internal capacity to develop the buildings. Their focus is to provide high quality visual and creative artsprogramming for youth and adults and that they are firmly committed to continuing to serve thiscommunity into the future. The properties as they exist now present a risk and liability to Art House andthey have been informed by their insurance agent that the property insurance for the two homes will bedropped as of November 2012. It is imperative that the Board develop a viable strategy for them, withassistance from the Task Force. It was made clear that everything is open for discussion, but the finalrecommendations to the board on their use must be financially and programmatically viable. CouncilmanCummins stated that his top priority was to insure that Art House be financially viable so that it cancontinue to provide services to the community.
Possible Redevelopment Concepts Pursued:
At the first meeting in June, the Task Force toured the properties, reviewed renovation outline and costestimate by a historic preservation specialist, and brainstormed possible uses for the properties.
The ideas generated included:
renovation of one of the properties by the American Indian Education Center (AIEC) or use fortheir programming; (1 vote)
development of an artist in residence program with gallery space; (5 votes)
redevelopment by and for Hispanic organizations; and (4 votes)
as a fallback last option, demolition of the two houses and creation of gardens, sculpture park,outdoor classroom area for Art House and parking area.
(5 votes)Based on these ideas, the Task Force discussed the pros and cons of each and then voted for the threeproject concepts they were most interested in. (seeSeedetails in attached June meeting minutes). Eachconcept had 2 to 4 members of the Task Force volunteer to research the feasibility of the concept throughmeetings with agencies and organizations that might carry it out, and then develop a short summary thatwould include the concept, what organization would do it, what their capacity was, the project budget andthe possible funding sources.Research was then carried out from June to mid-August and at its August 14
meeting the Task Forceheard reportsbacksfrom the research teams. See attached minutes and matrix of research results from
meeting. It had been determined through the research and meetings that the American IndianEducation Center was interested in one of the houses and AIEC director Robert Roche and board memberLucy Miler attended the August meeting. They however did not come forward with a written proposal asrequested and it was determined at the September 13
meeting that they were not a viable option.