Opponents askMaryland AG to block BMA’s sale of artwork
The 3 proposed sales will fund museum’s diversity initiatives
Nearly two dozen art lovers are asking topMaryland officials to block the BaltimoreMuseum of Art’s proposed sale of three iconic and arguably irreplaceable artworks. Theywarn that AndyWarhol’s “The Last Supper” is at risk of being disposed of “at a bargain-basement price.”
The letterwas sentWednesday night to Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh andMaryland Secretary of State John C. Wobensmith. It cites anomalies ranging froman alleged conflict of interest to the apparent lack of a competitive bidding process in choosing Sotheby’s Auction House to handle the sale.
In response, theBMAsaid it has broken no laws and violated no ethics codes in the “deaccessioning,” a museum’s decision to remove artworks from its permanent collection and put them up for sale.
The letter is protesting the Oct. 1vote by the museum’s board of trustees to sell the threeworks to fund diversity initiatives, including staff salary increases.
The letter asks the officials to halt the planned private sale of theWarhol painting aswell as the Oct. 28 auction of Clyfford Still’s “1957-G” and BriceMarden’s “3.”
“Therewere irregularities and potential conflicts of interest in the sales agreement with Sotheby’s and the process by which
staff approved the deaccessioning,” the letter says. “There are important questions regarding whether theBMAhas breached the public trust.”
Leading the list of signatures were the names of Laurence J. Eisenstein, a formerBMAtrustee and chair of the museum’s contemporary acquisitions committee and Constance Caplan, former BMAboard chairwoman.
Raquel Coombs, a spokeswoman for Frosh, said:“We typically don’t comment on complaints to our office or actionswemay or may not take in response to complaints.”
Wobensmith did not respond to a request for comment.
Because museums traditionally act as stewards for cultural treasures held on behalf of the public, decisions made by these institutions are overseen by state attorneys general.
The letter points out that the BMAhas received significant funds fromstate taxpayers, including $11.2million toward a multiyear $28 million renovation that wrapped up in 2015. If Froshwere to conclude that theBMA’s board of trustees had acted illegally, he could seek to block the sale by filing a lawsuit and asking a judge for an injunction.
When the salewas announced earlier this month, museum director Christopher Bedford said the three pieceswere expected to fetch around $65 million.
But the letter claims that “The Last Supper” alone could have been auctioned for that amount— if theBMAhad engaged in a competitive bidding process.
TheBMAreceived a guaranteed minimum price of $40million for the monumentalWarhol, the letter claims. It describes the painting as “a perennial favorite ofBMAvisitors” and “the most important work” in theBMA’s collection by the Pop artist.
Warhol made multiple paintings of “The Last Supper.” InNovember, 2017, a comparably sized versionwas sold for almost $61 million by Christie’s AuctionHouse, according to the auctioneer’swebsite.
“This significant disparity in price is extremely troubling,” the letter says, “and leads one to conclude … that theBMAdid not sufficiently exercise its fiduciary duty in valuation of thework and in seeking to maximize the sale proceeds.”
In addition, theBMAplans to auction off the only artwork it owns by Still, who lived nearWestminster between1961and1980.
“Because Still’s paintings have
price tags that run in the tens of millions,” the letter says, “one can say with almost 100% certainty that if theBMAdeaccessions its single piece by the artist, the museum will never again represent thework of this major Abstract Expressionist who lived in the state ofMaryland.”
TheBMA’s statement is silent as to whether it engaged in a competitive bidding process. It said only that “theBMAhasworked with Sotheby’s on numerous occasions, as have institutions across theUnited States, to great success.”
The proposed sale is just the most recent in a series of sweeping changes that Bedford has instituted since becoming theBMA’s director in 2016. He is attempting to make the museum morewelcoming and accessible to a diverse audience and artists.
Proceeds fromselling the pieces byWarhol, Still andMarden would create a $54.5 million en
dowment for the care of the collection. Interest fromthat endowment totaling roughly $2.5 million annuallywould be used to increase staff salaries, eliminate admission fees for special exhibitions and offer evening hours. In addition, $10 millionwould be set aside to acquire moreworks created bywomen and artists of color.
Some of Bedford’s previous decisions have been controversial, including a 2018 auction of seven artworks for $16.2 million that included two less significant Warhol paintings. Though the letter never names Bedford— it refers to him only as the museum’s director— it represents the first significant public criticisms of his management style.
The letter claims that the museumengaged in an ethical infringement by asking curators to vote for a sale thatwould increase their own salaries. The letter says the curators’ unanimous recommendationwas a key factor in securing approval for the sale from some board members.
“The Director of theBMA placed the curatorial staff in an untenable position where they could not avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest as they could directly benefit from the sale of theworks,” the letter said.
In its statement, theBMA called the conflict of interest allegations “unfounded,” adding that specific pay raises have been identified only for the security guards who noware paid $13.50 an hour and other low-paid staff members who did not vote on the potential sale.
“Members ofHR[Human Resources] and senior leadership areworking to map out additional positions in need of pay increases in order to achieve equitable compensation across the institution,” the statement said. “Moreover, key senior curatorial positions at theBMAare endowed, making these positions minimally impacted by any changes in salaries overall.”
The letter states that it “strongly supports” the museum’s goals of increasing diversity and inclusion. But it says the funds to support the new acquisitions and diversity programs could have been achievedwith standard fundraising practices.
“We hope that the Board will reverse its decision to deaccession theseworks while there is still time to do so,” wrote Eisenstein, aWashington attorney, in an email.
“If the sale of these iconic artworks is finalized, Maryland will lose a significant part of its cultural heritage.”
This news was included in our weekday morning audio briefing on Oct. 16.