Comments on: AAPAC Plans Response on Public Art

By: mr dairy

mr dairy — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:31:44 +0000

I guess I’m glad that council didn’t try to “steer” them either. Nor wouldn’t you have thought or am I just thinking wishfully that there would have been lots of public discussion to find out what the long term goals and objectives would be other than to spend a big ball of money on a fountain in front of a public building?

What this does show is that the AAPAC thought that they had all the answers. They didn’t seek sufficient input from sources other than their clique, and/or they dismissed any input that seemed counter to the committee’s vision.

Ann Arbor is a wannabe arts community. It might have the arts, but it lacks the community.

The AAPAC needs to build the community first then let the creativity flower.

By: suswhit

suswhit — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:58:30 +0000

But what about the reverse – using art money to pay for stormwater treatment? (Thus lessening the perceived cost of the new buildng?)

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:40:44 +0000

The ordinance specifically prohibits use of storm water construction funds for art (though $6,000 from the street tree planting for FY 2011-2012 is budgeted for art) but the program did receive $450,000 approx. in FY 2008 from water utilities and sewer. (Footing drain disconnection program alone gave $50,000.) No plan to use those water sources as far as I know.

By: suswhit

suswhit — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:20:17 +0000

“It would be difficult to achieve LEED status if the building did not clean and process the storm water that comes off the roof and the site. The sculpture is part of the storm water control system of the building. The committee wanted the art to follow the environmental theme of the building and city.”
If this argument held any water (ha ha ha – I’m so funny) then that line item would be in the budget for the building, not the budget for the “public” art. Or wait, maybe council is fudging where the money comes from for their new castle…err I mean police courts addition by moving the storm water treatment costs into the art budget….you never know with council these days….

By: David Lewis

David Lewis — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:36:52 +0000

The arts committee had been in place for years and they had a long lead up before the funding finally became available so they shouldn’t say they didn’t have time.

The committee had time and experience and most of them were there for quite a few years. I appreciate that the council did not try to steer them in a direction other than to provide public art.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:54:32 +0000

“…the committee had no clear direction or directive from council or the Mayor. They had a pile of money and there was a rush to get something at the new City Hall…”

When in doubt, don’t get any guidance just spend and spend until the plug is pulled. Got it.

By: mr dairy

mr dairy — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:29:24 +0000

I was talking to an AAPAC committee member the other day and they expressed their opinion that when the AAPAC was formed and the 1% was begun, the committee had no clear direction or directive from council or the Mayor. They had a pile of money and there was a rush to get something at the new City Hall, err Police and Courts addition.

There was little discussion or debate on much of anything including other ideas or discussion of local artists or much of an effort to seek clear guidance from council, Mayor or input from anyone else but the committee and art insiders. With a growing bucket of money and visions of something big, they rushed forward with their plans.

By: Marvin Face

Marvin Face — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:36:59 +0000

Yes David, One third of my objection is that the artist is not local. The people who like this piece are enamored with the name Dreiseitl and anything he would have produced would be “genius, just GENIUS!” My guess is that they like collecting “names” rather than having successful art.

You are right that part of the fun is debating the merits of the work. I’m having fun right now because sometimes you have to laugh to keep from crying.

By: David Lewis

David Lewis — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:58:41 +0000

It would be difficult to achieve LEED status if the building did not clean and process the storm water that comes off the roof and the site. The sculpture is part of the storm water control system of the building. The committee wanted the art to follow the environmental theme of the building and city.

By: suswhit

suswhit — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:14:58 +0000

fyi from here [link] "Another major line item is for “water technology,” at $125,000. Clein told commissioners that this would include water filters, pipes leading back to the building’s mechanical room, two to three pumps, and possibly a system for treatment of the water, if necessary." Do you really think this thing will operate with dirty water that has run off a nearby building? On the other hand, a rain garden uses the ground and plants to naturally filter water.