| Author | Message | |||
     MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4041 Registered: 5-2001  |
SO1969 - right on, as usual! JTA - FYI, it is Calabrese & DeVaris that are members of the Sculpture Committee. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4941 Registered: 1-2004  |
Oooops. My apologies to Art Taylor. Why do these two stay in the room when the sculpture is discussed? Aren't they supposed to leave? | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4942 Registered: 1-2004 |
Soda- So are you saying because the ''snickering' wasn't loud enough to be picked up by by the microphones' it makes it right? Maybe you have an answer for why it seems the only people who have spoken at a BOT meeting in favor of our taxes (to the tune of over one quarter MILLION dollars are paying for a piece of art, are members of the sculpture committee or one of the other organizations connected with this committee? | |||
| Agrackle Citizen Username: Agrackle Post Number: 47 Registered: 2-2004 |
The "No Taxes for Tau" campaign would be infinitely more effective if people would stop commenting on the art itself. What the BoT plans to put in the footprint of the gazebo and fountain is irrelevant to the real, underlying issue at hand. By adding subjective comments about the sculpture itself only provides the pro Tau contingent with ammunition to discredit all of the reasoned, rational and fiscally responsible arguments against public funding for this project. Mr. Goldberg and others are working awfully hard to inform citizens of our fine town about the BoT's mismanagement of our tax dollars for this project, let's help them out by objectively focusing on the facts of the issue. This really isn't about art at all, it's about fiscal responsibility, transparency and good government. | |||
| susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1555 Registered: 3-2002 |
Agrackle, Agreed! | |||
| vermontgolfer Supporter Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 429 Registered: 12-2002 |
Agrackle, You make a good point and I think I agree, however, I believe it's equally important to make everyone aware of what's to become of the location and what we will be looking at for many years. As I know, I've posted and believe others have as well, is that this sculpture, no matter if you like it or not, is totally misplaced where it's intended home is. We have an historical firehouse, that hopefully soon will be done and a while not an historical train station, at least one that is archectually fitting with the firehouse. This sculpture will be totally out of place and in my opinion, though probably not worth much, sitting between these two mentioned facilities. | |||
| SO1969 Citizen Username: Bklyn1969 Post Number: 296 Registered: 7-2004 |
I agree with agrackle and vermontgolfer. In the battlefield of debate, agrackle's point takes precedence: we must lead with the fact that this is an inappropriate expenditure for a municipality of our size and was approved without adequate notification to and input from the public and therefore should be revisited. At same time, a photo speaks a 1000 words. MHD's flyers using Bailey's photoshop image make what we're talking about concrete in the eyes of villagers. If you look at Pierro foundation flyer (see MHD posts) AND the photos of the scale model - those were posted a while ago(that Eric DeVaris ludicrously described as "better" than a professional 2-dimensional rendering), both make efforts to NOT depict a clear picture what we'll actually be looking at. Yet the sculpture supporters - in their flyer and at the BOT meeting - criticize the photoshop image as being out of scale, when in fact there are real people shown in that image that provide an ACCURATE and realistic image of the scale of the sculpture. I'll say it for the umpteenth time, if the sculpture folks - and Bill Calabrese, Mark Rosner (made a comment to this effect in newspaper), other BOT members, etc. really believed a large portion of South Orange wants to spend $250K (I'll use their number) of taxpayer money on this project, they'd: (1) Communicate to Voters that is what they propose to do (in Gaslight and on Village Web site)- sources and uses budget (2) Provide a professional, realistic drawing or computer generated image(showing surrounding buildings as they are, not as monochromatic blocks without architectural detail and with a grey/black asphalt street, not a white one) The truth is they don't. All they care about is that they got the BOT to spend our money on their pet project. Eric DeVaris has at least conceded this much. He's an open elitist on the topic - he was elected to lead and he knows this is the best way to spend our money. Boy, I wish the elitists in this town would open their checkbooks for this project rather than reaching into my wallet. They don't seem to realize that unless we raise taxes, we now have less money to spend on other priorities - priorities that a truly large cross section of the Village could enjoy and would be in keeping with the traditional and appropriate functions of a municipal government: Streets Sidewalks Playgrounds - does any playground in South Orange look like a first rate playground? None that I've seen are anywhere as nice as the one in Maplecrest Park in MWood or even as nice as the standard issue NYC park playgrounds Library Townhall The list could go on... BOT members are now saying some of these other matters will be addressed with other funds - they don't mention what they're talking about is BORROWING MORE MONEY. IT'S ABOUT PRIORITIES FOR USING PUBLIC DOLLARS AND A SENSITIVITY TO THE TAX BURDEN OF ALL RESIDENTS. Tau should be 100% privately funded. And, to vermontgolfers point, the general public should know the focal point of their village is being transformed. | |||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4042 Registered: 5-2001 |
Exactly, SO1969! Why won't the sculpture committee agree to raise all or even a solid majority of the funds? They have until next September according to the "gift" letter. If THEY want this so badly, THEY should pay for it. However, considering they are using their funds for matching T-shirts for everyone who attends a BOT Meeting, it is obvious that they have no sense of fiscal priority or responsibility. (For those of you not in the audience they were carrying stacks of t-shirts at the Meeting and handing them out to everyone) | |||
| SoOrLady Citizen Username: Soorlady Post Number: 3301 Registered: 9-2003 |
MHD - that's just a good PR move. They already had the shirts (saw them a Cheryl's a while back)... and let's face it.. "everyone" amounts to about 15 people - if that? Their literature really misses the point. While yes, we are upset at the direction the downtown redevelopment has taken and unhappy with the Board, our main concern is, and always has been, the misdirected and misleading informaiton the Board gave us regarding funding. | |||
| Soda Supporter Username: Soda Post Number: 3906 Registered: 5-2001  |
Just two points, and then I'm outta here: A)The name of this thread is "Flood's Hill -- graffitti or art??", and not one of you has so much as referenced the art in question since you went off on another tear about Tau. Please go find another thread to hijack. and 2)I guess Pizzaz still thinks he's running for something. Swell rhetoric, there, Pizzaz, but I'd prefer Dan Quayle...
-s. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4956 Registered: 1-2004 |
Since this thread is supposed to be about the 'art' on Flood's Hill I thought I'd share something I just heard. First, when I drove past the hill this afternoon it looked as if the 'art' had been redone. But, now several hours later someone called me to tell me (considering I was accused for trashing it last week) that it will be removed by the town tonight or tomorrow. From what I was told the town and police department received MANY complaints about it and it was supposed to have been removed a few days ago. | |||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 117 Registered: 11-2005 |
From today's Star Ledger.. sure glad that the reporter didn't real MOL and include some of the idiotic comments..
| |||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 474 Registered: 1-2006 |
The elite are better able to understand why the opinions of the rest of us don't count, to make deals, to confiscate public lands so they can publish political opinions, and get away with it. Now, if only they would confiscate Sayidistan and Lake Beifus, and invert their ownership of the anti-shoprite site. Maybe we should become elite. dj | |||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 309 Registered: 5-2005 |
JTA, I called the town yesterday and they told me that there were NO plans to immediately remove the "art". They said that that there will be a meeting at the Baird next Tuesday and it would be discusssed, but she did say that unless people turn up there and voice their concerns etc, it will seem as though there is no problem. I asked if many people had called and was told "I haven't had the calls, maybe they have called the Baird or the police" I was also told that the only place to raise this issue is at the Baird meeting as the trustees have nothing to do with this..... So, if anyone out there wants this "gone", you will need to go to the meeting and let them know how you feel. | |||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 475 Registered: 1-2006 |
I will be in San Diego, but will channel my thoughts to the plants, which are more likely to listen to the public than committed artistes. jd | |||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 121 Registered: 11-2005  |
More "mis" information from Auntie... | |||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 641 Registered: 6-2005 |
This reinforces the need for a real discussion as to whether municipalities should be in the business of funding art, and who should make the decisions as to which art to fund. I'll post here what I posted under the thread "government funding public art", along with some editorial comments: 1. Should funding public art by a municipality be done at all? (We should see some facts as to how many municipalities do this.) 2. What priority should be given to funding public art by the municipality, and what factors should be considered in the decision to fund or not to fund? 3. What data should be required to support the benefits to be derived from the funding? 4. If funding is to be given by the municipality, what level of spending is appropriate? 5. Should some level of funding be included annually, or on a project basis? {Right now, it appears the BOT does both...as I understand it, it allocates funds annually to the Rec Dept which includes the Gallery, PLUS gives money to special projects like the Tony Smith sculpture. Is there a breakout of money allocated specfically to the arts , i.e. salaries, gallery operations, admin expenses, marketing expenses? How much do we actually give to the arts now?) 6. Who should decide how any arts funds are to be allocated? Should there be a model similar to the Federal model of funding a council (NEA), or should there be a model similar to the European model of Minister of Culture who decides, or should the BOT's decide? {Note: Our BOT currently says its not their decision. But in fact, they do decide by allocating our tax dollars. Is Andy Brady or Judy W. our Minister of Culture? Who says? Is the Tony Smith Committee, a private committee, our self-appointed art council?) 7. What types of projects should be considered for funding? Events, buildings, outdoor installations, educational programs, etc. | |||
| Crazy_quilter Citizen Username: Crazy_quilter Post Number: 289 Registered: 2-2005 |
right on, jayjay! if we decide to spend money on art, then who gets to pick which art we buy? good questions! | |||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 9399 Registered: 4-1997  |
Is it art? is always a fun debate topic. Maybe put the arts funds in a blind trust? ;-) I think the work in the park is interesting. I noticed a distinct change in how I felt about it before walking up to it and then after walking away from it. In a way its message is about looking at details, like seeing how war affects families rather than simply seeing it as news headlines or soundbites. Not sure how this type of art could be seen without public funding. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4996 Registered: 1-2004 |
Hmmmm We'll see.... But about this meeting, how did you learn about it? Will something be in today's paper? I just called the Baird Center and they know nothing about a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday. | |||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4052 Registered: 5-2001 |
According to the Village Calendar, there is a "Recreation Advisory Board" next Tuesday, which I think is the relevant meeting: http://www.southorange.org/Calendar/ | |||
| Nancy - LibraryLady Supporter Username: Librarylady Post Number: 3434 Registered: 5-2001  |
The listing says to contact the Clerk's office for information on the Advisory Board meeting. Give Marge Smith a call, JTA. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4997 Registered: 1-2004 |
Update After making some phone calls I've been able to learn the meeting SOparents posted is taking place on Tuesday is the regularly scheduled Recreation Advisory Board Meeting. It's not a 'special' meeting set up to discuss the 'art' on Floods Hill. It's not even clear if this will be on it's agenda. From what I understand, those wanting to discuss this at last Monday's BOT meeting were advised to speak at this upcoming meeting. | |||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 315 Registered: 5-2005 |
I certainly hope it will be discussed JTA. I didn't think it was a special meeting scheduled for this topic, but from what was said at Mondays BOT meeting, and the suggestion that the lady speaking should attend and discuss her feelings there, and by being told yesterday afternoon that it would be discussed "At the meeting next Tuesday at the Baird Centre" it would be pretty bad if it wasn't brought up. | |||
| Soda Supporter Username: Soda Post Number: 3939 Registered: 5-2001 |
The public is always welcome at these meetings, and citizen input is also encouraged. Anybody who has an opinion about Flood's Hill should attend. -s. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4998 Registered: 1-2004 |
SOparent I'm with you. Do you plan to go? I sure do! Much to the dismay of my family who thinks I say too much on MOL as it is. I am VERY shocked to learn who some of the members are. I plan to make some phone calls to them beforehand. Thanks SODA! But, can we be asked to leave if the board doeans't like what we have to say? If members of the Advisory Board are also involved with the PG, can we request they not be involved in the discussion? I plan to speak with my sister to see if she thinks parents of the players on my nephews' team would be willing to go Tuesday night. I'd ask them myself, but I'm not going to be able to make their game Saturday. More important, will the Rec Dept get the word out to those who use the hill for their games? I can just see the PG turning this into another 'Well, the public had the chance to speak their concerns at the meeting we had; but nobody did...' bologna again. | |||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 122 Registered: 11-2005 |
JTA..who were you shocked to learn is a member? Pizzaz?? Who else?? | |||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 595 Registered: 1-2004  |
Extending the logic of the Recreation Committee's responsiblities for placement of art on public spaces, does anyone know if they approved the proposed location of Tau? | |||
| John Quincy Adams Citizen Username: Randolph_agarn Post Number: 27 Registered: 3-2006  |
Mr. FlyingSpaghettiMonst this is two threads today that you have attacked Pizzaz. You do really seem to have some kind of vendetta against him. Where the two of you rivals in high school? I have this feeling that you are in some way associated with the town or his political rivals. It seems fair to say that you will not divulge this information freely on this board. But that is my two cents. When I was a child parks were fun. There were no political games attached to them. Times surely have changed. | |||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 124 Registered: 11-2005 |
I am sorry Mr Adams. In the past Pizaaz has not only posted about being on the Rec Committee, he has asked for imput from fellow MOLers. How is naming him as a Rec Advisor attacking him? Maybe by reminding people that he is on the committee?? | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5001 Registered: 1-2004 |
Nice try Fly, but no. I already read somewhere he was a member. I do know for a fact some of the members do read MOL and even post here. I also know at least three of them know me in real life. And like I said, I am shocked to learn they had a part in this 'art' on Floods Hill being approved. If I am understanding what I was told in one of my phone conversations today is correctly. | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5002 Registered: 1-2004 |
JQA I think it's more like fly has something against me. We think he's one of my jilted ex's. | |||
| talk-it-up Citizen Username: Talkitup Post Number: 216 Registered: 3-2004 |
I do not understand why residents should be expected to attend a meeting on a public art display at the Advisory Committee for Recreation. This is not an announced meeting for this purpose. I also think it is not they that are accountable to the residents. It is the trustees that have the ultimate responsibility for the spending of funds and approving of policy. Art expressing political opinion goes beyond Art. This is basically a statement of what the Village of South Orange supports and I do not even understand it and I do not support someone controlling my opinion whatever it may be! This piece of "art" could just as well open the door for the presentation of other art that one might not agree with or that one thinks should represent the village. What if it was a cross out of garbage cans or the Star of David out of beer bottles or a swastika out of garden gnomes - whatever !!!!! Anyone could propose anything in the name of art. How could you say yes to one and not to another - everyone claims censorship. Is it censorship when you don't expect to see billboards of sexual content on public display? Is it censorship when you don't expect to see graffitti on all the walls in town? Is it censorship when you don't expect to see xxx rated movies at SOPAC? Is it censorship when the public library doesnt have certain reading or viewing material? Is it censorship when we govern what cannot be displayed for view by minors? BUT it is censorship when the public school is not allow to play certain music oh no they said it wasnt? Why? Perfectly acceptable but not.. How about taking the money to place guns on the hill to place art and music back full force in the schools? I think that is a very worth while battle. Did everyone fight as hard for that? Art and music is what makes this area special. And why is it that one would go to an Advisory Board for Recreation????????why would they even govern art????? EVERYONE NOW - OFF TO VILLAGE HALL THE HECK WITH THE ADVISORY BOARD. HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN YOU GET AT THE NEXT BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING? IT ALL HAS TO STOP NOW AND BE PLACED BACK IN PERSPECTIVE! THE Board of Trustees needs to live up to its role. They set policy and at this point we have more art around town than buildings going up. We have a fixed amount of money that requires prioritization. Beifus is showing activity. I do not see anything happening at the Shoprite Site. (which one does the Village control?) But How much effort is being placed on 'undoing' the gazebo which is built and is perfectly fine just the way it is. Oh, no we must take this down to place a pice of "art?" I guess the gazabo doesn't qualify as art. Is a structure deconstructed just because someone dictates to the Village that it MUST go there or not at all? then I say, "Not at all". There are plenty of other places to locate it. Let the money be raised and THEN place it. It takes long enough to start and finish a project around here, leave well enough alone and save the dollars. Art is great art is good. Music is great music is good. But, everything within (financial) reason and expectation. OK so How many to Village Hall??? When is the next meeting? Everyone needs to bring five people with them ????? who's for it??? Everyone needs to get off of this computer and down there??? Enough is enough? All those in favor of - - Gazabo stays Tau goes in an available location along South Orange Avenue - All those that don't want weapons on the hill - All those that want to keep green grass in the parks - All those that work in the city and come home and want to leave all that daily pain behind. All those people that see a worse whole in the ground and don't need be enlightened. Commuters leave South Orange and feel the pain and depression, they come back to South Orange for the peace, and the grass, and the kids, and the space, and really sometimes not to think too hard. I don't feel a need to see the gun on the hill. - All those that think a gun might hurt the parents that presently have someone in the armed forces or that think this gun on the hill might hurt a Vet who has seen to much or think that this gun will cause pain to a parent that lost a child to street violence - All those that think the hill is not the place for what should be "a personal political statement" to be represented by the Village -For all those that think a park is a park and maybe some people are even avoiding the park all together because of this gun - For all those that think every bit of space is South Orange does not require something covering it WHEN O WHEN ARE WE ALL GOING TO GO DOWN THERE????? SOMEONE has to care........ | |||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5011 Registered: 1-2004 |
Thanks talk it up! Very well said! Hope to see you at the Rec Department Tuesday. I think there is a group of people making sure the parents of the children playing games on the field this weekend are aware of this meeting. Otherwise we're just going to have a situation where people like you, sores, me and all the other people I've heard saying the hill isn't the place for something like this told by the PG members: 'Well the public had the chance to bring their concerns to us at the public discussion we had but, nobody came. Therefore there is no problem and we have the support of the majority of the residents. We know this because ***We*** talked to them all...' bull happening again! There are actually some pretty decent people on RAB board. I discovered I know three of them. I'm pretty sure two of them are level headed enough to realize a mistake was made. I'm also pretty sure both read MOL. I am pretty confident they will be supportive and helpful in resolving the situation. The third person I know I am pretty sure is now posting on mol under a different name. She use to use her real name, not sure why she changed. From what I've seen her posting on MOL it isn't likely she'd admit to being who I think she is and even less likely she'd be much help. What I don't understand is I thought the point of the PG was to showcase LOCAL artists! There was a really nice article about a young man who uses items around the house to create his artwork. What about showcasing him? | |||
| hariseldon Citizen Username: Hariseldon Post Number: 436 Registered: 5-2001  |
There are two committees concerned with approving the use of recreational facilities - specifically the "peace piece" we are talking about. One is populated by Trustees. The other is a advisory citizens group called the Recreation Advisory Committee. Our own hero John Pogany (AKA Pizzaz) is the chair of the latter, denials notwithstanding. | |||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2765 Registered: 4-2002 |
This is not the first time there has been artwork displayed on the hill. It certainly predates my time on the BOT, and I do not ever remember anyone complaining or objecting to using public space in the past (and I know that does not make it ok or not). So, it seems to me, that this time some people object because they do not like this artwork. From where I sit, I do not think it should be up to the BOT to decide what is acceptable art. That has been the policy decision. Maybe we shoud revisit that policy, but personally I think for the most part it has worked. There have been numerous exhibits (inside the baird center and outside) in the past and would hope we could continue to have work displayed by artists. I am guessing that the Rec. Advisory board did not make a specific decision on this project but probably more of a general one rather than one based on the artistic quality. As for some of the other points by talk-it-up, not sure how they are relevant to the flower gun. For instance, the BOE made a decision about the music for what they claim were legal reasons (not censorship) and something that has nothing to do with the BOT or this discussion. If grafittis is painted on property without permission, then it should be removed because it was done illegally (not because it is censorship and hope most can make that distinction). The BOT does not tell the library what books they can buy or have. SOPAC has it's own board. A big concern when SHU and the village announced they were going to be a "partner", was whether they would try and censor any of the productions or what movies could be showed. They have no say in the matter other than for their own productions. So to be clear, yes the BOT approved the policy making decision, but does not make decisions about what is art. So feel free to come to village hall and tell me you want to change the policy but please don't tell me your opinion of what is art. | |||
| Old and Gray Citizen Username: Pastmyprime Post Number: 355 Registered: 2-2005 |
What about the art incident on sloan street last year...was that okayed? | |||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2766 Registered: 4-2002 |
Old and Gray: I don't know but that was here and gone in a couple of hours. The gun is on the hill and is supposed to be here for over a month so a lot more people see it. I never are referred to as an incident before. | |||
| Spanish Inquisitor Citizen Username: Sinq Post Number: 65 Registered: 4-2004  |
It's just an outline of a gun. With all the outcry about it, you'd think there was real ammo in it. | |||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 127 Registered: 11-2005 |
http://www.bant-shirts.com/images/photos/flowerguns-280.jpg Peace T-shirt: Guns that shoot flowers Guns that shoot flowers. A design that clearly symbolizes the ideal of peace, and across all barriers of culture and language. Some pictures are worth a 1,000 words. This design is available on these American made sweat shop free t-shirts:  Maybe we should sell these on the hill! |
