Most, if not all, of the murals in Portland are on private properties that face the public right-of-way. There are two ways for murals to be “legal” in the eyes
of the city: (1) going through RACC’s Public Art Mural Program for approval, which then results in the mural being part of the city’s public art collection for as long as it exists on the building; (2) applying for a $50 Original Art Mural Permit with the
city.
The attached Art Easement is required and addresses most of the issues that Sarah articulates in her post. The easement must be signed by the property owner and
gets filed with the County against the property’s title. When someone other than the property owner (not necessarily the business owner) steps up to take responsibility for the maintenance, we add an amendment that also must be notarized and signed by the
party taking responsibility. Removal of graffiti from murals on City property is typically coordinated and paid for by the city’s graffiti abatement program.
The city’s Original Art Mural Permit has restrictions on size, material and location in some areas of the city. Links to those rules and regulations can be
found here.
If anyone has specific questions about these programs, please feel free to contact me at
pkendellen@racc.org or 503.823.4196.
Peggy
Peggy Kendellen
Public Art Manager
pronouns: she, her, hers
Regional Arts & Culture Council
411 NW Park, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97209
503.823.4196 |
racc.org
| Facebook
| Instagram
| Twitter
| YouTube
From: public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com [mailto:public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com]
On Behalf Of Hoffman, Kate
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 12:53 PM
To: public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com
Subject: RE: Examples of public funds used for murals on private buildings?
Dear Network,
The City of Huntington Beach is looking for examples of ordinances or regulations related to public art placed on private property that is public facing. We would
appreciate your input! Thanks in advance.
Kate
Kate Hoffman, Director
Huntington Beach Art Center
538 Main ST
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
714.374.1658
From:
public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com [mailto:public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com]
On Behalf Of Sarah Conley Odenkirk
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 8:29 AM
To: Jen Krava <jenk@forecastpublicart.org>;
public_art_network@americansforthearts.simplelists.com
Subject: Re: Examples of public funds used for murals on private buildings?
This is a very tricky area that can create real problems down the road particularly for the private property owners (perhaps that’s the reason for your inquiry!). While
it initially seems like a good deal for the property owner in that they get something that could be considered an enhancement for “free”, it can easily become a burden and the focus of lots of bad feelings. There are a couple of main considerations I often
see missing from these sorts of agreements. Because each circumstance is unique, there are multiple ways of approaching the relationship, but in terms of subjects, here’s a brief list of the bigger considerations in no particular order:
1. Maintenance, repair and conservation obligations
2. What happens in the event of damage caused by third parties?
3. What happens in the event of damage caused by private property owner?
4. Transferability of ownership/obligations to new owners
5. Ability to remove for a variety of reasons or no reason at all
6. Who bears the cost of removal?
7. Who is responsible for notifying the artist of damage or removal?
8. Clear statement of expectations for present and into the future
9. Who owns the work?
10. Does the initial permission amount to an easement or any forfeiture of rights that affect property owner in the future, or future property owners?
Again, because each situation presents a unique set of facts and circumstances, it is difficult to foresee all the variations of issues that might arise. But, the most important
consideration is to think about not just the permission and installation part of the project, but what happens down the road and who’s responsible for potential scenarios.
Hope that helps with some general considerations.
Best,
Sarah
Sarah Conley Odenkirk
Art Attorney | Founder
This E-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If
you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this E-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this E-mail in error, please immediately notify
me at the number above and destroy the original and any printout thereof.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE. Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of (i) avoiding
penalties imposed under the United States Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax-related matter.
On September 7, 2018 at 7:32:25 AM, Jen Krava (jenk@forecastpublicart.org) wrote:
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=BSqo5SqRgp3qqHVkKIIoGnRIUeCRPtjh