November 30, 2013
Saturday PM

The following clarifications and additional facts are provided in response to the article in Sitnews titled "11 Things You Might Not Know About the Proposed New Rain Gauge".

Clarification No. 1:  Funding for this project along with the description and justification for the project were in the 2013 Port budget as follows (word for word):  
 
"The current rain gauge sign on the Port is a one-sided sign mounted to the vent stack for the wastewater lift station located under Berth II.  The vent stack abuts the current KVB Building; therefore, the back of the sign is not visible.  The building will be removed in the fall of 2012 and a new KVB Building will be constructed approximately 30 feet away.  The proposed replacement rain gauge sign will be a commissioned piece of public art that will surround the vent stack covering it on all sides.  The Ketchikan Area Arts and Humanities Council would assist in soliciting the call to artists and selection of the artist and piece for a 7% administrative fee.  Funding would be from the Port Enterprise Fund but would be restricted to receipts from non-maritime related revenue such as rent monies from tour and food vendor leases."
 
I tried to explain this to Ms. Light from KAAHC in a phone conversation this past Tuesday but it appears she misunderstood as the article she provided you stated it would be coming from the "Maritime Tax".  I further went on to explain that if the Council decided to use CPV funds it would in my opinion just require a budget amendment since the source of the funding would be different than what they had approved in the 2013 budget.  I further went on to explain that since the piece was proposed for installation on the Port it would likely be a justifiable use of CPV funds if the City was ever required to account for the proper use of CPV funds or maritime related revenue of the Port Enterprise Funds, such as through a response to a future lawsuit over improper use of such funds.

The new rain gauge proposed by Jennifer Townley and Bette Adriaanse of The Netherlands to replace the rain gauge on Berth II.

 
Clarification No. 2:  Although I was listed in the article as a member of the selection panel, I was out of town attending my oldest son's wedding the weekend the selection committee met.  I was provided a copy of the proposals the other members of the committee where going to review.  I reviewed and scored all of the proposals and provided my results to KAAHC prior to my departure.  Since I was not there on the day the committee met and made their recommendation I cannot comment on how my scores and comments were accounted for in the selection process.
 
Clarification No. 3:  I completely support the public art selection process that we have used in the past and intended to use for this project; however, there apparently was a deviation from the process during the committee's review of the proposals.  As evidenced in clarification no. 1 above, the whole intent of this project was to commission a piece of public art to cover a 25 ft tall, 1 ft diameter galvanized steel vent pipe.  I worked with Ms. Light extensively during her development of the request for proposals to ensure this was a key element.  She understood and included the following statement in boldface on page 2 of the RFP, "The successful rain gauge proposal must completely cover the exisiting vent pole 360 degrees."  A photo of the vent pole on page 5 of the RFP reiterated  it with the following caption, "Successful rain gague proposal must surround vent pole 360 degrees".  Since I was not present the day the committee met I do not know if this key element of the RFP was pointed out to the selection committee.  In my phone conversation with Ms. Light this past Tuesday I tried to describe why I felt this was an important issue, not only to ensure the City was getting what it asked for but to also ensure the process was fair for all the artists who submitted proposals.  I have subsequently learned that at least one local artist admitted to a KPAW board member that had they known the selection committee was going to ignore the requirement to cover the existing vent pole 360 degrees then they would have submitted a different proposal.
 
Clarification No. 4:  Don't blame KAAHC or the artists for the $94,850 cost of the proposed piece.  The budget for the project was proposed by me and approved by the City Council in the 2013 Port budget in the amount of $107,000 after I discussed with Ms. Light and several local artists the size and scope of a piece of art that would have to cover a 25 foot tall vent pipe.  Based on previous public art projects it was determined that a piece of that size would likely run up to $100,000 with an additional $7,000 to cover KAAHC's 7% administrative fee for coordinating the RFP and selection process.  If the City Council determines they do not want to spend that much on this or any piece of art for this project they may do so.  This project is not a 1% for art requirement.  It was a voluntary attempt to obtain a piece of public art to cover a 25 foot vent pole that sits in the new pedestrian plaza in between Dave Rubin's statues and the new KVB Building.
 
 Steve Corporon
Port & Harbors Director
City of Ketchikan
Ketchikan, Alaska

Received November 29, 2013 - Published November 30, 2013

Related:

11 Things You Might Not Know About the Proposed New Rain Gauge

Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:

Webmail Your Opinion Letter to the Editor

 

SitNews ©2013
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska