Bunker Ramp

Should the city be mitigating risk when it comes to public art?

l3wis February 27, 2023 9Comments

This is a rendering I did of what I was told the Bunker Ramp mural would have looked like. A Native American taking a nap next to a river dreaming of buffalos frolicking in a rainbow sky. I still have NOT seen the image.

Mr. Lalley is suggesting that is what the mayor exactly did when rejecting the selected mural choice and cancelling the project all together, mitigating risk;

This wasn’t a commissioned piece, as Boice had to explain to me, which could include parameters on the theme or content.

In this case, the intent was to allow the chosen artist “control the narrative,” as Boice put it.

That’s new.

It’s a great idea when you’re fostering and supporting artistic endeavors in your community.

For a government, for people who want other people to approve of what they do, it’s risky.

But you have to know that going in.

Rejection from the wider public is always a possibility. In my experience uncertainty is the artist’s constant companion, whether they are painters, musicians, sculptors, writers or quilters.

There’s always risk in art.

City government is inherently about mitigating risk.

We may never know the content of what was intended as a short-term mural, that was recommended by the Visual Arts Commission and rejected by the mayor.

Which highlights a more perplexing theme.

We may never know if the mural in question was patently offensive to one or more groups of people in the community.

We may never know if the mayor was reacting to some real or perceived public consequence if he approved it.

With public art comes public scrutiny.

Artists usually want that.

Government usually does not.

While I still struggle with this supposed offensive mural, you can only look a block away to a naked dude that has been standing there for 50 years (with a short stint in a parks and rec boneyard).

While it appears that the mayor was mitigating risk, it also suggests to me he was more worried about what Taupeville would think of the mural and not everyday folks.

Just another shirtless Native American in front of the Bunker Ramp of Democracy.

Which brings us to Ben Black Elk;

As the unofficial greeter at Mount Rushmore, Black Elk spent 27 years welcoming guests and promoting Native American culture. A Huron Daily Plainsman article noted that he posed for an estimated 5,000 photos daily during peak tourist season, earning Black Elk the distinction of being the most photographed Native American in the world. In addition to his photo record, the Sioux City Journal reported that Black Elk was the first person to have a live image broadcast over the Atlantic — via the Telstar satellite that launched in 1962.

It seems the state did a fine job of mitigating the risk of having a shirtless Native American pose for pictures in front of Mt. Rushmore now if we could just figure it out in Sioux Falls.

UPDATE: Did Mayor TenHaken overrule the Visual Arts Commission?

l3wis February 11, 2023 6Comments

UPDATE: Mural Gate is getting interesting. While I am still waiting for more details it seems the funding source for the mural may be in jeopardy. I am assuming that NO announcements will be made until this is smoothed out. The mural was to be privately funded.

Not only is PTH busy forcing the city council to do his dirty work, but apparently he also has been throwing his weight around with the VAC (Visual Arts Commission).

The commission is tasked with making recommendations to the city council and mayor when it comes to public art. They probably haven’t had this much drama since they had to determine if the Munson plaque at Phillips to the Falls was art (I wish I still had audio from that city council meeting, I think the Quen Be started crying).

At their December 20, 2022 meeting the commission picked a winner for the Bunker Ramp mural. There were 3 entries and they voted on two of them;

Jurying for the 10th Street Parking Ramp
Commissioner Boice presented the numeric rankings for the three submittals. The Commission reviewed and discussed the rankings and Commissioner Schaeffer made a motion for the Commission to select between Amber Hansen/Reyna Hernandez/Darcy Millette and Eric Vozzola. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Dickson. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioners Jamison and Hoesing voted in favor of Eric Vozzola. Commissioners Schaeffer, Lum, Dickson, and Zaijcek voted in favor of Amber Hansen/Reyna Hernandez/Darcy Millette.
Commissioner Jamison made a motion that all members of the Commission are in unanimous support of Amber Hansen/Reyna Hernandez/Darcy Millette. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hoesing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Boice will update the Commission once a final decision after consultation with the donor and the City.

The VAC handled the selection process the way they are supposed to by making sure the entries qualify for the criteria set forth and having an open and transparent vote on the selection. They even went a step further by taking a 2nd vote for unanimous consent (heck, they run their meetings tighter then the council).

Fast forward to the January 17th VAC meeting (that is posted wrong on the agenda as a Jan 11 meeting) and you will notice they had a special guest to talk about the mural selection;

• 10th Street Parking Ramp Mural, Jeff Eckhoff

What is missing from the minutes is exactly what Mr. Eckhoff told the VAC. According to my sources at the meeting the VAC was informed that the Mayor was not a fan of the VAC mural selection and the mayor instructed that they use the 2nd entry. Not sure why because I am getting conflicting accounts.

While all the artists involved are very talented, they do differ in styles. The winner(s) the VAC chose do the mural are more culturally diverse and present a lot of symbolism when it comes to Hispanic and Native American culture, while the 2nd place entry that the mayor prefers does more nature/abstract/modern commercialized work.

I don’t know what the entries look like, but as an artist I will admit all the artists involved do great work and I can understand how it would have been a difficult decision to make. But if I was voting, I would have picked what the VAC picked purely based on the complexity of their work. While Eric’s work is good, it lacks substance and doesn’t tell a story. Art should always have a message, or NOT, but there is a clear dividing line.

Now there are a lot of rumors swirling around about how this all came down (I’m working on getting more details) but I do know that the VAC leadership was not happy about how it came down and there was some blow back.

The one thing an experienced leader can do is get out of the way especially when you have a talented and capable committee to make a decision for you. But authoritarians struggle with delegation because they want to micro-manage everything. It seems the artists that were in the running were all very capable of creating a great mural, so why did a color blind graphic designer have to have a pity party?

I get it if the mayor was NOT happy about the selection, but to piss in the VAC’s cereal is not a good way to start a day.