City and County of San FranciscoSan Francisco Arts Commission

April 5, 2010

Full Commission - April 5, 2010

MEETING OF THE FULL ARTS COMMISSION
Monday, April 5, 2010
3:00 p.m.
City Hall Room 416


Minutes

 

President Johnston called the meeting to order at 3:08 p.m.
 

  1. Roll Call
    Commissioners Present
    P.J. Johnston, President
    Maya Draisin, Vice President
    JD Beltran
    John Calloway
    Gregory Chew
    Amy Chuang
    Lorraine García-Nakata
    Astrid Haryati
    Sherene Melania
    Barbara Sklar
    Ron Miguel, ex officio

    Commissioners Absent
    Leo Chow
    Cass Calder Smith
    Sherri Young
     
  2. Approval of Minutes
    RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-085:
    Motion to approve January 4, 2010 Minutes.

    The remaining item was withdrawn.
     
  3. President’s Report
    President Johnston made no report, acknowledging the many members of the public who were interested in the budget discussion.
     
  4. Director’s Report
    Mr. Cancel was pleased to report that on March 18, the Mayor’s Art Award was presented to Carlos Santana before leaders of the City and the arts community, the press, and Mr. Santana’s family. He thanked the San Francisco Examiner for their generous underwriting of the event, and thanked publisher John Wilcox and his staff for their assistance. Mr. Cancel said that the award ceremony was also an opportunity to showcase emerging local talent, and he heard many positive comments about the performances of Futuro Picante and Martin Luther. He also thanked Commissioner Calloway, who had introduced Martin Luther to the staff, and had sat in with the band at the event. Mr. Cancel said that Mr. Santana had been gracious and very pleased to be part of the evening.

    Mr. Cancel said that the Executive Committee would have to consider in the next fiscal year whether to hold the next Mayor’s Art Award at the beginning of October, National Arts and Humanities Month, as were the first two awards, or whether to hold it in the new calendar year.

    He said that the event was very successful overall, and had received a great deal of press. He thanked all the staff who had worked on the event, getting publicity and posters out on time.

    Commissioner Beltran agreed that it was a great event, and was pleased to see the emerging chefs participating as well.

    Turning to the budget, Mr. Cancel explained that the City will begin in the next fiscal year to budget on a two-year cycle, and that many departments have been asked to prepare two-year budgets. The Arts Commission has not yet been asked to do so, and Mr. Cancel believes that, given the sorry state of the economy, the agency is better off for now with a single-year budget, with hopes of improvement next year.

    Mr. Cancel recalled that in February, the Commission considered and approved a 20% cut and an additional 10% contingency cut in the agency’s budget for fiscal year 2010-2011. The strategy consisted of, first, shifting several staff positions out of the General Fund to other sources; second, reducing grants to the Cultural Centers; and third, further reductions to the Cultural Centers and to Cultural Equity Grants. The Mayor was asking for the full 30% reduction to be taken from the current level of General Fund support, resulting in a loss to the Cultural Centers of $285,000, and to Cultural Equity Grants of $94,500.

    Mr. Cancel described the San Francisco arts community as reeling from the additional cuts in the private sector, with foundation grants and individual donations down by 30-40%. He explained that staff felt that the targeted cuts outlined would be the least damaging, and he noted that the Cultural Centers had been spared any cuts in the current (2009-2010) budget year. He referred Commissioners to the comprehensive budget document before them, and reviewed it page by page, including General Fund income and expenses, non-General Fund income and expenses, and grant development fund income and expenses.

    He summarized by saying that there was a staff reduction in the previous fiscal year, and the agency was reorganized with an eye to efficient administrative structure. Given all the initiatives underway, he did not see how the agency could sustain further personnel cuts. He said that the budget presented achieved the goal of reducing General Fund support while avoiding staff cuts.

    Mr. Cancel called for questions. President Johnston asked for confirmation that this document was simply for review by the Commission, and that they were not being asked to vote on it. Mr. Cancel said that the Commission was not being asked to vote, as it had taken its action on the budget in its February meeting. He explained that the comprehensive budget was not available then, and that the document now before the Commission shows how the reduction approved by the Commission in February will be implemented, taking into account the entire contingency cut requested by the Mayor.

    President Johnston observed that this year has been particularly challenging, and that all City departments were given the order to make budget cuts, with a January deadline. In the past two months, he said, the contingency cut became a reality. While discussions continue, the agency still must make almost $200,000 in cuts, which he described as a huge challenge for Mr. Cancel and Finance Director Kan Htun. He said that the Commission has weighed in on the major points and approved these cuts. He agreed, and hoped his colleagues agreed, that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to continue to deliver on the agency’s mission if staff is cut; he generally agreed that protecting the Commission’s workforce is paramount. While Mr. Cancel has been encouraged to make staff cuts, President Johnston agreed that the agency needs to keep its people.

    President Johnston said that procedurally, he thought it important for the Commission to formally adopt the full budget, not just the plan for making the budget cuts. He thought it was important for the Executive Committee to sit down with Mr. Cancel, Mr. Htun and staff to look at the budget area by area, program by program. He did not expect to find major areas of disagreement. He thought that the full budget should have been adopted in January along with the strategic plan, and now called for the full budget to be discussed at the April Executive Committee meeting, with a report back to the full Commission at its May meeting.

    Commissioner Sklar asked whether the state funding was firm. Referring to the last page of the document, Mr. Cancel said that staff took a conservative approach, budgeting the same amounts as in the previous year. He noted that in the last week, the agency was notified of several federal awards, including one much larger than the previous year’s.

    Commissioner García-Nakata thanked staff, particularly Mr. Htun, and Commissioners. She acknowledged that the Arts Commission is taking cuts like every City agency, and that the staff has been inundated with work on the budget process. She asked for information about what the budget cuts will mean in terms of reduced activities by the agency, for example, cuts in public art projects in the coming year. President Johnston cited another example, an $80,000 reduction in the expense line of WritersCorps. He asked whether this would mean fewer teachers, or less of something done by the program.

    Mr. Cancel explained that WritersCorps was one of the few programs actually sustaining a direct reduction in its support, and he planned to address that with staff over the next few weeks. He explained that this program was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, the California Arts Council, the San Francisco Public Library, and workorder funds from the Department of Children, Youth and Families (“DCYF”). Funding from the Library and DCYF has been reduced, and staff is still working out how to address that shortfall.

    Commissioner Beltran agreed with President Johnston on the impact of general reductions. She noted that San Diego, for example, was cutting its cultural centers, and considering the possibility of dipping into its percent-for-art funds, which is illegal under some cities’ ordinances.

    Mr. Cancel noted that bond funds previously approved by the voters are helping to create jobs, and that these projects generate two-percent-for-art funds for Public Art, the only area untouched by budget cuts.

    Commissioner Chew asked about the Mayor’s proposal to cut City staff to a part-time 37.5-hour workweek. Mr. Cancel replied that everyone at the Arts Commission had received the 60-day notice, and expected to be offered a 37.5-hour appointment in due course. He reported that the Mayor’s office and the unions were negotiating several proposals, including furlough days, and that the proposals were being submitted to the union rank and file for approval. He said that until agreement was reached, the Mayor’s plan was still proceeding. He was hopeful that the unions could reach an agreement with the Mayor’s office.

    In response to Commissioner García-Nakata’s question about the next step in the budget process, President Johnston explained that the full Commission would traditionally adopt the full budget, which would then be submitted to the Mayor’s Budget Office; the Mayor presents his budget to the Board of Supervisors on June 1, the Board deliberates and passes a final budget on second reading in August.

    Commissioner García-Nakata asked whether there might be further cuts this year. Mr. Cancel said it was a definite possibility, since the remaining budget gap is still quite large.

    President Johnston added that the Board of Supervisors traditionally achieves savings by cutting some of what the Mayor has presented, in order to achieve some of their priorities. He affirmed that the Commission’s process should make clear that there is no difference between its priorties and those of the staff.

    Mr. Cancel added that beginning with the next fiscal year, the Arts Commission will be moved to a two-year budget cycle, making projections for two years. He noted that the problem with that is that in a situation like the current downturn, the budget forecasts the pessimistic figures for two years, even if the economy improves in the meantime.

    Noting the necessity of reminders of the importance of the arts in the community, Mr. Cancel announced that Arts Education Program Manager Tyra Fennell is spearheading a new initiative, the Art Impact series, which presents individuals accomplished in non-arts fields to speak about how the arts have influenced them. For the first event in the series, San Francisco 49er Vernon Davis will speak, with a panel including Mr. Cancel and San Francisco School Superintendent Carlos Garcia. KTVU co-anchor Dave Clark will moderate. The panel will be free and open to the public in the Koret Auditorium at the de Young Museum. A fundraising event follow at Morton’s the Steakhouse, benefitting the Arts Commission’s Arts Education program and the San Francisco Unified School District’s Vernon Davis Visual Arts Scholarship Fund. Mr. Cancel encouraged everyone to attend, and he requested donations of high-quality items for the silent auction.

    Mr. Cancel reported that a controversy now surrounds the fate of murals painted some 30 years ago on the WPA-era Bernal Heights library. Mr. Cancel announced that Supervisor Campos has worked with the community and the Library Commission to craft a compromise solution, which hopefully will lead to the creation of artworks incoporating the history and values of the past with those of the current community. Mr. Cancel will watch to see how the process unfolds over the next several months.

    Mr. Cancel reported significant progress on the outstanding audits of the Mexican Museum. He reported that Millennium Partners is moving forward in developing the site and hopes to create their capstone building in the museum district. He reported that the Redevelopment Agency will soon review a major infusion of additional support to allow the hiring of the first staff that the Museum has had in five years. The Arts Commission will be modifying its Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with Redevelopment, and will continue to monitor the disbursement of funds. Mr. Cancel anticipated a public hearing at a Redevelopment Agency meeting in May.

    Mr. Cancel reported on grant funds received from the National Endowment for the Arts (“NEA”). They awarded the Commission’s full request of $70,000 in support of Zhang Huan’s Three Heads Six Arms, a key element in the Shanghai Sister City celebration. The piece will be installed in the Civic Center plaza, on the side closest to the Asian Art Museum. He reported that staff is working hard to make a May installation date, but he could not reveal the exact date. He specifically praised Director of Programs Jill Manton and Collections Senior Registrar Allison Cummings as the heads of a small army of people in various agencies, both in San Francisco and in Shanghai, working to get the sculpture to San Francisco.

    Finally, Mr. Cancel reported that the NEA renewed its grant of $50,000 in support of WritersCorps.
     
  5. Consent Calendar
    President Johnston called for public comment on the Consent Calendar. SOMArts Director Lex Leifheit expressed her concerns about cuts in funding for the Cultural Centers. She said that some of the buffers are now gone, and she mentioned losses in Hotel Tax funds. She said that facility maintenance funds to address fire safety, heating, plumbing and other issues could be as little as $5,000 for all of the Cultural Centers. She argued that when organizations’ budgets are cut, they turn increasingly to the Cultural Centers.

    President Johnston called for a vote on the Consent Calendar, which was unanimously approved.

    RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-086:
    Approval: RESOLVED, that this Commission does hereby adopt the following items on the Consent Calendar and their related Resolutions:

    Approval of Committee Minutes
    1. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-087: Motion to approve the Civic Design Committee Meeting Minutes of January 11, 2010.
       
    2. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-088: Motion to approve the Civic Design Committee Meeting Minutes of February 8, 2010.
       
    3. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-089: Motion to approve the Visual Arts Committee Meeting Minutes of February 17, 2010.
       
    4. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-090: Motion to approve the Community Arts, Education and Grants Committee Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010.
       
    5. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-091: Motion to approve the Street Artists Committee Meeting Minutes of March 10, 2010.
       
    6. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-092: Motion to approve the Visual Arts Committee Meeting Minutes of March 17, 2010.


      Community Arts, Education, and Grants Committee Recommendations (March 9, 2010)
    7. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-093: Motion to approve the following individuals as grants application review panelists for Cultural Equity Grants:

      Kerri Johnson, artist, arts administrator and curator
      Larry Kassin, Executive Director, San Francisco Live Arts
      Tomás Riley, Co-Executive Director, ArtsChange


      Visual Arts Committee Recommendations (March 17, 2010)
    8. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-094: Motion for the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into a contractual relationship with Ms. Alyssa Licouris for an honorarium in the amount of $5000. Ms. Licouris will conduct research and provide administrative support for the 40th anniversary exhibition season. Ms. Licouris will be conducting her work from April through August 2010.
       
    9. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-095: Motion for the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into a contractual relationship with Mr. Taro Hattori for an honorarium in the amount of $2000, and Ms. Gay Outlaw for an honorarium in the amount of $2000, for the research, development and production of newly commissioned artworks for the San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery’s exhibition Now & When opening June 4, 2010.
       
    10. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-096: Motion for the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into a contractual relationship with the following artists for the research, development and production of newly commissioned artworks for the San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery’s exhibition Transplanted opening September 24, 2010: $5000 honorarium to Mr. Primitivo Suarez-Wolfe, $2000 honorarium to Mr. Richard T. Walker, $1000 honorarium to Mr. Pawel Kruk.
       
    11. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-097: Motion for the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into a contractual relationship with an individual Gwen Kuan-ying Kuo for an honorarium in the amount of $1000. Gwen Kuan-ying Kuo will be the project management intern for the San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery’s exhibition Economica: Women and the Global Economy opening June 8, 2010.
       
    12. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-098: Motion to authorize the Director of Cultural Affairs to modify the agreement with Janet Echelman, Inc. to increase the agreement by $232,926, for an amount not to exceed $509,626, for the purchase of materials for fabrication of her artwork for San Francisco International Airport.
       
    13. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-099: Motion to authorize the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into an agreement with Public Builders for an amount not to exceed $215,000 to fabricate and install the artwork designed by Janet Echelman for Terminal Two at San Francisco International Airport.
       
    14. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-100: Motion to approve the public art approach for Fulton Playground as detailed in the Fulton Playground Public Art Project Outline.
       
    15. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-101: Motion to approve the artist Jovi Schnell and alternate artist Michael Bartalos as recommended by the Tutubi Plaza Selection Panel.
       
    16. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-102: Motion to authorize the Director of Cultural Affairs to enter into a contract with the selected artist Jovi Schnell as recommended by the Tutubi Plaza Selection Panel for design of artwork for Tutubi Plaza Art Project, in an amount not to exceed $15,000.

  6. Committee Reports and Committee Matters
    1. Executive Committee—P.J. Johnston, Chair
      1. President Johnston reiterated that he has shared his concerns with Mr. Cancel and Mr. Htun. He wants to see the Committee discuss further budget and planning issues, including how to pay for maintenance for the Cultural Centers and the role of Facilities Manager Tom Petersen. He welcomed all interested Commissioners to attend the Committee’s next meeting, noting that Commissioners who do not serve on the Committee have attended in the past.
         
    2. Civic Design Review Committee—Cass Calder Smith, Chair
      1. In the absence of Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Haryati reported that the Committee had not met, and that there were few projects to review. She expected the Boeddeker Park project to be calendared soon.
         
    3. Community Arts, Education and Grants Committee—Maya Draisin, Chair
      1. Vice President Draisin reported that the Committee heard Director of Grants San San Wong’s report on the Cultural Adaptability Conference, which had over 700 participants. She thought it was a tremendous resource for professional development, and that it exemplified what the Commission is trying to do for the arts community in these difficult times.

        Vice President Draisin reported that the Committee has tried the approach suggested by Commissioner Young where one Commissioner serves as “lead read” for each of the Cultural Centers, and found that it worked really well. While it was somewhat rushed for the Committee to review all six Cultural Centers in one meeting, they found the approach a good one.
         
    4. Street Artists Committee—Sherene Melania, Chair
      1. President Johnston thanked the many members of the public who requested to speak on this item for their patience. With the permission of Committee Chair Commissioner Melania, whose strong feelings he acknowledged, he began the discussion.

        President Johnston explained that he had heard from many of the street artists about the Recreation and Parks Department’s recently approved Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to bring in a vendor-manager to program Justin Herman Plaza. He said that it was not yet clear what that would mean for the plaza, and for the street artists, and he thought that uncertainty was creating a lot of the anxiety.

        He affirmed that the Arts Commission collectively very much supports the Street Artists Program, which he described as a beloved part of the agency’s program since the 1970s. He praised Street Artists Program Director Howard Lazar’s stewardship of the program since the beginning in many of the city’s neighborhoods. He acknowledged that Recreation and Parks, not the Arts Commission, is the steward of Justin Herman Plaza. He said that the Commission is asking Recreation and Parks for more information, asking that they keep both the Commission and the street artists informed. He added that Mr. Cancel has requested that Recreation and Parks make a strong effort to protect the interests of the street artists. President Johnston said that the Commission’s perspective parallels that of the street artists: they want to know what the plan is, and to be sure that other City agencies understand the role of the street artists and how important this issue is.

        President Johnston read out an e-mail from Larry Rosenblum of Recreation and Parks, and noted that while Mr. Rosenblum acknowledged the privilege of a street artist’s license, it was also a privilege for the City to have these artists and the program.

        Mr. Cancel quoted from a letter from Recreation and Parks General Manager Phil Ginsburg, confirming that he has “every intention” of continuing to allow the street artists to use the plaza. He said that the new market was intended to be a boon to business, and that new vendor contract would be reviewed annually.

        President Johnston thought that Mr. Ginsburg was sincere, although he was not convinced that Recreation and Parks staff has a real grasp of the Street Artists Program. He questioned what “programming the space” might mean.

        Commissioner Miguel observed that the Planning Department and Recreation and Parks often have mutual responsibilities or interests, and that they therefore, from time to time, have a joint meeting. They have done so for several items over the years, and he added that other departments have also occasionally had joint meetings. He added that this would be a special meeting, and proposed this as a possible way for the two commissions to talk to each other.

        Vice President Draisin said that she thought that the model Recreation and Parks had in mind was Bryant Park in New York. President Johnston said that almost any kind of vendor would have a significant impact on the street artists. He thought that Recreation and Parks wanted to see what responses they got to their RFP, what ideas were proposed, before having specific discussions.

        Commissioner Melania thanked President Johnston for presenting the background of this issue. She said that this was a tremendous issue for her personally, the biggest in her tenure on the Committee. She reiterated that the Street Artists Program has existed for 38 years, and said that the majority of the spaces are in Justin Herman Plaza. She thought that the Recreation and Parks proposal could be extremely detrimental to the artists, although after hearing Mr. Ginsburg’s letter, she was hopeful that “activating” the space could be effective. She thought that adding music or food could bring more traffic, but was adamant that new activities must not compete with the street artists. She was open to the idea of a joint meeting with the Recreation and Parks Commission, and she believed that it could work to both protect the street artists and activate the plaza.

        Mr. Cancel reported that the had had a phone conversation with Mr. Ginsburg and invited him to attend this meeting and give an update on the proposal. He said that responses to the RFP had just been received a few days earlier and staff was still reviewing the proposals; he did not feel that he or his staff would yet be able to give any further information beyond the issuance of the RFP. Mr. Ginsburg said that Recreation and Parks staff will meet with Arts Commission staff before taking further steps. Mr. Cancel said that these discussions would review the proposed plans to understand whether the respondents could coexist with the street artists. He said that they are taking a cautious, step-by-step approach, giving the Arts Commission the opportunity to shape the proposal and bringing the Arts Commission “into the loop.”

        In response to Commissioner Miguel’s question about the RFP, President Johnston said that its language mentioned “collocating existing vendors,” which he understood to include the street artists. He wanted to be sure that Recreation and Parks understood that the new vendors contemplated would be incompatible with the Street Artists Program.

        In response to a question by Commissioner Calloway, President Johnston said that the Arts Commission could entertain and adopt resolutions expressing its position, and these would ordinarily have to come from the Street Artists Committee. However, he thought that it would be better to try to work cooperatively with the department first; Commissioner Melania agreed.

        President Johnston called for public comment.

        Larry Steneck said that street artists at Justin Herman Plaza have created the market and made it a popular destination for people throughout the Bay area and beyond. He said that another market, with vendors selling commercial products will cheapen the space. He said that the additional loading and unloading would be a nightmare. He asked the Commission to do what they could to block efforts to cheapen the market.

        Larry Rosenbloom said that he wanted to emphasize that the street artists are subject to limits that he couldn’t imagine any other business having: they cannot have employees and they themselves make the artwork. He said that businesses with teenage clerks are totally different. He said that because of the lottery, the artists are in different locations from one day to the next, and although people keep coming back, this would make any other kind of business owner crazy.

        Chia Ying Fong said that everyone was suffering, that business was down by one-third. She said that the artists were of every age, and many were immigrants, all working hard to make little money. She hoped Recreation and Parks didn’t mess up the plaza for them.

        Vivena Cuyugan said that if used and salvage goods were sold at the plaza, she would be put out of business; her customers would bypass her. She said that one less person at the lottery would mean two more at Recreation and Parks. She said the “fair trade” proposal would be equally devastating, that well-funded nonprofits pay pennies for the goods they sell, and she couldn’t compete. She said they would readily produce in bulk. She said that her fees to the Street Artists Program would be offset by Recreation and Parks, with many vendors hawking the same types of goods. She expressed concerns about increased traffic, and volume dealers of low-priced products.

        Phillip Valdez said that this was his second stint with the program. He said that in the Street Artists Program, he works with equals selling a product they make themselves. It would be unfair for them to compete with bulk producers. He said that he makes the jewelry he sells himself, and can’t compete with a bulk manufacturer from overseas. He urged the Commission to try to block or change the Recreation and Parks proposal.

        Michael Addario introduced himself as chair of the Street Artists Liaison Committee, and said he wanted to speak on what unites the artists. He hoped to resolve an issue that might divide them. He said that what unites them is a love of art. He showed a map of the plaza, indicating that the artists occupy the central space, and that loading and unloading are crowded with so many artists. He listed several kinds of items that are not allowed under the program, and reiterated that the artwork must by made by the artist himself or herself.

        Tad Sky said that more than a hundred artists show and sell their work in the plaza. He mentioned the history of the plaza and its relationship with the Ferry Building farmers’ market. He thought there was a good synergy with the farmers. He said that this was the only location where artists can have a 10’x10’ booth and display larger, more ambitious work. He suspected that Recreation and Parks’ proposal would be more like a flea market. He explained that his work, blown and fused glass, has been shown in galleries all over Europe, and he was really hurt in 2008 with the economic collapse. He thought that additional vendors under the Recreation and Parks proposal would dilute the market, and the artists would have to go somewhere else. He said they were artists, not vendors.

        Mara Murray introduced herself as a new artist, in the program for less than a year. She explained that this is her income, and lots of the artists have had to “think outside the box.” She said that the artists get a lot of feedback from the community of competitors, and bringing in a new lower caliber of goods would reduce the impact. She said that customers tell their friends not to miss the market. She thought that if Recreation and Parks and the Arts Commission wanted to bring in more revenue, they could promote the artists, who would bring in more tax revenue. She said that parking and loading are a challenge. She said she had a different perspective on why to support the market, and wants it to be a good experience.

        Z.B. Doros wanted to add to Ms. Murray’s remarks; after 38 years, all of these artists, from scratch, create a San Francisco landmark. He said that people ask when they are open, and people all over the world know about the market. He doesn’t want to see it become a flea market.

        Hal Wahlborg, husband of Lindsay Wahlborg, spoke in her place, explaining that she had to leave the meeting to move their car. He said that because of the 10’x10’ booth size, artists with large pieces can actually show their work and make good displays. He said it was an unusually rich experience, and a delightful surprise to visitors. He explained that their work takes four to six weeks to make, and each piece is unique, one of a kind. He said that they couldn’t just order more, or ask anyone else to make the work, and that he can’t ask anyone else sell for him or help make his pots. He said that he was everything, including delivery person and tax preparer. He said that other vendors can undercut the street artists; their costs are low and they’re out selling everyday.

        Linda Pedersen said that she has been an artist since 1980, as a potter, working with polymer clay, and making reduction linocut prints. She said that she has shared the space at Justin Herman Plaza with some major artists of the world: Dubuffet, Vaillancourt, Arneson, Oldenburg, etc. She said that the street artists try to present the best art they can make, so as not to embarrass themselves in the presence of these great artists.

        Debra King said that Justin Herman Plaza is a beautiful marketplace. When it started, she said, there were ten or twelve artists, and it has increased like making an artwork. Now that it’s fully formed, she said that other people say “we can do that.” She said that the more than 400 street artists have chosen to limit how many can sell on the plaza, and every Saturday, some of them go home (not having a won a place in the lottery). She said that other places, like Civic Center and Candlestick, have fruit and vegetable markets, and that they could handle a large market.

        Michael Tugendman said that he has been in the program since 1975. He quoted Lev Kushner of Recreation and Parks, who said that they would like to raise $150,000 to lower the City’s budget deficit. Mr. Tugendman said that was about two jobs. He said that about 150 artists show up everyday at the plaza, and half are turned away and can’t sell that day. He thought that two jobs against 150 jobs didn’t compute.

        Tanya Key said that she hadn’t planned to speak, but now wanted to comment. She said that she had joined the program twenty years ago, and made her own items. She said that she had built up a lucrative medical-legal transcription business, but eventually lost 99% of her work to India and China. She said that what took her 80 to 90 hours a week could be done (overseas) for $150 a month. After months of denial, she said, she started to make her items one at a time. She was concerned about vendors who could sell mass-produced items.

        Maria Jimenez said that the way the street artists found out about the Recreation and Parks RFP was from a journalist walking through the plaza. They came to the Program Director to ask about it, and she said that he didn’t know much about it. She said that the street artists need more information from Recreation and Parks and from the Arts Commission.

        Mr. Lazar said that he has photographs from 1980, of the Arts Commission presenting awards of merit at the plaza. He said that in the 1990s, for nearly a decade, the Commission authorized him to contract with the Police Department to remove commercial items from the markets at the plaza and at Fisherman’s Wharf; he said those vendors were killing the street artists. He and the artists have made friends with the retailers. He asked whether Recreation and Parks has contacted the local merchants, and said that they tolerate the street artists because they’re selling a different product, a handmade product. Again he asked whether Recreation and Parks has canvassed the merchants.

        President Johnston thanked everyone who spoke. He said that although the Commission was also caught off-guard and has some concerns, the Commission wants to maintain a positive relationship with sister agencies within the City.

        He added that Commissioners are all individuals, and can express themselves at Commission meetings as well as before Recreation and Parks, and before the Board of Supervisors, etc. He reiterated that he hoped to have a positive interaction with Recreation and Parks, noting the friendly tone of the Director’s letter (which nonetheless did not fail to point out their control of the space).

        In response to a question about whether the Recreation and Parks income target was intended to be generated by all three locations listed, or byJustin Herman Plaza alone, President Johnston did not know. He said that the Arts Commission would need to hear more from them about their vision, and that they could not reveal the contents of the sealed proposals they have received. He reiterated that Arts Commission representatives would be in touch with colleagues at Recreation and Parks.

        There being no further discussion, Commissioner Melania presented the following motion.
         
      2. RESOLUTION NO. 0405-10-103: Motion to approve requests by former certificate-holders for priority issuance of certificate with waiver of re-screening of wares: Steven Robinson, Roger Fierro, Debra Skotland, Elias Romero, Laura Waterman, Joann Chen, Jess Zepeda, Reuben Barnes-Levering, Caroline Saxl.
         
    5. Visual Arts Committee—Lorraine García-Nakata, Chair
      1. Commissioner García-Nakata reported that Mr. Cancel had already discussed one of the main items considered by the Committee, the Bernal Library. She was happy about the meeting of the parties convened with the leadership of Supervisor Campos.

        She reported that the Committee reviewed several other projects, all of which are moving forward with no major problems. Commissioner García-Nakata thanked staff for their hard work on the many overlapping projects in progress.

        In closing, she returned to the Justin Herman proposal, noting that these are desperate times, and though people are well-intentioned, she feared that in trying to implement an idea not completely thought through, they might kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.
         
  7. New Business
    There was no new business.
     
  8. Reports and Announcements
    There were no reports or announcements.
     
  9. Public Comment
    There was no further public comment.
     
  10. Adjournment
    There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

7/7/10 spr