Costa Mesa City Council
May 5, 2026

691
File #: 26-259 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
The City Council may also decline to adopt the ordinance and maintain the City’sexisting approach to community cat management and continue to prohibit free-roaming cats.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the City’sGeneral Fund (Fund 101) associated with adoption of this ordinance. The TNR program relies on registered individuals and sponsor organizations to conduct trapping, veterinary services, and recordkeeping. Staff time associated with registration, oversight, and data review is expected to be absorbed within the existing Animal Services Unit budget.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’sOffice has reviewed this report and the proposed Ordinance and approved them as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Strengthen public safety and improve the quality of life CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2026-XX adding Title 3 Animal Regulations of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code 3-171 to establish and regulate a Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) program for community cats within the City of Costa Mesa.

692
Ordinance No. 2026-XX Page 1 of 5

ORDINANCE NO. 2026-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA ADDING CHAPTER IV, TRAP-NEUTER-RETURN, TO TITLE 3 OF

THE COSTA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A TRAP-NEUTER-RETURN

PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY CATS

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY FIND AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa, pursuant to its police power, may enact ordinances to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and

WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa has determined that a process of trapping, surgically sterilizing, vaccinating, ear -tipping, and returning cats to the location where they were initially trapped is an effective and humane method to manage the population of feral and community cats within the City of Costa Mesa; and

WHEREAS, Trap-Neuter-Return programs are a rec ognized animal management practice that reduces shelter intake, decreases euthanasia, and supports public health objectives; and

WHEREAS, maintaining records of all Trap-Neuter-Return program activities in the City will assist the City in determining extent of the community cat population, the Trap -Neuter-Return program effectiveness and potential need for any modification to the program; and

WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish a Trap -Neuter-Return program for community cats within the City of Costa Mesa.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Chapter IX . Trap-Neuter-Return, Sections 3-171 through 3-175 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows:

3-171 Purpose and Intent
The city council finds that the humane management of free -roaming, unowned, or feral cats through Trap-Neuter-Return programs reduces animal shelter intake, decreases euthanasia, improves public health, and results in more effective and compassionate animal -control outcomes. The purpose of this ordinance is to authorize and regulate Trap-Neuter-Return programs for community cats within the City of Costa Mesa.

3-172 Definitions
Chief of police means the chief of the Costa Mesa Police Department or designee, including, but not limited to the Animal Services Unit.
693
Ordinance No. 2026-XX Page 2 of 5

Community cat colony or colony means two or more community cats living in one general outdoor location.

Community cat means a free-roaming cat that lives outdoors, is unowned, unsocialized, and not readily adoptable.

Ear-tipping means the removal of the distal tip of a cat’s left ear while under anesthesia to indicate sterilization.

Feral cat means an unsocialized outdoor cat who has either never had any physical contact with humans, or human contact has diminished enough over time that the cat is no longer accustomed thereto.

Sponsor organization means a nonprofit rescue, veterinary clinic, or other organization that facilitates TNR services.

Stray cat shall mean any cat that has been lost or abandoned, and the pet guardian is no longer providing or attempting to provide care and lives outdoors and exhibits the characteristics of being able to be successfully domesticated.

Trap-neuter-return provider or provider means a person or sponsor organization authorized under this Chapter to engage in TNR activities.

Trap-neuter-return or TNR, is the practice whereby community cats are humanely trapped, taken to a licensed veterinary hospital or spay -neuter facility where they are sterilized, vaccinated, ear tipped, and adopted or returned to their colony to be cared for until the end of their natural life.

Trap-neuter-return activities means and includes trapping, sterilizing, vaccinating and/or ear tipping in in connection with returning a cat to their colony or location of capture.

Trap-neuter-return program or program means the TNR activities within the city authorized by and conducted in conformance with the requirements of this chapter.

3-173 Authorization Required for Trap-Neuter-Return Activities (a) No person shall engage in any trap-neuter-return activities within the city except as authorized by this chapter.
(b) It shall be lawful for a person and/or sponsor organization , upon registration and authorization from the chief of police , to humanely trap, transport, sterilize, vaccinate, ear- tip, and return a healthy community cat or feral cat to the location where it was originally trapped, provided any sterilization, vaccination and/or ear -tipping is done pursuant to all applicable laws.
(c) A cat returned as authorized by this chapter shall not be deemed to be “running at large” in a public place pursuant to subsection (a) of section 3-15, provided all requirements of this chapter are met.

3-174 Program Requirements
(a) Prior to engaging in any TNR activities and/or participating in any TNR program within the city, a person or sponsor organization must first register with and receive a letter of authorization from the chief of police.
(b) The chief of police is authorized to create and make available registration forms, logs, and other materials and to require information from applicants consistent with the requirements of this chapter, and to issue, deny, suspend and or place reasonable conditions on letters of authorization subject to the notification procedures of section 3-148. 694
Ordinance No. 2026-XX Page 3 of 5

(c) A letter of authorization shall be valid for one calendar year from date of approval. A request for renewal of authorization must be submitted at least 30-days prior to expiration thereof. (d) Mandatory Sterilization, Vaccination and Ear-tipping. All cats returned under this Program must first:
(1) Be scanned for a microchip ID and contact made with the registered owner prior to any treatment.
(2) Be surgically sterilized.
(3) Receive all core feline vaccinations as designated under current veterinary vaccination guidelines.
(4) Receive permanent identification through ear-tipping. (5) Exceptions. Cats that are seriously ill, injured, or determined by a veterinarian to be suitable for adoption shall not be returned and must instead be provided treatment and/or placement as appropriate.
(e) Recordkeeping.
(1) TNR providers are required to submit TNR logs documenting each TNR cat originating from the city, including but not limited to location trapped, date trapped, clinic or veterinarian used, sterilization and vaccination information, ear-tipping confirmation, and release location. Logs should be submitted upon completion of work on individual colonies and minimally at the end of the calendar year, or prior to the annual expiration of a letter of authorization, whichever is sooner.
(2) The city shall maintain TNR records for a minimum of three (3) years, or as otherwise required by law.
3-175 Enforcement and Corrective Measures
(a) A violation of this chapter is punishable pursuant to section 1-33. (b) TNR authorization may be modified, suspended and/or revoked based on a violation of this chapter, other applicable provision of this code or other law, and/or if reasonably necessary to protect against an immediate threat to the public health and safety , pursuant to the procedures of section 3-149.
(c) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from acting regarding cats that present a threat to public health or safety, display aggression, or are suspected of rabies or other disease. (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to feed any cat in or on any public area or property, unless specifically authorized to do so under this chapter. No person may feed a feral or community cat on private property in such a manner as to create a public nuisance pursuant to section 20-12 or other law.
(d) Denial, suspension for more than 30 days, and/or revocation of TNR authorization by the chief of police may be appealed by the TNR provider pursuant to Chapter IX of Title 2.

Section 2: Inconsistencies. Any provision of this Ordinance which is inconsistent with state law shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with state law. Any provision of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to the extent necessary to affect the provisions of this Ordinance.

695
Ordinance No. 2026-XX Page 4 of 5

Section 3: Penalties. A violation of this Ordinance is a misdemeanor that may alternatively be enforced as an infraction and shall constitute a public nuisance. A violation of this Ordinance may be enforced pursuant to the provisions of Section 1 -33, Chapter II of Title 1, and/or Chapter III of Title 20 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code.

Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason hel d to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance an d each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 5: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day after adoption.

Section 6: Certification. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.

696
Ordinance No. 2026-XX Page 5 of 5

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ______, 2026.

______________________________
John Stephens, Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________________ ______________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss

CITY OF COSTA MESA )

I, BRENDA GREEN , City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 2026 -XX was duly introduced for first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the XX day of XX 2026, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the XX day of XX 2026, by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa on this XX day of XX 2026.

______________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk
697

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 26-276 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
TITLE:

CONTINUATION OF THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER III OF TITLE 15

OF THE COSTA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC WORKS - DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT / ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTED BY: RAJA SETHURAMAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: SEUNG YANG, P.E., CITY ENGINEER, (714) 754-5335 RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt Ordinance No. 2026-XX, continued from the April 21, 2026 Council meeting, approving revisions to Chapter III of Title 15 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (Public Works-Drainage) to incorporate updated drainage impact fees, revise administrative provisions for fee collection, and align City code language with current state law and the City’sadopted Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study.

2. Find that adoption of this ordinance is not a “project”under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4) because it impliments fiscal activities or administrative actions that do not involve any commitment to a specific project or physical development.

BACKGROUND:

On October 15, 2024, the City Council reviewed and accepted Phase 1 of the Storm Drain System Master Plan Update, which included an “Existing Conditions Assessment Report” (ECAR) and the “Proposed Drainage and Water Quality Improvements” report.

On March 17, 2026, the City Council opened a public hearing and continued an introduction and first reading, by title only, of an ordinance amending Chapter III of Title 15 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code relating to drainage to the April 7, 2026, City Council meeting.

During its regularly scheduled City Council meeting on April 7, 2026, the Council, while approving the proposed staff recommendation, requested minor revisions to the proposed ordinance to clarify the appeal process for drainage fee adjustments in section §15-75. Specifically, the requested revisions establish that developer requests based on increased site permeability, including permeable surfaces, bioswales, or other stormwater infiltration features, shall be subject to final review and approval by the Public Works Director.

During its regularly scheduled City Council meeting on April 21, 2026, the Council had additional

698
File #: 26-276 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
During its regularly scheduled City Council meeting on April 21, 2026, the Council had additional questions regarding how and when credits for low impact development design features like bioswales and permeable pavers would be allowed and who would have the authority to approve credits for low impact development. During review of the ordinance, the City Attorney determined that there was an error in the proposed ordinance and requested the City Council continue the item to the next upcoming meeting. At the City Attorney’srequest, the City Council continued the item to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting on May 5, 2026.

The requested revisions by the City Attorney are now incorporated into the ordinance, presented for adoption and explained in the ANALYSIS section below.

All information regarding the Storm Drain System Master Plan Update study can be found on the City’s webpage at<https://www.costamesaca.gov/storm>.

ANALYSIS:

During its regularly scheduled City Council meeting on April 7, 2026, the City Council approved staff’s recommendation to adopt the 2026 Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study as the final component of the 2024 Storm Drain System Master Plan Update with changes to the proposed ordinance section: §15-75 Appeals.

In addition, during the April 7, 2026 meeting, the City Council approved a motion to include a review of the Drainage Fees after three (3) years.

During the April 21,2026 City Council meeting, a continuation to the May 5, 2026 Council meeting was approved to allow the City Attorney’s office to make appropriate changes to the ordinance.

The City Attorney’s office revised the ordinance to read as follows:
§15-74 Credits, Reimbursement & Reductions - Revise & insert paragraph(s) C & D C. A developer may be allowed a reduction of fees from the drainage fee requirements of this chapter provided that he is able to demonstrate a substantial showing of evidence of increased site permeability, using low impact design features such as permeable surfaces, bioswales, or other stormwater infiltration features, that will reduce stormwater runoff and impacts to the City’s existing drainage system.

D. Developer requests for a reduction of the drainage fee may be submitted through the permit application process and shall include a description of the low impact design features, an analysis to justify a reduced impervious coefficient for the developed site, and any other evidence that supports the request for a reduction of the drainage fee. A review of the request shall be completed within 60 calendar days after submittal by the applicant.

The Public Works Director shall have authority to review, comment, adjust, and/or approve qualifying requests for a reduction of the storm drainage impact fee.

This revision allows developers the ability to request credits and drainage fee reductions for low impact development and provides the Public Works Director authority to approve warranted drainage fee reductions during the permitting process as part of Municipal Code section §15-74 Credits,

699
File #: 26-276 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
Reimbursement & Reductions in lieu of section §15-75 Appeals as was originally proposed.

Ordinance No. 2026-XX is included as Attachment 1 to this report. The ordinance is presented for approval and adoption. If adopted, the ordinance would become effective thirty (30) days after adoption with the Storm Drain Impact Fees scheduled to go into effect sixty (60) days after their April 7, 2026, approval.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose to adopt, modify, or reject the ordinance as proposed. If the City Council chooses to make substantive modifications to the ordinance after introduction, the modified ordinance must be adopted by City Council in a future meeting.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The fiscal impact of updating the City’sdrainage fees will depend on the pace of future development throughout the City. All funds collected in the Drainage Fees Fund (Fund 209) will be utilized to fund eligible capital improvements identified in the nexus study and the 2024 Storm Drain System Master Plan Update.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The proposed ordinance and report have been prepared in conjunction with and reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

Pursuant to Government Code, section 66016.5(a)(7) and Assembly Bill (AB) 602, a notice was published in the City’slocal newspaper (i.e., Daily Pilot) on February 13, 2026 and on February 20, 2026. These publications provided more than the required (30) days’notice prior to the initial public hearing scheduled for March 17,2026.

At the March 17, 2026 City Council meeting, the public hearing was opened and continued to April 7, 2026, allowing additional time for noticing, public review, and consideration.

On April 7, 2026, the City Council completed the public hearing, adopted the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study, and introduced for first reading Ordinance No. 2026-XX related to drainage and the updated storm drainage impact fees.

On April 21, 2026, the City Council continued the second reading of Ordinance No. 2026-XX to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on May 5, 2026.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

The Storm Drain System Master Plan Update and the corresponding ordinance to revise the City’s Municipal Code work towards achieving the following City Council goals:
· Maintain and Enhance the City’s Facilities, Equipment and Technology · Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life · Advance Environmental Sustainability and Climate Resiliency

700
File #: 26-276 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2026-XX, continued from the April 21, 2026 Council meeting, approving revisions to Chapter III of Title 15 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (Public Works-Drainage) to incorporate updated drainage impact fees, revise administrative provisions for fee collection, and align City code language with current state law and the City’s adopted Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study.

701
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 1 of 10

ORDINANCE NO. 2026-__

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER III OF TITLE 15 OF THE COSTA MESA

MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DRAINAGE AND MAKING FINDINGS OF

EXEMPTION UNDER CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa prepared and adopted a comprehensive 2006 Master Plan of Drainage Update that included a 20-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Priority List for storm drain improvements to identify needed drainage facility improvements throughout the City and estimate the costs thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa’s current Drainage Impact Fees are based on the 2006 20-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Priority List for storm drain improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that an update of the Master Plan of Drainage was necessary and the existing drainage fee and drainage fee provisions of the Municipal Code should be revised and updated to create a more appropriate fee structure for new development, redevelopment, and construction; and WHEREAS, the City Council accepted Phase 1 of the Storm Drain System Master Plan Update on October 15, 2024, which included the Existing Conditions Assessment Report and the Proposed Drainage & Water Quality Improvements, dated October 2024; and
WHEREAS, on April 7, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed open and public meeting regarding the adoption of the proposed updated Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study, to complete the Storm Drain System Master Plan Update, as required by Government Code Sections 66016, 66017, and 66018; and
WHEREAS, the amount of each fee has been determined and calculated in a manner consistent with the California’s Mitigation Fee Act and any applicable finance plan; and
WHEREAS, the effective date of a resolution that establishes the initial amount or increase of a fee is to be determined in accordance with California Government Code Section 66017; and
702
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 2 of 10

WHEREAS, all other prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance, the approval of the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study dated February 2026, and the proposed updated Storm Drainage Impact Fees as specified by the Mitigation Fee Act (Cal. Gov.

Code § 66000, et seq.) and other applicable laws, have been satisfied.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Chapter III of Title 15 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
§ 15-64 Storm Drain System Master Plan identified.

The City has adopted and now has in effect a Storm Drain System Master Plan, which has been, after notice and public hearing, revised from time to time and which was adopted pursuant to Title 7, Chapter 3, Article 8, Section 65450, et seq. , California Government Code. The official copy of the current Storm Drain System Master Plan is on file in the Office of the City Engineer at 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California, and any reference in this chapter to the Storm Drain System Master Plan shall be to the reports, maps, plats, plans, specifications and other materials constituting said Storm Drain System Master Plan as on file at the above address. The terms of this chapter shall apply to all of the drainage facilities now in place within the City , as well as drainage facilities described and set forth in the Storm Drain System Master Plan and as may be required periodically by the City Engineer.
§ 15-65 Drainage fees established.

Development of, or construction on, property within the City will require construction of additional drainage facilities, as set forth in the Storm Drain System Master Plan and its Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study report and/or as may be identified periodically by resolution of the City Council or as may be imposed as a condition of development approval by the City Engineer. Drainage fees are hereby established for the Newport Bay Watershed and the Santa Ana Watershed. Drainage fees for the Newport Bay Watershed and the Santa Ana Watershed are to be set periodically by resolution of the City Council, 703
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 3 of 10

which fees shall be tiered to take into account the intensity of development proposed for the property. The fee tiers shall be as follows: low -density residential; medium -density residential; high- density residential; and commercial/industrial. The drainage fees for each drainage shed shall be imposed on a pro rata, per acre basis upon any parcel or other piece of property for which an owner, developer or other applicant has requested approval to develop or redevelop, or to construct or reconstruct any structure upon such property pursuant to Section 15-70, prior to, and as a condition of approval being granted for such development or construction.
§ 15-66 Storm Drainage Watershed Funds
The funds collected hereunder shall be deposited in two separate funds which shall be known as the "Santa Ana Watershed Drainage Fund" and the “Newport Bay Watershed Drainage Fund”. In the case of land development subject to the Subdivision Map Act, the drainage fee for the appropriate watershed, as defined in the adopted Sto rm Drain System Master Plan and its Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study, shall be collected, deposited and expended in accordance with Section 66483 through 66483.2 of the California Government Code, in addition to the provisions set forth below, and all other applicable laws of the state. In the case of any development, redevelopment, construction, or reconstruction not subject to the Subdivision Map Act, the drainage fee for the appropriate watershed shall be collected, deposited and expended in accordance with Sections 66000 through 66008 of the California
Government Code, in addition to
the provisions set forth below, and all other applicable laws of the state. § 15-67 Required Construction.
(a) Whenever a development is planned in a location where the Storm Drain System Master Plan or condition of approval calls for a storm drain and the applicant or developer is required to construct the storm drain upon a public right -of-way or on private property to be dedicated as a public right -of-way, the applicant or developer shall be required to post appropriate bonds to cover the estimated construction cost of the storm drain and submit copies of bid prices to the City Engineer prior to construction. Any and all such bonds shall be exonerated upon acceptance of construction by the City Engineer. 704
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 4 of 10

(b) If the City Engineer determines that additional drainage facilities are required in order to adequately provide for drainage, the City Engineer may require, as a condition of approval, the construction of those facilities for the detention of stormwater or such other means as may be necessary to provide adequate drainage of a particular property without adversely affecting adjacent properties or the City's drainage system. (c) Notwithstanding anything provided in this Section 15-67 or elsewhere in this Chapter III, any construction of drainage facilities required to be constructed prior to issuance of development approval shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, imposition of the drainage fee applicable to that property. Facilities included in the Storm Drain System Master Plan may be eligible for credit and/or reimbursement pursuant to this chapter. § 15-68 Fee refund.

If a building permit expires without commencement of construction or a subdivision or parcel map is abandoned prior to final approval, then the applicant or developer shall be entitled to a refund, without interest, of the impact fee paid as a condition for its issuance, except that the City may retain the actual administrative costs incurred on behalf of said applicant or developer, in accordance with Section 66014 of the California Government Code. The fee payer must submit a written request for a refund to the C ity Engineer within 30 calendar days of the expiration of the permit. Failure to submit the required application for refund in a timely manner shall constitute a waiver of any right to the refund. § 15-69 Use of funds.

The money obtained through payment of drainage fees as provided for in this chapter may be used by the City to defray the cost of constructing storm drains and related facilities as identified in the Storm Drain System Master Plan . The City may incur indebtedness for the construction of any drainage facility and utilize either of the drainage fee funds for repayment.
§ 15-70 Fees to connect to existing facilities.

Subject to the provisions of Section 66013 of the California Government Code , applicants requesting connection with existing drainage facilities shall be required to pay the drainage fee as provided for in this chapter.
705
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 5 of 10

§ 15-71 Applicability of fees.

Drainage fees shall be imposed in the following cases:
(a) For low density residential uses, any improvement, addition or major alteration to an existing structure or construction of an accessory structure, in any form, where the aggregate gross impervious percentage of the parcel as a result of such improvement exceeds 50% of the gross acreage of the parcel is subject to a drainage fee for the exceeding impervious acreage. The applicable drainage fee shall be calculated pursuant to the following formula:

Fee = (Impervious area exceeding 50% of the gross parcel acreage) X (Fee per Impervious Acre)
(b) For medium density residential uses, any improvement, addition or major alteration to an existing structure or construction of an accessory structure, in any form, where the aggregate gross impervious percentage of the parcel as a result of such improvemen t exceeds 70% of the gross acreage of the parcel is subject to a drainage fee for the exceeding impervious acreage. The applicable drainage fee shall be calculated pursuant to the following formula.

Fee = (Impervious area exceeding 70% of the gross parcel acreage) X (Fee per Impervious Acre)
(c) For high density residential uses, any improvement, addition or major alteration to an existing structure or construction of an accessory structure, in any form, where the aggregate gross impervious percentage of the parcel as a result of such improvement exceeds 80% of the gross acreage of the parcel is subject to a drainage fee for the exceeding impervious acreage. The applicable drainage fee shall be calculated pursuant to the following formula.

Fee = (Impervious area exceeding 80% of the gross parcel acreage) X (Fee per Impervious Acre)
(d) For commercial and industrial uses, any improvement, addition or major alteration to an existing structure or construction of an accessory structure, in any form, where the aggregate gross impervious percentage of the parcel as a result of such improvement exceeds 90% of the gross acreage of the parcel is subject to a drainage fee for the 706
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 6 of 10

exceeding impervious acreage. The applicable drainage fee shall be calculated pursuant to the following formula.

Fee = (Impervious area exceeding 90% of the gross parcel acreage) X ( Fee per Impervious Acre)
(e) For development of vacant land, any improvement or construction is subject to a drainage fee. The applicable drainage fee shall be calculated pursuant to the following formula.

Fee = (Gross Parcel Acreage) X (Land Use Impervious Factor) X (Fee per Impervious Acre)
(f) For land use changes, where the impervious factor for the future land uses as identified in the Storm Drain System Master Plan is greater than the impervious factor of the existing land use as identified in the Storm Drain System Master Plan.

Fee = (Drainage Fee per Acre of Future Land Use – Drainage Fee per Acre of Existing Land Use) X (Gross Property Acreage)
Drainage fees shall not be imposed in the following cases:
(a) For accessory dwelling units (ADU) less than 750 square feet. (b) For reconstruction of existing structures in the event of a disaster where the reconstruction does not increase the impervious area of the parcel. (c) For land use changes where the impervious coefficient for the future land use as identified in the Storm Drain System Master Plan is less than the impervious coefficient of the existing land use.
§ 15-72 Deposit of fees.

Subject to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act or Sections 66000 through 66007 of the California Government Code, as applicable, a drainage fee paid in accordance with this chapter shall be deposited in the appropriate watershed drainage fund prior to the approval of the final tract or parcel map in the case of recorded map developments and at the issuance of a building permit in all other instances, except for residential developments expressly permitted by Government Code section 66007 to defer payment 707
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 7 of 10

of such fees until issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final inspection, whichever first occurs.

§ 15-73 Private facilities.

Fees provided for, and the expenditures to be made from, the Drainage Fee Fund are to be applicable to those facilities as provided for in the Storm Drain System Master Plan.

Drainage facilities necessary within any development by reason of requirements of the City or the Uniform Building Code shall be at the sole expense of the developer, and funds obtained as provided for in this chapter shall not be expended therefore.

§ 15-74 Credits, Reimbursement & Reductions.

A. Whenever the conditions of approval of a development project require direct construction of a public storm drainage facility (see Section 15-67) described or listed in the Storm Drain System Master Plan, a credit or reimbursement, as applicable, shall be given against the development impact fee, which would have been charged to the development project under the program, for actual construction costs incurred by the developer, up to the cost included in t he Storm Drain System Master Plan. The reimbursement and/or credit amount shall not include any improvements the City can require from the development project under the Subdivision Map Act, or the portion of the improvement deemed to be an on- site improvement that is not included in the Storm Drain System Master Plan.

B. A developer may be allowed a reduction in fees from the drainage fee requirements of this chapter if the developer enters into a development agreement with the City pursuant to which drainage fees are assessed to the developer, or equivalent or comparable improvements are constructed and implemented by the developer.

C. A developer may be allowed a reduction of fees from the drainage fee requirements of this chapter provided they are able to demonstrate a substantial showing of evidence of increased site permeability, using low impact design features such as permeable surfaces, bioswales, or other stormwater infiltration 708
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 8 of 10

features, that will reduce stormwater runoff and impacts to the City’s existi ng drainage system.

D. Developer requests for a reduction of the drainage fee may be submitted through the permit application process and shall include a description of the low impact design features, an analysis to justify a reduced impervious coefficient for the developed site, and any other evidence that supports the request for a reduction of the drainage fee. A review of the request shall be completed within 60 calendar days after submittal by the applicant . The Public Works Director shall have authority to review , comment, adjust, and/or approve qualifying requests for a reduction of the storm drainage impact fee. The developer may appeal the decision of the Public Works Director to the City Council pursuant to Section 15-75.

E. No refund or payment shall be due to an applicant in the event that the impervious coefficient for the future land use as identified in the Storm Drain System Master Plan is less than the impervious coefficient of the existing land use.

F. State law. The City will comply with any fee reduction or fee adjustment requirements imposed by state law.

§ 15-75 Appeals
A. A developer subject to the drainage fees required by this chapter for a particular project may apply to the City Council for: (a) a fee adjustment based upon a showing of substantial evidence of a lesser impact upon the level of service; or (b) a land use category adjustment based upon a showing of substantial evidence that another land use category is more appropriate for a particular development. The written appeal and the applicable appeal fee must be filed with the City Clerk’s Office, prior to the issuance of building permit. The City Council shall establish the appeal fee by Resolution. The appeal shall state in detail the factual basis for the request for adjustment.

B. The City Council shall consider the appeal at a public meeting to be held within 60 calendar days after the appeal application has been filed. The decision of the City Council shall be final. The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall be mailed to the applicant.
709
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 9 of 10

C. If an adjustment is granted pursuant to this section, any subsequent change or intensification of the use or uses of the property or any expansion of the structures on the property, shall invalidate the adjustment, and the applicant shall be subject to the development impact fee requirement applicable to the entire development based on the fee in effect at the time of the change or expansion, less any amount previously paid.

D. If an adjustment is not granted pursuant to this section, then upon the payment of the required fees, the City shall provide the applicant a written notice of the amount of the fees or a description of the dedications, reservations, or other exactions, and shall also provide notification that the 90- day protest period has begun, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020.

Section 3. Any provision of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.

Section 4. The City Council finds that adoption of this ordinance is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), because adoption of the ordinance constitutes the establishment of a government funding mechanism and long-range fiscal planning tool. Section 15378(b)(4) provides that a “project” does not include fiscal activities or administrative actions that do not involve any commitment to a specific project or physical development.

Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, c lauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
710
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 10 of 10

Section 6. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this Ordinance to be published within 15 days after its passage, in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of May 2026.

_____________________________
John Stephens, Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________ _____________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney

THIS PAGE IS RESERVED FOR THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss

CITY OF COSTA MESA )
711
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2026-xx Page 11 of 10

I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 2026-xx was duly introduced for first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of April 2026, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 21st day of April 2026.

__________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk

712

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
TITLE:

ARTS COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT
DEPARTMENT: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
PRESENTED BY: BRIAN GRUNER, PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: BRIAN GRUNER, PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, (714) 754-5009
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Receive and file the Arts Commission annual report (Attachment 1).

BACKGROUND:

In 2017, the Costa Mesa City Council unanimously approved the development of the City’sfirst Arts and Culture Master Plan (ACMP), as shown in Attachment 2. The ACMP was adopted by the City Council on March 16, 2021. At the same time, the City Council awarded a contract to Arts Orange County to complete the ACMP. A subsection goal of the ACMP was to establish a City Arts Commission. On July 19, 2022, the City Council established a seven-member Arts Commission and Commissioners were appointed on September 20, 2022. The Commission held its first meeting on November 3, 2022.

Since its formation, the Arts Commission has been instrumental in moving forward initiatives from the Arts and Culture Master Plan, including but not limited to: community oversight for existing programs, setting the groundwork for new public art initiatives and increasing public participation for the arts grant program. The ACMP aligns with the City Council’score values of Innovation, Compassion, Inclusion, and Collaboration. Additionally, the ACMP also achieves the City Council’s goals by strengthening public safety and improving the quality of life in Costa Mesa by reactivating public spaces, making them feel safer and more vibrant.

The current ACMP was developed as a five-year plan that included a proposed budget for each fiscal year to be approved by City Council annually. The plan is currently in its fifth and final year. Staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) in January 2026 and is currently in the process of selecting a consultant to develop a new 5-year ACMP.

713
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
ANALYSIS:

The Arts Commission meets monthly to discuss the goals and objectives outlined in the adopted Arts and Culture Master Plan. The Commission will present an update to the City Council highlighting its achievements from the previous year and its progress toward established objectives. This year’s presentation will be delivered by Chair Alisa Ochoa, Vice Chair Allison Mann, and Arts Commissioner Fisher Derderian. The presentation will include a summary of accomplishments over the five-year span of the Master Plan, as well as highlights from 2025 and the Commission’sgoals and objectives for 2026.

Arts and Culture Master Plan Accomplishments from 2022-2025 Since the implementation of the ACMP and the hiring of the Arts Specialist in 2022, the following, but not limited to, top four programs and goals from the five (5) year action plan and budget have been successfully implemented and annually re-evaluated:
● Arts Grant Program, including new guidelines and application (pre-existing program re- evaluated in 2023 and 2025)
● ARTventure juried art exhibition and awards ceremony (pre-existing program re-evaluated annually)
● Poet Laureate Program (new initiative implemented in FY 2024-25) ● Hired consultant Arts Orange County to create an Art in Public Places Report (Attachment 3) to guide the public art goals in the ACMP (new initiative completed in 2023) Approximately 80% of the ACMP has been implemented within the program budget. Some items identified in the plan, such as large-scale public art have not been completed due to limited funding (Attachment 2, Pages 56-57). In addition, included is a comprehensive list of optional programs, accompanied by a detailed accounting of program goals achieved and not achieved over the past five years, as delineated in the ACMP (Attachment 4, Pages 53-55).

Arts Commission Accomplishments: Year 2025
The past calendar year, the Arts Commission continued to review and re-evaluate pre-existing programs and worked diligently to implement larger goals from the ACMP (Attachment 2, pages 38- 41), which included:

Goal #2: Expand public art throughout the city.

Action 2.2: Develop a plan for more ambitious temporary and permanent public art, including the identification of potential locations around the City, creation of policies with respect to selection and acquisition of artworks, and determination of the funding sources to be used.

Action 2.4: City may consider adopting a policy mandating fees for public art from new development projects. See Appendix for an example from the City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code on Art in Public Places.

714
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
Additionally, the following accomplishments have been achieved in 2025:
· Selection of Costa Mesa’s first-ever Poet Laureate position serving a two-year term. · Reviewed and approved twelve (12) new designs for the Utility Box Art Program. · Reviewed and approved nine (9) grantees for the Arts Grant Program and made changes to the Arts Grant Program guidelines that included increases to arts grant amounts. · Participation in a review panel to select poetry for a new public art initiative: Sidewalk Poetry project at Brentwood Park.
· Reviewed and approved a new Scope of Work for new ACMP update. · Discussion and review of the Art in Public Places Report as part of a larger plan to draft a public art ordinance for implementation in the future as a mechanism to fund public art projects in Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) as referenced in Goal #2, Action 2.4 listed above.

Arts Commission Goals and Objectives: Year 2026

1. Assist in the implementation of a potential update and new Arts and Culture Master Plan for City Council review to support updated initiatives and new direction focused on public art.

2. Review and approve new poems for new Sidewalk Poetry Project for upcoming park renovations at Ketchum-Libolt and Shalimar Parks as part of a new public art initiative.

3. Draft an official public art ordinance for City Council review that would include a one (1) percent fee for publicly funded Capital Improvement Projects over $500,000 in project valuation to be set aside for public art, and or possibly a one (1) percent fee or incentive for private development projects over $500,000 in project valuation to be set aside for public art.

Potential public art projects could include:
a. As per the ACMP Goal #2, Action 2.6: artist designed and created elements, such as street lights, playground equipment, fitness stations, bus shelters, and benches. Public art projects may also include murals, art installations, and sculpture for buildings and public places
b. As per the Costa Mesa General Plan: Arts in Public Places and in Private Development i. Policy OSR-4.15: Continue to review adopting an Arts in Public Places Program. ii. Policy OSR-4.16: Pursue the placement of public art in prominent locations, particularly along major travel corridors to enliven and beautify the public realm. iii. Policy OSR-4.17: Develop incentives or programs that encourage art in new developments.

Arts Commission Budget Priorities and Recommendations for 2026:

Funding Gap Visual (General Fund and the 130 Special Revenue Fund) The special revenue fund for the Arts and Culture Master Plan (Fund 130) was created with the use of 0.5% of gross receipts from cannabis tax revenue and to be collected and distributed annually.

These revenues have come in at approximately $200,000 per year over the past three years, while expenditures have exceeded $300,000 annually over the same period of time. Due to shortfalls in

715
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
expenditures have exceeded $300,000 annually over the same period of time. Due to shortfalls in projected cannabis tax revenue in the first couple of years of implementation, the ACMP 5-year budget has been supplemented by the General Fund. As revenue streams level out for cannabis tax, the amount of $230,000 is the estimated average of revenue (0.5%) from year to year to fund Arts and Culture programs. This amount is not sufficient to cover all the programmatic and staffing costs associated with the ACMP.

By utilizing this budgetary information, the Arts Commission set the following recommendations for budget priorities (Attachment 5):

1. Reclassify the Arts Specialist position to the City’s General Fund to address the annual funding gap for special revenue fund 130 (ACMP account funded by 0.5% cannabis revenue). o As currently structured, a substantial portion of the Arts and Culture Master Plan budget is directed toward a personnel line item rather than toward the programming, activations, and public art investments the ACMP was designed to fund. Reclassifying this position to draw from the general fund would restore those resources to their intended purpose and bring the budget structure into alignment with standard City practice.

2. Establish a special revenue Public Art Fund.
o A dedicated Public Art Fund would serve as a specialized, protected fund for public art investments. Critically, it would be structured so that it is not subject to general fund supplementation, meaning any unspent dollars would carry forward from year to year rather than reverting to the general fund at the close of each fiscal year. This structure ensures that public art funding accumulates purposefully over time and is available when meaningful projects are ready to move forward.

3. Dedicate a portion of any Transient Occupancy Tax increase to the Public Art Fund (this

716
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026

3. Dedicate a portion of any Transient Occupancy Tax increase to the Public Art Fund (this recommendation could be considered as a replacement to the suggested goal/objective #3 for a Public Art Ordinance, or to supplement it by funding public art projects outside of capital improvement projects and or private development projects). o As the Council considers how to allocate that new revenue, the Arts Commission urges that the Public Art Fund be included as a designated recipient. Hotel visitors are among the most direct beneficiaries of a culturally vibrant city, and there is a clear and logical connection between tourism revenue and the public art investments that make Costa Mesa an attractive destination. Dedicating a share of TOT growth to the Public Art Fund would create a sustainable, visitor-supported funding stream tied directly to the community’s cultural identity.

4. Increase the Cannabis Tax Allocation from 0.5% to 1% to fund the full implementation of the Arts and Culture Master Plan and address the funding gap for special revenue fund 130. o Doubling the allocation from one-half cent to one full cent would meaningfully close that gap and reduce the City’s dependence on annual general fund backfills to sustain Master Plan programming. The original vision behind the Measure Q set-aside was to generate visible, tangible results for the community through a dedicated revenue source. Increasing the allocation is the most direct way to honor that commitment without asking for new or additional spending from the general fund. A portion of the increased allocation could be directed to the Public Art Fund established under Recommendation 2, ensuring a dedicated and visible source of funding for public art projects as envisioned under the Master Plan.

5. Approve consultant, if selected by City Council, to work on a new ACMP update.

6. Approve new budget framework to fund the interim period between the last year of the current ACMP and the implementation of the proposed update to the ACMP until the new ACMP update is complete.

Next Steps:

Over the next nine months, the Arts Commission will be engaged in the development of the next five- year master plan. The plan will cover FY 27/28 to FY 31/32. Staff intends to bring forward an award of contract to City Council before end of FY 25/26.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may provide feedback and direction on upcoming year’s goals and objectives and budget priorities and recommendations.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Funding requests will be discussed and considered during the FY 2026-27 budget development process.

LEGAL REVIEW:

There is no legal review is required at this time.

717
File #: 26-214 Meeting Date: 5/5/2026
CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Strengthen the public’s safety and improve the quality of life. · Maintain and enhance the City’s facilities, equipment, and technology.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Receive and file the Arts Commission annual report.

718
ARTS

COMMISSION

PRESENTATION

TO CITY COUNCIL
April 21, 2026 | 6:00 p.m.
1 ATTACHMENT 1
719
Arts and Culture Master Plan Implementation
● Annual Art Crawl Experience
● Revised guidelines and standards for
Exhibition spaces in City facilities
● Created new guidelines for Utility Box
Art Program
● Updated Arts and Culture Calendar and
Artist Directory
● Arts Grant Program with new guidelines
and application
● Free Park Performances at parks and
city events
2022-2026
● Poet Laureate Program
● Implemented optional private property
Mural Permit in TESSA
● Free at Segerstrom Center Campus
program
● ARTventure juried art exhibition and
awards ceremony
● Hired consultant Arts Orange County to
create an Art in Public Places Report to
guide the public art goals in the ACMP
The following programs and goals from the five (5) year plan have been implemented and re-evaluated:
2 720
Accomplishments for 2025
• Selection of new Poet Laureate for two-year term
as Costa Mesa’s first ever Poet Laureate
• Reviewed and approved twelve (12) new designs
for the Utility Box Art Program
• Reviewed and approved nine (9) grantees for the
Arts Grant Program
• Reviewed and made changes to the Arts Grant
Program guidelines that included increases to
arts grant amounts
• Participation in a review panel to select poetry for
a new public art initiative: Sidewalk Poetry project
for implementation at Brentwood Park
• Reviewed and approved a new Scope of Work for
ACMP update
• Discussion and review of the Art in Public Places
Report as part of a larger plan to draft a public
art ordinance for implementation in the future as
a mechanism to fund public art projects
3 721
Upcoming Plans for 2026
Assist in the
implementation of a
potential update and new
Arts and Culture Master
Plan for City Council review
Review and approve new
poems for new Sidewalk
Poetry Project for upcoming
park renovations at
Ketchum-Libolt and
Shalimar Parks
Draft an official public art
ordinance for City
Council review
4 722
Upcoming Plans for 2026 (continued)
Review and make
suggestions for optional
TESSA mural applications
for private property
Review and approve
new designs for the
Utility Box Art
Program
Review and
approve new Arts
Grant Program
grantees
5 723
Purpose for Budget Priorities for 2026-27
• The current framework requires City finance staff to
return to Council each year to request general fund
dollars to backfill a recurring shortfall.
• Our recommendations are not a request for new
funding. The intent is to update city policies and
municipal codes to remove recurring inefficiencies
and better align existing and anticipated revenue
with their original purpose.
• Updating city policies and municipal codes where
applicable would ensure arts funding is properly
designated from the outset, staff time is not
consumed by avoidable annual shortfalls, and public
dollars are directed as efficiently as possible toward
the outcomes the Arts and Culture Master Plan was
designed to deliver.
6 724
Proposed Budget Priorities for 2026-27
3 Dedicate a portion of any
Transient,Occupancy Tax
increase to the Public Art Fund
Reclassify the Arts
Specialist position to the
City’s General Fund
Establish a
dedicated
Public Art Fund
6 Approve new budget
framework to fund the interim
period between the last year
of the current ACMP and the
implementation of the
proposed update to the ACMP
4 Increase the Cannabis Tax
Allocation from 0.5% to 1.0%
to fund the full
implementation of the Arts
and Culture Master Plan
5 Approve consultant, if
selected by City
Council, to work on a
new ACMP update
1 2
7 725
Illustrative Budget Framework for 2026-27
• The following budget frameworks are provided to
illustrate how the City’s arts funding can be organized more clearly and deployed more effectively under
current operating conditions.
• As the City of Costa Mesa approaches the end of the
current fiscal year, the Arts and Culture Master Plan
has effectively expired, and an updated plan has not
yet been adopted.
• These next two models also account for the anticipated cost of the Master Plan update contract, ensuring
that the update process does not create additional
pressure on the City’s general fund and remains
consistent with the intent of the ordinance.
• Both scenarios organize funding into clear categories and reflect a simple principle: core programming and
contractual obligations are funded first, with
remaining funds directed toward a Public Art Fund
capable of supporting visible, long-term improvements
across the City.
8 726
Proposed Budget for 2026-27 @ 0.5% Cannabis T ax Revenue FY26 & FY27 PROPOSED BUDGET @ 0.5% CANNABIS TAX REVENUE Account Item FY25/26 Proposed 26/27 Proposed 27/28
Multimedia, Promos
Free at Segerstrom Center Campus $ 60,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Utility Box Art Program $ 12,500.00 $ 12,500.00 $ 12,500.00 Consulting
Artist Laureate Program $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Large-Scale Installations $ - - $ - Master Plan Update $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ - Recreation
ARTventure/Action Arts $ 30,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Galleries $ 400.00 $ 900.00 $ 900.00 Free Park Performances $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 Art Crawl $ 3,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 Grants
Arts Grants Program $ 12,500.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 32,500.00 Public Art
Board Member Fees Arts Commission Stipends $ 8,400.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 8,400.00 Public Art Fund $ - $ 4,600.00 $ 62,100.00 Total Events and Initiatives $ 237,300.00 $ 248,400.00 $ 248,400.00 9 727
Proposed Budget for 2026-27 @ 1.0% Cannabis T ax Revenue FY26 & FY27 PROPOSED BUDGET @ 1.0% CANNABIS TAX REVENUE Account Item FY25/26 Proposed 26/27 Proposed 27/28
Multimedia, Promos
Free at Segerstrom Center Campus $ 60,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 35,000.00 Utility Box Art Program $ 12,500.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Consulting
Artist Laureate Program $ 2,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 Large-Scale Installations $
Master Plan Update $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ - Recreation
ARTventure/Action Arts $ 30,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Galleries $ 400.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Free Park Performances $ 48,000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Art Crawl $ 3,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 Grants
Arts Grants Program $ 12,500.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Public Art
Board Member Fees Arts Commission Stipends $ 8,400.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 8,400.00 Public Art Fund $ - $ 112,500.00 $ 177,500.00 Total Events and Initiatives $ 237,300.00 $ 428,400.00 $ 468,400.00 10 728
Press
11 729
Q&A
12 730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 3
815

Table of Contents Appendix
04 Executive Summary
05 Public Art Goals and Objectives
06 Public Art Recommendations
Criteria for the Siting of Public Art
Temporary vs. Permanent Public Art, Definitions and Distinctions Public Art Commissioning Process
Public Art Collection Management
Contracting
Murals
Public Art Donations
Criteria for Acceptance of Public Art Donations
De-accession of Public Art
Public Art and Development Mandates in Orange County
Inclusion of Public Art in Public Works Development Projects Inclusion of Public Art in Private Development Projects Budgeting for Public Art Projects
Funding Mechanisms for Public Art Projects
Imaginative Design in Functional Elements
08 11
14 20
22 28
36 42
44 46
48 50
60 62
66 78 About the Consultant
80 Orange County Cities with Public Art
Requirements & Programs
81 Orange County Public Artworks by City
82 Inventory of Public Artworks in
the City of Costa Mesa
91 Sample Public Art in private
development definitions and
eligibilities from other Municipalities
Sample Public Art Contracts
County of Los Angeles Artist Services Agreement
City of Los Angeles Personal Services Agreement
91 92
93 The Ram by Charles O. Perry
Images throughout this report are selections from Public Art in Costa Mesa 2 3
816

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION THIS REPORT
The Vision of the Plan stated:

The City of Costa Mesa rededicates itself to the distinction of being a “City of the Arts,” a place where:

Creativity and creative people can flourish
Imagination, inspiration and innovation are held in high regard The arts are agreed to be essential to everyone’s education Arts and culture enrich lives and uplift the human spirit Arts and culture promote civic pride
In 2022, the City implemented two important recommendations from the Arts & Culture Master Plan:

Hiring an Arts Specialist
Creating an Arts Commission
Also in 2022, the City determined that it wished to take steps toward fulfilling Goal #2 of the Plan:

Expand Public Art throughout the City, both indoor and outdoor, through donation, loan and purchase
Because the City has no policy or procedure for acquiring and displaying Public Art, it engaged Arts Orange County in June 2022 to prepare and present its recommendations.

The purpose of the consultancy was to recommend formal policy guidelines and procedures for the Art in Public Places program based on industry best practices that incorporate existing policies and any recommended policy updates and cover the following elements:

Establish purpose, goals and objectives for citywide Public Art Policy that ties into and utilizes data from relevant stakeholders collected from the Arts & Culture Master Plan; Criteria for the siting of Public Art projects;
Definitions and distinctions between Temporary and Permanent Public Art projects; Distinctive policies and procedures between Temporary and Permanent Public Art projects which should include the current Utility Art Box Program, permit processes for murals on private property as part of temporary Public Art processes and a general process by which artists are commissioned and selected for temporary and permanent Public Art; Guidelines for inclusion of Public Art in public and private development projects; Policies for the management of commissioned art projects including, but not limited to, City/artist/stakeholder roles and responsibilities, contracting requirements, and any applicable regulatory requirements;
Standards for maintenance plan and managing Public Art inventory; Develop funding considerations and or plan;
Policies for acceptance of donated/gifted artwork;
Policies and procedures for deaccession of artwork;
Process for incorporating imaginative design in all of the City’s functional elements and fixtures: streetlights, playground equipment, fitness stations, bus shelters and benches; Comparison and or case study of comparable Public Art polices in other Orange County cities.

In 2022, the City’s newly-appointed Arts Specialist immediately sought to address the lack of a written policy for the City’s existing temporary Public Art program (established in 2015) by preparing a Draft Utility Art Box Program Handbook. The consultant’s scope of work included reviewing that Draft Handbook and recommending revisions.

In 2017, the Costa Mesa City Council approved unanimously the development of the City’s first Arts & Culture Master Plan. This initiative signaled the Council’s belief that the time had come to appraise the value of the City’s cultural resources, to identify what strengths and weaknesses those who live, work or visit here feel exist in the local cultural landscape, and to envision ways that the City can support and advance arts and culture in Costa Mesa. Arts Orange County, the County’s nonprofit arts agency, was engaged as consultant for the project. On March 16, 2021, the City Council approved the Arts & Culture Master Plan. 4 5
817
City of Costa Mesa Public
Art Recommendations
The information and recommendations in this report are offered to support a program offering opportunities for artists and serve the community through varied approaches and perspectives. The adoption of any and all recommendations are at the City’s sole discretion, and any modifications to current ordinances, policies and procedures should only be made under further guidance from the City Attorney and are subject to final approval of the Costa Mesa Arts Commission and the City Council.

Thalo Sun by Gabriella Kohr
76 818
Criteria for the Siting of Public Art
The commissioning of Public Art can have a significant effect on a location as an environmental enhancement, source of pride, and place maker. Public Art can reflect and highlight the culture, history, goals, and/or values of a community.

In order to ensure the artwork achieves the highest level of positive impact, care must be taken in the selection of locations. This should include consideration of thematic and aesthetic appropriateness, audience, community and cultural equity, and public access. Conditions affecting ongoing maintenance and use of materials are also important in ensuring the long life of an artwork for the enjoyment of the community.

The following are questions to consider when contemplating a location and the overall commissioning of Public Art. The questions and criteria offered are intended to be flexible and allow for individual case by case commissions to be established using best practices in the field.

Costa Mesa City Hall and other public locations with high pedestrian traffic, such as the Costa Mesa Donald Dungan Library and Lions Park, are visible and natural sites for Public Art placement. Public Art in these locations can become iconic markers reflecting the importance of the work of the government or community amenities in these locations.

That being said, when considering the development of a Public Art collection, it is recommended that the City also look at smaller community gathering, or pedestrian centers spread throughout the municipality to ensure an equitable distribution of cultural assets across the City. Varying the size and types of projects within a City collection will result in balancing a range of large highly visible artworks with equally impactful intimate and midsize artworks that can enliven smaller parks or facilities.

Before settling on a specific location and format for an artwork, the commissioning body should establish the goals and concepts the work should encompass. While the following are not mutually exclusive, within a project one aspect may form the overriding purpose in the establishment of a Public Art project. Questions to consider and possibilities include:

Are there high levels of pedestrian traffic? Is there a specific purpose for the artwork in relation to celebrating the community’s history, services, culture, or heroes? If so, will a specific location (or locations) resonate more than others with this purpose? Is the artwork intended to enhance the aesthetics of a location and bring a moment of visual respite to a viewer’s day? Are there locations that can particularly benefit from this intervention?
Is the goal to bring an arts experience to a site for the sake of establishing an uplifting cultural moment? Are there locations with many pedestrians that can benefit from this intercession?
Is there an equitable distribution of artwork in the community? How will an artwork location balance the entirety of the Public Art offerings in the city? While it is tempting to consider free-standing sculpture as the norm when evaluating the placement and commissioning of Public Art, artwork can take many forms from artist designed functional objects or artwork integrated into architecture, to stand-alone artistic expressions enhancing single or multiple areas within a project site.

On-site locations for Public Art projects include, but are not limited to, walls, floors, ceilings, windows, exterior facades, stairways, rooftops and patios. Locations can encompass parks, plazas, civic centers, roadway medians, traffic islands, and bridges among other possibilities. 8 9
819
If funding for the artwork is attached to a particular site relating to a capital improvement development or other Public Works opportunity, site considerations within the development should include public access hours and visibility. If the site has a history of vandalism, the height or accessibility of the artwork siting if placed on the building structure or monitored locations such as lobbies or interior welcome areas should be contemplated.

Other considerations after a general location such as a specific park or municipal facility are selected, and the opportunity is under discussion include:

Is the artwork placement in a well-traveled area visible during regular working hours? Will the artwork block windows or entryways?
Is the placement accessible for required maintenance?
Will normal pedestrian pathways remain unobstructed?
Will the scale of the artwork be appropriate to the environment (surrounding architecture, signage etc.)?
Because of the almost unlimited options for placement and the form Public Art can take, the City should invite artists to visit the selected location if it is a preexisting site, or view plans in an early stage of development to allow the artist to bring their creativity and concepts to bear.

This can result in fresh and unique perspectives in site placement within the location and the formation of the artwork project.

TEMPORARY VS. PERMANENT PUBLIC ART ,

DEFINITIONS AND DISTINCTIONS
There are many commonalities to the commissioning and placement of both temporary and permanent Public Art, such as the need for the work to be appropriate the audience, reflect the community’s values, be fabricated with safe, appropriate materials and methods, be commissioned in an equitable fashion, be site-specific, be maintainable for the expected life of the project, be visible and contribute to the site as a place-making enhancement, etc.

Permanent Public Art
Within the field, municipalities commonly designate that permanent artwork has a lifespan expectation of a minimum of 25 to 30 years. This expectation leads to materials and methods that have a track record of longevity such as metal, glass, concrete, terrazzo, stone, mosaic, tile or other similar products. Because of the permanent nature of the work, artwork themes and concepts have an expectation of being broader or more universal, so as to not become dated in 10 or 15 years.

There are many reasons to pursue permanent Public Art projects. Permanent Public Art programs commonly have funding tied to a percentage of the cost of construction for public works projects. It is normal for a percentage or all the funding for these projects to be grants from entities requiring the use of the funds to be restricted to capital improvements. Permanent Public Art projects are generally eligible costs in this regard.

Permanent Public Art projects result in an artwork that will serve the community for many years and will become a City asset that may increase in value through the years. 10 11
820
Temporary Public Art
Temporary Public Art can range from an expected lifespan of a day for event connected work, to months, to a limited number of years. Because of the transitory nature of the work, edgier concepts, current affairs, and contemporary themes can be explored and experimental materials and methods can be employed. Because of the flexibility of temporary artwork, smaller budgets are generally needed, and sites can be activated with art to see how it is received prior to consideration of a more expensive permanent piece being commissioned at the location.

Materials such as vinyl, paper, canvas, wood, found objects, etc. can be employed, leaving a wide array of options for artists to consider. A temporary art program can also be a great way to bring artists inexperienced with Public Art to the table to learn how to work within the public sphere, complete contract milestones, and stay within time and budget. This is ideal as a stepping stone for artists to break into Public Art, and encourages diversity and equity in the field.

Advantages to temporary art include minimal or no required maintenance. When a Public Art program cannot commit to the cost of maintenance for an artwork for the foreseeable future, works of temporary art are an attractive choice. Temporary art also works well as a series of art elements activating several locations along a pedestrian path within civic spaces or areas.

Temporary art projects often give communities a chance to become involved in Public Art making, as they are often suitable to artist/community collaborations. This allows communities to become actively involved in their creative environment. Local artists can be engaged, and they can then gain experience and pursue other opportunities with larger budgets and greater complexities.

Definitions
There can be some fluidity in the practice of commissioning permanent vs. temporary Public Art, but as municipalities often have need for definitions to inform policies and practices, the following are offered as recommendations:

Permanent Public Art:

Art in public spaces, created by an Artist and fabricated with materials and methods with an expected lifespan
of twenty-five years or more.

Temporary Public Art:

Art in public spaces, created by an Artist which is designed to be exhibited for a limited, articulated period of time, typically 5 years or less.

Artist:

A person who has established a reputation of artistic excellence in the fine arts, including but not limited to visual, or performing arts, as judged by peers and experts in the field, through a record of public exhibitions, performances, commissions, sale of works, recognition and/or educational attainment. The qualified artist shall work primarily in the production of unique fine art.

Food for the Soul by Brian Peterson and Damin Lujan
12 13
821
Public Art
Commissioning
Process
The commissioning of Public Art is an exciting endeavor and can be the final step in a long planning process involving numerous stakeholders and location, budget, and other scoping considerations.

This report will break down the commissioning process into distinct steps with a discussion and recommendations for each component.

However, there is flexibility to each process and variations are possible.

Scoping and Planning
Prior to the advertisement of a Public Art opportunity, there should be a process for stakeholders to provide input as to the type of opportunity, goals, and potential themes of the artwork. A discussion of the types of questions to be considered have been offered in the “Criteria for the Siting of Public Art” above.

Stakeholder groups and the type of advance engagement will change depending on the type of project and the site under consideration.

Stakeholders can include representatives of departmental staff working in the facility, local community members, special “friends” groups, Commissioners, or other invested parties. Engagement can encompass a public meeting letting the community know of the opportunity and soliciting feedback on the type of themes that they find important to convey in the artwork. However, this should not be construed as an opportunity to dictate the imagery, design, or specific concept for the artwork. Other ways to obtain feedback are through surveys or interactive activities at City events.

This type of community engagement can be solidified once an artist is selected by requiring the artist, as part of their scope of work, to incorporate an engagement process at an appropriate level of interaction as fits their artistic process and the needs of the project. Community engagement with the artist can involve feedback, identifying actual design elements for incorporation into the final artwork, or simply engaging with community through a workshop to engender appreciation for the artwork and offer a chance to meet the artist.
14 15
822
Artist Selection
The identification of an artist should be conducted in an open transparent process. Best practices as articulated by the Americans for the Arts and exhibited by the practices of established programs at other municipalities recommend a two-step process of artist selection.

This process starts with the advertisement and issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) wherein the project’s budget, parameters, artwork priorities and goals are articulated along with the artist selection criteria, scoring breakdown, and expectations regarding the selected artist’s experience, interest, and past work images.

The following is an example of the types of materials that may be requested from artists responding to the RFQ:

1. Work Samples. Ten (10) images of artwork. Work samples should include the date of completion, project budget, artist, client/agency (if applicable), medium, location (if applicable), brief description of the project.

2. Artist Statement/Description of Work. 500 words (maximum) describing the themes, inspiration and questions explored throughout your work, as well as the materials, methods and techniques you use to create your work.

3. Resume/CV. 1-2 pages (maximum) outlining your professional art qualifications, which may include previous projects, experience, education/training and other related credentials.

4. Questions. Response to the following questions through written response:
a. Why are you interested in completing a project for XXXX (department/location/ etc./name of project)? 500 words (maximum).
b. How do you see your artistic practice or existing work aligning with the XXXX (department/location/etc./name of project) artwork priorities and diverse audiences? 500 words (maximum).

The following is an example of the types of selection criteria and scoring. (Should be listed in the RFQ.)
Artists’ applications will be evaluated according to the following criteria listed below and scored up to 100 points.

Criterion 1: Technical and Aesthetic Quality of Past Work (50% - Max 50 Points) The applicant’s past works and creative practice as expressed through their images, artist statement/description of work and resume/CV demonstrate a high level of aesthetic quality and technical execution. The concepts reflect originality and evoke a response.

Criterion 2: Suitability For This Project (50% - Max 50 Points) The applicant’s images, artist statement/description of work, resume/CV and answers to the application questions demonstrate the applicant’s suitability for the artwork priorities outlined in the RFQ.

The selection panel is key to the process. Other municipalities and the Americans for the Arts recommend as best practice site- or project-specific selection panels with a diverse perspective including experts in Public Art, site end-users, community, and professional project design participation. In this configuration there is Arts Commission participation by 1 or 2 members (who rotate among projects). A sample of the panel composition is as follows:
1 or 2 Arts Commissioners
1 or 2 Public Art professionals (can be curators, arts administrators, or experienced peer Public Artists)
The Architect of the project (if applicable)
A representative of the City Department with oversight of the Public Art location (i.e. Police Department or Parks & Community Services)
1 or 2 Community members at large with a link to the art location, such as “friends” or other support group members
In this manner the artist selection has professional design expertise as well as provides a voice to the groups that will experience the artwork daily. The inclusion of Public Art professionals ensures a high design aesthetic and fabrication proficiency. In this configuration, there is a stipend provided to the non-city employee (or non-Arts Commission) panelists for their service ranging from $150-$300 per day.

The selection panel selects 3-4 Finalists from the review of the RFQ applicants based on the stated criteria and submission materials.
16 17
823
The next step is the second Request for Proposals (RFP) stage. Proposals are requested only from the 3-4 Finalists. The artists should be provided with a list of expectations for the proposal including a narrative of the concept, design sketches and drawings (in-situ if possible), with dimensions and materials. The proposal should also include a preliminary budget, the fabrication timeline and any installation considerations. Additionally, the proposals should include any type of public engagement anticipated to be provided in tandem with the project. Artists should be provided with the criteria for evaluation of the proposals with an indication of the scoring breakdown based the stated criteria.

Artists are generally given 4-6 weeks to develop their proposal. In order to ensure all the Finalists are provided with the same information, there should be a proposal meeting with all the Finalists wherein the department staff from the relevant location will describe the activity, services provided, and constituents using the site, as well as the goals of the project. If the project is tied to a public works construction project, someone from the design team should provide information regarding the site and any technical considerations. This is an opportunity for all of the artists to hear the same information and ask questions.

It is important to note that it is a basic tenet within Public Art programs that professional artists are paid for the development of proposals. Professional practices require that artists be paid for their work, and the development of a proposal requires considerable research, time, and effort. The amount of the proposal fee per artist finalist in large part is dependent on the project budget and can range from $1,000 for a project budget of $100,000 or less, to $5,000 or more for a project with a $1M budget or higher.

The selection panel meets a second time to review the proposals as presented by each artist one-after-another, in an in-person meeting, wherein the selection panel can ask questions directly. After all the artists have presented, the panel will deliberate, score the proposals, and select the recommended artist and work.

Many municipalities allow for the selection panel (with its range of perspectives) to make the final recommendation, with the full Arts Commission providing the final review of the recommended work and issuing the final approval to ensure the selection is in accordance with the safety, durability, and programmatic requirements. In this instance, the Arts Commission reviews the final recommendation only and they do not compare it to other submissions.

If Costa Mesa decides the City Council has the final review and approval, as with the Arts Commission they would review the panel recommended proposal only and not every final submission. In this manner the panel’s wide range of perspectives are acknowledged. As the full Arts Commission or City Council are not privy to the artist presentations and discussions, it respects the panel process.

A variation to the above process is possible when community engagement is so vital to the artwork design and development, that the City requires the design to be developed though an intensive community process. In this scenario, it is not feasible for the design proposal to be developed in advance of contracting with the Artist. This process would have a similar RFQ process, but an important submission requirement to the RFQ would be a narrative about the type of engagement process they envision to develop the design, their approach to design, with an indication of their interest in the project, and a listing of previous projects they completed wherein the community engagement was paramount to the artwork design process. Instead of the second step incorporating a proposal review, the panel would interview the Finalists with open ended questions to ascertain the community appropriateness of the artist’s process to select the most appropriate artist for the commission. The contract with the artist in this case includes design development and approval milestones.

Poderosas by Alicia Rojas, Camilo Romero and Santa Ana Community Artists 18 19
824
Public Art
Collection
Management
Costa Mesa already has begun to build a collection of Public Artworks though commissions and donations. As the permanent works are now City assets, management of these works is paramount to ensure they are well maintained and remain is good condition for future enjoyment and to retain their value.

Roles and Responsibilities
Management of the works would ideally be the responsibility of a designated Arts staff member and includes the oversight of a database to track the artworks. The database should include artists information including a biography, narrative from the artists describing the concepts behind the work, artwork dimensions, budget, materials, methods of fabrication, maintenance requirements and artist contact information, and photos of the artwork. A digital file on the commissioning process should be retained including proposal files, correspondence, budget and final records, the selection panel, dedication event documentation a copy of the agreement with the artist and any other applicable information reflecting the commission process.

Additionally, a plaque should be placed at the site of the work with the artist’s name, the title of the work, date, materials, and the department to contact in case of maintenance needs.

Artist contact information should be retained, should there be need for unanticipated maintenance or repair, artwork removal, or alteration.

The City should consider sharing their collection on the City website with images of the works and their location. Some cities include a map of the City showing the artwork locations with artist and artwork information.

Maintenance
The City of Costa Mesa is in the early stages of developing a Public Art collection. The single most important aspect in ensuring the value of this asset is the regular maintenance of the artworks. Regular maintenance will help avoid costly future repairs. As part of the artist’s contracting process the city should require the artist to provide a professional art conservator’s assessment of the materials and methods with recommendations for maintenance.

It is recommended that staff work with art conservators to monitor the condition of the artwork in the collection and assess Public Art maintenance requirements and costs. The costs should be allocated as part of the city budget process on an annual basis for this purpose. 20 21
825
Contracting
When developing contracts with artists, it is important to keep in mind that art making and standards within the art industry require unique considerations and understandings regarding the scope of work, artist’s rights, copyright/use of image, milestones, payments, etc. within the agreement. Standard municipal contracts for services rendered rarely have the needed clauses, and sometimes contain clauses that are not recommended or applicable to art making and artists’ practices.

This report is not intended to be interpreted as legal advice, but as a point of discussion to advise the City of Costa Mesa on issues and concerns unique to artists’ contracting and to offer examples of ways others address these concerns. Any decisions regarding the language to be incorporated into contract templates should be made in tandem and with the approval of the City of Costa Mesa City Attorney.

A copy of the agreement template for Artist Services used by the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture is provided as an example for consideration.

The following areas of contracting reflect where the City’s standard contract language is recommended to reflect artwork specific standards and best practices.

Taco Mesa mural
22 23
826
Artist’s Rights
Commissioning artwork for the City’s collection will result in the City obtaining ownership of the artwork as an object, with all the associated rights and responsibilities. However, there is more than one type of ownership to consider. While the City as the commissioning agent will have ownership of a work of art as an object, this does not necessarily extend to ownership of the image and copyrights as articulated in the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) or the California Arts Preservation Act (CAPA).

These laws provide for a series of artists rights including the rights of authorship and rights surrounding the removal, alteration, or destruction of artwork. There is a range of ways in which municipalities address these rights.

Because of the risk of litigation associated with incorrectly destroying artwork in violation of these laws, the handling of artist’s rights varies among agencies. For example, the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture expressly acknowledges and accepts artists’ copyright by incorporating it into their Public Art policy, referencing it in artist agreements, and requiring artists to register their works with the U.S. Copyright Office. Agencies such as the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Agency (Metro) and the City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs both require that artists waive their rights under CAPA and VARA while simultaneously reinstating specific rights back into artists contracts.

The VARA and CAPA laws require that 90 days written notice be provided to an artist prior to the removal, alteration, or destruction of an artist’s work. It is also understandable that an agency would want the ability to remove an artwork immediately if issues of safety arise. As such, a clause waiving the VARA and CAPA 90 day requirement can be considered. However, even when the 90 day notice requirement is contractually waived, it is common for policies to be put into place to provide good faith advance notice to artists where possible should this need occur.

While it is generally accepted in artist agreements that the agencies can freely depict artworks for non-commercial educational or program promotional activity, activities resulting in commercial gain from the depiction of an artist’s work (such as t-shirts, posters, or mugs) should be negotiated with an artist independently.

Performance Bonds and Payment Milestones
It is common practice for municipalities to put a requirement for a Performance Bond in place for construction projects in the unlikely occurrence that a contractor defaults on a project.

While this may be a practice that is tempting for use in artist’s contracts, it is unadvisable.

The performance bond industry is not tailored for artworks, the cost would be unwieldly to the budget, and it is unlikely that a performance bond company would insure this type of project.

Untitled by Joshua Madrid
24 25
827
The Americans for the Arts puts it this way:
“Performance bonds are intended to guarantee the satisfactory completion of work. If a contractor is unable to finish a project, then a performance bond ensures that the work will be finished, usually by hiring a third party to complete any missing or unsatisfactory work. These bonds are commonly used in the construction industry and many cities’ public works departments require city contractors to hold them.

However, performance bonds have little applicability to the commissioning of fine art. For one, most commissions can only be completed by the artist who made the initial proposal, making the hiring of a third-party a nonstarter. More over, most performance bonds are prohibitively expensive for individual artists, and the desired objective (ensuring a satisfactory final project) is better achieved through alternative actions, like withholding final payment on a contract.

The best practice is for the use of project milestones to be incorporated into the agreement with a final payment left for the completion of services. A sample of this construction is as follows:
10 percent ($_______) upon Execution of the Contract.
30 percent ($_______) upon Acceptance of Final Design Drawings and Issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
20 percent ($_______) upon Completion of 50% of Fabrication. 20 percent ($_______) upon Completion of 100% of Fabrication. 10 percent ($_______) upon Completion of Installation and Issuance of Artwork Acceptance Notice.
10 percent ($_______) upon Completion of Project Close-out including documents, photography etc.

Scope of Work
It is to the City’s advantage to provide a clear list of expectations in the contract through the scope of work. The more specifically this is articulated, the less confusion there will be as to the responsibilities of the City and Artist.

Areas to describe include the overall responsibilities of the City and Artist, and Artist specific responsibilities related to design development, approvals, permitting, schedule, community engagement, budget, fabrication, installation, and any closing documents required such as final photography, artist narrative and biography, maintenance plan, etc.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.
26 27
828
Murals
Murals have been embraced as a valued art form by a diverse array of cultures and communities, providing an enlivening way to interject art to the street life of cities nationwide. They can celebrate the culture, heroes, and history through abstract or figurative imagery or any number of approaches conceivable. The possibilities are unlimited.

Painted murals are an art form with a rich history and deep appreciation. The expected vs. actual lifespan is dependent on several factors, and realities can be vastly different from project plans. Murals expected to remain intact for generations can come up against conditions requiring their removal after a limited lifespan, and murals developed with a limited expectation of longevity can become community icons intact for many years. The following is intended to provide guidelines to maintain a collection of mural works in good condition for their lifespan.

Welcome Home by Shepard Fairey
28 29
829
Murals
Commissioning
Process
Murals on City Property
Murals to be placed on City property can be commissioned though a process similar to the commissioning of Public Art projects as described in the section on Public Art commissioning in this report. However, because of the unique needs of murals regarding their maintenance and the unfortunate proclivity for them to be targets for graffiti vandalism, it is recommended that murals commissioned for placement on City property be required to have an anti-graffiti coating applied that is maintainable by the City, and the mural is fabricated/painted on a well prepared wall that has been assessed in advance by an art conservator with murals expertise to confirm the suitability for the murals’ longevity, and so they can provide recommendations for wall preparation and materials.

The mural should be evaluated every five years to assess the condition to evaluate if the artwork should be maintained or removed. If the mural is in poor condition and the City does not have the resources for a restoration, the applicable artist’s rights laws (VARA and CAPA) require that artist be provided with 90 days advance notice of its removal. The five-year review process and expected lifespan should be articulated in the City’s agreement with the artist.

Generally, murals on public property are considered government speech and, as a result, are not subject to the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. Municipalities may regulate murals on City-owned property to control the time, place and manner of its placement as well as regulate the design and content of the mural itself.

Murals on Private Property
While it may be tempting for a municipality to regulate the design and content of murals on private property, First Amendment rights of the property owner limit the oversight of mural approval processes to regulations such as the mural lifespan, placement, size, materials and methods, and process of permitting. These areas of oversight can still ensure that mural projects are developed with the full awareness of the community, with technical and legal considerations in relation to materials, maintenance, and artist’s rights, adhered to and understood.

Murals have also been the subject of controversies and legal battles in relation to First Amendment rights and clashes over the ways in which fine art murals are sometimes treated differently than commercial mural-sized signs or general signage.

As a result of these issues, which have now found resolution in cities such as the City of Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon, guidelines can be recommended in relation to the development of a murals ordinance for the City of Costa Mesa in consideration of these concerns.

The following are guidelines recommended to use in the development of an ordinance for the placement of murals on private property. This assumes that the murals will be funded by the property owner without city support.

It is important to note that as the mural permit requirements are design and content neutral, the process of review and approval can be completed in a “counter permit” process by city staff by qualified to confirm that the materials, manner, and processes follow requirements. 30 31
830

DEFINITIONS
An essential first step is the establishment of a mural definition to ensure that murals are original, artistic expressions that are not confused with advertising or signage which is regulated separately.

The following is recommended as a definition for this purpose:

Mural:

A one-of-a-kind original artwork created by a Mural Artist, or through a community engagement process led by a Mural Artist that is fabricated directly upon an exterior wall of a building, that is hand-painted or hand-tiled and does not contain commercial messaging. For definition purposes, a commercial message is any text, image, logo, or other visual communication that advertises or references a business conducted, services rendered, commercial enterprise, or goods produced or sold on or off the premises.

Mural Artist:

A person who has established a reputation of artistic excellence in the visual arts, as judged by peers and/or experts in the field, through a record of public exhibitions, performances, commissions, sale of works, recognition and/or educational attainment. The qualified artist’s creative output shall primarily consist of the production of unique fine art.

Requirements and Process:

The following are technical requirements designed to address the placement, scale, materials, and maintenance needs of the mural. Maintenance is of the upmost importance to ensure that murals do not deteriorate, become graffiti magnets, or cause blighted conditions. They are offered as a manner to allow murals within the face of a building, within commercial or business districts.

It is recommended that the City consider if the requirements for numbers 1-5 are in accordance with Costa Mesa’s vision and if not, adjustments can be made as appropriate. Recommendations for numbers 6-8 will ensure maintenance, artists rights and each artwork design are reviewed and addressed.

Recommended Requirements
No part of a mural shall exceed the height or width of the structure to which it is tiled, painted or affixed.

No part of a mural shall extend more than six (6) inches from the plane of the wall upon which it is tiled, painted or affixed.

No mural shall be placed over the exterior surface of any building opening, including, but not limited to, windows, doors, and vents.

Murals shall be placed on non-residential commercial or industrial property only.

Only one mural will be permitted per business location or structure.

A specialized anti-graffiti coating must be applied to the mural and maintained for the life of the mural. Varnish, other coatings or finishes that are not specifically designed as graffiti abatement products as part of a graffiti removal system do not comply with this requirement.

The property owner is required to maintain the mural in good condition and free of vandalism. If the property owner is negligent in this regard after sufficient warning, they can be issued a 120-day order to remove the artwork at their own cost. If removal is ordered, the property owner is responsible for the proper 90-days written advance notification to the artist as applicable by the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA) laws.

Mural permits are valid for one image at a time. Property owners wishing to change the mural design or replace it with another artwork must apply for a new permit.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.
32 33
831
Recommended Process
The following processes allow for the mural designs to be reviewed by the community in advance of its placement. This review cannot be considered an opportunity for the community to veto the mural’s content or design, but it does allow for community input and dialog.

As a rule, business owners wish to establish and maintain good relations with the community, so it is to their advantage to install a mural that will be welcomed by the neighborhood.

It is also essential that property owners are aware of the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA). Property owners will be responsible for compliance with all aspects of these laws (including requirements for 90-day advance written notice prior to the removal, destruction, or alteration of the mural) or negotiating waivers of any aspects of these laws through advance written agreements with artists.

The following are recommendations for the process requirements:

Applicants must hold a meeting at a publicly accessible location at least 30 days prior to the start of the mural fabrication. This meeting is to allow for the public to see the design, ask questions, and provide comments. Should an in-person meeting not be feasible due to public health mandates, a well-advertised virtual meeting can be substituted in a manner as approved in advance by City staff.

Applicants for mural approval must post notice of the public meeting 15 calendar days in advance of the meeting on the proposed mural site. This notice must include the intended mural size and location with a color depiction of the proposed mural design, in full and easy view of the community. The notice must also be mailed, or hand delivered to properties located within a half-mile mile radius of the proposed mural location.

No mural shall be permitted until the applicant certifies that he or she has completed this neighborhood involvement requirement. Certification shall include photo documentation of the posted notices and documentation of the meeting through a sign-in sheet, or other confirmation the meeting was held as indicated.

Property owners must sign a declaration that they are aware of the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA) artist rights laws, acknowledging they, and not the city, are responsible for compliance with these laws.

Should the property be sold, property owners must provide subsequent owners with maintenance information, anti-graffiti requirements, and artist rights information.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. Home Sweet Home by Brian Peterson
34 35
832
Public Art Donations
How exciting it can seem for a municipality to be offered artwork as a donation. While it can be tempting to accept all art donations, there are considerations that should be understood to ensure donated artwork fits within the city’s goals and environment and will not become a burden to the city’s resources.

The following will discuss areas and issues to consider in the acceptance of artwork and areas in which background information and assurances should be considered prior to the acceptance of a donation.

There are many sometimes complex reasons that a donor will be motivated to gift artwork to a city. Reasons can range from a sincere desire to share a work with the community, the understanding that a work of art has a special connection to a site or part of the city’s history, to the desire for a tax deduction, the need to find a home for a large or unwieldly work that the owner no longer can store or no longer has the resources to provide upkeep. Regardless of the motivation, any offer has the potential to be a welcome and uplifting addition to a city’s collection. There may also be valid reasons to deny acceptance of a Public Art donation.

Art Collection Goals
Of fundamental importance to the development of an art collection and the subsequent acceptance of donations is the understanding and establishment of the goals of the collection.

For example, the donation of a 19th century European religious painting may have high monetary value, but does it relate to the City and is there an appropriate place for its display? The following are questions to guide the establishment of art collection goals.

What is important to the city regarding the art it owns and maintains? For example, is it important for artwork to relate to the city’s location, history, and interests inherent in the cultural context of Costa Mesa? Should it represent the City in an interesting and expanded manner? Can the collection be used as a mechanism to support and uplift artists that reside in Costa Mesa? What is the storage or physical capacity to keep portable artworks? Are there limitations that restrict the number of donated items?
In addition to permanent Public Artwork installations, are there programs and opportunities to display portable paintings, drawings, photography, textiles or other art mediums? Some municipalities have internal loan programs allowing departments and civic offices to borrow portable artworks for a designated time period to enhance their surroundings for the benefit of staff and visitors. Costa Mesa may want to consider this as a mechanism to accept donations of artwork into the collection with a purpose and display opportunity. 36 37
833
Donation Process
An application process should be established up front to capture the relevant information for an informed decision and to identify any additional considerations to the donation offer. The following identifies main areas in which information should be captured.

Object Ownership and Valuation
As has been discussed, there is more than one type of ownership as related to art, and this needs to be considered in the acceptance of an artwork. While a donor may have ownership of a work of art as an object, this does not necessarily extend to the donor having ownership of the image and copyrights as articulated in the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) or the California Arts Preservation Act (CAPA).

To establish the donor’s ownership of the artwork as an object, a donation application needs to be developed with a requirement for information about the provenance and procurement of the object, including documentation such as a receipt or other proof of ownership.

Copies of any agreements the owner has with the artist or gallery should be included if applicable.

The value of the object should be established as part of the consideration of acceptance. This value can be established through:

Appraisal Report: An appraisal report including, but not limited to, dollar amount value, description, disclaimers, and additional support for valuation conclusions by a certified third-party appraiser affiliated with at least one of the four appraisal organizations:

Appraisers Association of America, the American Society for Appraisers, Appraisal Foundation, or the International Society of Appraisers.

A receipt for the purchase of the artwork
Other documentation establishing the value of similar artworks by the same artist
This valuation is essential as the artwork will become a physical asset for the city, and as such, a documented value is needed for asset accounting. Also, donors commonly request a letter from the city acknowledging the donation with the value indicated for their use as a tax donation. The city should have confirmation of the value for this purpose.

Copyright Ownership
As indicated, while a donor may have ownership of the artwork as an object, the artist may have retained the copyright ownership as established by the VARA and CAPA laws. The application should include artist information including contact, resume or bio, birth/death dates, and any known copyright information as available. This is particularly important if the donation is a work to be installed as a permanent Public Artwork as the artist should be notified of the donation and location of the installation.

The application should indicate the copyright owner of the object. If the donor is the copyright owner, the application should include documentation of this and should ask if the donor intends to transfer the copyright to the City of Costa Mesa should the donation be accepted by the city.

The City Attorney should identify if and how the acceptance of the artwork and installation will make the city subject to any applicable VARA and CAPA notifications or copyright requirements in the future. It is recommended that the City Attorney weigh in regarding these considerations and requirements prior to the acceptance of the donation. a.
b.
c.

Floyd’s 99 Barbershop by Jonas Never
38 39
834
Materials, Maintenance, Conservation
The application should identify the materials and any known maintenance or conservation needs. A condition report should be provided by the donor or obtained by the city to identify any issues and immediate or future costs associated with keeping the artwork in good condition.

Transportation and Installation
If the artwork is a large sculpture or other Public Artwork, it is important for the city to understand the costs to transport the artwork and install it at the desired location. Questions to consider are the need for any footings or special attachment systems, permits, insurance, storage, installation, and any conservation and maintenance needed in the immediate future. It should be established if these costs and the responsibility for this activity will be borne by the donor or if the city is expected to handle these costs and the scope of work to see to the full completion the installation.

Other Information
In addition to the above information the application should request any exhibition history, edition certifications or other pertinent information about the artwork as applicable and available.

Pablo Universal by David Flores
40 41
835
Criteria for Acceptance of
Public Art Donations
The identification of collection goals and the information above will greatly aid in evaluation of the donation application. It is recommended that the Arts Commission evaluate the donation based on the criteria for an acceptance recommendation to City Council. The City Council should maintain final approval, considering the Arts Commission recommendation.

The following are recommended criteria to utilize as applicable in assessing the acceptance of an art donation:

The artwork supports the goals of the art collection and would contribute positively to the City’s Public Art, meeting the standards for Public Art commissioned by the city.

The artwork is of high quality and aesthetic excellence.

There is an identified location to site the artwork if it requires a public installation, or there is a program or mechanism to display the artwork if it is a portable piece.

The scale, form, context, and design of the artwork are appropriate for the setting and audience.

The donor has committed to cover all applicable costs associated with permits, bonding, insurance, transportation and installation of the artwork or the city has committed the resources to cover these applicable items.

The future maintenance and conservation need of the artwork is understood and the city has identified the resources to attend to these requirements.

The legal considerations of ownership, copyright, liabilities, maintenance, and de- accessioning are understood and acceptable to the city.

The artwork supports an equitable collection inventory, allowing for a diverse range of artists to be represented, considering if there are already multiple donations of the same artist’s work.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

Reclining Figure by Henry Moore
42 43
836
The following represent acknowledged criteria for de-accession and are recommended for Costa Mesa’s consideration.

The artwork’s present condition poses a safety hazard to the public.

The artwork has been damaged or has deteriorated to the point that it can no longer be represented to be the original artwork.

The restoration of the artwork’s structural or aesthetic integrity is technically not feasible, or the expense of restoring it exceeds the resources of the city.

The architectural support (building, wall, plaza) is to be destroyed and the artwork cannot be removed intact for relocation.

The use of this particular public space may have changed, and/or the artwork may have lost its contextual meaning and it cannot be re-sited, or re-siting the artwork would be inappropriate.

The artwork requires excessive and inappropriate conservation and/or maintenance or has faults of design or workmanship which can be termed inherent vice.

An artwork is not, or is rarely, on display because of lack of a suitable site.

The condition or security of the artwork cannot be reasonably guaranteed in its present location.

The artwork was not installed or fabricated as proposed, is incomplete, or does not meet the requirements of the commission.

The artwork does not meet the goals of the collection.

Removal has been requested by the artist in writing and it has been determined by the Arts Commission to be a reasonable request.

The artwork has reached the end of its original anticipated lifespan.

The artwork is proved to be inauthentic or in violation of existing copyright laws.

The artwork has received documented and ongoing adverse reaction from community members where the artwork is located, and the City Council has determined the artwork no longer reflects the values of the community.

De-accession of
Public Art
There are numerous reasons that a city may wish to de-accession an artwork. These considerations can include safety, condition, change in the physical location of the artwork so it is no longer supported physically, community complaints, or other controversies.

As city owned artwork is a civic asset, the process should require a staff report addressing the applicable issues related to the de-accession criteria including the review of any restrictions which may apply to the artwork based on legal or contractual requirements. The report should include an analysis of the reasons for de-accessioning, options for storage or disposition of the artwork, and the appraised value of the artwork, if obtainable.

If the de-accession is the result of the destruction of the supporting structure (such as the wall, building, or plaza to which the artwork is attached), consideration should be made regarding the appropriateness and feasibility of relocating the artwork to another location.

Any considerations or requirements associated with VARA and CAPA laws, including notice to the artist, if applicable, should be carefully followed in accord with the City Attorney’s direction.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 10.

11. 12.

13. 14.
44 45
837
Public Art and Development
Mandates in Orange County
Among Orange County’s 34 cities, there are currently four that mandate Public Art within their communities: Brea, Buena Park, Dana Point, and Laguna Beach. Two more cities are expected to join that list upon approval of Public Art Plans they are completing: Anaheim and Huntington Beach. Four cities currently have programs encouraging Public Art in development without a binding mandate: Anaheim, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach and Santa Ana. The mechanism used most frequently is the assessment of a fee ranging from 0.5% to 1.25% on the total cost of new construction or renovations on projects valued at or above a baseline amount. Fees may apply to City capital improvements, private development, or both. Policies vary, with private developers, in some cities, permitted to acquire and install art on their property to fulfill the requirement (with City review and approval), or instead to pay into an in-lieu fund managed by the City to acquire and install Public Art on City-owned property.

See p. 80-81 for more information about other Orange County cities’ Public Art policies and programs.
46 47
838
Inclusion of Public
Art in Public Works
Development Projects
The inclusion of Arts and Culture into public spaces is known to enhance the livability or civic life and is a contributor to the quality of the environment while engendering community pride. Incorporation of Public Art into Public Works projects are a natural way to uplift the quality of these spaces for the enjoyment of the community.

Many Public Works projects are funded by grants or other sources requiring that the use of monies is restricted to capital improvements.

Permanent Public Art incorporated into the project is generally acknowledged as a capital improvement for this purpose.

With other internal sources incorporated, facility funding can be less restrictive, allowing for a wide array of arts programming on the site of the development. Municipalities have allocated between 1-2% of the cost of construction for these projects as part of the regular budgeting process.

A mandate by City Council for Public Art inclusion into Public Works construction projects declares the importance and value the City places on arts and culture in civic life. Should the City decide to mandate a Public Art requirement for private development, it would be a reasonable expectation that the City has a policy in place for Public Art within its own public works projects.

It is recommended that policies framing the approach to projects and the commissioning of artists are put in place to ensure that there is an equitable distribution of funds to diverse artists.

The City of Pasadena’s Public Art Program guidelines can serve as model of how goals and values can be realized. The following from the City of Pasadena is offered as an example for consideration for the City of Costa Mesa:

The commissioning of artists at a variety of points in their careers, but whose work is of the highest artistic merit, and who bring innovative artwork of all media and disciplines into the public realm;
The commissioning of artists and artwork which are reflective of cultural diversity and the city’s international populations, recognize the values and contributions of various cultures to the community, and contribute to the characteristics, aspirations and unique expressions of Pasadena’s values;
The encouragement of local artistic endeavors and support of local artists; The encouragement of public dialogue and interaction with art in public places, through appropriate education forums, public meetings, citizen task forces and programs; The commissioning of works of art varying in style, scale, medium, form and intent representative of the arts on a local, regional, national and international level;
The broad distribution of commissions among artists. To ensure this objective, no more than one City of Pasadena Public Art commission per artist/team shall be awarded in a three-year period. An artist may not apply for a subsequent commission until the aforementioned has been completed and has received final approval; The geographic distribution of artworks throughout the City of Pasadena; The inclusion of the artist and design team at the inception of the project.

Local Artists
A healthy arts ecosystem should include opportunities for local artist participation and will provide opportunities for professional growth. Recommended opportunities for artists new to Public Art include temporary Public Art projects. These projects can be singular, as a series along a path or walkway or grouped together in a park or other venues in a multi-artist festival or “happening” atmosphere to build excitement and space activation.

Similarly, a purchase program geared toward local artists that are new to Public Art can build a collection of artworks for offices and other public interior spaces. It is a great opportunity for participation and community engagement.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.
48 49
839
Inclusion of Public Art in Private
Development Projects
The purpose in establishing this definition is to ensure that the artwork is created by an artist and not the result of commercial design or product development.

While the first step is the definition of an artist, there is also a basic need to define Public Art for the context of approving artwork integrated into private developments. A comprehensive definition will allow for an objective review of a developer’s proposal for artwork.

As indicated above, there are two paths cities have taken regarding the inclusion of Public Art in private development, encouragement for voluntary participation or mandates through ordinances. There are basic concepts applicable to either effort that warrant discussion.

DEFINITIONS
So that all parties understand what types of projects are to be considered when referring to Public Art, basic definitions are needed to define who is an artist in this context and what is to be considered as Public Art.

It is essential that the eligibility of Public Art projects as falling within the program requirements include the definition of an artist to ensure that the project is truly unique, can be considered within a contemporary fine art dialog, and encourages a diversity of artistic approaches. The following are examples of this type of definition:

City of San Diego:
“Artist means an individual generally recognized by critics and peers as a professional practitioner of the visual, performing, or literary arts, as judged by the quality of that professional practitioner’s body of work, educational background, experience, public performances, past public commissions, exhibition record, publications, and production of artwork.”
Los Angeles County:
“Artist. A person who has established a reputation of artistic excellence in the arts, including but not limited to visual, performing or literary arts, as judged by peers and experts in the field, through a record of public exhibitions, performances, commissions, sale of works, recognition and/or educational attainment.” Welcome to Costa Mesa by Brian Peterson and Damin Lujan 50 51
840
For the City of Costa Mesa, the following definitions are recommended for consideration:

Artist:

A person who has established a reputation of artistic excellence in the fine arts, including but not limited to visual or performing arts, as judged by peers and experts in the field, through a record of public exhibitions, performances, commissions, sale of works, recognition and/or educational attainment. The qualified artist shall work primarily in the production of unique fine art.

Public Art:

Artistic and cultural facilities, objects, and amenities created as original works by an Artist that do not contain a commercial message, text, logo, trademark, or other product, business, or service messaging, and are not mass produced or reproductions. Qualifying projects include:

Sculpture: Free standing, wall supported or suspended, kinetic, electronic or mechanical in material or combination of materials.

Murals or portable paintings: In any materials or variety of materials, with or without the addition of nontraditional materials and means.

Works on paper: Photographs, prints, watercolors, drawings of any media and other paper works.

Textiles: Tapestries, quilts, embroideries and other forms of woven or non-woven fiber art.

New media: Including but not limited to new technologies in light, sound, film, holograms, virtual reality, digital media, and any hybrids of media and new genres.

Other media: Neon, glass, earthworks, mosaics, tile, ceramics, printmaking, collage, mixed media, assemblage.

Standardized fixtures or enhanced functional architectural elements: If rendered by an Artist as unique features, including but not limited to, grates, facade enhancements, stairways, fencing, and other design elements.

Cultural Facilities: Public gallery, exhibition space, public performance spaces, theaters, Public Artistic studio spaces, and Public Art education facilities; and Performing Arts: Theatre, dance, music and performance art.

Literary Art: Poetry readings, storytelling and creative writing.

Media Art: Film, video, or digital media.

Education: Lectures, presentations, and training in and about arts and culture.

Special events: Parades, festivals, and celebrations; and Similar arts services, facilities and amenities as approved by the City of Costa Mesa.

Similarly, as the oversight of artist selection, fabrication, and installation requires expertise of a specialized nature, it is recommended that developers are able to obtain the services of an Art Consultant as a legitimate line-item cost for their project. The Art Consultant can assist them with services related to the identification of an Artist, arts opportunity, facilitation and oversight of artwork fabrication and installation, or performing as the liaison to the city regarding providing reports, application materials, and other information related to the review and approval of the artwork. Indeed, the utilization of an Art Consultant who will have a network of artists and contacts can go far in aiding the developer in identifying a qualified artist and art project that is integrated into the development in exciting and innovative ways for the enjoyment of the visitors to the site. Typically, municipalities allow for Art Consultant services as 10-20% of the project budget depending on the specific services rendered.

California Scenario by Isamu Noguchi
52 53
841
The following is offered for consideration as a definition of an Art Consultant:

Art Consultant:

An organization or individual working as a professional administrator of the arts, who realizes income through the provision of services relating to the arts such as, but not limited to, identifying artists and on-site art opportunities, and contracting with artists for venues with public audiences, or providing oversight of on-site logistics, demonstrates previous success in project management, and provides leadership in completion of Public Art projects.

As a further aid to developers, the City of Costa Mesa may want to pursue a call for Arts Consultants to be pre-qualified and placed on a roster that can be shared with developers looking for Art Consultant services.

Voluntary Participation Program
As indicated, four Orange County cities have a voluntary Public Art in private development program. As this type of effort relies on the developer to embrace the benefits of integrating Public Art into their development, it is recommended that the City of Costa Mesa offer guidance where possible to developers to assist them in this endeavor. Further, it is recommended that the City of Costa Mesa identify what incentives can be offered to developers during the zoning and development planning processes to encourage Public Art participation. Without incentives, it is difficult to imagine developers participating in the processes required, and to subject artwork they will own to the City’s approval.

Ownership and Maintenance
Artwork created through a Public Art program for placement on private property, and funded by the developer, is the property of the developer, who will be required to maintain the artwork for the life of the piece. However, development owners should be made aware of the same artists’ rights and the differences between object and image ownership discussed elsewhere, as they will hold the responsibility for following the mandates of these laws.

Public Art mandated and receiving credit for compliance is commonly considered long term/ permanent in nature. An expectation of 25 years or more is commonly anticipated. For the artwork to be well maintained by the current and future property owners, a notarized Covenant and Agreement registered with the Orange County Clerk-Recorder describing the artwork and requiring that current and subsequent owners maintain the work for the expected lifetime is recommended as being required. The document should indicate the term of the maintenance requirement, and that an earlier termination of the agreement is possible with the City’s approval though a written release by the City.

Approval of Public Art Projects
City approval for Public Art proposed by developers for credit in the case of a mandated ordinance being in place, or for voluntary compliance if incentives have been offered in exchange for Public Art participation is required. With a robust criterion defining Public Art, agencies address approval in one of two ways: Either the review and approval is considered as an objective review based on the criteria and performed by the arts program city staff (such as the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, or San Diego), or the staff performs a preliminary review and the Arts Commission performs the final review and approval based on the criteria (such as the City of Brea or Culver City).

Criteria, Artwork Identification and Artist Selection
In addition to the requirement that the Public Artwork fit within the definition, the proposed art should uplift the development environment and be accessible for the community’s enjoyment.

As with Public Art that the City commissions, care should be taken to select a location with high visibility, work that is in harmony with the surroundings, and is accessible by the community during regular business hours. The artwork should be complimentary to the built environment, and constructed of appropriate long-term materials such as metal, stone, glass, tile, etc.

As they are the owners of the work, the identification of the specific project and artist are under the purview of the developer. However, the developer bringing an Art Consultant on board can greatly aid in the quality of the project as a wide range of artists with diverse styles and new ideas can be brought in for consideration.
54 55
842
Process
Developers should be made aware of the Public Art mandate if an ordinance is in place or the possibility of gaining incentives if participation is voluntary as early as possible in the project planning stage. It is at this early juncture that the developer can discuss the options and possibilities with City staff.

Preliminary Approval
Prior to the developer obtaining their building permit, they would file a preliminary Art Plan Application indicating the type of project being pursued, the preliminary budget schedule, and the process for artist identification.

The Parks and Community Services Director or their designee should review the preliminary Art Plan Application, and if it is found complete and in compliance with the ordinance or voluntary participation requirements, approve the preliminary plan. This approval will be deemed sufficient for the issuance of a Building Permit.

Within 60 days of the applicant obtaining a Building Permit, a final Art Plan Application for placement of artwork on private property should be submitted to the department with information including, but not limited to:

Final sketches, photographs, or other documentation of sufficient descriptive clarity to indicate the nature of the proposed artwork and its compliance with the ordinance requirements.

An appraisal or other evidence of the value of the proposed artwork, including acquisition and installation costs.

Preliminary plans containing such detailed information as may be required by the department to adequately evaluate the site location of the artwork in relation to the proposed development and its compatibility with the neighborhood in which it is located.

A narrative statement indicating how the artwork will be displayed in a public place freely available to the public at least ten (10) hours each day, or equivalent alternatives acceptable to the city.

Final Approval

The Parks and Community Services Director or their designee shall review the final application, and if it is found complete and in compliance with the requirements of the ordinance, prepare a recommendation to the Arts Commission.

The commission shall be responsible for review and approval of the proposed artwork for its compliance with the ordinance requirements, aesthetic quality, and the proposed location of and public accessibility to the artwork.

An applicant may appeal the decision of the commission to the City Council. Action by the City Council is final.

Project Completion
At the completion of the project the developer should provide a copy of the registration receipt for the Covenant and Agreement, photos of the completed artwork, final expenditure report, information about the artist and artwork, etc. City staff should perform a site visit to confirm the work is completed and satisfactory. A plaque identifying the artist, title of the work and crediting the program should be placed by the artwork by the developer as part of the project. 56 57
843
Financial Securities and Project Completion Guarantees
Municipalities handle the process of ensuring the satisfactory completion of the project in different ways. Developers receive compliance credit for their project in the form of an Approved Art Plan prior to a Building Permit being issued. Once the Developer has the Building Permit in hand, the City will require a way to ensure the project is completed satisfactorily as approved in advance.

If the project will be guaranteed to be completed in tandem with the building construction, then the Certificate of Occupancy can be tied to the satisfactory completion of the Art Plan and receipt of all closing documents such as the registration of the Covenant and Agreement, project documentation etc.

However, the completion of the art project may not coincide with the completion of the building and the City may not wish to withhold the Certificate of Occupancy waiting for the artwork.

In this instance, the best practice is to allow the developer to provide a Certificate of Deposit or a Letter of Credit to the benefit of the City that can be held and cashed in should the developer default on the project. This financial security would be automatically renewing to remain viable past the building completion date. Once the project is complete the Director of the Parks and Community Services Department can sign a release of the document back to the developer.

It may be tempting to utilize the Performance Bond process to guarantee the project, but this form of security is not recommended and is not appropriate for Public Art as discussed earlier.

The Storyteller by Jason Meadows
58 59
844
Budgeting
for Public Art
Projects
Utility Box Program
“The City of Costa Mesa owns over 120 utility
boxes at signalized intersections throughout the
city and is dedicated to incorporating art into
public spaces. A Utility Box Art Program was
launched in early 2015 to spotlight a handful
of utility boxes as beautiful art pieces. The city
currently has over 40 utility art boxes that display
artwork from local artists.” From City of Costa
Mesa 2022 Utility Box Program Handbook (see
Appendix). Current budget is $12,500 which
covers up to 10 new artworks per year, including
maintenance expenses. The artist honorarium
for creating a work to be placed on a utility box
is $300. The City invites sponsorships of utility
boxes ($1,500 to $2,500) and permits up to 20%
of the space for sponsor branding. Complete
details may be found in the Handbook.

Temporary Public Art Programs
Sculpture Program: Annual program costs can range from $100,000 to $500,000 (not including City Staff time), depending upon the number of sculptures to be displayed each year and the length of the exhibition for each work. Costs include project management consultant, artists fees, site preparation, installation, and de-installation. Site preparation costs will vary based on the number of concrete pads needed each year—more in the beginning, diminishing in subsequent years because the program reuses existing pads for replacement sculptures. The Sculpture Exhibition in Newport Beach Civic Center Park, now entering its eighth phase, has an annual budget of approximately $175,000. It exhibits twenty works concurrently, with ten works rotated in and out each year. For more information, visit: https://www.newportbeachca. gov/government/departments/library-services/cultural-arts/sculpture-in-civic-center-park- exhibition.

Permanent Public Art Projects
Murals: Cost is projected at $50,000 to $300,000, depending upon the mural size and the number of murals commissioned – budget includes project management consultant, artists fees, installation, and annual maintenance costs based upon artist’s maintenance manual, but not City staff time.

Sculptures: Costs range from $100,000 to $1,000,000, including project management consultant and artist fees, site preparation, installation, and annual maintenance costs based upon the artist’s maintenance manual, but not City staff time.
60 61
845
Funding Mechanisms for
Public Art Projects
Municipalities commonly use the following sources to fund art endeavors in general and Public Art specifically, aside from the allocation of these endeavors through usage of the General Fund.

Transit Occupancy Tax
As arts and culture offerings enhance the desirability of a community and support the appeal of a City as a destination, cities will commonly provide a percentage of the Transit Occupancy Tax as a line-item revenue stream. For example, the City of Los Angeles identifies 1% of the tax for (1) acquisition or placement of publicly accessible works of art; (2) acquisition or construction of arts and cultural facilities; (3) the providing of arts and cultural services; (4) restoration or preservation of existing works of art; (5) the City’s costs of administering the Public Works Improvement Arts Program; and, (6) support to programs and operations of the Cultural Affairs Department.

Using a slightly different approach, the City of Laguna Beach established more than 20 years ago a Business Improvement District comprised of its hotels, which added a 2% fee per night on hotel room stays. The program mandated that half of the proceeds are distributed to the arts in a formula that supports its three mainstay institutions (Laguna Art Museum, Laguna College of Art + Design, Laguna Playhouse), its Arts Commission’s Public Art Program, and more than a dozen small community arts organizations. More than $1 million is generated for the arts annually from this mechanism. The rationale for funding the arts through this program was that it supports year-round arts activities that contribute to filling hotel rooms during the off-season.

Public Works and/or Private Development Percent for Art Policies A natural enhancement to public works development is the integration of Public Art into the construction and improvement of City facilities. As permanent Public Art is considered a capital improvement, it is generally eligible as an expense in tandem with grants or other outside funding for these projects. Depending on the source, facility funding can be less restrictive, allowing for a wide array of arts programming on the site of the development.

Municipalities have allocated between 1-2% of the cost of construction for these projects as part of the regular budgeting process. Among Orange County’s 34 cities, there are currently 7 that mandate Public Art within their communities: Brea, Buena Park, Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Santa Ana, Tustin, and Westminster. Two more cities are expected to join that list upon approval of Public Art Plans they are completing: Anaheim and Huntington Beach. (See Appendix for more details.)
The mechanism used most frequently is the assessment of a fee ranging from 0.5% to 1.25% on the total cost of new construction or renovations on projects valued at or above a baseline amount. Fees may apply to City capital improvements, private development, or both. Policies vary, with private developers, in some cities, permitted to acquire and install art on their property to fulfill the requirement (with City review and approval), or instead to pay into an in-lieu fund managed by the City to acquire and install Public Art on City-owned property.

Quimby Funds
Restricted to parks, there are instances where the integration of Public Art into park enhancements can be eligible and a great use of the fund. This is a consideration that merits exploration on a case-by-case basis.
63 62 63
846
New State of California Funding
In June 2022, the Legislature approved and the Governor signed a State budget that includes a $25 million one-time General Fund appropriation for the California Department of Parks and Recreation to create a new California Cultural and Art Installations in the Parks program for state and local parks, in partnership with the California Arts Council. Installations will reflect local cultural heritages, connect the public to natural resources of state and local parks, and provide contemporary experiences to visitors. Details are forthcoming.

Private Funds
The success of most robust municipal art in public places programs is due to the investment of public funds, regarding the value of Public Art as similar to libraries, community centers and parks. Nevertheless, opportunities exist for raising private support to augment public dollars for such programs, ranging from “crowdfunding” small contributions (often used for commemorative monuments) to major gifts enabling a municipality to acquire an especially costly work of art by an internationally-renowned artist. An example of this was the $1 million gift by a donor toward the cost of commissioning art to be installed at the Golden 1 Center (a new sports arena) in Sacramento.
65 Fire Bird by Richard Lippold
64 65
847
As described in the Arts & Culture Master Plan:

Action 2.6: Incorporate imaginative design in all the City’s functional elements and fixtures. “There are artists and existing companies that specialize in the custom fabrication of creatively designed elements such as streetlights, playground equipment, fitness stations, bus shelters, benches. After a period of research, the City should conduct a call for artists to submit designs, which would be selected by the City through a process involving the Cultural Arts Committee, Planning Commission, City staff and Council. Based on budget, the City can choose to transform the chosen elements over a short period of time or phase them in as replacement of older elements.”
Streetlights
Streetlights comprise a prolific functional element in the urban environment that require routine replacement over the years and addition to the cityscape when new land use developments take place.

Some cities have embellished their appearance in subtle or dramatic ways. Historic “old town” districts of cities are often emphasized through the use of “Gaslamp”-style fixtures.

Contemporary developments have gravitated to more geometrical designs for their exterior lighting needs on pathways and sometimes adjacent streets.

Many decorative designs for streetlights are commercially available through a wide variety of sources and meet the latest eco-friendly standards by using LED lamps and solar or wind energy.

But “off the shelf” products don’t precisely fulfill the vision of the Arts & Culture Master Plan, which indicates a desire for uniqueness and authenticity.

Under the Public Art Goal #2:

Imaginative Design in
Functional Elements
66 67
848
Imaginative Design in
Functional Elements
Mission Viejo
When the planned community (now city of)
Mission Viejo was developed in the 1960s, the
Mission Viejo Company designed a distinctive
streetlight modeled on the El Camino Real
bells along the historic highway and the bells
at nearby Mission San Juan Capistrano. At that
time, experts said it could not be created, but
representatives from General Electric and Edison
worked together to transform the concept into
reality and today thousands of the “Mission Bell
Luminaire” streetlights illuminate the city. It is a
hallmark of that community, reflecting its self-
defined character.

Los Angeles
Other cities have held open competitions for such designs, and a recent example was “LA Lights the Way,” a 2019 call for designers in architecture, design, and engineering by the City of Los Angeles to submit concepts for a new design to replace its streetlights. LA has over 210,000 streetlights in over 400 different designs citywide.

Three competitions were conducted: one open to professional designers, one for students in professional design programs, and one for all other students. Guidelines included adherence to the City’s strict public works specifications required for safe, efficient and durable streetlights.

Juries for each program included representation from designers, architects, engineers, and City staff. Full program details may be found here: https://www.lalightstheway.org/ The winning design was announced by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti in front of the famous Chris Burden “Urban Light” installation at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art in 2020. 68 69
849
Imaginative Design in
Functional Elements
Benches
Benches provide another opportunity to
beautify functional elements in a City. The City
of Laguna Beach includes an Artist-Designed
Bench program among its Public Art programs.

The selection follows their normal Public Art
processes, though guidelines for the benches,
as functional elements on which people may sit
or lie down, are more specific as to materials and
design.

Bus Shelters
The City of Athens, Georgia, is widely known for artist-designed bus shelters, selected to open competitions similar to those described above. In their words, “The unique installations have sparked conversations, prompted explorations and brought the uniqueness of being an Athenian to our well-regarded Transit System. These shelters serve a practical need as well as connect with people who might not ordinarily seek out Public Art.” The following are
a few examples
of Laguna Beach
artist-designed
benches:

Street Calming, Pedestrian
Crosswalks, Bike Lanes
“Asphalt art had a strong positive correlation with improved safety benefits across aggregated and most individual study sites,” researchers wrote in the study. “Road user behavior clearly improved across the observed study sites in the after analysis periods.” This was reported by Bloomberg Philanthropies about their Asphalt Art Initiative, which they define as “visual interventions on roadways (intersections and crosswalks), pedestrian spaces (plazas and sidewalks), and vertical infrastructure (utility boxes, traffic barriers, and underpasses).” https://asphaltart.bloomberg.org/
70 71
850
The City of Portland, Oregon has more than 100 street art paintings. A recent article by BikePortland cited the following statistics from the Bloomberg Philanthropies report: “a 50% decrease in the rate of crashes involving pedestrians or other vulnerable road users, a 37% decrease in the rate of crashes leading to injuries, and a 17% decrease in the total crash rate.

The user behavior assessment yielded similar results; a 25% decrease in pedestrian crossings involving a conflict with drivers, a 27% increase in frequency of drivers immediately yielding to pedestrians with the right of way, and a 38% decrease in pedestrians crossing against the walk signal.” They did so in order to rebut “For years, the official stance from the Portland Bureau of Transportation has been that intersection paintings have no traffic safety impacts and are simply a tool to build community and bring people together around a shared neighborhood identity.”
Wallace & Center Streets, Costa Mesa
Monrovia & 19th Streets, Costa Mesa
In September 2020, with support from the nonprofit Costa Mesa Alliance for Better Streets, Costa Mesa installed traffic calming street art on a temporary basis to test the concept and the public’s response. The artwork was created by Costa Mesa artist Salina Mendoza. 72 73
851
Imaginative Design in
Functional Elements
Playgrounds and
Fitness Stations
Playgrounds worldwide for decades have showcased artist-designed equipment and whimsical experiences for children. While off-the-shelf playground themes are readily available, this is another opportunity for a city to demonstrate its uniqueness by commission artists in the creation of playground equipment.

Interestingly, just a few years ago, the National Fitness Campaign partnered with the Keith Haring Foundation (administrator of the famous artist’s estate) to offer communities a number of options to license stock outdoor fitness courts with Haring’s easily recognizable art emblazoned on their walls. However, in response to many communities’ requests, the National Fitness Campaign also opened up the opportunity for its fitness courts to be designed by artists chosen by local communities through commissions and competitions.

A playground
depicting
the literary
character of
Gulliver in
Portugal
National Fitness Campaign’s fitness court using licensed art by the late Keith Haring can instead feature the work of artists chosen by local communities
Example of a National Fitness Campaign fitness court
with art by a locally-chosen artist.
74 75
852
Utility Boxes
Costa Mesa already has a successful and growing Utility Box Art Program.

See p. 94 and following for its June 2022 Handbook.

Costa Mesa
Utility Art Box Program Handbook (draft 6/2022). The Handbook outlines the process:
- Use of vinyl wraps
- Maintenance & Repair – City responsible
- Submission for Artists – Artist Honorarium ($300)
- Submission for Sponsorships – can use name & logo on box plus artwork ($1,500 to $2,000 for private, for-profit businesses and $600 to $1,000 for public and non-profit organizations.) - Review & evaluation by staff and Costa Mesa Cultural Arts Committee (which was converted to Commission status in 2022)
Orange County cities with Utility Box Art Programs Include:

Buena Park
New Art in Public Places Program specifically for city public locations. Program does utility boxes (vinyl wrap) and murals (public pool).

Dana Point
Dana Point just completed Phase 3 of the Utility Box Public Art Program. Priority is given to local artists for the vinyl wrap boxes. Artwork is selected by the City of Dana Point Arts & Culture Commission. Each selected artist receives a $250 honorarium.

San Clemente
The City of San Clemente and the San Clemente Art Association created this pilot beautification project, “Street Art” in 2012. Each artist selected received a $500 honorarium and a supply voucher up to $200.

The boxes are painted with the predominant themes of nature and the surf culture.

Santa Ana
In 2020, the City of Santa Ana Arts & Culture Office did a Call for Art for their Utility Box Art Program. This was for artists who live, work, or study in Santa Ana. Artists painted the boxes and received an honorarium of $400.

Tustin
Creative Signals, Traffic Signal Cabinet Public Art Program. This was established in 2018 working with the Public Art Committee. Individuals, organizations, and businesses are invited to donate a Public Art project to the City of Tustin by having an original vinyl wrap designed and Functionality and Cost
Adding imaginative design or artistic treatments to functional elements in the cityscape requires adherence to specifications for safety, energy efficiency, durability, ease of maintenance, and other concerns. This can sometimes add to the cost of acquisition, which should be taken into account when planning such projects. But the costs should also be weighed against the value to the City in terms of beautification, community engagement, and contribution to the image and “brand” of Costa Mesa as “City of the Arts.”
Utility Box 39 by Jason Maloney
76 77
853
About the Consultant
Arts Orange County (ArtsOC) is the leader in building appreciation of, participation in, and support for the arts and arts education in Orange County, California. A countywide nonprofit arts council, Arts Orange County is designated by the County’s Board of Supervisors as its official Local Arts Agency and State-Local Partner. Founded in 1995, ArtsOC offers a broad range of traditional arts council programs and services that are augmented by an innovative portfolio of consulting and project management services for government, education and nonprofit organizations.

ARTS ORANGE COUNTY CONSUL TING TEAM
Richard Stein, President & CEO
Pat Gomez, Public Art Consultant
Karin Schnell, Municipal Art Consultant
Ashley Bowman, Public Art Researcher
Priscilla Reinholtz, Green Pea Design, Graphic Designer 17620 Fitch Suite 255
Irvine CA 92614
714.556.5160
ArtsOC.org
Historic Costa Mesa by Allyson Jones Wong
Appendix
78 79
854

ORANGE COUNTY CITIES

ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAMS
Mandatory Public Art – 4 Cities
These cities have ordinances requiring the acquisition and installation of art as part of public and/or private development.

Brea
Development projects with a total project valuation of between $1,500,000 and $3,999,999 have the option of contributing sculpture allocation funds to Brea’s Art Fund in lieu of installing sculpture at the project site. Development projects with a total project building valuation of $4,000,000 or more must install sculpture at the project site. 1% of total project valuation.

Program has been in place since 1975 with more than 180 artworks on display citywide.

Buena Park
New public parks and City capital improvements must include Public Art component (enacted 2019)
Dana Point

0.5% on private and public development projects (except County of Orange Dana Point Harbor) Laguna Beach
All new commercial and industrial development, residential development (including subdivisions) of more than four lots or units, remodeling, repair, or reconstruction of buildings in the above two categories when the value exceeds $225,000.00, and certain City public works projects when the value exceeds $225,000.00.

Acquire and install an artwork on the project site which is of at least 1% of the total project valuation, or pay an in-lieu fee which is a contribution to the Art In-Lieu fund and will be equal to

1.25% of the total project valuation.

In 2020, Temporary Public Art Installations were developed with funding from the Arts Commission Special Program Budget. Arts Commission budget generated from revenues from the Business Improvement District, Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), and donations.

Non-Mandatory
Programs – 4 Cities
These cities encourage private developers to incorporate Public Art into their projects and provide guidelines with varying degrees of detail.

Anaheim
Anaheim is at beginning stages in preparing a Public Art Plan. They are doing research on all the different communities in the city, looking at both cultural and historical aspects.

Huntington Beach
There is a draft Public Art Master Plan (2020) that has not been approved. The purpose of the Plan is to guide the process for Public Art within the City. Plan proposes to form an ad hoc Art In Public Places Committee to develop policies and procedures for the use of currently available Public Art in Parks funds.

Newport Beach
Newport Beach recognizes the importance of Public Art to enhance and beautify the city under an Art in Public Places Council Policy. For the past 10 years, emphasis has been on the temporary Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park, where 10 pieces are loaned for a 2-year period (20 works on display simultaneously). Phase VII was just installed and will be up through June 2024. The City has utilized various sources to pay for it over the years, including proceeds from a development fee, General Fund, contribution from a hotel fee (Business Improvement District), a State of California grant, and supplemental funds from a fundraising auxiliary to the City’s Arts Commission.

Santa Ana
Santa Ana just developed Public Art Guidelines, Chapter 15, as part of the Citywide Design Guidelines. In that, Public Art associated with commercial development is encouraged. Public Art projects such as fitness court murals, utility boxes, and a beautification project (Willits and Sullivan) have been implemented recently primarily as special projects directed by the City Council.
80 81
855
Inventory of Public Artworks in
the City of Costa Mesa
Permanent Artworks (58)
California Scenario (Award
Winning, 1994) / stone, water,
metal, plantings / 1980-1982
Artist: Isamu Noguchi
Location: Pacific Arts Plaza,
611 Anton Boulevard
Connector (Award Winning,
2006) /weatherproofed steel
sculpture / 2006
Artist: Richard Serra
Location: Segerstrom Center
for the Arts, 600 Town Center
Drive
Costa Mesa Bloom / mural /
2019
Artist: Aaron Glasson
Location: Triangle Square,
Harbor Boulevard and 19th
Street
Cytocast / ultra-high
performance concrete and
micro-rebar sculpture/ 2018
Artist: Joseph Sarafian
and Orange Coast College
Architecture students
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Dick Church’s Restaurant
Mural / mural / date unknown
Artist: Jennifer Bloomfield
Location: Dick Church’s
Restaurant, 2698 Newport
Boulevard
Dolly Parton Mural / mural /
2021
Artist: David Gilmore
Location: The Strut Bar and
Club, 719 West 19th Street
Electric Bike Company Mural
/ mural / 2021
Artist: Jennifer Bloomfield
Location: Electric Bike
Company, 1945 Placentia
Avenue
Fermi / marble modular
sculpture / 1975
Artist: Tony Smith
Location: 650 Town Center
Drive
Fire Bird / gold, silver, and red
stainless steel sculpture /
1986
Artist: Richard Lippold
Location: Segerstrom Center
for the Arts, 600 Town Center
Drive
Floyd’s 99 Barbershop Mural
/ spray paint mural / 2017
Artist: Jonas Never
Location: Former Floyd’s 99
Barbershop, 124 East 17th
Street
Food for the Soul / spray
paint mural / 2021
Artist: Brian Peterson and
Damin Lujan
Location: Someone Cares
Soup Kitchen, 720 West 19th
Street
Four Lines Oblique Gyratory-
Square IV / kinetic steel
sculpture / 1973
Artist: George Rickey
Location: 650 Town Center
Drive
Friends of Brentwood Park /
wall mural / 2017
Artist: Becky Feltman
Location: Brentwood Park,
260 Brentwood Street
Historic Costa Mesa /
painted mural / 2012
Artist: Allyson Jones Wong
Location: Sparks Enterprises,
1500 Adams Avenue
Hombre and Mujer / 2
sculptures / 2001
Artist: Vladimir Cora
Location: Mesa Art and
Framing, 789 West 19th
Street
Home Sweet Home / wall
mural / 2019
Artist: Brian Peterson
Location: First United
Methodist Church,
420 West 19th Street
Jonah and the Whale /
bronze sculpture in pool /
1918
Artist: Carl Milles
Location: 650 Town Center
Drive
Kobe and Gianna Bryant
Tribute Mural / mural / 2020
Artist: Tyke Witnes
Location: 739 West 19th
Street
Kobe Bryant Mural / mural /
2020
Artist: Efren Andaluz
Location: SOCIAL Costa
Mesa, 512 West 19th Street
Las Poderosas Mural / mural
/ 2020
Artists: Alicia Rojas, Camilo
Romero, and the Santa Ana
Community Artist(a) Coalition
Location: Baker Street and
Killybrooke Lane
Mustang Legacy Wall Project
/ brick wall mural / 2017
Artist: Costa Mesa High
School Foundation
Location: Costa Mesa High
School, 2650 Fairview Road
Neptune Water Spouts /
ceramic fountain heads and
fountain / 1975
Artist: Betty Davenport Ford
Location: 686 Anton
Boulevard
Night Shift / Sierra white
granite and stainless steel
sculpture / 1982
Artist: Jim Huntington
Location: 686 Anton
Boulevard
Oiseau / bronze sculpture /
1981
Artist: Joan Miro
Location: 650 Town Center
Drive
Orange County Graffiti Mural
/ mural / date unknown
Artist: Graffiti LA
Location: Former Rollin Deep
Ice Cream, 891 Baker Street,
Suite B-19
82 83
856
Pablo Universal / painted
mural on building / 2013
Artist: David Flores
Location: Former DAX Gallery,
2951 Randolph Street
Reclining Figure / bronze
sculpture / 1981
Artist: Henry Moore
Location: 600 Town Center
Drive
Sun Glitter / bronze sculpture
/ 1932
Artist: Henry Moore
Location: 650 Town Center
Drive
Sun Ribbon / glass and metal
windscreen sculpture / 1980
Artist: Claire Falkenstein
Location: 686 Anton
Boulevard
Table of Dignity / installation
and murals / 2017
Artists: Ricardo Mendoza,
Josh Sarantitis, and Emigdio
Vasquez Jr.

Location: 88 Fair Drive
Taco Mesa Mural / mural on
exterior wall / date unknown
Artist: Unknown
Location: Taco Mesa, 647
West 19th Street
The Artist’s Vision / metal
sculpture / 2004
Artist: James McDeamas
Location: 77 Fair Drive
The Free Britney Mural /
mural / 2021
Artist: David Gilmore
Location: Donkey D’s, 820
West 19th Street
The Ram / painted steel
sculpture / 1979
Artist: Charles O. Perry
Location: 686 Anton
Boulevard
The Storyteller, Upstage /
Downstage, The Herald
(Spatio Virtuo Teatro) / 3
painted steel sculptures /
2006
Artist: Jason Meadows
Location: Terrace at South
Coast Repertory, 655 Town
Center Drive
Thalo Sun / paint on wood
mural / 2021
Artist: Gabriella Kohr
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Tour Aux Jambes /
polystyrene, polyester, and
epoxy sculpture / 1973-1980
Artist: Jean Dubuffet
Location: 695 Town Center
Drive
Untitled – B-24 Mural / mural
/ 2021
Artist: Nancy Hadley
Location: 17th Street
Untitled – Bootleggers
Brewery Mural / mural / date
unknown
Artist: Unknown
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Untitled – Crack Shack Mural
/ mural / date unknown
Artist: Unknown
Location: The Crack Shack,
196 East 17th Street
Untitled / acrylic, spray paint
mural / 2009
Artists: El Mac and Retna
Location: RVCA
Headquarters, 960 West 16th
Street
Untitled / exterior color
primer paint mural on
building / 2018
Artist: Joshua Madrid
Location: Volcom Skate Park,
900 Arlington Drive
Untitled / 7 paint on wall-
mounted canvas panels /
2018
Artist: Joshua Madrid
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Untitled CD Tunnel / compact
discs installation / unknown
date
Artist: Unknown
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Untitled Gazebo / sculpture /
unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Untitled – Faces Mural /
mural / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street
Untitled – Industrious
Costa Mesa Mural / mural /
unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: Industrious Costa
Mesa, 3090 Bristol Street
Untitled – Parking Lot Mural /
mural / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: Industrious Costa
Mesa, 3090 Bristol Street
Untitled – Parking Lot Mural
2 / mural / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: Industrious Costa
Mesa, 3090 Bristol Street
Untitled / spray paint mural /
unknown date
Artist: Barry McGee
Location: RVCA
Headquarters, 960 West 16th
Street
Untitled – Save Our Youth
Mural / mural / unknown date
Artist: Save Our Youth
Location: Save Our Youth
Foundation, 2045 Meyer
Place
Untitled – Social Costa Mesa
Mural / mural / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: SOCIAL Costa
Mesa, 512 West 19th Street
Untitled – Tewinkle School
84 85
857
Mural / mural painted on
exterior wall / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: Tewinkle
Intermediate School, 3224
California Street
Untitled – RVCA
Headquarters Mural / spray
paint mural / unknown date
Artist: Unknown
Location: RVCA
Headquarters, 960 West 16th
Street
Utsurohi 91 – Costa Mesa /
chromium-plated steel and
ceramic tile sculpture / 1991
Artist: Aiko Miyawaki
Location: 695 Town Center
Drive
Welcome Home / acrylic
spray paint mural / 2017
Artist: Shepard Fairey
Location: 125 Baker Street
Welcome to Costa Mesa
/ spray paint mural / date
unknown
Artists: Brian Peterson and
Damin Lujan
Location: 21st Street
Wilson Elementary Mural /
mural / 2022
Artist: Jennifer Bloomfield
Location: 801 West Wilson
Street
Yes, No, Maybe (Neon Art) /
neon art / date unknown
Artist: Unknown
Location: The LAB Anti-Mall,
2930 Bristol Street

Utility Box Art Program
Current: 51
Former: 11
(“Former” refers to previous
artworks that have been
removed.)
Utility Box 1 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2015
Artist: Al McCoy
Location: Formerly 19th
Street and Placentia Avenue
Utility Box 2 / sticker wrapped
utility box/ 2015
Artist: Michael Ward
Location: Placentia Avenue
and Wilson Street
Utility Box 3 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2015
Artist: Scott Kennedy
Location: Formerly Placentia
Avenue and 16th Street
Utility Box 4 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2015
Artist: Gina Clark
Location: Formerly Fair Drive
and Civic Center
Utility Box 5 / sticker wrapped
utility box / unknown date
Artist: City of Costa Mesa –
City Manager’s Office
Location: Park Avenue and
19th Street
Utility Box 6 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2015
Artist: Abby Garcia
Location: Formerly Placentia
Avenue and 17th Street
Utility Box 7 / painted utility
box / 2015
Artist: Estancia High School
Artists
Location: 2323 Placentia
Avenue
Utility Box 8 / sticker wrapped
utility box / 2015
Artist: Segerstrom Center
for the Arts Graphic Design
Team
Location: Bristol Street and
Town Center Drive
Utility Box 9 / sticker wrapped
utility box / 2016
Artist: Thomas Griffithe
Location: Newport Boulevard
and Victoria Street
Utility Box 11 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2016
Artist: Marie Lavallee
Location: 17th Street and
Westminster Avenue
Utility Box 12 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Julie Bird Mattson
Location: East 17th Street
and Tustin Avenue
Utility Box 12 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2017
Artist: Papa Murphy’s Graphic
Design Team
Location: Formerly Wilson
Street and Harbor Boulevard
Utility Box 13 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: David Levy
Location: Mesa Drive and
Santa Ana Street
Utility Box 14 / painted utility
box / 2017
Artist: Senior Center Artists
Location: 19th Street and
Pomona Avenue
Utility Box 15 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Ben Brough
Location: 17th Street and
Santa Ana Avenue
Utility Box 16 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Marie Lavallee
Location: 19th Street and
Anaheim Avenue
Utility Box 17 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Craig Barker
Location: Adams Avenue and
Mesa Verde East
Utility Box 18 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Bill Anderson
Location: Bristol Street and
Anton Boulevard
Utility Box 19 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Segerstrom Center for
the Arts
Location: Bristol Street and
Sunflower Avenue
86 87
858
Utility Box 20 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: The Costa Mesa
Historical Society
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and 19th Street
Utility Box 21 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: The Costa Mesa
Historical Society
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and Mesa Verde Drive
Utility Box 22 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2017
Artist: Sharon Hurd
Location: Placentia Avenue
and Goat Hill Junction
Utility Box 23 (Former) /
sticker wrapped utility box /
2018
Artist: Jason Carrougher
Location: Formerly Placentia
Avenue and 18th Street
Utility Box 24 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: Orange Coast College
Location: Fairview Road and
Arlington Drive
Utility Box 25 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: Orange Coast College
Location: Fairview Road and
Monitor Way
Utility Box 26 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: Orange Coast College
Location: Fairview Road and
Merrimac Way
Utility Box 27 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Victor Briseno
Location: Hamilton Street
and Harbor Boulevard
Utility Box 29 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Orange County
Fairgrounds
Location: Wilson Street and
Harbor Boulevard
Utility Box 30 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Orange County
Fairgrounds
Location: Fair Drive
Utility Box 31 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Maria Reverberi
Location: Adams Avenue and
Pinecreek Drive
Utility Box 32 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Barbara Owens
Location: Milbro Street and
Baker Street
Utility Box 33 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Iriet Peshkess
Location: Baker Street and
Fairview Road
Utility Box 34 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Wade McDonald
Location: Paularino Avenue
and Bristol Street
Utility Box 35 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Al McCoy
Location: West 19th Street
and Placentia Avenue
Utility Box 36 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Frank Gutierrez
Location: Bristol Street and
Randolph Avenue
Utility Box 37 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Bill Anderson
Location: SOBECA Way and
Bristol Street
Utility Box 38 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Scott Kennedy
Location: West 16th Street
and Placentia Avenue
Utility Box 39 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Jason Maloney
Location: Bristol Street and
Baker Street
Utility Box 40 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Costa Mesa Historical
Preservation Society
Location: Placentia Avenue
and Fairview Park
Utility Box 41 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Julie Bird Mattson
Location: National Avenue
and Victoria Street
Utility Box 42 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Rebekah Corum
Location: Newport Boulevard
and 22nd Street
Utility Box 43 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Tanya Lozano
Location: Bear Street and
South Coast Drive
Utility Box 44 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Jeff Gillette
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and Fair Drive
Utility Box 46 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Bob Hogue
Location: South Coast Drive
and Harbor Boulevard
Utility Box 47 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Costa Mesa Historical
Preservation Society
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and Merrimac Way
Utility Box 48 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Marco de Jesus Nino
Location: Mesa Drive and
Newport Avenue
Utility Box 49 / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2021
Artist: Jennifer Bloomfield
Location: Newport Boulevard
and Del Mar Avenue
Utility Box 50 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Richard Walsh
Location: Red Hill Avenue and
Baker Street East
88 89
859
Utility Box 51 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Costa Mesa Historical
Preservation Society
Location: Newport Boulevard
and Bay Street
Utility Box 52 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Jeff Lee
Location: West Sunflower
Avenue and Susan Street
Utility Box 53 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Johnathan Schiesel
Location: American Avenue
and Victoria Street
Utility Box 54 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Ronald Chee
Location: Adams Avenue and
Royal Palm Drive
Utility Box 55 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Sonya Teymourian
Location: Superior Avenue
and Industrial Way
Utility Box 56 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Ana Paula Lima
Location: East 17th Street
and Newport Boulevard
Utility Box 57 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Britt Bastedo
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and West Bay Street
Utility Box 58 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Sonya Teymourian
Location: Fairview Road and
Fair Drive
Utility Box 59 / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Bob Hogue
Location: West 19th Street
and Meyer Place
Utility Box (Former -
Unnumbered) / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2020
Artist: Bonnie Matthews
Location: Formerly Bear
Street and Baker Street
Utility Box (Former -
Unnumbered) / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2015
Artist: Bridget Bourgon
Location: Formerly 19th
Street and Harbor Boulevard
Utility Box (Former -
Unnumbered) / sticker
wrapped utility box / 2018
Artist: Chris Simmons
Location: Formerly Fairview
Road and Fair Drive
Utility Box (Former -
Unnumbered) / painted utility
box / 2015
Artist: Marilyn Scott-Waters
Location: Placentia Avenue
and 18th Street
Utility Box (Former -
Unnumbered) / sticker
wrapped utility box / date
unknown
Artist: Raising Canes
Location: Harbor Boulevard
and Baker Street
Definitions and Eligibilities from
Other Municipalities

SAMPLE PUBLIC ART IN PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
City of San Diego:
“Artwork – An artwork may be in any style, expression, genre or media, provided that it is designed by an artist as defined herein. Artworks may be stand- alone, functional, or integrated into the architecture or landscaping and should encompass the broadest range of expression, media and materials.

Artwork includes:

Sculpture: may be made of any material or combination of materials; may be free standing, wall supported or suspended, kinetic, electronic or mechanical.

Murals or paintings: may be made of any material or variety of materials with or without collage; may be made with traditional or non-traditional materials and means.

Earthworks, neon, glass, organic materials (i.e., fiber, clay, wood, etc.), mosaics, photographs, prints, literary expression, calligraphy, any combination of media, including audio, video, film, CD-ROM, DVD, holographic or computer-generated technologies, or new genres.

Artwork as defined herein may be permanent, fixed, or portable, may be an integral part of a building, facility, or structure, and may be integrated with the work of other design professionals.”
90 91
860
The City of Los Angeles listing of projects eligible for their Arts Development Fee Credit, please note that the City of Los Angeles has a broader range of cultural services eligible for compliance:
“Credits.
(b) Cultural and artistic facilities are defined as follows:
(i) Exhibit/Performance Space: Public gallery/exhibition space, public performance spaces, Public Artistic studio spaces, Public Arts education facilities.
(ii) Sculpture: Free standing, wall supported or suspended, kinetic, electronic or mechanical in material or combination of materials. (iii) Murals or portable paintings: In any materials or variety of materials, with or without collage or the addition of non-traditional materials and means.
(iv) Earthworks, fireworks, neon, glass, mosaics, photographs, prints, calligraphy, any combination of forms of media, including sound, film, holographic, and video systems, hybrids of any media and new genres.
(v) Standardized fixtures such as grates, streetlights, signage, and other design enhancements, as are rendered by an artist for unique or limited editions.
(vi) Similar facilities on culture and the arts as determined by the Cultural Affairs Department.
(c) Cultural and artistic services are defined as follows:
(i) Performing arts: Theatre, dance, music, and performance art. (ii) Literary arts: Poetry readings and story telling.
(iii) Media arts: Film and video, screenings, and installations. (iv) Education: Lectures, presentations, and training in and about arts and culture.
(v) Special events: Parades, festivals, and celebrations. (vi) Similar services on culture and the arts as determined approved by the Cultural Affairs Department.”
Equally important is the listing of works not eligible for compliance. The following are examples of this aspect:

City of Los Angeles:
“The following facilities, services and community amenities are ineligible costs for a credit provided herein:
(i) Directional elements such as supergraphics, signage, or color coding except where these elements are integral parts of the original work of art. (ii) Art objects which are mass produced of standard design such as playground equipment, fountains, or statuary objects.
(iii) Reproductions, by mechanical or other means, of original works of art, except in cases of film, video, photography, printmaking or other media arts. (iv) Decorative, ornamental, or functional elements which are designed by the building architect as opposed to an artist commissioned for this design enhancement purpose. (v) Landscape architecture and landscape gardening except where these elements are designed by the artist and/or are an integral part of the work of art by the artist. (vi) Services or utilities necessary to operate or maintain the artwork over time.” Los Angeles County includes the following as an ineligible project to ensure the artwork does not contain a commercial message:
“Artworks that contain a commercial message by referencing, presenting, or promoting a product or service that is available on or off site of the subject property through text, image, logo, trademark, or other mechanism”
Connector by Richard Serra
92 93
861
P.94
862
ATTACHMENT 4
Below are the additional accomplishments outside of the pre-existing budgeted and new programs that were implemented from the budget forecast on page 56 in the Arts & Culture Master Plan
GOAL #1: INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL TO EXPERIENCE ARTS AND

CULTURE THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY, WITH A COMMITMENT TO EQUITY,

DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

1.1 EXPAND ARTS & CULTURAL OFFERINGS FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

1.1.1 - Increase the City’s financial contribution to
Summer Camp for the Arts
Ev
aluate impact of City’s contribution &
determine following year’s contribution
X SMAR T Camp is not part of the
arts funding.

1.1.2 - Engage community organizations in exploring
new opportunities
X

1.1.3 - Create/support more performance
opportunities for youth
X No Budget & schools have funding
through Prop 28

1.1.4 - Explore with SCFTA campus institutions off-site youth arts programs
X Budget & Staff capacity

1.1.5 - Engage OCC, Vanguard, Coastline & UCI in
exploring new opportunities
X Budget & Staff capacity

1.1.6 - Engage Newport-Mesa Unified School District in exploring new opportunities X
Ev
aluate effectiveness of outcomes from these
outreach efforts
X

1.2 INCREASE FREE ARTS EXPERIENCES YEAR-ROUND THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR ALL

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

1.2.1 - Create a one-time pilot art “crawl” experience with other organizations X
Ev
aluate the art crawl experience and if
successful, create ongoing schedule
X

1.2.2 - “Costa Mesa Residents FREE” - SCFTA, resident
groups, SCR
X
863

1.2.3 - Acquire a “showmobile” for use as stage for
outdoor performances
X $150K mobile truck Budget & Staff
capacity (PW capacity, special
licensing required)

1.2.4 - Develop schedule of performances throughout
the city on the showmobile
X Budget & Staff capacity

1.2.5 - Open a call for performing artists, ensembles
for the showmobile schedule
X Budget & Staff capacity

1.2.6 - On a limited basis, make showmobile available
for rent to groups
X Budget & Staff capacity

GOAL #2: EXPAND PUBLIC ART THROUGHOUT THE CITY
2 ESTABLISH A WORLD CLASS PUBLIC ART PROGRAM

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

2.1 - Continue the City-operated program of
temporary utility box art Review additional sites
that are suitable for such installations.

X

2.2 - Develop a plan for an ambitious temporary
and permanent public art program
X In progress, exploring Public Art
funding options. (1% fee for
development)

2.3 - Create a new program of temporary
installations of large-scale sculptures.

Install one phase of large-scale temporary art
(3 works)
X In progress, on the CIP list for 2028

2.4 - Consider a policy of developer fees to support
public art
X In progress, exploring public art
funding options

2.5 - Create a new program of permanent public art
Install permanent public art
X In progress, exploring public art
funding options

2.6 - Research imaginative public works elements

Call for designs & selection process of public
works elements

Fabricate and install new public works
elements
X In progress, exploring public art
funding options

864
GOAL #3: PROFESSIONALIZE AND ELEVATE THE STATUS OF ARTS AND CULTURE

IN CITY GOVERNMENT

3.1 BOLDLY ASSERT COSTA MESA’S “CITY OF THE ARTS” BRAND

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

3.1.1 - Create inspiring new logo X

3.1.2 - Incorporate new logo in all City
communications
X Not implemented at this time

3.1.3 - Agendize “artistic moment” at all Council
meetings
X Currently have the Poet Laureate
present once a year to City Council

3.1.4 - Appoint an Artist Laureate X

3.2 HIRE PROFESSIONAL ARTS AND CULTURE STAFF

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

3.2.1 - Create a full-time Arts Specialist position X

3.2.2 - Develop a position description X

3.2.3 - Open a search X

3.2.4 - Invite outside arts leaders to be part of
interview process
X

3.2.5 - Hire new Arts Specialist X

3.3 ESTABLISH A CITY ARTS COMMISSION & RETAIN ARTS COMMITTEE IN NEW ROLE

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

3.3.1 - Establish an Arts Commission comprised of 7
members appointed by Council
X

3.3.2 - Retain Cultural Arts Committee with a new
mission
X

865
GOAL #4: SUPPORT COSTA MESA’S THRIVING CREATIVE ECONOMY

4.1 RE-IMAGINE THE CITY’S ARTS GRANTS PROGRAM FOR GREATER IMPACT

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

4.1.1 - Re-think the mission of the grant program X

4.1.2 - Increase the range of grant amounts X

4.2 ADDRESS THE NEED FOR CREATIVE SPACES

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
Visual Arts YES NO Explanation

4.2.1 - Explore underutilized City & private spaces for temporary exhibitions or gallery
X Budget & Staff capacity and
redundancy in programming
(ARTventure)

4.2.2 - Explore easier paths for artists & property
owners to establish creative spaces
X

4.2.3 - Explore possible incentives for property owners to provide visual arts space
X Private Property mural (optional)
Performing Arts

4.2.4 - Test new Library/Lions Park spaces as
performance venues by offering free trial use
X

4.2.5 - Convene CM Playhouse & Attic Theatre to learn
more about their needs

Based on conversation, determine role of the
City in advancing a plan
X

4.2.6 - Study further needs for 300-400 and 3000-
4000 seat venues
Based on research, determine role of the City in
advancing a plan
X Budget & Staff capacity

4.3 HELP KEEP COSTA MESA’S “CREATIVES” IN THE CITY

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

4.3.1 - Explore opportunities for affordable housing
and work space for artists
X Budget & Staff capacity

4.4 PROMOTE GREATER CREATIVE SECTOR COLLABORATION

ACHIEVEMENT STATUS
YES NO Explanation

4.4.1 - Host initial meeting of CM arts organization
representatives

X

X

866
Send a City representative to attend future
meetings

4.4.2 - Host initial meeting of CM industry
representatives

Send a City representative to attend future
meetings
X Budget & Staff capacity

867
ATTACHMENT 5
To:

Fro
m:

Date:

Re:

MEMORANDUM
Costa Mesa City Council
Costa Mesa Arts Commission
April
2, 2026
Budget Recommendations to City Council for FY 2026-27
Purpose
This memorandum summarizes the budget recommendations discussed between Commissioners Derderian and Lucia and presented to the full Arts Commission for consideration and forwarding to City Council. The intent is not to create new financial obligations but to remove the inefficiencies in how existing and anticipated resources are structured and deployed. These recommendations apply the lessons learned during the first cycle of the Arts and Culture Ma ster Plan implementation to correct how existing dollars are structured and allocated. The current framework requires City finance staff to return to Council each year to request general fund dollars to backfill a recurring shortfall, creating unnecessary friction and inefficiency in the annual budget process. Updating city policies and municipal codes where applicable would ensure that arts funding is properly designated from the outset, staff time is not consumed by avoidable annual shortfalls, and public dollars are directed as efficiently as possible toward the community outcomes the Master Plan was designed to deliver.

Recommendation 1: Reclassify the Arts Specialist Position to the City’s General Fund The Arts Commission recommends that the full-time Arts Specialist position be reclassified from the Arts and Culture Budget to the City’s general fund for personnel costs.

The Arts Specialist role was established as a direct outcome of the Arts and Culture Master Plan and hired in 2022 at an annual salary of approximately $120,000. Currently, that cost is borne by the Arts and Culture Budget, which is inconsistent with how other City departments fund their staff. Every other City department draws on the general fund to cover employee salaries, and the Arts Specialist position should be treated no differently. In practice, the City has already been covering this cost through general fund supplements, meaning this reclassification does not introduce a new expense but rather aligns the budget structure with how the position is already being funded.

As currently structured, a substantial portion of the Arts and Culture Budget is directed toward a personnel line item rather than toward the programming, activations, and public art investments the Master Plan was designed to fund. Reclassifying this position to the general fund would restore those resources to their intended purpose and bring the budget structure into alignment with standard City practice.
868
Recommdenation 2: Establish a Dedicated Public Art Fund The Arts Commission recommends that the City work with the Finance Department to establish a formal, dedicated Public Art Fund. This action does not require a budget appropriation and can be initiated immediately through a request to Finance for Council approval.

A dedicated Public Art Fund would serve as a specialized, protected fund for public art investments. Critically, it would be structured so that it is not subject to general fund supplementation, meaning any unspent dollars would carry forward from year to year rather than reverting to the general fund at the close of each fiscal year. This structure ensures that public art funding accumulates purposefully over time and is available when meanin gful projects are ready to move forward.

Establishing this fund now also creates the necessary infrastructure to support Recommendations 3 and 4 below. Before the City can formally direct TOT revenue or an increased cannabis tax allocation to public art, a designated fund must exist to receive those dollars. Creating the Public Art Fund is the foundational step that makes the remaining recommendations actionable.

Recommendation 3: Dedicate a Portion of Any Transient Occupancy Tax Increase to the Public Art Fund
The Arts Commission recommends that City Council designate a defined portion of any Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) increase for the Public Art Fund.

The City Council is currently exploring a November 2026 ballot measure to raise Costa Mesa’s TOT rate, which stands at 8%, the lowest among surrounding Orange County cities. City staff have projected that each additional 1% increase in the TOT could generate approximately $1 million in new annual revenue for the City.

As the Council considers how to allocate that new revenue, the Arts Commission urges that the Public Art Fund be included as a designated recipient. Hotel visitors are among the most direct beneficiaries of a culturally vibrant city, and there is a clear and logical connection between tourism revenue and the public art investments that make Costa Mesa an attractive destination. Dedicating a share of TOT growth to the Public Art Fund would create a sustainable, visitor-supported funding stream tied directly to the community’s cultural identity.

Recommendation 4: Increase the Cannabis Tax Allocation to Fund Full Implementation of the Arts and Culture Master Plan
The Arts Commission recommends that City Council amend the municipal code to increase the cannabis tax allocation dedicated to arts and culture from one-half cent to one full cent of the 7 - cent-per-dollar retail cannabis tax, in order to better fulfill the original intent of Measure Q.

When the City adopted its retail cannabis ordinance, one-half cent of the 7-cent-per-dollar tax was earmarked to fund implementation of the Arts and Culture Master Plan. City leaders initially projected this revenue would be sufficient to fully fund the Master Plan’s programs, estimated at approximately $1.9 million over the plan’s five -year term. In practi ce, revenue has fallen 869
significantly short of that projection. The City currently collects approximately $230,000 annually in arts-related cannabis tax revenue, and that figure is not expected to grow meaningfully given existing caps on the number of licensed dispensaries. The City has relied on general fund supplements each of the past three years to make up the difference.

Doubling the allocation from one-half cent to one full cent would meaningfully close that gap and reduce the City’s dependence on annual general fund backfills to sustain Master Plan programming. The original vision behind the Measure Q set-aside was to generate visible, tangible results for the community through a dedicated revenue source. Increasing the allocation is the most direct way to honor that commitment without asking for new or additional spending from the general fund. A portion of the increased allocation could be directed to the Public Art Fund established under Recommendation 2, ensuring a dedicated and visible source of funding for public art projects as envisioned under the Master Plan.

Conclusion
Taken together, these four recommendations reflect the Arts Commission’s commitment to responsible stewardship of public resources. None of these recommendations create new financial obligations for the City. Each one is about directing existing or anticipated revenue more efficiently so that dollars already flowing into the City are put to work in the way they were originally intended. After several years of Master Plan implement ation, it is clear that the current funding structure creates recurring inefficiencies: finance staff must return to Council annually to request general fund dollars to cover a predictable shortfall, and dedicated revenue sources are not being used as effectively as they could be. These recommendations ask Council to update the relevant policies and municipal codes so that those dollars reach their intended purpose without unnecessary administrative burden each year. The result will be a more efficient use of staff time, a more transparent use of public funds, and a stronger foundation for delivering on the arts and cultural vision Costa Mesa has already committed to: a city where creativity can flourish, arts and culture enrich everyday life, and Costa Mesa ’s identity as a City of the Arts is visible and felt by everyone who lives, works, and visits here.
870
ATTACHMENT 1

ARTS GRANT AWARDS
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
• For the current fiscal year, there were 14 eligible applications • Each application was reviewed by a review panel of three people (2 Arts Commissioners and 1 arts administrator)
• A perfect score for an application is 30 points
• Requested funds could be for up to $5,000 for a project and or event in Costa Mesa • Total funds available: $12,500
Arts Organization
or Individual
Project or Event Final
Score
Requested
Amount
Award
Amount

Ramon Guzman

Fiscal Sponsor:

Trellis International
Faces and Reflections of Costa Mesa / Rostros
y Reflejos de Costa Mesa is a public art
installation and living tribute to the
Hispanic/Latin-X residents who form the city's
cultural backbone. Hosted at historic Lions
Park during Hispanic Heritage Month, this
temporary installation transforms traditional
portraiture into an interactive civic experience,
displaying from September 15 to October 15,
2026, with a community unveiling on
September 15th.

Event Summary: The project launches with an
unveiling at Lions Park, providing a dedicated
civic space for residents to engage with the
artwork, read bilingual histories, and celebrate
their shared identity. The launch features
targeted bilingual outreach and temporary
directional signage ensuring accessibility.

Art Installation Details: The installation features
three large, weather-resistant A-frame
structures elevating local voices:

Structure 1: Displays intimate portraits of Costa
Mesa families paired with bilingual stories.

Structure 2: Provides project background and
community testimonies about the installation’s
meaning.

Structure 3: Introduces a shatterproof
polycarbonate mirror for park visitors to see
their reflections alongside these narratives.

This structure includes ground-level
accessibility features in Spanish and English
and incorporates a QR code. Individuals can
upload their self-portraits to City of Costa Mesa
social media pages, promoting civic innovation.
29 $5,000 $5,000

871

Arts Organization
or Individual
Project or Event Final
Score
Requested
Amount
Award
Amount

Dance 4 Joy

The West Side Alive Summer Camp is a
community arts education program that brings
dance, creativity, and cultural enrichment to
children ages Pre-K through 6th grade in West
Side Costa Mesa. Led by Dance 4 Joy Ministries
(D4J), the program creates an inclusive and
welcoming environment where children of all
backgrounds and abilities can experience the
joy of artistic expression and movement. Since
2007, D4J has served the West Side Costa
Mesa community by providing accessible arts
programming that supports creativity,
confidence, and community connection. The
Camp is expected to serve approximately 45-50
children from local schools, churches, and
community organizations. Many participating
students come from West Side Title I schools,
where higher rates of free and reduced-price
lunch indicate a greater need for accessible
community arts opportunities.

28 $2,500 $2,500

Backhausdance
Following the success of the 8-week pilot project
funded by the City of Costa Mesa Arts
Commission in fall 2025, Backhausdance
proposes a new season of "Dance for Joy and
Well-Being," from September 28 to November
16, 2026 at the Costa Mesa Senior Center. Led
by professional Backhausdance dancers and
teaching artists, each 90-minute workshop over
the 8-week period, includes warm-up, learning
contemporary movement vocabulary and
technique, improvisation, and storytelling, with
seated or standing exercises, partner work, and
simple choreographed sequences set to uplifting
music chosen by participants. The last session
features a company class with additional
Backhausdance members and a special
performance by the Backhausdance Education
Performing Company of new repertory set to the
music of Aaron Copland, including "Simple
Gifts" from Appalachian Spring and "Hoe Down"
from Rodeo. New in 2026, the program will
connect to the national celebration of the 250th
anniversary of the Declaration of Independence,
exploring music by American composers and
themes inspired by historic places across the
United States and will also explore a partnership
with Local 7 of the American Federation of
Musicians (in Santa Ana) to incorporate live
musicians as accompanists for workshops and
the final celebration.
28 $2,500 $2,500
872

Arts Organization
or Individual
Project or Event Final
Score
Requested
Amount
Award
Amount

Pacific Symphony

Grant funds are requested for the Class Act
Music Education Program in three Costa
Mesa elementary schools during the 2026-
27 academic year. Specifically, students at
Victoria, College Park Elementaries and
Frontier Academy will participate in year-
long music engagement that includes
classroom lessons, on-site concerts and a
bus trip to the Concert Hall for a full Pacific
Symphony concert. For 31 years, Class Act
has met the need for music education in
schools to help Orange County improve
student scholastic test scores and
academic achievement. Class Act trains
and places Pacific Symphony musicians in
schools where students receive impactful
music learning. Through year-long
residencies, musicians focus on the
fundamentals of music through age-
appropriate classroom lessons and
musician performances culminating with a
trip to see the orchestra perform.
26 $5,000 $2,500
TOTAL: $12,500

873