Today The New York Times rendered its version of the controversy wracking the Miami art world: Should the Miami Art Museum renamed itself the Jorge M. Perez Art Museum, in recognition of his contributions to the capital campaign and donations of art?
The article follows several in the Miami Herald — see here and here.
But essentially, the articles all say the same thing — Perez (left) is giving a total of $35 million, if he gets the naming rights. The board approved, in a 30 to 4 vote, and the deal is set. But others, including some trustees who resigned, disagree with the naming. They call it inappropriate, saying that it sends the wrong signal “as to what the museum is all about.” Some may reneg on promised gifts.
I side with the dissidents, for several reasons, beginning with proportionality. The new museum is said to cost about $220 million — Perez is giving $20 million total, in cash, including a past pledge of $5 million. The rest is art. That is less than 10% of the capital cost — not enough for the whole building. A wing, yes.
Second, the naming is in perpetuity, Bad decision. As the Times pointed out, enlightened donors are realizing that non-profits must continue to raise money in perpetuity. They need to recycle naming rights. Fifty years should be the limit in most situations, especially one like this where Perez has not given that much.
Third, a question: is Perez liked in the donor community? If not, the Miami Art Museum should prepare to be turned down by donors who think he bought the museum, or held it up.
Fourth, does the museum and its board realize that they have slapped a ceiling on future giving? if naming rights for the whole museum cost $35 million, by generous count, what can they offer someone who comes along in three years, say, and has the capacity to give more?
We’ve seen this play out in New York in recent years. A few years ago, the New York Public Library received a $100 million donation from Stephen A. Schwarzman, chairman of Blackstone Group. The NYPL engraved his name FIVE times on its historic Fifth Avenue building, which was renamed for him. Trouble is, Schwarzman has manifested a devil-may-care streak for conspicuous spending and earned a lot of enemies along the way. Some people have stopped, or cut back, their giving to the NYPL as a result: they find the excess engravings to be tasteless.
And there’s that ceiling. Sure $100 million sounds like a lot of money; but the NYPL is a big organization, a top-notch place that earns donors much standing even in tough New York.
No one is going to give more than $100 million to it, because the NYPL has little in its arsenal of rewards for that now.
Too bad the Miami Art Museum didn’t think this all through before negotiating with Perez.
Photo Credit: Courtesy of The New York Times