Full text of Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee Meetings, Recommendations, and Minutes : Meeting, October 18, 2013 : Transcript

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

1
United States Mint
Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee
Meeting
Friday,
October 18, 2013
The Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee met in the
8th Floor Boardroom at 801 9th Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., at 1:30 p.m., Gary Marks, Chair,
presiding.

2
CCAC Members Present:
Gary Marks, Chair*
Michael Bugeja*
Robert Hoge*
Erik Jansen*
Michael Moran*
Michael Olson*
Michael Ross*
Jeanne Stevens-Sollman*
Thomas Uram*
Heidi Wastweet*
United States Mint Staff Present:
Don Everhart*
Greg Hafner
April Stafford
Jack Szczerban*
Greg Weinman
*Present via telephone

3
Contents
Welcome and Call to Order

4

Discussion of Letter & Minutes

5

Review and Discuss Candidate Designs For the Code
Talker Recognition Congressional Medal Program
(Monominee Tribe)
6
Discuss Platinum Program Themes (2015 and
Beyond)

35

Adjourn

60

4
Proceedings
(1:32 p.m.)
Welcome and Call to Order
Chair Marks: First item on the agenda is approval
and, or approval or discussion of the minutes and
the letters from the July 23rd 2013, July 24th, 2013
and September 18, 2013 meetings.
Mr. Weinman: Gary?
Chair Marks: Yes.
Mr. Weinman: This is Greg Weinman. Could I ask
you a quick favor? Could you please formally call
the roll for the Court Reporter? And then remind
everybody that before they speak to identify
themselves for the Court Reporter on this
conference call.
Chair Marks: I'm sorry. I should have done that.
Okay. So we will call the roll. Mike Bugeja.
Member Bugeja: Here.
Chair Marks: Robert Hoge.
Member Hoge: Here.
Chair Marks: Erik Jansen.
Member Jansen: Here.
Chair Marks:
Michael Moran.

Gary Marks, the Chair, is here.

Member Moran: Here.
Chair Marks: Mike Olson.
Member Olson: Here.
Chair Marks: Michael Ross.
Member Ross: Here.

5
Chair Marks: Jeanne Stevens-Sollman.
Member Stevens-Sollman: Here.
Chair Marks: Tom Uram.
Member Uram: Over Here.
Chair Marks: Heidi Wastweet. Okay. So we have
nine members in attendance. And, you know, just
as a reminder as we move through this phone
meeting, we're going to ask the members and the
staff that when you speak to please announce your
name so the Court Reporter will know who is
speaking. It can be very difficult when we can't see
each other.
And I'll also ask just to have some forbearance for
each other. And please try to avoid talking over the
top of each other. Everyone will get a chance to
talk. So just want to try to make this meeting as
intelligible for everyone as possible. So with that,
staff, are we ready to go?
Ms. Stafford: Yes, sir.
Discussion of Letter & Minutes
From Previous Meeting
Chair Marks: Okay. Now with that, let's look at our
letters and minutes from the previous meetings. Is
there any discussion? I mean, I'll just add that
Michael Moran had earlier sent me a couple of
changes for the minutes for July 23rd.
I made those changes, and 15 or 20 minutes ago I
sent a revised version of those minutes to the entire
committee and to the staff. So I'm hoping you have
those. The changes were not material.
They were just errors. And one was a type, and one
I misidentified the denomination on a coin. So is
there any other discussion on the minutes?
Member Moran:

Hey, Gary, this is Mike Olson.

I

6
haven't had a chance to look at the revised ones.
But the denomination of the coin, would that have
been the half dollar versus the dime?
Chair Marks: Yes.
Member Olson: Okay.
Member Moran: Gary, this is Mike Moran. I did
happen to look at the revised minutes. They're fine
with me. Therefore, I make a motion we approve.
Member Stevens-Sollman: This is Jeanne. I second
that motion.
Chair Marks: Okay, I'll ask Michael, you know, if his
motion includes all three sets of minutes?
Member Moran: Yes.
Chair Marks: And the letters to the Secretary?
Member Moran: Yes.
Chair Marks: Okay. Is there any further discussion
on the motion? Okay, all those in favor, please say
aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
Chair Marks: Any opposed? The motion carries
unanimously. That takes us into our review and
discussion for candidate designs of the Code Talker
Recognition Congressional Medal for the Menominee
Tribe. Are you ready to provide your staff report?
Review and Discuss Candidate Designs For the Code
Talker Recognition Congressional Medal Program
Ms. Stafford: Yes, sir. As noted before we had
planned to have tribal representatives join us.
Should they call in as we continue, perhaps if we
have started into the design discussion we could
pause and have them address us, if that's okay with
you, Mr. Chairman.
Chair Marks: Yes. That will be fine.

7
Ms. Stafford:
So it's Public Law 10-420 that
authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to strike
Congressional Medals to recognize the dedication
and valor of Native American Code Talkers to the
United States Armed Services during World War I
and World War II.
Unique gold medals are to be struck for each Native
American tribe that had a member that served as a
Code Talker. And silver duplicate medals will be
presented to the specific Code Talkers or their next
of kin. Bronze duplicates will be struck and made
available for sale to the public.
In January of 2013 we received from the Secretary
of Defense an updated list of Native American Code
Talkers who served in the Armed Forces during
World War I and II. The list was organized by tribal
affiliation. And the number of tribes has grown
from 25 to now 32.
Each tribe was contacted to establish a design
concept, and to appoint an official liaison who works
directly with the United States Mint, as well the
tribal historian or any other expert for design
review.
The Department of Defense designated the U.S.
Army Center of Military History as our contact to
review all obverse designs for historical accuracy of
uniforms and equipment. I can confirm for the
committee that the U.S. Army Center of Military
History has completed their historical review of all
seven candidate obverse designs.
The obverse designs represent the Code Talkers'
dedication to military service, while the reverse
designs feature iconic symbols or elements unique
to the tribe. And can include their tribal seal or
selected elements from their seal.
There are no required inscriptions for this program.
However, for consistency the obverse designs
include the tribe's name, Code Talkers, and if
desired a language unique to the tribe. While the

8
reverse inscriptions include either World War I or
World War II, as applicable to the war served, and
Act of Congress 2008.
In today's meeting we'll be reviewing obverse and
reverse designs for the Menominee Nation. And we
will go straight to the obverse designs. We have
seven obverse designs featuring Menominee Code
Talkers carrying out communication or tactical
tasks.
They are inscribed "Menominee Code Talker" and an
inscription which translates to Menominee secretly
talking to each other. Sorry, Menominee secretly
talk to each other.
First we have Obverse-01, depicting a Code Talker
using a field radio. Obverse-02 includes a B-17
flying overhead and another squad member keeping
watch in the background. Obverses-03, 04 and 05
all incorporate P-51 Mustangs with a Code Talker in
the foreground.
So I'll pause so members can review Obverse-03,
04 and 05. Finally, Obverses06 and 07 depict radio
use and watchful soldiers. So I'll pause to show
Obverse-06 and Obverse-07. Mr. Chairman, shall I
pause for discussion, or continue with the reverse
designs?
Chair Marks: Let's continue on with the reverse.
Ms. Stafford: Okay. We have six reverse designs
that feature the Thunderbird, the central element of
the Menominee Nation seal, the five clans,
specifically the Bear, Eagle, Wolf, Moose and Crane,
a sturgeon and wild rice.
The Menominee tribe is known for its reliance on
wild rice, and as intense fishers, especially for
sturgeon. The designs are inscribed World War II
and Act of Congress 2008.
Here we have Reverses-01, 02, 03, and 04. 04 is
the preferred reverse of the tribe. And it was

9
slightly edited to accommodate the request that the
mouth of the wolf be closed. And finally, Reverse05 and 06.
Mr. Boivin: Hello.
Ms. Stafford: Hello. Can you tell us who is on the
line?
Mr. Boivin: This is Gilbert Andy Boivin, Commander
of Veterans of Menominee Nation.
Ms. Stafford: Welcome. Thank you for joining us,
Mr. Boivin.
We've gone through review of the
obverse and reverse designs. Would you like to say
a few words to our committee?
Mr. Boivin: Well, first of all, just to let you know
that Warren Wilber, a prior commander, and Dave
Grignon, our historical Tribal, Historical Preservation
Officer is also here.
But I just wanted, I'd just like to say thank you for
including this on this program. It's a well-deserved
honor of our past veterans.
Ms. Stafford: Thank you very much. I would just
repeat, we've gone through each of the designs,
describing the descriptions of the seven obverse
designs. And if I did not note it, I should for the
committee, the tribe prefers Obverse-04.
Mr. Boivin: Yes.
Ms. Stafford: And we went through the six reverse
designs. And the tribe preferred Reverse-04 as
well.
Mr. Boivin: Yes.
Ms. Stafford: Okay.
Mr. Boivin: With the exception of the, with the
wolf's mouth being closed.
Ms. Stafford: Yes. And we have presented it to the

10
committee today with that adjustment made, at
your request.
Mr. Boivin: Okay.
Chair Marks: For our guests, my name is Gary
Marks, I'm the Chairman of the committee. And
before we move on with our consideration of these
designs, I'd like to ask if you have any comments or
any statement, or what have you, concerning these
designs?
Mr. Boivin: No. We don't have no concerns with
the designs. We actually, we like them. We like
them very much.
Chair Marks: You like, yes. And we understand you
like Obverse-04 and Reverse-04. Okay. Thank
you. Okay, April, do you have anything else to add
to your report?
Ms. Stafford: No, sir. That's it for us.
Chair Marks: Okay. For the record, I texted Heidi
Wastweet while we've been having our discussion so
far. She has responded to me, and said that she
would be joining the meeting shortly.
So when some, I'm expecting someone else in the
form of Heidi to beep in here soon. So with that, I
want to ask the committee if they had any
questions of a technical nature before we actually
start considering the designs?
I would like to get any questions answered that
might not necessarily be about the artwork, but
more about the technical natures of how the metal
might be produced, or other sorts of questions. So
is there anyone that has any technical questions?
Member Hoge: Gary, this is Robert Hoge.
Chair Marks: Yes, Robert.
Member Hoge: Hi. On the fourth reverse side, it
appears as though the (telephonic interference.)

11
How might that be?
Chair Marks: Robert? Robert we lost you. We can't
hear you.
Member Hoge: Sorry. On Reverse number 4, in the
central area it appears as though there's a darker
circle. I wondered if that is a form of stippling, or
how it might be done, how it might be rendered?
We might want to think about that.
Mr. Ancarmici: This is Steve Ancarmici. That would
be a texture we would build into the actual coin.
You could refer to it as stippling, yes.
Member Hoge: I don't see where that adds to the
design. But I just, I was curious as to what's
supposed to be done there.
Chair Marks: Okay. Is there someone else who has
any technical questions?
Mr. Everhart: Yes, this is Don Everhart. I just
wanted to comment on what Mr. Hoge said. I feel
that what it adds to the design is that it unifies the
animal heads, you know, into one entity.
And
makes it more of a unified statement.
Chair Marks: I think it also might -- Tell me if I'm
right on it. It may also give a little more contrast to
the central figure of, I'm not sure what -Mr. Ancarmici: Thunderbird.
Member Stevens-Sollman: A Thunderbird.
Chair Marks: The Thunderbird. Is that correct?
Mr. Everhart: Yes, Gary, it's very true.
Chair Marks: Okay. All right. Are there other
questions of a technical nature? Okay. I heard
someone beeped in while we were having our
discussion. Could that person identify themselves if
you just joined us?

12
Member Wastweet: This is Heidi.
Chair Marks: Oh, hi, Heidi. I'll mark you down as
in attendance. Heidi, we just received April's report
on the Menominee medal. We have some guests
from the tribe who are also on the phone.
We've been made aware that the tribe prefers
Obverse-04 and Reverse-04. And as I think you've
just heard we just went through our technical
question phase. So with -Member Wastweet: Thank you, Gary.
Chair Marks: Sure. But with that we will begin our
committee discussion. And I'm open for any one of
the members who would like to start our discussion.
Member Bugeja: Gary, this is Michael Bugeja.
Chair Marks: Yes, Michael.
Member Bugeja: I'd like to start. I have a quick
question for you, Gary. You know, I'm ill. I've got
the flu and a bad fever. And is this the only voting
agenda item today?
Chair Marks: Yes, it is.
Member Bugeja: Okay. So I would like to -Chair Marks: Well, I should clarify that, Michael. I
may need to clarify that. We are talking about the
Platinum Program later. I can't rule out that there
might be a motion -Member Bugeja: Okay.
Chair Marks: -- related to themes.
Member Bugeja:
Well I would ask you, Mr.
Chairman, if after I give my exegesis of the Code
Talker, that I be dismissed for illness.
Chair Marks: Okay. That will be fine. Can you
simply email Erik and myself your scores on the
site?

13
Member Bugeja: Yes, absolutely. I would like to
give a brief description. I happen to like both of the
tribe's choices on the obverse and the reverse. But
I have some slight recommendations that I would
like the committee to hear.
On Obverse-04, which was my favorite, and this is
not for a vote or for an amendment, or anything of
that. I wonder if the orientation of the plane can be
moved towards the viewer, rather than with the
soldier, five to ten percent, so that they're almost
coming out of the coin? It would add a lot of depth
from a design perspective. That's the only thing I
have to say on that one.
And on Reverse Number 04, which was also my
favorite, I noticed that on the previous reverses,
particularly on Reverse Number 02, there doesn't
seem to be a cultural -- And if I'm wrong I hope our
guests from the Menominee Nation will let me know.
But there doesn't seem to be a cultural placement
of the various animals. So if you take a look at
Number 02, you have everything the way one would
expect it logically.
You've got the eagle that flies on the top. And
you've got the fish that swims toward the bottom.
And it's set up very nicely.
Now I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the
fish is on top on Reverse Number 04 merely for a
design reason. But from a cultural iconic placement
-- And I do not know the Menominee Nation. But I
do know the Oglala, Lakota and others in South
Dakota.
And it's important to place these images in the
context of earth and sky. So if I'm wrong I'm
hoping that the Menominee Nation representatives
can let me know. But I would take the eagle, put it
where the fish is, move the fish down. The water
bird should be near the fish. The bear and the wolf
should be changed because bears are often in that
water too.

14
So I know that's a little bit different from what we
normally do. But I would ask our representative
from the Menominee Nation is, if making that kind
of a change would I be inappropriate or, and
somehow misguided?
Mr. Grignon: I'm Dave Grignon. I'm tribal Historic
Preservation Officer for the Menominee tribe. And
the orientation of the clan animals are correct.
And I believe the reasons the sturgeon is on top is
it's kind of a, it's a protector of our people. And it
has a lot of sacred significance to us. And, I mean,
that's the reason why the clans are orientated like
that, plus the sturgeon is on top.
Member Bugeja: Okay. So in other words I'm,
perhaps the Menominee Nation did not prefer
Reverse Number 02 because the sturgeon is where
it should be, you know, from a geographical
perspective. So am I correct, and that was one of
the tribe's reason for not liking Reverse Number 02,
because the sturgeon was misplaced?
Mr. Boivin: No it isn't -- This is Gilbert.
Member Bugeja: Yes.
Mr. Boivin: We're not really saying that it was
displaced, just that the sturgeon, it has such
significance for our tribe.
Member Bugeja: Okay.
Mr. Boivin: And, you know -Member Bugeja: I understand what you're saying.
Okay. That would have been my only suggestion is
to, from a geographical perspective. But if it has
meaning, then I withdraw my description.
Chair Marks: Okay. Michael, do you have anything
more?
Member Bugeja: And I'll go ahead and email you
my favorites. I'm going to like both Number 04s.

15
They're my favorite.
Chair Marks: Okay. All right. Are you finished?
Member Bugeja:
you.

Yes, I'm finished, Gary.

Thank

Chair Marks: Okay. And with that, is there another
member who would like to go at this time? Okay.
You know, what I'll do, since no one's popping up,
I'm going to go to our artists first, and ask them to
comment. And, Jeanne, I'm wondering if you might
be ready to -Member Stevens-Sollman: Sure.
Chair Marks: -- lend us your input.
Member Stevens-Sollman: Yes, I will. Thank you
very much.
I think that what the artist has
provided with us this time, I think our Code Talker
soldiers are a little bit different than previous ones
that we've had.
And I think it's very interesting to have some guy
art in there with the planes. It's very good. I too
like Number 04. I think it tells us really what the
code talkers are about, and the importance of their
work.
And on the reverse designs I, you know, I do like
Number 04. I think it's wonderful to have all the
clans represented. But Number 05 I think as a
medal is something very contemporary.
So I
thought it was the other powerful statement.
I like what is happening with the rice and the
sturgeon very much. However, you know, we are
lacking the clans there. So I will defer to the tribe's
preference. But I do think that Number 05 was
quite an interesting and strong piece. That's all.
Thank you.
Chair Marks:
ready to go?

Thank you, Jean.

Heidi, are you

16
Member Wastweet: Yes, I am. On the obverses I
think that we really couldn't go wrong with any of
these. And I will stand behind the tribe's preference
of Number 04.
One of the things I like about Number 04 is the
harmony of angles between the antennas, the
airplanes with each other. There's several things
going in the same direction. So it has a lot of
movement. And I'm in support of that.
On the reverses I'm also fine with the tribe's
preference. And I'm going to echo what Jeanne
said about Reverse Number 05. I think that's a
really beautiful design. Excuse me.
I understand the tribe really wants the symbolism of
the multiple animals. So I just wanted to mention
Number 05 as being a really strong design.
It's very unified. Whereas having each individual
animal is a little disjointed. So artistically Number
05 gets my support, but symbolically Number 04.
I would steer away from Reverse Number 06 for two
reasons. The animals there, I don't think they're
going to read terribly well on the finished piece.
They're going to be very, very small on those like
small coins. Design wise it's nice. I don't think it's
going to read completely well. And the bear seems
to be missing an ear.
My other point, the other thing I like about Reverse
Number 04 and 05 is the division of the words,
World War II and Act of Congress 2008.
Some of the designs have those words on the same
size and won’t come out when clumped together, so
that they become one statement. And that’s all for
that. So I will stick with 04 and 05. That's it.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Heidi.
else? who would like to go now?

Is there anyone

Member Olson: Gary. It's Mike Olson.

17
Chair Marks: Hey, Mike.
Member Olson: Hey. Again, a lot of good work
done here. I myself was also drawn to Obverse
Number 04. And I agree with Michael Bugeja that
that design could be made even more exciting than
it looks right now by turning the orientation of those
fighter planes slightly towards the viewer. I think
that would be very, very powerful.
As for the Reverse, no comments on that, other
than I'll support the tribe's preference. It's been
explained very well of what's happening, and what
the significance of the placement is. But I'm glad
that question was asked, because I had the same
question. Other than that, that is all I have for
comments on this.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Michael. I think I'll go
ahead and throw in, this is Gary Marks. I'll go
ahead and throw in my comments now.
Obverse-04 and 05 are my two favorites. Of course
they're very similar. If I want to go for the one that
I feel is artistically superior, and something that
might produce what collectors and folks that will be
buying these outside, of course, the Nations and the
Menominee Nation itself, I would go with Number
05.
Having the design kind of go off the edge as it does,
without the outer band, makes that actually, in my
opinion, a superior design.
However, I also understand the tribe's desire to
have the text that encircles, and just more
information. So I'll be supporting both of those
obverses in my evaluation.
Then as we go to the reverse, in general I want to
recognize the tribe's desire to have the clans on the
medal. I'll be bold though, and say that sometimes
when you put too much on to a small metal disk like
this you get less, not more.

18
And what I mean by that is if we look at Reverse
Number 05 and you see, other members have
spoken to this already, you see the power and the
size of those images, it translates a message about
the tribe that these others that have scattered
objects on them just cannot do. I mean, you know,
as far as its artistic power.
So, while I understand the reasons for the Nation
wanting Reverse Number 04, I feel very strongly
that 05 really serves the medal better from an
artistic point of view. So with that, those are the
only comments I have. Is there another member
ready to offer theirs?
Member Jansen: Gary, it's Erik. Can you hear me?
Chair Marks: Yes, Erik.
Member Jansen: On Obverse-04 I have a question.
Why does Obverse-05 in this co-action regarding
the antenna/wingtip issue?
Is there a different
reason?
Ms. Stafford: No. It's just another, it's another
iteration of it.
It's missing the inscription that
translates to Menominee secretly talk to each other.
Member Jansen: Okay. I generally agree with
Gary's comments. On a medal this large, often
bleeding the image off of the medal is such a
powerful way using the massive volume of the
medal to maximum image impact.
But in this particular case I think that's the minor
issue here. I like the angles here. It is a comment
I have, that I do like the Obverse-04, the back I
think here. But we're succumbing to, I think, an
artistic tool in here, which is taking away from the
design.
And that is, we have three planes that are
essentially identical copy and paste here, larger
size, smaller size. But nonetheless, they look just
like a Photoshop copying problem.

19
And I would urge the artist who sculpts this, I would
encourage you to sculpt each plane separately, and
let your hand add this natural variation in the
sculpting.
So they don't look like copy drop
Photoshop.
And did these airplanes lose their propellers?
Dealing with props is always an issue. And I refer
to Obverse-03, where you actually see props on the
planes.
I know Don has spoken to this in the past, that
when we had propeller aircraft in images, and the
pros and the cons, and the difficulties of that. But I
raise that for comment. Don, what's your thought
there?
Mr. Everhart: I feel very strongly that we should
not show propellers.
Because quite simply you
cannot see them when they are in rotation. And
like I mentioned before, when you do see them like
that, it's kind of disconcerting.
Because if you admit it may be gliding or
something. I just feel it's a better representation to
not show them in sculpt. And I've sculpted a lot of
coins, a lot of plane coin designs in my career. And
I never put props on.
Member Jansen: Okay. So drop the dropped prop.
But I would stand firm on the, to try to give a bit of
our artistic hand rendering on these, so they don't
look identical.
Otherwise, I think Obverse-04 is the way to go
here. I love the additional information around the
perimeter. Because it is such a richening of this
medal in this case.
On the reverse, Reverse Number 04 is my
preference. A couple of comments, however. It
looks like we've again got kind of a flip copy and
drop of the rice sheaves, if rice comes in sheaves.
They look identical to me.

20
I'm not sure I'd like them identical. That isn't to
say I want them so different that they put the
medal design out of balance.
But there's a
difference between identical and imbalanced.
Second of all, the Thunderbird design, and this is
really interesting. The Thunderbird design as it's
rendered here, including the six examples of it, it is
a highly geometric design with hard sharp borders
and proscribed angles, which clashes very harshly
with the accurate and soft rendering of the animals.
Now, that just is what it is. However, I would
encourage the sculptor to look at the variations of
the Thunderbird in the six designs here. Go from
design to design to essentially the perspectives that
vary here.
And I would refer to the tribal historian to really
look over this Thunderbird to make sure we got it
right. Because it looks to me like it suffered more
from the tool driven artifact of, how do I create this
Thunderbird out of straight line vectors, than do I
really have the Thunderbird right.
Now, to make my point a little more clearly, look at
the Thunderbird in Reverse-05 and 06. Actually, 06
is the best example. That's a very symmetrical,
left/right, bilaterally symmetrical rendering there,
with the exception of the head. Obviously we have
the head turned to the side.
None of the other Thunderbirds have this same
left/right symmetry. And so I ask, what is the
correct left/right symmetry, if there is left/right
symmetry? It's a harsh element, which I think is
going to end up looking very harsh when it's
rendered in relief. Because it's going to have very
hard contrasting edges against soft rendered fur
and feather on the beasts.
So, I'm just concerned. And so I would ask the
sculptor to really carefully, carefully deploy the
mechanics of his tools to minimize that, and get the
Thunderbird right, per the correct rendering, and

21
the artist and the tribal expert.
Reverse-04 is my vote.
It's my only vote.
Although, with all due respect, when I first looked at
this I loved Reverse-05. Because Reverse-05 stood
out as kind of a, tell me more about this unusual,
intentional image.
Mr. Grignon: Thank you, Donald. This is Dave
Grignon from the tribe. The Thunderbird that we're
using is the same one that's on the tribal seal. And
I think we want to stay consistent to what that is.
Chair Marks: Well, I don't think you were asking to
change it, were you?
Member Jansen: No, no, no. I'm not asking to
change it. But, for instance, I'll give you a specific
example.
On Reverse-04 at the heart of the
Thunderbird, call it the point of the, of its waiste, WA-I-S-T-E.
You find that the inverted V is kind of a funny
left/right transposition, versus that same inverted V
in the waiste position on say, Reverse-05, or
Reverse-06, which are both symmetric left to right.
So one of those three, or two of those three are
wrong. And I sense it's due to the difficulty of
creating that Thunderbird with the artist's design
tools, more than it was an intentional design.
Chair Marks: Oh, I see. I understand what Erik is
saying. If you look at the center of the Thunderbird
in Number 04, Reverse Number 04, and look at the
center of the Thunderbird on some of these other
examples, other reverses, there is a difference there
with those triangular shapes. Is that what you're
getting at, Erik?
Member Jansen: Well that's certain one example.
But the examples are right, they're right in the wing
feathers, the trailing wing feather. They're right in
the enter tail feather. It looks like an arrow. It
looks like an upward facing arrow.

22
If the inconsistencies in design Number 04, versus
the Thunderbird as it exists in the other five
designs. So I would just encourage the sculptors to
consult very carefully with the tribal historian and
experts on this to make sure that we honor their
symbol correctly, and with the integrity that it
carries.
Chair Marks:
Thank you, Erik.
Is everyone
understanding what Erik is saying? If you look at
the various illustrations of the Thunderbird, the
various reverse -Ms. Stafford: Right.
Chair Marks: -- designs, there are some variations.
They're slight. There are slight variations. And I
would echo Erik's concern that we make sure
whichever reverse we do that the Thunderbird is
done accurately, as per the specs of the Nation.
Member Jansen: I mean, in my view it's an artistic
element for sure. However, it is more than that. It
is first and foremost a cultural element, that I want
to make sure satisfies and gratifies the tribal
interest first.
Ms. Stafford: We understand the comment. And
we have the Thunderbird as depicted in the Great
Seal, that we'll ensure should this design be
selected, we'll ensure the sculptors use it as a
reference.
Member Jansen:
I believe we have an artistic
balance always. And we have an integrity and
honor intention always, as a committee.
Chair Marks: Okay, Erik. Is there anything more?
Member Jansen:
No.
I vote for Obverse and
Reverse-04 as my number.
Chair Marks: Okay. Thank you, Erik. We have four
members who haven't offered their comments yet.
Would one of you please go ahead?

23
Member Moran: Gary, this is Mike Moran.
Chair Marks: Mike, go ahead.
Member Moran: I'm fine with Number 04 of the
obverse. But I want to point out a couple of areas
that I think need to be focused on.
And it's basically a canteen on the soldier, on the
left hand side of the coin.
It appears to be
somewhat suspended. It would, if it were fuller it
would be hanging more closer to his side.
The other issue I have is the way he's holding that
phone up to his ear. For me that's an attendant
positioning of the hand. And he's not going to be
doing that in combat. He's going to be gripping that
phone handle, because he's in stress.
And I also want to follow up with Michael Bugeja's
comment.
If you turn the angle of the P-51
fighters' nose ever so slightly, to where they're
coming more out of the coin, or the medal, and at
the viewer.
You're going to need to turn the soldier's head,
because they're obviously focusing on the same
thing, which is an enemy emplacement out in front
of them. So to be consistent you're going to have
to turn both. You can't just turn the noses of the
planes.
As far as the reverse goes, my first choice as I put
through here was definitely Number 04. But then I
realized you dropped the clans. And you can't do
that. So my vote is for both 04s, and the Reverse04 as modified. Those are my comments.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Michael. I need someone
else to go ahead.
Member Ross: Hi, Gary, it's Michael Ross.
Chair Marks: Hey, Mike, go ahead.
Member Ross:

I'll be quick.

I like 04 as well.

I

24
think the tribal language should be on the coin. I
did, I was just going to say to compliment the
artist. I also like the depictions here. And they
reminded me of the beautiful cover on David
Maraniss' book, “They Marched Into Sunlight".
But I'm going to go with 04, because I agree with
the comments I've heard. And the same thing on
the reverse. So 04 and 04.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Michael.
need to hear from Robert or Tom.

Okay, I just

Member Hoge: Robert here. I would like to put my
vote for the Obverse-04 and Reverse-04, and
respect the tribe's wishes.
But I'd also like to comment that I agree with
Michael Moran's observations on the obverse in
regard to the hand holding the telephone, and the
positioning of the canteen, both of which just seem
to be kind of off placed.
Also, on Reverse-04 we were talking about the
Thunderbird design. I think it might we well to
learn a little bit about where it came, that design
that appears on the seal of the Nation.
Because if we could get back to an actual artifact
from which this came, that might be, you know,
something to just kind of find to tie into earlier
history of the tribe.
So many of these medals that we've looked at seem
to simply incorporate elements from tribal feel, but
really have kind of a WPA aspect about them.
They're always very flat, very linear. Sometimes in
this case geometrical.
But I suspect that these are derived from some
really, you know, really a prominent cultural piece.
Perhaps this is just beadwork from a shoulder bag,
or something like that.
Also, I'd like to note that these images of the

25
animals are so perpetual. You can see they're
almost the same from one of these medal designs
to the other. And to me they're disappointingly out
of proportion, each one with the others.
And I just wonder if the artist could come up with
something that would be a little bit more appealing,
and perhaps even more lifelike.
And perhaps
something that would coalesce a little bit better with
the Thunderbird element. That's it.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Robert. Tom.
Member Uram: Thanks, Gary. Again, on them, I
agree with those two, the comments that were
made regarding Obverse-04 and Reverse-04.
And I think on the canteen, Mike, there, where you
mentioned that it seems like the canteen has a little
bit more of a movement than the fixed depiction of
where we are with the soldier.
And so that may be why it's like he almost hit the
ground, and the canteen is going up, you know, that
kind of thing. That might be the attempt there.
And it may be that the thumb over that, the thumb
should be around, or the hand grasping the phone a
little bit more firmly.
That would be the only
problem.
I thought that, I really also, and Bob just mentioned
regarding the Obverse-06 and 07 I thought were
really nice designs also. But I'm going to -I think certainly with the planes, I was kind of
concerned with the planes, and proportion to the
whole thing. But I think that's been delved into.
And I'm going to stick with Obverse-04. And I think
Reverse-04 as well.
It's great. But being the tribe prefers that. And I
did understand Michael's comments earlier in
regards to the sturgeon being below in Reverse-02.
I do like Reverse-02, and 05 for that matter. 02, 04
and 05 are super.

26
But I'll defer also to the Nation's choice of Number
04. But the, you know, even the worst designs here
are really outstanding. Thank you.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Tom. Now, before we
move on to our voting phase for this medal, I
wanted to make sure there's not any follow up
comments that members may like to make.
Member Stevens-Sollman: This is Jean. I will have
to have a comment on hand on Obverse-04. It
really also troubles me. And simply choose that.
Well, maybe also recommend that maybe the grasp
be changed on that phone.
Chair Marks: Okay. Are there any other comments.
Okay. Now, there's two ways, I believe, that we
could proceed as far as our voting. Of course, there
would be our traditional method where we would
provide weighted rankings by scores one through
three for all the various designs.
However, I suspect there may be a more efficient
way to do it on the phone, given what seems to be
some fairly unanimity about the designs here.
So, I'm going to ask the members here if you would
be satisfied with a simple motion to indicate our
recommendations for this medal?
Member Bugeja:
Gary.

Michael Bugeja.

I'm satisfied,

Chair Marks: Is there anybody who would object to
a simple motion?
Member Uram: Gary, I think before asking just kind
of as a preliminary question, I presume the motion
would be to recommend the same design the tribe
prefers, that would be Obverse-04 and Reverse-04.
And under that presumption would there be a large
just agreement of that intention?
Chair Marks: Well, before we go down that road, if
we want to do it I'm going to ask someone to put

27
that motion on the table.
I just think that trying to do our normal weighted
scoring on the phone is going to be rather awkward.
And I suspect the results might be very close to
what a simple motion might create. So -Member Olson: Gary -Member Uram: Gary, I second your motion?
Chair Marks: Okay. Anyone else?
Member Olson: Gary.
Chair Marks: Yes.
Member Olson: This is Michael. I think maybe for
historical reasons we'd be veering off from a long
history now of not assigning a number.
Maybe we could have a motion to provide three
votes for the one that we're all looking at. Just for
historical purposes, this would be the only medal we
did not assign a point value to.
Chair Marks: Actually, that's not correct, Michael. I
can't name the medal right now. But there was a
meeting in the recent past where it was clear that
we were all on the same page, if you will. And we
took a motion.
So, I don't mind whichever way we go on the
motion. I heard somebody second a motion that I
didn't know that I had made.
Member Olson: I'm thinking that as a point of order
we should vote that way.
Chair Marks: Which way, Michael?
Member Olson: That we should vote -- I seconded
your motion. And under Roberts Rules, if there's no
more further discussion on the motion we are to
vote on it, or amend the motion.
Chair Marks:

Okay.

I'll just clarify.

I was not

28
aware I had made a motion.
(Simultaneous speaking.)
Member Jansen: Gary, this is Erik. I would make a
motion that with respect to the complexity of the
voting process by conference call, and in the
interest of expediency, as well as the appearance of
a large, apparent consensus, that we propose a
motion for accepting a single obverse, reverse
design, subject to minor artistic modifications that
might want to be added by further motion.
Chair Marks: Okay. Thank you, Erik. Now, I'm
confused.
Your motion didn't seem to indicate
specific designs here. Are you doing a pre-motion?
Member Jansen:
I will add to that that we
recommend Obverse-04 and Reverse-04, consistent
with what I've heard in discussion and tribal
preferences. But once again, reserving the right for
artistic modifications in further motions.
Chair Marks:
Okay.
Understood.
Bugeja, I'm assuming you --

And, Mike

Member Bugeja: And I'll second that.
Chair Marks: -- second that. Okay. So for the
record we have a motion by Mr. Jansen, seconded
by Mr. Bugeja, to recommend Obverse-04 and
Reverse-04 with recommendations that -- Help me
out here, Erik. The changes -- Help me out, Erik.
(Simultaneous speaking.)
Member Jansen: Okay. I want to make sure we
reserve the right to certain thoughts that have been
put out there nominally, turning the pitch of the
plane, correcting the canteen, the more realistic
grasp of the phone.
That we don't just have this motion unilaterally
adopt Obverse-04 and Reverse-04 as shown. But
reserve the right to add some artistic modifications.

29
Chair Marks: And when and how are we going to do
that, Erik?
Member Jansen: I would say the second motion by
people who fell strongly -Chair Marks: Okay.
Member Jansen: -- as you expressed.
Chair Marks: Well I would suggest that we pass a
clean motion here, just for the simplicity of
everyone understanding it. Any member's free to
put another motion forward after it. Would this be
acceptable?
Member Jansen: May I restate my motion simply?
Chair Marks: Yes.
Member Jansen: I move we vote as a block to
accept Obverse-04 and Reverse-04, subject to
further motions modifying certain artistic features.
Chair Marks: Okay. All right. You've all heard the
motion, and it has been seconded. So is there any
further discussion before we go to vote the
question?
Member Wastweet: This is Heidi.
Chair Marks: Go ahead.
Member Wastweet: As I'm sitting here looking at
the Reverse Number 04 and Reverse Number 05, I
am swayed by the beautiful design on Number 05.
And so before we go ahead and stamp our approval
on Reverse Number 04, I would just like to pose a
question to the tribe. Do they have an objection to
Reverse Number 05? Or would they be happy with
that one as well?
Mr. Boivin: This is Gilbert. The reason we choose
04, between the Chairmans, Warren and I as
liaisons, and we brought this work to David, was the

30
fact that we're trying to get back, our tribe is trying
to get back into tribal history, where a lot of our
Menominees are speaking our language now.
And we're trying to get back to the clans. The
reason why the clans were there in our ancestry,
and that current members at this time were a part
of. And were all brought down from the ancestry
and what clan you're -Because we've got a very large tribe. We got a
tribe of over 8,000. And we did have five clans at
the time. And what clans that came from, what
families came from what clan. So that's the reason
why we wanted the clans involved with this medal.
Member Wastweet:
input.

Okay.

Thank you for your

Chair Marks: Okay. Thank you, Heidi.
Member Stevens-Sollman: This is Jeanne. Just to
add to Heidi's comment. I think if we do both of the
tribe's preferences, which I think are very good. I
mean, I like them very much.
But I think to mention that Reverse-05 is something
that our committee is always looking for in terms of
something contemporary, something powerful. And
I think number Reverse-05 is just that.
Unfortunately it doesn't give the clans as the Nation
wants it. So I think if we can vote on Obverse-04
and Reverse-04, but also, send a message to our
artists that, you know, this is a very powerful design
also. And we'd like to see more like that. Thank
you.
Chair Marks: I agree. I agree very much, Jeanne.
Okay. Is there any other comment to be made on
the motion? All those in favor -- Or actually, I'm
going to call roll, just so we're clear.
Michael
Bugeja. Michael?
Member Bugeja: Aye, Aye.

31
Chair Marks: Robert Hoge.
Member Hoge: Aye.
Chair Marks: Erik Jansen.
Member Jansen: Aye.
Chair Marks: Gary Marks, the Chair, votes aye.
Michael Moran.
Member Moran: Aye.
Chair Marks: Mike Olson.
Member Olson: Aye.
Chair Marks: Michael Ross.
Member Ross: Aye.
Chair Marks: Jeanne Stevens-Sollman.
Member Stevens-Sollman: Aye.
Chair Marks: Tom Uram.
Member Uram: Aye.
Chair Marks: Heidi Wastweet.
Member Wastweet: Aye.
Chair Marks: The motion is unanimous, ten to zero,
motion carries. Are there any subsequent motions
to be considered?
Member Moran: Gary, this is Mike Moran. I'd like
to make a motion that we substitute the wolf with
the mouth closed from the third reverse, in
accordance with the tribe's wishes, in to the fourth
reverse.
Chair Marks: Okay.
Member Moran: And if we evaluate the positioning
of the canteen and the hand of the, right hand or
left hand of the soldier that holds the phone on the

32
Number 04 Obverse.
Chair Marks: I'm writing this all down. Just a
moment. Okay. And what Mike was referring to is
that there is a letter provided by the tribal chairmen
indicating a preference to switch the wolf's image.
So that is the reason the first part of his motion. So
I just mention that to clarify the record. Is there a
second on that motion?
Member Jansen: Second, Erik.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Erik. It's been moved and
seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion?
Mr. Boivin: Yes, this is Gilbert for the Menominee
tribe. We had, when I talked to Tasha Caldwell who
sent that letter, we told her we was having the
mouth closed like the picture in Obverse-03. We
didn't want the picture changed, the picture's fine
as is, with it just closed.
Ms. Stafford: And I would just add, Mr. Chairman,
that that change has been made. In fact, the
people here in D.C. are seeing the revised version
with the mouth closed. So that has been effected.
Chair Marks: Okay. Well I think we can remedy
this simply by asking Mr. Moran if he would amend
his motion to just simply have the mouth of the wolf
closed.
Member Moran: Absolutely.
Chair Marks: Okay. And, Erik, as the second do
you accept that change?
Member Jansen: I accept that change.
Chair Marks: Okay. Is there any further discussion
on this motion? Okay. We'll go through the roll.
Michael Bugeja.
Member Bugeja: Aye, Aye.
Chair Marks: Robert Hoge.

33
Member Hoge: Aye.
Chair Marks: Erik Jansen.
Member Jansen: Aye.
Chair Marks: Gary Marks, the Chair, votes aye.
Michael Moran.
Member Moran: Aye.
Chair Marks: Mike Olson.
Member Olson: Aye.
Chair Marks: Michael Ross.
Member Ross: Aye.
Chair Marks: Jeanne Stevens-Sollman.
Member Stevens-Sollman: Aye.
Chair Marks: Tom Uram.
Member Uram: Aye.
Chair Marks: Heidi Wastweet.
Member Wastweet: Aye.
Chair Marks: The motion carries ten to zero. Are
there any further motions?
Member Moran:
Mike Moran.

I've got one more Gary.

This is

Chair Marks: Go ahead.
Member Moran: I move that the committee give an
honorable mention to Reverse Number 05 for its
artistic merits.
Chair Marks:
I'll second that.
Is there any
discussion on that motion? Okay, then I will go
through the roll call again but I'll go in reverse.
Heidi Wastweet?

34
Member Wastweet: Aye.
Chair Marks: Tom Uram?
Member Uram: Aye.
Chair Marks: Jeanne Stevens-Sollman?
Member Stevens-Sollman: Aye.
Chair Marks: Michael Ross?
Member Ross: Aye.
Chair Marks: Mike Olson?
Member Olson: Aye.
Chair Marks: Michael Moran?
Member Moran: Aye.
Chair Marks: Gary Marks the chair votes aye.
Erik Jansen?
Member Jansen: Aye.
Chair Marks: Robert Hoge?
Member Hoge: Aye.
Chair Marks: Michael Bugeja?
Member Bugeja: Aye.
Chair Marks: That motion also carries unanimously,
ten yea and zero nay. Are there any other motions?
Okay, well, I believe that concludes our review and
discussion on the Menominee Code Talker
Recognition Medal.
I want to thank the members of the Menominee
Nation who joined us for our discussion here today,
and before we move on I just wanted to give our
guests one last chance to make any comments that
they might be interested in making.

35
Mr. Warren: This is Warren from Menominee. I'd
like to thank you guys for everything that you put
into this for us, and such a short notice.
We're kind of under the gun here for a little bit, but
I think you guys did a great job in the design of
this, what we give you to come up with. Thank you.
Mr. Grignon: David Grignon from the Menominee
Tribe too. I'd like to thank you for listening to us.
And this is a very good depiction of our clans and
sturgeon and also Menominee language on there
that's very appropriate to us. Thank you.
Chair Marks: Thank you very much, gentlemen. I
think I speak for the entire community when I say it
sure is an honor for us to work on your medal as
well as all the other tribes and nations that we've
worked on. It's going to be a phenomenal collection
and set of medals when they're all done and then
presented to the various tribes and nations. So
thank you again for your participation and for
helping us understand the importance of various
aspects of this medal for you.
So with that it's time for us to move to the next
item on our agenda, and that is our discussion on
the Platinum Program Themes for 2015 and Beyond.
And at this point I'll ask April if she's ready to
provide her report to us.
Ms. Stafford: Yes, sir. Actually I'm going to turn
that over to Greg Hafner who is a program manager
here at the United States Mint in the Precious Metals
Group. And we may also have on the phone Jack
Szczerban.
Jack, are you with us? No, not yet, but Jack may
join us. So Greg, do you want to walk through the
presentation?
Discuss Platinum Program Themes (2015 and
Beyond)
Mr. Hafner: Sure. Good afternoon everyone. The

36
purpose of this presentation is platinum coins.
Since the program began in 1998, we've had series,
multi-year series of designs on the coins.
Our current program is the Preamble to the
Constitution, six-year design series. It comes with
conclusion next year. So we need to start looking
at what we need to do beginning in 2015 and going
forward, so a little bit of the background.
Again, we began issuing these coins in 1997, and
Secretary is authorized to issue the bullion and
proof coins in accordance with specifications,
designs, varieties -- I'm not going to read that
whole thing. You can see it there.
But that gives us the authority to choose various
designs for the coins. Since the inception of the
program about 317,000 coins. The last year we
produced a bullion coin was in 2008, and we plan on
introducing that coin next year in 2014. Next slide.
So this slide here shows the platinum proof coin
sales, 1997 to 2013. As you can see, 1997 was the
strongest year in sales since the program began.
That's not unusual when we put out a new coin.
For instance, in 2006 we put out the American
Buffalo gold proof coin, 24-carat, brand new coin.
We sold almost 250,000 coins that year, and now
we're down to about 20,000 to 25,000 coins a year.
Several reasons for the decline in sales. Number
one is, you know, as the series wears on people
may become less and less interested, depending on
the designs, and the second reason -- if you could
flip that April -- is you can see as sales decline as
prices have gone up. So price certainly affects
behavior of sales of our customers.
Ms. Stafford: Can I interrupt really quickly, Greg?
Mr. Hafner: Sure.
Ms. Stafford: The committee members are on the

37
phone so they can't actually see which slides we're
flipping to, but they do have the presentation.
Mr. Hafner: Oh, okay.
Ms. Stafford: So if you can refer to slides by their
numbers they may be able to follow along with us a
little better.
Mr. Hafner: Okay. Well, Slide 3 addressed the
annual sales figures and Slide 4 addressed the
average platinum spot price for each of the years
since the beginning of the program.
So taking a look at these numbers on Page 3, we
were trying to think of what we can do to, you
know, try to kick start this program and, you know,
give something that our customers truly want in
terms of design.
What we decided to do was to go out and ask the
customers, to do some consumer research.
Internally we got together and held several focus
groups in-house just to come up with some designs.
And once we got some designs and we prioritized
them we went out and did research with those
designs and -Ms. Stafford: You mean design ideas, concepts?
Mr. Hafner: Yes, design concepts, and we'll be
discussing those here shortly. Just moving on to
Slide Number 5, design history. Designs on the
obverse of the platinum proof and bullion coins have
remained the same from year to year, featuring a
rendering of Lady Liberty from the Statue of Liberty.
That obverse design has never changed.
The design on the reverse of the platinum proof coin
has changed regularly to help increase the
collectability of these numismatic coins and to
reflect the series, or the current series.
So going into Slide Number 6, it's our current series
is the Preamble of the Constitution. It explores the

38
core
concepts
of
American
democracy
by
highlighting the six principles. And I'm not going to
read them off, but there they are right there. And
as you can see, the program comes to a conclusion
in 2014.
So potential new design concepts, which would be
Page Number 7, some of the issues we have, again
current series ends with the 2014 coin, what should
we offer in 2015? And while we're thinking of
maybe a next new series, keeping in the back of our
mind that 2017 marks the 20th anniversary of the
program.
The next slide, which I don't see has a number on
it, is the research chart. And this is where we went
out and presented some proposed design themes to
some of our customers.
As you look over on the left, the design themes we
ponied up were classic eagle designs, classic coin
designs, emblems of freedom, documents of
independence and freedom, and Revolutionary War
sites. We chose three different groups of customers
to run this by.
The first group, 1,500 random customers taken
from our database at random no matter what they
bought. The second group is platinum purchasers,
1,500 from the past five years. And the third group
was 1,500 of our gold purchasers. And what we did
is we went out, this was a web survey, and we
proposed several questions to them.
If you look at that chart under all customers, classic
eagle designs, we've got a 31 percent and a 50
percent. I'd just like to explain to you what those
numbers mean.
The first question we asked our customers is to rate
each of those five designs on a one to five scale,
where one is extremely unappealing and five is
highly appealing. And the numbers shown there for
this is the percent highly appealing which is the
percent rating of each theme that had a four or a

39
five.
So as you can see, the classic eagle design, all
customers rated at 50 percent as being highly
appealing. The platinum customers, next group
over, came in 60 percent, and past year gold
purchasers were 57.
And then the second question which is the dark
blue, it's 31 percent under all customers and the
classic eagle designs, the respondents are asked
which of the five themes are most appealing to
them and they were forced to only choose one.
So all customers, 31 percent of all customers chose
classic eagle designs as their top choice. Past fiveyear purchasers it was 34 percent, and past year
gold purchasers was 34 percent.
So I think as we can see from this chart, the first
two proposed themes, classic eagle design and
classic coin design are really popular with our
customers. We also got some other feedback from
the customers, and for suggestions for some other
themes. We've put them down below there just
anecdotally to see what other customers were
saying. American wildlife or space program, Civil
War, famous American landmarks, et cetera. Is
there any question on this slide before we move on?
Chair Marks: This is Gary Marks. Well, first, I have
plenty to say about this, but just on a technical
basis why did you do in the past year gold
purchasers when we're talking about platinum?
Mr. Hafner: I'd have to get the design research
group in here. But they just wanted a mix of
various segments of our customers to see who
would be interested in what.
Hopefully a gold purchaser who has not been buying
platinum, maybe it's because they didn't think the
design series was palatable, but they do seem to
like these. So we just wanted their feedback where
they might switch over.

40
Mr. Szczerban: This is Jack Szczerban. The overall
universe of platinum purchasers is understandably
fairly low, so without that, gold purchasers, we
would not have a -(Simultaneous speaking.)
Mr. Szczerban:
Gold purchasers, the pricing is
about the same as platinum so we thought they had
a good propensity to switch over to platinum if they
liked the design.
Member Jansen: This is Erik. So in each of the
three categories, all customers, platinum and gold,
how many solicitations were made in each of the
three categories and how many responses did you
get as a percentage of or whatever? In other
words, how big is the true response rate in these
three categories?
Mr. Hafner: They went out to 1,500 customers. It
was a random web survey. I'm not sure how many
of those 1,500 replied or does this represent 1,500
responses. I'll have to confirm that.
Member Jansen: Is it 1,500 in the all customers or
1,500 kind of in all three? Because I'm trying to
understand, because my own experience on these
things although web responses are certainly higher
than direct mail responses, but those typically are
single-digit percentage responders because out of
1,500 turnaround docs in the mail you get 30 back.
Mr. Szczerban: No, we can certainly find out. And
we don't have anyone from our research team that
was intimately involved in putting the research
vehicle together, but we could certainly get more
information on how that was conducted for you if
that's -Member Jansen: I only asked because I'm not quite
sure where you're going to go with the conclusions
you draw from this data. But if the goal is to
increase the volume of the platinum bullion series, I
think one has to make sure one stands on a firm

41
foundation before one starts marching off on a
conclusions-driven plan.
Ms. Stafford: I think it would be important for us to
get those numbers. But just having worked with
the research team, I can tell you that the contractor
with whom we work, they do not provide us the
analysis unless they have gotten responses that
they feel are statistically representative and carry
the weight from which decisions can be made.
In fact, in the past we've had to suspend research
or go back out for more research because we didn't
get the responses that would be required in that
vein. So we can confirm that.
Member Jansen: I'd sure love to see those numbers
because I don't know where you're going to go with
this.
But I think it's important to understand
whether we have compelling or less than compelling
kind of feedback here.
Mr. Szczerban: This is Jack again. It's certainly
consistent with what we've heard from our
customers over the past many, many years when
talking about what types of designs would
customers like to see on coins.
And bringing back all the classic designs from
American coinage history has always been, you
know, top of the list, and which is why the American
buffalo bullion and proof coin program, you know,
has been so successful. And certainly in American
eagle silver and American eagle gold it features a
modified version of the same kind and $20 gold
piece has been very successful.
So I think this is sort of consistent with what we've
heard from customers. As you notice on that chart,
classic coin designs came in a very close second to
the classic eagle designs.
Those are almost
interchangeable. And so key from our proposed
strategic direction since this is American eagle
program we're pursuing, you know, designs that
would feature eagles on the back of them.

42
Member Jansen: And not to belabor the statistical
research here, but I know there is one important
attribute of the effort of the Mint and that is to
expand the customer base, which at its first order of
magnitude other than buying power that typically
older versus younger collectors might have. Age is
already centered in the question, how do we engage
the coming generation, generations with equal
gusto as historical ones have done?
And it would be curious to cut this data by age as
well, because the age might also impact their
perception, value, or part of their awareness of
what classic means.
Chair Marks: Thank you Erik. This is Gary. I guess
I've got a couple of questions about this survey.
And my questions probably have more to do with
questions that weren't asked in the survey.
It
seems, Greg, from your Slide Number 5 that it's
just simply saying that the Statue of Liberty, Lady
Liberty continues on as in obverse image, is that
correct? And why wouldn't we want to consider a
renewing of the obverse at the same time?
Member Jansen: Very good question.
Mr. Hafner: Hey Jack, can you take that?
Mr. Szczerban: Well, certainly the obverse and the
reverse, the bullion coin you want it to remain the
same because that's really the nature of a bullion
coin, is you really don't want to be changing designs
and trying to turn a bullion coin into a collectable
coin.
I mean some Mints, like the Perth Mint that may be,
you know, fourth tier in terms of market share may
seek to do that to try and gain market share. But
your primary brands like Canada and the U.S.
always, and krugerand for that matter, always
maintain the same design for obverse and reverse
on bullion coins going forward.

43
Proofed coins, certainly we have a lot more
flexibility in that regard. And as I recall from our
last meeting on this, this was something that came
up, we certainly have the flexibility to change both
obverse and reverse, and what you'll see in the next
couple of slides when we start talking about what
we are exploring, doing for the 20th anniversary,
that for 2017 we are actually proposing a design
change for both obverse and reverse.
I think our general feeling has been to maintain
some sort of consistency with the program by
keeping the Lady Liberty obverse the same and
then just focusing on, you know, a compelling
design change on the reverse just so we have some
sort of consistency to the branding of the coin.
But certainly, you know, design change to obverse
and reverse, nothing legislatively prevents us from
doing that and we could certainly do that going
forward.
Chair Marks: Okay. Well, I just heard all the
assumptions about the obverse that you make
internally. My question is, if you're want to know
what your customers think why wouldn't you ask
them about the obverse too?
I get all the sales thing, but as design experts that's
not our concern. We're collectors, we're folks that
really get into the designs. Why wouldn't you ask
your customers about the obverse?
Mr. Szczerban: Well, I think the only reason we
didn't is because heretofore the only thing that's
changed in the proof, the numismatic version of the
platinum coin, has been the reverse. So we just
focused on, well, what would you like to see on the
reverse? We just assumed that the obverse would
remain the same. Changing the obverse was not
really something we really looked at.
Chair Marks: Okay. Well, I would suggest in the
future that when we go out to ask our customers
about the designs maybe we consider some of our

44
assumptions that we've always made. The way
we've always done it is not necessarily the way we
always should do it. And we don't know what the
customers think about the obverse, and I guess
that's my point on that.
And as far as questions not asked, I guess I have
some on the reverse too. And that is, here again
I'm disappointed that we seem to be going back in
time. We all use classic designs again and again,
celebrate past glories. So we ask about classic
eagle designs, we ask about classic coin designs.
We did a report back in 2011, our coin for
excellence in design at the United States Mint. And
at that time we acknowledged all those past
successes, the past glories from the great
renaissance in coin design at the beginning of the
20th century. Those are all good things.
We went back in 2009 and we redid the SaintGaudens, the gold bullion coin. We've done the
buffalo nickel on bullion.
We've done it on a
commemorative silver dollar.
There comes a point I would suggest that we have
great artists who have inspirations to provide to us,
and as a 30-year collector, 30-plus year collector, I
would love to see modern interpretations of Liberty,
modern interpretations of the American eagle,
modern
interpretations
of
things
American,
whatever they might be.
So I'm saying I'm disappointed that you didn't have
a question on here about new modern designs,
modern eagle interpretations. I hate to see us
going back, bypassing our artists and going back to
what artists who are long dead and gone
accomplished. I just think it gets tired, it gets stale.
And I'm sorry to be so forceful about this, but I
think this is the wrong theme direction for our
committee to be agreeing with. So I have no idea
what the rest of the committee thinks about what I
just put on the table here, but I really think that this
direction is wrong-headed.

45
Member Jansen: I would concur with what Gary
just said -- this is Erik -- in its entirety. And that is,
this committee has put forth the thought of raising
the bar on artistic, creative, topical content,
expanding the degrees of freedom for new ideas,
and I think our retreating to the older designs, quite
frankly, devalues the very features that socially we
seem to be promoting called innovation and
creativity. And I think moving bullion for fear of
something better to the past is quite honestly
devaluing it.
Mr. Szczerban: This is Jack again. Let me just
remind you that over the past few years we have,
you
know,
used
allegorical,
if
you
will,
representations of design. We have tried going that
route.
And I'm not saying those designs have not been
popular and that's why our sales have been
declining, I think our declining sales are undeniably
more a function of the price of platinum.
But I think in an effort to try and turn our sales
around, I think that was part of the thought process
was, well, we've sort of gone the allegorical modern
design. They're certainly beautiful designs, but our
sales still seem to be stagnating.
Maybe we should go back to some of these classic
designs and see if that's something that would jump
start sales. I think that was the general thought.
Because if you look at some of the designs that
represent the Preamble series, I mean certainly,
you know, they're allegorical, and I know what
you're saying.
I mean there was a talk about a second
renaissance, a second golden era, if you will, of
modern coin design. And if I hear you, what you're
saying is, well, what happened to that effort? It
seems like you started with Saint-Gaudens and
Roosevelt with that effort and now that's kind of
where we want to be now, but you seem to be
harking back to old designs again, and that's a valid

46
point.
But I think again it was just for us to try and do
something with the high price of platinum that
would appeal to the customers, and what we've
heard is these classic coin designs seem to be
popular with them.
So that was really the
motivation for us.
Member Olson: This is Mike Olson. I agree with
pretty much everything that Gary has said. I think
part of the reason that you're not selling these coins
is certainly the price, but I don't believe you're
offering them as fractional options either which
would make these designs more accessible to a
wider volume. And going backwards and rehashing
150, 175 year old designs is not the way, in my
opinion, to go.
I also share Gary's sentiments about the obverse,
which at this point really should be up for
discussion. Not that there's anything wrong with
the obverse design, but if you're trying to shake
things up all options should be on the table.
And to consider that obverse design, which I would
consider to be somewhat modern, and placing the
reverse of a Morgan dollar on the back or even a
Gobrecht silver dollar reverse, that is a disjointed
coin that makes no sense. And it would certainly
not be appealing to a collector.
I think you need to take a look at all options and
come up with something new. I see on here, just a
matter of personal preference, down in these
comments below it appears you've got several folks
that mentioned the space program.
I believe
there's only been a couple of coins produced that
even allude to that great achievement, which in a
large part is solely an American achievement as far
as landing astronauts on the moon and what has
happened since.
That is something that I think should be considered
but to not to lose focus on that one subject getting

47
back to the fact that we need some fresh designs
and fresh thought. That's all.
Member Jansen: This is Erik again. And I would
like to second Mike Olson's comments on the
fractional issue. If the price of the underlying rare
metal is cited as an issue, then I guess I find it
surprising that the simple question was not asked,
would demand rise, would you purchase Mr. or Mrs.
Customer, the half, the quarter, the tenth?
And I've actually had discussions with three
producers internationally of bullion who all believe
there's an opportunity for a 1/20th ounce. They of
course denominate it in grams.
But the point being the demand for fractional
bullion, whereas it might not consume ounces as
rapidly, it certainly builds franchise more durably,
and franchise being denominated as the confidence
in the sovereign assay as well as the premium, the
spot that they trade in the aftermarket, which I
think are both positives that this country's bullion
coinage would want to attract.
But I think Mike Olson has hit the business dynamic
square on the head saying bring back 2008, bring
back fractional.
Chair Marks: This is Gary. Let me get to you,
Michael, in just a second. I just wanted to very
quickly state that the platinum series from the point
of view of creative successes is one of the best
things the U.S. Mint has going for it. If you look at
just the last, well, this Preamble program, I think
some of the best work that the Mint has done, and
there have been other examples, and clearly the
9/11 medals, the Star Spangled Banner dollar coin,
the Girl Scouts, there have been several successes
that the Mint has been putting together.
If you look at the platinum program, there's the
2009 More Perfect Union, a beautiful design. The
2011 Ensure Domestic Tranquility, beautiful design.
The 2013, which is out right now, promoting the

48
general welfare.
Those are modern, beautiful successes.
I sure
would be very saddened to see us pitch in the towel
now and say, well, let's go and let's do a sure thing
for sales, at least we think that's a sure thing, and
revert back to the early 20th century, or before that
even.
If we're talking about classics, well, gosh, that takes
us back to maybe the later part of the 18th century
when we started making coins and the entire 19th
century.
Those are they're ancient.
They're
beautiful, yes, but they're ancient.
And all the rest of our collectors have examples of
those in our collections now. I'll just renew my call
that we need to unleash our artists, give them the
opportunities in this modern day and age to give us
renderings that can also be those future successes
that you've already seen in the last few years.
It's time to continue this process. It's time to
continue to promote creativity in a modern sense.
So I would just beg of the Mint not to revert to the
old. It's time for new.
So Michael Moran?
Member Moran: Okay. A few thoughts here. First
of all, we seem to be headed toward a redo of the
Saint-Gaudens double eagle in 2017.
As the
number one fan of Saint-Gaudens on the committee
as well as an expert of Saint-Gaudens, I'm going to
say please don't. You can't get it done on the
smaller tondo and you won't get the reverse, the
relief from the reverse that you really need to do
tests to the design.
Now I get back to the nuts and bolts of this thing. I
agree that we need to go with the smaller fractions
if we're going to make this a universally desired coin
within the collecting community. The problem we
have of here of practicality, and Don Everhart, I'm
sure, will second this, is whatever design we put on

49
the one-ounce platinum coin has to be scalable or
we'll have a disaster on a much smaller coin.
We certainly have had that with the gold bullion
coins. When the Saint-Gaudens original design was
intended it was going to be on the eagle, half eagle
and quarter eagle. They actually did. They halfeagled before they went with the design. It was a
disaster.
So if you're going to go to the smaller coins, smaller
units I should say, the bullion coin, you're going to
have to go with a smaller design or a simpler design
on a smaller tondo because your larger design will
not be scaled.
Now then, in terms of where we go with this thing, I
think back over the two, almost two and a half
years I've been on the committee, and I can
remember, well, not specifically, at least two or
maybe three eagle designs that the committee just
oohed and aahed over but didn't choose because of
one or another various reasons.
They were
inappropriate to the particular design theme.
They're there in the minutes.
And as a result, I'm going to basically come around
and say the same thing that Gary and Erik have
said. There are designs out there, and if you want
to stick with a classic eagle then, but don't make it
a classic eagle from an old coin. That just, it isn't
going to get it done.
And I really think it sells both our in-house
engravers as well as our AIP people short by not
giving them an opportunity to come with the
designs for the reverse. I really think that we need
to go back. I think we oversimplified the study.
I don't know. There are funds to go back in and
redo it, but I think that we really need to take a
look at themes that are being put forth to the
collecting community as to what possibly can be
done. And I think we oversimplified with them and
I think that we got a simple result.

50
Having said all that I'll shoot myself in the foot. If
you're going to insist on doing old coins and old
themes, which I hope you don't, then you need to
do one consistent theme across all and that would
be celebrate the reverses of the silver dollar. That
way you're not jumping from theme to theme as
well as from a small tondo to a large tondo.
But I'll say that only because you insist on pressing
forward. I really think you need to go back to the
drawing boards on this one and give it fresh thought
and include your AIP people and your engravers.
Chair Marks: Other committee members?
Did I hear you Tom?

Tom?

Member Uram: Yes, I just wanted to mention also,
as far as themes go and so forth as we're going out
forward on this, is that next year will be the 150th
anniversary of our nation's motto.
And it would be nice to see, particularly if we're
doing something as it relates to the platinum
theme, you know, that was obviously done in 1864
and then in 1959, made it official for everything.
But I think celebrating our national motto might be
an idea for the 150th year next year.
Member Moran: Tom, that would blow up in our
face. It really would.
Member Uram:
It's not expressing
God or
anything, it's just, get it as a motto, and I'm just
throwing it out there.
Member Moran: I know where you're coming from
and I appreciate it. By the way this is Mike Moran.
But there are enough people out there that it would
have an element of controversy associated with it.
And I think that's the last thing the platinum
program needs.
Chair Marks: Tom, you got anything else that you
want to bring up?

51
Member Uram: No, I think I did enough.
Chair Marks: All right. Is there another member -Member Moran: Send me an email, Tom.
Member Uram: No problem, Mike.
Chair Marks: Other members?
Member Wastweet: Heidi.
Chair Marks: Yes, Heidi, go ahead.
Member Wastweet: Thank you. I pretty much
agree with everything that's been said so far. I do
like that factual idea along with the comment about
the NASA idea. I think that sounds like a great
commemorative program, not necessarily a bullion
program. I mean, you certainly want to 3:08:40
away from any bubble type of design. So it's not
seen by any 3:08:49. And we've been pushing all
through our committee for more modern designs
and we've been getting some achievement on that
and we have a lot of opportunities for modern
designs.
I think that we could possibly do an historic series
but let's not rehash what's already been there.
There are archives within the Mint, are some
wonderful designs in the past by our celebrated
engravers that were never used. And I think if the
collectors had an opportunity to see those that
would be of more interest than the classic designs
that have already been released and are well
known.
So let's dig through the archives and find maybe
there's some treasures in there of historic value that
could be brought to life. And I think the collectors
might have much more interest in that.
And even though I love the modern designs we
don't have to have everything modern. We can
balance that out with the historical images. And if
we do so, if we're basing these designs on historic

52
lines, then let's also highlight the sculptors that are
doing the interpreting of these old designs. And let's
put a spotlight on the talent that we have. Talk
about the original historical designers, what they've
done and how the new designers are interpreting
that. Let's make that a full focus and highlight what
we have -- make them the rock stars -Ultimately we could, instead of going back to the
past, take this -- like the eagle idea. Let's do a
series
with
modern
eagles
and
not
just
contemporary, but let's really push the designers to
get very, very creative and very modern with the
eagle.
Mr. Szczerban: This is Jack again. Is it appropriate
to potentially abandon this need to come up with a
theme like we've been doing these multi-year series
with themes, and it's best to just go to the AIP
artists and the engravers and say, you know, the
platinum coin is the pinnacle of what the U.S. Mint
has to offer.
We want you to just, you know, give us a design
that's befitting this magnificent coin, you know, pull
out all the stops. And we're not telling you what the
theme should be, but obviously the theme of the
coin is the American eagle, and just give them more
free rein versus trying to tell them, look, this is a
multi-year series of the symbols of American
democracy. Leave it a little bit more wide open. Is
that something that's appropriate?
Member Wastweet: Absolutely. And having the
eagle as a theme is part of the theme, but artists
don't need to be directed any more than that. And
if you are so bold as to open it up to be completely
open, then the theme only becomes a marketing
issue.
The artist would be delighted to be
completely set free.
Member Jansen: This is Erik again. And I think
Heidi's words need to be really carried with the
weight that her experience brings forth here. She's
been involved with the bullion producers, that is,

53
other than the U.S. Mint much of her career. And
when she makes the comment that it's a marketing
issue, boy, is that, you know, I think you're hearing
the words of an expert from a marketing
perspective, not just an artist in that regard.
If Dick were in this room I would advance the
question to him saying, Dick, tell us what your goals
are here as the director. Are you trying to produce
more revenue from the West Point secure facility?
Are you trying to further the market share of the
U.S. sovereign bullion for political or other reasons?
What is your goal? Because those goals speak to
very different pursuits here.
If the goals are to pursue volume and that is, a
standard, kind of commercial production efficiency
out of the existing West Point facility which has
notably doubled, tripled, quadrupled or maybe more
if you had valued throughput, then the answer is
minority coins.
If the answer is no, we want to ship as much
bullion, as many ounces as possible, you know then
the answer is multiple designs and indicate a year,
so that those that are buying are buying more
because they don't dare not miss the more than
face value rarity design of that given year.
So I think where we're kind of treating it as a onedimensional consumer preference question and plan
here, I really think it begs the bigger question of
what is the goal.
Chair Marks: Okay, thank you, Erik. Are there
other members who want to make some comments?
Member Olson: Yes, this is Mike Olson. Erik made
some very intelligent comments there, I want to
just expand on them slightly. You've got to take a
look at what is the total market for these coins.
Who's buying them? Is it the bullion investor or is
the coin collector?

54
And that's something that really needs to be
analyzed, because especially if fractional is not in
the equation, those folks are some pretty high end
collectors if they're just buying the bullion. So
maybe there's a certain element of people that are
buying these coins that could care less what the
design is, and there's another element that does
care or cares slightly, and that factors into the
purchase decision.
But I think some analysis needs to go into that
question if it's not already been done.
Mr. Szczerban: This is Jack again. Keep in mind
that the bullion coins as has been discussed earlier
is being reintroduced in 2014. So we will have two
platinum products. One geared, targeted toward
the investor of the bullion product and one for the
collector with the proof.
Now because of the relatively low mintage numbers
of the proof, I would imagine there are some folks
that are buying the proof even before -- the
numbers getting lower and lower.
And I think that's been the problem with the
fractional, the whole fractional market on this. We
look at our sales of the gold bullion, gold proof
rather, and sales of the fractional coins have been
fairly small.
And I think that was the concern is, well, if you're
only selling a few thousand coins per year of the
quarter or half-ounce size coins, is that worth
doing? You know, if you can't sell at least 100,000
units, let's say, of a quarter or half-ounce is it worth
reintroducing?
So I know that's something that's stayed on the
Mint, the history of the fractional, and certainly with
the platinum fractionals, those sales numbers got
very low.
Member Jansen: This is Erik. On the fractional
question, I think the issue there is the pricing.

55
Because your fractional buyer is your more spot
price oriented buyer. And when we add markups
that the Mint characteristically does, I think you just
steer the fractional buyer to your bullion or your
producer who's producing it spot-plus for all their
fractional buys.
Chair Marks: Folks, this is Gary. I think we've had
some good discussion here about sales aspects of
this program. I'm going to remind us all that our
charge as a committee is to talk about designs and
the item on our agenda is about the themes.
And I note that the two go hand in hand, I get that.
But in the interest of bringing our meeting to a
close, I want to ask those members who have not
had a chance yet to speak if they might want to
contribute something to this discussion on design
themes. Bob, are you out there?
Member Hoge: I'm here, yes.
Chair Marks: Any comment you might have?
Member Hoge: No, I'm just pondering this. And it's
kind of difficult to make a decision, if that's what's
called for, between the kinds of modern designs
that we as a committee have tried to do, to call for
and to hope to see in various Mint productions, and
to weigh that against the classic designs which we
know are popular with many collectors that we have
in terms of preferences in the study.
I kind of like the idea, frankly, of seeing the old
designs coming back because they hearken back to
our heritage in numismatics. On the other hand it's
nice to think in terms of new, fresh ideas and the
potentiality of people getting some new doses of
numismatics, a new feel for it today.
I think a number of countries have been successful
trying to incorporate older designs into coinages,
you know, with some of the issues of Israel, for
instance, or Greece or Italy, and they've taken very
historical pieces and managed to incorporate them

56
into their coinages.
I think the Chinese have been pretty successful in
developing many multiple bullion designs, their
bullion proof issues. And they tend to be somewhat
traditional.
The period they represent with the
Chinese art. Let's think of the panel series, for
instance.
So I don't know. I have mixed feelings about these
things. I don't know whether it's our position to
make a determination on which way we think the
Mint should go or not.
On the other hand, while I appreciate the thinking
that Erik has demonstrated, I also have a problem
with this idea of the Mint making multiple designs at
any one time simply to try to milk collectors.
Because that's sometimes what it amounts to, it
seems to me, and it makes a bad impression with
many collectors.
Oh, the Mint is just trying to make its profit off the
desires of their loyal constituency to try to purchase
all the different items that keep coming out. And I
think that this can be sometimes a problem. The
idea of a bullion coin that is issued without a lot of
changes is very traditional too. You think back to
great classical coins of the past. They were very
popular in circulation for bullion content in multiple
circulating regions, but they didn't change their
designs, which was part of their success. So there
are many things to consider in this and I don't have
all the answers.
Chair Marks:
Thank you, Bob.
I might just
mention, as I'm listening on the phone here, is
someone, it sounds like they're moving out of
wherever they are. There's been quite a ruckus on
the phone. So I just ask if we could maybe not do
that. That would be really helpful to listening to
each person here.
We still haven't heard from Michael Bugeja. Are you
still on Michael?

57
Mr. Weinman: This is Greg Weinman.
that he had to get off.
Chair Marks:
line?

He texted

Okay, Michael Ross, are you on the

Member Ross: I am. I'm not sure if I have a strong
opinion on this subject.
And I heard some
discussion of possible themes, but I didn't know that
we were going to be asked that and that's
something I'd like to give a lot of thought to.
Chair Marks: All right, thank you. Jeanne?
Member Stevens-Sollman: Yes.
Chair Marks: Jeanne, can you talk about some
thoughts here?
Member Stevens-Sollman: You know, I agree with
what everyone is saying. However, I do agree with
you Gary when you say that our charge is to discuss
designs, and I just don't feel that this conversation
has really given us as a committee a time to talk
about designs.
I would like to see us as a Mint to go forward in just
a little more contemporary work in terms of, let's
present it out there in the world to see what we're
up against.
And our Mint, in my opinion we are not on the
cutting edge of what's going on, and by repeating
old classic designs which are beautiful, they are
beautiful, that doesn't mean we can't make new
beautiful designs.
And I feel like by repeating things we're sort of just
beating ourselves back into this hole and we're not
moving forward. I think we need to go forward and
present some great stuff to collectors, to investors.
And if it's good it will move. What we're doing is
not giving them good, really great stuff. If we did
something beautiful, beautiful will go someplace.
And repeating beauty, as Michael Olson says, he

58
already has, he has these coins in his collection.
We do need to go forward, and I feel we're on the
edge there. We've done a few beautiful things.
You know, the Girl Scout coins, I think we had an
opportunity to do something terrific today with the
rebirth of our code talker coin but, you know,
people are just so hesitant to do that. You know
what, we just have to jump off the board and go
swimming and get something better.
Chair Marks: Thank you Jeanne.
Mr. Weinman: Gary, this is Greg Weinman. I just
want to clarify. For everybody, the question that
seems to come up, yes, this is really the CCAC's
charge, that your charge is to advise on themes and
designs.
And, in fact, obviously this program
predates the CCAC so the earlier programs would
have been done without the benefit of the CCAC's
advice.
But historically, when the CCAC came into existence
in 2003, one of the very first agenda items was
talking about platinum themes and, in fact, the
CCAC specifically advised on some of the most
recent programs. So that is why we're bringing it
before you right now.
Chair Marks:
Yes, it's very much been in our
charge, and thank you, Greg, for clarifying that.
So we are approaching our scheduled conclusion of
our meeting so I'd like to keep as close to that as
possible. So I just want to make sure that everyone
feels like each member has said what they wanted
to say, and as soon as we can verify that then we're
going to conclude the meeting.
It's my opinion at this point that there's probably
not one single motion that would be of benefit to
the Mint here. I think the collective message that
we've all imparted by voice is our direction, and if
you think I'm wrong let me know.

59
But I want to give folks a quick chance here and if
you want to say something please keep it brief.
Just a quick chance to include our thoughts here.
So anybody who would like to do that.
Member Stevens-Sollman: Could we come back
and revisit this in another meeting?
Chair Marks: Well, I think that's on our schedule
sheet for the minutes of the -- 2014 is still part of
the existing Preamble Program. How much time,
folks, do you need?
Ms. Stafford:
I think we'd have to take that
conversation off line and maybe get back to the
committee on that the next time we meet, if that's
okay.
Chair Marks: That would be great. That would be
great. Anyone else? Okay, well, I'm going to add
this in case we don't come back. In case we don't
come back to this discussion, and I kind of hope we
do, but in case we don't, I would just quickly say
that my message is let's do something modern, let's
do something new. If though in the event that the
Mint decides that's not what they can do, that they
need something more reliable for sales, then I'm
going to say please don't do the classic designs
from the pourings of the past.
Follow Heidi's direction where we go into the
archives and we find those outstanding designs that
didn't get any play time, if you will. There are some
great ones out there that dazzle the collectors.
But here again, I only say that because, you know,
in the event that the Mint decides they're not going
to go modern, which I think is the way to go, I think
that that would be a better direction to try to seek
out some things that have not really been produced
by the Mint yet, aren't well known designs. So does
anyone else want to add anything?
Member Hoge: This is Robert again. I would like to
advocate to what you say, Gary. There are a lot of

60
very important past designs that we might wish to
consider.
This is something that the American
Numismatic Society has recognized and we're trying
to apply some original artist model, the
unsuccessful aspirants to U.S. coin design. Now I'm
not saying that these are better than anything we
can come up with today, but they might well be
intriguing or interesting and perhaps worth
investigating.
Chair Marks: Right. Okay. Thank you, Bob.
Member Wastweet: I have one more quick note to
add. If we do go back and do historic designs let's
be sure that they're authentic and that we are using
the original sculpt, not just the design. Well, I don't
want to see replicas sculpted of classic coins. Keep
the original artist's look. That's it.
Adjourn
Chair Marks: Thank you Heidi. This is your last
chance, anyone? Okay, hearing none, it is now
1:28 and we are two minutes ahead of our
scheduled agenda time and there being no further
business our meeting is adjourned.
Thank you
everyone.
(Whereupon, the meeting in the above-entitled
matter was adjourned at 3:28 p.m.)