| Author | Message | ||
     MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3409 Registered: 5-2001  |
Although, it DOESN'T look very fiscally responsible, does it? | ||
| Josh Holtz Citizen Username: Jholtz Post Number: 289 Registered: 4-2004 |
Eric/Mark: Please have the Beifus site included in the plan. Enough is enough. This project will never come to fruition as made evident during their update at the BoT meeeting. I heard not too long ago that Mr. Beifus had not found an anchor store for the retail part of the project - and wouldn't begin construction until one was found. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2601 Registered: 4-2002 |
Josh: I think it will be safe to say that if has not started (and I mean really started, not the bs we have seen) then it will be included. | ||
| Eric DeVaris Citizen Username: Eric_devaris Post Number: 282 Registered: 2-2003  |
Josh, I am not supposed to comment on this one. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 103 Registered: 1-2006 |
The public has not shown strong support for the project. A select few elitists, with the ear of our own Bill, are slickly forcing this on us, something that hardly anyone wants to spend money on, which will provide a visual block on the North - South axis of Sloan Street. It will attract graffiti, dogs, opprobrium, and, well, be a counterpoint to the site was formerly Shop Rite. The public wants no more money spent on this metallic ego trip. Some who know better than the rest of us are not a majority, just a powerful and minor - minority. I have seen the original at Hunter, or is it an earlier copy of the original, compared it last week to a Moore at Columbia, and am of the opinion that we hoi poloi may be on to something when it comes to what is worthy modern art and and what is just metallic art. We have much better things to do with a quarter million of taxpayer monies. We could start with an outside audit of our budgets, provided by forensic accountants with past experience in the CID of the IRS. jd | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 22 Registered: 2-2006 |
It is very human to want things you can't afford. And it is little wonder that poor fiscal planning on the part of the town would have residents thoroughly confused and/or in the dark about how bad off the town really is. At present, we cannot afford this sculpture, no matter how many people have said they want it. (Once things turned around, I might very well be among those who would champion it.) Saying you want something and paying for it are two different things. Given that so little money has been raised to pay for what people have said they want, in the present budget crisis, the leadership should go with what people have actually been willing to pay for rather than what the same or other people have said they want. And clearly, there is not enough money in the treasury to buy this sculpture. It is the responsibility of leaders to make tough decisions. Funding the sculpture now so that we can go even further into debt is just not responsible. I say this as someone who loves art and especially public art. Moreover, the probable public backlash against future public art would be too great, too high a cost to pay, if this sculpture is paid for through greater debt. There is no reason why as many unfinished, ill-conceived and worse-executed projects as possible could not be included, at least to some degree, in a plan for the future. But what would be the point of any plan whatsoever if the town is so far into debt it has no real options anyway? If I am reading a statement of the town's debt service that Howard Levison posted elsewhere correctly, the debt service being requested for 2006 is over $3.2 million, up nearly a million or nearly a 50% increase from 2005, an outrageous amount, and likely to climb. Under current pressures, a realistic hope (for a viable, well-thought-through plan) could collapse into a cynical exercise in futility in which, from the outset, the town would have compromised its own ability to realize whatever dreams it labored to produce. My sense of South Orange is that it cannot afford additional demoralization but instead needs to focus on what it can actually succeed at. I really hope the BOT will protect the town from this kind of self-degradation by avoiding actions that exacerbate it. Trustees are more than bean counters and they need to act accordingly. | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 23 Registered: 2-2006 |
“We could start with an outside audit of our budgets, provided by forensic accountants with past experience in the CID of the IRS.” (jd) I asked in another thread about audits of the town’s budget. Can anyone explain them? What does “CID” stand for? (I have my fears but would like to know.) What would it take to hire “forensic accountants with past experience in the CID of the IRS”? How much would it cost, roughly? | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 589 Registered: 4-2005  |
Eric, I think we're gonna need to look at this whole conflict of interest thing. The fact that you cannot debate and/or vote on matters is one thing (and I would agree) - but not being able to relay "facts" to your constituents (and/or relaying the sentiments of the board) is outrageous. I'm just gonna go investigate  | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 535 Registered: 5-2004  |
Eric, First let me say that I think you are a breath of professional fresh air on our BOT. Thank you for your efforts for the taxpayers. However, I have lived in S. Orange for almost 9 years and the first I ever heard of the Tony Smith Sculpture was several months ago when the heated back and forth began on this message board. I realize it is practically a lost cause and I therefore won't waste a lot of energy opposing it further. But, I completely dispute that
If that were the case, I, as a S.Orange taxpaying member of the "public" surely would have heard about it before last fall. And if "the public has been amply informed", why is it that NONE of my S.Orange friends neighbors knew about it before I told them or before they read it here on MOL? Is this a S.Orange "public" you are referring to? And last, you claim "the public" supports this. What evidence do you have to support that assertion? Has this been on a ballot that I missed? If so, then I will not say one word further. If not, then I think it is less than forthcoming to say the least and that it certainly SHOULD be on a ballot! If you and the BOT confidently believe that the public supports this, put an end to the debate and put it on a ballot. If the taxpayers vote yes, I (and probably most others who have voiced displeasure with this being a priority project) will accept the result. Oh, and btw, if the Sculpture has been planned for 8 years, answer me this: Why on earth was a gazebo and fountain installed in the well-planned spot during that 8 yr period? | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 418 Registered: 6-2005 |
Ok, so the BOT's are being held to a strict contractual timeline by the Tony Smith estate, which dictacted their vote tonight to go ahead with funding the fabrication. Funny that the village can be held to timelines, but developers the village contracts with cannot. (The New Market is now a "target" date. What a sham!) The BOT's has "faith" that the group behind the sculpture will raise the additional money and take care of maintenance going forward. But, of course, we the taxpayers, if nothing else will have to pay to relocate the gazebo, or toss it. And we will have to put up with the obfuscation of the BOT members (Calabrese, Jennings, Taylor et al) who tried to do a dance around the $250,000 which they gave to SOPAC under some grant, but that SOPAC gave back for the sculpture. (Is that even legal, Mr. Matthews?) And that $250,000 could have lessened the SOPAC burden taxpayers will incur. But, of course, those who object to reckless spending will have to put up with the name calling by the board and have their artistic sensibilities questioned. Let's see exactly how much of a destination a sculpture in a crowded area, with another just like it New York, will turn out to be. I'm sure the BOT's have tons of market research to their to support their decision. I don't know, but I bet more people would be drawn to a nice downtown area with historic buildings and nice shops and restaurants, and parking. But there is far less BOT urgency about that. | ||
| Eric DeVaris Citizen Username: Eric_devaris Post Number: 283 Registered: 2-2003 |
Pdg, I have refrained to respond to many of the post in this thread regarding the Tony Smith sculpture, because I find many of them sarcastic (like yours), or insulting, or intentionally misleading. But since you are challenging my statements above, I will direct you – and anyone else - to two discussions on this board where you can find my answers to your questions. http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=3133&post=441148#POST4411 48 http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=3133&post=444654#POST4446 54 If, after you read the above links you have further questions that are not answered there, I will be glad to answer them here. The public support has indeed been very strong even since the above discussions. In addition to the fundraiser in 2002 attended by 250 people who paid $100 a pop, there have been scores of letters to the editor and articles in the local paper supporting the project; also dozens of residents came to a recent BoT meeting to express their support. There were two residents at tonight’s BoT meeting to express their opposition, both having had several posts already on MOL opposing the project. The only opposition I found for the project is on this board, mostly by the less than a dozen anonymous posters who grab any chance they can get, to drift threads to their favorite subject: badmouthing the Tony Smith sculpture through sarcasm, insults, and misinformation. The Tony Smith sculpture is an investment in the future of South Orange. Like all investments it has its risks and its potential benefits. Knowing the dedication, talent, expertise, and enthusiasm of the volunteers directing the project, and the record of their fund raising accomplishments so far, I am confident that the sculpture is going to benefit South Orange. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 536 Registered: 5-2004 |
I started a lengthy reply, but I really just give up. Nothing I say here is going to convince our trustees to formally provide solid factual information in the GasLight or to ask the public whether they want this art. I can only assume there must be real fear of the public response. And clearly I will never receive a reply to the letter I sent to Mr. Calabrese on August 14, 2005, making the same two requests. I hope the statue looks ok next to the unfinished firehouse. I hope lots of Tony Smith art lovers move to S.Orange and help pay for it and other investments being made on behalf of the perhaps too trusting residents of S. Orange. My favorite quote from your old referenced posts was:
| ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3410 Registered: 5-2001 |
PDG, You are absolutely right. The majority of the Trustees in this town think they know everything and have zero concern for what the public thinks. Some, like Mr. Devaris even make bold campaign promises, like "high ever-increasing taxes are holding us back. I share these concerns with the rest of the Village. I believe that better planning and management of our resources will improve our quality of life and will afford us a better command in the management of our taxes", but when it comes to actuaqlly DOING something to improvement the management of our tax dollars, they'd rather turn the other way. Shameful. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 420 Registered: 6-2005 |
So 250 people spend $100 at a fundraiser for the sculpture. That's $25,000. Not even sure if that was all profit. But anyway, didn't they say that an additional $160,000 was needed. That's $135,000 more that is required. How many Tony Smith fans are going to dip into their pockets to fork up that money, and how many times? And what about SOPAC which is going to start fund raising? Won't that be competing for public dollars? I'm curious as to how many BOT members forked over their own $100 at that fundraiser. And if the fund raising group fails to meet the amount, will they personally make it up. If not, then why the resisitance to putting it to a vote, or even a poll, of the residents as to how many want their tax dollars to go for this thing? I'd venture to say that a restored train station, with nice restrooms and seating would do more to traffic people to town than this sculpture. I am surprised that not even one dissenter was to be found among the BOT's. Sheep mentality. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 539 Registered: 5-2004 |
And still the question, how many of these supporters were S. Orange residents? IMO the S.Orange residents are the only public that matter regarding placement and public cost for this tribute to Mr. Smith. And yes, JayJay, the many numbers that have been tossed around in MOL responses are very confusing. It would be so refreshing if a summary of the current details, including projected costs, presumed value of gift, and fund raising efforts to date, were published in the Gas Light for all residents. Let's do away with the misinformation that some claim is intentionally being put forth on this message board and get some official facts out to the taxpayers. Heck, it'd even be nice to see one of our local artists make a sketch of how it is supposed to look in the proposed location so we all can see it. Mr. DeVaris, perhaps since you've already taken a lot of time and thought into preparing most of such summary for an MOL post, you could get the BOT to sign off on your numbers and historical summary and have the facts circulated to S. Orange residents? It could even act as an advertisement for further fund raising from unaware residents who would want to help fund this project! I mean that quite seriously and with no sarcasm. How could that be anything but a service to your constituents? MRosner, would you support this type of public disclosure? | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 421 Registered: 6-2005 |
I am sorry, but I really don't see this thing down by the train station. If this is a done deed, why not in a park or in front of the middle school? I think this is the installation by Hunter College.  | ||
| John Glick Citizen Username: Jgg Post Number: 14 Registered: 12-2005 |
Based on the BOT e-mail resolution passed last night so as to be in compliance with the Open Public Record Act, are we suppose to discuss issues and direct questions and concerns to the trustees on this message board or to their private e-mail addresses? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 105 Registered: 1-2006 |
A metallic umbrella, good for the homeless, too. And cheap. jd | ||
| Offenherzig Sprache Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 328 Registered: 6-2005  |
I cannot believe that an elected official could be handcuffed into where and how they respond to a public query. The limitations proposed for an elected official's ability to channel communications, and specifically, by use of a personal computer is absurd. If our form of governance dictates how, where and why these limitations are set forth and demands compliance, it is no longer our concern as to the limitations but to the governance at hand. Get rid of these fascist's bums! | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3412 Registered: 5-2001 |
So...in 4 years, $25,000 has been raised of the $160,000 "pledged" by the sculpture supporters. At that rate, it'll be another 20 years before there is a chance it'll be paid back. Then again, based on Calabrese's comment last night - if the supporters can't raise the money, the taxpayers will foot the bill - there is now ZERO incentive for the supporters to raise any money. Brilliant! | ||
| J. Crohn Supporter Username: Jcrohn Post Number: 2392 Registered: 3-2003 |
"Get rid of these fascist's bums!" But Offenherzig Sprache, if we get rid of their bums, how are they going to sit down? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2602 Registered: 4-2002 |
John Glick: This message board is not an official communication tool for the village or the BOT. You should use emails or the phones if you want to have any direct questions. Pdg: I have always felt the biggest complaint with this project is that the cost has been a moving target. When I was first told about the project, I was told it will wind up costing the village less than $50,000. Then it was almost $100,000. Then after the grant money was "switched" we were told $250,000 (with another $150,000 to be raised privately, which is now $160,000). So yes, I would support full public disclosure and it should be given before the first vote is done. I do not remember the statue being discussed more than 4 years ago by the BOT, but I would agree with Trustee DeVaris that it would appear to have a lot of public support (no survey or ballot was ever done). I think the real argument is if people think government (at any level) should invest in the arts. One can always say we can never afford to buy art, invest in museums, support public TV, etc, but some feel it is a worthwhile investment and something government should do. I will admit, I had a lot of hesitation about this project in the beginning but after several discussions with people I did find the project had a lot of merit and there were a lot of positives that could come of this project. Even some of the people I know who were initially against the project had discussions with some from the Tony Smith committee and some of them did change their views. Jayjay: You can keep insulting people, but at best, all it does is say you are not worth having a dialogue with. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2412 Registered: 5-2004  |
What I find interesting is that so many people believe that what is posted here on MOL is representative of the opinions of "most" South Orange residents. If that were the case, the makeup of our BOT would be vasstly different, Beifus and New Market would be done, THD would have reopened months ago, and Sean would have either found a place or been run out of town (depending on which side you come down on). Obviously the opinions of those on these board, while completely valid, are not necessarily representative of the "average" South Orangite. So simpl becuase we don't see a lot of support (or we see mixed support) here, does not mean that the general public does not support the sculpture. I personally am not in favor of this, since I don't find it to be a fiscally prudent thing to do right now. However I do not kid myself that if we were to take a fair poll of the residents, everyone else (or even a majority) would see it my way. | ||
| Offenherzig Sprache Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 330 Registered: 6-2005 |
It is far more representative than you or I know.
I think that says it all. The interesting question is how the $250,000 flip-flopped between SOPAC and the sculpture. What were the conditions of the grant and what communications occurred with respect to the initial utilization of the funds? What was the cause of the redirection. SOPAC as we know is woefully underfunded! | ||
| John Glick Citizen Username: Jgg Post Number: 15 Registered: 12-2005 |
I agree with Rastro in that while I don't view this sculpture project as being necessary to the Village, as is the case with other issues and projects that our discussed and complained about on this message board, maybe the majority of residents do support this project and view this as enhancing the Village in future years to come. | ||
| Offenherzig Sprache Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 332 Registered: 6-2005 |
It's only an assumption. Place it on a ballot. Sell it to the community, don't prejudge the public's sentiment. We are facing a 10% hike in municipal taxes... let's be real? | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 540 Registered: 5-2004 |
Point taken Rastro! But as it stands, the public has not been polled or directly well-informed. If the public is informed of all the details with full disclosure and explanation of the costs and expected sources of funding, including very specific details about the federal grant of $250,000 (and the specific legal purposes it was granted under) and they are then polled and a majority of S.Orange residents - only - vote YES, I for one will be satisfied. Accurate and complete information in an honest democracy yields the best possible outcome for all. MRosner - thank you! What is the next step? Will you spearhead this for us? Is there something you need us residents to do in order to get information about the sculpture published and directly disseminated to all S.Orange residents? I guess this would have to be voted on at a BOT meeting, right? Would letters or emails help? If so, should they be sent to you or to Bill C. or the entire BOT? Thanks for the guidance! | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2605 Registered: 4-2002 |
Pdg: I will get the information (cost, grant info, etc) to you. We can discuss your options at that point, | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 422 Registered: 6-2005 |
Mr Rosner- When I observe citizens raising legitimate questions about an undertaking which will cost taxpayers money (directly or indirectly)at a public meeting - something they have every right to do - and when I see the BOT's acting arrogantly, putting down these citizens, failing to answer forthrightly about the finances - it makes me quite angry. You yourself said you had questions about the cost of this project, yet you went along to approve the fabrication money presumably without having all the information you would have liked. What am I to think? The residents might very well favor this project or not. A small group who come before the BOT (pro or con) is not representative and neither is MOL. But have the courage to put together a list of projects for the town. And on that list include public funding of the sculpture, and let's see where residents net out. Include a survey with the next Gaslight. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3417 Registered: 5-2001 |
jayjay, While I don't always agree with Mark, I don't think you should "shoot the messenger". Mark does generously offer his time here & does respond to questions (even if we don't always like the answer), unlike the majority of the BOT that has no interest in listening to the residents, including us here on MOL. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2606 Registered: 4-2002 |
jayjay: I was eventually given (as was the full BOT) the full cost of the project (with details). I did not think I put anyone down or did anything arrogant. I answered the question and said the cost when asked. I also had a long discussion with two persons - one of whom was against the project and one person from the Tony Smith committee. I was convinced there were a lot of positives to the project and saw the potential benefit to the village. It seems like you object to the location more than the cost based on your post of 9:20 am today. If you are against the town putting up the money, what difference does it make where it gets placed. A committee picked the location after considering several places. Do you think we should have ignored those volunteers? Wouldn't they find us arrogant to ignore their suggestion? As Eric pointed out the statue has been discussed quite a bit for quite some time (although I do not remember 8 years - more like less than four). Presentations were made to the BOT twice regarding the project. It has been on the agenda more than once. I do not think anyone spoke against it till last night (other than on MOL). I will agree the information came in bits and pieces. There should have been full disclosure up front. If we are going to do surveys, would you always accept the results - even when the typical response is less than 10%? | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3418 Registered: 5-2001 |
Mark - You did not. Mr Taylor, Mr. Calabrese, Mr. Devaris and Ms. Jennings DID. The full video is now available at: http://192.216.20.14/BoardOfTrustees/bot02272006.wmv | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 424 Registered: 6-2005 |
I thought I might mention that I actually did go to the fundraiser and gave $100 to the event to initially raise money for this sculpture. I did it because a friend asked me to. I will also tell you that I don't recall ever being told what the cost of this would be and what the grand plan was. The fundraiser was at a time when many felt they wanted to do something for Lenny Pierro who had given a lot of himself to the artisitic endeavors of the town. I think it was sort of a personal project of his to get this off the ground, and I, like others was willing to help his efforts, because I trusted the person who asked me. Perhaps I was more generous then, or I have become more synical now. In any event, I don't know how many of me there are out there, but I ask more questions now, and have lost a lot of faith in our BOT's to ask the questions for us. This are hard fiscal times. Taxes are getting way beyond people's ability to afford them. I see much of the town in desperate need of repair. I like the arts and have always been a supporter of them. But no longer does that mean for me, blindly supporting everything that comes along. I would have rather given my donation to help fix up the skatehouse in the park, which doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar. | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 76 Registered: 10-2005 |
On the topic of taxes and development, I think the BOT needs to realize that they need to act quickly, or the chances of South Orange turning a corner are going to evaporate for another decade. This does not mean act rashly (signing onto irresponsible plans, etc.), but with solid analysis and real energy. In another couple of years we, along with others in the region, could find ourselves in a the trough of a cycle and we'll want to be well-prepared if that day does come. There's still time, if the BOT can lead us. | ||
| Offenherzig Sprache Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 333 Registered: 6-2005 |
I'll saddle up to do just that..... Hi-Ho, Camel Jockey away....  | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 24 Registered: 2-2006 |
The town owes a great deal of thanks to the gentleman who asked the BOT last night to account for the purchase of the Tony Smith sculpture. His requests were justified, yet he was met with resistance, raised voices (from Trustee Taylor among others), any number of red herrings (from Trustees DeVaris & Jennings, if not others) and general incoherence in response to his request. The non-explanation and obvious lack of forethought for the sculpture’s funding would be a bad joke if it weren’t for the probability that several trustees find it acceptable or pretend to find it acceptable. The explanation provided, incoherent as it was, of funding for the sculpture claimed that $80,000 of federal monies was applied to SOPAC. They (the town administration) did this because they would have lost it, apparently, if they had not applied it to something “in the area of SOPAC” by a certain deadline. (Someone should request a copy of the grant application that sought this money and the grantor’s response; the original intent of the town, as well as the conditions the feds imposed on the town to accept the money would be revealed in them.) If the original intent of the town was to get this money for something merely “in the area of SOPAC ”, while it claimed later that the money was for the sculpture, its revision is a convenient afterthought. On the other hand, if they intended, from the outset, that this money be applied to the sculpture and not to SOPAC, it appears that, due to an inability to plan and execute projects in a timely fashion, they almost lost the money because they could not meet federally imposed deadlines but were nevertheless permitted to apply it to SOPAC instead of the sculpture. (Whether they have complied with other criteria required to accept this and other federal monies is, on the basis of last night’s performance, something that should be thoroughly investigated.) For some inexplicable reason, after applying the $80,000 of federal monies to SOPAC, it seems they then took capital funds that had been designated for SOPAC and applied them towards the purchase of the sculpture. The amount of SOPAC capital funds diverted to acquire the sculpture is unclear. It may be either $250,000 or, perhaps, $170,000 ($250,000 minus $80,000, although again, don’t ask why). But this money does appear to be obtained from tax revenues. So the widely given explanation that a “grant” purchased the sculpture appears to be an intentional deception. Another agent in this fiasco, besides the federal government, that may be holding the town to stricter standards of accountability than it is holding itself, is the attorney representing the Tony Smith estate (could South Orange retain him/her, one wonders, for its contract work?). By some mysterious circumstance, South Orange again willingly embraced a disadvantaged position in agreeing to meet the demands of the Smith estate, while having no reciprocal demands of its own. It allowed an agent outside the town to set deadlines for the town’s spending, while it set no deadlines of its own for funding the sculpture through supplemental sources before committing an indeterminate and significant amount of tax payer money to it. As for the rest of any costs of the sculpture, we witnessed a host of proclamations, dubious at best, by our leaders last night. Most notably, the private group which thus far has raised only a very small fraction of the cost to purchase the sculpture, is “a very reliable group,” we were told. Yet on the basis of this unjustified trust, the town provided carte blanche approval of the sculpture, and neglected to require that producing, as opposed to talking about, the rest of the money be a condition for the trustees authorizing an expenditure of tax revenues on the sculpture. Even more revealing was the complacency and sense of entitlement they exhibited as they pretended to but failed to explain themselves. Without apology, our leaders told us that if the private “fund-raising” group that has so far failed to produce needed funds continues to fail to produce them, the town’s tax payers will of course guarantee the purchase cost by funding the sculpture almost entirely. (Is there really no limit to the number of gaping money pits in the town?) As for Trustee DeVaris’ and Jennings’ unfortunate rebukes to the man who repeatedly asked last night for an explanation of the sculpture’s funding, and their charge that anyone who would ask for one and who would not settle for the non-explanation he was given, hates art, one can only hope they don’t actually believe such diversionary and muddle-headed claims. Anyone who loves art and who wants public art in South Orange should take measures to protect it from the fiscal mismanagement of the town. In this climate of misbegotten initiatives gone bad, and the inevitable scrambling for cover that will increase as the budget deficit grows, the fiscal crisis intensifies and the town’s indebtedness continues to skyrocket, those responsible will try to divert responsibility from themselves onto anything and anyone they can. Lovers of art in South Orange should take care to ensure that the widely respected goal of public art is neither lost nor compromised by illicit means of financing it. Otherwise art itself may be scapegoated while those responsible slip out of town unnoticed once the rows they have started are well under way. Sorry, Eric, even da Vinci wouldn’t justify it. And this little cubist you want to exhibit in a surround of pre-modern architecture ain’t him. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 548 Registered: 5-2004 |
SORising - that was incredible.  (But now I'm too exhausted to post...) | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4143 Registered: 1-2004  |
I just watched about an hour of the BOT meeting. What a bunch of clowns. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 549 Registered: 5-2004 |
JTA - are the videos of BOT meetings a good cure for your insomnia?  (And I thought I was up too late!) | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3424 Registered: 5-2001 |
Just saw this article online: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060301/ap_on_fe_st/gummed_up_art A 12-year-old visitor to the Detroit Institute of Arts stuck a wad of gum to a $1.5 million painting, leaving a stain the size of a quarter, officials say. We better start outlawing chewing gum in South Orange, or someone might desecrate our $500,000 piece of art.  |
