The public art plan for 2015 recently presented to city council was informative.
We plan to spend $250,000 at the zoo Chihuahuan desert exhibit. The explanation is “An artist to be selected to work with the zoo administators and designers to explore opportunities in the area.”
Explore opportunities. This money is not even for the design or delivery of a project. It is going to pay for talking about doing something.
The plan reminded us that they city paid $240,000 for an artist to design the leaves that adorn the Brio stops on Mesa.
Those leaves are not the right ones for the Alameda Brio project. The city wants to spend $300,000 for someone to design something more Alameda-ish.
And the leaves are evidently appropriate for the Dyer Brio project either. They want $300,000 to give to someone for a special design for the northeast.
How long does it take to design something like this anyway? Does the artist sit at a desk day after day and generate version after version of a proposed design? Would this take a full time effort for a whole year? At $300,000 how long would most of us have to work?
This thing is evidently going to be placed at the UTEP round-about by April of this year:
No kidding. All that for only $500,000.
We’re not against public art, but at these prices?
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
I suggest old clunkers for Alameda, to reflect all the car lots with the salvage titles. And, yes, I agree. Why all this money for a design, when a smartly run city would just hold some sort of a contest, asking local residents to submit their ideas, choosing the best one, and then have the idea incorporated into the project by the contractor. Maybe a little prize could be offered to the winning idea. As a matter of fact, go take a look at the Lower Valley Library (near Tigua). Way back when (like the 60’s) when that library was built, they asked for drawings from local school kids, and then turned those drawings into individual tiles, so that one wall is like a mosaic of the kids drawings. I think the kids were told to use their favorite story or fairy tale for their inspiration. But, no, these days, we need consultants at high dollar, preferably from out of town.
LikeLike
Well said.
Brutus
LikeLike
To me, Public Art is suppose to be Public Art by buying art that is already available, already been made and/or helping local artists by creating local competition. (Not commissioning and designing art just to fill a space)
Ordering Art from out of town is for a Museum.
What is Alameda Art?
Would that be a combo of Old West and Mexican designs?
All of the oldest type “Western Motels” are in that area.
But then that area is also known for its farms.
Amazing that there are FARMS . . . . INSIDE El Paso !
So, corn, cotton, & chilie, ( the 3 C’s ) would be the design.
But I dont know WHOM the art would benefit.
I dont know what purpose this would be . . . . .on a bus stop.
Is this to keep the bus riders in a better mood?
How about. . . the busses BE ON TIME and closer together and THAT would keep the bus riders in a better mood.
LikeLike
Local? Competition? Pride? Local Culture? Public Input?
Of course El Pasoans would step up.
We would save a lot of money and do a lot for our community.
Brutus
LikeLike
Great idea! Lets fill the EPMA with only local artists! That way, our children can see how many El Paso artists were working during the Renaissance! Heck, lets just fill the damn thing up with Tom Lea and Henry Cisneros art and call it a day! We don’t need no stinking out of town art!
LikeLike
Does anyone know who makes these decisions other than the one city bureaucrat in MCAD???
LikeLike
I am willing to bet that Mountainstar had a say in the water tower “installation art” that was recently installed next to the ballpark at public expense. One has to wonder why that piece wasn’t located at the newly renovated plaza rather than at the ballpark. Let me guess.
LikeLike
Where do they even find this stuff? Is there a catalog? Or is it more, “My brother-in-law is studying art at EPCC…”
LikeLike
Did you miss the news last week about the tower of pipes that also sprays water? It was just installed downtown by the ballpark at public expense. They had to go all the way to New York to find someone to do that one when they could have hired a local plumber. I think that one cost over $1 million, but it’s a comfort to know that the people who go to the ballpark will be able to cool off. I can’t help but wonder if Foster/Jordan got the contract to install that one as they did for all the whirligigs that were built at public expense at Airways and I-10, which is conveniently in front of Western Refinery.
The waste continues and it’s on more than art. The city manager is now setting aside $2 million to $3 million dollars for financial incentives to encourage city employees to take better care of themselves. He says it will save us money, yet he is asking for money to do it. This is simply more perks for city employees.
LikeLike
Okay Brutus….explain your price points.
LikeLike
I sorry but I don’t understand your question.
Brutus
LikeLike
What price would you (pretending you are the city of El Paso) pay for public art? What is the cutoff point? $50? $500? $5000? $50,000? Are all public art expenditures unreasonable?
LikeLike
No, but $840,000 for the design of the bus stop art is excessive. Think what the schools could have done with that money.
Brutus
LikeLike
Good point. We could have done a much better job remodeling Cabrera’s office.
LikeLike
Okay Brutus, so what price WOULD you have paid for the design of the bus stop art? You still have not answered the question about what you think is reasonable for the design and creation of public art. If the Art museum paid $5 million for a Van Gogh would that be excessive or a bargain? Depend on who you speak to I suspect.
There are lots of factors that go into art purchases, public or private:
Is the artist well known? Chicago has Alexander Calder works as part of their public arts program…would we only consider his work if it were $500 or less?
What has been the price paid for similar work?
How long is the work expected to last?
I don’t remember anyone saying that the Pick Ax at the Roundabout on UTEP was excessive…how much did UTEP pay for that?
As for using “local talent” the thing here is that the local talent actually has to be there. Did they respond to the call for proposals? Is anyone qualified to do the type of work being asked for? Maybe, maybe not. (Most of the local artists I know do art as a second job or third job…or hobby. Would they be able to commit theme to do a long term project?)
I am not saying that you are wrong in principal..we SHOULD get the best deal we can get. But we shouldn’t say that simply because something was expensive (in our minds) that is was a rip off.
IMHO.
LikeLike
The original post contained: “We’re not against public art, but at these prices?”
I guess that it is in the eye of the beholder–so my opinion about what something is worth might well be different from yours.
I do feel that with as many infrastructure needs as we have in this city we should be spending more of our money on basics and less (although not none) on luxuries.
In fairness I did not say that any of the purchases were a rip off. My thought is that they may be excessively costly.
Thank you for your continued involvement with the blog. Reading differing opinions helps us all.
Brutus
LikeLike
In many cities, I will use Albuquerque as an example, each public works project has a percentage of the total cost of the project dedicated to public art. I think in Albuquerque the amount is 2% but I may be incorrect. Therefore, a $100,000 project would have $2000 dedicated to the art that would adorn the project. A $1,000,000 project would have a $20,000 art project and so on.
I do not think that type of agreement is unreasonable.
LikeLike
If I am correct it is 5% in El Paso.
Brutus
LikeLike
Why do we look at art and say the price is unreasonable but say nothing about the cost of, say, highway construction? The 7 mile Spur 601 construction cost over $700,000,000. Close to a BILLON dollars. Any eyebrows raised about that? How many, as Brutus would say, schools could have been built for that money?
Is that “unreasonable?” By what standard? What could we have gotten for say, $600,000,000? No, we like our concrete, and we like roads, so we don’t bat an eye at those expenditures.
I think we pick on art because, like education, it is low hanging fruit. Easy to pick on, especially if we do not understand it. How many people look at art and say something like “My 1st grader could have done that?” No they couldn’t have, But we say it anyway, dismissing art because we do not understand it.
I actually like the neon lights on the freeway at night. I think it is no less gaudy than the giant star on the mountain which no one seems to mind.
Eye of the beholder and all of that.
LikeLike
I am very much in favor of spending on art, but in my opinion, the persons selecting our art and negotiating the prices are not doing a very good job. If all of the art throughout the city had been placed under the domain of museum director Michael Tomor before he resigned, we would have ended up with a far better product.
It’s as though the money is burning a hole in the city’s pockets and the persons responsible for these art projects are not being thoughtful about the overall approach, the placement, screening and selection. You never see or hear anything about the plans and process until something has been installed. Meanwhile, important projects that really affect our quality of life are stalled, poorly managed, or under-funded.
We talk a lot about local economic development and job creation, yet we keep sending bucket loads of money to companies and individuals out of town, including artists. The truth of the matter is that the people who control the purse strings don’t have much respect for local talent.
P.S. – No, I don’t care for the star on the mountain. Never have.
LikeLike
Are the Art projects that are on State highways paid for by local funds or state funds? Was the Airway project paid for by local taxes or by state taxes? I know that taxes are taxes for some people, but perhaps that makes a difference on who is choosing the projects..
LikeLike
I am an artist (albeit not qualified to create public art) and the prices that the city is paying to out of town artists is excessive. There are plenty of local artists that could design something that we would all like for less money. That cloud thing that you pictured is an embarrassment. The city should have some kind of theme as does Phoenix / Scottsdale. Our public art is all over the place and most of it does not provide beautification for the majority. Our public dollars and public spaces should not be a place for ultra-modern, experimental art by over priced artists from New York. It irks me that these pieces just show up without any consideration of what the public might like.
LikeLike
You are absolutely right. Drive across town at night, which I bet few, if any, Westside readers have done. We now have neon lights across some of the downtown overpasses and along the railroad yard fences, capped by the neon-like whirligigs at Airways. It’s cheap looking, the colors suck, and it looks like a lame attempt to be like Las Vegas or to make downtown feel like a theme park. It’s a waste of electricity in a time when most people are focusing on reducing energy usage. Did we really need neon lights along the interstate to tell people that they are passing through downtown? Unlike most art, the neon “art” will have an ongoing cost, which we must also pay for every single day that the lights are turned on. Where does that appear in the city budget?
LikeLike
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
LikeLike