The Senate Art Committee met to review a draft request for proposals to commission two portrait busts — of Elizabeth Freeman and Annabeth Adams — for display in the Massachusetts Senate chamber and to agree on outstanding evaluation and procurement questions.

Committee members focused first on budget parameters and procurement rules. The draft lists an $80,000 estimated cost per bust and the committee earlier set a target range of $75,000 to $99,000 per bust. Committee staff noted that projects above $100,000 would trigger a different procurement process under the Senate’s rules (the $100,000 threshold is the line that would change the contracting process). Billy Rinaldi of the Senate Business Office warned that “there’ll be a lot of unknowns in projects. So you wanna make sure you’re not hitting that cap right away,” and staff said the RFP language will reserve the Senate’s right to consider proposals above the target if needed.

Members discussed what the budget should cover. Linda Hartigan of the Peabody Essex Museum urged clarity about which costs the Senate will pay and which the artist must cover, saying the committee should specify whether pedestals, packing and shipping are included because “shipping and packing for things like marble and bronze are really expensive.” Senate staff said pedestals are likely a Senate expense but that staff would confirm shipping and include specifics in the RFP and contract.

Committee members clarified installation dimensions and asked that drawings and photographs be included in the RFP. Susan Greendyke of the State House Office of Arts said the chamber niches are semicircular and provided measurements for sculptors to use: “The floors measure, they’re about 28 inches wide and 17 and a half inches deep at the widest frame points. And then the pedestal maximum measurements would be about, 16 by 14.” Participants asked that the RFP plainly identify width versus depth and include drawings so applicants can judge fit and scale.

Materials and long-term conservation were another focus. The draft favors durable materials consistent with existing chamber works; committee members suggested language that allows bronze, marble or other durable stone and metal while discouraging fragile or experimental media that would increase conservation risk. Staff said the Senate’s acquisition guidelines and past language for similar projects will be used to ensure consistency.

The committee debated the selection process and timeline. Members agreed the RFP will be a limited solicitation under the Senate’s procurement rules (staff said the RFP will be distributed to a shortlist of artists), posted publicly but also sent to invited candidates. Susan Cross, a committee member, urged a two-phase approach: “get a certain number of proposals and then we choose 2 or 3 to then ask for a proposal and with that, we pay them something,” so finalists submit concept designs before an award. Others said a single-step contract award from submitted materials could be used if the committee already knows and trusts the artists under consideration.

The committee also discussed optional site visits and in-person finalist meetings. The group agreed to allow and encourage artists to visit the chamber to view the niches; several members recommended meeting finalists in person if the committee requests concept designs.

Artists’ budget disclosures and payment schedules surfaced in discussion. Members recommended asking applicants for a simple budget breakdown so reviewers can assess whether an artist can complete the work and to avoid unexpected tax consequences for artists; staff said payment schedule details typically appear in the final contract but can be signaled in the RFP (for example, phased payments tied to approvals).

Other items of note: the RFP will include standard language about phased payments and timelines but remain flexible so the RFP does not deter applicants; the committee will ask members with art expertise to submit shortlists of artists (committee staff will collect those names); and the draft currently proposes limiting eligible applicants to Massachusetts or New England artists, which the committee confirmed as a substantive criterion to reduce shipping costs and limit the pool geographically. Staff said they will circulate an updated near-final RFP for quick review and then the Senate Business Office will release it, aiming for summer distribution with an approximately six-week response window and a reconvening of the committee in September to set the formal evaluation process.

No formal vote was recorded at the meeting; members gave direction to staff to revise the draft RFP to include clarified budget language, installation drawings, more flexible budget-cap language tied to the $100,000 procurement threshold, and guidance on artist budgets and payment phases. The committee expects staff to return a cleaned and corrected draft and to solicit shortlists from committee members before distribution.