REMOVAL OF MURAL STIRS ART DEBATE
Mayors in cities where murals have been a ‘hot-button issue’ address the value of free speech and public expression
In quietly erasing a Black Lives Matter street mural this week, Redwood City leaders ignited a spirited debate over where to draw the line in the political messages conveyed by public art.
Like many Bay Area cities in the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing by a Minneapolis police officer, Redwood City allowed artists to paint BLM on one of its streets to show support for the growing movement against police brutality and social injustice.
But when a local businesswoman sought the city’s permission to paint a MAGA 2020 mural alongside the BLM one on Broadway in front of downtown’s Courthouse Square, Mayor Diane Howard decided neither was appropriate.
As a result, city crews scrubbed out the BLM letters on Monday, and since then Howard said she’s received dozens of angry and threatening calls from as far away as New York and Pennsylvania excoriating her both for rejecting President Donald Trump’s campaign slogan and for having the BLM mural removed.
Though some Bay Area leaders say they’ll revisit their own public art polices, others have no qualms about rejecting any kind of Trump election messages while allowing civil rights statements.
Put Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf in that camp, spokesperson Justin Berton indicated.
“The permitting process for a permanent mural includes vigorous community input and, obviously, in a community like Oakland — one of the most diverse in the nation — it’s highly unlikely such a message would win support,” Berton said.
“We’ve noticed the challenges some communities are engaged in related to street murals, yet for Oakland, our focus is on confronting the real issues in front of us — COVID-19 and systemic racism,” he added.
Supporters of a Change. org petition launched against Redwood City’s erasure of the BLM mural in Redwood City say officials there simply caved under pressure from local real estate attorney Maria Rutenberg, who forced a showdown by requesting permission to paint MAGA 2020 next to BLM.
Rutenberg contends on Facebook the city made an unconstitutional choice in approving the mural as “arbiters of private expression.” She said that before approving the mural, the city should have made sure it was widely popular among the public.
“I stand for the 1st Amendment and everyone’s right to express their political views in a new public forum of street asphalts,” she also tweeted.
Howard said the decision to remove the mural was made “recognizing that this became a very passionate hot-button issue” and ultimately was in keeping with the city’s own rules about public art, citing traffic and public safety concerns.
“When we look at our policy, we didn’t have one to allow statements to be on our streets,” Howard said. “We really have to be mindful of our ordinance because other people are requesting their own art. It’s one of those things where your good intentions steamroll into something that’s not so pretty.”
Howard said she feels comfortable in her decision because she wants to put the focus at future community-engagement meetings on police-community relations and not on political messaging.
“This became a political situation. The council did not consider it political. It was public perception that made it political,” Howard said. “Other mayors may think different, but right now we’re in the spotlight. They can call me. I have my cell on the internet so they can call me any time.”
Martinez Mayor Rob Schroder said he’s also received multiple emails both for and against the Black Lives Matter mural on Court Street downtown, which was painted by activists after white supremacist fliers were found strewn on downtown streets.
Schroder said approval of the mural “didn’t go through the normal process we’d put it though for public art on public buildings,” and as a result council members Wednesday met to scrutinize the city’s public art policy.
Still, he’s sure the city wouldn’t support painting a Trump reelection slogan downtown.
“In my opinion, Make America Great Again is a political statement with respect to a political campaign for office,” Schroder said. “On the other hand, the BLM mural is more of a civil rights statement as opposed to a political campaign for president. There is a distinction there.”
In Palo Alto, where a 245-foot-long, 17-foot-tall Black Lives Matter mural on Hamilton Avenue across from City Hall was criticized by a national police group for depicting Black Liberation Army member and fugitive Assata Shakur, Mayor Adrian Fine says the artwork is very clearly a civil rights message and not to be confused with a political campaign.
When asked whether he’d approve a MAGA 2020 mural like the one Rutenberg proposed, Fine said, “Would we consider a proBiden message? Libertarian? Green Party? I think there’s a difference between political candidates and civil rights movements, which is what BLM is.”
Everyone 18 or older can express their political opinions through voting, Fine said, but this year the message of Black Lives Matter transcends a mural’s letters and represents solidarity with the BLM movement.
“I think in this year, our country is going through a really hard time,” Fine said. “But at the same time, Black people in America have gone through a really hard time for 400 years. It came to a head this year again and, you know, what I think is that it’s appropriate to honor BLM and celebrate it and show some solidarity.”