The DIA figures that this will offset the $500-million that EM Orr is looking in revenue from selling their collection.

In exchange for this government coerced charity, the proposal also mentions the idea of Detroit handing over ownership of the art to the state, but it will physically remain in Detroit. The also threw out the possibility of statewide traveling art shows to sweeten the deal.

I'm not so sure how the UMMA, KIA, GRAM, or FIA members (just for starters), will feel about their own tax dollars being used to compete again themselves for visitors and potential donors?

I'm also not so sure how this will play out in Detroit.

Just last week, Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson compared the state contract to run Belle Isle as, well, I'll let the good councilwoman speak for herself:

"It's an absolute treasure, and Belle Isle is ours. It flies in the face of all the public pronouncements of the state trying to help the city. It sounds like a rape to me. It should never be touched. It's a disgrace before God to have this outrageous seizing of an asset."

To be fair, the protest on Woodward last week by the Socialist Equality Party had a fairly good turnout.

Finally, I'm not so sure about the Michigan taxpayer being on the hook for $500-million, with some of us already paying a DIA tax, when the collection itself was initially estimated to be anywhere from $10-billion to $20-billion.

Shame on you, Ms. Erickson, for not wanting to do your part to help Detroit emerge from bankruptcy.

Detroit owes an estimated $20-billion to creditors.

And with the potential for more taxpayer money coming in, comes an important question: Does the DIA know how to manage the money it already has?

Competent financial leadership has always been the DIA's Achilles Heel.

I've mentioned this before in an earlier post, but it strongly bears mentioning again.

Back in February of last year, the Detroit Free Press did a write-up on the "Rembrandt and the Face of Jesus" Exhibit at the DIA. In the article, Detroit Institute of Arts Director Graham Beal let slip a very damning quote on how he feels about DIA generating money on its own:

"The strong box office for Rembrandt is a boon to the bottom line. An especially expensive show to mount, it was budgeted at $1.8 million and was always expected to lose money", Beal said.

This is a very important quote from DIA Director Beal that bears repeating:

"...it was budgeted at $1.8 million and was always expected to lose money."

Must be nice to spend other people's money and not need to be responsible whatsoever.

One would think that on the surface, the DIA's proposal is DOA in Lansing.

I'd highly caution against that quick conclusion.

Aside from Speaker Bolger & Sen. Richardville, two republican representatives also feel that the proposal "merits discussion".

Quoted in the LSJ, Rep. Frank Foster said, "We need to put all alternatives on the table. The only alternative that's unacceptable is just selling the art to the highest bidder."

Rep. Rob VerHeulen quote was also a little disconcerting.  He said, "Historically, there has been funding for the DIA from the state. Of course, our budgets are always tight, but we need to look at all options. It depends on particulars. Is there a local match? How does it mesh with the tax millage from the three counties? It's a very complex thing, but it's a worthwhile discussion to have."

Yes, in true politician fashion, they both provided waffling, non-answer answers to the reporter's question.

But the correct answer should have been let the DIA stand on its own merits.

The Toledo Museum of Art has done this for decades.

So has the Henry Ford.

The same can be said for the Cranbrook Science Center.

What have they been doing for all of this time, that the DIA will not cannot replicate?

I wouldn't be very surprised if the DIA sent its big guns, Eugene Gargaro, Jr, Annemarie Erickson, Cynthia Pasky and Saul Green up to Lansing to do some "convincing" of state legislators. After all, we all know how weak-kneed republicans can easily be swayed when intimidated by the well-connected.

One final note: The DIA was well aware of the possibility for years that their collection was in jeopardy in the event of a Detroit bankruptcy, yet chose to do nothing without appearing to be political.

So True Believers, the choices here are:

Should stupidity be painful?

Or should people be forced to contribute to something that they have no interest in supporting?