A significant portion of the meeting concentrated on the community’s concerns about the current art installations and their visibility within the city. Members of the committee discussed feedback from the Union Academy Neighborhood Revitalization Group regarding a project on Martin Luther King Jr. Drive that used personal family photographs. Requests to remove images from two families prompted a dialogue about the potential relocation of the project and the necessity for contextual information. Committee members considered whether a brochure or dedicated website could provide clarity and enhance public understanding without altering the original art pieces.

Some members argued against altering the location of the artwork, fearing it could establish a precedent for future requests that might undermine the project’s integrity. Nevertheless, the committee acknowledged the need for better communication and suggested providing additional information about the artwork through brochures or online resources, listing family names to respect the community’s sentiments.

Another topic was the visibility of art exhibits, particularly one located behind the visitor’s bureau. Concerns were raised about this area not attracting enough visitors due to obstructive factors like work trucks and garbage receptacles. The committee discussed the prospect of relocating the exhibit to a more strategic site on Dodecanese Avenue, an area with higher foot traffic, to improve public engagement with the art.

The meeting also addressed the need for a cohesive approach to identifying artworks and ensuring they are easily recognizable to the community. There was a consensus that a correlating brochure or signage should accompany art pieces to provide necessary identification and context. Despite previous discussions, such resources had yet to be developed, highlighting an ongoing gap in the committee’s efforts to engage the public effectively.

The committee explored the possibility of transitioning from monthly to quarterly meetings, a proposal driven by the challenges of not having a full board and ongoing community recovery efforts post-hurricane. The suggested schedule would include meetings in January, April, July, and October. Members collectively agreed on the importance of a fuller board to ensure diverse input in future discussions. They approved a motion to cancel the December meeting and adopt the quarterly schedule, although there were questions about the need for a formal vote with only a few members present.

In the public comments section, there was a call for shifting the committee’s focus from fine art projects to more community-involved initiatives, like neighborhood art projects and signal box artwork. This suggestion stressed community engagement’s significance, particularly involving children to foster enthusiasm and ownership. However, some cautioned that any community projects should uphold existing aesthetic and quality standards.

The meeting illuminated a disconnect between the artist’s intentions and community needs, with committee members expressing a desire for more proactive measures to involve the community in the planning stages of art projects. There was reflection on past mistakes in community engagement, notably the limited involvement in the Black Heritage Project. The committee acknowledged that better outreach and solidifying locations before initiating projects could prevent future misunderstandings.