December 18, 2003
(Updated) Mayor Katz Releases Proposal For Public Murals
Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.
Just posted to PortlandOnline (no idea if it got sent out as email from the Mayor's office; if so, I didn't get it) is a news release describing the awaited proposal from Mayor Vera Katz for how to consider murals in the City of Portland.
Katz's proposal comes in the aftermath of the cessation of negotiations between Commissioner Randy Leonard and Clear Channel -- talks whose agreements didn't sit well with the Mayor, who feared they would increase the numbers of commercial billboards within the City.
"What I am trying to accomplish with this proposal is to find a constitutional way to protect artistic expression while controlling visual clutter," Katz said in the press release.
Mayor Katz�s proposal would not fundamentally alter the City�s Sign Code.� Rather, her proposal would exempt public art, including murals, from the Sign Code.� Mayor Katz noted that under this proposal murals created for commercial purposes could also be exempt from the Sign Code if they met the other criteria for public art.
The Regional Arts and Culture Council (RACC) administers the City's public art program.� RACC defines public art as "original works of art that are accessible to the public and/or public employees and which may possess functional as well as aesthetic qualities."
Any interested party could apply to the RACC for approval of their murals as public art, regardless of whether the images were for commercial or non-commercial purposes.� Public art murals would be placed on public wall space and funded through the RACC.
The RACC criteria for public art would be expanded to include murals and include "artistic quality, originality, context and scale, permanence, diversity, feasibility and community support."
According to the release, Katz believes the new policy would survive any possible court challenge because it does not make any content-based distinctions -- the element which caused the City's earlier sign code to be nixed by the courts. It also says that regulating murals this way, rather than as signs, is the approach currently, and successfully, used in cities such as Los Angeles and Philadelphia.
One element I'm currently confused on is a seeming conflict between the above statement that "[a]ny interested party could apply to the RACC for approval of their murals as public art, regardless of whether the images were for commercial or non-commercial purposes" and a later part of the release which says that "the public art program for murals applies only to art owned by the public in spaces dedicated to the public."
While the former statement would seem to open the door to murals such as that at Mirador in Southeast Portland (works which prompted this latest long round of discussion over murals in Portland), the latter would seem to suggest that such business murals would not be included.
Presumably, the intent is for such work to be included, but the release's description of this proposal leaves it not entirely clear. I am awaiting word back from the Mayor's office as to this particular issue.
According to the release, Mayor Katz "will now bring together a diverse group of stakeholders to assist the work group in fleshing out the concept and identifying outstanding questions that need answers," and then decide whether to forward the proposal to the City Council for consideration.
Update
Some information to explain the seeming conflict mentioned above, as to murals on businesses qualifying as public art.
Via email this afternoon, Scott Farris, Katz's chief of staff, said, "The current discussion -- and I emphasize this is a proposal that will be further honed through public discussion -- has been around the building owner granting the city an easement for the mural." He framed this as one way to ensure meeting the criteria for public art, one of which is permanence.
Farris also pointed out that parties responsible for murals comprising 200 square feet or less of space could choose to go through either the current process regarding the City's sign code, or through the proposed RACC-based process (if implemented).
Comments (1)
Alan DeWitt on 18 Dec 2003
"The public art program for murals applies only to art owned by the public in spaces dedicated to the public."
I expect that the answer to your concern is in that the "spaces dedicated to the public" phrase will be given much more weight than the "owned by the public" part. Bureaucratic handwaving of the best kind. :)
It certainly seems like a clever and good solution on the face of it. (Although who knows what Clear Channel's lawyers will manage to pull out of their hat.)
I especially like the inclusion of the "community support" criteria as part of the evaluation process. That is indeed not content-based, so it should pass Constitutional muster. And it seems to me that's going to be a pretty tough standard for someone like Clear Channel to meet, whereas someone like Mirador shouldn't have much difficulty.
Nicely done, PDX.