Testimonials From Richmond’s Artists

Consider that for every artist and organization willing to go public there are several more who won’t do it for fear of retaliation:

Tiffany Conway-Cornelius

In 2023 Public Art Advisory Committee and the Richmond Arts and Culture Commission awarded artists Tiffany Conway -Cornelius and Ari Takata-Vazquez $100,000 for their sculpture titled Living Room, to be located at Kennedy Park. The artists spent months meeting the project’s requirements without a contract. Upon learning that the first payment would be made at least 45 days after submission of their invoice, they unsuccessfully tried to negotiate a shorter payment turnaround. They were advised to either get a fiscal sponsor or take out a personal loan. Tiffany maxed out her credit card in order to pay for the up-front costs ($7,000), but the award was rescinded after a year without explanation. Tiffany took a second job to pay for the credit card debt their project generated.

Rebeca Garcia-Gonzalez

Rebeca was the lead artist of the large restoration project of two of John Wehrle’s murals under the highway 80 underpass. In 2023 and prior to the contract being signed, she had to convince the project’s team of nine artists to individually purchase general liability insurance at $800. The crew waited for more than a year and never got to begin work because of city-generated delays. The Arts and Culture manager promised she’d find the money to get them reimbursed, but then she said that the City didn't have the money to do so, and that the crew would have to wait until they got paid from the contract. After six months of this, Rebeca was forced to use her own money to reimburse three of those artists for fear they would leave the project. She later resigned from her lead artist position once she ran out of funds. She was finally was reimbursed in 2025.

Regina Gilligan

In 2024 Regina was awarded $5,000 through an NPA grant. Her California natives mural was going to be completed in Mendocino Park, in the Richmond Annex neighborhood. Early on she noticed a “lack of transparency regarding expectations” from the Arts and Culture Manager. Finding that the requirements greatly exceeded the risk generated by the project, she sought help from a City official in Parks and Recreation who came up with a workaround, but this solution was rejected. She was later informed that she could only paint the small mural under a general contractor’s contract, who would keep at least 10% of the contract. The nail in the coffin was that the expenses generated by the requirements ate her fee ($2,000). The manager told Regina that the funds “couldn't be released before paying the fees because the Risk Management Office wouldn’t allow it.” These unsurmountable obstacles forced Regina to withdraw her project.

Richard Muro Salazar

Richard was the lead artist for the $451,000, 2,800 square foot mural spanning 88 soundwall panels at the entrance of Parchester Village. It was a Love Your Block and Arts and Culture Division project. As the lead artist, he used the first payment from the project to pay his crew, supplies and equipment, reasoning that he would pay himself out of the second payment. But even though he “met all his benchmarks,” Richard experienced delays with each of his seven payments It took them almost 10 months to pay the 5th payment where.  They said the mural wasn’t 100% finished, so they finished the mural. Then the reason was that their insurance didn’t meet the contract requirements. So Richard updated his insurance. After involving the city manager, he only received half the payment after 5 months. Richard was forced to pay $3,000 for hazmat coverage in order to receive the 2nd half. The sixth payment went smoother once Richard began working with the city manager directly. The Arts and Culture Manager would not release the last payment until Richard provided a financial report which I was not required.

Jennifer Riggs

Her 2024 project was a collaboration with two non-profits and a business. They were going to create a mobile mural with youth and families from one of the non-profits. The theme was Richmond and the environment, and it was going to be displayed at three Richmond locales. There were checklists but “the deadlines changed as they went along.” Jennifer turned in all of the required paperwork plus proof of insurance on time, but the contract was never approved and she never recouped the money she spent on insurance fees. There were continual delays and Jennifer’s relationship with her community partner was severely impacted by the delays. Because she was the contact and had to keep delaying the project implementation, the partnerships soured. “Non-profit partners can't work this way.” Her contract was never approved.

John Wehrle

After years of paying out of pocket for the graffitti abatement of his public work in the city, John became the original lead artist of the large project that began in 2022, the restoration of two of his murals painted during the 1990’s under the highway 80 underpass. Risk Management had told him that the pollution insurance requirement had been waived. But then a new department head came on board and she reinstated it. We protested this, to no avail. His team researched the cost and found out was going to be $22,500 for our 9 artist team. The lead artist was then asked to write a pollution plan which was turned in. Risk Management finally waived this requirement after the project director intervened, because it would have been too costly.

Tiny Village Spirit

Tiny Village project is a tiny non-profit with a volunteer staff. This project provides 12 units of dedicated housing supporting unsheltered young people. Tiny Village Spirit was awarded $9,000 specifically to pay for the small mural part of this much larger project. TVS’s total budget for the panel project was $15,000. Richmond high school students presented their mural designs to the RAC six months ago, but they have yet to paint them because Risk Management did not waive a pollution insurance requirement that would cost almost half as much as the grant award itself. Update: their pollution insurance requirement was very recently waived and three years later, they can proceed with their project.

Anonymous Small Non-Profit
"We experienced extremely long delays in both the contracting process and the funding release process, often lasting more than six months. Despite being proactive with communication and documentation, this inefficiency prevented timely service delivery and cash flow management… The recurring delays—which affect not only RACC grants but also ECIA funding and current vendor agreements—suggest the City is not structured well… and this needs to be addressed structurally.”