View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

February 28, 2006
Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee
Public meeting
United States Mint Headquarters
801 9th Street, NW
2nd Floor
Washington, DC
John Alexander
Leon Billings
Bill Fivaz
Rita Laws (via telephone conference call)
Mitch Sanders
Donald Scarinci (via telephone conference call)
Ken Thomasma
Ute Wartenberg
S. Joseph Winter
1. Mitch Sanders, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 10.07 am.
2. By motion duly made by John Alexander and seconded by Leon Billings, the
minutes of the meeting on January 24, 2006 were unanimously approved with the
following change: the last sentence of paragraph 7 (“the committee…with his
view.”) was struck. The letter to the Secretary regarding the Committee’s January
meeting was noted. Dr. Sanders explained that due to subsequent decisions by the
U.S. Mint he had left out certain sections for the sake of clarity, which were being
reviewed again by the Committee.
3. Dr. Sanders also noted that Ms. Constance Harriman had resigned from the
Committee. He expressed regret about her resignation and acknowledged Ms.
Harriman’s service as a member of the Committee and in her period as
Chairperson of the Committee.
4. By motion duly made by Leon Billings and seconded by Ute Wartenberg Kagan,
the Committee asked that certain trade publications be sent to those members of
the Committee, who wished to inform themselves about numismatic matters.
5. Dr. Sanders introduced Kaarina Budow from the U.S. Mint, who introduced the
new presidential dollar designs. Before the designs were presented, Dr. Sanders
expressed the committee’s appreciation for the action taken by Acting Director
David Lebryk and the staff of the U.S. Mint for having shown such flexibility and
opening up the presidential dollars to the Artistic Infusion Program. Mr. Scarinci
extended his personal thanks to Mr. Lebryk for having acted on the Committee’s
recommendation to solicit new designs.
6. Members of the committee discussed some general guidelines for the presidential
portraits of the dollar series. There was general agreement that the portrait of the
President should be ideally of the period of his presidency. All members with one
exception also favored that the there should be a single template for the

arrangement of the obverse inscriptions for the entire program, thus creating a
consistency within the series. Everyone agreed that the President’s name should
be shown as he was known in his own time (for example, with the use of a middle
initial for James K. Polk).
7. Ms. Budow explained that artists were provided with official White House
portraits, intaglio engravings from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and
designs for Presidential medals as primary source materials for Presidential
images, and that in addition the artists could use other source materials as
8. Ms. Budow introduced proposed designs for George Washington. Most members
liked designs GW-08 and GW-12, which are based on the same painting of
Washington. Some members felt uncertain about the lack of a proper shoulder in
GW-12. Just judging the portrait and leaving the question of a banner or
inscription aside, the following were the Committee’s top choices (out of 27
possible points):
19 points
18 points
7 points
GW-08 was narrowly preferred, with considerable support also for GW-12.
Members generally thought highly of both designs, and both were considered
suitable choices.
9. Among the proposals for John Adams, the committee’s top three choices were
(out of a possible 27 points):
21 points
18 points
11 points
Members generally felt that designs JA-05 and JA-07 were preferable in part
because they represented Adams at the time of his Presidency. In the discussion,
JA-06 was also considered, but overall the portrait was not felt to portray the
correct image of Adams as President. Some members also thought that JA-07
could show less of his clothing.
10. It was mentioned that historically, coins portraying monarchs have alternated the
direction of the portrait, with a successor facing in a different direction from their
predecessor. Members unanimously rejected this plan for the Presidential dollar
coins as historically inappropriate, and it was agreed that the committee would not
take account of this practice and would not deliberately recommend such
alternation of portraits.
11. Thomas Jefferson’s portrait has been discussed for several prior coin designs in
recent years. At this occasion the Committee particularly liked portraits TJ-06 and
TJ-10, which represent a less grand Jefferson, who is shown in a three-quarter
view and in simple dress. Design TJ-09 was a distant third choice. The
committee’s top three ratings were (out of a possible 27 points):
20 points
16 points
7 points.

12. Among the somewhat less familiar portraits of James Madison, most members
liked a three quarter view represented in JM5, JM 6, JM8 and JM 9. The
committee’s top ratings were (out of a possible 27 points):
17 points
15 points
JM-05, JM-06 5 points.
13. On motion made by Mr. Fivaz, and seconded by Dr. Alexander, the committee
voted 9-0 to recommend that for the Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison
designs, a three-quarter facing image should be preferred over a profile.
14. The Committee voted 8-1 that there should be a consistent arrangement of
Presidents’ names, order of service, and dates of service throughout the duration
of the Presidential dollar program. The Committee rejected the arrangement on
design GW-08 by a vote of 5-3. The committee voted 7-2 to recommend the
arrangement of lettering on design GW-03, with the President’s name at the top of
the obverse, and the other required information at the bottom of the obverse below
the portrait, presented as (for example) “1st President 1789-1797”. Members
generally thought this arrangement was clearly expressed, and would fit with any
Presidential portrait. The committee indicated that it did not have a particular
preference regarding the font to be used for the obverse lettering.
15. Ms. Budow then presented proposed designs for the reverse of the Presidential
dollar design. Legislation requires a depiction of the Statue of Liberty, extending
to the rim of the coin but not giving the appearance of a two-headed coin. Ms.
Budow explained that the reverse design of the presidential dollar coin is not
required to remain the same throughout the entire program. The United States
Mint currently plans to use one common reverse for the presidential dollar coins,
but could revisit this decision in the future.
16. Committee members, in particular John Alexander, felt strongly that the torch
should be visible, reflecting the theme of “Liberty Enlightening the World,” and
that the tablet should be clearly visible as well. There was some discussion about
whether a view from below or a frontal view was to be preferred. After a
passionate plea from Mr. Alexander for the frontal, half-size view of the statue,
the committee voted their top choices as follows (out of a maximum possible 27
21 points
R-08 (without the inner circle) 11 points
10 points.
Members generally considered design R-03 to be a clear, complete, and accurate
view of the statue, and appreciated the direct frontal perspective of the image.
17. The Committee discussed proposals for edge lettering around the coin, as
required by the authorizing legislation. There was general agreement that a star
should be recommended to divide the different parts. The order of these parts was
suggested to be “2007  E PLURIBUS UNUM  IN GOD WE TRUST ”. The
committee did not express a preference regarding the font to be used, and Ms.
Budow indicated that the Mint’s aim was to make the font as large and legible as

18. Ann Bailey of the United States Mint then presented designs for the reverse of the
Jamestown commemorative gold five-dollar coin. The Committee had viewed
proposed designs for this issue at its January meeting, but revisited the issue after
some of the originally proposed designs, including the CCAC’s recommendation
for the reverse of the gold five-dollar piece, had been removed from
19. Members generally expressed support for designs GR-04, GR-07, and GR-10.
The Committee’s top three ratings were:
16 points
12 points
11 points
20. Cliff Northup, Director of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs for the
United States Mint, then presented the Committee with an update on legislative
items related to coins and medals.
21. There being no further business, the chair adjourned the meeting at 2:00 PM.