Feb
14
Local artists frustrated with city’s public art program
February 14, 2006 |
Discontent is rising in the local arts community over the city’s public art program. The program earmaks 1% of public construction projects’ budget for public art. While the local art scene has been getting lots of national attention for its quality and vitality, many of the city’s big public art commissions have gone to out of town artists.
Leopold Gallery owner Paul Dorrell recounts a conversation with local art pioneer Jim Leedy and notes that there is no policy for awarding even part of commission to a local artist. This seems odd to when the city spends so much effort trying to include local companies and especially minority- and female-owned businesses. Shouldn’t there be a local component for these big tax-payer financed public art projects?
Comments
6 Comments so far

Contact and Tips
As a project architect for the 11th and Oak parking structure, I sat on the Municipal Arts Commission committee that selected local artist Jim Woodfill to do the PULSE installation in the stair towers. I have to say that one of my strongest requirements was that the $200,000 commission went to a local artist. This was back when Avenue of the Arts was only 1 or 2 years old and the director of the Arts Commission at the time, Blair Sands, agreed that the 1% progam would be a natural transition for large public artworks by artists recognized by the AotA program. We short listed May Tveit and Jim (along with Eldorado Architects) and had a very difficult choice between the two.
Based on all of the portfolios we looked through, from artists all over the country, I can say confidently that both Jim and May’s work (along with so many other Kansas City artists) stand proudly.
Keeping this program local and steering the money to local artists is not, in my opinion, favoritism, because local work is just that strong.
I will say, though, that there were some on our panel that were very skeptical when we proposed using local talent. There absolutely is an attitude that Kansas City is not a legitimate art town. Only through stubborness on the part of 3 of us were we able to get May and Jim short-listed.
I am absolutely furious that with a $300 million arena, and theoretically, $3 million of public art money at stake, that NO ONE from Kansas City has been tapped yet.
“when the city spends so much effort trying to include local companies and especially minority- and female-owned businesses.”
You sir, are funny and you make me laugh. The city’s record on including minority owned businesses is abysmal and I’ve documented the fact almost daily on my page. If you’re talking about press releases then I guess you may have a point but as far as numbers go . . . everybody in town knows that city construction is a closed shop despite what Mayor Kay might be telling you.
Keep up the good work in advocating for local artists! Truly, these people are the salt of the earth and someone must speak on their behalf since obviously their parents never listened. Minorities don’t need equality, overprivileged white kids with crayons do!
Tony, I’m well aware of the shortcomings of the city’s minorty/women-owned business program.
Don’t be so fast to make this a racial thing. You would be surprised how many local artists are minorities, and could benefit from consideration by the Municipal Arts Commission.
I don’t understand the connection between local artists and overprivileged white kids??
I also don’t understand why they wouldn’t use local talent for the sculptures…if the idea was to have a design that is to be representative of our community it would make some sense to go with someone who lives here.
One of the proposals in the paper last week mentioned that it would be fabricated in LA…couldn’t we also find someone here to fabricate?? I think having a local element to the design should come into play and have some weight when choosing public art for this city.
Wonderful comments from all of you, and all of merit. I think you might be surprised at some of the large corporate projects coming up that will involve only regional artists, and include a great many minority artists. These will be made up of permanent installations of a variety of sizes and media. The pieces will be purchased from the artists, not loaned. It’s going to be a riot–just not in the literal sense.
Yeah, sometimes people in the arts take the art world a little too seriously, forgetting that it only makes up one aspect of a balanced life. How would I know? I’m in the freaking arts.
But I’m also a ball coach for rejected kids. Doing this reminds me of my relative unimportance in the overall scheme of things, and the greater importance of those with real needs. It keeps things in perspective, including the big art projects. I mean if these aren’t structured to be inclusive, what good do they do our society, and the generations coming up?
Just a reminder– When the Bi-State II was up for vote, one of the critisms from the opposition was that the Kansas City Arts Association was not being required to specify how the money would be divided up so that all of the arts had a chance to get a piece of the pie. They asked that specific divisions be set up with equal sums of money so that the money was distributed across the spectrum of arts endeavors in Kansas City Metro Area. The One % for arts committee consider themselves to be part of the “arts community” but they are elitist in prespective. When the next “Think Big” campaign for the arts starts up remember that the elitists and the arts administrators always– always give the money to their fellow elitist (read out of town “national”) buddies. There will be NO safeguards to require that the “arts” money is divided among the Kansas City Arts Community.