Well, Brandeis made the New York Times again, which is never good news. This time, it’s a short blurb about a lawsuit which has been filed against us by several Rose Art Museum overseers:
Lawsuit Seeks to Save Art Museum at Brandeis
Three overseers of the Rose Art Museum filed a lawsuit on Monday in state court in Massachusetts, seeking to halt Brandeis University’s plans to close the museum and clear the way to sell some of its works, which include pieces by Roy Lichtenstein, Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns and Ellsworth Kelly. The university’s trustees voted in January to close the museum and sell the works, collectively estimated to be worth a total in the area of $350 million, as a way to help the university contend with an endowment that has been seriously diminished during the financial crisis. Brandeis later backtracked, saying that no works would be sold in the immediate future and that the building would remain open as an art study center, though not as a public museum. In their suit the overseers — Jonathan O. Lee, Lois Foster and Meryl Rose, a member of the family whose donations created the museum in 1961 — contend that Brandeis’s plans to close the museum “contradict the charitable intentions” of the museum’s founders, “abrogate Brandeis’s promises that the Rose would be maintained in perpetuity” as a modern and contemporary art museum, and violate its commitments to those who donated art to the museum. In a statement, attorneys for the university called the lawsuit frivolous and without merit, arguing that the Rose’s endowment is part of the larger Brandeis endowment, and that the university is focused first and foremost on “providing its students with a first class education and ensuring that Brandeis continues to provide financial assistance to needy students.”
“Education Before Art, Brandeis Says”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/arts/design/29arts-EDUCATIONBEF_BRF.html?scp=1&sq=brandeis&st=cse
Responding to a lawsuit filed on Monday by three board of overseers members at the Rose Art Museum who want to prevent its closing by Brandeis University, the university said the needs of its students must come before art stewardship. “The debate here does highlight a difference between Brandeis and these three Rose overseers,” Thomas F. Reilly, a lawyer for the university, said. “That is, that the university has a responsibility to provide the very best education and faculty to fulfill its higher educational agenda. Apparently, these three overseers are oblivious to the Brandeis mission.” The university’s trustees voted in January to close the museum and sell its works, collectively estimated to be worth around $350 million, to help the university address a seriously diminished endowment resulting from the financial crisis. Brandeis later backtracked, saying that no works would be sold in the immediate future and that the building would remain open as an art study center, though not as a public museum. In their suit, the overseers contend that Brandeis’s plans to close the museum “contradict the charitable intentions” of the museum’s founders and renege on promises made to art donors.
more details are availible at http://www.thehoot.net