To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information



Executive_Committee

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 

MEETING of the EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Monday, January 26, 2009
3:00 p.m.
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 70


Minutes

Commission President P.J. Johnston called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m.

  1. Roll Call
    Commissioners Present
    P.J. Johnston
    Maya Draisin
    Jeannene Przyblyski
    Sherri Young
    John Calloway

    Commissioners Absent
    Cass Calder Smith

    Staff Present
    Director of Cultural Affairs Luis R. Cancel
    Deputy Director Nancy Gonchar
    Commission Secretary Sharon Page Ritchie

  2. President’s Report
    President Johnston, noting many members of the public in attendance, acknowledged the great interest in item 4 of this agenda, regarding reorganization of the Arts Commission. He explained that he would make no report, and would call for public comment immediately following the Director’s Report, before discussion by the Committee. He said that, regardless of the outcome of this meeting, that item would be on the agenda of the full Commission at its February 2, 2009 meeting as an action item.

    President Johnston added that, unfortunately, this is the beginning, not the end of a tough series of meetings throughout the City departments, as we face many bad choices.

  3. Director’s Report
    Mr. Cancel made no separate report, presenting his proposal for reorganizing the Arts Commission.

  4. Arts Commission Reorganization Proposal
    Mr. Cancel began by explaining that in formulating the proposed reorganization plan, he aimed to reach the Mayor’s budget objective of a cut of 25% in General Fund expenditures, while continuing to fill the agency’s mandated leadership role in the cultural community. He explained that he had met privately with senior staff to help shape his proposal, and worked with the Department of Human Resources (“DHR”) to get their approval.

    Mr. Cancel said that losing anyone is clearly very painful; that the Arts Commission has no surplus staff, and that all of the Arts Commission staff are highly motivated and care deeply about their work and their constituencies. He reported that he had recently returned from the United States Urban Arts Federation meeting in Charlotte, consisting of the directors of the nation’s sixty largest cities’ arts agencies. He said that the clear message at that gathering is that we are in a protracted recession, nowhere near the halfway point, and that the recovery may not appear until the middle of 2010. He said that “business as usual” will not work, that it is time to rethink and retool, while preserving what we hold near and dear.

    He presented the proposed reorganization chart and budget spreadsheet, explaining that the Arts Commission’s programs are funded by various sources, and that the target of the $400,000 cut called for by the Mayor’s office is only the General Fund.

    He explained that he had moved as many positions as possible to other funding sources to safeguard them, including half of one full-time equivalent position (“FTE”) for the Cultural Centers, the Development Director, half of the FTE for the Director of Public Art, and the Facilities Manager for the Cultural Centers. Regrettably, his proposal eliminated the Deputy Director’s position and the Arts Education Program Manager’s position, reducing that program from 4.5 to 3.5 FTE. He spoke about the Deputy Director’s long and devoted service, and he spoke about the value of arts education and how important it had been in his own life, recalling how a middle school arts teacher saved him from the gang life in the South Bronx and enabled him to take the exam for admission to the High School of the Arts. He reaffirmed the agency’s commitment to arts education, and said that he believes that the federal economic stimulus package will have funds for arts education; the Arts Commission will follow this closely to take advantage of any opportunities there, which he hopes to see in 2010.

    Mr. Cancel said that, painful as these decisions were for him, he believes that the Arts Commission will be better positioned to meet its obligations and operate efficiently with this slightly reduced staff. He explained that the staff will be organized into three functional areas: all grants will be consolidated under a Grants Program Division headed up by Cultural Equity Grants Director San San Wong, the Programs Division will be headed by Public Art Program Director Jill Manton, and the Finance and Administration unit will be managed by Chief Accountant Kan Htun. Mr. Cancel described the powerful new database being developed, which he expects to be operational by the end of the current fiscal year, and which he expects to greatly streamline the process of tracking grants and contracts.

    President Johnston called for public comment, and said that cuts are unavoidable, having been mandated by the Mayor.

    Commissioner Przyblyski added that the Committee members have read every one of the e-mails they have received, and that they were seeking input from the public on what was presented at this meeting.

    Antigone Trimis, Arts Education Master Plan Implementation Manager for the San Francisco Unified School District, explained that the Arts Commission’s Arts Education Program Manager was a critical partner in implementing the plan. She acknowledged the bleak economic reality that everyone is dealing with, and was waiting to see what would happen with California state funds. She said that the partnership with Rachelle Axel, the previous Arts Education Program Manager, had spearheaded a model recognized nationwide. She considered the continued participation of Dia Penning, who now holds the post, as critical, noting that the District doesn’t have the capacity to be in touch with everyone. Ms. Trimis expressed her concern that if the position were eliminated, it would be extremely difficult to add it back when the economy changes. She added that it is vital for the District to have certificated teachers in the arts, and that Ms. Penning’s work is crucial to providing them. She closed by saying that she feared that elimination of this one FTE will seriously harm the partnership with the District.

    Susan Stauter, Artistic Director for High Schools, San Francisco Unified School District, spoke on behalf of Rob Daniels, Arts Administrator for the District. She said that the Master Plan would not exist but for the incessant leadership of the Arts Commission. She said that the plan is now a national and international model, and that the Arts Education Program Manager is the glue that holds it together. She was interested to see how many people appeared at this meeting on their day off, and thought there were many others who would have attended if they could. She also expressed her concern for the children, the new consumers of art and future symphony audiences. She urged the Commission to look at the budget again, and find a way to keep the Arts Education Program Manager’s position.

    London Breed, Executive Director of the African American Arts and Culture Complex (“AAACC”), said that she understood that there would have to be serious cuts in the budget. Invoking the name of President Barack Obama, she said that there were people willing to take pay cuts in order to ensure that their coworkers have a job. She said that in these tough times, all the people, including Ms. Penning, were important to the survival of the arts in San Francisco. She said that some of our children are failing, and that the arts are a way to bring out the best in them. She said that losing that position is losing something vital, and she didn’t see a way to bring it back later. Saying that she knows that the AAACC will sustain cuts, she described how she had benefited from arts education as a young person, and she asked the Commission to try to figure out other ways to deal with the budget cuts. She didn’t believe this proposal served the best interests of children.

    Ann Wettrich, Codirector of the California College of the Arts Center for Art and Public Life, said that she had begun working in the field in the 1980s. She named Ruth Asawa, Leah Forbes, Gloria Unti and Anne Marie Theilen as mentors and colleagues. She said that it was important to make arts education systemic and sustainable; that otherwise only the same few schools with savvy principals get funding. She mentioned the Arts Education Manager’s work with all schools, and the Arts Education Funders Collaborative. She added that the arts create wealth, and urged the Committee to be mindful of what has been built.

    Mary Destri, of Music in Schools Today, said that her program has greatly benefited from the Arts Education program, including the Master Plan, events and collaborations with other agencies; she can’t put a dollar amount on the program’s value. She explained that her program is music therapy with at-risk youth, and that some of her students would not be alive today without it. She noted that Oakland has a larger staff devoted to arts education.

    Belinda Taylor, of Teaching Artists Organized, said that the Arts Education Manager has been a key partner of theirs. She said that the position proposed for elimination is a leadership/management position important for making linkages with other organizations. Describing teaching artists as a rare breed, she said that Ms. Penning is critical to implementing the partnerships with teaching artists. She said that their other partners included the Alameda County Arts Commission and other local arts agencies, and that they work with teaching artists throughout California. She said that they do not want to lose a leader like Ms. Penning. Finally, she asked everyone to join her in a brief exercise of the kind that teaching artists do. She asked people to think of a difficult time in their lives, and she read from Maya Angelou’s poem “Still I Rise.” She said that a teaching artist would go on to lead exercises and discussions. She urged the retention of a dedicated Arts Education Manager in the agency.

    Jessica Mele, Program Director of Performing Arts Workshop began by apologizing for her many e-mails. She said that she spoke as a member of the Arts Providers Alliance of San Francisco (“APASF”), a volunteer organization representing individual artists and small-to-medium-sized arts organizations as well as San Francisco’s largest cultural institutions. She said that she understood that these are tough times, but noted that the Arts Commission was chartered in 1932, even tougher times, and that arts education is in the Charter. She argued that there is an important difference between direct service responsibilities and policy responsibilities, noting that WritersCorps, for example, is a direct service program that does what it does very well.

    Lua Hadar, Artistic Director of the New Performance Group, explained that she is a credentialed teacher, and was the second of five speakers from the Arts Education Funders Collaborative (“AEFC”). She said that AEFC provides professional development that the School District doesn’t provide, and that the Arts Education Manager is a critical link in the process of certifying teaching artists for the District, and implementing the Master Plan.

    Tom DeCaigny, member of the APASF, thanked Mr. Cancel, and urged the Commission to dig deeper to find a way to keep the Arts Education Manager. He discussed the possibility of seeking federal funds, and leveraging funding support. He argued that the Master Plan implementation can’t be handled by a single support position, that it requires a dedicated staff position. He noted that the Department of Children, Youth and Families has helped to advocate for funding across City departments for arts education funding. Mr. DeCaigny argued against cutting a policy position rather than a direct service position, and thought it unfair that only Arts Education was sustaining cuts in this budget.

    Elena Lagerquist, Executive Director of StageWrite, said that she was the fourth of the five speakers from AEFC. She expressed concern about how several issues could be handled in the face of the elimination of the Arts Education Manager. The issues included forums and discussions on local impacts of the economic downturn; professional development for teaching artists; the Arts Education Master Plan; the InsideOut resource; collaboration with national teaching artists; anti-graffiti programs with the Department of Public Works; local representation among statewide teaching artists; connections with at-risk youth and after-school programs; loss of potential funding opportunities, including local funders as well as the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities; and the loss of a central “point person.”

    Julie McDonald, Executive Director of Leap . . . imagination in learning, said that she was the fifth of five speakers for AEFC. She quoted Mayor Newsom on his commitment to arts education and said that San Francisco was poised to reach the level of other cities. She said that progress on the Arts Education Master Plan was encouraging, but that San Francisco was years behind other localities. In Alameda County, for example, she said that the arts education program is supported by eleven FTEs. She urged the Commission to continue funding the Arts Education Manager’s position so that San Francisco does not fall behind.

    Mary Kelly, of Young Audiences of Northern California, said that her organization has been in existence for many years, though she is new to it. She said that she came to the meeting to represent Young Audiences in support of the Arts Education Manager’s position.

    Linda Howe, of the Zellerbach Family Foundation, said she echoed all the remarks made. She asked whether the Mayor knew that the Arts Education program was slated for reduction, and what the Superintendent of Schools thought of the cut. She said that the collaboration has been going on for fifteen years, and that the loss of the Arts Education Manager endangers potential funding from the next foundations the Arts Commission may approach. She noted that WritersCorps is more of a “standalone” program than the Arts Education program. Finally, she said that Zellerbach and other foundations have played a role in arts education since the beginning.

    Liz Harvey, of San Francisco Bay Visual Thinking Strategies, explained that her organization’s work brings art and learning together. She raised the importance of leadership connecting critical local and national discussions on arts education, and praised the role of the Arts Education Manager in creating the infrastructure for high-quality professional development for teaching artists. She said that this position was important for the kind of work that happens day after day in the classroom, and she wanted to add her voice to the support for maintaining the Arts Education position.

    Keith Snodgrass, representative of Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (“SEIU”), said that departments citywide are facing layoffs, and he has looked at lot of organizational charts recently. He argued that it doesn’t make sense to cut here, as this area took cuts in the last round.

    Karen Ames said that she came prepared to listen, not to speak. She said that the Arts Commission is leading the way, and that this is the first real budget-cutting proposal. She spoke in support of Deputy Director Nancy Gonchar and her work; the proposed elimination of her position was a surprise to Ms. Ames. She added that these are difficult times.

    There was no further public comment.

    President Johnston thanked Commissioner Calloway for his participation, noting that the Commissioners, too, are volunteers. He observed that the Commissioners have read the Charter and while their responsibilities are sometimes happy ones, this is not.

    President Johnston explained that each of the agency’s funding sources have limitations, and the subject of the current discussion is the General Fund payroll. He said that, contrary to what some of the public may think, cutting Public Art would not help the General Fund. Commissioner Przyblyski added that the Public Art Program is an “enterprise organization,” almost all of whose funds come from bonds for infrastructure projects. Those funds, she explained, are restricted in use and can’t be used anywhere else.

    Commissioner Przyblyski thanked everyone in attendance, saying that the work they do is inspiring and that it was helpful to hear about it. She said that the testimony made clear to her how closely linked policy and funding discussions are. She acknowledged the good work and good faith of Mr. Cancel to address this challenge through a reorganization strategy. She identified two issues. First, she said, was the challenge of the process, of working in a radically compressed time period. She thought that it would be impossible to approve any budget without convincing the full Commission, meeting just a week later, of this solution. Second, she said, the Commission was facing the way that a budget challenge plays out in the policy arena. She strongly affirmed that arts education is a priority of this agency, and of the Mayor, and she didn’t think that creating a “firestorm” around this issue was sustainable. She argued that the existing Arts Education Program is well-positioned take advantage of future opportunities, and while there are potential sources of state, federal and private funding, she asked whether the Arts Commission can afford to compromise its proven program for future possibilities.

    Mr. Cancel thanked all the people who came to the meeting, saying that it affirmed to him how important the Arts Commission’s work in arts education is. He said that partnerships with the artists and organizations in attendance has brought some success, and that he is committed to continue to move the arts education agenda forward. He said that things have to be reengineered, questioning how to continue to serve arts service providers. He said that he was open to thinking about how to do that in partnership with them, and how to position the Arts Commission to attract other funding. Still, the budget constraints remain.

    President Johnston asked about funds raised from Proposition H that went to the School District; Mr. Cancel said that it was approximately $32 million in the current fiscal year. Ms. Trimis said that only about $5 million of the total went for the arts, and that was cut; President Johnston observed that some administrative costs were absorbed by the School District.

    Mr. Calloway said that he has been an arts teacher for the School District for twenty-one years, and that there’s not enough art in the schools. Some of the children he sees only 45 minutes each week. He said that Luis Rodriguez inspires him, and that the Commission must find a way to use its imagination. He thought it sent a bad message for the Arts Commission’s first cuts to include arts education.

    President Johnston reminded him that the first cut was actually the position of the Arts Commission’s Deputy Director, the agency’s finance director for sixteen years.

    Mr. Cancel agreed that this was a major cut. He added that furloughs and across-the-board pay cuts were not an option because of union opposition.

    Commissioner Przyblyski said that the unions have done good things, and she asked for clarification on whether the proposal includes increases to other positions. Mr. Cancel said that only one of the three positions to report directly to him would have a direct increase, whose cost would be negligible.

    Commissioner Przyblyski observed that the new programs area is an enormous portfolio. Mr. Cancel noted that it is an exempt position.

    Commissioner Young said that arts education has been very important in her life, and that she has had experience with almost every organization, and every person in the room. She described the budget cut as horrible, and said that she never understood how cutting positions helps the economy, although she understands that the Arts Commission has to fulfill the directive to cut its budget. She knows that Mr. Cancel is “between a rock and a hard place.” She said she couldn’t see how a person who already has a full-time job could take on another full-time job, and she was troubled by saying that the Arts Commission supports arts education, but not seeing it reflected in the organization chart. She apologized for not being more supportive.

    Commissioner Przyblyski said that she supported the Commission’s involvement with the Cultural Centers, and that she very much questioned the agency’s ability to support four physical centers. She said that the Commission had to ask what it could do well, and what someone else could do better.

    Vice President Draisin said that although the time was limited, there was some time, including the full Commission meeting, to discuss this issue. She thought it was good to have the public input, and she congratulated Mr. Cancel on negotiating the very narrow channels of the budget situation. She seconded Karen Ames’s comments, stating emotionally that the departure of Ms. Gonchar would be a tremendous loss.

    She said that while it is one thing to work out a plan on paper, it is another to see the public respond to it. She said that it brings home the reality that this choice does not bode well for the Commission, which does not want to be seen to be making a statement against arts education. But then the question remains where else to take the cut.

    Mr. Cancel noted that, within Sunshine regulations, he was willing to meet with the Commissioners to develop alternative scenarios, which would necessarily impact other programs. President Johnston reminded the Committee of the Mayor’s Budget Office deadline of February 20, and encouraged the Commissioners to do their homework. Recalling discussions at the November retreat, he said that Commissioners must understand the limits on what they have to work with. While they know what they don’t want to do, they must now say what they do want to do.

    Commissioner Przyblyski suggested that the City Hall Docent Program should be funded by income from City Hall rentals, not by the General Fund. She also raised a question on the Development Director position, noting that it was a recent addition, created in part thanks to an addback from the Board of Supervisors, and intended to bring grants funding into the agency. Decribing that addback as seed money, she suggested that if the development position began to partially pay for itself, some of the POPS funding could go to Arts Education. Mr. Cancel noted that the Development Director has had a substantial impact, and has been fundamental to the agency’s ability to secure funding from the federal government and other sources.

    President Johnston noted that Commissioner Przyblyski was teasing out some of the hard questions that must be asked. He said that the Commission couldn’t tell the Director who to lay off, but could look at the organizational structure and ask questions about it. He said that while it is true that making cuts to arts education is not one of the Mayor’s pillars, neither is cutting mental health, which he has had to do.

    Commissioner Przyblyski said that everyone has felt the pain of talking about this proposal in terms of people’s names. She said that she would like to see the organization chart flagged to indicate civil service status and funding sources for the positions; President Johnston agreed.

    Commissioner Calloway was alarmed to hear the Cultural Centers mentioned, and said that in good times, none of this would be considered. He regretted that someone would be hurt by the budget crisis.

    President Johnston noted that one of the supporting documents includes information about funding sources. He was sure that other Commissioners would have a lot to say at the full Commission meeting, and would forward the motion without recommendation to the full Commission at its next meeting.

  5. Public Employee Performance Evaluation: Director of Cultural Affairs Luis R. Cancel
    There was no public comment on this item.

    1. Vote on Whether to Hold Closed Session to Conduct Public Employee Performance Evaluation of Director of Cultural Affairs Luis R. Cancel (San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b))
      The Committee voted unanimously to hold a closed session for the above purpose. The closed session commenced at 5:00 p.m.

    2. Closed Session
      Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b), performance evaluation of the Director of Cultural Affairs, Luis R. Cancel.

      The closed session included Commission President P.J. Johnston, and Commissioners Maya Draisin, Jeannene Przyblyski and Sherri Young.

    3. Reconvene in Open Session
      1. Possible Report on Action Taken in Closed Session (Government Code Section 54957 and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.12(b)(4))
        The Committee reconvened in open session at 5:30 p.m. and reported no action taken.

      2. Vote to Elect Whether to Disclose Any or All Discussions Held in Closed Session (San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.12(a))
        The Committee voted not to disclose any discussions held in the closed session.

  6. Public Comment
    There was no further public comment.

  7. Adjournment
    There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:35 p.m.

spr 3/6/09