10.17.18 BAC Retreat Notes CITY OF BOULDER
BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RETREAT
NOTES
Name of Board/Commission: Boulder Arts Commission
Date of Meeting:October 17 2018 at the CU Museum of Natural History, 1030 Broadway,Boulder,CO 80309
Contact information preparing summary:Celia Seaton,303-441-3206
Commission members present: Mark Villarreal,Felicia Furman,Kathleen McCormick,Devin Hughes,Erica Joos
Commission members absent: None
Library staff present:
Matt Chasansky,Office of Arts&Culture Manager
Lauren Click,Coordinator,Grants
Mary Haan,Coordinator,Programs for Artists
David Faman,Director
Celia Seaton,Administrative Specialist
City staff present:
Jane Brautigam
Members of the public present: Sarah Braveman(BMoCA),Amanda Berg Wilson(The Catamounts),Katie Lehman
(Boulder Philharmonic),Katharine Reece(I have a Dream Foundation of Boulder County),Orit Manham(Women Align
LLC),Bridger Tomlin(CU Boulder MENV),Jayne Persch(BRIAR Danse)
e of Meeting—Retreat
Agenda Item 1: Call to order and approval of agenda [0:00:11 Audio min.]
The meeting was called to order. Villarreal asked the group for any addendums or changes to the agenda. Villarreal
announced that audience input regarding the grants program can occur earlier if attendees need to leave before the public
comment period for that item.
Furman moved to approve the agenda. McCormick seconded,and all were in favor.
Agenda Item 2: Review of Minutes 10:02:39 Audio min.]
Item 2A,Approval/Review of September 2018 Meeting Minutes
Villarreal asked the commission for changes or addendums regarding these minutes. McCormick noted suggested
changes/adjustments. Furman moved to approve the August minutes as amended,McCormick seconded,and the motion
was unanimously approved.
Agenda Item 3:Public comment [0.07.48 Audio min.]
None
Agenda Item 4:Matters from Guests [0.11.05 Audio min.]
City Manager Jane Brautigam spoke to the"awesome"trajectory of arts effort from commission and staff. Hailing from
Loveland with its robust art programming,Boulder seemed"behind"when she arrived a decade ago;however,the wider
array of offerings in the Boulder ring now eclipses Loveland's sculpture-focused scene. Declared"all credit"to Chasansky,
commission,staff,and the efforts through Community Cultural Plan rollout. Relayed City Council's appreciation of the
work done for arts and culture which resulted in a one-time additional$250,000 in funding(with potential for continuance)-
she charged the commission with"spend[ing] it wisely and ... focus[ing]on some of our larger cultural organizations... I
know that you'll all do a really great job."
Villarreal acknowledged Brautigam's efforts to make the arts a priority in city governance. Chasansky:regarding affordable
housing as it pertains to creative professionals/artists,how can Arts Commission contribute? Brautigam suggested data-
driven survey surrounding artists'needs for affordable housing—this input to Housing Board can then be relayed to City
Council. Chasansky noted that the Artist Census findings could be built upon for this purpose. Audience member asked
about the historic lack of diversity in Boulder. Brautigam:"I can't really explain it other than... as a vicious cycle"—
"people want to live close to friends and family"—Denver more welcoming to"developing enclaves." Boulder never
developed these communities and she can't explain why—"it happened 150 years ago." When people came they wouldn't
feel comfortable. Spoke to the structural racism in this nation,"people don't know what they don't know." Called out the
two compelling issues in our nation-climate change and structural racism. Joos:"the housing question is so potent right
now,"doesn't favor artists competing with other marginalized groups. How will City hold the private sector accountable
with enhancing the lives of those who want to live here? Brautigam:Boulder puts much into Human Services,have started
to reduce from the Economic Vitality department,shifting priorities. We can't"make"private sector do what we want.
"The city can't solve all the problems;"this needs community assistance. Joos expressed appreciation that this issue is on
the mind of city management. Jane spoke to how the Chamber of Commerce is also one of the most`progressive"in the
nation--"they have this on their mind as well." McCormick brought up community benefits that can result from providing
housing for artists and housing for diverse populations. Villarreal discussed the need to not create"artist ghettos"-
consolidated studio space is beneficial,but housing should be"mixed"increasing artistic awareness. Brautigam spoke
about upcoming opportunities such as within the East Arapahoe Area Corridor(55th and Arapahoe as the potential hub)-
this area is ripe for mixed use redevelopment perhaps as well as the Alpine Balsam project.
Joos asked about the progress of discussions surrounding the Poor Farm site on 631d that could potentially be granted as
reparations to the native peoples-this was a topic that surfaced during the recent Indigenous Peoples Day events;
Brautigam confirmed that she heard this request during"Welcome Arapaho Home"celebration. She spoke to two elected
officials who were favorable to this idea,but perhaps not that specific property. In March 2019,the City of Boulder plans to
hold its first tribal-consultation in over a decade,inviting the thirteen tribes with which the City has an MOU. She
expressed openness to the agenda;renaming Settlers Park is one issue she'd like to discuss. Brautigam referred to her
impression of the"patient and measured"nature of tribal discussions;she is still unclear on their needs. She is 100%open
to the idea of reparation and knows that two City Council members are"on board." Villarreal:Does the city have a liaison
talking with the tribal nations? Brautigam-yes,internal city staff as well as a consultant,Ernest House,who has
previously served on the Colorado Commission of Indian Affairs.
-The group expressedapprecia-io'n tff Rraubgam thi malangthe time to and aiscuss Inese issues and Brauffg-a-mUffinked
commission and staff for the invitation and the opportunity to thank them for all their dedication and hard work.
Agenda Item 5:DISCUSSION: Community Cultural Plan(CCP) [0.37.00 Audio min.]
A. Revisit the Cultural Plan-discussion of community priorities and vision that shaped the CCP(vision elements:
Cultural Vitality,Creative Identity,and Vibrant Environment). Potential of neighborhood activation of arts. On
the horizon,elements of youth and creative economy. Fieldtrip fund work begun. Review of 2018 which included
Boulder Arts Week,98 grants awarded,27 public art projects and murals,among other accomplishments. New
conditions include NoBo Art District's official recognition and coordination,a changing marketplace for
nonprofits,and a flat budget.
B. Phase Two"Refresh"-discussion of three critical questions: 1)what is working that needs to be reinforced?(GOS
Grants,Public Art,Scholarships,NoBo Art District),2)what is not working that needs correction?(funding mix
for nonprofits,affordable housing,regulations),and 3)what is next?(focus on artists,findings from artist census,
more gatherings and networking,venue mix,updated market study,and next CCS tax renewal).
C. 2019 Work Plan-sensitive to prediction for a flat sales tax guiding the budget.
L Research and policy-work across departments,continue equity work,statement on Climate
Adaptation.
ii. Venues-study,CCS,city facilities,one-time funding for facilities,rental assistance grants
iii. Public Art-discussion of project implementation,maintenance,and art in public places with
holds and delays indicated. See handouts.
iv. Creative Neighborhoods-currently on hold until 2020
v. Creative Economy-NoBo Art District Phase Two
vi. Programs for Artists and Creatives-artist census rollout,dance showcase,genre-specific
advocacy,gatherings(how do we promote networking and showcasing opportunities throughout
the currently subterranean art scene?)
vii. Civic Dialogue-Communications(social media,"fastest growing"Instagram account,Boulder
Arts Week,sponsorships,community and office Events,website renovation)
viii. Cultural Organizations-cultural grants,leadership development,project sponsorships,and
office relocation sponsorships(Boulder Philharmonic-model of this relationship whereby Arts
+Culture sponsorship dollars were offered as matching money-match 10%off the rent with
some other criteria involved. Eased transition period to get into a new space and hopefully
continuing landlord relationship.
Furman questioned the status of the proposed Fellowship Program. Chasansky:with the confirmation of yesterday's
accepted budget,this program is not on the plan of requests for 2018-2019. Funding for the Fellowship Project was the
proposed cut that was accepted by City Council.
Agenda Item 6: Publie-A 4 Program Items 10.00.00 Audio...:..,
***Break or dinner and tour***
Agenda Item 7: Grant Program [1.24.31 Audio min.]
A. ACTION:Grant Reports
1. BaoBao Foundation,Akoma,Beat of the Heart,$10,000
Furmanattended. `Very well done;"she moved to approve and Villarreal seconded. He appreciated the
provided evidence of collaboration with other arts organizations. All were in favor and the report was
accepted by commission.
B. ACTION:Christopher Pagliaro Cultural Field Trips Fund grant funding—Click noted that these awards have all
been distributed this year. Granting Christopher's application would necessitate a shift of distribution from ticket
fund. Furman made a motion to approve this recommended shift to fully fund Pagliaro's application,Hughes
seconded and all were in favor.
C. DISCUSSION BVSD refund of 2013_grW funds—irL 2013tfhe�flood intern�ptecLthis-zoetLoge project.These
monies will be returned to arts education grant funding and placed in the surplus funding that commission will
discuss before the end of the year(along with ticket fund excess).
D. DISCUSSION:Grants Cycle Blueprint(Phase 4)
Staff presented and discussed proposed adjustments regarding the one-time GOS funding in the form
of the Special Facilities GOS Grant($250,000)alongside clarifying questions from commission-
Joos asked what prompted City Council to provide this new funding resource. Chasansky:it appears
prompted by conversations Council Member Bob Yates has sought out with larger organizations.
Idea of including not only art venues,but also possibly educational,science,health,etc. Hughes
suggested the branding:"Creative Collaboration Grant."
Staff proposed parameters of allocating around 10 Special Facilities Rental Grants at$1,000 each and
6 Special Facilities GOS Grants at$40,000 each. Staff clarified that this sum is completely additional
to the current funds. Farnan noted that this decision won't impact grant award decisions in other
areas. Commission discussed requiring collaboration component with venue use to smaller and mid-
sized groups which encourages the trickle-down potential to help resolve the equity dilemma.
Wondered how the Arts Commission can review criteria concerning health or science. Chasansky
replied that he"can't imagine"a science organization applying for this grant,"so[he]wouldn't be
too worried about that." The goal is to expand beyond the narrowest definition of arts—possibility of
venues like Museum of Boulder,Naropa,NIST,and Intercambio.
Joos:in this"hypercompetitive process,all commissioners should consider when reviewing GOS
grants if they've already gotten this one." Chasansky reminded the commission of the grant's criteria
that this should not negatively impact other funding"though conversation is certainly permissible."
Click clarified that these will be decided after the GOS grant process. Chasansky suggested an
application question covering how funding will be focused on collaboration and whether accessibility
will be aided by low admission fees. Commission was favorable,with the exception of Hughes who
still sensed the appearance of a"mandate directive"circumventing commission process and
democratically received feedback—he views problematic equity issues and desires wider opportunity
for this funding. Joos:can we ask Council? Hughes doesn't want to lose the money but wants the
opportunity"opened up as much aspossible." Chasansky:Council intended it to be competitive and
equitable. Farnan:"[commission]would have to come up with criteria,but it would need to be in the
spirit of what Council was wanting to support." McCormick liked the idea but wanted to add criteria
of partnering with smaller groups. Hughes:"best collaboration wins." McCormick spoke to needing
to support venues that serve enormous audience(like Chautauqua and E-town);the impact is much
greater than those that can't provide their own venue. Joos agreed but it is consistently the"same
demographic"of people.
Staffpresented the variety model without inflation for facilities GOS grants in their Draft 2019
Cultural Grant Funding Structure Options(see handouts ;GOS grants are now split into 4 categories
instead of 3. Analysis of Funding change 2018—2019 indicates through graphics how small
organizations will have higher quantity of grants as one subtracts from the pool for the large,and
majority of these funds shifted to small. Villarreal noted that this aids equity issue since the large are
"taking a hit." Sliding Scale Model for GOS Grants has constant grant amount with variable
competition rate and number of grants. Staff noted that this will match the number of grants to the
number for expected applications to have balanced competition rates. Hughes:"you can't get more
equitable than that." Joos thinks this is fantastic. Group in favor of this sliding scale.
Artistic Excellence component now folded into community priorities question,this would eliminate
the western standard-Furman and Villarreal approved. Click indicated that the Arts Education
questions do not include a community priority component. Chasansky recommended a rewording of
the community priorities questions. McCormick likes that.
Click welcomed commission feedback on application and reporting questions,specifically character
requirements for GOS narrative query. Furman suggested reducing the number of characters and
Villarreal ugme-l. M-eCorrffiek.-1-et's cut itin-h—la f.—Chasansky-suggested response asis pertmen to
the organization,leaving discretion to the applicant-the group agreed. Group agreed to 10,000
characters. McCormick suggests elimination curatorial excellence as it sounds elitist. Chasansky
said we can eliminate the"off-putting"term entirely. Group agreed.
• Public Hearing-A representative with KGNU(Sarah)suggested that it would make more sense to
define the large category's range as$500,000-$1,000,000 as opposed to the proposed$250,000-
$1,000,000"as[the latter]seems like a big jump." Chasansky explained that this range was mostly
necessitated by the examined grouping—the divisions would have had too few representatives
otherwise. Katie Lehman noted her organization,the Boulder Philharmonic,rests in the extra-large
category"by Boulder standards." Approx. 10-12%of full operational budget spent on a facility.
$150,000 pays CU Macky's rental fee. Her group will be competing for fewer grants and doesn't
qualify for the new facilities-based$250,000 one-time grant program. "There are many different
ways to measure equity." Spoke to negative sense of competition. She worked with some executive
directors and decided that they wanted to all work together;"competition sends us back into our
siloed`bunkers'...is there a way to have organizations at a given level help each other."
Group agreed that they would want to hear how the applicant would spend the money to collaborate with other groups and
retain low admission costs. Advantage of not paying rent can allow offer of reduced rentals. Commission questioned the
incentive of awarding funds based on willingness to share these funds. Chasansky:we can delay the release to present again
in November. Furman favored staying aligned with the vision that City Council has of the criteria. Villarreal:"this is a
litmus test for us,"noting that future availability of these funds may depend upon how the money is handled this time
around. Per the public comment,Boulder Philharmonic is an exception that needs to be addressed.
Click apprised the group on upcoming dates:panel applications and interviews November ln,grant workshops November
271 and December 41,and Cultural Organizations Summit on Equity and Inclusion set for December 11'.
Agenda Item 8: Commission Business [3.29.45 Audio min.]
A. DISCUSSION:2018 Priorities Letter to Council—Villarreal,inviting ideas,will draft letter and relay.
Agenda Item 9: Matters from Staff 13.31.20 Audio min.]
A. DISCUSSION:Questions About the Manager's Memo-Chasansky welcomed questions by email.
B. 2019 Meeting Planning-Seaton distributed a proposed schedule of meetings to the group(see handouts ;
Chasansky noted that there are still public art deadlines to be incorporated—invited emails re:special topics and
offsite suggestions.
C. Update on the 2019 Budget–Faman reported on the approved budget and the additional$250,000 in funding.
Agenda Item 10:Adjournment 13.32.02 Audio min.]
Villarreal noted the upcoming new commissioner for next year and assignment of new chair;he also noted that he will
likely miss 4 meetings in 2019 due to family commitments. Hughes again recommended the creation of an emailed"arts
calendar,"perhaps in magnet form if the budget allows. He also suggested connecting nonprofits with sponsors and
highlighting those partnerships. Chasansky noted this as a good agenda topic. There being no further business to come
before the commission at this time,the meeting was adjourned.
Date,time,and location of next meeting:
The next Boulder Arts Commission meeting will be at 6 p.m.on Wednesday,November 21,2018,in the Boulder
Creek Room at the Main Library, 1001 Arapahoe Ave.,Boulder,CO 80302.
APPROVED BY: A
oard air Board Secretary
Date Date