Opinion: Detroit Art Sell-Off Would Betray Public and Donors

Selling masterworks from the Detroit Institute of Arts to pay down the city’s $18-billion debt would be “a betrayal of public trust and donors’ bequests” and violate the museum’s nonprofit status, a New York Times art critic writes in an analysis of the controversy.

Roberta Smith lays out the history of the museum’s operational and financial ties to the city, which formally owns the institute’s building and collection. Detroit’s emergency fiscal manager, Kevyn Orr, has retained auction house Christie’s to assess some of the museum’s holdings as part of the city’s bankruptcy proceeding.

Ms. Smith argues that Detroit is less the owner than the “steward” of art acquired by the museum, primarily with money that did not come from the city. She says the controversy raises questions “about who owns the art housed in public nonprofit institutions, and what art is good for” and has “struck fear in the hearts” of officials with other museums tied to city governments.