So much is out there re: the Detroit situation that I can simply give you a few excerpts for the flavor.
From a Reuters article published yesterday:
[Emergency Manager Kevin] Orr said he has never visited the DIA, though he has studied the museum’s art collection, which includes an 1887 self-portrait by Vincent van Gogh and a 27-panel fresco by Mexican artist Diego Rivera.
“I actually took an art history course years and years ago, and the stuff I read about is there,” Orr said….
…Orr said he would make a decision about what to do with the art after Christie’s completes its review, perhaps by mid-October.
Despite the size of the DIA’s collection, only 5,000 or so works are on display at one time. Orr said about 35,000 works are not subject to bequests or other obligations that would limit the ability to sell them.
“Once we find out what we’re talking about, that’ll probably lead the discussion about what we can and can’t do,” he said. “I’m not being flippant, I’m just being very careful because every time I say something about the DIA it’s another three weeks of, ‘Orr the Luddite is getting ready to sell our family jewels.'”…
…The emergency manager said many works “may not have been seen for decades,” and that the city must determine what is worth selling.
“If you have to sell 10,000 pieces to get ten dollars, why would you do that?” Orr asked.
Oh, brother.
Meantime, James Russell, over at Bloomberg, is more sensible:
…What would it take to put Detroit on a sustainable footing? That’s the question that’s got to drive decisions, and it is appalling that it does not….
…Once disinvestment starts in an American city, it’s pretty hard to stop. When businesses leave because somewhere else is newer and accessible by a shiny new freeway, you lose the talent and investment that keeps cities healthy. You lose good leaders and have to settle for hacks. Of course Detroit is badly governed, as many other poor communities are. Who would want such a thankless job?…
…The primary counterbalance to the forces of disinvestment has been the historic-preservation movement, which has drawn millions of people and catalyzed the investment of billions of dollars in cities….
…So responding to the Detroit debacle by regarding art assets as monetizable for the purpose of paying off creditors is not only wrong, it is strikingly venal and cruel. Detroit’s assets need to be understood in terms of what they can do to revive the city, not on what cash they will produce at auction.
Amen to that one.