HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.15.21 BAC MinutesCITY OF BOULDER
BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING
MINUTES
Name of Board/ Commission: Boulder Arts Commission
Date of Meeting: September 15, 2021
Contact information preparing summary: Celia Seaton
Commission members present: Kathleen McCormick, Devin Hughes, Georgia Schmid, Eboni Freeman, Maria Cole, Caroline
Kert
Commission members absent: Bruce Borowsky
Library staff present:
Matt Chasansky, Office of Arts & Culture Manager
Lauren Click, Coordinator, Grants
Mandy Vink, Coordinator, Public Art
David Farnan, Director
Celia Seaton, Administrative Specialist
City staff present:
None
Members of the public present: Mary Wohl Haan, Marda Kirn, Kari Palzzari, Elaine Schnabel, Nick Forster, Patricia
Bruck
Type of Meeting: Regular|Remote
Agenda Item 1: Call to order and approval of agenda [0:02:51 Audio min.]
The meeting was called to order. McCormick provided an introductory orientation around the virtual procedure, as this
meeting was held through Zoom videoconference. She asked the group for any other addendums to the agenda. Though not
an agenda shift, Chasansky highlighted continued staff discussions with the City’s Racial Equity Guiding Coalition as work
progresses on the commission’s statement on cultural equity. More conversation on the coalition’s instrument will occur at
a future meeting. There was a nod of approval for the agenda as presented.
Agenda Item 2: Review of Minutes [0:04:13 Audio min.]
Item 2A, Approval/Review of August 2021 Meeting Minutes
McCormick asked the commission for changes or addendums regarding these minutes. Freeman moved to approve the
minutes, Kert seconded, and the motion was unanimously approved.
Agenda Item 3: Public Participation [0:04:45 Audio min.]
Forster announced that eTown Hall will be hosting a Boulder city council candidate forum. Create Boulder and Boulder
County Arts Alliance partnered to showcase this panel specifically concerning arts and culture issues. Intended goals
include educating city council candidates and the opportunity to secure their arts-friendly statements, as well as a chance for
community participation in local government. Livestreaming will be made available.
Kirn spoke about EcoArts’s recent work around climate change; she hopes that this pressing global issue will be included on
the commission’s retreat agenda. She emphasized the need for collaboration to bring together various finding funding
resources along with the various groups within the city. Kirn noted that Boulder has the highest density of climate change
scientists globally. This prime space “needs the arts to mobilize it.” She welcomed commissioners to contact her to engage
in this effort.
Palazzari (Studio Arts) welcomed the group to the upcoming fundraiser Chili Bowl Festival. She noted that the event has
been scaled back this year to “safely spread out the fun.” Art demonstrations will occur all weekend along with the Pottery
Lab’s fall pottery sale.
Leah Woods: I am here to be available for questions and would like to speak to those questions pertaining to the Block 1750
2021 Community Project Grant request for change.
Agenda Item 4: Public Art [0.14.04 Audio min.]
A. 2022 Public Art Implementation Plan Updates, Chapters 2 and 3 – Vink continued to present on significant
changes and new projects (see handouts.) Alpine Balsam is “still tracking,” but a year behind in its schedule. For
the Alpine Balsam area plan and hospital deconstruction, as well as future intended use, please see
https://bouldercolorado.gov/projects/alpine-balsam-implementation. The George Reynolds branch library
renovation refresh will involve a new mural in the children’s area, with an artist chosen from the mural roster.
Cole asked whether the artists on the roster are Boulder-based. Vink explained that the artists are located anywhere
from Colorado Springs up to Laramie. The parameters are intentionally kept as broad and functional as possible.
Cole also wondered whether a donated piece comes with donated maintenance funds. Vink explained that the
donor is encouraged to donate 10% to assist in covering the maintenance needs. In response to Kert’s inquiry,
Vink clarified that the mural roster is updated with new additions ever year, but an entire update occurs every other
year.
Regarding the capital improvement projects like the 30th and Colorado Underpass Project, McCormick wondered
whether restriction of Transportation’s budget would then cause the art component to become value engineered.
Vink explained that because this project was an outlier to the typical process, it may well be value engineered if
need be. Transportation is working with Vink to try to bring funds where they need to be for the art element.
Cole: is it possible to make accessible signage a permanent requirement? Vink explained that this signage tends to
fall on the burden of the artist as a portion of project cost.
Freeman wondered about the “hold” on the Public Art Experiments. Vink explained that this hold was instated in
2018 because Public Art Experiments was initiated with a one-time funding. It remains as a hold because it was so
successful; staff is still waiting to hear on updates to the budget, as this could become a 2022 contender.
https://boulderarts.org/public-art/temporary/
Agenda Item 5: Grant Program [0.46.00 Audio min.]
A. Patricia D Bruck, 3rd Extension, Community Project Grants, Awarded March 21, 2018, River Beginning: A
Journey From the Edge, $4,000. In response to Kert’s question, Bruck explained that she is unsure of the reasons
behind the past two extensions. Click recalled that the delay was impacted by COVID-19 considerations, along
with the death of the title subject.
McCormick would like to approve the grant extension. She cited the understandable conditions that caused the
delay and is excited to see the final product. Kert agreed. Freeman wondered if it was possible to share the
progress as it currently stands. Bruck has six hours of “talking head” style footage – she plans to upload some
content online to be relayed by Click to commission. She must now create an alternative “b-roll” instead of
focusing on her main character River. Cole feels supportive of artists through these challenges and felt struck by
the tenacity of artists continuing to adapt despite extenuating circumstances.
Cole moved that the extension request from Patricia Bruck be approved. Hughes seconded. All were in favor, and
the motion passed unanimously.
B. Block 1750, request to change the nature of the 2021 Community Project Grant previously awarded for Block
Party 2021, $10,000. Click explained that commissioners have the options to a) approve the change in the program
request, b) not approve the change in the program request and request return of the funds already received by Block
1750, or c) postpone approval of the change in program request pending the answers to specific questions. Interim
Director Woods was present to answer questions.
Cole stated her preference to approve the change in the program request. Kert agreed, appreciating the strength
needed to “right a ship” of a project’s progression. In response to Kert’s inquiry, Woods explained that the
proposed costs just cover the in-house studio space, Avalon costs would be additional if needed. Schmid has not
had good experiences in her interactions with Block 1750; she doesn’t approve supporting it through the allocation
of city dollars. She cited positions changing hands, inconsistencies with class schedules, and unprofessionalism.
Schmid does not approve this change and finds the continual funding for Block 1750 concerning. Freeman
appreciates the ingenuity involved in creating a new program. Freeman is excited about the project and would like
to see the project realized but feels it should be entered under a new grant review and approval process.
Cole inquired whether questions might be posed whose responses might alleviate Schmid’s concerns. Schmid
responded that, in her 7 years of experience, she has observed schedules/instructors not aligning with the actual
class events, as well as issues of drugs and alcohol that were not well-addressed by the on-site leadership – “lives
have been lost” due to the situation. Schmid doesn’t see this studio as mature enough to be awarded the
responsibility of taxpayer monies. Kert suggested an update on policies and leadership from Woods which may
address Schmid’s concerns. Woods assumed her role in March 2021; she acknowledged the changes within Block
1750 and agreed with Schmid’s estimation of the turn-over. While volunteer-run for many years, she sees a shift to
more professional organization with four new people in leadership.
Cole suggested a postponement to allow Block 1750 leadership time to provide responses on how they are
currently defining a safe space and their commitment to the teachers that are included in this program proposal.
While respecting Schmid’s comments and perspective, Freeman would like to highlight that grant funding usually
focuses on the project, and not on management issues. Schmid clarified that she is not “disgruntled,” she has seen
this organization continually be awarded grant money, yet not handle it appropriately. McCormick stated that she
has seen a good track record of edgy and youth-oriented project, however she is concerned with precedent of
changing a project so far into the timeline.
Hughes wondered whether challenges of the organization caused the changes to the project (an annual block party).
Woods: community feedback signaled a “dissonance” which led to structural change. The precedent argument is a
fair and ethical concern that she appreciates. Kert was curious as to the consideration to postpone event. Woods
explained the desire to reimagine an event with the present leadership which will serve the same need of bringing
together the contemporary local dance community.
Cole made a motion to postpone approval of the change in program request pending the answers to specific
questions (further expanding on the statement in letter re: “safe space,” the commitment to teachers outlined in
proposal, and the similarities to the previously funded program). Kert seconded. All approved, except for Schmid
and Freeman who voted against this motion.
This item will be brought back in October’s meeting for further consideration.
C. Reports for Approval
1. Colorado Conservatory for the Jazz Arts, SheBop Weekend Workshop, $3,000 follow up responses –
commission provided a nod of approval for the responses.
2. Angie Eng, Earth Wear, $5,000 – Cole commented that she appreciated the feedback. Freeman agreed with
Cole. She would like to see the qualitative data evidenced through key quotes from the questionnaires. Kert
would also like to review the questionnaires, and particularly appreciated the large amount of volunteer
assistance. McCormick was impressed by the report, but concerned by the potential overextension of Eng’s
efforts, timewise. Click will relay feedback and inquiry to Eng.
Kert made a motion to approve the grant report and follow up with the questions. Freeman seconded, and the
motion was unanimously approved.
D. 2022 Grant Cycle Blueprint: Recommended Changes (see handouts.) – Click reviewed staff-recommended changes
to the 2022 Grants Program. Topics include grant program financial structure, process improvements, and the 2022
Grant Program schedule.
The staff recommended financial structure includes the purchase of software and equipment to allow virtual
programming and equipment as well as remote software.
Chasansky noted that the levels of funding for General Operating Support grants (GOS) have changed, but they
have not risen adequately since establishment in 2016 to reflect inflation. He advised that the group examine the
mix of funding. The Community Cultural Plan calls for commission to focus funding on the resiliency of
nonprofits to operate business. GOS funding provides best sustainability for organizations and best return on
investment. He imagined concentrating on GOS and considering a reduction of the other categories (e.g., projects)
for nonprofits. Chasansky is proposing this topic for discussion, not as a staff recommendation. McCormick is not
in favor of eliminating categories in favor of consolidating funding to GOS. Smaller grants like the community
project grants and art education grants spread city funding to more of the arts community and provide opportunities
for organizations that do not get GOS funding and for individual artists to receive support for projects.
The group discussed potential process improvements. Regarding eligibility around contractual age, staff
recommended that all applicants must be of legal contractual age as defined by the state of Colorado (18 years).
“We encourage those younger than 18 years of age to engage with a fellow artist or organization in order to apply.
Contact the Office with questions.” Freeman approved of this language. Staff also recommended City of Boulder
city limits remain as currently described.
Process improvements re: GOS were reviewed. For the 2022 GOS application, what impacts of COVID-19 should
be considered in elements of criteria and selection? Staff recommended asking for 2019 and 2020 financials and
use the higher budget number to determine grant category.
Staff do not recommend including the question concerning whether organizations can accept less than the full
request for funding.
Process improvements: do not seek panelists to join the grant process. Commission discussed whether it was still
interested in adopting a rule that Commissioners cannot miss more than one grant program review now that they
are a body of seven as opposed to five. Commission agreed to table this topic until a future meeting to gather
Borowsky’s input.
Process improvements regarding engagement and publicizing the grant program. Next year will see a focus on
Government Alliance on Racial Equity (GARE) group connections, print advertising, and utilizing the city’s
Community Connector contacts.
Palazzari agreed that the GOS grants allow an organization the most flexibility in handling awarded funds. The
two groups of organizations in the middle “stair” levels still feel a financial squeeze and thus often apply for
project grants as well. She suggested a curve as opposed to this staggered model (see handouts.) She offered to
return with further data to illustrate the proposal.
Wohl Haan spoke, recommending the panelist addition even if limited to just two members. She cited the lessened
chance of issues with recusals as well as the desire to engage diverse voices to unite the community.
Chasansky clarified that the majority of commission members would not like to see an option whereby all funding
be centralized to GOS grants.
Agenda Item 6: Matters from Commissioners [2.55.30 Audio min.]
A. McCormick spoke about the outcome of the City Council discussion around the Community Culture and Safety
Tax continuation ballot item. McCormick highlighted the language calling for 10% of the tax revenues over 20
years be directed to nonprofits vs. current 20%, essentially cutting this funding in half. McCormick and members
of Create Boulder advocated to council for more and dedicated funding to arts and culture. They did get “culture”
back in the ballot measure’s title, but council majority did not decide to set any additional monies aside to this
effort.
This 0.30% tax would help fund infrastructure projects, which Boulder voters will decide whether to renew in
November, would extend for 15 years and is now called the Community, Culture, Resilience and Safety Tax.
McCormick also spoke about an effort to plan for accessing the CCRS tax for a cultural arts center in downtown
Boulder. She referenced concept plans previously developed for the Civic Center master plan that could include
redevelopment of existing buildings such as the Boulder Library Main north wing and the senior center, as well as
a new performing arts building.
APPROVED BY: ATTESTED:
_________________________________________ ________________________________________
Board Chair Board Secretary
_________________________________________ ________________________________________
Date Date
Agenda Item 7: Matters from Staff [3.03.40 Audio min.]
A.Manager’s Memo: See packet. Chasansky welcomed questions.
B.Budget Update: Farnan and Chasansky (see handouts.) – Chasansky discussed 2021 budget restorations and
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds available for this year. One detail of the special adjustment to base
amounts to $157,250 under grants restoration. Staff recommended awarding project grants that scored above the
minimum threshold, but there was not enough funding available. After confirming eligibility, provide those grants
in order: Community Projects for Individuals, then Arts Education, then Community Projects for Organizations in
the order of highest scores. Lastly, add a round of Rental Assistance Grants with criteria changes pertinent to the
pandemic.
Chasansky next spoke about expansion in 2022 over and above the budget restoration thanks to ARPA funding
(reestablishing the Experiments in Public Art Program or providing an enhancement scholarship for GOS grants).
McCormick: can ARPA funding be used to complete a project (e.g., the University Hill) which is currently on
hold? ARPA law encompasses very targeted criteria around what the monies can be put toward, but Chasansky
will inquire and report back. McCormick also wondered whether a portion of ARPA funding can go to permanent
neighborhood art. As this is more of an infrastructure element, staff felt that may be challenging to present as a
response to community need. With this proposed $275,000, Vink would only anticipate 3-4 permanent
neighborhood-scale projects could happen. Farnan: we are also under time constraints on ARPA funds and public
art projects consume a lot of time as well as staff focus.
Cole moved that commission support the staff recommendation for use of the budget restorations in the Grants
Program to fund the top scoring organizations and individuals in the 2021 Community Project Grants for
Individuals, Arts Education Grants and Community Project Grants for Organizations categories after they have
been deemed eligible by Office staff and, that the balance of the funds be used for an additional round of Rental
Assistance Grants with a change to the criteria that online expenses be an allowable use of the funds. Kert
seconded, and the motion was unanimously approved. Hughes recused himself as he is employed by an
organization that benefits from the funding.
Agenda Item 8: Adjournment [3.38.40 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, October 20, 2021, on Zoom.
11.9.21