Hello Public Art colleagues,

I’m doing a quick survey for feedback from the field on your preferred current mechanisms for covering the administrative costs (in addition to standard permitting fees) for facilitation of required and/or optional public art projects initiated by the private sector.

These can include, most notably, compliance review for private % for art mandated projects, as well as facilitation of any allowable alternatives that require more attention and negotiations of contractual obligations, etc. for work placed in the PROW.

Additionally, I am interested in whether you charge fees for artist and community initiated projects for public property.

All of these types of proposals include associated administrative costs. The question is, do you charge a flat fee, a percentage or other amount for those costs, or are they just covered by general program overhead, and are you happy with the current systems?

I know Sarah C. Odenkirk is making updates to the amazing databased she created for June. And I’m sure this topic is covered to some extent in the archives, but I am most interested in hearing from folks who are satisfied/happy/thrilled with the current mechanisms for covering these costs or who are challenged by hidden costs associated with this type of programming. I’m looking for some real time data to share with elected officials now.

And for the record, currently in Oakland we have authorization to charge a cost-recovery hourly fee for certain types of projects, but the structure is awkward and unpredictable.

Thanks in advance for your hopefully quick replies! I will follow up for more detail with you independently if appropriate.

Kristen

Kristen Zaremba

Public Art Coordinator

Cultural Affairs Division, Economic and Workforce Development Department

City of Oakland, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 9^th Floor

Oakland, CA 94612

510-238-2155 / kzaremba@oaklandnet.com

http://www.oaklandculturalarts.org