Because the Metropolis of Austin prepares to demolish and rebuild its conference middle, it has deaccessioned 4 public artwork items throughout the constructing and intends to not pay for the removing of the works. If they aren’t eliminated, the items can be destroyed upon the constructing’s demolition.
The Austin Conference Heart web site’s Visual Art Collection page has not been up to date to clarify the way forward for the works within the constructing. Partially, it states, “In line with the Metropolis of Austin’s Artwork in Public Locations Program (AIPP), a number of iconic items had been commissioned as a part of the capital enchancment price range for the unique building of the Austin Conference Heart and subsequent additions. Along with the general public artwork assortment, the Austin Conference Heart Division started buying extra works by among the area’s most completed artists, which will be present in numerous spots all through the power.”
The web site lists 21 artistic endeavors as a part of the gathering, together with a mural within the 2nd St. parking storage. Among the many items listed on the web site are prints, images, work, sculptures, and murals. One merchandise on the agenda of the January 30, 2025, Metropolis Council assembly was to approve the deaccession of eight AIPP works, together with 4 positioned on the conference middle. These 4 works are Margo Sawyer’s Index for Contemplation (2002), a site-specific sculptural set up; Rolando Briseño’s Macro/Micro Tradition (2002), an set up of giclee prints, that are completely affixed to the partitions; John Yancey’s Riffs & Rhythms (1996), a mosaic mural constructed into the construction of the wall; and Damion Priour’s Waller Creek Cabinets (1996), a sculptural set up.
A element of Damion Priour’s “The Waller Creek Cabinets,” 1996, limestone, glass, and located objects
In the course of the City Council meeting, numerous group members spoke up in assist of the artists. Many questioned the necessity to demolish the conference middle, which they categorized as “completely purposeful,” merely to rebuild a bigger facility. Others questioned why the $1.6 billion price range for the construction didn’t embrace funding to assist the removing of the artists’ works.
Former Council Member Ora Houston remarked, “Dr. Yancey is a certainly one of a form artist whose work elevates and celebrates African American heritage and satisfaction. That’s why, years in the past, town commissioned Riffs & Rhythms… Please be sure that his mural is safely eliminated and correctly saved and guarded so it may be prominently displayed within the new conference middle. We’re on the verge of Black Historical past Month — permitting the destruction of a Black artist’s mural could be, in my view and the opinion of many others in our group, very disrespectful and embarrassing.”
John Yancey, “Riffs & Rhythm,” 1996, damaged ceramic tile mosaic
Mr. Yancey, a famend artist and Professor Emeritus of Studio Artwork on the College of Texas at Austin, stated on the assembly, “Shortly after shifting to Austin, I used to be commissioned to create and set up the work titled Riffs & Rhythms on the then-newly-built conference middle. With coloration and vibrant presence, this work celebrates the multicultural phenomenon of the assorted genres of Texas music. For 30 years, it has greeted thousands and thousands of the attendees to South by Southwest and numerous conferences and conventions… I’m right here to ask the Metropolis Council to do three issues: pause, assess, and protect. I urgently request that you simply pause the accession as a result of the present coverage is out of date and never relevant to present realities, it states, within the case of deaccession, the artist can reclaim the work at his or her expense…”
The insistence of the Metropolis that the artists reclaim their work at their very own expense contradicts among the artists’ contracts for his or her conference middle commissions. The contract Mr. Yancey signed in 1995 states, “…If the Metropolis shall at any time resolve to eliminate the Work by means aside from sale or commerce, it shall by discover to the Artist provide the Artist an inexpensive alternative to get well the Work without charge to the Artist apart from an obligation of the Artist to indemnify and reimburse the Metropolis for the quantity by which the associated fee to the Metropolis of such restoration exceed the prices to the Metropolis of the proposed destruction.”
In contrast, Ms. Sawyer’s 2001 contract states that if the paintings will be faraway from a constructing or construction with out damaging both the work or the constructing, the artist can take away it “at her sole expense.”
Relating to the artists taking over the removing bills, Mr. Yancey continued, “This coverage is unrealistic and unreasonable. Typically, artists can not probably afford to rent the conservators, skilled crews, and [pay for the] heavy tools at their very own expense to reclaim their work as acknowledged within the outdated coverage. Furthermore, it is rather attainable, the present deaccession coverage and the proposed act of deaccession earlier than you at the moment, could also be in violation of the federal Visible Artist [Rights] Act of 1990, or the VARA act of 1990.”
Whereas VARA protects artists from the “destruction, distortion, mutilation, or different modification” of their work, which might “hurt his or her repute or honor,” it does waive these rights when “a piece can’t be faraway from a constructing with out” such alteration.
In the course of the assembly, Council Member Anthony Seger, Interim Director of the Financial Improvement Division, acknowledged the Metropolis had three firms come out to evaluate every of the works within the conference middle, and with regard to Mr. Yancey’s mural every stated they couldn’t transfer it resulting from its dimension. Council Member Seger recounted the businesses added that the work “[wouldn’t] be the identical even should you had been to attempt to salvage it.”
Glasstire reached out to Jaime Castillo, the AIPP Supervisor, and Sue Lambe, the previous AIPP Director and present public artwork advisor for the Austin Conference Heart, for remark concerning the firms the Metropolis contacted to evaluate the potential removing of the works, and the cash allotted for brand spanking new artwork within the conference middle price range.
A spokesperson for the Metropolis responded and declined to share details about the precise distributors who assessed the work. Nonetheless, they famous that in November 2024 AIPP requested evaluations of the 4 artworks slated for deaccession, and two of the three distributors offered value estimates for the works, excluding the mural by Mr. Yancey. The spokesperson stated, “The distributors indicated that [Mr. Yancey’s] paintings was completely affixed to a website wall with mortar, making removing infeasible with out vital injury and reassembly unattainable.”
Relating to the price range allotted for brand spanking new artwork within the to-be-built conference middle, the spokesperson shared, “The venture features a $17.7 million public artwork funding, the most important in Austin’s historical past… Whereas the price range prioritizes new paintings integration, [the Austin Convention Center Department] contributed funds to assist the deaccession course of, together with documentation and assessments of removing feasibility. Nonetheless, site-specific constraints and value estimates in the end decided that removing was not possible for sure items.” The Metropolis’s assertion didn’t particularly reply to Glasstire’s query of why among the price range for the brand new conference middle couldn’t go towards the deinstallation of the artworks within the present constructing.
Donna Carter, an architect who was on the crew that drafted the unique AIPP ordinance in 1985, spoke on the Metropolis Council assembly. She commented, “Regardless of a decade of redevelopment discussions and over a billion greenback price range, the destiny of those public works was addressed lower than a yr earlier than scheduled demolition, town recognized 4 items they deemed, not a conservator, they deemed weren’t salvageable. They offered no evaluation, value, estimates, or conservator’s view on how they may salvage [or] important steps in any preservation effort. This lack of planning contradicts the very spirit of a everlasting connection, and it is a failure of management.”
Martha Peters, the former Director of Public Art at Arts Fort Price who served as an administrator for Austin’s AIPP program from 1991-2003 (throughout the time these works had been commissioned), spoke with Glasstire about nationwide finest practices round deaccessioning public artwork. She pointed to the Fort Price Public Artwork Grasp Plan Replace (2017), which states, “Deaccessioning ought to be cautiously utilized solely after an neutral analysis of the paintings to keep away from the affect of fluctuations of style and the untimely removing of an paintings from the gathering. Previous to the deaccession of any work, the Artwork Fee should weigh fastidiously the pursuits of the general public… and the pursuits of the scholarly and cultural communities.”
Ms. Peters went on to say, “For me, the difficulty will not be about what’s ‘authorized,’ however what is actually in the very best pursuits of the Metropolis of Austin’s public artwork assortment (all the works being deaccessioned are of excellent high quality and have withstood the take a look at of time) and these native artists, who had been fastidiously chosen to create site-specific works that displays Austin’s various arts group to conference middle guests. I really feel that town is lacking a chance to include these works (or modified variations of the bigger installations) into the design of the brand new conference middle, or, on the very least, relocate the works to different metropolis buildings to allow them to stay on public view.”
Finally, throughout the Metropolis Council assembly, Metropolis Council members voted to approve the deaccessioning of the artworks, with solely Mayor Professional Tem Vanessa Fuentes voting towards the agenda merchandise. Moreover, Council Member Zohaib “Zo” Qadri famous the issues introduced by group members, however indicated that if the agenda merchandise was not handed, the artists wouldn’t have a chance to reclaim their work.
He defined he could be voting sure for that purpose, however went on to say, “I’m dedicated to working with my colleagues and Metropolis workers to discover options to handle the challenges which have resurfaced… I look ahead to collaborating on significant steps to assist and maintain our artistic group and within the upcoming weeks [and] months, we’re going to place pen to paper and get one thing finished.”
Final week, a month out from the council assembly, Glasstire reached out to Mr. Qadri to comply with up on what options could also be within the works. On the time of publication Mr. Qadri had not responded to our inquiry.
Margo Sawyer, “Index for Contemplation,” 2002, powder-coated metal & aluminum and yellow zinc-plated metal
Relating to the removing of her work, Ms. Sawyer, who’s the niece of Harlem-Renaissance artist Aaron Douglas, informed Glasstire, “I used to be by no means invited to have a dialogue with AIPP, or the committee who had the discussions on what artwork to maintain and what to not deaccession… The Conference Heart solely reached out when it was too late. No consideration for the significance of the artwork. No consideration for dialogue and enter till it was too late.”
Ms. Sawyer pointed to shifts within the AIPP management during the last two years as a possible trigger for the shortage of communication across the choices concerning the artworks. Ms. Lambe stepped down as Director of AIPP in January 2022. Following her departure, Constance White served as Supervisor of AIPP from July 2022 till July 2024, when Mr. Castillo stepped into the function.
Ms. Sawyer informed Glasstire that she first discovered in the summertime of 2023 from a information article concerning the plans to demolish and rebuild the middle. On the time she reached out to AIPP and her contact didn’t know concerning the plans for her artwork. On July 28, 2024, she obtained an electronic mail informing her that her work could be deaccessioned and that she may take away it at her personal expense.
Ms. Sawyer famous that she’s going to work with a crew to take away her work at a private value of $16,000. Whereas the quantity could seem small compared to the Metropolis’s price range for brand spanking new artwork within the Conference Heart, Ms. Sawyer defined that in an effort to make the removing attainable, she is pulling cash from her retirement funds to take away and retailer the work.
