Download this page in PDF format
Tuesday Night’s Council Meeting was attended by the new Base Commander Major General David H. Berger. He gave a little impromptu talk on sequestration and was welcomed by the Council.
The Art Mafia had their noses bent this evening when a never approved but somehow out on the agenda months later $10K mural was shot down. Council Woman Heiser brought the facts that while the mural was on a past agenda the presenter never showed up to the meeting. Somehow the mural was promised anyways by the City Manager without council approval… While the money was budgeted, it was spent on the “Sheep-a-dillos” on top of the new city provided commercial sign at National Park Drive.
The Art Crowd were none too pleased when the Council voted 5-0 no and sent them back to the drawing board. Go job Council.
The City Council accepted the $258,000 offer from the County of San Bernardino to settle a lawsuit dealing with overcharges from the Tax Collector….. I wonder could this $250k windfall be a chance for the city to do right and help out the fire department? Just asking…
4-1 on support of AB981…… This bill is dead on arrival. No Contracts no projects boys and girl.
Talking about projects… Project Phoenix will be back on an future agenda…. I hope they shoot this pie in the sky boondoggle down once and for all…. I can always hope…
Nothing that can be reported from the closed session.
Incoming search terms:
- graffiti
- major general david h berger
- steven spear sequestration
With regard to art and murals, I would remind readers that the City Council has tackled this type of issue in the past. Here are excerpts from the minutes.
During the City Council meeting held on Tuesday, July 12, 2011, item 8.3- “Public Hearing and Work Session on Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2011-2012″
Council member Corbin suggested adding a goal to the City Council goals to have joint meetings with the Planning Commission in an effort to give direction to the Planning Commission regarding what they want them to be following. He said he was not in favor of establishing the goals on page 250 and 251 goals six through nine (6-9) and possibly ten (10). He said on page 274 regarding the Public Arts Advisory Committee (PAAC) he requested a goal in the budget regarding the need to solicit for approval and said the piece should have to be approved by the City Council.
Consensus of the City Council was to delete goals six through nine (6-9) on page 250-251 of the budget.
Council member Klink said he wanted the mural to be replaced that was torn down by Walgreens but he said the City should not be responsible for financially replacing the mural.
Consensus of the City Council was to leave the $20,000 towards a replacement mural or a public art piece and accept recommendations from the Public Arts Advisory Committee (PAAC).
If you want to look back further here is an excerpt from the City Council meeting Tuesday, July 13, 2010, item 8.2- PC 10-07 An Amendment to the Municipal Code, creating a new Chapter 19.39 “Art in Public Places”.
Chuck Caplinger, Public Arts Advisory Committee (PAAC) Chair, gave a power point presentation to the City Council regarding Arts in Public Places. Councilmember Cole said the concept should not go away and that the PAAC should continue to work on this. He said he is not ready to kill the item but he is not ready to fund it.
Mayor Pro Tem Harris said Art in Public Places really says something about the community and it is important.
Councilmember Spear said he is still philosophically opposed to this.
Councilmember Klink said he sees this program as a fee to developers to put up a piece of art work that they might not even like. He said he is not an artsy person and he does not want to see the fee being put on developers.
Mayor Flock said he is in support of the arts in the community. He said public art encourages development but developers do not want to pay for it.
Councilmember Klink asked if the public arts could be funded privately.
Mr. Caplinger responded no, the Arts in Public Places program could not be funded privately.
Director LaClaire suggested the City Council table the present Ordinance review and asked the PAAC to address questions raised by the City Council tonight and to revisit the Ordinance after consideration of the fee review associated with the update to the General Plan.
ACTION: On a motion made by Councilmember Cole, seconded by Mayor Pro
Tem Harris and carried with a 3-2 (Klink and Spear no) roll call vote, the City
Council tabled the present Ordinance review and asked the PAAC to address questions raised by the City Council tonight and to revisit the Ordinance after consideration of the fee review associated with the update to the General Plan.
And there is the rub…. the whole issue sat, festering and rotting until last night. In hopes of ‘Ram-a-dillo’ being fresh in the minds of the Council, Murals-R-us would come hat in hand to eat more from the public trough. It was hoped that folks like Carey and Cora would not look to the records of the past.
I can guarantee you that not one fire has been put out or one victim of car crash has been extricated by way of a mural artists paint bucket. The only folks that feel good about the murals is the small group of mural junkies themselves.
In times of near depression economic, are times we need a frugal local government that has priorities that are based upon the Public Good. 15 years of funneling municipal funds to a small but influential small group of people is not right. The amount of money over the years given to the arts crowd is astounding.
In reading this report and Branson’s report one would think that we have a repeat of the 2010 funding fiasco that occurred between Action Council 29 and the city.
Again we have a non-profit perhaps thinking that the funding was a “done deal”. How can that be? Who is telling these people that they are getting tax dollars to do these things.
One would think that 29 Palms has its own “entitlement” issues. Not in regards to social security or medicare or anything of real importance but we have a group of people in this city that feel they are “entitled” to tax dollars to do art. Wow!
I would like to know where Action Council 29 got $20,000 that they think they provided to the city for the sculptures at the monument sign. If I remember right they got that $20,000 from city tax dollars in the first place and they claim it is their money – wow again!
I hope the city council comes to the realization that it does not matter what the mural will look like if it is painted. The question is should we as a city start this funding process for murals that we were never ever a part of through the city governing process? It could be a slippery slope that starts for our city should the city council start funding any mural at all.
I am glad to hear that Cora voted no on AB981. The bill stands no chance of passing and to be part of any request to continue to assist in the decline of this state by trying to save 1.4 trillion dollars in poorly floated bonds throughout the state is beyond comprehension, at least for me.
I am hoping that the city council at some point in time requires city staff to submit a plan on how to defease these bonds as fast as possible. Meaning faster than the 10 year mark. If we do not get these bonds out of our way then future staff as well as council members will continue to spend tax dollars trying to use the bonds. We are, as a city, already at $577,000.00 or over 1/2 million tax dollars spent for Project Phoenix and have nothing to show for it.
I did notice that the lawyers and consultants are all driving new Mercedes but I am sure that is a coincidence. That would be an exaggeration and a joke of course.
Anyways good job for our council last night.
No raise for the city manager, one voted “no” on the continued pursuit of Project Phoenix, flashing lights and traffic dots to be installed, and no money for a mural that should never have been on the agenda in the first place. 4 out of 5 stars if you ask me.
Sorry Dan have to chuckle at Branson’s use of the word “ShXXcaned” Just can’t see how that one would stand up.
I also thought the piece was known as “Baa Ram Ewe”?