SR-305-003-01 (7)
. .
.
.
11-1/
JUN t 8 1985
3&l5>003-0/
Santa Monica, California
DL:bh
council Meeting:
6/10/86
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Recommendations for Revisions to the city's Percent for
Art Program
Introduction
This report presents two options and recommends Council adoption
of a resolution which incorporates revisions to the City's
Percent for Art Program.
The Arts commission has reviewed the
proposal and concurs with the recommendations.
Backqround
A. History
On April 24, 1984, Council approved the recommendations of
Staff and the Arts Commission and adopted Resolution Number
6854,
which established a Percent for Art Program.
Subsequently on May 22, 1984, the same resolution was adopted
by the Redevelopment Agency and the Parking Authority.
In general, this resolution mandated that an allocation of
one percent (1%) of eligible City capital projects be made
for the acquisition of public artwork(s) as part of the
city's annual budgeting process.
Also, this resolution
mandated the Arts Commission to coordinate the preparation of
an Annual Art Plan for submission to Council. This Art Plan
is to include the process by which selection committees will
- 1 -
II-,If
JUN 10 1986
. .
determine the nature and location of artwork and a budget for
the Percent for Art Program.
Also, the Annual Art Plan is to indicate the two categories
into which Percent for Art projects have been placed. First
Tier projects are capital projects of more than $100,000
suitable for on-site art.
Second Tier projects are all
capital projects of less than $100,000 and any capital
projects of more than $100,000 for which on-site is
unsuitable. Uses for Second Tier funds can include increased
allocations for First Tier projects, off-site art projects,
and/or purchases of art for pUblic display (the Art Bank).
Several Percent for Art proj ects have resulted from Council
approval of the 1984-85 and 1985-86 Art Plans.
These
projects have included the following:
1. Palisades Park Project
(1984-85 Second Tier, $3,100)
This project commissioned a sculptural seat/functional
bench for installation in Palisades Park.
2. Ocean Park Beach Project
(1984-85 First Tier and Second Tier, $52,600)
This project will commission one or more site-specific
artworks for the park areas of the Ocean Park Beach
Redevelopment Project.
3. parking Structure Project
(1984-85 and 1985-86 First Tier, $10,460)
- 2 -
. .
This proj ect will commission a mural on the interior
entrance wall of Parking Structure #1.
4 . Art Bank
(1984-85 Second Tier, $17,100 1985-86 Second Tier,
$12,190)
This project purchases artworks for display in public
facilities and spaces throughout the city. In 1984-85,
fourteen artworks were purchased.
5. Ocean Park Library Project
(1985-86, $5,000)
Although this capital project pre-dated the Percent for
Art Program, Council determined that a public art project
should be implemented.
Therefore, a work of fiber art
will be commissioned for installation near the new main
entrance of the library.
However, a number of projects have not been implemented for a
variety of reasons. These have included the following:
1. Third street Mall Project
(1984-85 First Tier, $3,000, 1985-86 First Tier, $5,000)
These funds are being rolled over as this is a multi-year
capital project and in an attempt to accumulate
sufficient funds to implement a significant art project.
2. pier Project
(1985-86 First Tier, $2,700)
- 3 -
. .
This project has not been implemented for the same
reasons as stated above.
3. Clover Park Project
(1985-86 First Tier, $2,000)
This project has not been implemented for the same
reasons as stated above.
4. Main Library Project
(1985-86 First Tier, $13,000)
This project has been delayed until plans for the Main
Library are finalized.
5. Fourth street Median project
(1984-85 First Tier, $1(500)
This project was determined by Council to be an
inappropriate location for public artwork.
Because of problems such as these that have resulted from the
existing guidelines of the Percent for Art Program, Council
directed city staff to investigate options for possible
revisions to the program that would result in the acquisition
of more "significanttl artworks. This direction to staff was
made during council's consideration of the 1985-86 Annual Art
Plan on November 12, 1985.
- 4 -
.
.
B. Analysis
1. Fundinq Level and Flexibility
Although 1984-85 funds totaled $93,958 and 1985-86 funds
total $44,050 for the Percent for Art Program, individual
projects (with the exception of the Ocean Park Beach
Project) have not received sufficient funding to result
in more significant artworks. This is due to the fact
that:
a. First Tier funds must be spent on-site, even when
they could be better spent at another site.
b. Second Tier funds have not proven to be sufficient to
augment First Tier projects in a significant way.
c. Enterprise funds must be used for art projects
related to the enterprise.
These restrictions result in arbitrary and fixed small
amounts of funding for many PFA projects. For example,
only $3,100 was available for the palisades Park Project,
when $5,000 or $10,000 would have resulted in a much more
significant sculpture. However, the $3,100 had to be
spent on-site for this project. If more funds were
available or funds could be allocated in a more flexible
manner, more significant artworks could result.
- 5 -
. .
2. Integration of Art and Architecture/Design
In order for artwork to have maximum impact on its site,
the artist and architect should collaborate from the
earliest possible design stages of a capital project. By
doing this, the architecture can be designed in a way so
as to better incorporate the artwork, and vice-versa. If
this is not done, the artwork can merely be "slapped" on
a wallar "plunked" in a plaza after the project has
already been designed (and quite possibly, after it has
already been constructed) .
This problem exists, to a large degree, with Santa
Monica's Percent for Art Program.
The timing of the
decision-making regarding artwork is such that it occurs
well after the decision-making regarding the design of a
capital project. This is due to the fact that the Annual
Art Plan is adopted based on a previously adopted Capital
Improvements Program budget. There is no opportunity for
an artist to work with an architect early in the design
of a proj ect.
For example, artwork for the Ocean Park
Beach Project will be selected long after the project's
overall design has been approved.
Therefore, the
potential impact and significance of the artwork on this
capital project is limited.
C. Options
Two other cities in California have developed municipal
Percent for Art programs that deal effectively with the
- 6 -
. .
problems of (1) funding levels and flexibility and (2) the
integration of art and architecture. These programs are as
follows:
1. Citv of Sacramento and the Sacramento Housing and
Redevelopment Agency
The Percent for Art Programs of the City of Sacramento
and the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency
require that 2% of the cost of city construction and
renovation projects be spent for the acquisition of
artwork.
since the inception of this requirement in
1979, 33 Percent for Art projects, totaling $685,571,
have been realized.
Application to Santa Monica
This option would simply increase the percentage of the
Percent for Art Program from 1% to 2%. Thus in 1985-86,
the total amount of the Percent for Art Program would
have increased from $39,050 to $78,100. More significant
artwork would result from more funding being made
available to individual projects. However, this option
would not address funding flexibility or the integration
of art and architecture.
2. city of San Diego
Beginning with the 1986-87 annual budget of the City of
San Diego, the City Manager will be required to establish
a Percent for Art account in the General Fund in an
- 7 -
.
.
amount equal to 1% of the total amount of the Capital
Improvements Program budget.
The city's Public Arts
Advisory Board, in its recommendations to the City
Council, will oversee the process by which these funds
will be used in support of public art projects. on-site
projects associated with current or future CIP projects
are possible. Therefore, artists will be able to work
cooperatively with architects toward integrating artwork
into future CIP projects.
Also, off-site public art
projects will be possible in this program. Although no
pUblic art projects have developed from this program, it
was developed based on the experience of other cities I
publ ic art programs.
Funding for the program in its
initial year is projected to be approximately $220,000.
Application to Santa Monica
This option would result in more significant artwork
through the establishment of more flexible funding
arrangements (as "First Tier" and "Second Tier" projects
would be eliminated) and the integration of art and
architecture.
As the
overall
percentage
is
not
increased, fewer projects at higher funding levels would
be possible.
Also, only two sections of the existing Percent for Art
Resolution (Number 6854) would need to be altered in
order to revise the program using this model.
changes are reflected in the attached resolution.
These
- B -
.
BUdget/Financial Impact
.
If council were to adopt either of the two options presented
above, the budget and financial impact would be as follows:
Option 1
This option, which would increase the Percent for Art
requirement from 1% to 2%, could require more City funding
and increase the cost of capital projects.
Option 2
This option, which would require that one PFA allocation be
made in an amount equal to all eligible CIP projects, could
increase the total PFA allocation and result in an increase
to the General Fund.
This could result for two reasons.
First, the calculation of the PFA allocation would be based
on CIP projects in all funds, but the single PFA account
would exist in the General Fund. Second, an increased number
of CIP projects in enterprise funds would be able to be
calculated for the General Fund PFA allocation, as the
restriction that PFA projects funded from enterprise funds be
required to relate to the enterprise would not be applicable.
The only PFA proj ects to be funded from enterprise funds
could be those related to major CIP projects (not ongoing
maintenance projects) such as the airport, the Pier, and the
Third street Mall.
Based on the provisions of the existing PFA resolution, the
Annual Art Plan for 1985-86 included funding of $44,050 for 7
- 9 -
. .
projects (of which 3 are underway). If this Annual Art Plan
had been based on these provisions, total funding would have
been $45,550 for an undetermined number of public art
projects.
However, the impact of this option on the 1986-87 Percent for
Art Program would be much more significant.
In the 1986-87
proposed budget, funding for the Percent for Art Program
totals $89,000.
However if the PFA budget were to be
calcultated using these guidelines, the total will be
$130,500. This is because the PFA budget would be based on
cIP projects in a much wider variety of funds, including
Water, wastewater, and Beach fund projects.
Recommendation
city staff recommends that Council:
1. Revise the Percent for Art Program by adopting Option 2, as
it allows for the possibility of more significant artwork
without increasing the overall percentage, and
2. Adopt the accompanying resolution which incorporates the
recommended changes to the Percent for Art Program.
If Council approves these recommendations, then City staff will
revise the proposed 1986-87 budget to reflect the fiscal impact
of the changes to the Percent for Art Program.
Prepared by: David Lutz
Cultural Arts Administrator
Attachment: Draft Percent for Art Resolution
- 10 -
CA:RMM:rmd254/hPca4IJ
City council Meeting 6-10-86
.
Santa Monica, california
RESOLUTION NUMBER 723l(CCS)
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING
THE PERCENT FOR ART PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Santa Monica has
established an Arts Commission to carry out certain specified
purposes; and
WHEREAS, the Arts Commission has recommended that the City
Council of the City of Santa Monica adopt a Percent for Art
Program; and
w~EREAS, a Percent for Art Program will enrich the lives of
all residents of and visitors to the City of Santa Monica by
providing funding for various forms of public art; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Monica
adopted Resolution Number 6854
(ccS)
on April 24, 1984,
establishing a Percent for Art program; and
WHEREAS, the Cl ty Council of the city of Santa Monica
desires to make changes to the Percent for Art Program,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SA...~TA
MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Percent for Art Program attached hereto is
hereby adopted.
- 1 -
.
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
PERCENT FOR ART PROGRAM
.
Adopted by Resolution Number 7231 (cCS)
.
.
1. Establishment. The Percent for Art Program is hereby
established in the City of Santa Monica. The Percent for Art
Program shall be incorporated into each Budget of the city of
Santa Monica commencing with fiscal year 1986-87.
2. Definitions. For purposes of the Percent for Art Pro-
gram, the following words and phrases shall have the following
meanings:
a. Art. Art including but not limited to sculpture, paint-
ing, graphic arts, mosaics, photography, crafts, mixed media, and
environmental works.
b. Arts Commission. The Santa Monica Arts Commission es-
tablished pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2931.
c. Capital Project. Any capital project as defined in the
Capital Improvement Program Budgeting Administrative Instruction
inVOlving the construction, remodeling or renovation of property
undertaken by the city of Santa Monica or one of its agencies,
which property is owned by the city or one of its agencies or is
subject to the Beach operating Agreement with the state of Cal-
ifornia, including any building, park, sidewalk or street, park-
ing facility, utility, decorative structure and including por-
tions thereof. ~he follow~ng shall be excluded fro~ the defini-
tion of capital project:
1. Des~gn and research studies.
- 1 -
.
.
2. Purchase and renovation of rOlling stock.
3. Urban design or art projects.
4. Grants to private agencies.
5. Purchase of equipment not related to capital con-
struction or renovation.
6. Operating costs (e.g., tree trimming).
7. Acquisition of land (whether improved or
unimproved) .
8. Any capital project for which legal restrictions
preclude application of this program.
9. Community Development Block Grants other than for
the construction or renovation of public facilities.
d. eIP Committee. The Committee established by the capital
Improvement Program Budgeting Administrative Instruction.
e. PFA. The Percent for Art Program.
3. Administration. PFA shall be administered by the C~ty
I{anager. The Arts Commission shall provide guidance to the City
Manager and assist in the seletion of art as provided for in
these Guidelines.
4. proposed Budget. The proposed budget submitted to the
city council shall be of an amount equal to at least one percent
- 2 -
.
.
(1%) of the total budget of all eligible capital projects devel-
oped in accordance with the following procedures:
a. The PFA allocations shall be determined by the ClP Com-
mittee and be contained in the capital improvement budget submit-
ted by the City Manager to the City Council.
No allocation from any capital project funded by any enter-
prise fund shall be allocated except for an art project related
to the enterprise.
b. One PFA Account shall be established in the general
fund of the capital budget. Appropriation authority shall be
contained in the capital budget for all PFA projects. From time
to time, the city Manager may recommend other budgetary proce-
dures to appropriate and expend PFA allocations, including any
necessary interfund transfers and special PFA accounts in enter-
prise funds to fund PFA projects of major importance to the
enterprise.
c. Administrative expenses of the Arts Commission in car-
rying out PFA shall be payable from the PFA account in an amount
not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the a~ount of funds in the
PFA account.
5. Annual ClP Art Plan. The Arts Comm~ssion shall coordi-
nate the preparation of an Annual Art Plan, which shall set forth
specific projects for the PFA allocations in accordance with the
following standards:
- 3 -
.
.
a. Each Department shall form one or more Selection Commit-
tees to determine the type of art for anyon-site art from its
capital projects. The Selection Committee shall consist of one
member of the Arts commission, one person appointed by the De-
partment Head (which may be the Department Head), and one person
mutually agreed to by the Arts Commission appointee and the De-
partment Head appointee. One of the members of the Selection
Committee shall be an artist.
b. The Arts commission shall form one or more Selection
Committees to determine the type of art for any off-site art.
c. The Selection committee shall have the following
responsibilities:
1. To determine the type of artwork desired for the
site. The Selection committee shall consider all possible con-
straints on the site and shall attempt to ensure that the artwork
selected is appropriate for the site's overall design and is
practical in terms of maintenance and operation. only low main-
tenance artwork shall be considered for outdoor, non-secured
locations. The maintenance implications of the artwork shall be
explored with the appropriate department having maintenance
responsibility for the site. If the Selection Committee deter-
mines that the art should consist of a mural, the Standards and
Procedures for Public Murals shall govern the project.
2. To work with appropriate review boards.
- 4 -
.
.
3. To solicit advice from art professionals and from
businesses and residents that will be affected by the project.
4. To determine the method by which the artwork will
be selected: invitation, limited competition, open competition,
or direct purchase. All selection must be done in accordance
with applicable legal requirements.
5. To empanel a jury, if it's determined necessary,
to make the selection decision. The procedures for a jury shall
be approved by the Arts co~~ission.
6. To recommend a maintenance schedule for the art-
work, including whether or not the contract with the artist will
include any ongoing maintenance responsibilities.
7. To prepare a report setting forth the manner in
which it met its responsibilities under these Guidelines.
d. The Arts Commission shall prepare the information con-
tained from the various selection committees into an Annual Art
Plan. The Annual Art Plan shall be submitted to the Commission
for its comments and to the city Council for its approval.
6. Implementation of Annual Art Plan. After the Annual Art
plan has been approved by the city Council, the Selection Commit-
tee shall iwplement the approved plan. Upon the selection of an
artist, the Selection co~~ittee shall make its recommendation to
the Arts Commission. The com~ission shall approve the selection
of the artist and artwork, subject to appeal to the City Council.
- 5 -
.
.
7. Maintenance. The Arts co~~ission shall prepare an An-
nual Schedule of Artwork Maintenance. The schedule shall be pre-
pared as follows:
a. The Arts commission and the Department having main-
tenance responsibility for a particular artwork site shall agree
upon maintenance responsibilities for the artwork.
b. Any extraordinary costs of maintenance shall be charged
to the PFA Administrative Account.
- 6 -
SECTION 2.
~ city Clerk shall certifY~O the adoption of
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~'-'.~.,'
ROBERT M. MYERS 0
city Attorney
- 2 -
Agenda Item #
.. t:'-._ .:'-- .
J
BEFORE DISTRIBUTION CHECK CONTENT OF ALL
DISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION H 7:; 5/
Coun~il Meeting Date C;;o /re
If ~ A-
~/Y6
.
FOR CITY_C,/:ERK'S ACTION
ORDINANCE /I
Introduced:
Adopted:
AINl\YS PUBLISH AOOP'lW ORDINJl,Nl'F'.c;*
*Cross out Attorney 1 s approval
,
,
l
~
Was it amended?
VO'fE: Affirmative: ~Et'.:T, /1 4?f-( :(tz~ ~~':~. ("c.--{))._
Negative: ' .
Abstain:
Absent: /l.r~
~ 'P'!i()(jF vOtE~ WITH ANOy/.{Ef{ PERSON BEFORE At\rvTHING
DiSTRIBuTlvN: uKi(;l.NAi. '[0 be !;igneci, sea:i.ed and filed in Vault.
NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION {Date:
Department origInating staff report (
Management Serv'~se~ Lynne Barr~tte -urdinances only
Agency mentioned in document or staff report
)
)
~
..
(certified?)
"
,
Subject file (agenda packet)
Counter file
1
1
Others:
Airport
I
Audltorum
Parking Auth.
Personnel
BUIlding Dept.
PlannIng
ccmnuni ty and Econcroic Dev.
l1inance
Police (en-
forcement?)
Fire
Purchasing
Recr/Parks
.
General Servo
I
Library
Transportation_____
Treasurer
Manager
; SEND FOUP"COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES- TO:
CODED SYSTEMS, Attn Peter- Macrearie
12_0'''lain'....tT~et ...
AVr)',<,J ~TElW' Jersey_0?717. .
SEND FOUR COPIES OF AU. OI<nTNAN('PS 1'0:
D~bra !-1yr~ck
~A~TA MONICA MUNICIPAL COURT
;725 MAIN STREE~ Room lIe
SAnTA MONICA, CA 90401
. *Check Code Sechons before send1ng.
TOTAL COPIES
.
.
Adopted and approved this 10th day of June, 1986.
(?1~4 ?-~
r _I" Mayor
I hereby cert~fy that the forego1ng Resolut1on No. 7231(CCS)
was duly adopted by the C1ty Council of the C1ty of Santa MonIca
at a meetIng thereof held on June 10, 1986 by the following
Council vote:
Ayes: Councllmembers: Conn, Epstein, Jenn~ngs, A. Katz,
Zane and Mayor Reed
Noes: Councilmembers: None
Abstain: Councllmembers: None
Absent: Councilmembers: H. Katz
ATTEST:
~7h,~
Cl.ty Clerk
"_"-~-Ir;---_""- ... ~~..-_r-~"...-'. ""~
'ii..,...~o:~!:~~.~ ~....'" AI- .:'i--_~"'~'....{.-""~ "--~........... .-'
-= ~_.a::-.w",. ~~~ - ' _~-,o-"-~""""V'-o~'" ....-....~~_.......- .>-..........__...:. _......i>o~_.......~__
'..~.....---,...- ~~.....,-~__-..~_~~:--.:~.........;:..~-:.:;u
.
.
Adopted and approved thls 10th day of June, 1986.
(2j" "./1
/' '~~D~l-~
/ - - !-layor
I hereby certlfy that the foregoing Resolution No. 7231 (CCS)
was duly adopted by the City Council of the CIty of Santa Monlca
at a meeting thereof held on June 10, 1986 by the followlng
Council vote:
Ayes: Councllmembers: Conn, EpsteIn, JennLngs, A. Katz,
Zane and Hayor Reed
Noes: Councllmembers: None
AbstaIn: Councllmembers: None
Absent: Councllrnembers: H. Katz
ATTEST:
~7h,~
CIty Clerk