Prompted by convention center controversy, Council seeks changes to public art program

In response to increasing scrutiny over Austin’s handling of public art, City Council voted Thursday to modernize the Art in Public Places program by updating policies to prevent mishandlings like the controversial deaccessioning of artwork at the Austin Convention Center. The resolution, which was approved on the consent agenda, follows a heated debate over the fate of Riffs and Rhythms, a large-scale mosaic mural by John Yancey, a former University of Texas professor and respected artist.

Yancey’s work, commissioned in 1996 as part of the city’s public art initiative, is set to be destroyed as part of the soon-to-commence demolition and rebuilding of the convention center, an estimated $1.6 billion project.

The resolution directs the city manager to update the AIPP program to ensure it applies to public-private partnership projects while exempting affordable housing costs from its requirements. It also seeks to establish a structured process for allowing alternative compliance with the program’s standards.

Additionally, the resolution calls for reviewing how public art is incorporated into private development regulations, allowing more flexibility in how AIPP funds can be used for maintaining, relocating and storing public artwork. It also permits art installations in publicly accessible spaces owned or controlled by the city, including properties managed by entities like the Austin Housing Finance Corporation.

In attempt to make public art programs open to more artists, the resolution seeks to address barriers such as contractual maintenance requirements on AIPP projects. It also encourages the use of curatorial services for major public art projects and explores city support for maintaining and preserving public artworks on private property, such as murals.

The city manager must present recommended changes to the Arts Commission and the Economic Opportunity Committee and report back by July 18 with an update on these efforts, including any necessary budget considerations.

Yancey and other artists impacted by the deaccessioning process were informed they could reclaim their works at their own expense, but the scale of the installations makes them prohibitively expensive to remove and store. Yancey has been vocal about his inability to personally fund the $70,000-plus cost of removing and relocating his mural.

John Riedie, CEO of the Austin Creative Alliance, sees the resolution as a way to help public art policies evolve with the city’s changing creative and economic landscapes. Riedie told the Austin Monitor he supports clarifying ownership responsibilities so that artists aren’t left scrambling for funds to save their work when redevelopment occurs, as well as allowing more flexible use of public art funds so they can be used for maintenance, conservation, relocation and storage, as well as expanding the eligibility of art projects to include murals on private properties that serve the public good.

“This resolution is a step in the right direction,” Riedie told the Monitor. “It ensures that what’s happening at the convention center right now won’t happen in the future. The city is finally acknowledging that public art isn’t just something you install and forget about. It requires long-term stewardship.”

In a statement announcing the approval of the AIPP resolution, Council Member Zo Qadri said he hopes the expected program changes will prevent future situations in which major pieces of public art could be destroyed.

“There have been a lot of discussions recently about the City’s approach to Art in Public Places due to the approaching redevelopment of the convention center,” Qadri said. “While this item does not affect any of the art pieces at the convention center that were deaccessed, the process will be better for any future case of deaccession. Item 29 notifies artists of their rights and responsibilities at a significantly earlier point in the process, so that no artist is surprised by a short timeline to prepare, fundraise, and save art set for deaccession.”

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.