Public Art in Clark County
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
August 13, 2000, Sunday
PUBLIC ART IN CLARK COUNTY
BYLINE: BRETT OPPEGAARD, Columbian staff writer
SECTION: Life; Pg. d1
LENGTH: 2864 words
When community leaders unveiled the 7-foot-tall, 700-pound bronze "Ilchee" statue on the Columbia River waterfront in the mid-1990s, many hoped this privately funded piece would be monumental in form as well as function, motivating citizens to create a cultural identity here like the people of Copenhagen have done with their "Little Mermaid" or New Yorkers with their "Statue of Liberty."
In Clark County, though, cultivation and refinement in the arts traditionally comes at a slower pace. Case in point: Virtually every major city in America has a public art program to finance new works, including Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles.
In Washington state, every city with more than 70,000 people has such a program except one: Vancouver, which has nearly twice that many residents. And this isn't just a concept for large metropolitan areas. Washington cities that fund public art include some less than a third the size of Vancouver, such as Olympia, Lynnwood and Edmonds, and even smaller towns, such as Bainbridge Island and Mercer Island, which have only about 20,000 people each.
Without any such government support, cities in Clark County have had to rely upon private donors and state purchases to provide the smattering of public artwork found here. Although relatively sparse, this local landscape now seems involved in a transformation of sorts, as more pieces keep appearing albeit slowly amid the allure of "Ilchee."
Sculpture Garden on Broadway
Mary Granger was one of those who attended the "Ilchee" unveiling, partly because the group she helped to create, the Community Foundation for Southwest Washington, financed the plaza around the sculpture, partly because her father's R.F. Petersen Memorial Fund contributed to the effort and partly because she for years had hoped Vancouver would recognize the broad value of public art.
"We just can't have enough of it," Granger said. "Art feeds the soul. It inspires imagination. It makes us think about something other than the news of the day. ... That doesn't mean there aren't other needs in this community, too. But art has to have its place."
From the first look Granger had at "Ilchee," she said she felt the need to bring more artwork, especially outdoor sculptures, to Vancouver. She brought together a committee of influential friends and convinced the city to designate a strip of land at East Ninth Street and Broadway as a sculpture garden.
Since then, Granger and her group have raised more than $ 100,000 and installed three modern pieces at the site: Don Wilson's "Wheel Series I," James Lee Hansen's "Glyph Singer No. 3" and Beth Kohler's "Winged Woman." Granger said her group will place a fourth piece, a yet unnamed bronze by Manuel Isquierdo in the Sculpture Garden on Broadway next spring.
Other local efforts
Meanwhile, the Friends of Vancouver recently raised and spent $ 70,000 to create a statue of Capt. George Vancouver, which has been installed in front of Vancouver City Hall until a permanent site is chosen. Avril Massey, chairwoman of the group, says the money for the work came from grants, fund-raising events and private donations, including $ 35,000 from local developer Elie Kassab, who built the 12-screen movie theater downtown.
Kassab also is involved in another piece of downtown artwork, making plans for a statue of Lewis and Clark as part of his proposed Lewis and Clark Tower, a five-story building at Seventh Street and Broadway that offers work-force housing.
"It only takes two or three projects to set the tone," Kassab said. "I think that with what we've done so far, every new building downtown is going to have art incorporated. ... This is extremely important for everyone. Public art is what makes a city pedestrian friendly and livable.
"If you're walking along the streets, just looking at blank walls and storefronts, there's nothing that's going to stop you and grab your attention," he said. "If there's a piece of art, though, you'll stand there and admire it. It'll make you want to walk by it again and again and show friends. It also will give you pride in your city. When people come to visit, you can show them how beautiful this place is."
Art programs at work
Most of the cities in this region that fund public art spend at least 1 percent of all major public construction budgets on new artwork. Under that plan, if Vancouver were to build a new $ 25 million city hall, $ 250,000 of that would be spent on art.
This concept actually originated in the West in the late 1960s, with Hawaii passing the first legislation of its kind in 1967. Alfred Preis, then director of the Hawaii State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, said his state needed a program "fit for democracy" as opposed to the European standard "where art support grew out of the aristocracy." The program's goal was to embrace "those already involved in the arts, as well as those for whom art meant nothing," he said. Washington state was the next to pass such a directive, in 1973, followed by Oregon and Alaska in 1975, then 23 other states. Dozens of cities soon followed, including Portland. More than 130 public art programs are in operation in America today.
For its involvement in the field, Clark County relies almost entirely on the Washington State Arts Commission, which administers the state's 1 percent public art program. To date, the commission has helped to place about 200 pieces here in 50 locations, mostly schools, at a cost of about $ 650,000. Those works include "The Wailing Bell" on the Washington State University at Vancouver campus, "The Guardian" on the Clark College campus and the controversial "Reach for the Sky" sculpture at Battle Ground High School, which has raised issues in that city about arts funding.
Portland serves as a nearby example of a place that gets funding for artwork from state, county and city sources and puts public art somewhere on its priority list. Eloise Damrosch, public art director for the Regional Arts and Culture Council, which administers Portland's program, said Clark County originally was expected to be a partner with the nonprofit group, which provides leadership, funding and advocacy for the arts in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties. The group's logo even has four interwoven strands, symbolizing the four counties working together. Yet Clark County pulled out of the coalition once talks began about contributing money to the effort.
Besides spreading art throughout its partners on the Oregon side of the metropolitan area, the council has teamed with such agencies as the Port of Portland, city of Gresham and Tri-Met to incorporate artwork in major construction projects.
As evidence of how effective such programs are, and how stimulating their results can be, one merely needs to ride Portland's light rail MAX from end to end. The bare east-side line, from downtown Portland to Gresham, was built before Tri-Met had a public art program. The west-side line, from downtown Portland to Hillsboro, incorporates art in all 20 stations, including abstract images, glass etchings, American Indian baskets, a 30-foot-tall trophy that claims "World's Greatest," an artist-designed trail and an aural piece that amplifies the sounds of nearby wetlands.
"Many, many people would not choose to go to museums or galleries," Damrosch said. "By putting art where the public can interact with it, people can more easily appreciate what artists bring to our lives. Artists really think about all aspects of existence and turn those thoughts into such wonderful expressions. ... What people put in their homes, speaks to them individually. What we all put out in public, speaks about the larger issues we share."
Developing public art here
Although Vancouver's city government doesn't have a specific program to finance public art, it has started giving a modest amount of arts grants each year. As part of that fledgling effort, Vancouver gave $ 5,000 to the Hough Foundation earlier this week to help the group create specially tiled pedestrian entryways along the sound wall that separates Hough neighborhood from the nearby commercial developments. Vancouver also has helped with maintenance and provided city crews to install privately donated pieces.
Pam Brokaw, the city's cultural services manager, said the two-year-old arts grants and the creation of the Vancouver Cultural Commission three years ago indicate the city has begun to recognize the importance of developing arts here and to put some resources toward that goal.
Brokaw said the commission's first major task in this realm is to develop a set of basic guidelines concerning acceptance of donated public art as well as its siting, maintenance and, if necessary, its removal. After that plan is finished, Brokaw said, the group will begin to create an extensive inventory of the public artwork already in place, including the location, history and value of each piece. Even though a percent-for-public-art program in Vancouver has been talked about since the commission formed in 1997 and has been in its master plan since the beginning, Brokaw acknowledged that such an ordinance isn't likely to be adopted soon.
"We're just not there yet," she said. "We have so many needs in the city right now. We're looking at that as something to pursue, but we have to make that proposal when it makes sense."
Various arts leaders in this community have questioned whether Vancouver will ever find that perfect opportunity, or even seriously look for it. The Vancouver City Council earlier this week learned that city expenses were growing faster than income. Budget Manager Kent Shorthill predicted $ 1 million-plus shortfalls each of the next five years. Traditionally in this city, arts programs are among the first to be cut when budgets are tightened.
Council member Pat Jollota acknowledged, "We always talk about public art, but we don't want to spend any money for it. That's the bottom line." Jollota said although she philosophically supports more public art in the city, she and other council members have a tough time choosing artwork over roads, police officers and firefighters.
Council member Jeanne Lipton, who earned a bachelor's degree in fine art from Brooklyn College in 1974, said, "Art is necessary for the soul, no question, music and dance and all that. But if we have to choose our priorities, we have to look at a balanced budget and health and safety and roads."
Jim Moeller, also a council member, said he is among the people in this city who think development of the arts is a fundamental city service.
"Art is just as necessary as breath," he said. "It's more than just pretty things. It's more than what you do when you've got a little extra money. It goes all the way back to the cave paintings. Those people had nothing. Yet they spent an enormous amount of time and energy to locate pigments and make art on cave walls. That is how important the arts have been to the human race since the beginning of time."
Fellow supporter Eleanor Van de Water, who was chairwoman of the committee that purchased "Ilchee" for Vancouver, said she, too, is among those who think the arts should be considered a fundamental function of government.
"Public art is an outward statement of our beliefs," she said. "It's a way for us to show what we value as a community. ... In general, art says to the world that we are multifaceted and not just interested in and concerned with provable phenomenon and finite things. There are aspects of human nature that are not nurtured by a scientific, factual, analytical approach."
Van de Water said that Vancouver historically "has leaned on Portland awfully hard for its source of ideas, places of entertainment, self image and for its appreciation of history." Yet she said that appears to be changing.
"Vancouver seems to be coming in to its own," she said. "I like the positive feeling now of hope and optimism and sensitivity and appreciation."
The Columbian (Vancouver, WA.)
August 14, 2000, Monday
PUBLIC ART IN CLARK COUNTY
BYLINE: BRETT OPPEGAARD, Columbian staff writer
SECTION: Life; Pg. d1
LENGTH: 1816 words
As new superintendent Shonny Bria first looked at the artist's sketch of a sculpture that the Washington State Arts Commission planned to place in front of Battle Ground High School, she laughed heartily. It seemed almost comical at the time last year, she recalled, that a school district embroiled over the previous administration's perceived fiscal irresponsibility would accept such a challenging and abstract piece of artwork, at a cost of more than $ 30,000 to the state.
She thought some people in this conservative town in central Clark County might question the acquisition, but being new to the area from Arizona, she also figured that the committee of local citizens that picked the piece knew best. Bria did, however, halt the group's plans to move the flagpole from the front of the school to make room for the 20-foot-tall sculpture, "Reach for the Sky," which looks a little bit like an ancient basketball hoop. They agreed on an alternate site, to the side of the school, yet still visible from the road in front of it.
Bria doesn't see the humor in this sculpture situation anymore. Since the piece was installed in May 1999, Bria said she has been under a continuous assault from people unhappy with the artwork. In turn, Bria has been on a nearly continual pilgrimage to assuage these complainers visiting classrooms, school groups and community clubs trying to somehow persuade folks that the district had no choice but to spend the state's money on art and that the district was not squandering funds once again.
"This has plagued us since the day the piece was put in," Bria said. "We've been accused of misusing funds, and 95 percent of the reaction I've heard has been negative. I've been on the road for months trying to explain to people about the state program. People just do not seem to understand this artwork comes from a separate agency. Most people here think it's inappropriate for this community. Many have said to me, 'You could have got a teacher for that price.' They don't seem to believe me when I tell them we couldn't have."
Community disapproval and widespread outrage about a piece are just some of the perils of spending public money on communal artwork. If a couple can have a hard time agreeing on how to decorate a living room, imagine what diversity of opinions exist in a group of 140,000. Vancouver, though, has become the first city in Clark County to seriously explore ways to bring more public art to its citizens, contemplating a percent-for-art program similar to the one the state commission uses to finance its projects, such as the Battle Ground sculpture.
Model programs
In the metropolitan area, Beaverton, Ore., and Lake Oswego, Ore., already have joined Portland in putting aside a percent of major public construction projects to pay for art. Furthermore, of the eight largest cities in Washington, Vancouver is the only one without a program to pay for public art, instead relying almost entirely on private donations and the state arts commission.
So far, though, concerns about funding for basic city services as well as fears of having an experience like Battle Ground has kept Vancouver from earnestly considering such an ordinance to fund art. But with the installation of the Capt. George Vancouver statue at City Hall recently, the burgeoning Sculpture Garden on Broadway and various other art pieces appearing around town, some are saying the time finally has come for this city to incorporate public art in its grand vision.
Council member Jim Moeller said, "There is a perception that art is fluff. That it's not necessary for civic enjoyment. Yet when you go to a bigger city and are more exposed to art and cultural events, you can experience different cultures and different ideas, and it gives one a greater appreciation for that. We've got a lot of citizens interested in the arts here, and we have some people with great souls who want to make this happen." Moeller said he has been willing to champion the effort, but he has yet to receive an organized proposal to make such a thing happen.
Problems with public art
Vancouver has other potential public art-related pitfalls besides disapproval of a piece.
For instance, the Washington State Arts Commission program, which has placed about 200 pieces of artwork in the county at a cost of about $ 650,000, constantly has been challenged to maintain the pieces and keep track of them all.
In a Columbian survey about care of these works, which are kept in 49 local schools and a Department of Licensing office, most were reported in good condition and on prominent display. Yet some top administrators were unable to locate certain pieces, and before checking, many acknowledged that they weren't even aware the school had such artwork. Some institutions, such as Roosevelt Elementary School, just wouldn't cooperate with the survey and failed to return telephone calls.
Yacolt Primary School Principal Carol Northrop acknowledged that she could not find a linen called "Exile," which cost the state $ 2,500 in 1982, and she said she thought another piece, a hand-colored photograph called "Misty Forest," which cost the state $ 1,600 in 1996, was stolen during a summer burglary in 1997. Also in the Battle Ground School District, Maple Grove Middle School Principal Gary Greene couldn't find nine of his school's 20 state-provided pieces, missing paintings, prints, earthenware, a photograph and two stained-glass works with a total original value of more than $ 6,000. Both said that the pieces must have been missing before they took over their respective positions.
Besides the public artwork that has been lost or stolen, some pieces have been put in storage and others have been stuck in obscure areas where few ever get a chance to see them. At Mountain View High School, for example, an enamel on steel called "Night," which the state paid $ 15,000 for in 1985, has been put away while school officials try to determine a new spot for it. Battle Ground High School long ago took down its other state arts commission piece, "Ribbons of Evolution," a $ 3,350 mixed media work it received in 1982, and recently found out that it would take $ 1,500 to have it restored and remounted. At Clark College, an unpopular cotton and cordine piece called "Obie," which cost the state $ 3,800 in 1982, has been put in a seldom-used recreation room in the basement of Gaiser Hall.
Christel Ratliff, a spokeswoman for the state arts commission, said her group relies on each institution to take care of its pieces "as a courtesy more than anything else." The state system doesn't penalize schools that lose pieces, fail to take care of them or just stick them in storage. But it does allow groups to return the artwork, if they so choose.
Bria, superintendent of the Battle Ground School District, said she has considered removing the controversial sculpture from the city's high school but isn't sure if that just wouldn't create a new problem.
"I don't think that sculpture has helped this community appreciate art," Bria said. "I think what it's done is separate people into two camps, those who like it and those who think it's really provocative."
Other worries
Sometimes, in addition, a piece of artwork just doesn't do what it is supposed to do. For example, the state arts commission paid $ 16,000 for an artist to sand-blast the school's falcon mascot on the front of Prairie High School in 1979. Art teacher Paul Shapard said the piece looked great during the blasting while the white masking tape outlined it. But once the tape was taken off, the image blended into the brick and can barely be seen, unless the sun illuminates it just right. Over time, the exterior brick was expected to discolor while the sand-blasted area was supposed to remain the same shade, giving more contrast to the image. But that exterior color change hasn't happened, and Shapard said he doubts it will for decades. Meanwhile, he said, the only way to see the image is to "look really hard."
Vancouver had its own trouble with a 12-ton, 20-foot-tall wooden Indian head that was carved in Esther Short Park in 1974. According to the artist, the sitka spruce sculpture was supposed to last "a heckuva lot longer than 100 years."
In early 1992, though, city crews found that the wood had severely rotted, and the sculpture was removed that year.
Yet despite all those inherent worries that go along with public art, plus protection from vandals, Vancouver seems poised to incorporate more of it, possibly even pursuing a percent-for-art program in the future.
Supporter Mary Granger said, "Vancouver has been in the shadow of Portland for a long time in regard to public art. But we're going to do our own thing over here and do it well. We've been pretty inspired by what goes on in other communities. We feel we can do anything anyone else can. We just need to light a spark."
Steve Burdick, the city's economic development director, acknowledged that "we have a ways to go. Even a place such as Wenatchee has some delightful art in its downtown. So we're probably lagging behind in that respect.
"But it just seems to be a lack of focus. Vancouver tends to focus on something really well, like the (Columbia River) waterfront, and get it done. We haven't ever focused on public art. Maybe it's time."