LOVE mural again rejected due to Manhattan Beach pier location requirement
Loves me, loves me not: the months-long saga of the proposed loan of the iconic LOVE sculpture came to a likely end after a topsy-turvy affair in which the Manhattan Beach City Council rejected the sculpture, then accepted it, and finally rejected it again Tuesday night. It’s not about you, a council majority seemed to say — they just weren’t in love with the proposed location of the sculpture, near the city’s pier.
“I just didn’t want that area to be cluttered,” said Councilperson Richard Montgomery. “This is not the right location for this type of thing.”
“As if the pier isn’t iconic enough,” said Councilperson Steve Napolitano when the loan of the sculpture was first considered in early April.
At that time, Council directed staff to see if the owner of sculpture — of which several exist, all by sculptor Robert Indiana — was open to another location in the city. When the answer came back that owner Warren Lichtenstein preferred the pier location, which he can see from his home, a council majority seemed to accede to his wish at its May 1. The final approval for the sculpture to be located at the south end of the pier parking lot was on Tuesday night’s agenda as a consent calendar item. But Councilperson Nancy Hersman, who’d supported the pier location, pulled the item for discussion.
“Frankly, I’ve had a change of heart,” Hersman said, noting that she’d literally had trouble sleeping, tossing and turning in bed, as she thought about the proposal the last few days. “It’s kind of funny this would be the thing that keeps me up all night.”
Originally, Hersman said, she thought the sculpture would add to the pier’s beauty. But the more she thought about, the more she believed the opposite was true.
“I’ll be voting against the resolution at this point,” Hersman said.
Although Councilperson David Lesser indicated he’d also had a change of heart, going from opposition to support of the sculpture’s installation near the pier, that still left a council majority opposed. Mayor Amy Howorth also supported it, but the proposal lost in a 3-2 vote.
Napolitano said public art decisions should not be made based on the preference of one person, in this case, the sculpture’s owner.
“That is the last place I would want it placed…while it works for [the owner], I need to keep the broader view of what best serves the interests of the community, and I don’t think that location best serves the community,” Napolitano said.
But like any on again, off again love affair, this one ended in less than a definitive manner. The sculpture’s owner, Lichtenstein, sent out a brief statement saying he “absolutely” remained willing to consider another location.
| “I hope to continue to work with the City Council to see if can reach an agreement for the betterment of the community,” said Lichtenstein. |