Arts_Task_Force
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 MEETING OF THE ARTS TASK FORCE
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
4:00 p.m.
City Hall, Room 201
Minutes
- Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m.
- Roll Call
Voting Members Present
Ken Foster
Rick Galbreath
Tim Gaskin
David Gluck
Elaine Katzenberger
Krissy Keefer
Tony Kelly
Maria X. Martinez
Vinay Patel
Pamela Peniston
Richard (Rick) Putz
Alma Robinson
Laird Rodet
Virginia (Ginny) Carollo Rubin
Marc Vogl
Debra Walker
Voting Members Excused
Jeffrey Ferns
Ron Gallman
Voting Members Absent
Pamela Wu Kochiyama
Darryl Smith
Nonvoting Members Present
Bob Davis
Renee Hayes
Rich Hillis
John R. Killacky
Richard Newirth
Elizabeth Murray
Geraldine O’Brien
Charles Roppel
Nonvoting Members Absent
Daniel Homsey
P.J. Johnston
Gloria Woo
- Approval of Minutes
Motion to approve the minutes of the May 18, 2005 and June 7, 2005 meetings.
Beth Murray proposed a clarifying correction to the second sentence of Item 7 of the June 7, 2005, minutes by inserting the phrase “decisions that may require” as follows:
“Ms. Zmuda provided a handout regarding current budget proposals and a brief explanation of how allocations are being handled in light of decisions that may require all Hotel Tax funds now being deposited into the General Fund.”
The clarifying correction was adopted without objection.
As to Item 5 of the June 7, 2005 minutes, Maria X. Martinez indicated that she had seconded the nomination of Tony Kelly as Vice-chair and wished to have the minutes reflect that fact. The language as corrected is stated as follows:
“Tim Gaskin renewed the nomination of Tony Kelly, which was duly seconded by Maria X. Martinez and adopted by acclamation.”
The correction was adopted without objection.
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the minutes were unanimously approved as amended.
There was no public comment on this item.
NOTE: ALL VOTES ARE UNANIMOUS UNLESS OTHERWISE RECORDED.
- Announcements by the Chair
The Board of Supervisors Budget Committee will hold hearings on the Hotel Tax Line Items on June 23, 2005, and vote on said items on June 30, 2005. Budget Committee hearings convene at 10:00 a.m. Any members able to attend and testify are encouraged to do so.
Because of the internal operating procedures of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, hearings are not scheduled for open seats on boards and commissions until there are at least four applicants. Consequently, a hearing on appointing an applicant to the open seat on this Task Force formerly held by Deborah Cullinan (representing an arts organization with a budget between $250,000 and $1 million) has not yet been set. Members are encouraged to recruit applicants to satisfy the Clerk’s procedural requirements.
The Chair indicated that some progress has been made on appointments to the Task Force from the Asian and Fine Arts Museums and the Film Commission. There should be more information for the July 5, 2005 meeting.
California Lawyers for the Arts has successfully recruited a pro bono attorney to assess the effects of recent court decisions on the Hotel Tax Fund and to advise the Task Force accordingly.
There was no public comment on this item.
- Presentation on Mid-Market Plan
Rich Hillis was recognized to present an overview of the Mid-Market Redevelopment Plan and proposed Special Use District that will go before the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors in the near future. Highlights of the plan included provisions that allocate 50% of projected tax increment funds to the financing of affordable housing; an allocation of 20% of projected tax increment for arts uses that would generate approximately $40 million in funding; and Transfer Development Rights that could yield an additional $5.5 million for arts uses.
It was further noted that the affordable housing funds could be applied anywhere citywide, but the funds for the arts uses would have to be expended within the boundaries of the project area and such funds could be accessed by any consortium to acquire and develop property within the project area. There is currently no designation of a panel or definition of a process to manage and/or oversee the allocation of arts dollars under the Redevelopment Plan.
Randy Shaw was then recognized to offer a differing view of the Mid-Market Redevelopment Plan: Mr. Shaw proffered that the historical track record of the Redevelopment Agency has been to demolish more affordable housing than was subsequently built and that to return Mid-Market to the vibrant arts and cultural center envisioned would require a different strategy than that embodied in the current plan. He noted that the Project Area Committee representative from the arts community had voted against the plan at the PAC level.
Mr. Shaw proposed an alternative plan that would supplement the voluntary contributions that developers can make with a mandatory development fee dedicated to funding affordable artist live/work rentals on site. Such a scheme would send the message that the arts and artists are the primary focus of Mid-Market development and would be one way to get developers to buy in to the concept of a Mid-Market arts and entertainment district.
Kathleen Diohep, a PAC member and affiliated with ArtHouse, was recognized and spoke in favor of the Redevelopment Plan, noting that subsidies rather than zoning for the arts was preferable. Supporting acquisition of arts space through access to capital funds would allow transformation of existing buildings into arts space and would leverage entrepreneurial opportunities.
Marshall Foster, a planner with the Planning Department, offered that zoning was a blunt tool and that the flexible uses of a combination of capital and operating funds was a preferred development strategy. Zoning can provide a base for development which should then be studied to ascertain the best new uses and reuses of buildings that would conform to the zoning.
Public Comment:
Otto Duffy commented that the biggest concern was that redevelopment is a euphemism for overdevelopment. He said that the city is already too dense and family housing is probably not the best use for Mid-Market given the pedestrian safety issues and lack of parks and playgrounds. The arts need help and don’t need help because low-income people would look at the art and ask, “what is this?”
Andrew Wood of the San Francisco International Arts Festival commented that a real red flag is raised when something is done “for the arts” as it does not always mean for the arts. More often, he argued, it is the leading edge of gentrification and further displacement of artists.
Jeff Jones commented that Yerba Buena redevelopment indirectly impacted other arts through the amorphous process at Redevelopment which did not address the real needs of artists: access to affordable space which is essential to keeping artists in town. Citing the War Memorial as a heavily subsidized performance space, Mr. Jones suggested that the SomArts model be used as a template for development: turn the existing porn theaters into affordable performance, rehearsal and office space, identify the still unmet needs of artists and subsidize the development of that space which doesn’t yet exist.
Angel Naf commented that it was frustrating to decide to whom to listen, given the time pressure to decide, but indicated that it was exactly the approach that would lead to the kinds of discussions we need to have every year regarding the arts allocations.
There was no further public comment on this item.
- Working with Other Departments
Presentation by Rajiv Bhatia, Department of Health; Fred Blackwell, Mayor’s Office of Community Development; and Rich Hillis, Mayor’s Office of Economic Development.
Rajiv Bhatia was recognized and offered that we need to get back to the roots of public health: healthy living condition and neighborhoods. Improvements in the public’s health came from environmental improvements. Today burdens stem from urban issues. Public Health got out of the environmental improvement business for awhile but a living wage analysis led to a land use focus for Public Health and here's what we need to change:
Mr. Bhatia said that Eastern Neighborhoods impact assessment envisions a healthy city with both opportunities and conflicts: Development can provide money for affordable housing, but “where?” is the difficult question. The Healthy City vision includes arts and culture by uniting affordable housing, street design, and the creation of community space. Healthy and livable and arts and culture are not mutually exclusive, but rather are interdependent. The arts are a set of shared ideals that unite a community and help bridge differing communities through a shared, accessible experience. Mr. Bhatia said that we need arts everywhere—a holistic approach to community by establishing all the required elements gets us to win-win solutions. A vibrant, healthy community encompasses all these elements and needs to be planned for and supported.
Fred Blackwell of the Mayor’s Office of Community Development (“MOCD”) was recognized and gave a short presentation on the “Communities of Opportunity” reform program in which a process to integrate arts into Bayview and Visitacion Valley has started engaging the community in discussion. The effort is not just from MOCD, but is a multi-departmental approach to process and planning; a people- and place-based approach based in using scientific data and involving people of the community to try new ideas and make new mistakes rather than try to replicate other tried and failed models. Mr. Blackwell indicated that some of the family flight from the Bayview and Visitacion Valley has been ameliorated by the influx of immigrant families.
MOCD has determined that some of the current best practices involve arts and culture by bringing a community together using arts to create understanding; improving the arts improves communities.
Rich Hillis of the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development (“MOED”) was again recognized and offered that arts and cultural uses were an essential element of commercial corridor revitalization. Recent trends in economic development have found arts and cultural uses of maritime properties. He cited the current Exploratorium as an example. Mr. Hillis also mentioned that the Port had properties that could be developed for arts uses and asked for suggestions on how to integrate arts into MOED and MOCD programming.
Public Comment:
Andrew Wood commented that this is exactly what we needed to hear: a multi-agency, interdisciplinary approach to the arts, noting that many people at the table are good at raising money—federal and state funding—to multiply by partnering with the city’s large groups to support the expansion of the arts.
Jeff Jones commented that it was time to get out of the silly compartmentalized thinking that dominated City bureaucracy. He asked how it all fits together, saying that we have been forced into thinking in a vacuum. MOCD had guidelines that Community Development Block Grants cannot fund an arts organization, yet the arts represent a substantial job base. He said that there are no programs to unite departments and we cannot trust the City to do the work: the arts community must rise to create the strategic partnerships.
Otto Duffy commented that art is health and artists need health care and environmental protection.
- Outreach Update
An extensive first draft of an outreach plan was distributed and discussed briefly. Further discussion will be calendared for future meetings.
- Continued Discussion about San Francisco Arts Infrastructure
Discussion of this item was continued at the discretion of the Chair.
There was no public comment on this item.
- Outline Report
Discussion of this item was continued at the discretion of the Chair.
There was no public comment on this item.
- Resolution Regarding Hotel Tax and 2005-2006 Budget
This item was taken out of order. The resolution was unanimously passed as amended, as follows:
Whereas, By Resolution No. 781-04, the Board of Supervisors has established an Arts Task Force to make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors and Mayor whether and how to update or restructure the various elements of the City’s agencies, programs and policies concerning the arts in San Francisco; specifically with the emphasis on achieving the following goals:
1) Sustaining and stabilizing community-based not-for-profit arts organizations serving, celebrating and supporting San Francisco’s many diverse neighborhoods.
2) Building upon San Francisco’s strong creative workforce and existing substantial arts economy to increase employment and leverage new economic opportunities.
3) Expanding City resources for low and moderate income housing and affordable studios and workspaces, to help retain artists in San Francisco.
Whereas, The Arts Task Force held its first public meeting on April 7, 2005, is continuing to meet on a bi-weekly basis, and is scheduled to submit to the Board of Supervisors a final written report by November 1, 2005; and
Whereas, The Arts Task Force has been advised of possible changes to the City's Hotel Tax allocation language, which would change the process by which Hotel Tax revenues are distributed to City agencies that support and serve arts organizations and artists in San Francisco; now Therefore Be It
Resolved, By the Arts Task Force that it hereby recommends to the Board of Supervisors and Mayor that no action be taken or approved by the Board of Supervisors and/or the Mayor to change the City’s Hotel Tax allocation language regarding the process by which Hotel Tax revenues are distributed to City agencies that support and serve arts organizations and artists in San Francisco, until the Arts Task Force has undertaken and completed the purposes and duties, and has submitted its final written recommendations, as set forth in Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 781-04.
Further Resolved, By the Arts Task Force that it hereby recommends to the Board of Supervisors and Mayor that the City’s budget for fiscal year 2005-2006 include funding for City agencies that support and serve arts organizations and artists in San Francisco consistent with the goals set for the Arts Task Force as stated above.
There was no public comment on this item.
- New Business
There was no new business, and no public comment on this item.
- Public Comment
There was no additional public comment.
- Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m.
7/1/05 DW/spr
