strand mural the facts 03 02 2014 (low res)

Strand City Mural Map The FaCTS

The Strand City Map Mural

The FaCTS

The Strand city map mural in Southsea was originally painted back in 1998 and was unveiled by the local mayor which subsequently won the best landscape award from the Portsmouth Society and raised local trade by 30%.

At a cost of only £8,000 in total, including £5,000 from the Arts Council and £2,500 from Portsmouth City Council this has become one of the best value for tax payer’s money the city has ever seen. This has also grown to become one of the most well-known public art murals on the south coast of England. Yet you will never see it mentioned in the City Council’s brochures and publicity. This document has been produced from our FOI (Freedom of Information) request from

1

Portsmouth City Council to show why this is and also the disinformation that has lead us to be blacklisted from any contracts, commissions or local/external funding. All of this, along with our 110% rent rise on our community centre and thousands of pounds of extra costs, it looks as though there is a campaign to discredit us and get us out of the Arts Lodge.

After 5 years the render at the lower level of the mural started to come down in patches. The first 7ft of the wall was not rendered in 1997 because it was in sound condition, there became problems when the overflow pipe from the middle flat was leaking down the wall for over a year and a half year.


The next step was to find the funding for the project which cost from £30-50k, we budgeted that we could undertake the new mural for £30,000. We applied to the Arts Council of England for £10k, Southsea Town Council for £10k, PHA for £2.5k, Portsmouth City Council for £2.5k and the other £5k from local businesses & residents.

The reason why we secured £10k from Southsea Town Council was due to the fact that Portsmouth City Council wanted to disband it and 5-6 joined the committee of STC and when I presented the project most of STC were against the grant yet PCC voted for and some abstained. It was originally mentioned that we should apply for a £2,000 grant yet I thought as the mural is so important for the rejuvenation of that area in Southsea it was worth more to the residents than that.

The News: June 2000

2

The News: 1997

The Journal: 1997

I know most artists work for free when they are starting out and some people even expect them to forever, but we are like anyone else and have bills to pay, even more so when you fund a community arts centre that costs £20k pa before wages.


The N

ew

s: 19th No

vem

be

r 2002

3


City Arts were very reluctant to give us any funding to repair this, in the end Cllr T. Hall secured some from the neighbourhood funds to fix the problem after the Housing Association re-rendered the patch. We also ran free art workshops for the local community and tourists walking past, which reached over 100 people all painting flowers, butterflies and insects on the ground level.

4

Strand City Mural Map The FaCTS5

The N

ew

s: Thursda

y 26th aug

ust 2003


Date: 2003

6

As you can see there has been hostility towards us since we opened Portsmouth’s only independent, self-funded Arts Centre back in 2002. The recent ‘fiasco’ of our Party in the Park free festival was some in the leisure services throwing every obstacle at us, trying to stop us putting it on and only giving us permission the day before the event.

Date: 12th July 2004


Portsmouth City Council undertook a survey in 1999 around the strand area of Southsea that established local trade increased by 30% due entirely by the newly painted mural.

The News: 2003

7


As you can see the mural started to have problems after 5 years with the render and overflow pipe and in 2008 we had an on-site meeting with PHA the owners of the building and we all concluded the render needed to come down due to subsidence to the building which has caused the render to crack and become unsafe.

8


Assessment and overview summary

Assessment

criteria Score Overview Score

Quality 1 1 - received funding before 1

Management 1 2 - limited or no opportunities for people to engage with

arts activity 2

Finance 1 3 - little (once or twice a year) or no engagement with arts

activity 0

Public

engagement 1 4 - development of the arts sector 0

4 – comments

Totals 4

The activity is for the creation of a fairly conventional painted

mural, and so is unlikely to support key development agendas

for the visual arts. Plans to engage children and young people

whether through consultation or in practical workshops do not

appear to offer insight into artistic considerations or practice.

Whilst partnered financially by Portsmouth CC, the local

authority does not see the project as a strategic priority and

appears doubtful that meaningful engagement would take place

with its key audience groups. It describes its relationship with

the applicant as 'having its ups and downs'.

3

arts Council rejected application

Reasons for refusal

arts Council application (feedback from C. Looney)

10

Recommendation

Summary of

assessment

This re-application to refurbish a mural on a gable end in Portsmouth

has taken into account feedback from the previous application that it

would be usual to create an artist's brief and that local communities

might be actively involved in the commissioning process, at least

through consultation. Overall, however, the activity remains the re-

painting of a mural with no real consideration of what art in the public

realm might be in the 21st Century. Whilst the applicant suggests that

it wishes to create a fully integrated environmental sculpture which is

experiential and place making, artistic possibilities appear limited by

the proposed nature of the work.

The applicant is a community arts organisation based in Portsmouth

which has created murals within the city and beyond, but these

commissions do not appear to be support or encourage development

in the arts.

Public participation appears to be a combination of 'drop-in' painting

workshops for up to 150 people during the creation of the mural (the

detail of these and of who would lead them is not provided) and

public consultation in relation to potential historical subject matter for

the mural which includes a competition involving the local newspaper

to identify local characters of note or repute. Whilst the latter appears

appropriate for the activity, there is no indication of who would carry

out this research and it does not appear to form part of the artist's

brief.

Whilst the artist’s brief offers a clear framework for the submission of

proposals, it presents little detail in relation to aims and objectives of

the commission, other than to suggest that the mural would enliven

the environs with colour and act as a way-finding device.

The applicant does not describe how the activity might develop an

understanding or appreciation of the arts within participants or

audiences of differing levels of knowledge or experience in the arts.

Whilst anecdotal demand for the replacement of an existing mural is

described and the potential social benefits of the overall activity are

alluded to, these are not supported respectively with evidence or in

detail.

Overall, the activity does not appear to support the development of

the applicant or artists or of an understanding of the arts within the

community. Funding is not recommended.

We managed to get help from a professional bid writer to proof read our application to the Arts Council of England, yet still we were rejected. Here are some of their reasons.

It seems incredible that these people receive very good wages from the taxpayer to undermine community organisations in this way. It reminds us of the banks that have just been caught undervaluing then refusing support for viable businesses, so that they can take them over.


Claire Looney comments on community involvement and development, Mark’s artists? I have employed over 150 creative people paying out over £250,000 over the last 12 years. On the new Strand mural there were paid local artists, artists in training, work experience local to European students and local residents all painting over the last 3 years. We also consulted the community through face to face meetings, The News, on site, BBC radio and flyers/posters. It seems as Claire Looney is accusing us of what she has had many complaints made about her for, even from the Portsmouth Society complaint about all public art has to be OK’d by Claire Looney personally, not even by an independent body such as the Hampshire Sculpture Trust. She made sure we were not invited to the Albert Road public art commission meeting, only artists OK’d by her were, and after 5 years and £100,000 of public funding there is still no sign of the public art?

One of the most unique parts of the Strand mural is that it can be added to year after year, we are still getting requests to add people, business premises, company vans, people riding bikes or on the beach. In theory we could be painting more and more detail on there every year for 3-4 months throughout the summer for the next 20-30 years. Creating the most detailed public art mural in the UK. We have so many creative ideas for our city it’s such a shame we can’t work with our Council to maximise the city’s cultural potential.

The only time we have ever received a grant from the Arts Council was £5,000 for the first Strand mural in 1997. Surprisingly we were denied a grant for the new mural even though the mural was a great success and created positive publicity for the Arts Council.

11


You can see we have mentioned many times before to various council officers, councillors and local residents and the press why the mural had to come down, for the comment above ‘The Strand mural performed poorly because the paint used flaked off the wall’ to say it was our fault due to non-professional materials (Keim Paints last over 100 years) is yet another slur resulting in us being blacklisted by the council for local contracts or commissions and even local and external funding coming to us.

Preparing surfaces is something that Mark has done for over 25 years now and making sure that the paints last as long as possible is one of our highest priorities.

12


We requested our Freedom of Information from the Arts Council after we were rejected for a £10,000 grant towards the new Strand mural. These identified negative comments from Claire Looney, most of her comments were censored out.


Dear Lee Hunt Cllr,

We are writing to you concerning a serious breach of the council’s code of practice by one of your officers Claire Looney.

This deliberate hindrance to our organisations running and financial stability has included not only denying us access to local grants and commissions but also external funding and contracts. When we first found this derelict historic building in 2001 and renovated it into a community art centre and cafe we did not expect on top of all the extreme work and costs we would need to be fighting our own council. Where instead of working together for the good of the city without it being driven by any political or personal point scoring agenda.

We have had and still do receive support from some councillors and most employees of PCC yet it seems we are banging our heads against the wall if we are not actively supported by the people who mark the scores and give out the contracts.

We have been continuously marked down in interviews for large contracts with PCC arts dept see enclosed Copnor Bridge interview sheet. After writing to Marian Headicar in 2007 (letter enclosed) we were assured the matter would be dealt with appropriately. Later it was mentioned CL would be moved into a different department.

Still after 3 years we are not invited to public art commission meetings including Albert road where we have been the only arts organisation actively supporting the area for over a decade. And now we have just received our FOI from the arts council after being refused match funding for the new Strand mural and we can see CL is up to her old tricks again by saying certain untruths that will obviously hinder our chances of receiving the grant. This includes saying that the project does not fit in with PCC strategic plans for the area and it is medium priority, see enclosed letter.

As you can see this really is not the kind of support we were expecting after a meeting we had with Parks and Leisure last year trying to iron out our differences. As you may or may not know after we initiated and painted the Strand mural in 1997 local trade went up 30%, over a 10 year period this goes into generating £2-3 million for just that area alone. Could you please explain how the new mural does not fit in with PCC strategic plans for that area and is only medium priority especially now the area is so run down again since the damage to the mural 2 years ago.

Regards,

Mark LewisDirectorThe Art & Soul Traderscc. Mike Hancock MP/ Steve Bailey/ Terry Hall

14

A complaint by us to Portsmouth City Council regarding Claire Looney, 2010.


The News: 22nd November

2010

16

As you can see in the article above which the council officers in the emails do get to see and read that the reason why the mural had to come down was subsidence which is confirmed by First Wessex who agreed to re-render it. So why are some at PCC so determined to say the opposite and discredit our organisation?


The News: 22nd

November 2010

We managed to secure a deal on the first and second scaffolding (funding in kind) due to the positive publicity and advertising and the local builders we know. The scaffolding in 2011/12 was the same money to leave up than pay more for them to take it down for 4 months and then erect it again. This also helped us to check the mural through these months and undertaking any work we were able to.

Portsmouth City Council part funded the project with a £2,500 grant for their places of interest to be represented on the city map. As you can see from the photographs below we had added them by November 2010 and by September there was more than just a few black lines.

June 2010

September 2010

November 2010


After waiting many months for the Southsea Town Council to be disbanded the grant was handed over to PCC to administrate the release then we heard that the money was in their Iceland fund account and could not be accessed.

We were then sent a cheque for the whole grant of £10,000 from STC and we subsequently deposited it in our account where we have a ring fenced policy in place in our constitution to guarantee grants are spent on that project alone, yet this was cancelled within a few hours. Contrary to what they say is normal for grant conditions to change as you can see on the last statements above that they were yet again going to put strict conditions on releasing small amounts of the grant to hinder the project even Mr Kerr adding Miss Looney would add even more.

18


We can not believe that the Council Officers have tried to take us to court to prosecute us for misleading marketing and fraud with no reason or evidence. Where we have evidence of defamation, malicious falsehood and slander of our organisation by them.


The News: 14th September 2012


Due to Claire Looney’s new conditions we could not get enough funds from CL PCC to start painting until the autumn of 2010 which meant we went into 2011 and 2012 which both ended up being the wettest on record. The specialist mineral paints we use can only be applied in certain conditions so this limited the time we could spend painting the mural, as we only received half of the funding to pay for the whole project this means we have been working voluntary on the mural for over a year, adding up to over £12,000 in time.


The News: 14th September 2012

The News: September 2012


S.O.S. Call to arms(in a non-violent way!)

whaT yOu CaN DO TO helP

So what does this all mean?

This document is one of five different cases that show how underhand and devious people in positions of authority can be and how it hurts not only our organisation, but volunteers, the community, visitors, tourists and other staff at Portsmouth City Council.

This is just part of a long campaign to drive us out of The Lodge as Portsmouth City Council couldn’t do anything with the building in the 1990s when I found it derelict and burnt out, until we raised the necessary £70k to renovate it. They probably thought, “If we don’t fund or support them they won’t last and we can have it back... perfect!”

Yet we have survived, due to the continuous support from over 200 volunteers over 14 years and the various projects & services we provide. But now we can not get the mural contracts and funding. We have also had our alcohol license undemocratically taken away, after one noise complaint in 14 years! Along with our 110% rent increase and extras, it’s clear to anyone what they are trying to do.

This year is the first time we have seriously thought about going bankrupt and leaving The Lodge Arts Centre and Park Cafe in the hands of City Arts and Cllr Hunt, since they have moved into the premium coffee trade. They ‘invested’ £100,000 of taxpayers’ money to open an ‘Arts Cafe’ in the arches in Old Portsmouth in 2012, so maybe it could be of some use to them. Sorry - no free creative opportunities for the community there though!

We are at our final hour and need people’s help. We need support, legal advice, work, resources, solidarity and we need the truth!

yet most of all - please join, support, sponsor, share and smile!

See other documents:

‘Savoy hoardings’ & ‘TGlR Murals’

Tel: 023 9287 0880 • Mob: 07787 798 341www.artandsoultraders.com

The Gate Keepers lodge, Victoria Park, angelsea Road, Portsmouth, PO1 3hJ

The lodge arts Centre

strand mural the facts 03 02 2014 (low res)

Documents