Author |
Message |
   
Rastro
Citizen Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3205 Registered: 5-2004

| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 12:57 pm: |
|
Video (downloadable) from this week's meeting is up on the web site. http://www.southorange.org/videoviewer.asp |
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4105 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 2:09 pm: |
|
Yes...and to correct SO1969, Calabrese did say the "estate was donating" the sculpture. However, we all know, they are simply donating the "RIGHTS TO FABRICATE" a sculpture. |
   
SO1969
Citizen Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 314 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 2:39 pm: |
|
Thanks for the correction. It wasn't a new one: "state is paying, so state can tell us how Sloan Street should look." It was an old one: "estate is donating, so estate can tell us how Sloan Street should look."* Just as wrongheaded, but not new. The estate, as MHD notes, is donating right to fabricate. Calabrese and BOT have put the taxpayers on the hook for a minimum of $250,000, but that is open ended, as balance needs to come from private funding that has only partially been secured. *not a direct quote |
   
Soparents
Citizen Username: Soparents
Post Number: 387 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 2:47 pm: |
|
OK - I THINK I heard a trustee (Dr.Rosen??) say last night that it would be no more than 250K... I was surprised to hear that there was a "limit". Did I hear correctly? |
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4107 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 2:51 pm: |
|
SOP, Yes...Dr. Rosen stated last night that the Village would be spending no more than $250k. However, that is in direct contrast to Calabrese's comments from Feb 27: In response to questions raised by Mr. Goldberg, he was advised that the sculpture would cost $85,000 to fabricate and that the total estimated cost of the sculpture was $410,000 with $250,000 coming from the Village in grant money and the remainder from fundraising by the Tony Smith Committee which has pledged to cover any and all other costs including future maintenance costs. Mr. Goldberg asked if the Village taxpayers would have to pay the balance of the cost for this sculpture in the event the Committee did not raise the funds. Village President Calabrese replied in the affirmative. http://www.southorange.org/minutes/2006/02-27-06RM.pdf |
   
SO1969
Citizen Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 315 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:20 pm: |
|
I was not watching when Dr. Rosen made those remarks...it will be interesting to see that enforced: Sequence of past and future events as I understand them... Township has already executed contract for landscape design (~$71K); assume provider delivers and is paid Township has already executed contract for fabrication and delivery sculpture (~$110K); provider delivers and is paid It becomes clear that foundation will not meet its fundraising goal of $160K, but costs to implement site work exceed the amount of private money raised and the remaining public monies. Township has $181K sunk into the project, does it proceed or not? My bet is on the Township filling the gap. Dr. Rosen's position would be much more credible if the Township had waited to execute the contracts until the private monies were in hand. Calabrese, in this instance, was being more honest and direct.
|
   
Soparents
Citizen Username: Soparents
Post Number: 388 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:24 pm: |
|
MHD... Yes, that is what made me sit up and pay attention last night. I thought he said max 250K, but I thought I remember previous information contrary to that..... What is concerning is that he also said last night that money was available for all needed repairs etc in town. He is chair of the finance committee...... Either he knows something we don't, we know something he doesn't, or no-one knows anything.
 |
   
joel dranove
Citizen Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 501 Registered: 1-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Rosen played a three card monte trick on the Rutgers alumni, explaining our tau is one of three originals. If is not. It is one of three in this newest series of copies. If it is here to stay, then put it in the park in front of 76 SO Avenue. There the metallic "art" will stand out, not overwhelm the site, and be seen by any and all who care to see it. jd |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9558 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:28 pm: |
|
Hold on. Joel, if you're going to speak about the SID you have to let me know so I can ask Eric to leave the Internet. |
   
SO1969
Citizen Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 316 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:45 pm: |
|
Joel raises a good point. I think one of the pro Tau people said that 76 South Orange Avenue was one of the original potential locations selected by the committe of the elite. The questions seem to be: Was that derailed because we at one time hoped CDBG funds would pay for it and that was an ineligible location? Or because it wasn't to the Estate's liking? Or it wasn't to certain BOT members' liking (Calabrese in particular)? As wrong as this project is, if the Tauistas want to take the wind out of the opposition's sails, then the smartest thing they could do is move it to the 76 S. Orange Street location. 1. Makes more sense aesthetically 2. Doesn't involve destruction of recent improvements 3. Is likely a cheaper location to prepare for the installation (altho sunk costs in design might make that a wash)
|
   
Spitz
Supporter Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1780 Registered: 3-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 8:32 pm: |
|
MHD - Could you please show the clip of the gentleman who spoke towards the end. He was teriffic. When he pulled out his cellphone and called Sterling to inquire about a condo at "The Avenue" - priceless. |
   
Lizziecat
Citizen Username: Lizziecat
Post Number: 1235 Registered: 5-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 11:58 pm: |
|
All three were terrific--Joel Dranov, Michael Goldberg and the third gentleman at the end, whose name I didn't catch. People are angry, and these people asked the right questions last night. I was gratified to hear the last man say that he was going to do everything in his power to stop Tau. Thank you, all of you. You were articulate, you had your facts marshaled and you let it be known that you are angry while maintaining a polite demeanor--something that I don't think I could have done. I sense a battle coming on.
|
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4110 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 8:25 am: |
|
The last gentleman who spoke was Jerry Andrews. I will try to put up a clip of him speaking later today. (for the record, I had no idea who he was or that he was going to speak, prior to him getting up to the podium) |
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4111 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 10:47 am: |
|
By request: (due to a 10 minute limit per file, I have split Mr. Andrews comments into 2 parts) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTOs_NtyGD4 (part 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af2Nh8m8RFg (part 2) |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9574 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:06 am: |
|
Alan Rosen replying to the great Jerry Andrews' comment regarding the Tau being a replica: "When a lithograph is issued these days, and there are 100 copies, are they all replicas, or are they all originals?"
 |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9575 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:08 am: |
|
Definition of original: preceding all others in time or being as first made or performed p.s. There are many more than 3 Taus. Just slightly different sizes. |
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4112 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:15 am: |
|
I actually enjoyed Calabrese telling Mr. Andrews he was "in left field". This coming from a guy who STILL has the NERVE to try to claim this sculpture isn't costing us anything. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9576 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:17 am: |
|
In fairness to Eric, he has answered the Tau question before and in greater detail than anyone else on the BoT. This is from sometime in August 2005 and before we and Eric knew John Gross was likely lying or simply not stating the whole truth about the funding. I am reprinting it here:
Quote:I will try as best I can - albeit in a long treatise – to share with the MOL readers the little knowledge I have, and give my two cents on the subject. Is this project a priority for our town? Our town does not have a list of priorities. Priorities today are established ad hoc by the BoT, led by the Village President. There is no Strategic Plan for the future of South Orange that would establish our priorities. A plan that receives public input from its inception. A plan that coordinates the budget with our land use needs, our capital improvements needs, our infrastructure, our redevelopment, and with the real estate trends of the region. A plan that addresses our demographics, the business needs, historic preservation, the environment. A flexible plan that, as a living document, would be regularly updated to adjust to changes and to public input. We do not have priorities because we do not have a Strategic Plan. Instead we have a Land Use Master Plan (updated every 6 years as required by law), an Open Space and Recreation Master Plan, a Church Street Redevelopment Plan, a Central Business District redevelopment Plan, a Parking Study, and a Traffic Study. Few of these plans have received public input, and they are all acting independently without coordination, and with little reference to our budget. If we had a Strategic Plan it would have designated a space downtown for public art, and we wouldn’t have to remove the gazebo to accommodate art. If we had a Strategic Plan we would have an appropriation in our budget for public art. Many municipalities in the US set aside for public art 1% to 3% of the budget of certain municipal construction projects. Corporations appropriate 3% to 5% of a construction project’s budget to art. The priority of the hour, as we all know, is SOPAC. The Tony Smith Sculpture Project is a priority only to the extend that it is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to acquire the sculpture of a world-renowned artist – who happens to be from South Orange, whose work is coveted and purchased by major museums and cities. What’s the story behind it? In 1998, a small group of local artists found it strange that although Tony Smith and his work are admired the world over, South Orange didn’t honor its native artist in any way. They began a campaign to acquire one of the works of the artist and have it installed in a public space in South Orange. In 2002 the Lennie Pierro Memorial Arts Foundation began the “Tony Smith Sculpture Project” with the goal to fabricate and install in downtown South Orange a permanent outdoor sculpture created by its native son Tony Smith. The Foundation’s work with the Tony Smith Estate resulted in a substantial and generous gift to the Village of South Orange: the Estate offered South Orange the rights to fabricate the museum-quality sculpture “Tau”, estimated in value at $500,000-$600,000. Its size: 14 ft. wide x 21 ft. long x 12 ft. high. It is the artist’s wish that his works be reproduced in limited editions of three. This is common for sculptors who work with large metallic pieces. They build their models and they have a foundry or sheet-metal workers who fabricate them in limited editions. Auguste Rodin, as well as many other sculptors did so. To clarify: “Tau” is neither a replica nor a statue. It is an original Smith sculpture like the ones in major cities and most major museums around the country. The offer was presented to the South Orange BoT in 2002. In 2003 the Village applied for a CDBG grant of $250,000 for the project. In 2005 the County approved the grant. Subsequent to the County’s approval, the Lennie Pierro Memorial Arts Foundation was able to continue its fundraising efforts in earnest. How come we didn’t know about it until now? Beats me! The project has been out in the open since its early stages. Newspaper articles about it were published in The New York Times (11/3/02), the Star Ledger (1/9/03), and the News-Record (11/21/02, 1/30/03, 11/6/03). A widely publicized fundraiser for the project was held by the Lennie Pierro Memorial Arts Foundation in 2002 and was attended by more than 250 South Orange and Maplewood residents. A widely publicized (News-Record, MOL) lecture was given at the Adult School of Maplewood-South Orange, also organized by the Foundation, in 2003. The Foundation made presentations with all the facts on the project to more than a dozen civic and neighborhood groups in 2004. The Village BoT held several open public meetings on the subject in 2003, 2004, and 2005. These meetings have been televised, and minutes are posted on the Village’s website. Community collaboration and transparency are very important for every public arts project. The venues for public participation in the Tony Smith Sculpture Project were offered to the public and many Villagers took advantage of it. Should there be public art in South Orange? Should you have that beautiful picture hanging in your living room? Do you really need it? Would you take it down? No, you don’t really need it. But you wouldn’t live in a living room with empty walls, would you? You did go out and bought a piece of art – be it a photograph, an oil, a watercolor, a pottery bowl, a tapestry, a glass vase, a figurine, any wall-hanging to decorate your walls and beautify your environment. Let’s face it, art is an integral part of our private lives. We don’t even think whether we need it or not. We just want it, and we get it. In developing countries, where people cannot afford to buy art for their houses, they create it with their own hands, and they decorate their environment and themselves, thus creating the most beautiful expressions of art: the folk art. Public art adorns the living room of a community. It has existed since the beginnings of history and in the most primitive societies. It has become an integral part of a successful urban environment. South Orange does need public art; a creation that will fill our chest with excitement when we look at it, that will make us proud when we show it to our visitors, that will make us happy to share it with our children, that will earn us a place in the world of art. Indeed, this is such a unique town and project that PBS’s “State of the Art” program is waiting for things to begin so they can shoot a documentary on this project and our town. Why a Tony Smith sculpture? Because Tony Smith is a child of South Orange. He was born here in a third generation South Orange established family, raised here, worked here, and raised his family here (his daughters attended Columbia High). He loved South Orange. Because the art of Tony Smith is revered throughout the world, exhibited in major museums, admired in the world of the arts, inspired many other artists, and is on permanent public display in several cities such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, not to mention housed in major museums including the MoMA, the Whitney, the National Gallery, the Metropolitan Museum, and more. I know not of another artist of enduring international reputation and higher artistic caliber, who is so tied with the soul of South Orange. Historically South Orange has paid its respects to public art through the beautiful architecture of its public buildings. The Tony Smith sculpture is an opportunity to marry our historic art with the contemporary art of our own, here in our own backyard. And what an opportunity this is! Under no circumstance would South Orange be able to afford the cost of purchasing a Tony Smith sculpture. We can have it only through the generosity of the Tony Smith Estate who, desiring to give back to the community that Tony called home for so many years, gifted the rights to one of Tony’s priceless creations, the sculpture called “Tau”. “Tau” is a sculpture bound to create controversy. Those somehow familiar with abstract forms will admire the strength in its boldness, the defiance to gravity in its posture, the intricate exposure of its planes to light, its monumental size. Those ill-at-ease with abstraction will see it as a incongruous assemblage of gigantic plates. But, hey, that’s art. Art is always controversial. Only good art endures the trials of controversy and of time. Tony Smith’s art has done just that. Why that location? There are several locations in South Orange where “Tau” could be installed. The plaza on Sloan Street, between the Train Station and the Firehouse was selected collectively by a group of local artists, the Tony Smith Estate, and our Village government. It is ideal if one wishes to bring the two historic structures and the sculpture together and thus accentuate the contrast of the old with the new. Linked with the proper landscape design this contrast could become harmonious. Replacing the gazebo is a blessing; this structure is a poor attempt to reflect the architecture of the Train Station and the Firehouse. I must say, however, that this would not have been the location of my choice if I had my ‘drathers, but I don’t have them so I shut up. The Economics If the town were to purchase “Tau” outright, it would cost between $500,000 and $600,000. That is why the Foundation worked so hard to establish such good relations with the Tony Smith Estate, because without the gift this project would be impossible. So what the gift means – and it is a gift – is that South Orange will get a museum-quality sculpture simply for the price of fabrication, estimated at $80,000-$90,000. A gift worth in excess of $420,000 sounds like a gift to me. The Foundation has paid for a preliminary conceptual redesign of the site. Based on that conceptual design the estimated total cost for the project – which includes fabrication, transportation, installation, final site design, engineering, clearing and construction – is $440,000. The Village has allotted to the project $250,000 it received from the County’s Community Development Block Grant. The Lennie Pierro Memorial Arts Foundation has committed to raise the remainder needed to complete the project through private donations. Granted the $250,000 CDBG money could have been used to reduce our taxes for 2005 by approximately $44 per household ($250,000÷5,600 households). And although to some these $44 would have made a difference in their budget, it is a worthwhile sacrifice when it comes to enriching our downtown with art, and further enhancing our reputation as a vibrant arts' community. Because believe me, you don’t find many – if any – other villages that have an art gallery, put on famous jazz concerts, and have a downtown sculpture by a world-renowned artist. If all this isn’t a plus for South Orange, then I don’t know what is. In conclusion I suggest let’s grab this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the good of South Orange.
|
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4113 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
Eric has also neglected to mention that he is a member of the Tony Smith Sculpture Advisory Committee, along with Calabrese. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9578 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:34 am: |
|
Soundtrack for future meetings
|
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9579 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:36 am: |
|
Another conflict for Eric is his Greek heritage. After Tau he'll want Alpha, Gamma, Delta, etc. Soon they'll have lowercase sculptures and will place a burden on the schools. |
   
joel dranove
Citizen Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 505 Registered: 1-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 11:49 am: |
|
At least one of a set of NINE taus is for sale on line. How many were already copied is up in the air for now. See the following url: http://www.artnet.com/artwork/424045242/tony-smith-tau.html jd |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9581 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 12:12 pm: |
|
Plenty of Tau to go around. The series Joel sites is simply another sizing of originals. (choke) For example, here is an auction reference with different sizes:
|
   
joel dranove
Citizen Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 506 Registered: 1-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 1:17 pm: |
|
Ahh, but you forget, SO will have the biggest Tau in the country, until the Smith business that calls itself art sells another VP of another town a bigger, longer, uncut Tau. jd
|
   
Josh Holtz
Citizen Username: Jholtz
Post Number: 445 Registered: 4-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 1:29 pm: |
|
Bigger, longer, uncut ... is it too late to reverse my circumcision? |
   
singlemalt
Supporter Username: Singlemalt
Post Number: 1144 Registered: 12-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 1:45 pm: |
|
I think "Fountains of Wayne" on Rt. 46 has several Tau's on display in their parking lot for significantly less less what the village is paying. By Alan Rosen's definition, everything sold at Fountains of Wayne is an original.... |
   
SO1969
Citizen Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 318 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 2:31 pm: |
|
If it was okay to build these, why not replicate (or better yet, purchase an existing sculpture) sized to fit in the lobby of SOPAC? - Private monies are likely to cover all costs or at least nearly all (if replicating much smaller) - Security and maintenance are likely to be much lower cost items - No displacement of recent, CDBG funded public improvements - I'd be surprised if anyone other than the estate would object to the location - If we (or better, the Pierro foundation) purchase an existing sculpture, we don't need the estate's permission I couldn't see any pricing info...anyone know what these smaller versions go for? |
   
SOrising
Citizen Username: Sorising
Post Number: 374 Registered: 2-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 2:56 pm: |
|
I just saw the clips, MHD. It is very interesting how the BOT weaseled out of responding, EITHER individually by trustee OR collectively as a group to Mr. Andrews' question whether they want Tau to go where the gazebo is now and whether they approve of destroying the gazebo in order to do so. (Rosen partially answered by saying he wanted Tau in another location, thus reducing the expense of destroying something the town is still paying off a loan for.) The BOT is a group of people who have made a huge mistake and cannot find a way to correct themselves, EITHER individually OR collectively. How's that for leadership? Please vote in the next municipal elections, everyone, and elect people who have the courage and fortitude to correct their own mistakes. |
   
MHD
Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4115 Registered: 5-2001

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 3:16 pm: |
|
Funny...I believe that there are now 3 Trustees that have stated "on the record" that they do not prefer the location dictated by the Estate (Allan Rosen said it Monday night, Eric said it in his post above, and I believe Mark has also said it*) In addition, on Monday night, Stacey inquired about if the location can be changed. So, we have potentially FOUR TRUSTEES who do not like the proposed location, yet the project goes forward as mandated by the "gift" letter. Why? * Mark - please correct me if I misspoke your position. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 9589 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 3:28 pm: |
|
There's something slightly dysfunctional about the trustees and I'm not saying that meaning that I'm not also at times dysfunctional. For example, if TerriAnn is as strongly opposed to the gun art why wouldn't she ask Ed Matthews what the process is to dismantle it in front of the public? I like that she seems to have her own opinions. Another example. Art Taylor doesn't speak much, but when he explains something I understand him. In opposition to his clarity is Calabrese's half guesses and glances to Ed Matthews for completion of his ideas. Art understands things (at least when they're not hidden from him by Gross). So I understand when Art says they need to follow procedures; however, why doesn't he openly ask what the procedures are so everyone watching can understand them? Also, why does Dr. Rosen speak on issues he's obviously ignorant about (art valuation, reproductions vs. originals, etc.)? It reminds me of Mark Twain's dictum that it's better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you might be stuipid than to open it and remove all doubt. When Eric was asked a question and Eric said it wasn't the right question and then supplied Mr. Andrews with the better question and then didn't answer that one, it was confusing, as well. Eric has a decent and fair position on the sculpture and he should have stated it as his personal opinion. He didn't have to defend others. |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5142 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 4:07 pm: |
|
rep·li·ca ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rpl-k)n. A copy or reproduction of a work of art, especially one made by the original artist. A copy or reproduction, especially one on a scale smaller than the original. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=replica
|
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5143 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 4:10 pm: |
|
In response to this statement "I will try as best I can - albeit in a long treatise – to share with the MOL readers the little knowledge I have, and give my two cents on the subject." from your 11:15am post. Shows how full of beans Eric is. He is ON the Sculpture Board. So he had a lot more then a 'little knowledge' back then. . |
   
talk-it-up
Citizen Username: Talkitup
Post Number: 228 Registered: 3-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 9:16 pm: |
|
I always liked the idea about putting it up by 76 South Orange ave. I never knew that was one of the sites proposed. To me it just seemed like the right site. The building is more contemporary and there is a large space around it to view such a large scale sculpture. |
   
SOrising
Citizen Username: Sorising
Post Number: 375 Registered: 2-2006
| Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006 - 12:44 am: |
|
It would be great, MHD, if the four trustees you mentioned at least stood up for their own judgement that Tau would be badly located where the gazebo is and that destroying the gazebo and fountain before they are even paid for is flagrantly wasteful. Their silence speaks volumes. It says they are perfectly content to burn money and pile debt (gazebo and fountain) upon debt (Tau loan) to pay for a sculpture completely incongruous with the surrounding built environment. It doesn't even have the contrast that a natural setting has to it which would be enough, IMHO, to be justifiable on aesthetic grounds. But we all know the artistic genuises behind the current location should be allowed to make executive decisions for the entire town, despite the fact no one elected them to do so. |
|