HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/16/2019 Item 1, Ashbaugh
Christian, Kevin
From:john@johnashbaugh.com
Sent:Tuesday, July 16, 2019 4:38 PM
To:E-mail Council Website
Cc:Jim Blase
Subject:FW: Monuments Policy Discussion
Sorry – I had the incorrect email address for the Council.
I am also cc’ing this to Jim Blase, the author of a very recent book on Theodore Roosevelt’s 1903 trip through the
American West.
JA
From: john@johnashbaugh.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 4:36 PM
To: council_all@slocity.org; 'hharmon@slocity.org' <hharmon@slocity.org>; Christianson, Carlyn; 'Andy Pease'
<apease@slocity.org>; 'Gomez, Aaron' <agomez@slocity.org>; estewart@slocity.org
Cc: Johnson, Derek; 'Stanwyck, Shelly' <sstanwyck@slocity.org>; 'Lindsey Stephenson' <lstephen@slocity.org>; 'Sims,
Shannon' <ssims@slocity.org>
Subject: Monuments Policy Discussion
This email will summarize the remarks that I will offer to you in oral testimony at your study session later this afternoon
regarding the issue of whether to adopt a “Monuments Policy” in the City of San Luis Obispo.
Our project committee for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Legacy Grove is the only active proponent of a
public art project that might be reviewable under any proposed “monuments policy.” We have an application
before the City that has been stalled now for six months while this report was being prepared.
We continue to want to work with the City, and we intend to continue collaboration with the community and its
various “stakeholders” to create the project in a manner that conforms with any emerging policy.
We remain committed to talking with all those with an interest in this project, including the dozens of donors
that we have identified to date as well as those who have emerged as critics.
Toward that end, a Lifelong Learning course on the subject of “Monumental Mistakes” is being offered at the
Carnegie Library on Tuesday, August 12 at 10 a.m. More information on that event can be found here:
https://www.lifelearnerscc.org/single-post/2019/06/19/Monumental-Mistakes-%E2%80%93-Rewriting-the-
%E2%80%9CHand-of-History%E2%80%9D----John-Ashbaugh
The work before you represents a rather sparing analysis of the work of other small cities, the vast majority of
which do not have any “monuments policy.” While it does provide some interesting material that should be
considered by any city that is facing decisions with existing or proposed monuments, it fails to consider the
unique nature of our very deep, diverse, and evolving culture in San Luis Obispo.
The most prominent public art project in San Luis Obispo, and certainly one of the most controversial, remains
the “Bear and Child” sculpture in Mission Plaza which is totally missing from the listing of such projects on page
12 of your packet. In fact, Mission Plaza itself should be considered a monument to the fact that our city was
built around Mission San Luis Obispo, which features a prominent statue of Saint Junipero Serra looming over
the “Bear and Child” from the front steps of the mission. If you are not familiar with the controversies associated
with BOTH of these statues, suffice it to say that even now, many years after they were erected, they are subject
to wildly different interpretations and they provoke strong reactions from their viewers (not always favorable).
But isn’t that what great art is SUPPOSED to do?
1
(and as a reminder: In all of California, our “Bear and Child” statue is the ONLY accurate representation of the
yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini people, and the artist who created it and nurtured it into being is Paula Zima, the
artist that we have chosen for the Conservation Legacy Grove)
In the event that your City Council does decide to adopt some type of a “Monuments Policy,” we urge that you
delegate this work to the same team of staff members who create and regularly update the City’s Public Art
Policy. In fact, we have a specific recommendation to do the following:
o Add a definition of “monument” within those existing policies so that applicants are guided as to when
their project constitutes a “monument.”
o Provide an additional routing in the flow chart within the existing policies that outlines the Public Art
approval process to route any “monument” project through the Cultural Heritage Committee for review
of any written message that accompanies such a project – while leaving to the public art jury the task of
reviewing the artistic merit of any graphic, sculptural, or animated features of the artwork.
o State clear and concise criteria that guide the work of the CHC as to what constitutes compliance with
the City’s “monuments policy.”
This sounds like a lot of work. It isn’t. In my oral remarks to you this afternoon, I will demonstrate for you a very simple
fix that could accomplish these purposes within a matter of weeks, and that could be accomplished entirely by your
staff. The real work that lies ahead for us will be to then take that definition, that process, and those criteria and apply it
to our proposed Public Art project.
We look forward to that challenge.
Thanks,
John Ashbaugh
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Legacy Grove Project Committee
2