Express strong support for Bay View Art Stop
April 30, 2012
Dear Editor,
My husband and I want to express our strong support of the Art Stop Project.
We attended the April 12 Art Stop meeting at Bay View High School and were extremely disappointed that the artists’ presentations were continually disrupted by a small, vocal group of participants, who were only there to speak out in opposition to the committee and the selection process. Their interruptions were rude and uncalled for.
They made it clear they believed the project was not transparent or inclusive, and we strongly disagree. These people chose to make this a political matter, and this was not the proper venue to pontificate about recent election politics.
This type of project should bring us all together, not divide us.
My husband and I have lived in the Bay View neighborhood for nearly five years. We are Bay View Historical Society members and are actively involved in the community. We think the people on the committee are perfect for the project.
We know Kerry Yandell personally, and we are confident she understands the importance of historic preservation and community development. She and her family are invested in this area and are a big part of why we decided purchase a home in Bay View. We think the neighborhood is lucky to have talented people like her who step up and organize an artistic venture such as this.
We really hope that the poor attitudes regarding new developments in Bay View don’t continue to reflect poorly on this neighborhood or get in the way of meaningful discussions.
Thank you,
Bob & Erin Lenz
Bay View
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
GF Bird on Mon, 30th Apr 2012 12:22 pm
Dear Bob and Erin Lenz –
I appreciate that you have been in Bay View five years. I’ve lived at my residence 4 blocks east of the ArtStop site since 1984 (not nearly as long an many multi-generation families). That means I’ve seen over all those years many efforts to revitalize this most historic of Milwaukee’s crossroads, and am happy to see the most recent business efforts meeting with the limited (another entertainment district) success they have. I was on the Bay View Historical Society board of directors for two terms totaling six years. I’ve source-researched extensively about my neighborhood’s history.
I also strongly support of the ArtStop project, but process and selections thus far, once again, sell our neighborhood short.
Were you to have a deeper understanding of Bay View’s history, you would know of the Bay View Interorganization Council dating from the late 1940s, indicating there have long been many active politically oriented organizations in Bay View and the BVIC effort to consolidate and dampen their contentiousness. It is a long-standing technique used to diminish one’s opponents to use labels like, “small” and “vocal”, “only there to speak out in opposition” (as if opposition were illegitimate!), and, “rude and uncalled for”. Golly, let’s not embarrass the powers-that-be by letting any of our feelings show!
You “strongly disagree” private meetings of a self-selected selection committee are not “transparent or inclusive”? A public meeting called by politicians is “not a proper venue to pontificate about . . . politics”? Why does this smack of suppressing public involvement? It even sounds like those who only now that elected officials they support are being recalled seek to limit political avenues of recall to officials who, after the usual due process of lengthy appeal after appeal (even unto their co-partisans on the Supreme Court), are convicted of “criminal” law breaking, demanding their opponents shut up and accept whatever is dished out until a regularly scheduled election. (BTW, note: Wisconsin Constitution, Article One Section Four — “The right of the people peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, shall never be abridged.” Act 10 collective bargaining limitations to only cost-of-living wage increases are clear violations of Wisconsin’s Constitution. Impeachment by co-abridgers and co-partisans won’t happen, so recall, thank goodness, remains the constitutional safety valve.)
You think the committee members and process are “perfect”? Then, what about those who have lived in Bay View a lot longer than you, who are frequent customers (always right?) of business owners who don’t live in Bay View, who don’t think the Art Stop process, self-selected selection committee members, and finalist selection members are “perfect”, and who want something better (truly “monumental sculpture”), to do? Would you have them take what is handed down to them from those who “understand”, and who are (uniquely?) “talented”, and shut up with their “poor attitudes” “reflect[ing] poorly on this neighborhood . . . get[ting] in the way of meaningful discussions”?
Where in your post did you previously champion “discussions”? If there had been champions of discussions, the ArtStop opportunity would have been opened up to discussions about planning with the public and neighbors at the front end, when it was conceived, so that a submission-anonymous selection process that did not allow insider favoritism and conflicts to enter into the process was established.
(disclosure and disclaimer: I submitted to ArtStopBayView competition.)
Bob on Mon, 30th Apr 2012 9:58 pm
GF Bird,
Not everything is a political conspiracy.
First of all, we are all neighbors here. I don’t mean any disrespect to anyone who is opposed to the project or the process. I don’t think any opinions should be silenced.
We felt the need to write this letter because just like you, we want our voices to be heard.
The point is that the artists’ presentations were unnecessarily interrupted. It’s fine that some people are opposed to the selection committee process, but this forum was neither the time nor the place for such debate. It was meant for the artists to present their proposals. If statements needed to be made about the process, they could have just as easily been brought up at the very end. Some of the comments that were made were completely disrespectful. I am surprised that you, being an artist yourself, don’t see this.
It’s easy to get combative when you don’t agree with something, but let’s all remember to take a step back and approach these situations in a mature manner. Please, by all means, let the healthy debating and discussion continue.
- Bob Lenz
GF Bird on Tue, 1st May 2012 9:24 am
So, your post had no political design, purpose or effect? I’m shocked that such “innocence” could be misinterpreted as political!
Maybe you haven’t noticed over the years and years of Bay View public meetings, but too often there is only one public meeting, so, because iffy development marriages often result, “speak now or forever hold your peace”. Do you actually think that after three polite, mature and respectful 45-min presentations there would have been time allowed to go back and discuss the flawed process before the room would have been vacated? When does such a fix get to be “disrespectful”? And, allowing the set-piece to proceed as those it favors plan only legitimizes the self-selected selection process.
Do you actually not recognize the injustice in this?
Carol on Wed, 9th May 2012 7:55 pm
Thank You Bob & Erin Lenz for writing this letter. What is happening to Bay View? When did this certain group become so disrespectful and hateful towards its community and it’s achievements? It is worth noting that some names on these forums and other blogs are associated with the Bay View Neighborhood Association. This is disturbing to me given they really shouldn’t be involved in anything political given their Non Profit Status. Don’t take it personally Bob and Erin about the hate you will receive from the people on the Compass Forums. It is the same people that go to these meetings and are outright disrespectful. They have no tact. This paper seems to breed the same, small group of Tony Zielinski haters. The Art Stop is a wonderful project and the art community of Bay View is very excited about it. It is yet another wonderful addition to Bay View and we welcome it!
Jessica on Mon, 14th May 2012 8:49 pm
Let’s recap the public input in this process: It was contained to one meeting, where the only response “in bounds” was to comment directly on three proposals chosen by the committee, (behind closed doors, with no minutes available). That comprises the entirety of the opportunity the public had to contribute to the development of public art. When would’ve been the appropriate time to raise objections to the process? It’s clear that public input was deliberately constrained. You may call objecting to that “disrespectful and hateful,” but don’t be surprised that people disagree with that characterization.
I didn’t hear anyone in the forum object to the Art Stop project, and we should be excited about it. Objecting to the process =/= objecting to the project.
Bob Lenz on Mon, 14th May 2012 9:47 pm
Hi Jessica!
I made a comment in response to GF Bird on April 30th where I covered a couple of your points.
Objecting to the process is your right and I don’t think it’s disrespectful or hateful at all. You might be responding to Carol about that, but I just have to say that I’m happy there’s a diverse community here with all sorts of different viewpoints.
However, it WAS disrespectful for people to interrupt the artists’ presentations. I’d like to think that Bay View is a nice enough place where we can get together as neighbors and have a civil discussion. That’s all I ask. The comments regarding the process were out of place and could have been made after the presentations, let alone emailed or phoned in to the alderman or committee members. The artists worked extremely hard to prepare for this, and a few bad attitudes really ruined it.
While Paul Shinkle might’ve had good intentions, his speech seemed like a stunt and it threw off the vibe of the meeting. This wasn’t a political rally.
I respect your opinion to be opposed, but I remain in support of both the project and the process.
GF Bird on Mon, 14th May 2012 10:47 pm
Jessica, thank you for stating the truth.
Remember, this was the ONLY public neighborhood meeting about this signature design for our most historic crossroads. If you’ve been to a marriage ceremony, there is usually a proclamation, “Speak now or forever hold your peace.” The way things are in Bay View, and have been through many terms and public projects, this was the only opportunity to express opposition at a meeting of gathered citizens, so, it was an entirely appropriate “political rally”, because it was not one orchestrated entirely by the incumbents.
“Comments regarding the process were out of place and could have been made after the presentations, let alone emailed or phoned in to the alderman or committee members.” Explain, Bob Lenz, how those comments would have been recognized or given weight after the presentation if time for the room had expired, and all the comments had been made one-on-one, “informally”, outside of the gathered citizens. Explain how all those comments and emails after the event would have been collated and made available, in their entirety, by the incumbent to interested citizens and neighbors for further discussion or consideration. In fact, all those inputs would have disappeared into the ether of the incumbents’ discretion. Nope, even though there are many, many neighbors who want to see something truly “monumental” at this most historic crossroads of Bay View, the process has been purposely narrowed – it even looks like an inside fix – foreshortened and “rammed through” with a cursory nod to public participation.
I called my supervisor, who is on the self-selected selection committee, last week, and talked to her assistant about when there will be a hearing/meeting by some committee of the County Board of Supervisors about the ArtStop issue, and was told he would check and get back to me. He hasn’t yet. Let’s hope news of this meeting is made public and posted to the public by the Compass and other media. Otherwise, all concerned citizens will know the Walker gang’s practices of cutting out the public and other assembled citizens are, sadly, pervading other branches of government. Recalling the Walker gang will start to turn these practices around and set an example for how government should work.
Bob Lenz on Mon, 14th May 2012 11:03 pm
GF Bird, just reading your comments makes me tired.
I cannot explain myself in any clearer detail. You seem focused on starting arguments with everyone who has a different viewpoint than your own.
Lets just face it… we have different opinions on this, and that’s okay.
GF Bird on Mon, 14th May 2012 11:10 pm
Since you are tired, your passions are weakening – and so are your arguments.
Face it, Bob, the ArtStop selection process is a mess, and, like most want, it should start over by having a public meeting BEFORE a selection process is made.
Bob Lenz on Mon, 14th May 2012 11:26 pm
It’s pretty funny how you say “most want” this to start over, without any evidence of that whatsoever.
It feels like you’re just here to argue, and when no meaningful discussion can result, there is no point.
I’m done, GF Bird.
GF Bird on Mon, 14th May 2012 11:53 pm
Poor Bob — starting over got more responses than any of the finalists. Don’t you remember? No surprise – it wasn’t allowed to be “officially” counted.
Jessica on Tue, 15th May 2012 10:08 pm
@ Bob: Thanks for the response. While I disagree that a presentation was interrupted (it was Q&A time), I understand your position. Anything outside of narrow constraints on comments would be considered an intrusion into the meeting according to that viewpoints, and that’s exactly the problem I see. And, yes, some of my comments were in response to Carol, not what you wrote. Glad we’re neighbors–it’s nice to disagree without attacking each other!
GF Bird on Wed, 16th May 2012 10:16 am
Dear Jessica –
“Narrow constraints on comments” sure sums up the ArtStop process, and so much of what is going on in the Walker gang’s Wisconsin. Wait for one-and-only neighbors’ public meeting until after self-selected selection committee has eliminated all but three instead of bringing neighbors in at the beginning. Then, schedule the meeting with long presentations that take up most of the time before the venue closes. Only collect opinions on narrow list of finalists and not about anything else, like whether the process is bad. Narrow constraints = poor results and disgruntled neighbors.