Monument Installation and Naming/Renaming City Assets
FRAMEWORK
I. Background Statement
A. To provide history, context, and rationale for the proposed framework
II. Definitions
A. To build a common understanding of terms used within the framework
III. Tenets and Values
A. To remind all stakeholders about the deep values and tenets that root the City of Chula Vista
IV. Guidelines
A. General rules and instruction about naming City assets and monument installation
V. Process and Procedures
A. Steps for the application, review, and approval process
I. Background Statement
On September 28, 2021, the Chula Vista City Council heard public comment from various community members and commissions in order to address the permanent disposition of the Christopher Columbus statue in Discovery Park and the renaming of Discovery Park. Council voted to establish a task force (Columbus Statue Removal Task Force) composed of the Human Relations Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, Cultural Arts Commission, Kumeyaay community, and Sons and Daughters of Italy to address the following items: Disposition of Christopher Columbus statue; renaming of Discovery Park; identifying replacement artwork; and the development of a framework to guide the city with naming/renaming of City assets and installation of future monuments. The City of Chula Vista currently does not have a formal policy regarding the naming or renaming of City assets or monument installation. The City, through its departments, and advisory boards and commissions, has followed a number of processes/policies for naming or renaming its parks, libraries and other City assets, as well as monument installation.
The Columbus Statue Removal Task Force utilized various steps in order to develop a framework that would provide the City with a clear protocol for future naming, renaming, and monument installation requests while ensuring transparency and allowing for public participation throughout the process. The task force researched similar efforts, discussions, and policies from surrounding cities, as well as other cities within California, and drew upon best practices from each.
The task force developed and approved a framework with the purpose of establishing uniform guidelines for the naming and renaming of City assets, as well as to establish criteria and guidelines for the consideration and installation of monuments deemed by the City to be appropriate.
II. Definitions1
City Assets Tangible or intangible items of value that are owned or created by the City, including but not limited to
City facilities. This definition does NOT include
PUBLIC ARTWORK.
City Facility (included in City
Assets)
Any part of real property or structure owned by the
City or for which naming rights or monument
installation are conferred by agreement, including,
but not limited to parks, libraries, Recreational
Facilities buildings, parking facilities, interior or
ancillary features that are a part of, or within, a
larger facility and other City facilities.
Commission Any commission as recognized by the City of Chula Vista City Council and/or City Charter;
Commemoration Refers to events on the anniversaries of past events designated of importance to the City. They are
typically held annually and often in conjunction with
sites or markers of memorialization.
Commemoration serves the purpose of continually
reinscribing the importance of the original event in
public memory.
Department Director Appointed director of the department that oversees the City Asset eligible for naming, renaming, or
monument installation. The director may assign this
responsibility to other department staff within their
delegation of authority.
1 Definitions influenced by City of San Diego Council Policy 900-20, Naming of City Assets
Donation or gift A monetary (cash) contribution, endowments, personal property, real property, financial securities, equipment, in-kind goods or services, or any other
City Asset that the City has accepted and for which
the donor has not received any goods or services in
return. For purposes of this Council Policy, the terms
“donation” and “gift” shall be synonymous.
Donor A person or other legal entity that proposes or
provides a donation to the City.
Funding Financial or in-kind resources to provide funding that might result in naming or renaming.
Funding Source The source of funding which can include individuals, nonprofit organizations, and for-profit entities.
Marker Permanent writing on plaques, walls, stone carvings, pavers, bricks, electronic display, or interpretive
signs that are temporary or permanent and are used
to memorialize; also considered part of a monument
it is describing.
Memorialization Intentional attempt to give importance to particular people, sites, events, and/or incidents in the
historical record of the City through the placement
of monuments, plaques, statues or other markers.
Indicative of a City narration on the history of itself.
Monument Markers, statues, and other similar installations, designed to be permanent, which are installed on
City property with City permission. Monuments may
be in various forms including statues, fountains, or
gardens among other forms of monuments as
determined by the City.
Naming The selection and approval by the City for the initial naming of a City Asset other than streets within the
public right of way.
Non-Profit Organization A corporation or an association that conducts business for the benefit of the general public
without shareholders and without a profit motive.
Public Art In contrast to the presumed permanence of
monuments, this includes more temporary
installations wherein aesthetic considerations take
precedence over historic significance. Approval lies
with the Cultural Arts Commission.
Renaming The selection and approval by the City of a new name for an existing City Asset other than streets
within the public right of way.
Work of art While both public monuments and public
art/installations can be commonly referred to as
‘works of art’, each carry an important distinction in
historical versus aesthetic significance, as well as
protocols for approval, as noted in the definitions
and guidelines within this document.
III. Guiding Principles/Tenets/Values
❖ Process Matters as Much as Outcome: The City of Chula Vista aims to take time for quality, move at the speed of trust, and cultivate relationships beyond the life of a single monument and/or name. We strive for a powerful final result that is fueled by intentional and iterative processes. We balance urgency and timeliness with purposeful reflection. We aim to work collectively with Kumeyaay communities when reviewing the region’s history. ❖ Truth Telling and Accountability: We work towards
acknowledging a comprehensive and robust history of our region. ❖ Elimination of Prejudice and Discrimination: We acknowledge that the historical and contemporary practices of monument installation and the naming/renaming of public assets has created harm and continues to marginalize communities and community members. The installation of monuments and the
naming/renaming of city assets must thoroughly vet efforts, donations, and proposals that may inflame prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination.
❖ Welcoming City: We believe that truly welcoming places have intentional, inclusive and equitable policies, practices, and norms that enable all (especially those marginalized) community members to live, thrive, and contribute fully.
❖ Public Memory and Memorialization is POWER: Monuments, naming, and renaming can convey a powerful connection
between Chula Vista and its history, and in some instances its future. It is therefore important that the placement of monuments and the naming/renaming of city assets be limited to
circumstances of the highest community-wide importance, to be mindful of the relationship between commemoration and
memorialization. 2
2 City of San José, Council Policy 9-14, Monument Policy
IV. Guidelines
Our communities are dynamic, as they continue to change in many ways. The ethnic and racial compositions of our communities are an integral part of this change, as we have witnessed shifting community demographics over time. The process of monument installation and the naming/renaming of city assets must engage and strive for balance between the concept of permanence in an ever- changing society. Therefore, monuments and the naming/renaming of city assets should have a broad acceptance in a multicultural society while also considering future generations.
The City names/renames City assets, installs or accepts City-approved monuments on City property as a form of “Government Speech”, as City recognition of significant events or people, or to provide information from the City on topics approved by the City, as set forth below:
a. The contributions of individuals or groups who made a substantial impact upon the City of Chula Vista:
b. The history of Chula Vista:
c. Historical or cultural influences on Chula Vista;
d. Native flora, fauna and wildlife of Chula Vista and the greater South County area;
e. Local innovation or creativity that has contributed to Chula Vista’s growth and prosperity; or
f. Other criteria selected by City Council and set forth in an amendment to this Policy.
Order of Preference: Monument installation and the naming/renaming of city assets are pursuant to the following guidelines in order of preference:
1. Geographic Location. Whenever possible, all City assets will be considered for their geographic location. Creating names and monument installation based on the asset’s geographic location should be considered first. The geographic location may be based on the relationship of the asset to a specific place, neighborhood, major street, regional area of the City or the City’s name if the asset serves the entire community.
2. Other Considerations. Consideration of monuments and names may also include a prominent form of topography, prominent flora, and cultural or historical precedent.
3. Extraordinary Circumstances. Only under extraordinary circumstances and with broad public support will the City consider monument installation and the naming/renaming after a person or group.
Monument Installation or an asset may be named in memory, or honor of, an individual, group, or organization if it fulfills the criteria outlined in this policy:
i. The person, group, or organization made lasting and significant contributions to the protection of natural or cultural resources of the City of Chula Vista; or
ii. The person, group, or organization had a significant positive impact on the lives of Chula Vista’s residents; or
iii. The person, group, or organization offered a lifetime of volunteerism and service to the community;
iv. The naming of the person, group, or organization does not result in the excessive commercialization of the City asset.
V. Process and Procedures
Monument Review Process
● The City Manager or designee shall provide the initial screening of monument proposals to determine if the proposed monument complies with the provisions of this framework (policy) including without limitation, to evaluate the suitability of the proposed monument site, if any.
● The City Manager (or designee) shall decide whether to forward the proposal for further review or to decline further City consideration of the proposed monument based upon considerations consistent with this framework (policy).
● If the City Manager’s decision is to conduct further review of the proposal, the City Manager or designee, shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s for consultation and the City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the proposed site and objectives of the Monument. If there is a doubt regarding the appropriate commission, the City Manager shall determine the appropriate commission for review of the proposal.
● The City Manager or department shall prepare a report for consideration by the commission, and coordinate with all other departments and commissions that are relevant to the proposed monument.
● The commission/s shall review the proposed monument to make an advisory recommendation to the City Manager regarding the monument based upon the factors set forth in this framework (Policy) and the Review Criteria set forth below.
Each monument applicant or donor shall be informed in writing of their right to appeal the City Manager’s decision in the monument donation/application materials prepared by the City.
● If a proponent for a proposed monument disagrees with the City Manager’s decision regarding a proposed monument, the proponent may submit a written appeal of the City Manager’s decision to the City Manager within 30 calendar days of the City Manager’s decision. ● The City Manager and the overseeing commission/s shall evaluate the merits of the appeal and determine whether to forward the appeal to City Council pursuant to the Council meeting rules.
● City Council shall make a final determination on the approval or denial of the Monument proposal by evaluating (i) the merits of the Monument proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy), (ii) City Manager’s reason for denial, (iii) the results of any staff review of the proposal, and (iv) the recommendations of the appropriate City Commission.
Monument Review Criteria
● A proposed monument must conform to the approved Government Speech topics and reflect the values and tenets listed within this framework (policy).
The proposed monument is not objectionable to the persons or community including those that the monument is intended to honor. If through the public outreach process, the City Manager finds that a proposed Monument is a source of substantial dissension or discord within the City, the City Manager shall seek further direction from departments and commissions before making a final determination.
● A Monument must be made of durable materials, able to withstand the elements for a minimum of 50 years with minimum maintenance, shall be made of materials resistant to vandalism and graffiti as much as is reasonably possible, shall be of a scale, materials, color and style appropriate and consistent with aesthetics of the proposed location of the Monument and such other reasonable factors as the City Manager determines.
● The Monument proposal has been through community outreach conducted by the group or person suggesting that the City install the Monument, and the installation and maintenance of the Monument is within the priorities of the work plan of the responsible Department.
○ Community Outreach shall be directed to specific interested groups, that can include:
i. Public notification of proposed changes through media or a public meeting
ii. Outreach to specific local organizations that may be considered stakeholders, i.e., South Bay Community Services, YMCA, Southwestern College, other Non-profit organizations located within the City, local school districts, etc.
● The City may decline to approve or to accept a monument for any lawful reason.
● Monument proposals shall be considered by the applicable (or closest applicable) City commission/s and department/s associated with the proposed location for the monument. That commission shall make a recommendation to the City Manager for approval or disapproval based on consistency with this framework (Policy) and as further described in the Review Process. The City Manager may accept or deny the recommendation from the commission as further provided in the review process.
● The City shall only proceed with the design, fabrication, and installation of a monument after completion of the review process and if the conclusion is to move forward. In reviewing a proposed monument, the relevant departments, the applicable City Commission and City Manager shall review the proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy).
Monument Removal Process
The City Manager or designee shall provide the initial screening of monument removal proposals to determine if the proposal complies with the provisions of this framework (policy) including without limitation, to evaluate the removal implications on the monument site, if any. The City Manager (or designee) shall decide whether to forward the proposal for further review or to decline further City consideration of the proposal based upon considerations consistent with this framework (Policy). If the City Manager’s decision is to conduct further review of the proposal, the City Manager or designee, shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s for consultation and the City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the site and objectives of the monument. If there is a doubt regarding the appropriate commission, the City Manager shall determine the appropriate commission for review of the proposal.
The department shall prepare a report for consideration by the commission, and coordinate with all other departments and commissions that are relevant to the monument removal proposal. The commission/s shall review the proposal to make an advisory recommendation to the City Manager regarding the monument based upon the factors set forth in this framework (Policy).
Each monument removal applicant shall be informed in writing of their right to appeal the City Manager’s decision, found on the monument removal proposal application provided by the City. If a proponent disagrees with the City Manager’s decision regarding monument removal, the proponent may submit a written appeal of the City Manager’s decision to the City Manager within 30 calendar days of the City Manager’s decision. The City Manager and the overseeing commission/s shall evaluate the merits of the appeal and determine whether to forward the appeal to City Council pursuant to the Council meeting rules. City Council shall make a final determination on the approval or denial of the proposal by evaluating (i) the merits of the proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy), (ii) City Manager’s reason for denial, (iii) the results of any staff review of the proposal, and (iv) the recommendations of the appropriate City Commission.
If a monument is approved to be removed, consideration should be given to placing a marker to chronicle the event, including the reasons for the decision to do so, and its historic significance.
Monument Disposition Process
In the case that the City Council approves monument removal, the disposition process is as follows:
1. The City Manager shall refer the responsibility of monument disposition to the appropriate City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the monument site and objectives of the monument.
a. At the discretion of the City Council, a special task force may be assembled consisting of the Human Relations Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Cultural Arts Commission, and specific community members/stakeholders.
2. The City Manager shall prepare a report for review by the commission to provide contextual information (ie. monument location, history, removal process), as well as the directives of the framework (Policy) including values, tenets, and disposition process.
3. The City Manager (or designee) disseminates a Requests for Statements of Interest (RFI) for a period of sixty days. The RFI process includes a media press release conducted by the City staff, as well as promotional strategies to inform potential stakeholders.
4. After the closing of the RFI period, the City’s commission or specialized task force reviews all RFIs. The City’s commission or specialized task force may ask the RFI proposers for a follow-up presentation or for additional clarification on the RFI application.
5. The City’s commission or specialized task force shall deliberate on the RFI proposals utilizing the values and tenets listed within this framework (policy), community feedback, and advisement from City Council.
6. When, and if, a RFI proposal attains unanimous approval, the City’s commission or specialized task force shall make an advisory recommendation to City Council.
7. As per the framework, when a monument is removed, consideration may be given regarding the placing of a marker at the site. The City’s Commission or specialized task force may prepare a proposal for a future “marker” that chronicles the event, shares the decision to do so, and its historic significance.
The marker, fitting the definition of a monument, then follows the Monument Proposal and Review Process.
8. In the case that the City’s commission or specialized task force is unable to make an advisory recommendation to City Council regarding disposition, the monument will remain in City storage for three years or as determined by the City Manager. After three years, the City Manager initiates a new cycle of the monument disposition process.
Naming/Renaming Nomination Process
City departments, commissions, task forces, or community members shall submit their naming or renaming proposal to the Department Director depending on asset type. If applicant’s proposal follows the intent of this framework ( Policy), the Department Director shall make a proposal in writing for naming or renaming of a City Asset as follows:
● For library facilities, the Department Director will make the proposal to the Cultural Arts Commission.
● For parks and recreational facilities, the Department Director will make the proposal to the Park and Recreation Commission.
● For other City Assets, the Department Director will make the proposal to the City Manager, who shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s and/or City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the City asset and objectives of the asset.
Written proposals must, at a minimum, include the following information:
● The proposed name;
● Reasons for the proposed name, including a discussion of the criteria identified in this policy;
● Written documentation outlining community support for the proposed name; ● If proposing to rename a City Asset, justification for changing an established name.
Naming and Renaming Review Process
Upon receipt of a naming or renaming proposal for any City Asset, the Department Director reviewing the naming or renaming proposal shall consider the following items in the review, including but not limited to, the following:
● Submit the proposal to appropriate City historical staff to review the California Historic Resources Inventory Database (CHRID) to determine if the City Asset is a Designated Historical Resources with an assigned historic name; ● Ensure that supporting information has been authenticated; ● If the City Asset is a Designated Historical resource listed on the local, State or National Register of Historic Places, any on-site recognition shall comply with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Historical Resources staff according to those standards;
● Ensure compliance with framework (Policy)
● Consider the impact of the naming or renaming to the community; and ● Other City staff may review and provide input on the proposal for naming or renaming.
● Consider the cost of implementation and signage, and identify the funding to cover such costs.
The Department Director will submit the proposal to the City Attorney’s Office for legal review of the following issues that include, but are not limited to:
○ Ownership rights, by agreement or by law; and Adherence to City policies, as well as any local, state, or federal regulation.
If a naming or renaming request is for a library or park, the designated City’s Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider the necessity or desirability of naming the park/facility, and the proposed name and any alternatives. The public hearing will be announced on the commission’s website for at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing.
The designated City’s Commission shall prepare a recommendation for action by the City Council. The recommendation shall include no more than three (3) names for the asset that the Commission deemed most appropriate under this framework (policy) and the reason for the Commission’s selections.
The City Council will review the staff report and the Commission’s recommendation and take action. The City Council’s selection is final. Non-selected names can be resubmitted for consideration in subsequent years.
Name Change
Once a name has been selected under this policy, it shall not be changed unless, after an investigation and public hearing, the name is found to be inappropriate because it does not fulfill the criteria laid out in this framework (policy). Review of a name selected under this framework (policy) shall occur only once a year, per the procedure outlined. A facility’s name, once upheld, shall not be reviewed again or changed for fifteen (15) years unless extraordinary circumstances merit, and approval is granted by the City Council.