HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.17.19 BAC PacketBoulder Arts Commission Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2019
Location: Boulder Creek Room, Boulder Main Public Library, 1001 Arapahoe, Boulder 80302
1.CALL TO ORDER
Approval of Agenda
2.REVIEW OF MINUTES
3.PUBLIC COMMENT
4.GRANT PROGRAM 15 minutes
A.ACTION: Grant Reports
1.Arts Education: Boulder Metalsmithing Association, Enhancing Art Through Metalsmithing, $3,000
2.Arts Education: Friendship City Projects, Taller Artistico Xuchialt Art and Culture Exchange, $3,000
3.Arts Education: Museum of Boulder, Teen Corps: 3D Printing Artifacts for the Blind (Seeing
Through Touching), $2,900
4.Arts Education: Studio Arts Boulder, Pottery with the “I Have a Dream” Foundation, $3,000
5.Community Project Grant: Boulder Symphony, GLOW Project, $5,000
5.COMMISSION BUSINESS 30 minutes
A.Discussion of the decision process for the Special Facilities Grant
6.MATTERS FROM COMMISSIONERS
7.MATTERS FROM STAFF 60 minutes
A.Questions about the Manager’s Memo – Matt
B.Artist Census – Mary
C.Volunteer to assist with the Martin Luther King Day Enhancement Grant – Matt
D.Retreat Planning – Celia and Matt
8.ADJOURNMENT
1
CITY OF BOULDER
BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING
MINUTES
Name of Board/ Commission: Boulder Arts Commission
Date of Meeting: June 19, 2019 at the Main Boulder Public Library, 1001 Arapahoe Ave.
Contact information preparing summary: Celia Seaton, 303-441-3106
Commission members present: Kathleen McCormick, Erica Joos, Devin Hughes, Bruce Borowsky
Commission members absent: Mark Villarreal
Panel members present: Belgin Yucelen, Sarah Braverman, Leah Brenner Clack
Panel members absent: Katharine Reece
Library staff present:
Matt Chasansky, Office of Arts & Culture Manager
Lauren Click, Coordinator, Grants
Mary Haan, Coordinator, Programs for Artists
Mandy Vink, Coordinator, Public Art
David Farnan, Director
Celia Seaton, Administrative Specialist
City staff present:
None
Members of the public present: Leah Podzimeck (Boulder Symphony), Carolyn Booth and Tim Plass (Museum of
Boulder), Annett James and Jude Landsman (NAACP Boulder), Travis LaBerge (Parlando), Lizzy Hayes (Boulder Opera),
Jennifer Shriver, Betsy Hicks and Mari Munet (Community Cycles), Josh Baldner (Mesa Elementary), and Alan O’Hashi
(Boulder Community Media)
Type of Meeting: Regular
Agenda Item 1: Call to order and approval of agenda [0:0 0:05 Audio min.]
The meeting was called to order. McCormick, acting chair, asked the group for any addendums or changes to the agenda.
Chasansky mentioned an addition under Item 7’s Matters from Staff as “e” – discussion of the Human Relations
Commission grant collaboration around the equity grant. Borowsky moved to approve the agenda as amended. Hughes
seconded, and all were in favor.
Agenda Item 2: Review of Minutes [0:01:18 Audio min.]
Item 2A, Approval/Review of May 2019 Meeting Minutes
McCormick asked the commission for changes or addendums regarding these minutes. Being none, Joos moved to approve
the May minutes. Borowsky seconded, and the motion was unanimously approved.
Agenda Item 3: Public comment [0.02.10 Audio min.]
McCormick asked the assembled crowd whether there was any public comment.
Tim Plass introduced himself as a member of the board of directors for the Museum of Boulder (MoB) and reminded the
commission of MOB’s appearance last month at the General Operating Support (GOS) grant awards. Plass noted that in the
GOS cycle, MoB came in eighth out of eight; he believes this ranking points to an issue wherein MoB often feels itself a
“square peg trying to fit into a round hole” of the Arts Commission grants. Referring to the upcoming Special Facilities
Grant, MoB wants to ensure that City Council’s intent for the grant to encompass educational realms and other non-
traditional art be carried out, but some of the language in the application was concerning (e.g., under Community Priorities,
reference to “high artistic merit”). While also troubled by “project” terminology in the application, he has gained
clarification that this crosses a broad swath including operating costs. Plass requested that commission consider culture just
as valid in the application as the “pure arts,” in alignment with council intention.
Joos thanked Plass for his input. She noted that this stands currently as a one-time offering from City Council; if
incorporated into the grant cycle, the community would be invited for input on the language. McCormick: “things have
shifted more in the last couple years to embrace culture as well as arts,” perhaps out of line with the Cultural Plan.
2
Chasansky disagreed, indicating that the Cultural Plan specifically calls for a broad definition of “art” to include both
history and culture. Chasansky agreed that the term “project” is an “odd fit,” for the outcomes that council was seeking.
Agenda Item 4: Grant Program [0.09.30 Audio min.]
A. ACTION: Grant Reports
1. Colorado Shakespeare Festival, Shakespeare & Violence Prevention, $3,000
2. Nii Armah Sowah, African Arts & Cultural Workshop Series: A Participatory Experience Through the Arts,
$3,000
McCormick noted that both projects were “wonderful.” Joos moved to approve the submitted reports, Hughes
seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.
B. ACTION: Professional Development Application – Erica Joos
Click noted that while previously a commission-reviewed process, this year staff review aimed to lessen the
workload of the commission. However, in this instance of a commissioner applying herself, the application comes
before the commission in the interest of full transparency as these applications were traditionally given extra
scrutiny. McCormick: this vocal/movement program in France seems to align well with Joos’ work as an art
educator. She spoke to the importance of providing growth opportunities to the members of the c ommission.
Devin made a motion to grant this Professional Development grant to Joos, Borowsky seconded, and the motion
was unanimously approved.
C. ACTION: Arts Education Grant
• Discussion: Boulder Symphony application eligibility – Click explained the background on this issue.
Consultation with City Attorney’s Office clarified that commission has a basis to outright deny the
application because Niwot is not included within the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. The General
Eligibility Requirements state that “[t]he product (performance, piece of art, etc.) funded in whole or in
part by the Boulder Arts Commission must be provided for and accessible to the Boulder community.
Any product that receives other funding may be held in another municipality or area, provided that at
least one performance is provided within Boulder Valley, as defined in the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan, and is for the direct benefit of the Boulder community.” McCormick wondered
whether a certain percentage of performance must fall within city boundaries. Click, referring to the
eligibility guidelines, explained that at least one instance of the funded art experience must take place in
Boulder.
McCormick asked Podzimeck, who was in attendance as a representative of the Boulder Symphony,
whether the group has arranged for a Boulder performance. Podzimeck replied that one concert will be
at First Presbyterian Church in Boulder. Additionally, all mentors are Boulder artists. Joos asked
whether this sort of program has run before and Podzimeck replied that this would be their pilot run; her
goal would ultimately expand this offering to more schools. Borowsky and McCormick voiced concern
about precedent of awarding a program outside the city with city taxpayer funds. Borowsky and
McCormick don’t feel it meets the eligibility standard. Joos stated her view that this application does
appear eligible. She spoke to the importance of educating young people in music and advocated
flexibility around funding 10-20 miles outside city limits. McCormick would like to see this brought to
BVSD schools in the future. McCormick thanked Podzimeck for her clarifications and comments.
Borowsky moved that the Boulder Symphony’s application unfortunately is not eligible to be included in
the 2019 Arts Education Grant process as their project application does not comply with the Boulder
Arts Commission’s general eligibility requirements. McCormick was also in favor; the motion passed 2-
1.
• Presentations and Rescoring (a full list of applicants can be found on p. 11 of the packet.) The scores
from Villarreal and Reece will not be included due to transparency rules for conducting meetings of
boards and commissions.
3
• Panel Discussion of Scores: Top ten scoring applicants were determined as: Parlando School for the
Arts, NAACP Boulder Authorized Committee, And Art Space, Boulder Opera, Boulder International
Film Festival, Colorado Shakespeare Festival, Boulder Community Media, Dairy Arts Center,
Community Cycles, and Mesa Elementary.
• Commission Approval
Hughes moved that the following applicants are awarded the Arts Education Grant: Parlando School for
the Arts, NAACP Boulder Authorized Committee, And Art Space, Boulder Opera, Boulder International
Film Festival, Colorado Shakespeare Festival, Boulder Community Media, Dairy Arts Center,
Community Cycles, and Mesa Elementary. Borowsky seconded and the motion was unanimously
approved. Click noted need for one more round of voting for the Mesa Elementary School’s risers as
this item falls under the designation of a capital improvement project. Joos moved to approve this
capital improvement funding, Borowsky seconded and the motion was unanimously approved.
D. DISCUSSION: Unspent Grant Funds – Click explained how these unallocated monies left over at the end of the
year can be used or return to the general fund (see handouts). Click presented the staff recommendation to use
$5,500 to fund the 2 remaining unfunded Arts Education applications, and $4,500 to fund 7 additional Round Two
Professional Development applications. The commission provided nodding approval to the staff recommendation.
Agenda Item 5: Commission Business [1.38.45 Audio min.]
McCormick reminded the group of the last commission meeting wherein two of the extra-large organizations who
will not be eligible to apply for the Special Facilities Grant were not granted GOS funding. Commission, dismayed
that there wasn’t enough money to fund all, resolved to alert council to this concern. Villarreal, Joos, and
McCormick attended the City Council meeting the following Tuesday to join voices in a plea for more arts
funding. Borowsky noted that he met one-on-one with five council members to convey this same need.
Agenda Item 6: Matters from Commissioners [1.41.58 Audio min.]
None.
Agenda Item 7: Matters from Staff [1.42.02 Audio min.]
A. Questions About the Manager’s Memo – Chasansky welcomed questions by email.
B. Office Relocation Sponsorship – Click spoke to this effort to support Boulder-based organizations in relocating
their offices to affordable space within Boulder. Staff recommendation advises the remaining sponsorship funds
this year be dedicated to this program. Commission agreed. She asked for commission assistance to review the
applications – Joos and McCormick volunteered.
C. Access and Equity Practices for Commission Meetings – Chasansky and Seaton presented on proposed
accessibility services including discussion of audio amplification, hearing helper headset, ASL interpretation,
Spanish and other language translation, and child-care service. Joos suggested certain City boards and
commissions occurring simultaneously to pool the time periods that these services would be needed – more
efficient scheduling for common services though she is not sure about the feasibility of such alignment . Borowsky
advised that it is better to buy instead of rent in terms of the A/V equipment. Borowsky offered his expertise and
A/V vendor suggestions. Next steps involve pricing and consulting with eServices Manager Aimee Schumm.
Chasansky presented on the proposed preamble for the start of the commission meetings that would encompass
commission mission from ordinance, cultural plan vision, and land acknowledgement. He noted next steps as
selecting a volunteer from commission for drafting, seeking permission from the tribal nations on the language, and
then returning with a draft preamble for commission approval. Joos volunteered to assist, as she has experience
working with Right Relationship Boulder.
D. Process for the Special Facilities Grant – Staff provided commission with opportunity to try out new method
whereby applicants would reply with a written response for the rescoring portion (as opposed to the 3-minute
presentation response). Click presented on this staff recommended alternative complete with an updated schedule
4
APPROVED BY: ATTESTED:
_________________________________________ ________________________________________
Board Chair Board Secretary
_________________________________________ ________________________________________
Date Date
projecting August 21st as the meeting for presentation of final grant decisions. This process would have no
interaction save for online between applicants and commission/staff. All scoring would be blind, with decisions
presented at the August Meeting. Hughes approved the removal of influence that may come into play when the
commissioners can all see other’s scores. Borowsky noted his own experience as a grant writer valuing the face -to-
face human element. McCormick expressed her view of face-to-face interaction with the public as an integral part
of her commissioner duty. Hughes suggested trying this process out for one cycle to see how it goes. Borowsky
agreed. Commission suggested having scores published in the packet. Nodding approval from commission to use
this alternate process.
E.DISCUSSION: Human Relations Commission grant collaboration – In the HRC’s May and June meetings,
discussion resulted in a request to use this equity grant for the Martin Luther King Jr. Day event as opposed to
Indigenous Day. This would provide more “breathing room” as these documents wouldn’t be needed until
November. Joos wished both could be funded, but she trusts the HRC’s judgement. McCormick stated her
agreement to earmark funds for MLK day as this celebration has had low visibility in Boulder. The group provided
nodding approval to allocate the equity grant’s $10,000 for MLK day, as per the advice of the HRC.
Agenda Item 9: Adjournment [2.54.18 Audio min.]
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, July 17, 2019, in the Boulder Creek
Room at the Main Library, 1001 Arapahoe Ave., Boulder, CO 80302.
5
TO: Members of the Boulder Arts Commission
FROM: Matt Chasansky, City of Boulder Office of Arts + Culture
DATE: July 12, 2019
SUBJECT: Manager’s Update for the Boulder Arts Commission Meeting
on July 17, 2019.
1.Notes on the July Agenda
>Please note that, at the request of the University of Colorado, the deadline for the Arts Administration Certificate Program
Scholarship has been extended. As a result, it is necessary to postpone the Arts Commission’s decision until the August
meeting.
>A reminder that the agenda item for the decision on the Special Facilities Grant has been moved to the August meeting.
>6B, Artist Census – In Attachment One, please find a draft of the Artist Census findings document. This is provided for your
review before the meeting, during which staff will ask the Commission for final questions and advice on the study.
>7E, Retreat Planning – During the meeting staff will ask members of the Commission for the best dates in October to set the
annual Arts Commission retreat. Also, staff will discuss the basic agenda and get advice on a location for this year’s retreat.
2.Public Art Administrative Approval
In Attachment Two, please find a notice of administrative approval for a temporary public art proposal received from the
Melody Catalpa neighborhood.
3.Commission Correspondence
In Attachment Three, please find copies of email correspondence received by the Boulder Arts Commission during the period
between the publication of the June 2019 and July 2019 packets.
4.Staff Updates
Staff provided a series of proposals for budget increases to the city’s Executive Budget Team (EBT). In the coming two month s,
the EBT will refine these proposals and incorporate them into a city-wide 2020 budget proposal, currently scheduled for
discussion by City Council at their September 10 meeting.
The area plan for Alpine-Balsam (former Boulder County Hospital site) continues with a series of public engagement meetings
and tours. More information can be found at the Alpine-Balsam project website. Please help us spread the word.
Staff supported the team from the library division and the Neighborhood Services office for the Civic Soup event on June 11.
Work continues with other city departments on developing a statement on the role of culture in climate change adaptation.
Work continues with other city departments on regulation improvements.
Staff continues to support the team coordinating the Community, Culture, and Safety Tax.
Staff is participating in the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan.
6
> Grants and Programs for Organizations
Please help us spread the word, and mark your calendars, for the next summit of cultural organizations:
Tuesday, August 27, 2019
5 to 6:30 p.m.
Boulder Creek Room, Boulder Public Library, 1001 Arapahoe Ave.
For this quarter’s meeting of senior staff and board members of cultural nonprofits, Paul Chinowsky with CU’s College
of Engineering and Applied Science will speak about the impacts of climate change on arts programs, festivals, and
destinations. Please rsvp if you would like to attend.
At the request of university staff, the deadline for the CU Boulder Graduate Certificate in Arts Administration
Scholarship has been extended to July 25, 2019 to allow more time for applications to the scholarship.
The updated grants schedule can be found in Attachment Four. It includes revisions of the following:
- Special Facilities Grant program schedule
- CU Boulder Graduate Certificate in Arts Administration Scholarships program schedule
The following Rental Assistance Grant reports were approved prior to the meeting:
- Colorado MahlerFest, MahlerFest XXXII, Macky Auditorium, $1,000
- Parlando School for the Arts, Xanadu, The Musical, Dairy Arts Center, $1,000
- Future Arts Foundation, The Bluebird Music Festival, Macky Auditorium, $1,000
The following Professional Development reports were approved prior to the meeting:
- Alan O’Hashi, Creative Industries Summit, Salida, CO, $500.00
- Leah Podzimek, League of American Orchestras Conference, Nashville, TN, $1,000.00
- Nancy Smith, SAVVY Arts Venture Challenge, Columbia, SC, $1,000.00
The following Professional Development applications were approved prior to the meeting, per the adv ice of the Arts
Commission to dedicate additional funds to Round Two:
- Andrew Neely, Screenwriting Workshop through CU Boulder’s Continuing Education program, online, $500
- David Kansuke Wheeler, Shakuhachi Kenshukan 30th Anniversary International Shakuhachi Festival in Okayama
Prefecture, Japan, $1,000
- Emily Volk, The Digital Naturalism Conference, Gamboa, Panama, $1,000
- Kathryn Aronson, Creative Living Embodied Arts Training Program (CLEAT: Giving you creative traction), Boulder,
CO, $500
- Shay Wescott, Leadership Exchange in Arts and Disability, Denver, CO, $500
- Susan Eriksson, Chicago Responsible Jewelry Conference, Chicago, IL, $1,000
- William McCrossen, study music composition / arrangement coaching with Art Lande, Boulder, CO, $500
All reports and applications which have been approved by staff are available for commissioners’ review.
In Attachment Five, please find a current grants program budget.
> Public Art Program
POSTPONED: the 2019 Public Art Social, originally scheduled for Friday, August 2, 2019 has been postponed due to a
delay in preparing the site. The Office of Arts and Culture will still have a table at the NoBo First Friday and will
showcase many projects underway in North Boulder including a charette with commissio ned artist Sharon Dowell.
Public Art Commissioning Updates:
- Diagonal Highway (Christian Muller/Totems): Installation
7
- Civic Area 11th St. Spine Signature Artwork (Adam Kuby): Final Design underway including budget adjustments and
potential value engineering (reducing project scope to meet available budget) due to project timeline delays in
permitting; updates will be available Oct/Nov 2019. Anticipated installation Spring 2020. www.adamkuby.com
- University Hill (ENVD 3300 Praxis): Project on hold due to permitting and zoning issues. The project team is
currently considering the following options: cancelling the project, redesign to meet zoning and permitting
regulations, or re-siting the work to CU’s campus. If project is a go, earliest installation will be delayed to Spring
2020. https://www.colorado.edu/envd/
- North Broadway (Sharon Dowell): Preliminary Design – See the information above regarding Sharon’s community
charrette on August 2 and please join us! http://sharondowell.com
- Arapahoe Underpass (Michelle Sparks): Final Design – Wetlands variance approved! Project is officially in final
design with anticipated install Fall 2019. http://michellemsparks.com
- 30th and Colorado Underpass (Rosie Fivian and Ransom Beegles): Final Design and bid.
http://www.architectista.com/ http://www.rdesignstudios.com/
- Foothills Underpass (Carolyn Braaksma): Fabrication of formliners. Project bids came in double expected; Office of
Arts and Culture and Transportation are seeking additional funding or value engineering (reducing project scope to
meet available budget) of project. https://www.braaksmadesign.com/
- NoBo Library: Selection – Proposal Meeting, July 25th from 12-5pm in the Eldorado Meeting Room; Semifinalists
are: Kimberly Garza (Sacramento, CA) www.atlaslab.com, Joel Swanson (Denver, CO) http://joelericswanson.com,
Mouna Andraos (Montreal, Quebec) www.dailytouslesjours.com, Patrick Marold (Nederland, CO)
www.patrickmarold.com, Sam Falls (Los Angeles, CA) https://samfalls.com
- Main Library Restroom Renovations (Monica McElwain and Chris Huang): Fabrication is complete. Restroom
schedule anticipated completion early August 2019.
https://mcervonem.myportfolio.com/projects http://www.yellowlotusdesigns.com
- BCH/Alpine Balsam (Heather Patterson – North 1; AJ Davis – North 2; Allie Ogg – West; Jason Graves – South; Sam
Cikauskus – East/Broadway): Contracting. Fence installation delayed – no project begin date available at this time
but anticipated for late Aug 2019. http://www.heatherpattersonart.com/ https://projectstreetgold.com/aj-
davis/ http://www.allieogg.com/ https://jasontgravesart.com/ https://www.samcikauskas.com/
- Scott Carpenter Park: Pre-selection
- Fire Station 3: Pre-selection
- CAGID Garage Art Public Art Program: On Hold
Community-Initiated Projects Updates:
- Bear Hugs Downtown Boulder Partnership Donation: Contracting
- Strength from Within Melanie Yazzie donation proposal: Coordination on sculpture delivery and plinth fabrication.
Work may need to be sited in alternate location until plinth (and funding) available
- Tim Eggert Memorial Donation: Pre-approval Process – working to understand permitting requirements for
proposed artwork
- Nobel Circle Monument: Pre-approval Process – fundraising, project development, working to understand
permitting requirements for proposed artwork
- Rotary Club: Pre-approval Process - working to understand permitting requirements for proposed artwork and
project timeline
- Boulder Housing Partners for the development of 30th and Pearl: Contracting
Maintenance and Conservation:
- The public art collection will be featured on the www.boulderarts.org website this fall.
- Work continues on the new city-wide asset management system Beehive for maintenance coordination with other
city depts.
- 2019 Condition Report is complete; review of conditions and anticipated costs to conduct maintenance and
conservation for 2019-2020.
- RFP’s for conservation and maintenance will be distributed in August
8
Staff is participating in the annual Capital Improvement Project review.
In Attachment Five, please find a current five-year program budget for public art commissioning. A handful of projects
are anticipated to have a fund gap. Staff is working with finance and budget to identify possible budget support while
also exploring re-designs to meet value engineering (reducing project scope to meet available budget)
> Programs for Artists
Staff attended the 2019 DanceUSA National Conference in Cleveland, OH. Once again, a major focus of many of the
sessions were around awareness and efforts on accessibility for all artists. Staff has also begun collaboration with
leaders in the community to prepare for the 2020 National Conference in Denver.
Staff attended the annual meeting of The Dance Archive (formerly the Carson Briery Giffin Dance Library) at the
University of Denver. Of note: The Dance Archive, https://library.du.edu/dancearchive/, is no longer a membership
organization.
Staff is updating details for the 2019 Annual Dance is for Every Body! Showcases November 2 and 3 in the Canyon
Theater of the Boulder Public Library. Applications go live July 15 and the deadline to apply will b e August 26. These
free showcases are an outreach program for the community and include professional as well as novice dancers in a
variety of dance genres. Please help us spread the word.
Staff is finalizing details for a Professional Artist Forum for photographers in early September.
Staff is continuing to work towards a professional development project for aspiring professional authors.
Staff continues to collect and update the Dance Bridge page, www.boulderarts.org/dance-bridge and send e-
newsletters on resources and opportunities at least once per month.
> Creative Neighborhoods
Applications for the 2019 Mural Artist Roster is closed. The roster will be used to identify artists for public projects
around the city. And, members of the community are encouraged to visit the roster and commission an artist!
Staff is planning for another round of neighborhood murals, anticipated for 2020.
> The Creative Workforce and the NoBo Art District
The Artist Census final analysis will be the subject of conversation at the July meeting, and will be posted on the
website. Thanks to everyone who participated in surveys and focus groups, and to the experts at Qualitative Research
Centre for their excellent work on the focus group meetings.
The NoBo Arts District 10 year anniversary celebration is now scheduled for September ’s First Friday.
Staff continues to support the team in NoBo proposing a Business Improvement District.
9
Attachment One
Artists Census Draft Report
10
11
12
13
14
15
Attachment Two
Temporary Public Art Approval Memo
City of Boulder Office of Arts + Culture
Library & Arts Department
www.boulderarts.org
MEMORANDUM
To: Boulder Arts Commissioners
From: Matt Chasansky, Boulder Arts Commission Liaison
Cc: Mandy Vink, Public Art Administrator
Date: July 11, 2017
Regarding: Paint the Pavement application approval for Melody Catalpa
This memo serves as notice to the Boulder Arts Commission of the administrative approval of a temporary
public art project.
Project Intro: The Melody Catalpa neighborhood has applied for a Paint the Pavement project through the
City of Boulder Transportation Department. The mural, located at the intersection of 16 th and Kalmia, will be
created during a block party on July 21, 2019. The project concept is a catalpa tree with the sky and flatirons
behind. It features a musical movement in the roots to incorporate “melody” and beehives in the center as
Melody Catalpa was the first neighborhood in the world to achieve certification as “bee safe”. This project is
being stewarded by Lieschen Gargano Quilling and Merlyn Holmes. This is one of the first murals and art in
public places projects in this neighborhood.
Review Process: In the October 2017 Arts Commission retreat, the commissioners approved a public art
process change for community-initiated temporary projects. The rule defines community-initiated projects
such as this to be temporary exhibitions, identified in Section IV. Limitations, and therefore can be approved
and work to begin in a more expedient manner. Temporary exhibitions, including community -initiated
projects, require internal review by the technical review committee and will be reviewed at the conclusion
of two years. At that time, the work may be considered as a donation to the city’s collection.
This project has been approved by and is supported by the Office of Arts and Culture, the Neighborhood
Liaison Office, and the Transportation Department.
The following pages include the pertinent sections of the Melody Catalpa neighborhood paint the pavement
permit application.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
From:Chasansky, Matthew
To:Bruce Borowsky; Devin Hughes; Erica Joos; flynvartranch@comcast.net; Kathleen McCormick
(fonthead1@gmail.com)
Cc:Seaton, Celia; Click, Lauren; Farnan, David
Subject:FW: Concerns about Criteria
Date:Monday, June 17, 2019 7:58:57 AM
Attachments:image010.png
Commissioners—
I understand that Angelique Espinoza has sent emails out with a concern. She has also been in touch
with me. Below is the response that I sent last week. You are, of course, encouraged to respond as
you see fit. I think some of the information I gave to her might be helpful to you.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks!
–Matt
From: Chasansky, Matthew
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 4:00 PM
To: Angelique Espinoza <director@museumofboulder.org>
Cc: Tim Plass <tim.plass@gmail.com>; Carolyn Booth <booth@museumofboulder.org>; Click, Lauren
<ClickL@boulderlibrary.org>; Farnan, David <FarnanD@boulderlibrary.org>
Subject: RE: Concerns about Criteria
Angelique—
Thanks very much for this email. And, for the phone call today. My notes, below, capture some of
what we talked about. On carbon copy are David Farnan and Lauren Click, who have been in
conversation about this grant for the past 10 months. They may be able to add thoughts. (Thanks in
advance, Lauren and David!)
I will be out of the office early next week. But, I very much want to take you up on your offer to
meet and discuss these points. However, I thought it important to connect on these questions so
that we can make sure you have everything you need ahead of Monday’s deadline.
To start, I will repeat what I wrote in my quick email yesterday: I highly recommend you chat with
some of the commission members. Especially, Mark and Kathleen. They have been the most
engaged with City Council around this grant, as well as speaking in advocacy for more funding for
your organization (among a few others).
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
25
So, on to your points:
1.In the email below, you call out those places in the application where the terms “art”, “artistic
merit”, and “artists and creative professionals” are mentioned.
As we discussed, there is some disagreement in the community about the precise definition of
“arts and culture”. However, the Arts Commission has been very clear that, for their
purposes, the term “arts” includes heritage. They have worked on aligning, what was before
2015 a pretty exclusive term, to the sentiments of the community. We heard from folks who
participated in the Cultural Plan that history, heritage, and specifically your organization are
important to the cultural strategy. So, for example, when you see the term “artists and
creative professionals”… the commission understands that term unequivocally includes
historians, history writers, practitioners of traditional cultural forms, social historians,
curators of heritage, etc.
This is captured in several places. Please refer to COB Revised Code 14-1-2 (a) (9) where
“history and heritage” are listed under eligible programs and projects. Also, in the specific
eligibility criteria for this grant which reads: “The facility may be programmed for any field or
specialty including culture, heritage, social justice, science, or the arts.”
2.Regarding your points about the seven guidelines that City Council set for this funding:
Those guidelines were developed on the fly during City Council’s meeting last October and
were the subject of much discussion at Arts Commission meetings in October, November,
and January. They attempted to translate this guidance into viable evaluation and eligibility
criteria. That was further endorsed by Council on March 5, 2019.
In your email you specifically bring up the following:
"Examples of facilities based organizations to include...Museum of Boulder...."
Staff and the Arts Commission agree that the Museum of Boulder is eligible.
"Unlike typical arts grants, these grants would include programs, performances,
and exhibits that are not traditionally art...." And, "they would include any
educational or engagement experience, including culture, science, art, and
health"
This is specifically stated in the eligibility criterion: “The facility may be
programmed for any field or specialty including culture, heritage, social justice,
science, or the arts.”
"The programs, performances and exhibits would be targeted towards residents
of the Boulder region....”
This is highlighted in the purpose statement “support nonprofits which own or
operate venues to improve the provision of programming to the community
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
26
through the public use of their facility.” Also, please note the general eligibility
requirements that the organization be headquartered in Boulder and that all
grants are used to support programming for the community.
A note that the specific evaluation criteria that are captured in the purpose
statement and rubric (connections to the community; encourage collaboration;
improve access; and contributes to the experience of participants) were
developed with a lot of help, including from Ken Wilson. He met with David and I
to help us align some of this language to what he felt was the specific perspective
of the Museum. He may have further insight.
3.Your final point refers the use of the term “project grant”.
That term is a directive from Council. One that I admit I would not have recommended. It
falls into common terminology of grant making: as opposed to an operational grant.
However, we have tried to open up that term so that some types of operational uses can be
considered. For instance, the grant calls out that limited operational uses such as hiring extra
staff for a big program or investing in minor capital purchases may be considered. In short,
we were compelled to put it in the category of project grants, but understand that the
outcomes Council desires call for a more broad approach.
Also, regarding one further issue you brought up during our phone call, I was correct that the
instance that mentions “artistic merit” is in a list of examples. This is for the Community Priorities
evaluation question, which is used to measure all competitive grant applications against the
Community Cultural Plan. Not only for this category. This is how the application reads:
Examples of ways to demonstrate impact on the Community Priorities may include
descriptions of how your project or organization:
Supports artists and creative professionals by providing professional development
programming.
Contributes to Boulder’s creative identity and creates a vibrant cultural
destination through high artistic merit and excellence in the practice of a medium
or discipline.
Engages the community in civic dialogue about the arts through interactive
outreach in the neighborhoods.
Adds creativity in the public realm by engaging underserved populations in art-
making for their community.
As you know, the Arts Commission this year decided to do away with a specific evaluation criterion
for artistic merit. And, instead, to allow applicants the option to make the case that their cultural
practice contributes to the Cultural Plan. It is clear that this is a list of examples meant to encourage
applicants to describe in their own words how their application connects to the Cultural Plan.
I hope this helps clarify a bit. I am happy to set up time to meet and talk in more detail. Let me
know when you are free.
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
27
Best.
–Matt
Matt Chasansky
Manager,
Office of Arts and Culture
303-441-4113
chasanskym@boulderlibrary.org
he/him/his
boulderarts.org
Library & Arts Department
1001 Arapahoe Avenue | Boulder, CO 80302
bouldercolorado.gov
From: Angelique Espinoza <director@museumofboulder.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 10:51 AM
To: Chasansky, Matthew <ChasanskyM@boulderlibrary.org>
Cc: Tim Plass <tim.plass@gmail.com>; Carolyn Booth <booth@museumofboulder.org>
Subject: Fwd: Concerns about Criteria
Dear Matt,
We have concerns about the questions used in the facilities
grant application:
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
28
Note how heavily these questions still lean into art as the
primary critera. This seems inconsistent with both your email
to me in which you state "the Arts Commission has eliminated
the 'artistic excellence' criterion in all grants":
It also seems in conflict with the 7 criteria approved by
Council:
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
29
Particularly the following:
"Examples of facilities based organizations to
include...Museum of Boulder...."
"Unlike typical arts grants, these grants would include
programs, performances, and exhibits that are not
traditionally art...."
" They would include any educational or engagement
experience, including culture, science, art, and health"
"The programs, performances and exhibits would be targeted
towards residents of the Boulder region...."
(emphasis mine).
For this reason, it is troubling to see art featured so heavily,
and mention culture only once in the grant questions. Even
where culture is mentioned, is is important only when
contributing to Boulder's creative identity and culture through
high artistic merit.
"How does out organization support artists and creative
professionals; contribute to Boulder's creative identity and
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
30
culture through high artistic merit; engage community in civic
dialogue about the arts through interactive outreach in the
neighborhoods; and, add creativity in the public realm by
engaging underserved populations in art making for their
community?
This does not seem in keeping with Council's direction for this
grant.
We worry about the weighting of the application questions to
the “artistic,” when I think that it is clear that council’s intent
was to create a broader category of funding for facilities-based
“cultural” institutions. It seems like the bias against cultural
organizations that we encountered in the General Operating
Support grant questions remains for the facilities-based grant.
Additionally we find it troubling that the application uses the
term “project” in this fashion: "Hereafter, the proposals for
projects, programming, or operational needs which form an
application to this grant will be referred to as the “project.”
This language is from the website
https://boulderarts.org/2019-grants-program/2019-special-
facilities-grants/
We worry that in evaluating the applications, the Art
Commissioners will undervalue proposals that aren’t actual
projects. For example, our request for operational funding may
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
31
not be seen as a "project." We are concerned that the metrics
criteria associated with the “project” idea serve to reinforce
this bias.
We would very much like to come to a meeting of the minds
on this issue. Please let me know if it is appropriate to have a
phone call or coffee to discuss.
Respectfully,
--
Angelique Espinoza
Museum of Boulder | 2205 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302
303-449-3464 x1 (office) | 303-818-2032 (mobile)
she/her/hers
www.museumofboulder.org
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
32
From:Chasansky, Matthew
To:Angelique Espinoza
Cc:Kathleen McCormick (fonthead1@gmail.com); Bruce Borowsky; Devin Hughes; Seaton, Celia; Click, Lauren
Subject:RE: Concerns about Criteria
Date:Monday, June 17, 2019 7:57:49 AM
Angelique—
Thanks so much for emailing the commission members.
A quick note, just in case you were not aware, that the practice of the Arts Commission is to include
any email sent to three or more commissioners in the public record. The email below will be
attached to the July meeting packet. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best.
–Matt
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Angelique Espinoza <director@museumofboulder.org>
Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 2:36 PM
Subject: Fwd: Concerns about Criteria
To: <fonthead1@gmail.com>, <bruce@boulderdigitalarts.com>, <devin@devinpatrickhughes.com>
Hi Bruce, Kathleen and Devin,
As the Interim Executive Director of the Museum of Boulder, I
have some grave concerns about the wording of the criteria
for the special facilities grant. I simply cannot accept that the
word "art" means "art, culture, and heritage". The current
wording places all the emphasis on art, artists, and artistic
merit. Please review the email I sent to Matt Chazansky below
for specifics.
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
33
I appreciate your attention to this matter. Please feel free to
contact me with any questions or concerns.
Angelique Espinoza
303-818-2032
____________________________
Dear Matt,
We have concerns about the questions used in the facilities
grant application:
Note how heavily these questions still lean into art as the
primary critera. This seems inconsistent with both your email
to me in which you state "the Arts Commission has eliminated
the 'artistic excellence' criterion in all grants":
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
34
It also seems in conflict with the 7 criteria approved by
Council:
Particularly the following:
"Examples of facilities based organizations to
include...Museum of Boulder...."
"Unlike typical arts grants, these grants would include
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
35
programs, performances, and exhibits that are not
traditionally art...."
" They would include any educational or engagement
experience, including culture, science, art, and health"
"The programs, performances and exhibits would be targeted
towards residents of the Boulder region...."
(emphasis mine).
For this reason, it is troubling to see art featured so heavily,
and mention culture only once in the grant questions. Even
where culture is mentioned, is is important only when
contributing to Boulder's creative identity and culture through
high artistic merit.
"How does out organization support artists and creative
professionals; contribute to Boulder's creative identity and
culture through high artistic merit; engage community in civic
dialogue about the arts through interactive outreach in the
neighborhoods; and, add creativity in the public realm by
engaging underserved populations in art making for their
community?
This does not seem in keeping with Council's direction for this
grant.
We worry about the weighting of the application questions to
the “artistic,” when I think that it is clear that council’s intent
was to create a broader category of funding for facilities-based
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
36
“cultural” institutions. It seems like the bias against cultural
organizations that we encountered in the General Operating
Support grant questions remains for the facilities-based grant.
Additionally we find it troubling that the application uses the
term “project” in this fashion: "Hereafter, the proposals for
projects, programming, or operational needs which form an
application to this grant will be referred to as the “project.”
This language is from the website
https://boulderarts.org/2019-grants-program/2019-special-
facilities-grants/
We worry that in evaluating the applications, the Art
Commissioners will undervalue proposals that aren’t actual
projects. For example, our request for operational funding may
not be seen as a "project." We are concerned that the metrics
criteria associated with the “project” idea serve to reinforce
this bias.
We would very much like to come to a meeting of the minds
on this issue. Please let me know if it is appropriate to have a
phone call or coffee to discuss.
Respectfully,
Angelique Espinoza
Museum of Boulder | 2205 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302
303-449-3464 x1 (office) | 303-818-2032 (mobile)
she/her/hers
www.museumofboulder.org
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
37
From:Click, Lauren
To:Mark Villarreal; Kathleen McCormick (fonthead1@gmail.com); Devin Hughes; Erica Joos; Bruce Borowsky
Cc:Chasansky, Matthew; Seaton, Celia
Subject:Documents for review for Commission meeting 7/17/19
Date:Tuesday, July 9, 2019 3:30:35 PM
Attachments:Boulder Symphony CP report 2018.pdf
Studio Arts Boulder AE report 2018.pdf
Museum of Boulder AE report 2018.pdf
Friendship City Projects AE report 2018.pdf
Boulder Metalsmithing AE report 2018.pdf
Hello Arts Commission,
There are five items for you to review for the grant program before the meeting on Wednesday, July
17, 2019.
·ACTION: Grant Reports
1. Arts Education: Boulder Metalsmithing Association, Enhancing Art Through
Metalsmithing, $3,000
2. Arts Education: Friendship City Projects, Taller Artistico Xuchialt Art and Culture
Exchange, $3,000
3. Arts Education: Museum of Boulder, Teen Corps: 3D Printing Artifacts for the Blind
(Seeing Through Touching), $2,900
4. Arts Education: Studio Arts Boulder, Pottery with the “I Have a Dream” Foundation,
$3,000
5. Community Project Grant: Boulder Symphony, GLOW Project, $5,000
I have attached them here, or, you may go to the online portal, then to your Shared Documents
folder, then to the appropriate folder. You’ll discuss and make final decisions on these items at the
meeting.
Also, please be reminded that your initial scores and comments on the 2019 Special Facilities Grant
are due this Friday, July 12.
Feel free to contact me at any time if you have any questions. Thank you for your hard work and all
that you do for the arts in Boulder!
Cheers, Lauren
Lauren Click
she/her/hers
Cultural Grants Program
Office of Arts + Culture
720-564-2355
clickl@boulderlibrary.org
www.boulderarts.org
Library & Arts Department
1001 Arapahoe Avenue | Boulder, CO | 80302
Attachment Three
Commission Correspondence
38
Attachment Four
Revised Schedule for the 2019 Cycle of Cultural Grants
39
40
41
Attachment Five
Current Cultural Grants Program Budget as of July 12, 2019
GRANT
CATEGORY
ASSIGNED
BUDGET
UPDATED
BUDGET
GRANTS
AWARDED BALANCE
GOS: Extra Large Orgs $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00
GOS: Large Orgs $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00
GOS: Mid Orgs $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00
GOS: Small Orgs $88,000.00 $88,000.00 $88,000.00
GOS remaining funds $4,000.00
Community Projects: Indv. $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Community Projects: Orgs. $60,000.00 $56,000.00 $56,000.00
Arts Education $30,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
Rental Assistance $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,006.50 ($6.50.00)
Professional Dev. Scholarships $17,000.00 $20,000.00 $19,895.00 $105.00
Certificate Scholarships $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00
Cultural Field Trips $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
Equity Grant $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
Special Facilities Grant $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00
TOTAL $925,000.00 $925,000.00 $646,901.50 $278,098.50
There are 11 free rentals still available for the Macky Auditorium.
Note: The new column titled “updated budget” reflects changes the Arts Commission has approved to the original
budget as it was first approved in October 2018. The “balance” column is “grants awarded” minus the updated budget.
42
Attachment Six
Current Public Art Program 5 Year Budget as of July 12, 2019
FUNDING
SOURCE PROJECT/ARTIST TOTAL
APPROPRIATED
AMOUNT PAID
TO DATE
BALANCE
REMAINING
2019 PROJECTED
SPENDING
Gen. Fund Civic Area Temp. / Tashakori $ 10,000 $ 9,000 --- $1000
Gen. Fund Civic Area Temp. / Parson $ 7,000 $7,000 --- $600
Gen. Fund Civic Area Permanent / Kuby* $ 45,000 $45,000 --- $28,750
Gen. Fund NoBo Mural / in selection $ 9,500 $ 1,500 $ 8,000 $9,500
Gen. Fund Melanie Yazzie Donation $11,186 $11,186 --- $11,186
CCS v1 Civic Area Permanent / Kuby* $325,000 $55,750 $269,250 $286,000
CCS v1 North Broadway / Dowell $165,000 $ 8,250 $156,750 $50,000
CCS v1 Univ. Hill / CU ENVD $ 95,000 $28,500 $66,500 $95,000
CCS v1 Diagonal Gateway / Muller* $ 81,500 $40,750 $40,750 $40,750
CCS v2 NoBo Library / pre-selection* ~$260,000 --- ~$260,000 $91,000
CCS v2 Creative Neighborhoods / various* ~$ 25,000 --- ~$ 25,000 ---
CCS v2 Scott Carpenter Pool / pre-selection ~$100,000 --- ~$100,000 ---
CCS v2 Fire Station #3 / pre-selection ~$ 75,000 --- ~$ 75,000 ---
% for Art Arapahoe Underpass / Sparks $ 42,000 $ 6,300 $35,700 $ 35,700
% for Art Foothills Underpass / Braaksma $ 35,000 $17,500 $17,500 $35,000
% for Art 30th Underpass / Fivian & Beegles $ 33,750 $12,636 $ 21,114 $ 33,750
% for Art BPL Restroom / Huang and McElwain $ 6,800 $ 3,800 $ 3,000 $ 6,800
% for Art BCH Deconstruction Project $60,000 --- $60,000 $20,000
% for Art CAGID / on hold $ 50,000 $25,000 $25,000 ---
TOTAL $1,436,736 $272,172 $1,163,564 $745,036
*Multiple funding sources.
CCS: Community Culture and Safety Tax.
Additional maintenance projects are not represented.
43