. You know? I I don't know how I could say it really any better. I will only make it worse if I try to say anything. But Yeah.

But the idea is is that, you know, the there's a lot of different ways to go when trying to create a piece of artwork at Alameda Point. And my particular background is in figurative classical figurative sculpture. And I was trying to think of something that looked active and wasn't stiff and conveyed movement and also but very much honored, you know, the the, you know, the the context for our development, which is on the former naval base. And, also, honored somebody who or some people who were not the typical honorees that most people think of when they think of of military history. I wanted to to point a light on people that played an important role, but that probably haven't gotten nearly the recognition at all.

And I did a little poking around at the museum down there at Alameda Point and talked with a couple of people from the city of Alameda. And there's one guy who's kind of a historian guy that I talked with. And, you know, he we all kind of I I said I wanted to do something that that really focused on the world women, essentially. And and, you know, we came up with the idea of of Marilyn who, you know, was was involved early on in in in the nineteen forties. And then she stayed on after she was, you know, released from duty to be a airplane mechanic Alameda Point for a long time, many years.

Wasn't quite clear. Some of the dates were a little sounding a little conflicting to me, but, like, something like twenty years. And then she was involved in for in founding the museum, which is you know, that's a lot of service from one person. And so this is not necessarily an actual moment in time for her, but I think that given the fact that she was an airplane mechanic even in the in the navy as a wave, I think it's very likely that she would have once or twice propped a plane. And because I was looking for something active, this I this image of this woman that I found online propping a plane just seemed like this is a great image because, you know, it it it's so active, and it's doing something that is seemingly a a very dangerous job if you don't know what you're doing.

And she's taken over the role of of a of typical trained man that would have done it. So she's showing bravery. She's showing technical skill in a in a in a new trade for women at the time. And and it's also and I what I also like about it is it's it's also, like, it's also a metaphor. You know?

Like, she's starting something here. And that's what I feel like was taking place historically when women played a role in the in the in the military during the war. They didn't just come in there and do some stand in for a few a few rounds. They started something that that continued on from there, and, it's the reason why there are so many, very talented and powerful women that are even leading, the state of Alameda today. And so I just thought it was a worthwhile, you know, concept start to finish.

And I I think that this is kinda neat because it everybody looks at it and thinks it's something to do with baseball at first until you kind of till you get a little closer look at it. But that's cool because the first impression is is is motion, is action, is something that's familiar, something that's very kind of grounded in the history of America. But if you look at it, it pulls you in, and then you don't get it closer and you start asking, like, what's going on there? What's happening? What's she doing?

Or who what is that person doing? Who is she? You can you know, it brings you to learn more about it, and that's kind of the idea is it it it it it's a it's an interesting way to share and educate people about something and and, you know, connect them to the past and connect the very place that they're standing to the very past. That was the whole basis for the naval base. So I I I think it's you know, I'm pretty excited about it, and I think it's gonna be very, very cool.

And I think it'll be a nice defining feature for the for the building as well. I think that people are gonna you know? It won't it won't it will be nicely done, and it will be, at a minimum, a very nice piece of sculpture that that gives people an opportunity to learn and connect with the past.

Thank you, Jonah. And I'm gonna go through and show you a little bit more. This is

I do wanna say one thing about the color. So we're on the page there. I realized that, like

I don't know.

Let's The color is gonna start out brown, but it would be a really uphill battle to try to keep it brown because of the the connection to the water. It's it's just gonna go green. And so I actually brought a green sample in because I think that either we go brown or we just know it's gonna go green over time, which is fine. That's what bronze has done for thousands of years. Or we just start with green, and the sample's right there on the the ground if you wanna hold it up. Right? But it's that that's it's just gonna go green. Anything that's by the water or the salt is gonna turn the bronze green. I don't think that's a bad thing. I think that's what pretty much everybody expects from bronze sculpture is that it will go green unless it's indoors.

When it's indoors and it has no salty air and you have people, you know, waxing it every so many, you know, times a year. But I think the better thing is just let it be what it what it wants to be. I

was just wondering because you said waxing. So this is unwaxed.

Well, that's that's been outside of my back yard for a long time. But I I know you know, if you look at any sculpture that's anywhere near the water, it just goes clean.

No. That I I was just wondering.

Okay. But it it will be it's initially waxed. Okay. You know, the puddinga will be initially waxed. It's just that over time Yeah. You know, it's it's it's I don't think it I don't think it's I don't think there's any good aesthetic reason to try to preserve it as brown over time. Like, we could just let it do what it's what it normally wants to do by the water. Then it'll look like every other bronze sculpture that people are used to seeing

Right.

In their natural environments.

Okay. So I just wanted to go quickly over the site plan. Again, this is all included in detail in the application that was attached to the agenda. Again, it's eight and a half feet from the street. And then oops. Let me go back. It also shows the existing Landscaping. Yes. Landscaping around it. You can see those those low water plantains that are nearby, but not too close. And

to the ground. And low

to the ground. Oops. Yeah.

And then here's the sculpture and the pedestal where we located on the full site on the block.

Looks teeny.

Yes. And then gosh. This is really hard to do this with the And where is it? So is

it with the tree that's currently? No.

No. No. It's it's gonna be more, like, right right here. There's we're gonna extend the the little sidewalk and put it, like, right there. Oh, in that little? Mhmm.

Yeah. The tree that's the tree that you can see on the photo, is that the tree that's marked in the dark park, or is that Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. That that tree is, like, pretty far away. Oh, that's

the dark. Mhmm. Oh, yeah.

That's pretty far. So it's it's not gonna affect the, you know, the the light or shadow.

And then there's a maintenance plan, a detailed maintenance plan in the application as well, which is regular cleaning with mild soap, water, as well as waxing. But, yeah, due to the location, it's it's gonna have that patina. And then here's the budget. Again, this is also included in the application and full size clay, engineering, bronze casting, artworks, and that's working with the foundry here locally.

Yeah. Berk the artworks found.

Mhmm. And then the construction costs and the transportation installation, artworks, foundry costs. So this is a total of 150,000.

I would never budget I would never base anybody else's budget on what I think I can do this for. I I'm throwing a lot of stuff in, you know, and we're doing the construction on the concrete and whatnot. Mostly, if you were to go look for a sculpture of this size and this whatever, it would not cost you a $150,000. But because I'm a developer and I and I'm also an artist and it's it's kinda near and dear to my heart, I designed most of the building, and I've been behind the project for the last ten years. I I just thought it would be fun if I could actually do the artwork for it too. So I'm I'm sort of throwing in everything that's above and beyond the cost of a 150,000. And

then, again, there's more detail in there, but I wanted to show you a couple pieces that Jonah has worked on. This is from 2022 at Chase Center, a sculpture of mayor Ed Lee, and that was commissioned by the Golden State Warriors. And then this is another one from 2013, Adolf Sutro at San Francisco City Hall, and it was commissioned by the SF Arts Commission. And so the evaluation criteria is something we go through to the ordinance, and staff has reviewed the resume and the examples that mister Hendrickson has provided and previous work as well, and they demonstrate the experience and qualifications required to complete the proposed artwork. And the second question about sufficient public visibility, the proposed artwork would be excuse me.

Would be located near the corner of West Ranger Avenue in Saratoga and Alameda Point, and this location would provide ample visibility for passing pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. And as a feature in Alameda Point, Making Waves reflects its surrounding environment and history. It tells the story of women in aviation and their contributions to our nation's wartime efforts and our city's naval air history. And the other evaluation criteria is proposed on-site on-site artwork is durable and cost effective. The proposed bronze sculpture would be durable with an expected lifetime of fifty or more years.

The ownership of this artwork would remain with the developer, Alameda Pointe Redevelopers, and they would perform regular maintenance, which would be cost effective using ordinary methods. Bronze has been used in other public art throughout the city, and there are no particular maintenance durability problems identified to date. And then finally, the budget for the proposed on-site artwork and any in lieu fees proposed is equivalent to or exceeds the allocation. The budget for the proposed artwork would satisfy 100% of Alameda Point developers to look at requirement for the storehouse lofts development.

Okay. And now for the

next Where's questions? So clarifying questions now. Commissioners, anyone? We're good? Alright. How about some public comment? Do we have any of that?

There is a comment that came in over here. Just here tomorrow. Thanks. You should have concerts in some

of parks around the city as well. Okay.

Maybe I was. I

think Rachel had a comment.

Did you have a comment, Rachel? Hey. Please come on up.

You don't mind doing the intersection? Yes.

Just so everyone watching. Terrible idea.

Hi, Rachel Campos. Sort of representing myself tonight. Well, normally, I would love to see it break away from since we had to work so hard to get away from the historical references. I would love to see more fun and whimsy. I I actually I really, really appreciate the thought that Jonah put into this.

You know, the location of the sculpture would be very close to the former Navy Waves housing. I think it was just taken taken down. And then there is a there's a wonderful display specifically about Maryland Newark at the Naval Air Museum and the waves. And so I I see this actually as a project that can have multiple connections that Alameda pointed as we sort of grow our cultural resources out there.

I think that that could be

a really wonderful project. Maybe that's something that could be incorporated in there is to learn more about maybe ways in Maryland herself by going over to this other resource. So, anyways and I know the

folks at the name

of the museum are thrilled to bits to see Maryland have some recognition because she's very important there.

And that was another thing too because

that it really does help draw people with the possibility of going to actually visit the museum. I don't think that many people even know there's actually a museum out there.

Oh, well, here's a clarifying question. Do you plan on putting something on that monument that directs people to the museum?

I would be happy to.

It'd be a nice thing.

Or even a QR code or something.

Mhmm.

You know, it's just something to get in there. Yeah. And that that that's the key element, is that it that that in in making the connection between the artwork and the what was there before is that there's the museum, and there's stuff about Maryland there, and and they can go over there. The museum is you know, it's not exactly what you might expect from the museum, but it needs and it needs a little love. But, nonetheless, it's all it it it really you can learn a lot from spending an afternoon there. And it it it took me a long time to get there. I was working out on on a daily basis. At least, well

Peter, you look like you'd like to say something.

Nothing terrifying.

Okay. Okay. Great.

Did you say

nothing terrifying? Nothing. You mean nothing too terrifying. Terrifying. Yeah. I like that. Okay. Okay.

Do that in virus. Apparently. Yeah. I don't know who this Brazilian plays.

We're gonna close that public comment then. I think we're done with that. Commissioner discussion and feedback.

Yeah. Now. Go for it. I very much appreciate this. Like, first of all, the arts commission has a weird setup when it comes to these kind of these kind of sculptures because we can actually essentially only say, is the artist an artist, and is the artwork visible?

I very much appreciate that this one is visible compared to others. And I I am I have to say, like, there's a lot of bang for the buck here. Like, this is huge for a $150,000, and it's it's a it's a very I mean, I don't expect this budget to hold, but I'm very appreciative about it. And I very much appreciate that. Do I like more bimsy stuff?

Two, yes. But I think in this area, it really fits. And I feel like it adds more to it. It's nice to have a sculpture model in in the front there, but a little bit more behind and gives people more of a chance to kinda wander around. I have nothing bad to say. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Any other commission or comment? Awesome. Does anyone, make a motion to approve as presented?

Absolutely. Motion to approve as presented. Alright. Seconded. Alright. There we go.

Get started.

You, Jonah. Alright. Okay.

Thank you, guys. Alright. Good luck. You.

Yep. Thank

you. Thank you. Bye. Oh. You have to vote, actually. You have to vote.

You vote after the vote the second. Right?

Yes. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. Okay. Okay. Four to zero.

Four to zero. Woo hoo. Alright. Thank you, Jonah.

Thank you,

guys. Thanks

for your time.

Thank you. Thank you. Alright.

Let me do the next presentation. Oh, this one doesn't have presentation, does it? Or is there oh, there is. Okay. Sorry. It's on here.

Just some pictures.

Yeah. Some pictures.

There we go. I found it.

Now I'm going to share. Okay. So,

yeah, we did talk about this a little bit already, but this is the recommendation to approve the subject for. Next slide, we can Mhmm. Look first just at the current public art fund budget. So the budget considerations that we're talking about today are coming from this big pot that seems like it won't be growing in the next few years as as development has slowed. So the reason it's split up like this is just because of how finance has the fund balance set up.

So 362,000 came from a different project and was separated by the savings in, like, 2017, especially Yeah. 1719 from the capital budget. But the the the important number is the 1.2 that we have now after the $70,000 of cultural arts fund that we Just paid out. Just paid out. So we also wanted to look at some recent similar public pieces like rock spinners as well as some other regional examples.

So here next, we have rock spinners, which was $202,287,000 dollar total budget, and then we have the 2025 kind of inflation comparisons too with these. And these are just total budgets. The total includes site installation. Yeah. Okay.

So, yeah, that was rock spinner, so we can mix that. This was a recent one at the Berkeley Ashby Bart Plaza, a large bronze sculpture that was just last year, 354,000. And, yeah, also to to to Peter's point, I think this is a huge sculpture that also has a fairly small concrete base. So those are high, high estimates Mhmm. When we get to that.

This is Chime Way, which is a cool one down in San Leandro. Also very interactive and big and, you know, place making in a in a space that has traffic. And that was 2016, I think, for 235,000. They also had some interesting overlap with the the city ended up I think it was good for the project, but there was a lot of work that they did with the exploratory to to get this project developed. And then this is passage, which is a series of these colorful, kind of towers, which was a little on the cheaper side for We'll get that.

That was last year, I think, as well. '23. We're 35,000, which would be about a 154,000 now. So yeah. And then one of the biggest budget concerns or things that are subject to change are these site prep estimates.

So, yeah, we did talk about this a bit already, but these are some things we, like, are very high estimates because we don't know about electricity connection if that's something that we'll need or want. Concrete pad can be much smaller. And the the depth of the footing was given from Breckenbart. I mean, the size two, but from the depth was was recommended based on, I think, a scoreboard that they put in the Estuary Park, which was their most recent project. So those are the best numbers they could give. But, you know, there might be art that isn't a scoreboard. So

It might be.

Yeah. These are these are certainties, and I think they are high estimates. And then miscellaneous things, so irrigation adjustments where the path might change in the park or be adjusted for ADA requirements or kind of a a viewing loop around around or or how you interact with that. So those things are subject to change, but definitely things we're considering. And then here's the other location that is a little larger because, you know, we could we're talking about spanning a pathway.

It's where there's electricity and just the its its location in the park. Raise that up just a little bit. But, yeah, again, something to change just how we're thinking about it now so that the the total recommendation makes more sense, which is at this time, staff is recommending that PAC approve a budget up to 350,000 for the forthcoming public record call.

No. Yeah. Okay. So any verified questions? Yes.

In in your presentation, is it possible that there's a mistake with inflation for time life or or way, or are there additional costs in it to to because there's an inflation of about 20.5% per year, you're ending up at 290,000 and 480,000.

I think this was made

in 2016. Yes. That's ten years.

Yeah. I I think I calculated it using the the the federal government's page, the CPI page.

But That is that's literally doubled.

Yeah.

Like, that feels

Okay. Well, maybe that Inflation is not quick.

Yeah. Possible that that's a mistake. Okay. But is that these 235,000

are only the grant that the Exploratorium got, or does that include the

This was the this was the total project budget. I'm I'm not sure how the how the breakup of Exploratorium versus San Leandro was. Okay. But the the total project budget was Okay. And then

just a clarifying comment to the Mildred Howard exposure. Mhmm. The city of Berkeley had allowed or had voted to increase the budget to a maximum of two of 354,000 from 02/10000. Yeah. That it wasn't 2022, but they only used 35 thousands for increase. So the overall sculpture ended up costing about 250,000.

Oh, they

didn't they didn't use all that? They didn't use the whole one. They wanted to go from eight feet to 11 feet. I don't think they did that. So they only they isn't they were only allowed to increase or to to use up $250,000 based on actual costs. It wasn't that much. Which is still a lot. Brass sculptures in general are just really, really expensive. Bronze sculptures in general are really, really expensive, which is also what I've known before. It's surprisingly cheap. Alright.

K. Any other questions?

Okay. Any public comments? Oops.

I don't

have any comment on my my end.

Okay. We're gonna close those public, close the public comment. Commissioner discussion and feedback. What do we all think about this budget? Does this seem reasonable to achieve a substantial piece of sculpture in Washington Park?

I can start. It it feels like a very reasonable budget. 350,000 installation cost feels like a reasonable budget for for a medium sized sculpture. I honestly do not wanna spend that much money in Park. Right? I wouldn't mind if it's a smaller sculpture in Washington Park, and we have more left over for years to come, especially if we're not if you're not sure of how much is coming. I would at least go down to 350. If not if not actually going down to to 250 in installation cost, which would still probably be the actual artwork could it's around $200,000.

I'll just look at that number and think about how much arts programming we could fund with that amount. So I would support reducing that number.

And I think that given 350,000, people will spend 350,000. Even if you say up

to. Yes.

Right? So I think if we I love that idea, Peter. Just we have to be conservative with our dollars right now. We don't know what the future brings as far as building construction here in Alameda. So we wanna continue funding the arts. For years to come, it's good to be prudent and conservative with what we were giving out.

I I do have one it's it's more a clarifying question than anything else. Are we requiring a minimum artist fee in our budget?

To my knowledge, I don't think we

have a minimum artist fee. I

if possible, I would like to have a minimum artistry. Like, I wanna see that an artist makes money with it, even if that means that the sculpture is likely smaller than than saying we're all stretching ourselves to the extreme and and economically essentially not by. Yeah. I've seen proposals where where there was a requirement to 10% of the overall margin is an artist fee. I I don't wanna make specific suggestions. I just wanna say it would be nice to look.

For once we get to, like, creating the mock ups and getting their full budget for what the arts can cost for that stage in development.

And, yeah, even even if that means, like, in the end, that thing is still, like, half a foot smaller. I I don't know. But

Like, you're saying setting up

Like, I wanna be prudent. Value. What I'm saying is that's the that's the discussion part. I wanna be prudent, and I still wanna have like, I wanna be prudent because I just don't see that we're getting a lot of money over the next few years. And I'm still panicky about the aquatic center. At the same time, I don't wanna turn this is prudency into sorry. That's the non native speaker.

Okay. I don't wanna turn

this I don't wanna turn this into something where an artist is stretching themselves in order to make this happen and still rather prefer to have a chance than an artist. Yeah. I think that's important part of what we're doing is not only supporting

art place making and such, but supporting artists.

You're identifying a common thing that an artist will cannibalize their own stipend. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah.

That would be interesting to see what other cities are doing or other grant agency budgeting.

About that particular budget for the Yeah. I can look into that.

Does that look like you're, like, a percentage of the

honestly, I'm not sure. Like, I wanna give I wanna give you as much flexibility as possible. I I just wanna say, like, right now, this is too much money for me to spend under current economic circumstances. And at the same time, I wanna make sure that the artists don't have to share and not to stretch themselves in order to make anything happen. Mhmm. Like, that's those two comments.

But would that number then come in when the when they come in, the

RFPs come in?

We look at that carefully and Yeah. Make sure that is happening. Right?

And maybe that's a good reason to start with a lower number,

and we can

build on that as we see fit. Yeah.

So, that being said, what would a comfortable number be for us to put out? Are we slashing this by 100,000? Is that enough to, create something? I mean, taking into consideration that perhaps 90,000 of it might be for, site prep.

Yeah. I mean, 250,000. This is maybe silly, but leaves us with $307 over a million. So we've still got a

million dollars in the fund and

that feels psychologically better than

It does, doesn't it? It does. You're right. It's silly. But Yeah. But, yeah, people love the round numbers also. Yeah.

How would how would the proposal look or how let me just I mean, how would the RFP look like when the overall budget is 350,000? Like, what are we asking from the artist that they give us a budget for the site preparation too?

No. That would also I my understanding is that the they would work with us to do the site preparation. Okay. So we we would work together, but that dollar amount would all would be inclusive of site preparation.

Okay. In yeah. In which case, I would suggest 250,000 expecting that the site preparation and the sculptures, but it's not over the last. So, you know, so that's to roughly 50.

And what percentage would you like to see of that

$2.50 for the minimum artist fee? I don't know

if it's somewhere between five to 10%. Like, I would just make sure that a an artist fee is included in some way. Like, whatever whatever suggestion the artist we can also leave it open. I would just like to see that the the artist include a fee in their budget. Mhmm. Actually, let's do that. Yeah. That's So Yeah.

We go back and look at the proposal for making waves, there's Yes. What I would consider the artist fee was $92,000 Mhmm. Out of a 150.

That's that includes design and and everything.

Design. And then there's engineering, casting, it's all separate. Concrete pedestal, separate. Transportation.

You bet. If you look at what's an example of ours?

That's mostly artistry.

But it's because it's no. That I mean, his case includes the clay fabrication. Like, the the artistry for me is outside of the fabrication. Like, in this case, it's been special because the fabrication part is so much different, but the artistry to me is, like Money for the artist.

Just money for the artist for their thoughts and their

concept and all that. It. I got it. Okay.

Okay. And let me yeah.

I think five or 10% sounds like

probably a reasonable

I I wouldn't even put it in it. I would just say that See what they do. Right? That they should Yeah. Include an artist fee in the in the proposal in the proposed budget. Yeah. It's a good idea.

Yeah. Okay.

Like, I I'll give you an example. We're setting up the sculpture next week. You go pay a part. So we're, like, roughly $3,300,000 for sculpture that's gonna be there for two years, and the artist fee is $30,000. But that's kind of outside of actual work in hours on the piece and maintenance and whatsoever, essentially the the margin. Mhmm. Good.

Alright.

So I think what we're proposing here is a a reduction in the approved budget for this project.

And then is there any flexibility in that? Well, that's why you say up to two.

You don't have to.

There you go.

There's the flexibility.

Upside anything?

It's best that we set our budget now.

You know?

Because the budget is gonna go into the RFQ. Want to let people know, like, this

is what we're working with

and, yeah, this is what we

plan to spend in total. Well,

my suggestion would be to for the PAC to approve a budget of up to $250,000 for the. I second that. 260.

Sorry. Was it seconded by Okay.

The second. Yeah. Okay. All those in favor? All those opposed? Okay. Motion passes.

Alright. We have a budget.

Okay. That brings us to five staff.

K. So does the staff have any other items to communicate to the commission?

Nope. Are

there any written communications to share?

I don't have any.

Any commissioner communications? Yes. Commissioner Plasztember.

I had a wonderful Gamalan concert by Rhythmics at Harborview Park last weekend, It was absolutely worth going, and I wanted to kinda get using arts organization. It was quite a lot that were involved into organizing this and actually doing this very first art event at this new park.

Very nice. Very good. Very good. I had a question for staff, actually. Did everyone who we awarded a staff of arts programming grant accept the sometimes reduced amount?

Yeah. No. Yeah. They did. Right now, we're in contracts with all of them. So all 10 were notified, and all the folks who did not receive a grant were also notified and were currently writing contracts. And the funds can't be released released until after the first tomorrow, but there are already a few folks that give us, like, their half of the I have a few folks that I have three events that are in July. Mhmm. And so they're just waiting because we have to go through the finance process. But, yeah, they've all been notified.

Right. I thought that everyone who got less than they asked for is still able to.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah. Are

the are the events that we found in the public art information, like, the email that we sent out? Are we putting that in?

Oh, yeah. There there was an email that went out after that tenth day of expiration. So

I mean, in the in the public art updates. Are we are we putting them in in the future?

You mean the awardee's other email address going into that?

No. That Are we verifying that? That we inform the public about events that are coming up if they if they're refunded by us.

I don't do all of them. No. Because sometimes I don't I don't get communication about things, but, also, I usually do, like, updates about grant opportunities. Okay. So I'm like, oh, Zellerbach opened or has an opportunity. So I usually send those, but they did get a notification, everyone on our list, about all the awardees and how much money they paid or they were awarded. Sorry.

Yeah. Yeah. That's okay.

Very good. I would like to communicate a happy fourth of July to everyone. Be safe. Don't blow your hands off with care works, and be safe, and, have fun. And I'll be judging the parade.

So if you're Oh, cool. Alright.

How appropriate. Wait. The judging stand is at Otis and and Graham.