Full text of Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee Meetings, Recommendations, and Minutes : Meeting, September 21, 2012 : 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,
September 21, 2012
The Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee met on
the Second Floor at 801 9th Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., at 10:00 a.m., Gary Marks,
Chair, presiding.
CCAC Members Present:
Gary Marks, Chair
Robert Hoge
Erik Jansen
Michael A. Ross
Donald Scarinci
Jeanne Stevens-Sollman
Thomas Uram
Heidi Wastweet
United States Mint Staff Present:
Don Everhart, Sculptor-Engraver*
Ron Harrigal, Acting Chief Engraver
Greg Weinman
*Participating via teleconference

2
Contents
Welcome and Call to Order by Gary Marks

3

Introduction of New Member Thomas J. Uram

3

Discussion of Letter and Minutes from Previous
Meeting Gary Marks

4

Review and Discuss Candidate Designs for the
Reverse of the 2013 Native American $1 Coin Ron
Harrigal and Don Everhart
5
Review and Discuss Proposed Theme for the
Reverse of the 2014 and 2015 Native American
Coins Ron Harrigal

35

Review and Discuss Candidate Designs for the Code
Talkers Congressional Gold Medals Ron Harrigal and
Don Everhart
48
Discussion and Approval of the 2011 CCAC Annual
Report
65
Wrap Up

79

Adjourn

80

3
Proceedings
(10:02 a.m.)
Welcome and Call to Order by Gary Marks
Chair Marks: Calling this Friday, September 21,
2012 meeting of the Citizens Coinage Advisory
Committee to order. Good morning, everyone. We
thank you all for being here this morning for our
meeting. We have some interesting programs to
review today.
Introduction of New Member Thomas J. Uram
But first of all, I want to introduce our new member,
Tom Uram. Tom and I have spoken on the phone a
few times and spent some of last evening together.
And I know that Tom is going to be a phenomenal
addition to our committee. I am looking forward to
his participation. And rather than trying to convey
his background and his numismatic history myself, I
am going to ask Tom if he would just give us a brief
introduction to who he is.
So with that, Tom.
Mr. Uram:
Thanks, Gary.
And thanks to the
committee.
I look forward to being an active
participant and in sharing in the knowledge of
numismatics.
A little bit of background. I am married. My wife's
name is Lynn. I graduated from the University of
Kentucky. I always say a small basketball school,
University of Kentucky, in 1982. My degree was in
financial -- finance and business. I have been a
member of the financial services industry for 30
years.
Numismatically, I joined the ANA in 1974 as a life
member and been exhibiting and so forth. I am
active in many clubs and currently I am President of
the Pennsylvania Association of Numismatics.
And I just also learned that Jeanne also shares in

4
another hobby that I have by default with my wife
and that is doing agility and showing of dogs. We
have, as far as children go, I have eight four-legged
children. And she is very active in that interest of
hers.
So once again, thank you for that and I look forward
to being a participant.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Tom.
Discussion of Letter and Minutes from Previous
Meeting Gary Marks
The next item on the agenda is the discussion of our
letter and minutes from the previous meeting,
which was the Tuesday, June 26, 2012 meeting.
Those materials were provided in the packet to all
the committee members.
Do we have any comments or discussion about
those documents before I move to a motion?
Okay, hearing none, may I have a motion to
approve both the minutes and the letter to the
Secretary?
Mr. Jansen: Motion to approve the minutes and the
letter to the Secretary.
Chair Marks:
second?

It has been moved.

Do I have a

Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Second.
Chair Marks: Jeanne seconded it. Any discussion?
(No audible response.)
Chair Marks: All those in favor, please say aye.
(Chorus of aye.)
Chair Marks: Opposed?
(No audible response.)

5
Chair Marks: The motion to carry is unanimous.
Review and Discuss Candidate Designs for the
Reverse of the 2013 Native American $1 Coin Ron
Harrigal and Don Everhart
That takes us very quickly down to our first program
for the day and that is the reverse of the 2013
Native American one dollar coin. Ron Harrigal is
here to give us a report on the designs that we will
be looking at today. Ron.
Mr. Harrigal: Okay, thank you, Gary. I do want to
make a note Don Everhart is participating by video
conference and he is on the screen up there and is
available to answer any questions related to design
and/or coinability.
Public Law 110-82 requires the Secretary of the
Treasury to mint and issue one dollar coins in honor
of Native Americans and the important contributions
made by Indian tribes and individual Native
Americans to the development and history of the
United States.
The Act mandates a reverse design for these coins
with an image emblematic of one important Native
American or a Native American contribution each
year in chronological order.
The design series thus far was in 2009 agriculture,
the spread of "Three Sisters" circa 1000 A.D. And if
I could pause for a second. Don, can you put it on
mute up there?
We are hearing some paper
shuffling and that.
Mr. Everhart: Okay, I'm sorry.
Mr. Harrigal: And then we will get you online when
questions come up. Thank you.
2010 "Government -- The Great Law of Peace,"
early 1400s. 2011, diplomacy, treaties with tribal
meetings, the "Massasoit of the Great Wampanoag
Nation Creates Alliance with settlers at Plymouth

6
Bay (1621)."
In 2012 we had trade and economy, the "Trade
Routes in 17th Century."
And for 2013, the designs were created with the
concept the Delawares Treaty 1778.
Just a design note on the drawings. The artists
were given broad instructions to interpret treaties
as they wanted to in an artistic fashion. The actual
treaty was a folded document and not a scroll type,
however, it is depicted all different ways just to
convey the signing of the treaty.
And we also have had the National Museum of the
American Indian that had been consulting on this.
And we have Jim Adams here to answer any
questions related to any of the issues that might
come up on the subject matter.
Inscriptions, the obverse continues to bear
Sacagawea, with the inscriptions, "LIBERTY," "IN
GOD WE TRUST. " Required reverse inscriptions are
"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" and "$1."
And
actually it is the dollar sign with the one, as
specified in law. And the edge-incused inscriptions
are "E PLURIBUS UNUM" and "2012."
Other inscriptions in 2013 on this design is "TREATY
WITH THE DELAWARES 1778."
Okay and of course here is the picture of the
obverse, the Sacagawea obverse.
So for the reverse candidates. Designs one and two
are similar. They represent the artist's symbolic
view of the signing of the treaty. So we have two
versions here.
Design number three illustrates the spirit of the
Delaware Treaty of 1778. The artist's intent is to
symbolically portray each nation signing its newly
formed alliance. It features a wax seal and design
patterns from a wampum belt and the flag.

7
Designs four and five we have here feature a treaty
with a quill pen, two versions here. Design number
six here shows the historically representation of the
signature of Chief White Eyes. The border designs
on all three of these are inspired by wampum belts.
Design number seven depicts a modern version of
the signing of the treaty. It features a quill pen and
an eagle feather with parchment paper in the
background.
Design number eight depicts an inkwell, quill pens,
a treaty and a turtle. The turtle is one of several
clans within the Delaware Tribe. The pattern of the
Delawares was the artist's inspiration for the
background.
Design number nine depicts the abstract cloth
pattern seen on Delaware Tribe's bandolier bags.
The artist believes that the intertwined pattern can
symbolically suggest forward movement after the
Delaware Treaty of 1778.
And this was the
preference by the CFA yesterday.
Design number ten features a turkey, a howling
wolf, and a turtle. They are all symbols of clans of
the Delaware Tribe. A ring of 13 stars to represent
the colonies.
Designs 11, 12, and 13 here are versions with the
turtle. This is a turtle totem which is the Delaware
Tribe's oldest clan. Here is 12, a more realistic view
of the turtle, and 13. Again, the elements around
the turtle there are inspired by wampum belts.
So here we have 13 designs for consideration and I
would like to turn it over to you, Gary for any
comments.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Ron. Before we move
towards the segment where the members would
give their own individual analysis, I wanted to ask
members if you have any technical questions about
the designs, not to express your opinions at this
point, but any technical questions or informational

8
questions that you might have, I want to make sure
we have those addressed to the best of our ability
from the staff. So do we have any questions?
Erik.
Mr. Jansen: I see more designs using encuse and
some of the features we have been kind of
experimenting with and I'm glad to see it. Thank
you.
Chair Marks: Any questions?
Ms. Wastweet: Actually, I do. On number nine,
what is intent to be raised and which is encused?
Are the black leaves encused?
Mr. Harrigal: Definitely the black leaves are but I
will let Don talk to the design if he has any
interpretation.
Mr. Everhart: Yes, Heidi, the black would indicate
that that pattern itself is encused. The rest would
all be raised.
Ms. Wastweet:
So the black leaves would be
encused to the field level and would they be
polished?
Mr. Everhart: Correct.
Ms. Wastweet:
version?

Would they be polished in a proof

Mr. Everhart: Yes.
Ms. Wastweet: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Everhart: Yes.
Chair Marks: Any other questions?
Mr. Jansen:
To that same design, the same
question. There are two belts here. The bottom
belt has the large features encused. The top belt
has kind of a bold blackness on the edges of the
features of that belt, the leaves and so forth. Is

9
that encuse or just kind of a rendering trick the
artist used?
Mr. Everhart: Erik, that is just to indicate relief.
Mr. Jansen: Okay, so that is just the shoulders of
the positive relief.
Mr. Everhart: Yes, that is like the draft of the relief.
Mr. Jansen: Thank you.
Mr. Everhart: It just indicates that it is higher than
the field.
Mr. Jansen: Right, thank you.
Chair Marks: Any others?
Mr. Harrigal: Gary, I would like to just give Jim
Adams here an opportunity to speak to the
significance of the turtle -Chair Marks: Absolutely.
Mr. Harrigal: -- as the NMAI representative.
Chair Marks: Okay, Mr. Adams.
Mr. Adams: Okay, fine. Thanks for having me here
again.
Chair Marks: Well thank you for being here.
Mr. Adams: I did want to just explain the turtle a
bit because it is not just a clan symbol, although the
Delaware had three clans in the turtle, the Unami
clan is considered the most religiously prominent.
But in North American Indian cosmology, this
continent is called Turtle Island because it rests on
a turtle. And when the name turtle appears or the
symbol turtle appears in Indian usage, as for
instance the chief named Little Turtle, it really has a
broader significance in that you are conducting to
the entire cosmological outlook.
So the rendering of the turtle in the more abstract is

10
actually very similar to a flag of one of the current
Delaware-recognized tribes because of that overall
significance. So we are not just dealing with Animal
Totems here.
We are dealing with kind of a
connection with the cosmology. And I think that is
something that maybe doesn't come across to the
average non-Indian viewer but I think it is very
prominent in Indian talk.
Chair Marks: Okay. That kind of hits on an issue
that I guess maybe we should bring up and that is
that we have a comment from the Congressional
Native American Caucus in the House on this point
of the turtle conveying that the tribes believe that
the designs that display only the turtle are
exclusionary with the other clans.
Mr. Adams: Right.
made that point.

That is one of the reasons I

Chair Marks: Pardon me? I don't know if you have
any additional comment to add to that. When I
read that, that caused me some concern about
those designs that have just the turtle in that.
Mr. Adams: I have heard that complaint or that
point made. And in terms of the designs that are in
front of us, the one that has all three of the clan
symbols, the turtle, wolf, and the turkey, I think has
them out of proportion. It is just that the wolf is
much more prominent in the design and is actually
one of the junior clans in the tribe.
So I am not uncomfortable with having the turtle as
the focus because of the broader significance and
also because one of the main movers for this treaty
and drafter of the treaty was Chief White Eyes, a
very interesting figure, who was a Turtle Clan
member. But I certainly appreciate the point made
by people who are not Turtle Clan members.
Chair Marks: All right. Are there any questions for
Mr. Adams?
Okay, hearing no one else --

11
Mr. Scarinci: What is the significance of the cloth
pattern design and why did we isolate that for
purposes of the coin?
Mr. Adams: The pattern that is on design nine I
think was taken from some materials provided by
the museum to the designers as a typical Delaware
design. And I think it is meant to suggest the
wampum designs that were exchanged at the
treaty, although there were a lot of wampum belts
passed back and forth and they are described
vaguely in the documents but I haven't seen
anything that shows exactly what they were. One
of them shows the rope part of the rhetoric was for
clearing the path between our peoples. A very vivid
image of that in that right now we are tripping over
the bones of the people who have fallen in the
conflict and now we are clearing those away.
But this design does suggest that progression but I
don't think it is correctly from a wampum belt but I
can't say for sure because I don't know what the
wampum belt designs were except that one of them
was a road.
Mr. Scarinci: So it is really just a generic -Mr. Adams: I would say yes.
Mr. Scarinci: -- interpretation?
Mr. Adams: Yes, but from a Delaware bag that the
museum made available that was in our collection.
Mr. Scarinci: Thank you.
Chair Marks:
Why don't we move on to our
individual comments? I want to, for Tom's benefit,
just kind of run quickly through the process at this
point.
Normally when we are presented with a significant
number of designs, we have, for lack of a better
term, a culling process where initially we will do a
quick survey of the committee on each design

12
presented in our package.
And for any design
where there is no indication of interest by any of the
committee members, we will set that design aside
and then we will, in that way, cull down the number
that we want to focus on.
After that, then we will go around the circuit. Each
individual member has an opportunity to provide
their comments or thoughts about any or all of the
designs that were considered. You don't have to
comment on every design. You can if you want to.
But at that point, you would just tell us what you
think about the various designs, what your
preferences are, even items that you find
particularly unattractive.
When we are done with that, there is a scoring
sheet that each member will be asked to fill out.
And in that scoring sheet, each member has as
many as three points to assign to any of the
designs.
You could give three points on every
design or you could give no points to any design.
So it is kind of a test of intensity of support for
individual designs.
We collect those, do the totals. The design that has
the highest point total, provided that it is greater
than 50 percent of the potential score, normally it
would get our recommendation unless there is a
motion to say otherwise. So that is just the quick
run through.
So with that, we have 13 reverse designs today for
this dollar coin. So I am going to start with number
one and just ask for indications from the members
for their support or not.
So for design number one, is there an interest in
considering this design? Hearing none, I will set it
aside.
Number two, any interest? None.
Number three. Interest in number three?
that one aside.

Setting

13
Number four.
one aside.

Interest in number four?

Set that

Five? Moving on to six. Setting that one aside.
Design seven.
(Chorus of yes.)
Chair Marks: I will indicate support to look at this
one.
Eight? Is there interest in eight?
eight? Going, going gone.

Anyone else for

Okay, design number nine?
Mr. Jansen: Yes.
Chair Marks:
ten.

Design ten.

I will make a case for

Design 11? Eleven is in. Twelve? Interest in 12?
Thirteen? Interest in 13?
Mr. Scarinci: Yes, I think you have to.
Chair Marks: Okay. So for the record, continuing
to be considered by the committee are designs
seven, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, and thirteen. All
others have been set aside.
I will ask the committee members in the interest of
time and preserving time that we reserve our
comments only for those that we have just indicated
that we want to go forward with.
So with that, we will get going with our comments
and I am going to recognize Heidi first. And then
what I think WHAT we will do, this is a little
different, I will ask Donald to go next. Then I am
going to circle back to myself. I want to give Tom a
chance to really kind of see what this process is and
we will circle back around to Jeanne and then we
will have Tom, if you don't mind having follow-up.

14
So, Heidi.
Ms. Wastweet: Thank you. I want to talk first
about the intention from the write-up that we see
about the treaty. And this being a Native American
coin, the focus for me is not so much the treaty
itself but what the treaty represents.
And the
overarching theme of this whole series is the Native
American contributions to this country. So let's
keep that in mind.
In our write-up, it said it was the first formal treaty
so that is what makes so unique. And it says here
that it was for the mutual defense. So those are the
two points. It wasn't so much about the treaty itself
but what the treaty represented.
And so of these designs, the one that stands out to
me the most is number seven. And the reason that
this stands out is because I think this design
symbolically really represents what the treaty is
about.
And the treaty was about the Native
Americans and the White men coming together and
finding common ground. And each of the peoples
are using feather in a different way, the feather
being representative of a symbolic pen which the
treaties were signed with and the significance of the
feather within the Native American tribes.
And
these two items are crossed together in finding
mutual ground as the treaty was for mutual
defense. And that started out a very long and
bumpy road of finding common ground between
these two peoples. And so I think the symbology in
this design really hits the nail on the head.
My concern with the design is the parchment paper
in the background with the encused text. I think
that is going to impose a technical striking issue if
we have that parchment in the background raised
enough to encuse the text. I would rather see that
parchment recede back to the field level and have
the text raised. I think it would strike up much
easier in the production line. And I will open that
up to Don, if you have any comments for or against

15
that. Don Everhart.
Mr. Everhart: Yes, I don't know. I think that we
could make it work. The other option would be to
reverse from having the parchment at the top
putting it on the bottom where the letters are more
bold. Perhaps that would solve the problem. And
they are also raised. I think we can do it.
Ms. Wastweet: Either way, whether it was on the
top or the bottom, you are going to have a step in
the field and that I think that that is going to inhibit
metal flow.
Mr. Everhart: Well the step would probably be no
more than 15 thousandths or so on an eight-inch
model.
Ms. Wastweet: It seems simpler to me to just raise
the edge of the parchment and then angle it back
down to the field level and raise the text.
Mr. Everhart: We could do that. We could do that,
yes.
Ms. Wastweet: Just for ease of manufacturing.
Mr. Harrigal: One thing to note, Heidi, we would
still put a texture in where the parchment is there,
so you get the illusion of the parchment.
Ms. Wastweet: Right. Okay, moving on I would like
to address design number nine.
As mentioned this was the CFA choice. I think this
would be an attractive coin. I think the symbology
is a bit obscure.
I don't see any particular
symbolism rising forward. It is an attractive design.
It is simple. It would show up well. I am still in
preference
of
number
seven
for
symbolic
significance.
The remaining designs, numbers ten, 11, 12, and
13 all feature the turtle. And I want to point out
here that the turtle is a symbol for the tribe. The
turtle is not a pet that the tribe owned. And in

16
these designs, we see some realistic turtle
representations and then in design number 11, we
have a more symbolic turtle. And I think that works
much better because it is clear that it is a symbol
for something else. It is not literally a turtle.
So those representations that are very realistic, as
in number 12 and 13 don't work for me because this
is not a mascot or a pet that the tribe owned. It is
a symbol for the people.
Mr. Harrigal: I do want to add on that design that
there is some symbology also in here that there is
13 main segments to the shell on the turtle, as well
as 13 stars. So there is a tie-in there that I didn't
mention earlier. So I apologize for that.
Ms. Wastweet: Very good.
Design number ten specifically, again, we have very
realistic animals.
If these animals had been
represented in a symbolic stylized fashion and
equally sized as the museum representative pointed
out, I think this would have been a more successful
concept. So I am opposed to this for the fact that it
just looks like it is about animals. It doesn't look
like it is about the Native Americans. And the
layering, too, is a little excessive for a circulating
coin. This would be more appropriate for a deeper
relief medal.
So I am standing in favor of number seven.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Heidi. Donald?
Mr. Scarinci: Just as a preface first, before the
Chinese developed the use of spade money, before
Lydia was struck the first electrum stater in 700
B.C., before Alexander the Great conquered the
world -- conquered the new world at the time,
before the Romans built roads, the American Indian
had a very sophisticated network of trade and
communication. And as recent evidence suggests,
we have talked about this before, when we have
considered these dollars, for whatever reason in a

17
series that is designed to honor the Native American
Indian, we have passed all that. And we have fastforwarded to the American Indian after their contact
with Europe and Europeans. And I don't know why
we did that but we did that.
So I am not going to rehash any of that but we are
here.
We are in this place now and we are
obviously starting with treaties. And of course we
jump past any treaties with settlements that are
now Canadian. We have jumped past all of that.
Now we are here into the treaties with America after
the Declaration of Independence.
So here is where we are. And if we are going to be
in this place with treaties, I suspect we are going to
be in this place for a while because there is a lot of
treaties. We are probably going to go to Indian
Peace Medals before we are done and we are going
to be looking at reproductions of those.
I really don't think, and I'm glad that everybody -I'm glad that we rejected all of these designs
depicting treaties and quill pens and pieces of
paper. And I think that sends you a message, Don
and the artists a message, please don't show us
that again. It is trite. It has been done. We have
got coins. There are commemorative coins that
have done this before and have done it in certain
cases quite well but we have done this. We have
done the treaty and the quill pen thing and I don't
really think we need yet another coin that has quill
pens and treaties on it.
So I think since we are here dealing with treaties
and since it is not likely to go away in the near
future, because I think now it is just going to be the
treaty series. Instead of the Native American coin
series it is now the treaty series. I think we have to
deal with the designs that, you know, the few
designs that we can really look at.
Having said that, none of these designs, including
by the way the quill pen and the treaty designs are
award winners. None of them. So we are not going

18
to hit the ball out of the park with this coin. So now
let's just get this over with and pick one of these
and figure out which one we should pick.
So I could understand completely why the
Commission on Fine Arts went with the cloth design.
They went with it because it is artistically interesting
and does something that is a little different. It
would look great as a proof coin. Unfortunately, I
am not sure that the meaning of the cloth is
particularly special or relevant or communicates
something that we would want people to understand
or know about the Delawares.
So I am not sure that the cloth design is the right
way to go, even though of all of these designs,
visually I probably find it the most appealing and
the most different. That is not the same old, same
old, same old, same old that we seem to get all the
time.
But I think you then have to look at the turtles. So
okay, now -- and I think we rejected the dog that is
eating the A. Right? We are not considering that
one.
Ms. Wastweet: It's a wolf.
Mr. Scarinci: Oh, okay. I think the dog is probably
going to need a problem -- is probably going to
have a serious problem after or the wolf is going to
have a serious problem after he eats the A but I just
can't get beyond that. So I can't really consider
this. I just can't get beyond that.
And we have got the turtle and the turkey kind of
like standing in formation. So that is just -- if that
happens and if you could photograph that, that
would make an outstanding photograph just
because it would be unusual to get that kind of a
pose. But we can do with all these poses on coins.
It is not a problem. So I reject that one.
I think we are stuck with the turtles. I mean I
really think we are stuck with the turtles. And my

19
conceptual problem with the turtles is I think you
have got to -- you know, the one with the 13 stars,
I don't know why we are going there with the 13
stars. Why do we insist on talking about us? This is
the Native American dollar series. Why are we
talking about us? Then we should talk about the
Early America series and of course the interaction
with the Indians was vital to the Early Americans.
But the 13 stars is about us. It is not about the
Native American Indians. So I have to discount
anything with the 13 stars. Another reason for
discounting the wolf. And it would be kind of fun if
there were only 12 stars there because it would
imply that on his way to eat the A, he ate one of the
stars. So that would be kind of neat.
But if we are dealing with the turtles, we are really
dealing really with two selections. We are dealing
with the realistic depiction of the turtle from the
side and I am assuming it is realistic. I mean, I am
a city kid so I don't really know any better. You
could easily fool me. But you are dealing with the
realistic view and you are dealing with kind of the
aerial view of the turtle, almost like the squash
view, you know, that you are going to step on it.
So I mean I have to choose between one of these
two. I am going to listen to what everybody else
says because I really don't have any firm opinion. I
am not going to sit here today and rant about we
are producing pictures on metal and all the things I
say all the time. And we don't have any real art
going on here. I'm just not going to do that today.
So I will spare you that.
But it is really to me between these two -- you
know, the decision is between these two coins. I
think we have got to go with the turtle. So which
turtle, I don't know.
Chair Marks: So what -Mr. Scarinci: I think we have to go with one of the
two turtles that don't have the 13 stars because I
think the 13 stars is wrong. So we are looking at 12

20
or 13, the last two, in my opinion.
Chair Marks: Are you done?
Mr. Scarinci: I'm done.
Chair Marks: Okay, thank you, Donald.
Mr. Harrigal: Gary? Jim Adams would like to talk
about a historical point on this specific issue, if that
is okay.
Mr. Adams: Is this a good point to kind of get it in?
On the 13 stars, one aspect of this treat that really
fascinates me that I think I haven't expressed firmly
enough is that there is one feature of this treaty
that is very -- that is unique and it was proposed by
Chief White Eyes. This is an Indian idea, which was
to make the Delaware a separate state as a part of
the Union.
So that brings in the 13 plus the
Delaware was the actual terms of the treaty. It
didn't get very far in Congress but that was one of
the first of several proposals to have an Indian state
as part of the United States. So that fascinates me
and I just thought I would throw that out.
Chair Marks: Thank you. I want to start off by
talking about what Congress' directive was to us as
far as it concerns the one dollar Native American
program.
And in the statute -- I hope this informs all of us
why we are seeing some of the images we are
seeing. If you go to the Act, which was provided in
our packet, section 2(A)(I) says that "The design
on the reverse shall bear images celebrating the
important contributions made by Indian tribes and
individual Native Americans" -- here is the key point
-- "to the development of the United States and the
history of the United States."
Now I agree with Donald. I would have loved an
opportunity to go back to more of the early history
of Native Americans and explore that. I think that
is an opportunity lost, though, by virtue of the

21
statute.
And I think most of the committee
members understand that one of our limitations is
to work within the statutory structure that is given
us. We don't really have an authority to address
issues outside of that.
So the reason -- I mean I will now interpret the
reason we are seeing 13 stars is because if you read
that statement again, this program is about how
Native Americans helped develop the United States.
So it is about the United States. Whether we agree
with that concept or if we agree that the program
should be set in that way, isn't for us to argue. We
can as individuals but as a committee our task is to
fulfill that directive.
So because of that, I have to find that the Mint has
given us designs that comply with that direction. So
with that in mind, I want to shift now a little bit to
address the artist just briefly.
But I hope that the process we have gone through,
Don, here in our initial calling out, I hope it helps
inform the process in that when we are approaching
subjects in coinage and often what the committee is
looking for is not so much the illustration of a thing
or an event but we are looking for the symbolic.
And if we look at what was called out and what was
preserved, and in fact if it wasn't for myself with my
singular vote for ten and Mike Ross' singular support
of 12 and 13, we would have been left with three
symbolic designs. We would have been left with
seven, nine, and 11.
So I hope that informs the process. I think if we
can step outside the box of the illustration and focus
more on perhaps the abstract thought about like a
treaty in this case and try to illustrate the situation
in those terms rather than showing like a document
or something of that nature, I think we will be
moving in a direction I believe the committee is
interested in.
So with that, my comments. Probably my favorite

22
design would be number 11. However, I am hung
up on the comment from the Native American
Caucus of this idea of excluding the other clans.
And in no way do I want to recommend something
that is viewed as exclusionary to a tribe. If there
are clans within a tribe and whether the turtle may
serve as a general representation perhaps, I don't
know if I understood Mr. Adams correctly or not, it
also is very clearly a representation of a specific
clan. Perhaps a prominent clan but still a clan. And
that there are other clans that have their own
symbolism. We see that in number ten, which is
why I had that one pulled out. I don't think I am
going to get very far with ten because I was the
singular vote.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I support it.
Chair Marks: Oh, do you? Okay.
Mr. Jansen: Yes, even I like that one but I figured
once you said ten, that was it. Only one person had
to single it out.
Chair Marks: Okay, thank you.
And so let's talk about -- well actually I'm going to
go back to the turtle, number 11. So I like the
symbolism there. I like that it is not like we took a
photograph and we drew a photograph of a turtle.
We represented the turtle here symbolically in an
interesting way that seems to kind of go with the
flow, the roundness, if you will, of the coin. I like all
that. Thirteen stars and the turtle together would
suggest the European settlers who had come to the
Union of creating a United States entering into an
agreement with this tribe represented, in this case,
by a turtle, albeit perhaps exclusionary to the tribe.
I like that design but I am hung up on that. And if
others want to try to convince me why I shouldn't
be hung up on that, please have at it.
So then if we look at number ten, I notice some
comments about proportionality and I understand

23
that.
And I understand Heidi's very insightful
comment about layering. I'm not sure how that is
going to produce. And I don't know maybe if Don
could comment on that in a moment, I would like to
know his perspective. But here again we have got
the 13 stars representing this new nation in 1778.
And we have what I assume would be a better
representation of the tribe in total with the three
different images.
And here again, like the turtle image I just talked
about, the symbology there is the United States
with the 13 stars with the symbols of the tribe
together with the description Treaty with the
Delawares. That makes sense to me. Whether or
not the committee on balance think it is
proportioned correctly or not, I don't know. But to
me it conveys the essence or the spirit of the
agreement.
That would then take me to nine.
I will just
comment on nine briefly. I'm not sure. Nine is in
my thinking a little too minimalist. I'm not sure it
conveys enough information or interest from a
design point of view to really have any gravitas if
you will for the reverse of the coin. So I am not a
big fan of number nine.
Number seven, at this point, depending on how
others influence me on the balance of our
discussion, number seven is probably in the lead for
me. The quill pen and then the feather representing
the Native Americans together, the quill pen being
the European settlers who formed the new country
with the Native American representation of the
feather.
The background of the parchment, I'm not sure if
there is a layering issue there or how that will
present itself.
But I guess I see some nice
convergence symbolically of the two parties
involved in the agreement.
So at this point, I am not real firm on if I have a
favorite. Seven is probably in the lead with me.

24
Someone could probably convince more on ten or
even 11 if there is a good argument why I should
not be concerned about excluding the other clans.
So actually I want to ask Don if he could comment
on that layering issue for ten. Specifically, do you
think there is going to be an issue with illustrating
that turkey in front of the wolf?
Mr. Everhart: Well if I was sculpting it, what I
would do, I would step it back behind each animal.
You know, step back the wolf behind the turkey,
and the wolf's legs behind the turtle, so that you
can maximize the relief on each one of those
animals separately and show that you have three
definite layers there.
Chair Marks: Okay.
Mr. Everhart: That can be done.
Chair Marks: All right. Okay, thank you. Erik, are
you ready?
Mr. Jansen: I am ready. First of all, two thanks.
One for all of the background and comment
information because it somehow creates a context
for my own thoughts, as well as a baseline for my
thinking. So it is very, very helpful. We all know
that constituents don't always get what they want
and a lot of times what they want isn't what they
end up with. So thank you for that.
And second of all, somebody did the background
work here to keep our devices consistent. Now that
may be because the devices on this particular issues
were predefined by the Sacagawea obverse but
nonetheless, we don't have any contention there.
And I appreciate that. It means we don't have to
doctor these things by moving devices that already
are on the other side.
As usual, I get my opinion from Heidi. Actually, I
came with very similar thoughts that she
enumerated. And so without going through all of

25
those, it leaves me with images seven, nine, and
then the turtles. So I want to eliminate my turtles
but I want to save some thoughts here because I
think a couple of folks have asked for comments.
On number ten, the first time I looked at this my
first reaction was cool howling wolf; wow, howling
turtle! And seriously, I looked at that because the
heads were both going to the moon or whatever.
And the second thought I have on this: if you want
to know how the turkey might be done poorly, look
at the mountain sheep on this year's quarter. It
just disappears into a morass of variable relief. And
that just scares the bejeebies out of me in terms of
committing this coin to that because I think it is
going to lose its power as three tribes, animals,
whatever.
And number 11, my reaction to this when you look
at the coined version of this is wow, why is that
turtle like stretching to hold the ends of a horseshoe
together. it kind of didn't work for me. It didn't
come together as a symbol with static power.
And then 12 and 13 are both my pet turtle and we
have heard that diatribe. So that is kind of how I
end up with seven and nine. So seven and nine.
Nine is the safe, easy for everybody solution. It is
easy to render. It is easy to sculpt. It is probably
pretty easy to strike. It is in a bold font. You are
not going to lose serifs to dye breaks.
So nine rolls right off, just like Donald said. Seven
is what I would love to work with. And where I
come up on seven here is I like the way it coins up,
if only somebody looks at the coins and goes cool,
feathers. Okay. It is a Native American coin.
Feathers is a pretty good symbol. It means a lot of
positive things, I think.
So if it doesn't get
Delaware we just get positive and that is okay.
Where the feathers cross over, in the eight-inch you
can see very nicely oh, I see, that is European quill
against a leather-wrapped ornamental feather.

26
Great. Now wait a second. But when you take it to
a coin, you kind of lose that. So I am scratching my
head going how do we take that idea and give it a
little more impact so that it doesn't get lost when
you take it down to 1.04 or whatever?
The second thing is I think most of the quills are
white and typically relatively pointed.
And this
feather is relatively pointed. It is not a little field
abused. That is fine.
The Indian feathers are typically ravens.
They
probably still had bald eagles in that part of the
country at that point. So that feather is a rounded
feather but it has black and white contrast. And so
somehow the sculptor, you have got to do that
magic, Don. How do you give me black and white
on silver?
Mr. Everhart: That's not a problem.
Mr. Jansen:
Okay.
Now let's talk about the
discussion about the parchment and the surface but
more to the point, flipping it around and instead of
having a 65 percent coverage coin of the upper 65,
go the lower 35 in parchment. That gives us a
chance to take the "Treaty with the Delawares" go
encuse there. And I don't know if you like that font
or not. I do like the way they pull the idea of the
quill across the page with a Hancock-esque graphic.
That is pretty cool. If you do that, you may simplify
your encuse problems.
My question to you is, if you don't do that, Don, do
you think you can do that 1778 with those serifs? I
mean, that is a little tiny piece of relief on the dye.
Mr. Everhart: Yes, we can probably eliminate those
little thin serifs and thicken up the one on the top of
the one.
Mr. Jansen: Okay.
Mr. Everhart: I don't think it I would lose anything
if we knocked off the little serifs at the lower right

27
part of the one in the upper left part of the sevens.
Mr. Jansen: Okay so I would say is this the font we
want to use and that is really an issue of readability
to that size.
So the last thing I would say is one of -- I don't
know.
I just think it is ridiculous that the
numismatic community gets all hung up on these
doubling features right smack dab at the geometric
center of the coin because of the way the smash
happens or it doesn't happen when you make your
production dyes.
I'm looking at that feather going right past the
middle and I am -- remember we have got Lincoln
with six fingers and all this stuff? And you are going
to see a triple feather there or something. So that
might make moving it over a couple of hundredths
save somebody some trouble in the quality control.
Thank you.
Chair Marks: Okay. The process would be for us to
go to Mike Ross at this point. However, Greg, do
you want to inform us -Mr. Weinman: With apologies to the guests, I need
to ask the chair to take a recess probably for 15
minutes so that we can take care of some
administrative security work for the CCAC down
with respect to the building and credentials. This is
the time that the security office was available for
that.
So my request is to recess the meeting for at least
15 minutes.
Chair Marks: Okay. We will stand in recess.
(Whereupon, the foregoing proceeding went off the
record at 10:58 a.m. and went back on the record
at 11:42 a.m.)
Chair Marks: Okay, I'm going to call this meeting
back to order and we are on the record. We are on

28
the record now.
Mike Ross, your comments, please.
Mr. Ross: I am just going to own the floor for a
second because it will go to my comments on the
work we are going to do later in the morning.
So earlier Gary said we should focus on the
legislative intent of the legislation. And he correctly
read the part that said we images celebrating the
important contributions made by Indian tribes and
individual Native Americans to the development and
history of the United States. But I think you have
to read the legislation in total because then they
give explicit -- individuals and events that they are
recommending get depicted. The creation of the
Cherokee
written
language,
the
Iroquois
Confederacy, Wampanoag Chief Massasoit, the
"Pueblo Revolt" against the Spanish in New Mexico,
the Olympian, Jim Thorpe, Ely Parker of the code
talkers, most of which I think are great but it is an
expansive interpretation of what represents a
contribution to the United States. The Cherokee
written language. It is not just things that White
settlers looked back and said oh, that was helpful.
That was helpful that they signed a treaty that later
gets ignored and they lose their land. That was
helpful that they guided us to discover a land that
we were then going to take and that we can find
lots of things to celebrate in Native American culture
to honor on a coin.
Jim and disagree slightly but I don't know that
treaties, given the history until the 1970s of the
United States ignoring, decimating treaties through
Indian removal, through the Dawes Act, through
ignoring the decisions of the Supreme Court in
Worcester versus Georgia and Cherokee Nation.
I don't know that when you have a coin here with
the two feathers on it, it implies that something
solemn happened that got respected. And if you
look at all the treaties, if we gave back all the land
from treaties that didn't go well, the nation would

29
look very different today. And admittedly, as Jim is
mentioning, Native Americans today have a vested
interest in treaties now that they are being enforced
because it allows them to have self-governance that
includes the money that could be made from
casinos and tobacco sales and all of these other
things. So there is a genuine economic interest in
it.
But I don't think America's history of treaties is a
good one.
I don't think that Andrew Jackson
respected treaties, Custer is rotting all over the
Black Hills. And my general sense is, if we are
going to pick from that list, most of which I don't
see being depicted, the Pueblo Revolt, which is
great and there is the statue in Statuary Hall on
Capitol Hill of one of the leaders of the Pueblo
Revolt against the Spanish. The coin that depicted
the Pueblo Revolt in this series was of horses.
And with that said, I don't think that a coin on
treaties -- Jim and disagree -- but I don't think a
coin on treaties represent Native American
contributions to the United States.
And later when we do westward expansion, I don't
know how that became a sub-theme. It's not in the
legislation. I don't know how treaties became a
sub-theme. It is not in the legislation.
When we do westward expansion, you had a coin
with Sacagawea out there forever, which I think
kind of covers the ground.
Yes, they aided
westward expansion but it looks like we are about
to not just do the Sacagawea coin but two coins of
Native Americans aiding the people who are
exploring the land that they are going to take.
So with that said, I am hoping Greg has suggested
that this coin series is going to have some more
room to maneuver as we move along, that we look
to themes of which there wouldn't be contestation
over and, instead, the Native Americans are
universally proud of.

30
So Jim I was asking you but we had this debate
during the break and Jim conceded that I got the
better of it.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Ross:
ground.

I'm joking.

He didn't give an inch of

But with that said, I am going to point to coins not
that celebrate this treaty which I don't -- my
impression did not, in the end, benefit, the Lenape
in Delaware and ones that celebrate Native
American culture; either the turtles, which we could
also sell at the University of Maryland, or the
number nine.
All right, I have said my piece. Thank you.
Chair Marks: Go ahead, Jeanne.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman:
Did I understand you
correctly that you are going with number nine? Is
that your choice?
Mr. Ross: That would be my choice, yes.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Okay.
Mr. Ross: Or one of the ones with the turtles. I'm
going to pick nine because I think it makes the best
coin but I think the turtle coins also come from a
Native American perspective, as aside from a
perspective of celebrating a treaty.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Okay, thank you.
I have enjoyed all the comments of my colleagues
this morning. I also am stuck on these coins. I was
happy to see that we settled on the few that I
thought were worthy of talking about.
I liked the simplicity of number seven; however, I
am not quite sure that is where we need to go. And
I like the argument about our treaties being broken.

31
However, I think that the Delaware Treaty is
supposed to be the first one and that is why we are
honoring this. Am I correct?
Mr. Ross: I think commemorated.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Commemorating it.
Mr. Ross: This is about commemorating.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Okay. Because it is the first
written treaty. So with that said, I think it is
important to combine the totems of the Delaware
with the 13 stars. I have to agree with Heidi that
our pet turtles should be sort of ignored.
And that kind of leaves me with looking at number
ten and number 11. I am not going to go with
number nine, although it is our most abstract and
probably powerful piece. But I feel like the citizenry
is not going to quite understand what that imagery
is. And I think we need to honor the totem of the
tribe.
I don't agree with the wolf eating the letter A.
Mr. Scarinci: Hungry wolf.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: But I do want to point out in
number ten that the totems there are, and Jim
mentioned that the turtle should be the important of
all three because the turtle was/is the most
important tribe within the Delaware Nation.
However, if you know turtles, this turtle is totally
oversized. You won't ever see a turtle in the woods
this large of that species. So I think that the artist
did render the significance of the turtle properly.
And if we look at the turkey and the wolf which are
maybe those species that are about equal in clan
lineage, they are probably their actual size. If these
totems were abstracted, maybe it would be a little
more easy to interpret.
But I, as a devout animal lover, I do love number
ten and I think it would represent the tribe as a

32
whole and communicate to the people that hold this
coin that this is a bit about Native Americans. And
the same I feel with number 11. I am not quite
sure I enjoyed the grasping of the belts. It is a little
confusing. When I first looked at it, I thought
maybe his front feet were a little bent. It took me a
while to understand that that was the end of the
wampum belt and he was grasping it, the turtle was
grasping it.
So I have a little problem with the confusion that
that leads to. However, I love the fact that there is
13 stars and there is 13 plates in the turtle's back.
So that to me is significant.
And I am having trouble, I am totally having trouble
trying to decide which one would be best. Heidi
mentions that this might be a difficult -- number ten
might be difficult in striking. However, I think we
do have some pretty complicated images.
You
know, I think about the Lincoln penny with the
building on the back that is, I think, from the time I
was two years old, that was a symbol that I couldn't
imagine how that could get on there. So I do think
we do strike very complicated imagery.
And Don, you mentioned that this would be able to
be done. So maybe Tom can convince me if either
one of these could be chosen but right now I am on
the fence of ten and 11.
Chair Marks: Okay, thank you Jeanne. Tom.
Mr. Uram: Well, being the one from Pittsburgh here
I guess I really have to step up to the plate since
that is where it was.
I agree that the number seven and number nine are
a generalization and probably would both make
good coins. And as far as the cloth and everything
goes, you know, what you can do from a marketing
point of view to promote it and understand it. But I
think both are that way.
As far as the turtles go, I do like number 12 over

33
the dead turtle in the middle of the road approach
with these two. The flat just doesn't do it. But I
think if number 12 not the pet-looking like turtle,
then that might be able to work.
Now on to number ten, which was my first call also,
but I didn't notice, Don, the wolf eating the A so
much as the wolf having tail feathers. And I guess
that put into perspective, I guess having looked at
the number seven and the number nine as being
general, this is more specific to the tribes themself
and the recognition and so forth. I guess if it could
be made where you would have the 3-D or be able
to stagger them in such a way that it wouldn't look
overlapping. I think that would be my biggest
concern would be how would this actually look if it
was produced.
If I was probably looking at adding anything to it, I
would have done the parchment in the back and
then maybe the underneath part here from nine to
seven or four would have put the cloth in there and
you would have had the whole package.
But if we are going to include the whole treaty and
the purpose, I kind of like number ten if it could be
done right.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Could I just add one thing?
Chair Marks: Go ahead, Jeanne.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: If the turtle's head could be
turned so it would be more -Mr. Uram: Proportionally you are absolutely right.
You are right.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: It's way bigger than it should
be.
Mr. Uram: Yes, both; actually the turkey, too.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Well the turkey is a pretty
big bird if you ever sit beside them.

34
Mr. Uram: Then maybe that is a small wolf.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman:
Anyway, then maybe it
wouldn't look so much like the turtle or baying with
the wolf. But I think that the turtle is okay.
Chair Marks: I have a suggestion, Jeanne. If this
design prevailed in the scoring, if you wanted to
make a motion to make an adjustment, we could
certainly do that.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Okay.
Chair Marks: I would also like to remind all the
members that in your scoring, you don't have to say
to yourself I have a favorite. You could say, there is
two or three or four, or whatever that I regard
equally.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Okay.
Chair Marks: And maybe you want to give three
points to all or two points to all or three to some,
two to others, and so forth.
So it is not necessarily which design wins even in
your own mind, unless that is your mindset.
So anyway, any other comments?
Ms. Wastweet: I have one comment. There was a
technical issue raised. I forget who I was asking
the question about the quill pen in number seven,
whether that was going to be visible at such a small
size. And I just wanted to point out that the tip of
the quill pen is approximately the same size as the
one dollar sign. So if the one is visible, then the tip
of the pen will also be visible and recognized as a
pen.
Chair Marks: Any other quick comments?
Mr. Scarinci: Can I just say one thing? After now
having spent a little over two hours or an hour and
a half talking about these designs, I have reached
the same conclusion that the Commission of Fine

35
Arts reached in five minutes. You know, in my
mind, all of these designs are flawed and probably
the least offensive is number nine.
So I am going to throw my support to number nine,
not because it is a great design but because it is the
least problematic design.
Chair Marks: Okay with that, I will ask all the
members to finish their scoring sheets if they
haven't done so already. When you are done with
those, would you please pass them in towards the
center? Erik, as has been the tradition the last few
meetings, has consented to tally those for us. And
so when we have a score, I will report those back to
you.
Review and Discuss Proposed Theme for the
Reverse of the 2014 and 2015 Native American
Coins Ron Harrigal
The next item on the agenda is our review of the
proposed theme for the reverse of both the 2014
and the 2015 Native American one dollar coins.
And I will go to Ron for a report on that.
Mr. Harrigal: Okay. Thank you, Gary. I will give
just basically a little background and talk about just
briefly the two concepts that we are dealing with
here without actually getting into the full text. You
have the text. We can enter the document into the
record as part of the transcripts from that.
The background on this. It is the 2014 and 2015
Native American dollar coin programs that deals
with the westward expansion concept, exploring the
Louisiana purchase for part one and then into part
two, securing the Pacific Northwest.
And the westward expansion concept will be
featured over a period of two years so that it can
accurately portray the full extent of the Native
American assistance to Lewis and Clark expedition
across the continental divide, featuring the concept
for two years as a result of feedback from our

36
consulting
organizations,
which
include
the
Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate, the
Congressional Native American Caucus of the House
of Representatives, and the National Congress of
American Indians.
Their recommendation was to commemorate the
contributions provided by both the Mandan and
Clatsop tribes to Lewis and Clark. Because of the
success of these explorer and their men depended
on the hospitality and provisions of the winter
quarters and cooperation, accordingly westward
expansion, one, exploring the Louisiana Purchase
introduces the 2014 design concept, which is Native
Hospitality Lewis and Clark winter at Fort Mandan in
1804 and 1805.
Westward expansion two, securing the Pacific
Northwest introduces the 2015 design concept,
continued hospitality. Lewis and Clark went there
with the Clatsop Indians in 1805 and 1806.
National museum of the American Indian has
reviewed each design concept, reviewed each
design concept for historical accuracy and
appropriateness and it is suggested that its edits
have been incorporated. I guess Mr. James Adams
is a historian, if he would like to provide any
additional comments.
Mr. Adams: Yes. As you mentioned, I think it was
the pushback from the Senate there is a committee
in the NCIA that caused a shift from the original
focus of the coin was resolved, basically on the
Clatsop, to include the Mandan and Hidatsa. And I
think partly because the Mandan are very sick of
being
considered
extinct
when
they
have
contributed some very significant leadership to
National Indian Affairs.
Today, Tom Hall is a
significant figure.
In thinking this over, going over the historical
justification for having two years, there is really two
things going on here.
In the Lewis and Clark
expedition, the first phase which culminates in the

37
wintering in the Mandan villages was the exploration
of the Louisiana purchase, which was the watershed
of the Mississippi River.
The second phase, which is the Clatsop crossing the
Continental Divide is a name that Jefferson
conceded before the Louisiana purchase, which was
to secure the northwest, the United States claim to
the northwest as opposed to the British claim, which
is being established by the explorations of
Alexander Mackenzie.
And in crossing the Continental Divide, Lewis and
Clark were in an entirely separate historical phase of
securing the Columbia River for the United States,
as opposed to British claims.
Now when we talk about Indians aiding the
American expansion, I think you should take into
consideration that it is not just the Americans, it is
kind of choosing the Americans versus the British in
this point of view.
But this 2014 I think we can think of, at least in
writing the theme, was the Louisiana Purchase;
2015 is the Northwest Territories. And that is, to
my mind, in addition to the tribal considerations,
the historical justification for having two separate
coins.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Mr. Adams. Are there any
questions for Mr. Adams?
Okay. So we were provided with the write-ups for
these narratives. How do we want to handle this?
Do you want to -- I'll just -- let's call on members.
If you have comments, make yourself known.
Mr. Ross: Gary, I will be brief. I think once you got
into a world where western expansion was going to
be the theme, that is where the trouble began.
Then I understand why different -- and Lewis and
Clark had interactions a lot more times than just
two, right?

38
Mr. Adams: Absolutely.
Mr. Ross: So I mean, we could do 13 coins on how
they aided western expansion.
Mr. Adams: If you want to. But actually, the Mint
has done a lot of Lewis and Clark coins.
Mr. Ross: I know and I think it has been done.
Like having Sacagawea out there already I think has
covered the ground. But now because once we
define westward expansion as the coin, then I can
understand well all right, that is what it is going to
be while other tribes want in on the story for other
reasons, like the fear that they are being thought of
as extinct. And that is why the problem is we are
just sprawling out that the biggest Native American
contribution was aiding White settlement in securing
their lands and coin, after coin, after coin on that
point.
And I wouldn't have picked westward. If I am
picking Native American contributions in the United
States, I am not picking westward expansion as a
theme to begin with, just as I am not picking
treaties. And I am definitely not expanding it into
multiple coins.
So if we have to do it, I would keep it one year and
take the flack that you take for ignoring the Mandan
or have just a representation of all the Native
Americans that assisted Lewis and Clark, rather
than celebrating something that -- I'm not a radical
voice. If you look at the National Park Service
website on Lewis and Clark, there is a big paragraph
on how Native Americans view Lewis and Clark's
excursions with ambivalence and they do not
celebrate them. They commemorate them as an
historical event because of what they led to. And
that is on the National Park Service website. It is
not like some '60s radical here at the table. That is
the main view.
So I understand the political considerations but if I
had my way and were going to make coins

39
celebrating
moments
in
Native
American
contributions to the United States, I am not doing
an expansive series that started with Sacagawea on
aiding White settlement of the continent.
Okay, thank you.
Chair Marks: Okay, Erik.
Mr. Jansen: When you read these notes and I have
actually been to both of the locations they talk
about, Mandan and I live in Washington, I just want
to say up-front I think we should ban any and all
maps on coins because we are going to be tempted
to integrate some form of a map. Because to
Clatsop that was essentially the end of Lewis and
Clark's trip where they turned around and tried to
figure out now can we get home again.
The second thought would be from these two
narratives, it is really very difficult to immediately
distinguish one from another in classic here we are
on the shore shaking hands or saying how to
another tribe of Indians and it applies to both. Or
here we are standing in the middle of winter in
Oregon with the Indians or here we are in the
Dakotas with the Indians and it is hard to really get
distinguished much.
I would say that there may be some anecdotal, if
not accurate and visually rich opportunities by
maybe digging into the logs of Lewis and Clark for
seminal events -- it's a bad pun really -- that might
have happened -- sorry about that, Michael. The
rest of them will get in a minute. -- that might
have happened at those particular locations. This
was the first bear we took, I think was one of the
things that happened maybe right before they met
at Mandan.
I think it is going to be challenging without some
real depth on this to have the artist know what they
are going to draw because we really -- otherwise,
we are going to inherit a lot of pictures of two
figures shaking hands and we don't need that, I

40
don't think, in the artwork.
Chair Marks:
weigh in.

With that, I am going to have Heidi

Ms. Wastweet: All right. That was a perfect segue
into what I have to say.
Mr. Jansen:
you.

Well you know, I get my ideas form

(Laughter.)
Ms. Wastweet: Setting aside the topic that Mike
Ross brought up, which I think needs more
discussion about the topic itself, but I want to talk
about the write-ups. These give good back story
but they are very story-like and don't contain much
as far as images. And it is a good jumping off point
but it is not a laundry list of what we want to see.
And we have complained before and I will say it
again, we don't want storyboard illustrations of
smiling Natives shaking hands with the friendly
White Men. It is too saccharine. It is too literal and
we don't want to see that.
So part of the luxury we have in reviewing these at
this stage, before it gets to the artist is we can tell
them things. Like Erik just mentioned, please we
don't want to see maps. Because that is a valuable
feedback. We don't want to waste valuable artists'
time drawing maps when we are just going to reject
it from the very start.
So what I would like to add to these as a
contribution
from
this
committee
is
some
suggestions of symbols and images that could
represent these narratives. We can not only add
what we want to see but what we don't want to see,
like saying no maps if we don't want maps.
And as I am reading through these, again, if we are
going to go with this theme, I am thinking what
images, what symbols represent these ideas, rather
than just picking a literal scene. And as I am

41
picturing the harsh winters that these explorers
went through and if you ever have been camping, a
symbolic welcoming is come sit by my campfire
because in the winter that is what you want is the
warmth of the campfire.
And when someone
already has a settlement and a traveler comes into
that scenario, that is what is the welcoming symbol
is come and sit by my campfire.
So I think stylized campfires would be a good
symbol that would represent that without getting
too literal or without excluding one tribe, without
trying to worry about costumes and that kinds of
action, but just talking about the hospitality that the
Indians showed and the overwhelming trust and
faith that they had in their new visitors.
Also an important part of the challenge to the
explorers was food.
And the Native Americans
helped them out a good deal with food, corn being a
very important contribution. It lasted through the
winters and was easily stored.
And it says in our narratives that what was traded
was axe heads were traded for corn. And I think
that this symbology could allude to the rather
ominous future that lay ahead of the Native
Americans, that it did turn violent. So if we chose
to represent axe heads with ears of corn, it can be
not only decorative and work well on a coin but it
can allude to that kind of dark future ahead of them
without being too saccharine as another concept
idea.
And then using circular motifs to represent the fact
that there was trading going on. There was no
money. There was no credit cards. So the trading
itself was very important, what passed from one
hand to another and came full circle around.
On the second part of this we head to the northwest
and it was a little more in the summer into the fall.
And it is not in our narratives here for some reason
but in the Lewis and Clark diaries, they mention
how they ate so much salmon that they were

42
absolutely sick of it and would not mind if they
never saw another salmon again but salmon is not
mentioned here. I would suggest representing a
salmon because that was an essential food that
even if they got sick of it, it carried them through.
And the Northwest Indians have a very rich artistic
culture of carvings that represent extremely well -reproduce on coins extremely well. So if we could
have some stylized salmon in the style of the
Northwest Indians, that would be very beautiful.
Also there was mention of a canoe. That would be
another good image to put on a coin. I think pelts
are very difficult to depict on a coin. It is going to
be very difficult to tell what that furry thing is on a
coin. It mentions that they traded fish hooks and
tobacco, which of course is used in pipes. So these
are all good visual that we can get or teeth into.
So I would like to open the floor to the rest of the
members to suggest some images to go along with
these very vague -- not vague, but these back
stories that don't focus on images so that we can
help the artist get off on the right foot with us and
not waste time on images that we don't want to
see.
Mr. Jansen: Yes, that is how I am thinking of this.
What can we do to raise the quality of artist's work;
that is, narrow his thinking. Take what we have
here as a great foundation and then tack onto the
end, rather than generate photographs on metal,
following anecdotal things we are taking from their
diary and have about ten or 12 of them, one or two
lines each, nothing huge, just enough to give the
artist hint that the front half of this thing was the
backdrop and the bottom half below from here is
your fodder.
Chair Marks: Other comments?
Mr. Jansen: I think the results we get will amaze us
in terms of -- well that combined with some devices
and symbol guidance will really give us six, eight,

43
ten, credible images that we are voting on, not
three or four.
Mr. Scarinci: My only comment is my request just
not to repeat ourselves with images on coins. And
you know, let's make sure we look at not only the
body of commemorative coins since 1982 but let's
look at the body of commemorative coins since the
Columbian Exposition up until 1956 or '55. And let's
just be absolutely sure that we don't have repeating
images. I mean, there is only so many baseball
players that we can do and treaties and documents
and quill pens, you know, army soldiers. There is
only so much of that stuff you can do. And it all
really kind of just blends in.
And so I think the challenge that the artists face
when dealing with these narratives, is to A) know
what we have done in the past and be familiar with
that as something to be avoided in the future
because we have done it already and B) try to
depict these images in new and modern ways.
And you know, that is an easy thing to say, not
necessarily an easy thing to communicate because
we are talking about art. But perhaps looking at
images of coins from around the world, especially in
the progressive mints, I think that, as a staple diet
might help us come up with designs that will be
candidates for an award.
I hate to sit here and start the conversation by
saying well, you know, there is no winner here, so
we just got to pick something but there is no winner
here. And every coin, as a blank canvas has the
ability to be a winner. Every coin, every design,
even when Congress dictates exactly what the
design needs to be but especially when Congress
gives us a blank slate and says do it, come up with
something, as is the case with these dollars. And
that is, I guess what disappoints me, that we don't
meet -- we really don't meet the challenge when we
can. And collectors out there think that we produce
these ugly designs because we are told what to do.

44
I mean, we are told in detail in some of the
legislation exactly what the design has to be. And
unfortunately, that is just not the case all the time.
A lot of the things we are doing where there is an
opportunity to really excel artistically for whatever
reason, we are defaulting.
So anyway, I just want to -- you know it is one
thing to get the narrative and that is important.
And this is a very good process that we are now in
the loop on the narrative but I really want to just
pound it home to the artists to be artists. And that
is what our report was.
That was the
encouragement and support that all of the artists
and all of your artists, Don, have gotten from the
Mint certainly in the last year. And I think that you
have now got to restore creativity, rebuild a
playground, get people's juices flowing because the
talent is there. There is no question. And I see
what you guys are producing. I mean, come on,
Jim's FIDEM medal was creative as hell. I mean, it
was great. So you want to design, you want to
come up with liberty in a new and different way?
Well, he does images of women and he does it very
creatively. See what he comes up with. Let him
run.
And I always lecture you because you are some of
my favorite medals that you have done. This can
be done. And I understand what happened in the
past. I was there. I know what they did but the
shackles hopefully are taken off you. And now I
certainly want to see on everything we get at least
one or two designs, at least one or two 21st century
designs, modernist designs.
I want to see
something even if it is not good.
I mean look, like number nine was today. All right,
well I am happy at least we got that. I mean I will
take that. You know, so and sometimes it will work
and sometimes it won't work, just like the volcano.
And John Mercanti gave us the volcano. And we will
have some discussions and we need to do a look
back to see did the volcano work or didn't it and

45
why. But at least we got the volcano. You know, at
least it was cool. At least you get a coin and you
get the cool factor. I would rather try and fail than
not try.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Don. I am going to get to
Mike here in just a moment. I want to start moving
us towards some direction, specific direction for the
Mint staff. So as soon as Mike is done, I would like
to encourage our comments to be moving in that
direction.
So, Mike.
Mr. Ross:
I'm sorry about this, Gary, but I
understand it is under our authority to recommend
that we go back to step two and suggest new design
themes. And my suggestion is that we recommend
that the Mint use one coin, come up with a
symbolism for all the Native Americans who aided
Lewis and Clark in 2014 and in 2015 come up with
another representation of a contribution of Native
Americans to the United States, rather than two
coins on the same subject with either two different
symbolic visions. Have a 2014, a symbolic vision of
that. And 2015, there is plenty of contributions the
Native Americans have made to United States
history, come up with a new one for 2015.
Chair Marks: Okay. In the interest of moving us
along, that sounds like something that would be
appropriate for a motion. I would like to get us on
the record moving towards conclusion of all this. So
rather than just talk in circles more, if that is a
motion, make it such.
Mr. Ross: That is a motion. I move that we
reconsider that the Mint -- we recommend that the
Mint reconsider the design themes for 2014 and
2015. And for 2014, come up with a representation
of Native Americans' aid to Lewis and Clark; for
2015, select another Native American contribution
to United States history.
Chair Marks: Is there a second to that?

46
Mr. Jansen: Second.
Chair Marks:
Okay, it has been moved and
seconded. To reconsider the themes provided for
2014 and 2015 for the Native one dollar program
with the 2014 theme being the Lewis and Clark
westward expansion and 2015 being another
unspecified as yet -Mr. Ross:
history.

Native American contribution to U.S.

Chair Marks:
motion?

Okay, is there a discussion on the

Mr. Jansen:
I would like to know what the
museum's reaction to that is.
Mr. Adams: Quite frankly, in drafting themes, I was
reacting more to the input from outside bodies,
particularly the consulting groups that are
mentioned in the legislation.
I was sort of surprised but we are not in the
legislation. As consultants but -Mr. Jansen:
Not but you
gatekeepers discussing the --

are

part

of

the

Mr. Adams: Yes. Well, we have the pushback from
the Dakota tribes that said look, you are leaving us
out and they wanted to be in. And there is a
rationale to do that. So I produced the rationale.
Mr. Ross: Can I just say, but Jim if we are going to
have a symbolic representation of these aiding of
Lewis and Clark anyway, then it isn't going to be
tribe determinative, if it is going to be a salmon or
something like that.
Does it matter that we have two coins where the
subtext -- I mean if you can't tell from the coin who
it is, do we really need two coins to a topic that I'm
not sure all Native Americans think is something
celebratory?

47
Mr. Adams: I don't know if it is appropriate for me
to say this but this is the one theme where I was
more of an amanuensis than an originator. And the
original suggestion was the Clatsop. The Mandan
heirs and successors said we did a lot for Lewis and
Clark and they are proud of it. They actually have
invested in Lewis and Clark as a tourism museum,
et cetera, et cetera. And there is an historic
reason, an historic rationale for it and I think my
personal reaction is that you can make the case.
There are two but you can also make the case for
just one. And actually the suggestion of a campfire
or a fire within a hot is a very nice symbol. But
again, that is up to you guys.
Chair Marks: Okay, there is a motion on the table.
Is there any more discussion on a motion?
Ms. Wastweet: I would just like to add that I think
that we could successfully, with symbolism,
represent both of these themes in one coin instead
of two.
Chair Marks:
discussion --

Okay.

Not hearing any further

Mr. Jansen:
Does the mint have any timing,
logistical issues that would put the 2015 program
kind of on ice for a moment?
Mr. Harrigal: I think as it stands right now if we
take this and revisit it as a one-year program versus
two, we owe it to the three committees to go loop
back with them as to what our final is. I mean, it is
not -- we have consulted and that is the point. But
I think I would leave it, see if I could get some input
from Greg on this.
Mr. Weinman: Yes, the process is we would take
this motion into consideration and then it is in our
discretion to return to step two. And if we return to
step two then it would go back through and yes, we
would consider it. As part of step two we would
consult back again in step three with the consulting

48
organizations. So it would move back through.
Mr. Jansen: So the recommendation of anecdotal
stimulus for the artists probably still applies. We
are just going after a single set of drawings, as
opposed to two sets.
Chair Marks: That is what the motion would lead us
to, yes.
Okay, does everyone understand the motion?
Believing that everyone does, I won't read it. So I
will go to the question. All those in favor, please
raise your hand.
(Show of hands.)
Chair Marks: It is unanimous, seven ayes and no
nos. It is approved.
So at this point, unless the committee disagrees
with me, I think we are at a conclusion for this
matter at this time.
Review and Discuss Candidate Designs for the Code
Talkers Congressional Gold Medals Ron Harrigal and
Don Everhart
Okay, with that, then that takes us down the
agenda. I'm not going to do the break for lunch,
knowing that there are some members who have
some schedules with flights back home. And we will
move now immediately to the review and discussion
for the candidate designs for the Code Talkers
Congressional Gold Medals. And I will recognize
Ron and Don if he would have some comments to
contribute.
Mr. Harrigal: One second here while I bring this up.
(Pause.)
Chair Marks: Oh you know what, Ron? Before you
get going, let me just pause for a minute and report
back the result of the Native American one dollar
coin.

49
Mr. Harrigal: Okay.
Chair Marks: In contention were designs seven,
nine, ten, eleven, twelve, and thirteen. So the
prevailing, and this was very close, the prevailing
design was ten. We had a potential possible score
of 21 with seven members present. By a committee
rule, you have to get to greater than 50 percent of
the vote for a recommendation. Fifty percent of the
vote, of course, would be 10.5. Design number ten
received 11 and it was the highest score. The next
one was design seven, which received ten. I'm
sorry to go in awkward order there but then design
nine received eight, eleven received seven, twelve
received seven, and thirteen received three. So
that is the report on that program.
Ron, are you ready to report?
Mr. Harrigal: Yes. Okay, we are moving on to the
Code Talkers Recognition Congressional Gold Medal.
Legislation is Public Law 110-420. It authorizes the
Secretary of the Treasury to strike Congressional
medals to recognize the dedication and valor of the
Native American Code Talkers to the United States
Armed Services during World War I and World War
II.
Unique gold medals will be produced for each Native
American tribe that had a member who served as a
code talker.
Silver duplicate medals will be
presented to the specific code talkers or their next
of kin. Bronze duplicates will be produced for sale
to the public.
The Deputy Secretary of Defense prepared a list of
identified code talkers that will be continually
updated as new individuals are identified. To date,
the list has grown from 22 to 25 tribes and from
180 individuals to 193.
Each tribe was contacted to establish a design
concept and an appointment of an official liaison
who works directly with their tribal historian and

50
other experts for design review.
The Department of Defense designated the U.S.
Army Center of Military History as our liaison. The
team completes a historical accuracy review of
military uniforms and equipment seen on the
obverse designs. The design concept that we have
pursued to date is on the obverse designs, code
talkers' dedication to military service and the
reverse design features iconic symbols or elements
unique to the tribe, including the tribal seal and/or
elements of the seal.
There are no required inscriptions. However, for
design consistency on the obverse we have put the
tribe's name, the word code talkers, if desired, and
a language or inscription unique to the tribe.
Reverse inscriptions are World War I and/or World
War II as applicable and Act of Congress 2008.
Today we will be reviewing obverse and reverse
designs for the Crow Creek, Sioux Tribe and the
Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe.
And I would like to recognize a special guest here,
Mr. Donald Louder. He is a liaison for the Crow
Creek tribe and I would like to allow him a chance
to say a few words on the designs.
Chair Marks: Absolutely. Mr. Louder.
(Applause.)
Mr. Louder: Thank you. I am honored to be here.
I serve on quite a few committees here in
Washington. I am in Washington about once a
month. But I am honored to be here and I was one
of the three people that forced Congress into
looking at the other code talkers other than
Navajos. Because the Navajos wasn't code talkers
until 1943 and it seemed like they got all the play
and they got everything and it upset the tribes.
It upset a lot of the tribes, especially the Choctaw
Tribe. I understand that Chief Pyle didn't show up

51
the first time because they were just here or
something.
But Chief Pyle from the Choctaw
Nation, they were the first code talkers in 1918.
And the mission that went on when they used the
Choctaw Tribe in Germany, they were being
slaughtered as they made invasions in different
parts, and one of the officers heard the Indians over
there talking in their language. And he said what
are you guys talking? They said it's our native
tongue. So he said, you know what? It kind of
rung a bell. Let's try that. Maybe the Germans
don't understand it.
So anyway, they used the Choctaws. They were the
first code talkers the military were using in 1918.
And when they landed at that mission, they went in,
there wasn't a shot fired. So they knew they was
on to something so they checked to see what other
tribes they had within their division and they ended
up with five. And my tribe, the Sioux tribe was one
of the five that was there, along with the
Comanche, the Cherokee, and I think it is the Osage
the other one. But those are the five that were first
used in World War I and they couldn't say nothing
about it so nobody doing nothing about it. And the
Comanches were commissioned by the United
States military to start -- they were the first code
talkers in World War II. And later on the Navajos
come in two years' later and they got all the history.
But we are honored. You know one of the things
that I talk to when I talk to my tribe -- I should
explain a little bit about myself, I am not only a 33year military Mustang, if any military people know
what I am talking about, but I spent 33 years in the
military from 1950 to 1983. But I talk to my tribe
about it. I say now when we look at this medal, one
of the things I want to caution you about, don't
make it too busy. One of the guys could be me. I
say you could put too much on it. Make it simple
and then make sure that we have our tribe's name
on it and everything.

52
So what you are seeing there, what design that we
picked there went over very, very well. And we
talked to some of our elders. One of our oldest
living member in our tribe is a World War II
veteran. He is 99 years old. And he looked at that
and he said Don's right. That is the one we want
because he said not only if you had that for the
Board but it has the high cheek bones in it. Indians
have high cheek bones. And I told them, we don't
want to get that one by the water because if you
are military you don't sit out in the middle of the
water trying to talk while the enemy is shooting at
you. Make it the one sitting by the rocks. So that
is the one we went with on there.
And the Hunkpati Dakota Oyate is actually the name
of our tribe. The Crow Creek part of it is when the
Cavalry was in that area, that was the name of their
Cavalry post. And they named it after a creek that
came by there and from what I understand there
probably was a bunch of crows there or something
but that isn't even the name of our tribe. We are
the Hunkpati Dakota Oyate Sioux tribe so that is
what we put on.
And we think that that is a very appropriate design
for our tribe. And if you look at it, it kind of
shadowed in those high cheek bones and the old
World War II veteran said that is our people. So
that is what we went with and we made it very
simple with the back part of it. The back of it for
the tribe we have, I don't know if you looked at that
or not but it has got the three teepees in it. And
those three teepees represent the three districts
that are within our tribe. That is the one right
there. There is three teepees in there and those
represent the three districts within our reservation.
And we come from one of the smaller tribes. We
only own about a million and a half acres. But
those are the three tribes. You notice that we
wanted the WWI written out words World War I and
World War II. More people would understand it and
the schools would understand it because some of

53
them didn't know what WWI what does that mean.
But anyway, it is not busy. It is to the point. But
we understand.
So if you have any questions, I can go back -- I do
a lot of speaking at the Veterans. I am the National
Commander of all the Indian Veterans throughout
the United States, so I have been traveling. I flew
in from Arizona. We had a big veterans meeting
down there and I flew in. And after I got here, I
find out the meeting was changed to 1:30 or
something. I asked Betty, I said can I get tickets?
I already made my travel to fly back at 3:30.
But anyway, I am honored to be here and I will
answer any questions you want but you know I was
looking at what you were talking about those two
feathers on there. That is the one I did like. To me
the bird of the United States is what? The eagle,
right? And that has been the representative of all
the tribes since the beginning before the White
people even come to this land, our land. So I
thought hey that represents all the tribes really on
that thing. You represent a turtle and I took my cap
off and I said look I have got a turtle of mine but I
said that turtle represents the women. It says
women are all sacred. And that is the way the
Indian people are.
If any of you have never attended an American
Indian pow-wow -- have any of you ever attended
one? The first thing they do -- what is the first
thing they do? They honor the veterans. And we
invite any veteran that is there to come in there and
they honor him. They sponge him, they cleanse
him and everything that goes on but that is one of
the things they do. The American Indians represent
the veterans. We don't use the word veteran back
home until we have to because we are warriors.
You go back way before, hundreds of years before
1492 and Congress first here. We were warriors
then. We are warriors now. But we are veterans
when we serve for our country. And we volunteer,

54
it is a known fact in the Department of Defense,
Department of Army, of Navy, any of them. The
word veteran is for everybody. A veteran is a
veteran is a veteran. But we represent everybody
when we are there and we volunteer to go there.
The American Indian serve at the highest
percentage of all ethnic groups per capita in every
war and conflict we have ever had. So I will just
stop right there and if you have any questions, you
can ask me. I will try to answer them.
Chair Marks: Any questions?
Mr. Scarinci: I have one quick question.
Mr. Louder: Yes, sir.
Mr. Scarinci:
So everyone is unanimous that
obverse-1 and reverse-1 is the combination of the
designs that you want?
Mr. Louder: Yes.
Mr. Scarinci: Okay. I don't know if anybody has
anything to say but can we just make a motion to
do this?
Chair Marks: You can certainly make a motion.
Mr. Scarinci: I make a motion that we support
obverse-1 and reverse-1 and suspend the voting
and just support the obverse and reverse.
Mr. Ross: Second.
Chair Marks: Okay, it's been moved and seconded
to support -- one minute. You are catching me
unaware here -- so support or recommend the
obverse and reverse number one for the -- I was
going to try to pronounce. Sir, forgive me if I
mispronounce but for the Hunkpati Dakota Oyate
for the code talker medal for that tribe. So is there
any discussion on that motion?
Any discussion?

55
Ms. Wastweet: I for one would like to discuss the
reverse as far as how that is going to look on the
actual coin. I am fine with the obverse.
Chair Marks: Could do that now?
Ms. Wastweet: I could do that now.
Chair Marks: Go ahead.
Ms. Wastweet: Can I ask Ron about the polish and
frost scenarios for these three designs?
Mr. Harrigal: Yes, we have on a Congressional gold
medal, we are going to do more with texture than
polish. We don't put polish on the medals. So what
we will have is a coin surface that it is going to be
lightly de-blasted on everything but we do texture
into the medal. So you will see on design number
one here those areas that are pebbled, that will
have a larger amount of texture. You will see
around the text border, the background on that will
have a lighter amount of texture to it.
Now Don you are there and now I am not sure how
we are going to interpret the scene that goes down
from the doorway on the teepees but that is
something that Don may be able to speak to.
Mr. Everhart: Yes, what I would do is the black
areas, I would have them at field level and I would
raise the stitches that are above that.
Mr. Harrigal: So you would do it in relief, basically?
Mr. Everhart: Yes, I would raise the teepee and
then have the black areas that show the entrance to
the teepee at field level and have the stitches above
that be raised above the field.
Mr. Jansen: And at what level is the white?
Mr. Everhart: That would be just -- that would be a
little bit above the field. The field would be the
black colored-in area.

56
Mr. Jansen: So the black ends up looking like an
encuse, if you will?
Mr. Harrigal: It will, yes, but it is not going to be
polished in this case.
Mr. Jansen: Understood. Okay.
Ms. Wastweet: So on design number one, the way
it is drawn, there is a bit of an outline around the
teepees. So that would suggest a raised border
around the teepees?
Mr. Everhart: So that is how I see it because you
have that circular border that is inside of the text
and the teepee border kind of intersects with that
and there is not a demarcation so I think that that
would be a raised line and it would be all the way
around -- would be above the rest of the relief.
Ms. Wastweet: So on design two, you don't have
the raised outline.
Mr. Everhart: That's right.
Ms. Wastweet: So that to me, I see that as being a
little more three-dimensional in nature, without the
raised border around everything.
You can just
represent the teepee with the opening as an
encused area with the texture in the background?
Mr. Everhart: Basically, it would pretty much be the
same as number one, except it wouldn't have the
raised lines.
Mr. Weinman: You just have a difference in the
height of relief there to show the demarcation.
Mr. Everhart: I would see a raised border where it
says World War I -Ms. Wastweet: I see.
Mr. Everhart: -- and Act of Congress.
Mr. Harrigal: Right. You would do that in different

57
steps of height.
Mr. Jansen: Yes, I'm with Heidi. Because we have
a three-inch medal here, I move away from design
one preferring either two or three, depending on
how kind of graphic you want to be. It was a
smaller item.
Chair Marks:
I'm going to bring you back to
number one because that is the motion.
Mr. Jansen: Well I am going to say the same thing.
I probably wouldn't end up preferring reverse one
because we are dealing with a large field here. And
I think one just doesn't play into that large field as
well.
Heidi, your thoughts?
Ms. Wastweet: Well when I look at one and two, I
can't help but see the symbol for toxic waste. It is
very stark in the triangles; whereas number three, I
see three teepees.
And I think number three is what is going to
represent the best when it is in a sculpted form in
metal.
Chair Marks: Okay, is there any other discussion
before we go to the questions?
Okay, the motion is to recommend obverse number
one and reverse number one. All those in favor,
please raise your hand.
(Show of hands.)
Chair Marks: One, two, three, four. Opposed?
(Show of hands.)
Chair Marks: Motion carries four to three.
So with that, we will -Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I would like to make a little
comment about number one, now that that one has

58
passed.
I think because this is about the code talkers of
World War I and World War II, I believe it is more
important to state that than it is to say the Act of
Congress. And so the wording on number two, I
think if we can just reverse the wording on number
one to perhaps with number two so that on the top
we will have the reading of World War I, and World
War II, and the Act of Congress on the bottom.
Mr. Jansen: Do you want the Act of Congress in a
smaller font and the World War I and World War II
in the larger font?
Mr. Harrigal: If I may interject here, Gary, I think
the CFA made those exact same comments and
they did talk about the significance of World War I
and World War II being more important. And I am
not sure how their wording is going to go on their
motion but they did talk about inverting inscriptions
of World War I and World War II at the top and Act
of Congress was at the bottom because World War I
and World War II were more important.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Yes and I agree with that.
Chair Marks: I was going to go to ask for a motion.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I make it a motion that we
have the World War I/World War II reading on the
top and the Act of Congress on the bottom.
And as far as the size of the font, I don't think we
should vote on that yet. I think just the wording,
the reverse of the wording.
Mr. Scarinci: Second.
Chair Marks: So the motion is to reverse or to
invert Act of Congress 2008 with World War I and
World War II.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Yes.
Mr. Scarinci: Second.

59
Chair Marks: It's been moved and seconded.
there any discussion?

Is

All those in favor, raise your hand, please.
(Show of hands.)
Chair Marks: It is unanimous. Motion carries.
Is there anything else on that medal?
(No audible response.)
Chair Marks: Okay, then we will move on to the
Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe. Ron?
Mr. Harrigal: Okay. So here we have two obverses
that are different. The tribe preference is obverse
number one. We have the code talker which we
have seen on a couple of the other medals that we
have done the same imagery and also this spread of
wing eagle. Design one shows an eagle shielding
the code talkers while two shows a strong eagle
backing the code talker. The description Sisseton
Wahpeton Sioux and code talkers is on the medal.
So we have these two versions for the obverse.
And on the reverse we have variations from their
seal, the tribal seal. Seven teepees in the design
represent the districts within the Sisseton Wahpeton
Lake Traverse reservation. The seven is also the
sacred number to the Dakota tribes.
The pipe
above the reservation is a kanupa with four feathers
attached which signifies the four directions of the
four winds.
Inscriptions and we have a second version with
"Pacific Theatre" and one comment made by the
CFA was should theater be spelt this way or the
traditional "E-R" instead of "R-E" at the end?We
have "Pacific Theatre," "World War II," "Lake
Traverse Reservation," and "Act of Congress 2008."
So this medal is specific to World War II only.
And here is their seal. And of course here you see
some verbiage on it that spells Pacific Theater with

60
an E-R at the end.
So we have the reverse and the two obverse.
back over to you Gary, for comments.
Chair Marks: Okay. I'm sorry.
recommendation of the tribe?

So

What was the

Mr. Harrigal:
The recommendation was design
number one on the obverse and reverse they liked
the design two which had the additional wording on
it of Pacific Theater.
Chair Marks: Okay, I am just going to ask the
committee generally, do we have significant issues
to talk about with this or are we likely to go to the
recommended design? Because I would rather save
our time.
I want everyone to have their say, certainly. But if
this is where we are going to go, then I would
rather do that sooner than later. Heidi.
Ms. Wastweet:
I'm inclined to go against the
recommendation here.
And I think that is the
reason why we even have a review here. If we
were just going to go with the tribe preference all
the time, then it is kind of pointless that we even
review and give our recommendation.
It is
supposed to be our expertise that guides the tribes
when there is something that we view as not an
image that will translate well. That is our job to
advise the tribes.
In this case on the obverse, I do not like design
number one because for two reasons. We have
seen this character twice now. It is getting re-used
quite a bit. I would like to see something fresh.
And the second reason is because of the combined
gesture of the eagle and the soldier, the way he is
holding his hat, it looks like he is getting attacked
by the eagle.
And because the eagle is represented again in a
realistic fashion, it looks like a giant prehistoric

61
eagle attacking our soldier; whereas in design
number two, we have a symbolic eagle, so it, I think
communicates better the idea behind the eagle of
the United States standing behind its soldier and
protecting. Although the soldier in number two is
strong in a bit of a stiff fashion. I can't give a
strong recommendation because of that but I do
prefer the design number two over design number
one.
On the reverse, there is nothing to object to on
either one so I am inclined to go with whatever the
tribe wants on the reverse but I did want to express
my opinion on the obverse.
Chair Marks: Okay. Since Heidi had some concerns
about having a discussion, I have gone ahead and
passed out the scoring sheets. We will observe our
normal process here.
So rather than go person-to-person, are there
members who have comments for these designs?
Erik.
Mr. Jansen:
Yes, I would echo the comments
adding that design number two, and these are
sometimes damning words, but design number two
looks to me like something coming out of 1931
Germany. That is just the way I took it. It is the
way the eagle is drawn. But obverse one, it is
attack mode and I just I can't get over it either.
If this were a fresh situation, I would send it back
for new ideas.
If the group wants a
recommendation, even though it is not strong, I go
for obverse two. Reverse, no objections.
Chair Marks: For myself, I will just add that I do
not like either of the obverse designs. And so
unless someone can convince me otherwise, I will
go with the tribal recommendation.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I would like to just make one
point about this eagle in number one. So many of
you think of it as being an attack. I look at it and

62
when I first saw it, I really interpreted it as the
eagle keeping the soldier in a protective way, as
though he were coming down and caping his boot.
Not that he is going to eat the soldier but that he is
protecting it from other people. So I am look at
that angle as being more protective than being a
threat.
Chair Marks: Thank you, Jeanne. Donald?
Mr. Scarinci: Just a quick comment from me. This
is what is interesting about this process I mean and
why it is so difficult to communicate. I mean we are
trying to tell the artist what we think is good art and
not and it is interesting because on this one, I
thought this was a pretty cool design, actually. I
kind of like the all-embracing eagle. I didn't see it
as a threatening eagle. I see now that you have
pointed out that you think it is threatening, I can
see how you think it is threatening.
I mean when I looked at it, I thought it was a pretty
neat design. I liked the way that -- of course I am
a sucker for that anyway. I like the way the wings
spread around the circle and they use the circle to,
you know, you have to use the circle to frame the
eagle. So it is funny how, I mean you know,
different people see different things.
Again, these medals are hard enough to do.
Mr. Everhart: Sure., I agree with what Donald said
and I will tell you why. When the eagle has his
wings in a kind of protective gesture and had he
been looking at the figure, I think yes, he is
attacking. But the fact that he is looking off to the
side to me indicates that he is looking to protect this
person from something that is outside of the circle.
Ms. Wastweet: My objection is not the position of
the eagle but the position of the soldier who looks
like he is afraid of the eagle because of his body
gesture, guarding his face and holding on to the
helmet. He looks like he is scared of the eagle over
the top of him. The eagle itself is fine.

63
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: But he is not hanging on. He
is listening. He is holding his ear to listen. It is not
clear. It is confusing. But I interpret that as though
he is listening to something, as he should.
Mr. Everhart: It is certainly going to make the
sculpting of the eagles eyes and so forth really,
really critical here.
Mr. Scarinci: Yes, I wish I was able to sculpt this
one. I would like to do this one. I liked it.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I wish you would, too.
Mr. Harrigal: Gary, I would just like to do one note
on that there is a separation between the two, if
you look at the top of the helmet and the eagle that
the artist did intend to have a separation between
the two. The two figures don't actually blend in
together there.
Chair Marks: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Jansen: I would like to make a motion that we
go with the tribes' request on this, which is design
number one on the obverse and design number two
on the reverse.
Mr. Ross: Second.
Chair Marks: We have a motion to recommend the
obverse number one -Mr. Jansen: Obverse-01, R-02.
Chair Marks:
-- reverse number two for the
Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux.
I will start the
discussion.
I don't have any objection to the motion for what its
objective is.
But given that Heidi had some
concerns and all, I am willing to stand down from
this or to vote against this motion and just go ahead
with our normal scoring. But it is not a huge issue
to me. So we will see how the vote goes. Anyone
else?

64
Mr. Scarinci: I mean we could short circuit easily
just by doing the vote.
Chair Marks: Okay well let me ask this.
Mr. Scarinci: I mean if it carries then -Chair Marks: Yes. Heidi had the concern to start
with. Heidi what is your take on the motion, if I can
impose on you?
Ms. Wastweet: I would prefer to just do our regular
voting.
Chair Marks: Okay. So I guess I am going to just
to honor the fact -- if we were all unanimous on this
point -Mr. Jansen: Can I withdraw my motion?
Chair Marks: Well I would have to
have Mike withdraw the second.
Mr. Ross: Withdraw it.
Chair Marks: Okay, so that is withdrawn.
I think it is important -- just to finish the thought -I think it is important that unless we are all
unanimous on setting aside our normal process, I
want to honor it. In the first instance, we were
receiving very unanimous for the first tribe we
looked at to just approve what had been
recommended and there wasn't any question about
it. If there is any question at all, I want to revert
back.
So the scoring sheets have been passed around. If
you want to go ahead and complete those and
before I run over anybody, are there any other
comments?
(No audible response.)

65
Discussion and Approval of the 2011 CCAC Annual
Report
Chair Marks: Okay hearing none, then Erik will tally
the scores for us. And while he is doing that, I am
going to move us down on the agenda to the
discussion on the approval of the 2011 Annual
Report.
And I am going to run through very
quickly, for the benefit of the press here and others
what is in the report in the way of our
recommendations, which is kind of a brief of what
this report is about.
And we have it broken down into circulating
commemoratives, numismatic commemoratives,
and a category we call other, which you will
understand when I get to that.
But as far as the circulating commemoratives we
have a program proposed here that has been
proposed for the last I don't know about three or
four years and it is the idea of our co-circulating
Liberty Series where the concept would be
beginning in 2017, which happens to be the 225th
anniversary of the founding of the Mint that a
Liberty-themed penny or one-cent coin would be
produced that would circulate in tandem with a
2017 Lincoln cent. We are not doing away with the
presidential themes at all.
The next following year, 2018, there would be a
Liberty Nickel that would circulate in tandem with
the 2018 Jefferson Nickel and so forth through the
denominations until we arrived at the dollar coin in
2022 and there would be a Liberty Dollar that would
be issued alongside the Sacagawea Dollar. So that
is the circulating commemorative program that we
are recommending in this report.
As far as numismatic commemoratives, Congress
and the President have completed processes for
2012, 2013, 2014.
There is nothing for us to
recommend for those years. When we last talked
about this report, 2015 had two open spots for
commemorative recommendations. Since that time,

66
the U.S. Marshal Service Commemorative Coin Act
was put into place. And so we need to, as I am
done presenting this, we need to make a decision
between the two recommendations we have put in
here. We need to take one out.
And the two recommendations are the National
Fallen Firefighters Memorial, which I have always
seen as kind of the bookend to the Peace Officer's
Silver Dollar that was done in the 1990s to
memorialize I think there is a memorial here in D.C.
for peace officers. There happens to be a site in
Maryland for the National Fallen Firefighters. The
idea here would be to honor those first responders.
And then the other recommendation for 2015 was
the observance of the 150th anniversary of the
Thirteenth Amendment to the constitution, which
was the abolition of or outlawing of slavery and
involuntary servitude, which occurred on December
6, 1865. So we will circle back to that but keep
those two in mind. We need to make a decision.
2016 as far as commemorative programs, we are
recommending the 150th anniversary of the
founding of the American society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals, the ASPCA, which was
founded in 1866 and, as I think most of us knows,
has been instrumental in advancing the humane
treatment and protection of animals.
Then we had the concept of a 90th anniversary
commemoration of the establishment of U.S.
Highway Route 66. It was a unique program in that
our idea here is rather than to do the traditional
silver dollar and perhaps a half dollar or a $5 gold
coin which we typically see, this idea is to produce
eight clad half dollars with each half dollar bearing a
common reverse and a unique obverse. And that
unique obverse, one of each would honor each of
the eight states through which the route passes.
And I tried to capture that in the paragraph that
describes this recommendation.
Moving on to the other recommendation section, we

67
recognize that in 2011 the one dollar silver eagle
bullion coin had reached its 25-year point of
existence, which under the law would allow a
change. Our recommendation is to stay within the
intent of the public law 9-61, which approved back
in I think '85 or '86, and to simply go with that vein
and issue a new Liberty image and a new eagle
image both on the obverse and reverse
respectively.
Then the more creative idea here is a medals
program that in the report is called the Expressions
of America Art Medals Program which would give
our artists an opportunity to be innovative and to
use some advanced design techniques. Those could
include ultra-high relief, encused design treatments,
laser etching, selective gold plating, holograms,
colorization, gold cameo insets, holographic colors,
bi-metallic outer rings and such.
The program would be set up so that there would be
an annual theme or themes developed by the Mint
to be approved by the Secretary and then the
artists would just be given free rein to create
something within whatever the general overarching
theme was, which would have something to do with
America.
So other than that, there is just some informational
items about when we met, what we talked about,
and then a brief listing of who the members were
who served during fiscal year 11 and some of these
people did not serve concurrently. So understand
that.
So two things I would like the committee to look at.
Knowing that we, as a committee, I know there are
some new folks here but as a committee, we have
looked at all of this in the past. One is that I erred
in the recommended mintage for the Route 66 half
dollar series and I put in a recommended total of
500,000 half dollars or clad half dollars. Normally
with half dollars we go with the 750,000 figure.
And then of course we need to make the decision on

68
the commemorative program for 2015.
If there are any questions or comments, I would like
to have those now.
Mr. Ross: Gary, I just want to quickly. At the 2015
I am not going to speak against the firefighters
because I think that is an admirable coin theme but
I just want to speak in favor of the Thirteenth
Amendment theme under the theory that we did a
big series on the Civil War which is important in the
events of the war but the Thirteenth Amendment
gets to the meaning of the war and adds a
dimension to the representation of that period in
commemorative coins that is important.
Chair Marks: I have a suggestion to make. Seeing
that the Thirteenth Amendment is an event that
makes sense that we would honor it in the year of
its 150th, whereas the firefighters item is not a
year-specific honor or commemoration, it is just
simply commemorating the fallen firefighters.
I
would suggest -- the fallen firefighters was my
original idea so it is very important to me as
someone who I served with these first responders
as a professional city manager and would like to see
them have a commemoration equal to their
counterpart first responders of the peace officers.
So it is very important to me that we retain that in
some way but my suggestion would be that if the
committee is agreeable that we would go with the
Thirteenth Amendment for this report but I would
like the committee to be on record that we are
going to find a slot for that perhaps in the next
report. And if that is agreeable, then that is a
direction I would like to go.
Mr. Jansen: What's the genesis of the Thirteenth
Amendment concept? Did it come from a particular
group or -Chair Marks: It was Mike, I think that brought it up.
Mr. Jansen: You kicked that one in there? Okay.

69
Mr. Scarinci: Okay, so let's get a motion. Right?
Chair Marks: Yes.
inclusive motion.

I mean we would have one

Mr. Scarinci: Oh, okay.
Chair Marks:
Let's approve the report with a
change in the recommended mintage for the
Highway Route 66 from 500,000 to 750,000 and
then
to
eliminate
the
fallen
firefighters
commemoration with the understanding that we will
pick it up in the fiscal year '12 report.
Mr. Scarinci: We are keeping Route 66?
Chair Marks: It's already been approved.
Mr. Jansen: Ron, there is the assertion in here that
you guys are excited and capitalized to do all of
these wonderful, dare I say Canadian coin
processes; bi-metallic, holographic, gold, cameo
inserts, colorization, selective gold plating, laser
etching.
Mr. Harrigal: Well, we don't have the equipment to
do colorization. We don't have gold plating that we
can do, unless we send it out. And I know the
selective gold plating is somewhat of a proprietary
process. It requires licensing. Bi-metallics, we do
have eight press that can do bi-metallics. It is in
our R&D center. It is not in a production area but
we do the capability for bi-metallics.
The Canadian processes with holograms and that
sort of thing, we don't have the same equipment.
They have newer generations lathes, newer
generation lasers that can do it. There are other
ways to do holograms and that is with an insert, a
titanium insert and that sort of thing. We would
have to go with that technology.
Mr. Jansen:
So the answer is you are not
committed against them.
Mr. Harrigal: No and in fact we have an R&D Center

70
that we put in that we are staffing up, getting more
equipment. I am going through the process right
now of a business case to justify a laser like the
Canadian Mint.
So we are going through the
processes of doing that, which will give us the
capability.
The one thing that is more of, I think, a longer shot
and requires a lot more discussion, is like colorized
coins.
Chair Marks:
that --

Yes, and I just want to emphasize

Mr. Jansen: I just didn't want to put something in
here that becomes a white elephant for the Mint to
deal with.
Mr. Harrigal: You know, it is one of those things
that if it is put in there and there is a ground roots
support for it, we will develop the technology.
Other mints do it. Some of this stuff shows up in
legislation like curved coins and things like octagonshaped coins that show up.
Mr. Jansen: So the key is to make sure that -Mr. Harrigal: If it is in legislation, we have to do it.
Mr. Jansen: -- the deed pays its way, so to speak.
Chair Marks:
And we are not talking about
legislation. We are talking about medals that I
understand the Mint Director has the ability to
authorize.
Mr. Harrigal: Yes.
Chair Marks: And these are not directives. These
are suggested ideas. The operative word here -Mr. Jansen: I just didn't want to put them in a
position that asked them to for a terbium of blanks
or something.
Chair Marks: Yes, the operative word here is these

71
"could" include.
Mr. Harrigal: Yes, that's great. You know that
technology, other mints are doing it. We would
have to acquire and there is a bit of a time frame on
coming up to speed. But if it is something that from
a business case is justifiable in the way of at least
break even, we could do it.
Chair Marks: Yes, the idea is just to give our artists
some free reign just to create, which is something I
think we all have wanted to see. If we took the
wraps off the detailed instructions with you have to
have this inscription and you have to have a design
that this element and that element in it, if artists
were just free to create something in a more
general context, what would they do? I think it
could be really illuminating for all of us.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: I just wanted, as an artist, to
speak to that issue.
Sometimes having the
parameters is a good thing. And if you are trying to
work with a program, you need the parameters.
However, the parameters could be flexible and I
think that that would help the artist, I think, a lot,
some flexibility. But eliminating totally, I think I
would flounder a little bit.
Chair Marks: Yes, I mean there are parameters and
that is the process of the Mint staff developing
conceptual ideas, having the Secretary or I don't
know the Director perhaps sign off on those, so that
it is not just -- it creates something American. Here
is an American theme. Create something within this
realm kind of thing.
Okay, so with all of that, is there a motion to the
extent that I described it?
Mr. Jansen: I move that we accept the Draft Annual
Report 2011 with the amendments previously
described.
Chair Marks: And I will second that.

72
Mr. Jansen: You owe me for that.
Chair Marks: What's that?
Mr. Jansen: You owe me for that.
Chair Marks: I know I owe you for that. Okay.
Okay, so the motion is to approve the Fiscal Year
'11 Report with changing the mintage on the Route
66 half dollar to 750,000 and to move forward with
the
150th
anniversary
of
the
Thirteenth
Amendment, and with an intent to include the
National Fallen Firefighters in the Fiscal Year 2012
Annual Report. Is there any discussion?
(No audible report.)
Chair Marks: All those in favor, raise your hand.
(Show of hands.)
Chair Marks:
approved.

We got six votes -- unanimous it is

Okay, we have reached the end of the formal
agenda. I am aware that there is probably some
discussion yet to happen. Who had that?
Mr. Weinman:
Sisseton?

What was the scoring on the

Chair Marks: Oh thank you, Greg. Let's look at the
scores. Okay, yes, Sisseton Sioux.
Out of a possible 21, obverse-01 received 18 and
obverse-02 received one. And then for the reverse,
reverse-01 received three points and reverse-02
received a perfect 21.
So those are our
recommendations.
So -Ms. Stevens-Sollman: Just wait before we leave
that topic. There was a discussion on the spelling of
theater. Do we have to address that.

73
Chair Marks: On what?
Ms. Stevens-Sollman:
theater.

Theater.

The spelling of

Mr. Jansen: E-R or R-E.
Chair Marks: Okay well let's talk about it.
Ms. Stevens-Sollman: On the tribal seal it is with ER.
Mr. Jansen: It's -- oh, okay. Yes, back one. Yes,
upper right; two o'clock.
Ms. Wastweet:
their seal.

So the spelling is different from

Chair Marks: Is the tribe aware of the difference?
Mr. Harrigal: Yes, they are. They okayed the
design this way and we can loop back with them to
see whatever their preference is on it.
There was a discussion yesterday at the CFA about
what is proper when you talk about Pacific Theater.
So we are going to have break out the Oxford
English Dictionary to make sure we are spelling it
right.
Chair Marks:
Okay.
You know I think if the
committee is inclined, I think we could rely on the
staff just to go ahead and address that issue.
Mr. Harrigal: It would be a historical inaccuracy.
Mr. Ross: It's not. It goes either way. Some
grammarians say that a theater is an actual like
theater company and a theater is a place. So that
would lend towards the E-R.
But when you look at the trends of American
History, it is only since about 1980 that E-R has
become the commonplace and people used R-E
before. So it doesn't matter.
Mr. Harrigal:

Yes, and I think in this place what

74
complicates it is on the seal. And I am not sure -we have to go back and verify this on the seal but it
is spelled with an E-R. So anyway, we just loop
back with the tribe and see if they have a
preference or an accuracy. I don't think either is
wrong in this case. It is just a matter of where we
want to go with it.
Chair Marks: Okay, Heidi.
Ms. Wastweet: I wanted to open up the floor to the
members expressing their opinions of the new
circulating white quarter. When we reviewed this
artwork it was an experiment and so, therefore, I
think it is important to look back around now that
we have the final product and evaluate that and see
was that experiment successful or not.
And I can pass these around to anyone who wants
to hold it again and look at it again.
Chair Marks: Is there discussion about that? What
do we think about that quarter? It was kind of -- it
was clearly an experiment. We all knew it was
going to be an experiment and we moved ahead
and -Ms. Wastweet: Don, why don't you -Mr. Scarinci: Do you want me to chomp?
Ms. Wastweet: Yes.
Mr. Scarinci: I'm chomping.
Ms. Wastweet: Go first.
Mr. Scarinci: Look, I think the proof, I mean we
were all excited about it when John Mercanti
showed it to us and I think that it was, in many
respects, a drop of water to some thirsty people
looking for some attempt at coming up with images
that are new and different. And so we took a
chance.
I think the proof version actually does work. So I

75
think the proof version of that is a nice design. We
knew there would be issues with the uncirculated
version at the time, we didn't know that it was
going to be like this. I mean again, there is going
to be things that we are going to do that are going
to come out great and we are going to love them.
And there is going to be things that we are going to
do that are going to be problems or challenging and
you are not going to know because to some degree,
we are breaking new ground. A piece like this
breaks some new ground and it is going to take a
while to acclimate the American people to seeing
designs like this on coins that circulate.
So I don't expect instant change but I do expect us
to try. And did this one work? You know, there is a
lot of reasons that I think you will say that the
uncirculated version of this did not work. But I
would still, if I had it to do over again, I would still
absolutely, unequivocally do it.
Chair Marks: I will go on record agreeing with
Donald that it is important that we try these things,
although I was a very loud dissenting voice for this
design because I feared this outcome.
But
nevertheless, I think it is important that we do
make attempts to be innovative and to try new
things because there will be times when we have
great success and we did see that recently with the
9/11 medal, with the Star Spangled Banner and I
expect the same will be true of the Girl Scouts.
So with being on the cutting edge and the bold front
here, there is going to be wins and losses and so I
think it is important that we continue to press
forward with innovation.
Are there any other comments?
Mr. Harrigal: Gary, I would just like to add one
thing on the coin there. When we went through this
exercise about which design to select on Hawaii, we
talked about how to take a design like this that was
somewhat abstract and flat and execute it and we
committed to doing it.
When it came time to

76
execute, it was one of those items that allowed us
to think further on what we are capable of doing.
On the proof coin we used multiple levels of frosting
on the ejecta from the cone. So you will see two or
three different levels of frosting on that. So it
translated well on the proof coin. On a smaller coin
or one that doesn't have the ability to do that kind
of frosting on it, it may look like dirt on the coin or
dye breakage or whatever it is. I also want to say
that in a five-ounce, the three-inch version, you get
a different visual than you do on a quarter size and
we are seeing that with a lot of them but on quarter
size they just don't quite work. But we put it into a
three-inch pallet and you say wow, that is just
amazing what you can put on those coins.
So I thank the committee for the opportunity to go
forward with that. And like with anything that you
do that you are breaking new ground on it, you are
going to have some designs that are going to be
home runs and you are going to have some that
maybe not strike out but not as good as what you
would have hoped for.
So I appreciate the committee allowing us to go
forward.
Chair Marks: Heidi.
Ms. Wastweet:
I'm very excited that we tried
something new and the five-ounce is really
interesting looking.
I want to take away something here that we can
learn and apply in the future, not just analyzing this
one piece of work or not work but what can we take
away from this to learn from the future.
In
analyzing this, I think that we just have too much
monotony of the same texture whereas a natural
element like a volcano and the lava coming out of it
would not be so evenly spread. And also the detail
is so small and I'm impressed that it showed up the
way it did. But it could be snow or something it is
so tiny and so evenly disbursed.

77
So maybe in the future recognize that we need a
little more variation in sizes of the texture and in
the middle.
Where the lava is coming up, it
becomes such a mass that it looks like a tree or
something and it is not really coming forward. So
when we are looking at the artwork in the future, to
keep this coin in mind the fact that it worked on the
larger piece is really telling that size is really
important and that we should just keep that in mind
in the future when we are evaluating designs.
And I would like to ask Don what his opinion is and
what his takeaway is learning from the future on
this piece.
Mr. Everhart: Well I'm glad we tried it, too. I'm not
sure it is my favorite of the ATB series, although I
do like the large version also better than the small
one. But I think that it is good that we are open to
experimenting and with different laser textures and
different polishing patterns and things like that and
I would like to continue to do that.
Mr. Jansen: I would like to thank you. I don't know
how many times the clay was thrown away as you
were doing this. I think it is fabulous.
Mr. Everhart: Well I didn't do it, so I can't tell you
that.
Mr. Jansen: Oh, okay. Well, then recant it.
I think it is great. I love the fact that it was a low
political risk venture for this committee and you
guys as a group to do this. Because a lot of times
the fear blocks the possibilities. So thank you for
being able to do that.
Mr. Everhart: Do you want us to -Mr. Jansen: What's that?
Mr. Everhart: Go ahead, I'm sorry.
Mr. Jansen: No, no, go ahead, Don.

78
Mr. Everhart: I was going to say you want new
ideas and things and we are open to stuff. You
know, definitely want to try and we want to have a
look to the stuff that we do to the medals and coins
that we do that is exemplary of the times we live in
and that people in the future will look and they will
say yes, this was done in the early 21st century by
the U.S. Mint. You know, we are going to try and
get to that point that. And we are going to have
growing pains getting there but we are going to try.
Mr. Jansen: Well maybe we can do some clouds
and some fur and explosions and things like that
with this kind of stuff.
Mr. Harrigal: I can say one thing that this pallet
would be perfect and that coin would be perfect to
colorize.
Mr. Jansen: Oh, yes.
Mr. Harrigal: I mean, that is the pallet that you
want to use for colorizing.
Mr. Jansen: Yes, yes.
Mr. Everhart: And I hope you don't do it.
(Laughter.)
Chair Marks: Amen.
Mr. Jansen: There was some discussion among
some folks about alright, texturing, sculpting aside,
was this the right volcanic crater? I don't really
care. I just think it is awesome that we did it.
Thank you for pushing and trying. And the fiveounce version of this is very sweet. It is very
sweet. Thank you.
Chair Marks: And Don with all the innovation that
we are looking forward to in the future, I would be
very pleased if you just forgot about colorization but
that is just one man's opinion. So I think it is
sacrilege to put color on a coin or a medal.

79
But anyway, is there anything else for our
discussion?
We have reached the end of our
agenda and if there is nothing else -Wrap Up
Mr. Jansen: When is our next meeting?
Chair Marks: That's a good question. Ron or Greg?
Mr. Harrigal: We are actually talking about two
months away with the election coming up. As I said
earlier, that we are talking either the week before
Thanksgiving or possibly the week after. It depends
how we progress with ATB and the Presidents in
platinum. Those are the three primaries. And then
the one other program that may end up coattails
effect is the spouse, although that does generate a
lot of time and a lot of effort by the committee.
That may be pushed off to the next.
Chair Marks: Okay, our normal meeting date in
November would be the 27th, which is the Tuesday
that follows the Thanksgiving weekend. So I would
just asked the members just tentatively keep that
date in mind. Don't give it away.
Mr. Scarinci: I already gave it away.
Chair Marks: Okay well we will need to converse
about it perhaps online and figure out the best date
but just as a matter of course, that would be our
normal date. I'm not saying that is what we will do
but that would be our normal date.
Mr. Harrigal: Yes, we definitely want to meet before
the end of the calendar year. So if it is not that
week, it would -Chair Marks: It needs to be soon because as we get
into the holiday season -Mr. Harrigal: Exactly.
Chair Marks: -- it is going to be really hard to get a
quorum.

80
Mr. Harrigal: Yes, I understand.
Chair Marks: Okay, we will work that out. Thank
you for the question, Erik. Is there anything else?
Mr. Jansen: What I was going to say next is what is
the possibility of meeting in Philadelphia one of
these times soon, just to afford the new members
who haven't enjoyed the Philadelphia site a bit of a
tour and so forth?
Chair Marks: Greg?
Mr. Everhart: Let's see our new area here.
Chair Marks: We would love to see it.
Mr. Weinman: As you know, -Mr. Everhart: We love it!
Mr. Weinman: As you know, we are in a period of a
bit of austerity at the moment. That could change,
depending on how the fiscal situation goes her in
Washington. So at the moment it is not something
that I would commit to today but in a more typical
environment yes, we try to -- we have always tried
to have at least one meeting at a facility, usually
Philadelphia, especially when we have a lot of
turnover members.
So I think this is probably best a question to table
until after the new year.
Adjourn
Chair Marks: All right, good enough.
Okay, if there is nothing else, we stand adjourned.
(Whereupon,
at
1:32
p.m.,
proceeding was adjourned.)

the

foregoing