Oak Harbor Art Commission adopts digital review process for public-art proposals, sets biannual schedule

The Oak Harbor Art Commission on Oct. 9 agreed to a digital workflow for reviewing public-art proposals received through the city’s online form and set a schedule of biannual strategic reviews in January and July.

Commission staff said two proposals are currently in the system and staff will create a SurveyMonkey version of the commission's candidate project worksheet so commissioners can score submissions remotely. The commission agreed to a one-week turnaround for commissioners to complete their scoring once a submission is circulated, and to use a new "next step" field on the worksheet that will indicate whether a proposal should be placed on an upcoming agenda, sent to the annual/biannual retreat for budget consideration, or handled as a more immediate item.

The move formalizes a process the commission drafted as part of the Oak Harbor Art Plan. Staff member Bridal said the online form is live and that two proposals have been submitted; commissioners discussed additional ideas they had previously kept on whiteboards and agreed those ideas must be entered into the formal process to be considered. "We have 2 projects that are in the system," Bridal said. "Now last month, we talked about...we need to meet to to fill out the rest of this, to start entering them in here." (paraphrased for clarity.)

Commissioners and staff described how the workflow will operate: when a submission arrives staff will forward the proposal and a link to the scoring worksheet to all commissioners. Commissioners may score the proposal at their convenience; if a majority of responding commissioners indicate the item should be placed on the next agenda it will be added, provided the agenda-posting deadline is met. Commissioners also asked staff to compile an electronic repository sorted by year and project.

Commissioners discussed how to handle proposals that do not request funding but seek advice, assistance or partnership. Several commissioners said those requests should also be entered into the system so the commission can track ideas and offer guidance. The meeting record names a set of proposals and contacts discussed during the session: a lion's-head statue submitted by the Playhouse annex (Playhouse), a bruiser/elk sculpture and an entry from "Jasmine Flowers," an Oakwood-related item presented by Sherry McLean (no city funding requested), a Fil-Am statue contact Maria McGee, a skate-park bench proposal and bus-poetry project ideas. Commissioners agreed to invite applicants to speak to the commission when a proposal advances to a meeting agenda. "If you'd like to present, we're going to invite you — you're invited to the commission," a staff member said during the discussion.

The commission also agreed to a short pilot of the digital scoring form using the Playhouse lion's-head submission. Staff will email commissioners a SurveyMonkey link titled "rating sheet for the Palomar lion's head" and an attached PDF of the proposal; commissioners may test the system and staff will adjust the scoring or reporting as needed. The commission discussed making the forms and resulting repository accessible to the public and providing applicants with a checkbox on the submission form to request an in-person presentation.

Several implementation and administrative details were clarified during the meeting: staff will digitize the candidate project worksheet and the project implementation worksheet; commissioners will be assigned as project leads once a proposal advances; items with funding implications will be scheduled to align with the January and July budget/review windows; and a $10,000 miscellaneous (discretionary) arts line was mentioned as available for small requests (amount current and previously used by the commission). Commissioners recommended that smaller items that do not require immediate council action be handled without waiting for the biannual retreat when feasible.

The commission closed the discussion by directing staff to create the SurveyMonkey form, circulate the lion's-head materials as a pilot and notify applicants when their proposal has been received and what the next step will be. Formal votes were taken earlier in the meeting to approve the agenda and the September minutes; both motions were approved by voice vote. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn that passed.