Direction of MoNA, and its future, contested

Over 60 people filled the second-floor gallery for the community workshop considering the path forward for the Museum of Northwest Art last Wednesday, the 21st, and none of them were happy. Tom Beckwith, a member of the board of directors, ably led the meeting. Like a huge family reunion, the group was contentious. Not everyone liked each other, but all were civil.

Gary Molyneaux, board president, invited participation in his opening remarks, saying “we are trying to move toward accountability and the future. To move to the future, we need you. We need your input and ideas.”

He got plenty of both.

The board is considering three alternatives for MoNA’s future: 1. Maintain MoNA “as is” – fix the roof, siding, and replace the mechanical (HVAC) systems to protect the gallery’s holdings; 2. Expand MoNA – develop a facility that represents the community’s vision; and 3. Close or revise MoNA, sell or reduce space occupied in the current building, and donate or share the collection. The general sentiment, in and beyond the meeting, is that option three is untenable, indeed unthinkable.

As one person asked, rhetorically, “The question to address is was this brought about by some natural disaster? I would like to know how MoNA got here.”

Gretchen McCauley, one of the six board members who resigned on December 2, spoke to the historic struggles MoNA has faced. McCauley had served 17 years on the board and her mother, Phyllis, was a museum founder. She recalled that money has always been a problem and community support always a strength. McCauley expressed a sentiment that people on all sides probably share: “I am hearing things that are not true or are exaggerated.”

Six primary issues were voiced: board and management – executive director Christopher Shainin’s – leadership and competency, financial solvency, the annual auction, local artists’ recognition – the lack of it, community, the physical specialness of the region, and education and outreach programs.

The plan of breaking into groups was abandoned as the crowd insisted on maintaining the town hall meeting unity.

To summarize the themes:

The good

Sherry Chavers, a volunteer and donor, and Christine Cleland-McGrath, both of Anacortes, praised the education and outreach programs. Chavers passionately shared the success and worth of working with poor children typically ignored by museums and Shainin’s vision to make that happen.

Cleland-McGrath, holding her baby, recalled her mother bringing her to MoNA and the importance of programs for her older daughter.

The museum “needs to get the trust of the community back. This is a community plan. Get more of our community involved. And don’t depend on Seattle or Tacoma,” was an early audience comment.

Former board member C.J. Ebert integrated the themes of community and the auction “Since the auction moved to the Casino, the passion has gone done. And, additional funds have not been generated.” The auction at the Casino has created dissension in the community, he believes, and on the board. He shared his frustration that promised board discussion on bringing the auction back to La Conner did not occur. MoNA turned its back on the community when it took the auction away” to the Casino in Anacortes was a sentiment several shared.

Theodora Jonsson, an artist living at the mouth of the Skagit River, stood up and made a plea for the working artists and the landscape, the geology and geography. “It’ about a sense of belonging and its about community,” she said. “It is the people that make art here and what nurtures them,” including three watersheds and two seas. She spoke for this generation of artists.

Several artists spoke to the lack of recognition by the Museum of local artists and criticized the seemingly sole interest in their art to support the auction.

The bad

Building maintenance has been deferred for years. The roof, south side of the building, and heating and air conditioning are in desperate need of repair or replacement. HVAC costs are estimated at over $300,000; the work must be done in 2018.

MoNA operates at a deficit until fundraising, primarily the annual auction, brings accounts into the black.

In 2014 an unsolicited donation of over $600,000 was given. That money was spent on operating costs. Folks expressed concern that other large donations, and monies given for restricted purposes, have been co-mingled with operating funds and spent. [this will be examined in a future article – editor]

The bulk of donations comes from locals, someone observed. More than one person, speaking for themselves and their peers said they will give no more money to the Museum.

Someone criticized reaching to the Seattle metropolitan area for donors: “You thought the money was in Seattle. It’s not. It’s in the Valley. Get rid of the idea that the money is in Seattle.”

Everyone agreed that more robust results in fundraising are needed now and for the long haul

Bruce Bradburn, who also resigned with the group in December, shared his frustrations with the lack of urgency from Shainin and Molyneaux. He had been prepared to solicit large donations one-on-one and was told no. He was removed from committees, he said.

Regarding the deferred maintenance to the building, Beckwith admitted, “We were not effective. We let it go too long. In simple terms, it didn’t get done.”

The ugly

Many placed the blame on Shainin, the executive director since 2013 and Molyneaux, board president since 2016. Erlene Beckes, a former board member, stood up in front, faced the group, and took Shainin and the board to task. She said he had failed in the fundraising responsibilities of his position and leading the Museum. The relative newness and inexperience of the board was his responsibility, she said. “Turning things around would start with Shainin’s resignation,” she said.

Ebert and McCauley also called for Shainin’s and Molyneaux’s resignations.

More work is needed, including press coverage

The meeting wrapped up before people were ready to go. Many wanted to have further and deeper discussions on many of the topics.

It was clear that a monolithic position is not held by the entire community. Rather, the community has many interests and voiced different positions on the same issues.

No one statement got overwhelming applause. The greatest support was for educational programs, artists and “community” unity between artists and appreciators of art and the Museum. All other positions, for and against got tepid to polite clapping.

The MoNA community agrees: The Museum is in deep trouble and the way forward is unclear, contentious and troubling.

All are unhappy. People are not united around one faction and no stronger leader is now present.

More next issue.