Mergers & Acquisitions

Growing up in Philly I learned that there were two ways of getting things done: on the streets – usually quicker – by handling it yourself or hiring someone (no names!!) or in the courts – slower, less messy – The Main Line Way. The latter course illustrates what is going on at the Barnes Foundation, and documented most recently in the documentary The Art of the Steal.

The movie which opened last Friday at the Landmark E Street Cinema is a riveting account of how disparate groups of characters – politicians, nonprofits, and the Barnes’ own Board of Directors – worked diligently behind the scenes to engineer the move of the much heralded Barnes Collection from Montgomery County to the Benjamin Franklin Parkway. As a former resident and enthusiastic supporter of their arts scene, I can tell you it saddens (at times disgusts) me to see the City, State, and nonprofits coming off looking so badly. For those who agreed to appear on camera, and many did not, the complete lack of ethical scruples looks almost childlike as they explain to the audience the realities of doing business in today’s world. It breaks down like this: You bring the product and we’ll supply the venue.

In sports terms, you’re looking at a franchise heist. Philadelphia wants the Barnes Collection and to pry it out of Merion they’ve offered what amounts to a new stadium, boatloads of money, and corporate sponsorship. Maybe naming rights are up for grabs, down the road. If you thought nonprofits were akin to public service, you’re living in the distant past. Trustees are in essence minority partners; they buy a stake (at the price of a small ransom) with the idea of bringing in others with the mutually beneficial backroom-business arrangement such cozy proximity spawns. The financial bar is set quite high, but not too high; as Michael Kaiser points out in his book about remedies for ailing nonprofits, the Art of the Turnaround, the focus is on the larger donor. In the case of the Barnes, they’ve created an extra ten places at this stacked table, but for the privilege of remaining in the game they’ve got to observe the “3 Gs: Give, Get, or Get-off.” When it comes to private versus public interest, the house always wins.

If you care about historic preservation or environmental issues you’ll have a sense of what is at stake in the gutting of this splendid educational facility. To remove the essence of what defined Albert Barnes unique vision of art appreciation and education and drop it in the center of the Benjamin Franklin Parkway is an act of cultural vandalism. The Barnes Foundation is a threatened historic facility and as such qualifies as a candidate for America’s 11 Most Endangered Places identified by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Despite all you’ve read and heard about the move, the issue here is tourism, or more specifically tourist dollars. Access – making the collection available to more people – is a red herring. The prize is the art; education as such amounts to no more than window dressing. The vested interests are looking for a big uptick on their investment: more visitors, store purchases, donors, and the tax revenue those increases will bring, along with a bonanza in grant money. There will be matching and challenge grants galore as trusts look to bring in as much of the rake as they can without putting up any (or as little as possible) of their own funds.

There will be opportunity costs, in economic terms, with limited money to go around, especially in these tough economic times, there’s only so much available for charitable giving: small nonprofits will be the big loser, it’s my bet the philanthropic money will follow the big institutions.

Proponents of the move are fond of quoting the judge who ruled in favor of the move, who said he did so with a clear conscience. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a jurist who is untroubled by matters of this magnitude. I don’t want one who sleeps well at night; I want one who tosses and turns.

All you Washingtonians out there: I invite you to conduct the following thought experiment. Imagine that it is James Smithson’s will we are talking about and it’s the Nineteenth Century. Now Britain ultimately coughed up the dough, but it didn’t have to, especially given our status as a former rebellious colony. Saner minds prevailed in those days and we can only hope before this matter rests that the right thing will be done here, if not through the legal system, then in the ultimate court of appeal, and the most important, that of public opinion.