OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/St Louis, Missouri/Board of Aldermen Committees
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Poet Laureate Task Force Meeting: October 6, 2026

Board of Aldermen Committees — Tuesday, October 6, 2026
BodySt Louis, Missouri
SessionBoard of Aldermen Committees
DateTuesday, October 6, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 56:27

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:05

Okay, well, we can go ahead and get started.

0:08

I'm calling going to call this meeting to order at 5 34 p.m.

0:17

Hope everyone is doing well.

0:20

Um Christine, would you mind taking roll for me?

Speaker 2

0:25

Sure thing.

0:26

Uh Dr.

0:27

Nick.

Speaker 1

0:28

Here.

Speaker 2

0:33

Pam.

0:36

Here.

0:37

Sorry.

0:38

No worries, Kyle.

0:40

Here.

0:41

Dea.

0:42

Here.

0:44

You have a quorum.

0:46

Present, you may proceed.

Speaker 1

0:47

Awesome.

0:48

Thank you so much.

0:50

So the first item on the agenda for us to do is the approval of the minutes.

0:56

These minutes would be well, uh, the August 3rd.

1:00

We did we did have a session on we had two sessions, one on September 7th, which was with the city council.

1:08

That was kind of an informal meeting, not an official task force meeting, and then we had a working session on the 14th, at which we did not have quorum.

1:16

Hi Mani, good to see

Unassigned speaker

1:17

you.

Unassigned speaker

1:18

Um,

Speaker 1

1:18

at which we did not have quorum.

1:20

Um, so there were no uh official task force business or official action taken, but the minutes uh should reflect August 3rd.

1:29

So I just want to make sure that uh we approve those.

1:33

And are there any corrections to those minutes?

1:36

You all had an opportunity to take a look at those from August 3rd.

1:42

If hearing no connect uh corrections, then um the minutes are approved at distributed.

1:50

Okay.

1:52

So the next thing I want to do is kind of go over what was accomplished on September 14th, which was our working session that the lovely Ann hosted at RAC, um, in which myself and Patia and Pam got together and wanted to talk about a number of different things, one being um sort of a path forward or uh understanding what a pathway for funding might look like.

2:19

And before we started exploring actual pathways, we wanted to first ground ourselves in what the criteria for those pathways would be.

2:29

What are the things that must be true regardless of what path we look at?

2:34

We want to make sure that the these five or six things in the criteria are met.

2:39

And so that was part of our discussion.

2:41

And then the other part of our discussion was to look at the poet uh laureate selection process and look at what opportunities just kind of go through that process for those who may have not been familiar, and then go through where did we uh what were some misses and wishes?

3:00

What were some opportunities for us to improve on that process?

3:03

Um, and what are some of the things that we must improve before we go into this next selection um season going into January?

3:12

And so we had a great conversation around that.

3:15

And so what you would have seen in that email is a recap of that session and some notes.

3:20

So hopefully you've had an opportunity to review those as well as some pictures from the session.

3:25

They had more detailed sticky notes and things that we discussed as a group.

3:30

So I'll pause there.

3:32

Um any reactions, questions, I'll kind of open the floor for discussion.

3:42

The reactions?

3:43

Okay, great.

3:44

So tonight, what we want to do is um, because we weren't able to make any decisions in that room.

3:50

Tonight, what we'll do is bring forward some of the things, one being the criteria from that um for the funding pathways and some open questions, and we'll talk through what some discovery questions need to look like, and then what I'll do is we'll talk about um assigning that, and so we'll have a discovery plan at the end of our call today.

4:12

And essentially, you'll walk away with some level of ownership on what it what question you need to hunt down and go get answered, and then bring that back to the task force.

4:22

And then the other um item that I want to make sure that we get through today is um the selection process and making sure that we nail down um some upper what are the things we definitely want to solve, and then who's gonna own those things as we as we move forward.

4:38

So essentially at the end of tonight, you can expect to own some sort of um task or uh activity and then be expected to bring that

Speaker 3

4:47

back in the next task force meeting.

Speaker 1

4:50

Okay.

Unassigned speaker

4:52

So during the working session, we identified um several things that a future funding model should possess.

Speaker 1

5:01

And some of those things were if you look at the notes, and I don't, I have some notes in front of

Unassigned speaker

5:07

me.

Speaker 1

5:09

But I actually I can probably pull them up if you need me to.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Funding Pathways███████████████████████23%
Procedural██████████████████████22%
Public Engagement██████████████████████22%
Budget███████████████15%
Community Engagement█████████████13%
Arts And Culture█████5%
Summary of Proceedings

Poet Laureate Task Force Meeting: October 6, 2026

The Poet Laureate Task Force met on October 6, 2026, at 5:34 PM. Members present were Dr. Nick (chair), Pam, Kyle, and Dea, with Imani, India, and Ann also in attendance. The task force adopted funding principles for the program, assigned discovery questions for funding pathways, and scheduled further discussion on the poet laureate selection process for its next meeting.

Consent Calendar

  • The minutes from the August 3rd meeting were approved as distributed without correction.

Discussion Items

  • Working Session Recap: Dr. Nick reviewed the September 14th working session, which established criteria for evaluating potential funding pathways and began a retrospective process on the poet laureate selection.
  • Funding Pathway Criteria: The group debated the draft criteria. Imani proposed including a communication and marketing strategy within any funding model, emphasizing audience engagement and donor cultivation. After discussion, the group decided the marketing component could be captured under the existing “sustainable and predictable” criterion rather than as a standalone principle. Pam highlighted the necessity of understanding the actual program cost before seeking donors. Kyle asked about the permissibility of private donations under city rules; Christine confirmed that private donors and MOUs were viable options. Ann suggested exploring housing the program under the St. Louis Public Library system.
  • Discovery Plan: The task force formulated four primary discovery questions and assigned owners:
    1. Annual program cost (including poet laureate compensation, programming, and operating expenses) – Pam and Imani.
    2. City funding options (legal mechanisms, budget processes) – Kyle, with support from Christine.
    3. Benchmarking research on comparable poet laureate programs – Dr. Nick.
    4. Governance and accountability (reporting requirements, success metrics) – Dr. Nick.
  • Poet Laureate Selection Process: Due to time constraints, a detailed review and potential revisions to the selection process were postponed. New members Imani, India, and Kyle expressed a confidence level of about 5–6 out of 10 in their understanding of the current process, so the next meeting will include a grounding exercise before any changes are considered.

Key Outcomes

  • Motion to adopt the funding principles – The motion was seconded and passed by voice vote (all in favor, none opposed). The adopted principles include: sustainability and predictability; administrative simplicity; support for poet laureate compensation and programming; diverse revenue streams (including MOUs and private donors, but excluding corporate funders); clear expectations and permissions; data-informed decision-making.
  • Motion to adopt the discovery plan priorities – The four questions (annual cost, city options, benchmarking, governance) were approved as the task force’s official discovery priorities, again with unanimous support.
  • Adjournment – The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 PM.

Note: Ann indicated she could not volunteer for discovery tasks due to pressing matters with the Regional Arts Commission (RAC). The task force will reconvene to continue the selection process discussion and review findings from the discovery groups.

Meeting Transcript

Okay, well, we can go ahead and get started. I'm calling going to call this meeting to order at 5 34 p.m. Hope everyone is doing well. Um Christine, would you mind taking roll for me? Sure thing. Uh Dr. Nick. Here. Pam. Here. Sorry. No worries, Kyle. Here. Dea. Here. You have a quorum. Present, you may proceed. Awesome. Thank you so much. So the first item on the agenda for us to do is the approval of the minutes. These minutes would be well, uh, the August 3rd. We did we did have a session on we had two sessions, one on September 7th, which was with the city council. That was kind of an informal meeting, not an official task force meeting, and then we had a working session on the 14th, at which we did not have quorum. Hi Mani, good to see you. Um, at which we did not have quorum. Um, so there were no uh official task force business or official action taken, but the minutes uh should reflect August 3rd. So I just want to make sure that uh we approve those. And are there any corrections to those minutes? You all had an opportunity to take a look at those from August 3rd. If hearing no connect uh corrections, then um the minutes are approved at distributed. Okay. So the next thing I want to do is kind of go over what was accomplished on September 14th, which was our working session that the lovely Ann hosted at RAC, um, in which myself and Patia and Pam got together and wanted to talk about a number of different things, one being um sort of a path forward or uh understanding what a pathway for funding might look like. And before we started exploring actual pathways, we wanted to first ground ourselves in what the criteria for those pathways would be. What are the things that must be true regardless of what path we look at? We want to make sure that the these five or six things in the criteria are met. And so that was part of our discussion. And then the other part of our discussion was to look at the poet uh laureate selection process and look at what opportunities just kind of go through that process for those who may have not been familiar, and then go through where did we uh what were some misses and wishes? What were some opportunities for us to improve on that process? Um, and what are some of the things that we must improve before we go into this next selection um season going into January? And so we had a great conversation around that. And so what you would have seen in that email is a recap of that session and some notes. So hopefully you've had an opportunity to review those as well as some pictures from the session. They had more detailed sticky notes and things that we discussed as a group. So I'll pause there. Um any reactions, questions, I'll kind of open the floor for discussion. The reactions? Okay, great. So tonight, what we want to do is um, because we weren't able to make any decisions in that room.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com