The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
BREAST CANCER AWARENESS COMMEMORATIVE COIN COMPETITION PHASE TWO JUDGING MEETING Wednesday, February 15, 2017 3:06 p.m. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY US Mint 801 9th Street, NW Washington, DC 20220 (202) 354-7371 Reported by: Nate Riveness, RPR/CSR Capital Reporting Company A P P E A R A N C E Chair: Beverly Ortega Babers, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget, Department of the Treasury CCAG Members: Mary Lannin Jeanne Stevens-Sollman Dennis Tucker. CFA Members: Edward Dunson Liza Gilbert Elizabeth Meyer. UNITED STATES MINT SMEs: Don Everhart, Lead Sculptor-Engraver Ron Harrigal, Acting Manager, Design and Engraving Breast Cancer Research Foundation Liaisons (telephonic) Sadia Zapp, Director of Communications Meghan Finn General appearances: Megan Sullivan Frederick Lindstrom April Stafford Apryl Whitaker Elizabeth Meyer Edward Dunson Greg Weinman Vanessa Franck Elizabeth Young Pam Borer Roger Vasquez Heather Sabharwal Michelle Satchell Dave Moti Frederick Lindstrom P R O C E E D I N G S MS. BABERS: We’re going to start. We’re going to just come to order please and start our meeting. I’m Beverly Babers. old hands at this now, right? And many of you we’re We’ve been here before most of us and so I think we are going to be able to move through this really well and efficiently. don’t we do introductions initially? Ortega Babers. Why So I’m Beverly I used to work at the Mint, now I’m at the Department of the Treasury. But very pleased to be back. MS. SULLIVAN: I’m Megan Sullivan. You guys have been hearing from me a lot over this program. So thank you all for your patience and all your hard work. MR. LINDSTROM: I’m Fredrick Lindstrom, I’m Assistant Secretary of the Commission of Fine Arts. And I’m here to observe and facilitate. MR. HARRIGAL: Ron Harrigal. I’m currently acting as the Manager Design Integrating in Philadelphia. And I’ve been in this role a few years back and I’m back doing it again. here. Thanks. So I like being MR. EVERHART: Don Everhart the Lead Sculptor in Philadelphia. MS. STAFFORD: April Stafford, Chief of the United States Office Design Management. MS. GILBERT: Liza Gilbert from the Commission of Fine Arts. MS. LANNIN: Mary Lannin, Chair, CCAC. MS. BABERS: Our transcriber. MS. WHITAKER: Apryl Whitaker, attorney, US Mint. MS. MEYERS: Beth Meyers from the Commission of Fine Arts. MR. DUNSON: And I’m Edward Dunson, Commission of Fine Arts. MR. TUCKER: Dennis Tucker with the CCAS. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Jeanne Stevens-Sollman with the CCAS. MS. BABERS: back. (Inaudible) people around the You Greg, introduce yourself. MR. WEINMAN: MS. FRANCK: Management. I’m Greg Weinman, (inaudible). Vanessa Franck also Design MS. YOUNG: Elizabeth Young attorney for the United States Mint. MS. BORER: Pam Borer, also Design Management. MR. VASQUEZ: Roger Vasquez, Office of Design Management. MS. SABHARWAL: I’m Heather Sabharwal with Office of Corporate Communications. MS. SATCHELL: Michelle Satchell, Senior Advisor for the United States Mint Director’s Office. MR. MOTL: I’m Dave Motl, I’m the Acting Principal Deputy Director (inaudible). MS. BABERS: MR. MOTL: And that is a very good segue. Very good. MS. BABERS: Because you’re next on our agenda. MR. MOTL: welcome everybody. (Inaudible) a few minutes to And I was also fortunate enough to look through the designs. So I know you have a very challenging task in front of you. And the other thing is it would be really neat if I could somehow say, hey, here’s your compensation for doing all this for us. can’t. I (Inaudible) to really give you, other than our sincere appreciation. Because I know it’s a lot of effort on your part to go through this. And but the neat thing is we come out with some really, really great results. And I think from what I’ve seen I think what will come out will be something very fantastic and something well representative for the program. it will be very exciting. I think And but you guys have a really tough challenge and so my sincere appreciation. Appreciation from everybody at the Mint for helping us out. And Bev a special shout out to you for doing this. MS. BABERS: MR. MOTL: Thank you. This is your third or second? You’ve shared a couple with us. MS. BABERS: MR. MOTL: Yeah, yeah. And so a lot of experience. And so a lot of experience and so she’s -MS. BABERS: MR. MOTL: With a lot of the same people. Yeah, so I really appreciate that. Bev’s always a good friend of the Mint. So we appreciate the CFA members and the CCA members for stepping forward and doing this. And April for your formation and, of course Ron and Don for stepping in too. Well, just everybody in the room, thank you very much. Anyway, just, you know, welcome to the Mint and then just real quickly, so I’ve been put in an acting position to lead the Mint until such time as a nominee is put forward or Treasury gets sick of me. And so, you know, I don’t know how long that process will take. And so I do personally believe that my philosophy is that the Mint will continue to do great things and that we have a really good direction to go. And I don’t see hiccups or bumps along the way. I do believe the Mint operates best when we do have a director in place. fit. And so just, you know, it’s a good I think, you know, that’s how it’s meant to be. And so I look forward to supporting that process as a (inaudible). But in the meantime, you know, things are happening very well at the Mint. are going on. A lot of good things And we will continue to do good things. So that’s the process (inaudible). flexible in this. We are very We have been through this many, many times, transition. through. And it’s just part of what we go So I don’t know if anybody had any questions or maybe not (inaudible). appreciation. But anyways, my And if you guys have any questions I’m just down the hall. Feel free to pop in, my door is always open, you know, ready to talk to you. Anyways, thanks. MS. STAFFORD: Madam Chair, you should probably also note on the conference call line we have our official liaison for this program, Sadia Zapp. She’s the Director of Communications for the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. And also Megan Finn who is also with the Foundation. MS. BABERS: Thank you. MS. STAFFORD: MS. BABERS: Uh-huh. Well, welcome Sadia and Megan. MS. ZAPP: Hi everyone. MS. FINN: Thank you. MS. BABERS: All right. So, April, let me turn it over to you and Megan please. MS. STAFFORD: Sure. I believe the first thing that we’re going to do, after our little introduction, is we’re going to have a walkabout and take a look at the plasters. Twelve, correct, Megan, twelve of the -MS. SULLIVAN: Sets. MS. STAFFORD: Twelve sets of plasters out of the 18 artists. selected 20. Of course you all remember you Two, however, were pulled from consideration for a variety of reasons. But we’ll do that for a handful of minutes until you’re satisfied with those views and then we’ll come back here and start discussing which designs should remain in consideration. Okay. But here is some background regarding the program. It is public law 114-148, the Breast Cancer Awareness Commemorative Coin Act that requires the Secretary of the Treasury to mint an issue five-dollar pink gold coin. This is the first time the United States would ever have a pink gold coin, one-dollar silver coins and half-dollar glad coins in recognition of the fight against breast cancer. The act also requires that the design selected by the Secretary be based on the winning design from a jury compensated design competition. can have only one winner. This competition So the obverse and reverse design must be designed by that single artist. In addition, each design submission may consist of a twodimensional design, a three-dimensional model or both. The jury selected 20 artist from phase one to go onto phase two, but only 18 will be reviewed today. Two were removed from consideration for violation of the contest rules. Before you begin your review and deliberation we’d like to remind you that we’re not necessarily looking for a final product here. As the design ultimately minted for this commemorative program needs only to be based upon the winning design selected today, the winning design itself does not have to be a perfectly executed line drawing or plaster. Rather the winning design should be the submission which with edits where necessary will make the best coin. These edits will be made either by the submitting artist or by our United States Mint sculptor engravers or possibly a combination of the two. We believe that the discussion of the recommended edits to the winning design is as important a part of this process as the selection of the winning design itself. So to that end we’ve reserved a significant amount of time during the meeting for that discussion. To assist you in the decision-making process we have on hand a number of subject matter experts. Our official liaison Sadia Zapp the Director of Communications for the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, as well as Megan Finn also with the Foundation. You’ve met Don Everhart, our United States Mint Lead Sculptor Engraver and Ron Harrigal, Acting Manager of Design and Engraving who will be commenting about coin ability as you drive out your recommended modifications. So after you review the plaster models on display we’ll present the designs in a slide show. We ask that as we go through the designs you indicate whether the designs is one you would like to discuss further. Any designs not indicated will be removed from consideration. The legislation, however, requires that designs accompanied by plaster models receive preference from the jury. So following this initial calling we’ll return to the plaster models and ask again for you to indicate whether or not you’d like to further discuss this design in the rest of the meeting. Okay. MS. BABERS: Okay, thank you. So I think we can -- let’s look at what we have. (Off the record to view models.) (Back on the record.) MS. STAFFORD: Thank you. Before we begin going through the designs I wanted to ask our legal counsel on this program, Apryl Whitaker, to point out a few important points. MS. WHITAKER: matters. Sure. Just two procedural If you were a judge on level one (inaudible) one reminder is that this is a non-public meeting. Even though we have the transcript here this is for Mint internal purposes only. So the discussions of the designs that will not be released to the public. So and I don’t think I’ve seen anybody take out their phone, but make sure you don’t take any pictures of the designs, just admire them. And the second is that we have some guidelines, some evaluation criteria posted up in the front. This is what the areas we’re shooting for when they submitted their designs. This will -- this criteria will probably come naturally to you as you look at the designs based on your professional experience. But please just keep those guidelines in mind as you move through judging the designs. MS. BABERS: Thank you. MR. LINDSTROM: One question. The announcement for the winner is whoever is selected is not to be disclosed until -MS. STAFFORD: Correct. It would absolutely not be before the Secretary of the Treasury formally selected this design. But we do have a very robust communications plan surrounding each of these competitions. And so Heather Sabharwal is overseeing that schedule and we’ll be sure to communicate that with everybody. MR. LINDSTROM: I ask because we have a public meeting tomorrow and we are reporting on our commission members’ participation. MS. STAFFORD: Uh-huh. MR. LINDSTROM: And I think the best way to phrase it is a design was selected -MS. STAFFORD: Yeah. MR. LINDSTROM: MS. STAFFORD: -- and that’s about it. Okay, great. MR. LINDSTROM: No specifics or references to any one individual designer or artist. MS. STAFFORD: Okay. MS. WHITAKER: That would be perfect. MS. STAFFORD: Alrighty. As the design descriptions for these submissions have been provided to you the jurors we’ll not revisit those unless you request that. Certainly we can do that. All right. So we’re going to go ahead and go through the designs. We’ll start with Artist 177. to call for a voice vote. And the intention here is I’ll leave that to our chair. MS. BABERS: And the question is whether or not, we’re doing one, an initial call, so the question is whether or not we want to talk about this further. Is there anyone who is interested in further discussion of this particular design? Anyone say yes? Anyone saying no? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: Okay. No. Thank you. The Artist 200 say yes if you’re interested in further discussion. MR. TUCKER: Yes. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: it. Okay. Yes. One yes is enough for me to do And then 201, anyone interested in further discussion? MS. ZAPP: (Inaudible) so I don’t know if I can say yes or no, but I want to say yes if I can. MS. STAFFORD: I think if the jurors would like to hear from our liaisons from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation on the reasons behind if the design is particularly compelling I believe it would be good for us to hear that. And then the jurors could then make the determination. So would you like to -- is it 201 you’d like to comment on? MS. ZAPP: Yeah, I think that one I just wanted to put on the table. I just wanted to suggest putting it on the table only because it speaks really well to us as a cause. Because obviously (inaudible) all that research and that’s our singular mission, that’s all we do. Right now this is about breast cancer awareness. But that’s from a cause effective and in terms of (inaudible) our -- it’s representing not just the cause, but also the organization that the cause will support. support is research. What the coin will ultimately So it is something interesting for us to continue to look at and (inaudible) to the other designs. MS. STAFFORD: MS. MEYER: Any discussion? I’ll say yes. MS. STAFFORD: Okay. And keep in mind as well several of these have plasters associated with them. So even if you say no now we’re going to be holding them up for consideration. MS. BABERS: So thank you. Thank you. So we have a yes on that Sadia for further consideration. Artist 214, is there anyone who would like to consider this further? Do we have to get the no or is it okay just -MS. STAFFORD: MS. BABERS: No. Okay. Artist 217, would anyone like to consider this further? MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. BABERS: Yes. Artist 222, would anyone like to consider this further? MR. TUCKER: Yes. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. BABERS: consider this further? Yes. Artist 223, would anyone like to Heard no yeses. Artist 227, would anyone like to consider this further? (Multiple nos.) UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: No yeses. Absolutely no. Artist 228, would anyone like to consider this further? (Multiple nos.) MS. BABERS: Artist 234, would anyone like to consider this further? (Multiple nos.) MS. BABERS: Artist 236, would anyone like to consider this further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: No yeses. No. Artist 243, would anyone like to consider this further? MR. DUNSON: Yes. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: Yes. Artist 253, would anyone like to consider this further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: No. Artist 254, would anyone like to consider this further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: No. All right. Artist 259, would anyone like to consider this further? MR. TUCKER: I’ll say yes on this. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You’ll say yes? MR. TUCKER: (Inaudible). MS. BABERS: Artist 266, would anyone like to consider this further? MS. MEYER: Yes. MS. BABERS: Artist 277, would anyone like to consider this further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: No. There are no yeses. Artist 279? (Multiple yeses.) MS. BABERS: MS. STAFFORD: Several yeses. All right. Okay. So now we’ll go through again and we have some team members here who will hold up the plasters that are associated with designs that you indicated no on. Okay. So the first one is Artist -- and if we can go through the Power Point while we do this. here on the screen. plaster. The first is Artist 177 seen And this artist did submit a You indicated no. And the plasters are here, obverse and reverse. MS. BABERS: this further? Would anyone like to consider There are no yeses. MS. STAFFORD: was a yes. Okay, thank you. Artist 201 was a yes. Artist 200 Artist 214 was a no and it also has plasters associated with it. So you can see this design on the screen and we have the plasters here, the obverse and the reverse. MS. BABERS: this further? Would anyone like to consider There are no yeses. MS. STAFFORD: yes. Thank you. Artist 222 was a yes. Artist 217 was a Artist 223 was a no. You can see the design here on the screen and the artist did submit plasters. reverse. They are here, obverse and MS. BABERS: this further? Would anyone like to consider There are no yeses. MS. STAFFORD: Artist 227 was a no. Artist 228 was a no, but the artist submitted plasters. designs can be seen here on the screen. The And the two plasters, obverse and reverses are presented for your consideration again. MS. BABERS: Would anyone like to consider these further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: MS. STAFFORD: No. No. There are no yeses. Moving on, Artist 234 was a no. Artist 236 was a no, but the artist did submit plasters. You can see the designs on the screen and the two plasters, obverse and reverse are here for your consideration. Would anyone like to consider these further? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: MS. STAFFORD: was a yes. No. There are no yeses. Okay, moving on. Artist 243 Artist 253 was a no, but the artist did submit plasters. The designs are here on the screen and the obverse and reverse plasters, again, for your consideration. Would anyone like to consider these further? MS. BABERS: There are no yeses. MS. STAFFORD: Thank you. Artist 254 was a no in the initial calling, but the artist did submit plasters. We have the two-dimensional designs here on the screen and the actual plasters for your consideration here. MS. BABERS: these further? Would anyone like to consider There are no yeses. MS. STAFFORD: 266 was a yes. Artist Artist 277 was a no and there were no plasters submitted. concludes. Artist 259 was a yes. Artist 279 was a yes. And that Okay. MS. BABERS: Thank you. All right. So should we go through the remaining yeses and have some discussion? Is that the next thing? MS. STAFFORD: So the first yes was Artist 200. MS. BABERS: If someone would like to talk about why they said yes. MS. LANNIN: I like the sense that she’s engulfed by the ribbon. safety and protection. It’s as sort of a measure of But I do not like the reverse. Too medical. The caduceus, you know, the, you know, (inaudible). I just -- it didn’t do it for me. MR. TUCKER: Can we -- how much commentary and guidance to the designers in changing or modifying their designs? MS. STAFFORD: So the legislation stipulates that the coins ultimately minted for this program need only be based on the winning design. Having said that, in selecting a winner I think it’s fair that we’re looking the design that offers the most complete design that can be turned into a coin to communicate the mission of this program. MR. TUCKER: So we wouldn’t be able to ask the designer to keep the obverse and completely do the reverse or vice versa? Not talking specifically about this, you know, this combination. MS. STAFFORD: I think we’re getting into difficulties there because the legislation states that there will be a winner, and that includes the observe and the reverse as submitted. So a complete redo is out. MR. TUCKER: Okay. But based on -- that’s such a vague -- that’s vague terminology. MS. STAFFORD: It is. And I think the jury I know we tackled that with the World War I discussion. I think we did a very good job at balancing that, wanting to be true to the artist’s original vision and respect that. But also make the necessary modifications in order to improve it. MR. TUCKER: Okay. I wanted to ask that not specifically for this design particularly but just in general. MS. STAFFORD: Okay. Any other discussion on 200? The next is Artist 201. It was a yes. This is the design that our liaisons from the Foundation commented upon. And I’ll ask Apryl Whitaker to clarify if I’m not speaking to this correctly. But the requirement in the legislation is for these designs to be emblematic of the fight against breast cancer. And while the Foundation is the recipient organization that doesn’t necessarily mean that the mission of the organization needs to be particularly and explicitly represented. Would you expound on that? MS. WHITAKER: Right, exactly. The design should be emblematic of fight against breast cancer, not necessar -- and should not honor a specific organization of breast cancer or research organization. Just the fight against breast cancer is the design theme. MS. MEYER: Well, I offered the yes just we could have an opportunity to talk about it, even though I hadn’t voted for it originally. And do think that the definition of fight for a disease is research. It’s not simply advocacy, so I thought that was compelling. And I guess my reservation is that the ribbon is used for many other things and is not as powerful for me as some of the other ways that breast cancer is symbolized in other medals. But I do think that the inclusion of research is a valid and important way of defining fight. MS. BABERS: MS. STAFFORD: Any other discussion? The next design is Artist 217. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: I’d like to speak to this one just a little bit because I think when we are thinking about breast cancer we need to think about the vulnerability of it. We need to think about the fact that we want to make people aware and it should be something beautiful. I think this is a particularly primitive sculpting but it does say something about we have to talk about the breast somehow. And we have this butterfly, which is the representation of or a symbol of resurrection, healing. However, this particular butterfly doesn’t quite make it. So if we chose this I think I would suggest that we change the butterfly to the swallow tail butterfly, which is a symbol of vulnerability. And vulnerability in this whole project is important. need so much. And we need research, we But we’re talking about maybe emotion about lots of things. And how are we going to have -- raise awareness to the public if we’re going to be giving out, minting quite a number of half-dollars which will be circulated. the public. And that’s going to be in It’s not like we’re doing a five-dollar coin which is (inaudible) numismatic coin. MS. BABERS: We’re not circulating -- MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. STAFFORD: We’re not circulating -- They’re all numismatic. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. STAFFORD: All numismatic? Yes. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. STAFFORD: All 400,000? All of the coins for this program. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: (Inaudible). awareness. Okay. Okay. However, I think we still need raise We have a tiny bit of the ribbon shown on the reverse. It’s a little confusing with the lilies. But lilies are a symbol of death and the butterfly is the symbol of resurrection. represent this? particular piece. Again, how are we going to Those are just my comments on this It’s good, it has good ideas. MS. BABERS: Any other discussion? MS. GILBERT: I have an issue with the stance of the woman, with the drapery and (inaudible). So much about breast cancer has to do with things being removed. And there are many women in this day who are deciding not to have reconstruction. that image just loaded. And so I find It also looks like a Botticelli, you know, Venus coming out of a clamshell type. I’m not sure that’s what we want to show in terms of a body on the coin to represent this. MS. LANNIN: me. It really looks like a Madonna to And all really just overtones. MS. ZAPP: Foundation. This is Sadia again from the And please Megan or Apryl, whoever, please interrupt me if I’m ever overstepping. I don’t want to, you know, give, you know, speak when I’m a step over my bounds. But I just wanted to comment. There’s on this one and in general, just from our point of view, I know we will definitely have a major part in making sure that these coins are being sold, and so from our point of view we’re looking at all of these designs from two lenses. And really from, A, someone who is really deeply embedded in the cause and understands all of the nuances and sensitivities expressed by the breast cancer community. And someone just touched on it right now, which is a depiction of breasts. And while the disease is obviously breast, like the part of your body, we really shy away (inaudible) to depict that in any way because it’s such a sensitive and people are really -- can be very loud about their upset in terms of when it’s depicted. So that’s one thing, it’s just a very, very sensitive about depictions of breasts and we’d like to avoid that in any way. Particularly when it comes to let’s say “products” that we’re trying to encourage the sale of. So that’s just one thing. And I think that in terms of just looking at all of these events something to keep in mind, which is that, again, just like someone else has talked about right now, there definitely is sensitivity around the removal of breasts, having a vasectomy and what your body looks like. And it’s just something we avoid because breast cancer we are really aware, we’re hyperaware of how quickly it -- it’s such a physical manifestation. And the disease often gets highly sexualized because it’s part of a woman’s body. So just throwing that out there, that that’s one, you know, lens that we’re looking through at all of these designs through, which is just keeping in mind our audience and the people that we want to be respectful of. And the second lens we’re sort of also looking at these through is from a business perspective. Because obviously we have really been in poor communication with the Mint in terms of making sure that we want to be able to sell these coins. Because obviously a lot -- obviously (inaudible) benefit (inaudible). So having said that, also just moving forward and as we go through some of these other designs that’s also what we’re thinking about. Because we from BCRF’s point of view are extremely familiar with riding the line between being sensitive to our audience, but still having a (inaudible) product that appeals to them (inaudible). So they’re just a couple of comments I wanted to make in terms of this particular coin and in the ones we’re looking at moving forward. MS. BABERS: Thank you. And we welcome your comments, so thank you for sharing. All right. So on 217 any other discussion? MS. STAFFORD: The next design is Artist 222. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Okay. speak about this one also. MS. BABERS: Thank you. I’m going to MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Sadia just mentioned. I liked very much what And I like the fact that this particular design incorporates research, it also incorporates the swallowtail butterfly, which is the symbol of vulnerability. There was comments about the women on the obverse and might not be exactly depicting hope. But I do believe the older woman does -- she seems to me be happy about the fact that maybe she has some better news than she could have had. And the fact that the swallowtail is floating above both of them, a young person and an older person I think is important. I particularly like this design because it is encompassing both observe and reverse. I’m hoping it doesn’t have too much information on the reverse. But the butterfly is so big on this pallet I think it could be really wonderful I think when it’s sculpted, you know, to have some beautiful piece. on that. That’s my comments Research, vulnerability, women. MS. LANNIN: Thank you. Jeanne, what about the scalpel? And I think that the -- I love the butterfly, but everything else is so incredibly busy on that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yes. But I think if we had the butterfly (inaudible) about this, those implements could be smaller and we could maybe take away one of them. little bit. But I do think it builds it up a For me it’s okay. I like the fact that we’ve got a little bit of chemistry in there. again, I agree it might be too much. And but, But it does speak to the research of it very simply. MS. GILBERT: I do think the front, the obverse, it’s quite moving, the hands because the hands are really about the heart. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. GILBERT: Yes. And the feeling that it’s not about the breasts. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: But also she’s go this (inaudible) -MS. GILBERT: And then there’s this. The hands are really -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: What about if her eyes are open? MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. GILBERT: I think so. Well, you know, she’s -- She’s calm, she’s thinking. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: She’s thinking. I think she’s meditating. this butterfly. a Zen thing. I think she’s putting power into It seems to be, you know, it’s almost I believe that it’s a nice contrast between the woman who has achieved victory and to this other woman who is still in a very vulnerable state. Her eyes being closed and this kind of wispy smile is to me very pleasing. I don’t know if we can get that on a small coin, but I like it. MR. DUNSON: MS. MEYER: I agree with that. I think that’s an interesting issue, the scaling down. But I want to say that I think the power of the observe is its ambiguity. MR. DUNSON: I was going to say the same thing. MS. MEYER: And I read the women totally the opposite. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. MEYER: Right. Oh, interesting. One can hopefully defiant, the younger woman in the background, and the other probably relieved. And so -- MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: good point. Yeah. Yes, a relief, that’s a MS. MEYER: So I think that’s the power of it, it’s about the effect -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. MEYERS: results of the care. Yes. -- the disease and whatever the And I think that’s really compelling because it’s not explicit. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yeah, I like it. I think it’s a very moving piece. MS. GILBERT: And also the depiction of different ages -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. GILBERT: Yes. -- is incredibly important. It strikes people of all different ages. MR. HARRIGAL: Can I make a comment about coin ability here? MS. MEYER: Yeah. MR. HARRIGAL: MS. MEYER: Is that a word? MS. BABERS: MS. MEYER: On the reverse -- Yeah. I’m going to use it now. (Multiple speakers.) MR. HARRIGAL: The biopsy needle will create a problem. Long thin lines are very tough to make in a proofed coin. It’s tough to keep it straight. It’s tough to keep it polished (inaudible) on the needle. So if I make any recommendation for coin ability the biopsy needle would have to go or be made much thicker and then it doesn’t look like a needle. And possibly the chemical symbol there, there’s very thin lines there. We would have to do something with that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: So if we took away the biopsy needle -MR. DUNSON: And the scalpel and the other (inaudible) -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. DUNSON: butterfly. Who’s saying that? I take what you said about the To me that is a very powerful thing just the butterfly. MS. LANNIN: If it was just the butterfly. MR. DUNSON: Yes. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And I feel like the butterfly, you know, the stripes and the splats those can be either incised or -MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: very, very powerful I think. MR. DUNSON: You know, it could be Yeah. You see when you look at the observe and the reverse with the butterfly on one and the other, I mean I think that, you know, that says a lot. I think this one says to me take away some of the clutter. MS. LANNIN: Please, yes. MR. DUNSON: Just get to the point. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: What about the DNA thing? MS. LANNIN: No. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. DUNSON: No. Can we -- Because that’s kind of -- MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: We don’t need that. MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: We just need the butterfly. MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: Just the butterfly. If you’re going to give me a woman with the eyes closed we just need a butterfly -MR. DUNSON: There you go. MS. LANNIN: -- on the back, Jeanne. That’s the deal. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: that deal. Well, I could accept I don’t know what our advocate says. MS. LANNIN: MS. ZAPP: It’s just so busy. Yeah, I was just going to jump in. And based on the coin ability perspective I think that, you know, everything you guys were talking about, the front totally on board with. That makes -- it’s exactly our -- it was exactly our thinking. Getting the back what we -- what I will say is that in imagining people buying this coin to give to a loved one or something, the scalpel and the biopsy needle are scary. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. ZAPP: Yes. And it’s not something people really want to remind themselves of. So in terms of expressing that hope and that feeling of you’re gifting this to your mom or whoever it’s just not something you would -- you’d give -- you’d pause or maybe you wouldn’t get it and you’d get something else. So just from appealing to mass that back with all the other stuff, just like you guys were saying, the butterfly would be totally fine on its own. It’s just the scalpel, the needle are just scary. People don’t want to see that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Okay. Mary, I’ll give this to you. MS. LANNIN: Okay, thanks. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Thank you, Ed. MR. DUNSON: There you go. All right. MS. LANNIN: Okay. MS. BABERS: Just I’m just curious about not, We’re in agreement of that. you know, taking away the smaller pieces, which you guys have identified, but would you be open to substituting another element like on the back of 201 where it’s got the, you know, it indicates research but in probably a more hopeful way. Because it’s about finding a cure and no so much about the medical treatment, but about -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. MEYER: MS. BABERS: So you would -- No, it doesn’t need it. And I don’t mean the whole -- I don’t mean the reverse. I mean just finding a small, like a small element to put behind the butterfly. MS. LANNIN: I think just the butterfly by itself on the reverse is going to be the total selling point for this coin. MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: It’ll be a beautiful coin. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yeah. And I think we have to think about beautiful because we have to -MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: And salability, that’s what they’re talking about. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: beauty. They want salability and Yeah, that would be cool. MS. LANNIN: Yeah, I just, I think just the butterfly. MS. BABERS: Artist 243. All right. The next design was Anyone want to speak to this one? MS. LANNIN: The reason why I liked this one was sort of similar to (inaudible) point. Was the fact that the ribbon continues from one side to the other. That was sort of my favorite part about this. And I like the “we will win the race” and then “together”, “that’s really hopeful” on the back. depiction necessarily of the women. I don’t like the But it speaks to all of the, you know, march for the cure and walk for the cure and all of those kinds of things. And the ribbon gives you a chance to say where it’s breast cancer awareness. Coinability, Ron, on that? MS. ZAPP: interrupt. Yeah, I’m sorry, I don’t want to I just wanted to throw out there from BCAF’s point of view. This particular one I love the, you know, “that we will win the race together.” the ribbon being on the back and the front. I love I think for us it gave us pause because we at BCAF we don’t participate, we don’t host any walks, any runs. That sort of would differentiate this from the other causes. So this speaks to -- this to you as a consumer or someone who is buying this you sort of automatically think Komen or any other cause. MS. BABERS: MS. ZAPP: Okay. So it might be misleading to me that I might think this is going to Komen and maybe that’s why I buy it. But that’s not true. MS. BABERS: MR. ZAPP: Okay. And I just wanted to put that out there. MS. BABERS: MS. MEYER: Okay. On a separate because it gets to the issue of women’s bodies. I do think the observe is quite moving because there is this moment of selfrealization. You know, I mean it’s not just about going to the doctor, but it’s noticing a lump and I was just really moved by that. I totally get the issue of the race and maybe the fact that it being a running race isn’t appropriate. But I do think that that is really powerful. MS. LANNIN: Right. But for what she said it’s not going to -MS. MEYER: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: -- be adequate, so -- MR. TUCKER: Something I would mention is that of the designing combinations that we’ve chosen to discuss further this is one of the few that actually has the words breast cancer awareness. And I wonder if that’s guidance that we could give to our artists to try to work that into some of the designs that we like that don’t have them. And I understand that that would be a challenge in a lot of cases because they’ve really used their canvas and have planned the right space and their elements layout. But I wonder if maybe for certain audiences we might need to guide them a bit beyond symbolism and have that kind of legend or inscription. MS. STAFFORD: Once the jury reaches a consensus on the winning design absolutely that can be part of the discussion about requested modifications. MS. BABERS: Okay. Any other discussion on 243? The next design is from Artist 259. MR. TUCKER: like the reverse. I said yes to this one because I I understand the observe. I’m really a true fan of what it shows. But I think the reverse design is very nicely done. So this is one of the design combinations that kind of ties to my first question of how much modification can we -- or guidance along those lines can we give to the artist? MS. MEYER: Well, what’s the smallest amount of an edit you could make to the obverse? Do you know what I’m saying? MR. TUCKER: MS. MEYER: MR. TUCKER: MS. MEYER: MR. TUCKER: Yeah. Yeah. I mean I think that’s -I don’t --- the -Right. How can we keep the bulk of it without -MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MR. TUCKER: I think it would change it. It’s a challenge, right? MR. DUNSON: if the reverse was there I think you’d see bigger butterflies and more butterflies and less of the -MS. MEYER: Ribbon. MS. LANNIN: Ribbon. MR. DUNSON: -- ribbon. MS. LANNIN: Ribbon, yeah. MR. DUNSON: And so the ribbon gets smaller and the butterflies -- because that’s what it’s really about. MS. LANNIN: right? And it would be swallowtail, MR. DUNSON: Yes. Yes. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And it has to be a type of swallowtail. MR. DUNSON: Yes. Right, exactly. MS. LANNIN: So where would you put breast cancer awareness on this coin then? MR. DUNSON: MS. GILBERT: MR. DUNSON: MS. GILBERT: Well -On the ribbon. On the ribbon. Where “in God we trust.” MR. DUNSON: On the ribbon, yes. MS. LANNIN: But you have to put “in God we trust.” MS. GILBERT: MS. LANNIN: Yes, you have to have it. You have to have -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. GILBERT: It’s legislated. Do you have to have it on every single coin? MR. DUNSON: Okay. 2018 then breast cancer awareness on the bottom. MS. LANNIN: So -- MR. DUNSON: Yeah. But I think the ribbon overplays it. And it needs to be -- it’s really the ribbon is here and then there’s butterflies. MS. GILBERT: But it’s also it’s very muddy. I mean it’s a cocoon with butterflies coming out, but it’s a ribbon, but it’s -- I don’t know what happens at that crucial point where they’re -MR. DUNSON: MS. MEYER: MS. GILBERT: (Inaudible), right? (Inaudible). -- (inaudible). They need to be emerging more or something. MR. DUNSON: Right, right. MS. LANNIN: I like the word “hope”. MR. DUNSON: Yes. MR. LANNIN: But the obverse was a little sort of Hallmark card for me. MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: You know. MS. MEYER: And I think the reverse is powerful until you realize United States of American. I have to -- I mean the powerful part is the relationship between the script and the butterfly wing. MR. DUNSON: Yeah. MS. MEYER: stunning, right. I mean that is graphically just But it just it’s the tension -- MS. LANNIN: But the (inaudible) just didn’t -MS. MEYER: Yeah. MS. GILBERT: MS. MEYER: Yeah. It needs to be on a t-shirt. Yeah. MS. GILBERT: MS. MEYER: It would be perfect. Exactly. MR. DUNSON: Okay, we tried. (Laughter.) MS. GILBERT: MR. DUNSON: Yeah, exactly. MS. GILBERT: MR. DUNSON: MS. ZAPP: And it was more abstract. It’s a very cool idea. The ribbon is much too little. I do want to jump in a little bit on this particular coin, only because internally at BCAF this was one of the favorites. And mainly, again, looking at it from the point of view of, okay, if we’re selling this to someone in the middle of North America who is trying to give something to their mom or their friend or whatever, this seems like the most salable to us. Because, A, it’s genderless. actually impacts men as well. And breast cancer It’s a small fraction, but it’s a loud fraction, they’re very vocal. breast cancer community is very vocal. The male So that’s one thing we liked about this it’s sort of genderless. We agreed about the ribbon. We did think that somewhere adding the words “breast cancer awareness” might help. there. But so we definitely are on the same page And the hope with the butterfly, again, mainly, again, purely from the point of view of looking at this as how appealing this is going to be. And in our experience with working with partners that sell products that give back to BCAF this kind of stuff is a little -- like someone just said Hallmark cardy, but it generally sells really well. So just to put that out there. From a brand play BCAF, like most of our representatives probably in design 201, which we looked at with the microscope on it. But from salability I think 259 from our point of view seemed like in what we know sells when it comes to breast cancer and it comes to the breast cancer community. People who are impacted by the cause this one would probably be more easy to sell to that market. Similar to 222. was the two women on the front. The 222 And we talked about the butterfly with the scalpel, like without the scalpel, without all the medical stuff on the back 222 and 259 came to me the most (inaudible) or the most that speak to the cause without being too patronizing, but still very beautiful and something you’d want to own, especially as a pink gold coin. So when they’re out there to consider when in terms of making as salable as possible from our point of view. And I keep throwing that out there only because, again, having experience and working with partners who do sell products, you know, specifically to benefit BCAF. This is kind stuff it’s a little -- it can be a little sort of, you know, kitschy I guess, but it works. So something to consider. MS. GILBERT: I don’t think it does work, because I don’t think the design works. So I think on the front there would need to be a major reworking of that ribbon and it would need to be folded and more abstract and the butterflies coming out. So I disagree. It’s not -- I think you have some other options here that do work that are further along that could also take care of these issues of salability. MR. DUNSON: Yeah, I agree. MS. BABERS: All right. Artist 266. Any discussion? MS. LANNIN: obverse. The next design is I like the abstract part of the We talked a little bit about -- Don and I talked a little bit about the sort of missing top of the head. small. Obviously “hope, faith and love” are far too That could be replaced perhaps with “breast cancer awareness”. the back. I like the strength of the hands on And those are just my comments on that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: particularly unappealing. Well, I find this And the fact that, you know, in terms of salability I don’t think that the woman it’s just got her whole head on. mutilated in this depiction. But I mean she is so I just think that this would be a very hard (inaudible). You know, I don’t care for it the reverse. MS. BABERS: right. Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? All Moving onto the final design Artist 279. MS. GILBERT: this on a coin. I’ve never seen anything like And I think it’s incredibly intriguing, kind of the depression, the area that’s missing. And also that the body seems more almost like an anatomical depiction of the human body, unless -obviously it’s a female, but it’s less sexual in a way. And I think my one comment in terms of this laurel leaf or the oak leaves seem too small. why they’re there. hardly read it. I’m not quite sure There’s the word “hope” but you can I think it’s a really, really powerful image. MS. LANNIN: I agree with Liza. This actually was my favorite in terms of making, really making a statement. I think it’s about loss, loss of person, loss of self, loss of life. The oak leaves need to go. It could be a ribbon there, it could be something. There could be something on the back as well. Ron and Don talked about the ability to coin it and the relief that we would get for this. But I just think, I think this is incredibly powerful. MS. MEYER: I was very moved by the (inaudible) version of this. It was when I realized the difference between -MS. LANNIN: MS. MEYER: Right. -- looking at a drawing. And I also think that the body is just so strong. MS. LANNIN: Right, exactly. MS. LANNIN: It’s not -- I mean I also was moved by the vulnerability of earlier bodies. But to have something that’s not cloyingly sexual, but MS. LANNIN: MS. MEYER: MS. LANNIN: But the strength. Yeah. Look at the strength in the legs too. MS. GILBERT: MS. LANNIN: Right. You know. No, this was my favorite. MS. GILBERT: research to me. It also kind of sings kind of When you look at the reverse it looks like you’re almost doing some type of x-ray to the body to see what’s in it. There are a lot of different kind of layers in terms of the imagery that come to mind. MR. TUCKER: Do you think it captures the concept of hope though, as well as the medical? MS. LANNIN: I think if we replace the oak leaves, Dennis, with a ribbon or something like that. MR. TUCKER: Okay. MS. LANNIN: And “hope” could be written on a ribbon or “breast cancer awareness” could be written on a ribbon, or whatever. But that’s, I mean that’s a stunning piece of art. MR. TUCKER: Is it too medical? I mean to be honest with you when I see this I agree it’s very well done. But is it -- I mean the missing arms and the missing head to me speaks of a medical cadaver and dissection post-mortem. And that to me is a turn off. But I understand what you’re saying that it’s, you know, I see the strength of it as well. MS. LANNIN: The trunk of the body, the strength. MS. MEYER: MS. LANNIN: Yeah, I didn’t see it as -I didn’t (inaudible) arms or legs. MS. MEYER: MS. LANNIN: Yeah. Yeah. I see the trunk of the body as being the strongest part. MR. TUCKER: humanity. But a missing head is missing There’s no face, there’s no expression, eyes, (inaudible). MS. LANNIN: But there are men and women who have breast cancer too. MS. GILBERT: So -There’s kind of an everyoneness to it. MS. MEYER: Yeah, exactly. MS. LANNIN: Yeah. Like the Vitruvian Man sort of. MS. GILBERT: MS. BABERS: Yeah, yeah. How does our stakeholder feel? Sadia. MS. ZAPP: Yeah, I’ll also -- I think we also thought this was beautiful. depiction of the body. It was a very beautiful I think again for us it’s just it’s a hardline we draw when it comes to just depicting the body in general just because of the concerns I stated earlier. So we were very (inaudible) on this one primarily because, again, it’s beautiful, I mean it’s a beautiful work of art. And anyone can tell by looking at it, you don’t need to be necessarily a discerning eye, you don’t have to have a discerning eye. But I think for us, again it just goes back to when we’re pushing this coin and we’re talking about it and promoting it through our channels are we alienating the women? Because it’s a traumatiz -- very traumatizing experience to go through. So the surgery is not good. And losing part of your body is really (inaudible). It’s just simply just a reminder of that. And would people want that reminder? Because they have other options to support the cause without having to have this dark sort of, again, reminder of the trauma that you’ve experienced one way or another. So, again, for us the body is just really sensitive and one we shy, generally shy away from, particularly in promoting that message to our audience. Just because, again, the breast cancer community is loud, they don’t hold back their thoughts. And so I just know that this one to me feels like it has the potential for some risk. It has a potential for some risk in the feedback that we would get. little shy about this one. MS. MEYER: So I’d like -- So I’m a MS. LANNIN: MS. MEYER: Well, it would make a great coin. I’d like to respond by suggesting that the audience also includes the families. Sometimes families with -- family members no longer alive who’ve had breast cancer and I think that’s an audience too that could find incredible beauty and power in this. So I feel like you’re limiting your sense of who the audience for buying this coin is to people who have had breast cancer. MR. TUCKER: AND I think -- And this is a coin for collectors. MS. MEYER: That there are a lot of people who are affected by breast cancer besides the victims and they would also potentially be buyers of this coin. And so I so respect your comments, but I feel like your sense of the audience is too narrow. MS. ZAPP: I think for the most part for us I actually think caregivers and loved ones are probably the majority of people that are buying products. Because generally they’re not the ones necessarily in the middle of treatment. Because often, you know, there are people that are in the middle of going through whatever they go through because it’s a long process. So for the most part when I think of our audience they’re definitely caregivers and loved ones are probably just as big an audience as the people who are going through the experience themselves. But I think generally we certainly do take them into consideration. And they’re part of our lens let’s say. But again, this is, you know, we’re just, we’re hyper aware, let’s put it that way, again, from people that having just been embedded in the cause for so long it’s a sensitivity we certainly do have. So again, I agree with all of you this is a totally beautiful coin and even layers and listening to you guys speak about the layers of the different representations of it I loved hearing. And seeing that through a fresh point of view is very interesting. But again, I think for us, again, I’m just a little bit worried about that reminder of what someone goes through when they lose literally a piece of their body. MS. GILBERT: Might there be kind of a beautiful honestly to this thought that some people might find reassuring instead of, you know, butterflies and ribbons and hands over the heart? And there’s kind of an honesty about it and being beautiful. MS. LANNIN: MS. GILBERT: MR. TUCKER: Classically Greek. Classically Greek I find it stark. I think, I really think that the loss of the face is a loss of personality or personality. This turns the body into a mask that’s being observed. You’re under observation, you’re being scrutinized as a medical, just a medical thing. To me. symbolism. I understand the strength and the I think it would make a wonderful medal. On the coin and as a coin it would be innovative certainly with this contrast of the depth and the recessed portions. But to me it’s just it’s an unpleasant image because of the loss of the fracturing of the body, pieces that are missing. I think that there are other depictions of the human body and the humanity in other designs that capture the spirit of hope and, you know, and what the medical side is trying to accomplish, which is eradication of breast cancer. just -- So I don’t know if it’s MS. GILBERT: It’s really helpful to hear your reaction. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: I don’t think of the (inaudible) without a face (inaudible). But I think that’s an important observation that will give us another direction. This particular piece should it go forward I think that it has to be bigger in the field. MS. GILBERT: MS. LANNIN: Yeah. Yes. Yes. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yeah, I think if it’s bigger and more shallow then it says something -- it becomes more beautiful right now. get rid of the (inaudible). And you do need to It’s the (inaudible) icon for this subject matter. MS. MEYER: If it were bigger too then it’s simply that the head isn’t shown and the coin and -MS. GILBERT: That’s right, it wouldn’t be so noticeable. MS. LANNIN: Exactly. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: awareness”? That’s a good point. Where could we put “breast cancer MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Well, I think perhaps, you know, perhaps we could take “in God we trust 2018” and move it around. You know, like maybe we could put “in God we trust” on the left-hand side, 2018 on the right-hand side and breast cancer awareness on the bottom. So that you don’t interrupt the figure. You don’t put any more information in there, no ribbons, no nothing. But I think if we just kind of like make that (inaudible). UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. LANNIN: That’s a good idea. I would say if you have a bigger figure. MR. HARRIGAL: Just a point for coinability the (inaudible) enlarged. That is kind of small. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MR. HARRIGAL: Too small, yeah. I think “United States of America” is probably okay, but that’s probably the minimal size (inaudible). MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: Don, you said you had an idea about how to sculpt this? MR. EVERHART: So that would -- Me? MS. LANNIN: Yeah, I’m putting you on the spot. MR. EVERHART: make a great medal. Yeah. I agree that it would But as far as the coin is concerned, and Ron and I discussed this, going (inaudible) could be an issue, particularly when you back these up against each other on a coin flip. So what I had suggested was to put a circle, a relief of circle around it that’s raised. Have the figure this side raised and be able to cut into that circle that’s already raised, but not down to the field level. MS. GILBERT: MR. EVERHART: Got it. And also that would create a border for the lettering would strengthen the design I think. MS. GILBERT: Would you feel this? If you put your finger on the coin would there be like the tactability, would you feel the indent a little bit? MR. EVERHART: MS. GILBERT: MR. EVERHART: MS. GILBERT: Sure. On the coin you would. It’s a small amount of relief. Very small. MR. EVERHART: But you’d definitely be able to feel that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: So, Don, you were mentioning earlier that you would have to put the flush part on one or the other on the opposite sides. MR. EVERHART: that up. Well, yeah, Ron had brought Because when you back up with a coin flip you have the negative opposing the negative. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. EVERHART: Right. So we would have to, one of them would have to be reversed. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And I think that would be perfect because you’re not going to see them. MR. EVERHART: Yeah, I don’t think that that makes any difference as far as the statement is concerned. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: No. I just really think that this is a powerful coin. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: It is a powerful coin. But I think also we need to think of our stakeholders. I would like to be able to make two of these. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: if we wanted two. I think we’ve got two Yeah. MS. MEYER: I think we got two if we wanted two. MS. STAFFORD: Should we define, should we (inaudible) to get down to those two? It seems like we’re there. MS. MEYER: I think they know them. MS. STAFFORD: MS. BABERS: Okay. I want the ones where that where they seem to be the most robust discussion, positive discussion where I thought 222, 243 and this one 279. Were there others? I know like -- MS. STAFFORD: MS. MEYER: 222. What was the third one? MS. STAFFORD: MS. BABERS: You mean this one, 243? Yeah, 222, 243 and then the one we’re just talking about. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: So that’s good that we’re down to three now. MS. BABERS: those seem to be -- Are you guys in agreement that MS. GILBERT: Yeah. MS. LANNIN: Yeah, those are three. MS. BABERS: Okay. Is there one that we could knock out and focus in on the other two? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. GILBERT: 243. 243. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I mean I just think there’s -MS. GILBERT: Yeah, there were elements we all liked, but -UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But it’s maybe (inaudible). MS. GILBERT: MS. MEYER: MS. BABERS: Yeah. I’d agree with that. All right. 222 and 279. Do we know on 222 the recommended edits that we ruled previously? MS. LANNIN: Just the butterfly. MS. BABERS: Just the butterfly on the back. I think there was talk about I think we’d have to change 17 to 18. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. MS. BABERS: But the front I didn’t hear -- I heard suggested like open the eyes, but it seemed like we wanted to leave it -MS. LANNIN: Closed, that’s just me, you know. MS. ZAPP: Well, for the back of 222 would you want to add the words “breast cancer awareness” maybe? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. BABERS: Yeah. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. MEYER: Yes. That would be a good place for it. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. GILBERT: I think, yeah. I think we can do that. Does the ribbon really have to go into the butterfly on the front? Could the butterfly be detached from the ribbon? MS. MEYER: MS. GILBERT: MS. MEYER: MS. GILBERT: MS. MEYER: MS. GILBERT: Free? Yeah. (Inaudible) free. Yeah, just could it be free? Not together. Yeah. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It looks like they’re flying a leash. MS. GILBERT: It looks they’re flying a leash. MR. HARRIGAL: Yeah, you’d either have to run it right into -- because if you think about it the field would have to be proof polished, so you need an edge. So you’d have to truncate the ribbon somehow. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. EVERHART: So just get rid of it. Yeah, but it looked like it was part of the butterfly. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. HARRIGAL: Yeah, the -- You’re talking about the upper part? MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: MS. GILBERT: MR. HARRIGAL: MS. LANNIN: Yes. The upper part. Yeah. That doesn’t really add value. Yeah, above her nose if that part of the ribbon was gone nobody notice. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: But when you sculpt, when this is sculpted can you make sure we have the image of the older woman, which I think is really important to know she has an elderly neck and eyes and around her mouth. drawing. This is so beautifully done in the You know, and we would have to make sure that it was sculpted I think so she doesn’t look as young as the one -- I’m excited about this one, I mean I really am. MR. TUCKER: Something I would mention too is the -- there’s not a lot of differentiation in the topography. Each element is given almost the same weight. MS. LANNIN: Yeah. MR. TUCKER: And “in God we trust” is really given a central -UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Way too big. MS. LANNIN: Way too big, yeah. MR. TUCKER: -- position. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. TUCKER: That’s a good point. Could that be run along the edge perhaps or -MS. LANNIN: On the side of her sweater or something. MR. TUCKER: MS. STAFFORD: Something. And then -- Say that again, what? MS. LANNIN: -- “breast cancer research”. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MR. TUCKER: “In God we trust.” “In God we trust,” maybe that could be where we put “breast cancer awareness”. Or that might not fit there. MS. STAFFORD: Actually Don had a comment as MR. EVERHART: (Inaudible) if you’re going to well. take away all those elements that aren’t butterflies you could put -UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MR. EVERHART: You’ve got more space. -- “breast cancer awareness in that -UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You’ve got plenty space. MR. EVERHART: MR. TUCKER: MR. EVERHART: MR. TUCKER: -- upper left-hand field. On the reverse. Right. Yeah. Okay. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: But could you put it as it was going around, you know? MR. EVERHART: Like on a banner or something? MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: banner. Not necessarily on a But just “breast cancer awareness”. MR. EVERHART: I think you could with a little bit of finagling of the butterflies you could do that. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yeah. I mean just like “breast cancer awareness,” you know, like “breast cancer” on one side and “awareness” on the other side of the wing. MR. EVERHART: MS. MEYER: Yeah. Just so that it’s part of the concentric circle and -MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yes. MS. MEYER: -- not its own figure. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. EVERHART: Yeah. You may have to rotate the butterfly a little bit to get it to break between “cancer” and “awareness” where the wing cuts in. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Right. But if that happens maybe we could set it like the lettering is the same all the way around. So, you know, maybe we can change the size so it’s not quite so boring. yeah, I think we could do this. And, I think this would be pretty powerful. MR. TUCKER: and typographically right now “in God we trust” is given special emphasis because it’s the only element, typographical element that’s not curved. I don’t understand symbolically why that was given that weight or emphasis. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. TUCKER: Can that be moved -To the edge. Yeah, to the perimeter of the coin. MS. MEYER: So it raises -- MS. LANNIN: MS. MEYER: To the older woman’s shoulder. -- an interesting question. Do we need to have the ribbon on her chest? MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: No. MS. MEYERS: Because if you take that out then MS. TUCKER: That might be how to do it. -- MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. MEYERS: Yeah. Yeah. Because then you can actually get the text in there. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. EVERHART: Yeah. You can (inaudible) that lettering. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. EVERHART: Yeah. Are you talking about right down in here? MS. LANNIN: MS. GILBERT: a little sloppy? Correct. Does anyone else find the cuffs Could we eliminate the woman in the back her cuff, could that be gone so you really see her hand? And then the woman in the front maybe bring it down a bit so you can see her wrist. Because it looks like they’re wearing sloppy shirts that are covering their beautiful hands. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: MS. LANNIN: MS. GILBERT: That’s a good point. I’m sure. They look -- it’s really that they look like wings, you know, crossing one another. So just kind of increase that kind of bird wing on top of bird wing. MS. STAFFORD: So just, I’m sorry, the “in God we trust” if it’s moved to the edge Don suggested incusing that. If that is incused would you keep the breast cancer pin on her shirt or remove it? MR. EVERHART: No, it wouldn’t be obscured by it. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think you should remove it. MR. EVERHART: And also you would feather out the relief as you go towards the (inaudible) so you can accommodate the incused (inaudible). MS. LANNIN: Yes. MS. STAFFORD: Got it. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And then we just put “breast cancer awareness on the reverse. MR. EVERHART: We can make it work. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. HARRIGAL: I think so. You actually have two spots you could put it, above the (inaudible) or down here near the bottom even. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MR. HARRIGAL: Yes. You’ve got a lot of open space there. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: Yeah, either way. think it should stay in a concentric circle. MS. MEYER: Yeah, absolutely. But I MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And then I can -- this would be a calling piece. MS. LANNIN: Yes, tranquil. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: You know, very tranquil. You know, it shows the vulnerability, but it also shows successful -MS. LANNIN: Okay. I would like it in the record that the artist, the second artist, the final artist -MS. STAFFORD: MS. LANNIN: Yes. -- be commended for -- MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: -- a tremendous. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: MS. LANNIN: Oh, definitely. Very much so. It’s -- That was 279. MS. STEVENS- SOLLMAN: It really should be. think somehow this person should come forward with other ideas. MS. LANNIN: Yes. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And this was very, very powerful and I think very innovative. really what we’ve been asking for. And this is I MS. LANNIN: Exactly. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: But I think in terms of marketability I keep thinking about our Girl Scout coin where we had a beautiful coin and it didn’t sell. this is something we have to think about. So You know, and we sort of in my opinion dug our heels in with that one. Didn’t listen quite to the liaisons, stakeholder person, which I think they have a good handle on what’s going to happen. So I believe that this, although in my opinion wins the art prize -MS. LANNIN: Yeah. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: -- I don’t think it’s going to win the marketable prize. MS. LANNIN: Yeah, I understand what you’re saying, Jeanne. MS. STEVENS-SOLLMAN: And I feel sad, but yeah, that’s the way it is. MS. ZAPP: And I’ll just say from BCAF’s point of view, we are totally -- I mean you kind of just wrapped up our sentiment. Because I think from us and even just looking at these the last one is just, it’s beautiful on a number of levels, 279 is beautiful on a number of levels. I think for us it’s that we need to think about our experience in promoting this coin. And I know that in our talks with (inaudible) we are really trying to take on a lot of that weight in selling the 400,000 or however many. So to do that we need to be super comfortable and safe in what we’re pushing. And so for us I think 222 with the changes we just discussed seemed like the easiest no-brainer as far as how often we talk about it, how often we (inaudible) people to buy this coin. us up (inaudible). And doesn’t open Because even though it’s really the Mint that’s selling this coin, when we’re talking about it we take ownership of it. So people don’t differentiate like is this the Mint or is it BCAF? (Inaudible) because BCAF is selling it. And so it’s just mitigating that risk factor. MS. BABERS: All right. Thank you. (Inaudible) while you were out of the room -MS. STAFFORD: around this. There seems to be a coalescing But I don’t know how you want to take confirmation of that. MS. BABERS: Yeah, let’s do that for the record. So looking at Artist No. 222 with the discussed edits to the reverse side -MS. STAFFORD: Would you, actually, would you mind if I went through this just really quickly and make sure that everyone’s preferences are captured? For the obverse the date would change to 2018. A recommendation to moving “God we trust” to the edge. And removed the pinned ribbon from the woman in the foreground’s chest. Untether the butterfly from the ribbon, specifically deleting the upper part of the ribbon that seems to be springing from the woman in the foregrounds nose. And remove the cuff all together for the woman in the background and bring the cuff of the shirt of the woman in the foreground slightly lower to make the hands and the wrists more prominent. For the reverse only the butterfly, as well as the inscriptions will remain. And the inscription “breast cancer awareness” is recommended to be added to the field, preferably in an arced fashion. MS. LANNIN: That covers it. MS. BABERS: Okay. All in agreement with this selection and those edits please say yes. ALL: Yes. MS. BABERS: Is there anyone who disagrees with that conclusion? a decision. There are no nos. So we reached Thank you. MS. STAFFORD: Congratulations. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you, Megan for all your hard work. MS. STAFFORD: MS. BABERS: Thank you all very much. Sadia and Megan thank you for your commentaries, very helpful. MS. ZAPP: All right. Thank you guys so much. This was so fun to listen in on all of the (inaudible). I had no idea all this goes into a coin. of fun. MS. BABERS: Thank you. (Adjourned at 4:39 p.m.) It was a lot CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC I, Nate Riveness, the officer before whom the foregoing proceeding was taken, do hereby certify that the proceedings were recorded by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting under my direction; that said proceedings are a true and accurate record to the best of my knowledge, skills, and ability; that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this was taken; and, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any counsel or attorney employed by the parties hereto, nor financially or otherwise interested in the outcome of this action. NATE RIVENESS Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER I, Wendy S. Sardina, do hereby certify that this transcript was prepared from audio to the best of my ability. I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to this action, nor financially or otherwise interested in the outcome of this action. DATE WENDY S. SARDINA