Laserfiche WebLink
Received After Agenda Printed <br />November 25, 2014 <br />Agenda Item No. SS3 <br />November 25, 2014, City Council Agenda Item Comments <br />The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by: <br />Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(a)yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 -6229) <br />Item SS3. Arts and Culture Master Plan <br />As of Friday, there were no handouts or links to additional information available to help either <br />the Council or the public prepare to comment on this presentation. <br />That seems characteristic of the way in which this plan has been largely developed in private <br />and sprung on an unprepared public. One might think that before launching on a plan, the <br />process would have profited from a preliminary attempt to reach a public consensus on what the <br />City is attempting to accomplish in the arts, and why, and only then would a plan have been <br />developed and offered as a way of achieving those goals. <br />By way of background, on March 2013, in adopting Policy 1 -13, also without preliminary <br />discussion, the City Council created a dedicated "Public Arts and Cultural Facilities Fund" <br />funded by developer fees for purchasing permanent art and art facilities. Shortly thereafter, <br />$100,000 from the General Fund was transferred into the Capital Improvement Program budget <br />as project C8002036 ( "Arts and Culture Master Plan "), and later rebudgeted into the FY2014 -15 <br />CIP with the description "A consultant will retained to create a master plan for arts and culture in <br />Newport Beach. The plan will include a comprehensive review of potential and existing facilities, <br />development of collections, possible governance structures, and financial requirements to <br />support plan elements." <br />$40,000 of the project budget was allocated towards a six -month contract, C -5829, issued as <br />the result of the direction given by the City Council at its April 8, 2014, Study Session, in which <br />the same consultant who had been retained to coordinate the Sculpture in the Civic Center Park <br />project (also with minimal public input) seems to have been chosen without benefit of a request <br />for proposals. <br />Since the present agenda mentions the City Arts Commission's meeting "earlier in November," <br />and since copies of an "Master Arts and Culture Plan" were distributed there as part of Item <br />V.B.1, I assume the subject of the present meeting will be the same document, which seems to <br />be the culmination of contract C -5829 even though the Scope of Services seemed considerably <br />broader, including a Phase 2 which has been relegated to "Next Steps." <br />Although called a "Master Plan," that document does not seem to me to be plan, at least not of <br />the same sort as the Balboa Village Master Plan or more recently the Bicycle Master Plan, both <br />facilitated by outside consultants, but both developed and refined through a series of open <br />public meetings. The present "plan" seems to me to be more of a paid outside "evaluation," <br />more like the Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel's study of Balboa Village or the <br />recent "planning charrette' of Mariners Mile conducted by the Congress for the New Urbanism's <br />California Chapter. As such, it is ideas, which may or may not be of interest, being imposed on <br />the city rather than something addressing wants arising organically from the residents. And <br />having the evaluation privately conducted by a past and possible future beneficiary of the City's <br />arts largesse, based on private consultation with other past and potential future beneficiaries <br />does not seem like a proper use of public resources to me. <br />