View original document

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