TIMELINE:

– January 11, 2007
Received Arts Night Solicitation letter in the mail

The term ‘volunteer jury’ is used in the letter twice and the term ‘jury process’
is used once. This was CLEARLY a juried exhibit, by jurors, not a selection comittee.

– March 16, 2007
Received rejection letter in the mail

The rejection letter also uses the term jury, not selection committee.

– March 19, 2007
Requested jurors names from David Merhib in an email

I personally requested the names. I did not request them so they can be
printed in any publication or materials. It is out of respect for me as an
artist, period. Since the donating artists were not anonymous or asked to
cover up there names on their pieces, it would seem only fair that the JURORS
not be either.

March 20, 2007
– David Merhib rejects my request in an email He did not say there would be a discussion, he did not say
I would get them in the near future. He rejected my request. Period. (see below)

April 8, 2007
– First letter to the editor explaining my situation

May 5, 2007
– Paul Schiller’s response to my letter:

Art judged openly, fairly
By Paul K. Schiller

I would like to disagree with our troubled artisans who feel that they need crystal clear governance in the judging of art for Arts Night at the Washington Pavilion. This is the same argument and noise they put forth in the judging of SculptureWalk.

Arts Night is a fundraiser for the Visual Arts Center, and submissions of art are voluntary. When an artist submits work into these “competitions,” you do so knowing that it’s a credible organization that has a fair and qualified selection process. That is the case with both the Washington Pavilion’s Arts Night and our ever-popular SculptureWalk.

A funny thing happened on the way to Arts Night this year. Ninety artists submitted work for a fundraising auction that had room for about 60 pieces. In past years the Arts Night committee was lucky to receive 50 to 60 pieces of art. The event is growing in popularity with both artists and art buyers. The result is a sold-out event with a great selection of quality art. The uneventful result of this year’s success was the fact that some pieces had to be rejected.

So we’re back to openness and fairness. I find the art-judging process open and fair. Have I had my art rejected in other competitions? Yes. Does it feel good? No. But rejection results in one of two things: You go around and complain about the process not being open and fair, or you go back and create better art for next year’s competition.

If that’s not satisfactory, then I suggest if you want absolute clarity in all forms of life, you could partner with the Argus Leader and take on their quest for total transparency in city and state government!
May 5, 2007
– My first post on the Argus Leader Forum about the situation.

46 days AFTER I requested the jurors names was when I finally responded on the FORUMS.  I was responding to a Washington Pavilion’s Board member’s personal
attack on on me, I have the right to defend myself, the First Amendment gives me that right. Hardly ‘antagonistic’.

The Pavilion will NEVER give me those names, and they know it. They continue to make up excuses, back peddle
and flat out LIE to me and the public.  I find it laughable that they won’t release the jurors names to me because
I might retalitate (an assumption and excuse on their part). Yet they haven’t released them to the other over 90 artists who submitted
to Arts Night, including some who have also requested those names. I suppose they think they will retaliate to. I have received so much bologna from their side of the argument I
could have opened a sandwich shop or fertilizer business by now.

The Washington Pavilion’s policies have further proven that the art establishment in this community has zero
respect for local artists and there contributions to this city and it’s people.

Pathetic.