Financially strapped MOCA announces layoffs

More financial woes for the Museum of Contemporary Art:  The cash-strapped institution announced today that it is reducing its staff by 20% as well as cutting operating expenses. The plan is to reduce expenses by approximately $4.4 million a year.

The cuts will result in the elimination of 32 jobs -- 16 full-time and 16 part-time -- across all museum departments.  A statement from the museum says the departments of marketing and programming will be most affected.

MOCA's chief executive officer, Charles E. Young, said in the statement: "It is my responsibility to lay a new foundation for the museum's long-term financial stability based on efficient and accurate financial management.

"In addition to making these vital cuts today, we are committed to supporting MOCA's on-going and aggressive fundraising and to the recruitment of new and dedicated MOCA trustees so we can together continue the exceptional mission of MOCA."

-- Diane Haithman

Photo: MOCA's Grand Avenue museum. Credit: Lori Shepler/Los Angeles Times.

Comments

[Donald Frazell]

Sounds responsible. Now, when the fundraising gets going and the economy imporves sometime next year, prehasp we can rename the place. NO, not in honor of Young, but perhaps a wall or something, but become a relevant piece of LA. MOPCA
Museum of Post Contemp orary Art

Maybe then they will find something to put up on the empty walls, if they have anything left of the Count Panza collection, which I have heard rumors that they already long ago sold some of their best pieces, a Pollock included, this from an ex employee I will not name. Lets see a list of what they got and what they still have, no one ever sees it, So dump the Contempt stuff, and keep the late Modern and find something worth viewing, now that the Age of Excess is over.

art collegia delenda et

[FrazellIsMyGuru]

When you check out the "future exhibitions" page on the MoCA website, you'll quickly see why layoffs are needed: simply, nearly every exhibition at the museum in 2009 is boring, academic, architecture-heavy, artistically-light, crap. I wouldn't be surprised if the museum garners the lowest attendance in its history, and lower than many mediocre regional museums. Who's programming this place, Art Center?

Dan Graham. Who?
Adam Silverman and architect Nader Tehrani. Who?
Benjamin Ball and Gaston Nogues. Who?
Thom Mayne/Morphosis. Who cares? (Go up the street and glance at CalTrans...that's all I need to see)
Luisa Lambri. Boring.
Drew Heitzler. Who?

For arguably the best contemporary art museum in the US, there sure isn't anything to see. My suggestion? Go check out LACMA, Getty, or Norton Simon. That's how to do it. MoCA isn't even as good as the Hammer, and that's really sad.

[Paul Planters]

Everyone i know just go to shop at the stores anyways. The shows have been either really good or really bad, but the store is always worth the trip and the hassle to park. Plus, it is the best way to support the museum and come away with something cool. I'm sorry for the people that got laid off, hopefully it won't effect the good stuff.

[Mat Gleason]

How about MOCA start by selling off any art in their collection that was made by artists MARRIED to its tenured permanent curators. Start with curator Ann Goldstein's talentless photographer husband. MOCA owns a few - who paid for them? Probably couldn't get ten cents on the dollar for his obtuse, pedantic images these days. The frames are worth more!

[John Quincy]

FrazellIsMyGuru are you kidding? I know nothing about art and even I know who Dan Graham is. I think you need to look at the mix of exhibitions again, and you will realize the breadth and depth of MOCA's programming, from local young artists to conceptual behemoths, to architecture and design. If you look at what they've done the past year, it has been the same thing, introducing me to local artists in their Focus series, and ranging from accessible and visually easy shows like Louise Bourgeois, and more complex ones like Kippenberger. I agree that all the other museums you have mentioned are doing fine work as well, but to disparage MOCA is just ill-tempered and petty. They are an excellent institution and I am proud to be receiving my "contemporary arts education" through them...

[Mrs. Almasy]

To CEO Young,

It's a true shame that you laid off all your best and brightest today. Did you ever vet the selected 32 employees laid off, or did you blindly accept the ‘recommendations’ of the higher management that got MOCA into this bleeding mess in the first place? Something tells me - belonging to the upper management ilk yourself - that you went with the latter. How absurdly foolish! Well, you are certainly off to a great start - if bringing down the remaining fractured pieces of that spoiled city treasure is what you intend to do.

What a tragedy Eli Broad's money will be spent to keep the place afloat long enough for the current employees to drive it further into the ground. And trust me, it's no secret the Directors and the Deputy Directors and Assistant Directors – i.e. the same people that protected their own necks today - are the very people that have brought MOCA to its knees in the first place. The poor souls who were sent adrift today were merely the rank and file that spent years (some decades) with full fledged passion committed to that godforsaken museum.

Bon voyage, MOCA!

[FrazellisMyGuru]

JQ - I do know a lot about art and have heard the name Dan Graham, but couldn't tell you a damn thing about him or any of his work. Thus the "who?" I don't want to disparage MOCA, but in their economic shape, in their awful location, and with the tremendous competition (primarily from centrally-located MOCA), NOW would be the time where they need to do a series of superstar shows to bring in the locals, the tourists, raise their profile and raise some cash. I'm not talking about King Tut, Giorgio Armani, motorcycles or Vanity Fair photographs, but I think the public at large and museum members would completely understand if MOCA put aside some of the "education" aspect of the museum for a year or two and focused on some crowd-pleasing, revenue-generating exhibitions.

[Donald Frazell]

Ahhh, that must explain the huge throngs of people who descend on MoCA everyday, to be thriled, revived, intrigued, inspired by such wonderous works. Oh, my bad, no one goes, and no one who hasnt been to an art school knows or caresabout any of it, ones brains must be shrunken to the size and limitations of a spud to find it intersting in anyway. Oh, forgot the heart, there is SOO much passion in Contemp Art. LOL!!!

[Hang the Rascals]

Sounds like many of you posters are already looking for excuses not to support MOCA. That would be a horrible mistake in its time of critical need.

How much more evidence do you need?

[Irrelevant]

All these people that MOCA never bothered to notice, Gleason, Frazzelli, all come out to beg for attention in the comments section of this blog. Enjoy the spotlight ! MOCA will live on, you'll be forgotten.

[arteeeest]

I've got no problem with the MOCA exhibits. I don't know half the people they show, so I just view the piece on it's own merit, not with the knowledge that x artist is sleeping with y curator.

(I've gotta find me a curator. Woo!)

Anyway, what *I* don't understand about the cuts is why they are aiming them at the marketing department. After all, they are the ones who actually put together the programs meant to lure people into the museum, and therefore bring in the money.

What they going to do now? Have the prints assistant curator stand at Union Station with a clapboard around their neck??

[Cindy Bernard]

I am amazed at the irresponsible moderation of these forums. Instead of dialog, the forums continue to be dominated by one voice and unproductive personal attacks such as Mat Gleason's.

Shame on you LA Times for posting such drivel.

And congrats to John Quincy for his reasoned response.

[ex la art fan]

matt gleason ...frazell....paleeeeez what a gang of whiners the mag is crap the comments dull and un helpfull get a life left la and dont miss the art scene at all...it was never ever about la artists it was posers from out of town showing the latest purchases by board memebers or junk lie armani or selling handbags garbage all of it what happ to the local artists where did they show ...in coagula haha

[FrazellandGleasonAreRight]

Ms. Bernard - My naysaying doesn't come from MOCA hatred, rather it stems from a combination of passion for contemporary art and simultaneously sound business practices. If I didn't care, I wouldn't waste my time posting comments about it. But the lame programming at MOCA and their complete inability to grasp the reality of their financial, management, parking, lack-of-restaurant restaurant, space and location situations/limitations, is staggering. As you and many other "mobilizers" have opined, you, and yes, even I, know more about how to make MOCA a success than the "professionals" that run the place. LACMA is kicking MOCA's ass and they have nary a clue why that is. I'd like to see MOCA relevant and coffers flushed, but first they have to recognize and admit their problems. Right now, and with their awful 2009 programming, they are doomed to failure.

[Mat Gleason]

MOCA is in complete denial about their failures and the people who point this out are NOT the problem.

I have loved MOCA since my first visit there in 1984 at the TC and those who seek to stop criticism of this institution are threatening its lifespan by keeping it aloof, rewarding its secrecy and insisting that the record of its management be free from scrutiny and critical analysis.

[Kelly L]

It is sad that in the second largest city in the United States a great museum like MOCA has to struggle. Maybe it is time for more people to get a membership.

[FRAZELLED]

A critical ruling by the Supreme Court in 2005 augmented protections for older workers. The court stated that a plaintiff in such an discrimination lawsuit need not prove an employer acted intentionally, only that a layoff had a “disparate impact” on older workers. The ruling is important because it can be difficult to find evidence that an employer deliberately singled out one or a group of employees.

[T. Kelly Mason]

Hey Mat, I think you are angry. you act like your being oppressed and I don't see it. But firstly, this newsstory was about job cuts, people lost their jobs OK.

Why should you use this as an occasion to diss Christopher Williams. And to be so dumb about it. If you want to know where the funds came for the purchase you can politely call the museum and someone there will tell you.

Does MOCA oppres you somehow? Gimmie a break. They support people that make things (artists for one) in this community and sometimes yeah poseurs from out of town. You been selling a kind of attitude with your magazine that requires you have somebody or some instituition to kick against. Everybody get's what your doing.

I'm surprised that after all this time on the scene you can't see the bigger picture. Different groups are always served differently by different instituitions. The more art that is hapenning in this town the more advertising you sell in your magazine. MOCA is good for you. Hell, if you were ambitious, you might assign some of your resources at your magazine to reporting on the situation. Ask real questions about real things instead of speculating about real people in print. That's out of line.
No one is happy about getting fired or knowing people who were fired or even firing people. And people seem confused about what's happening or even how things happen. Like it or not you do have a voice in this community why don't you do some decent reporting about the story.

This story here is just a press release from MOCA, is someone at the LA Tmes or Coagula going to ask MOCA some questions about the restructuring plan they have in mind? If they fired from specific sectors than what's the idea behind it. How will the firings make the museum stronger, more flexible, cheaper to run? That would be fit to print and a competent CEO would surely make that information available.

These arguments about programming have no place in the discussion right now. People lost their jobs.

[Mat Gleason]

Yeah yeah sorry for caring and for being upset about a great museum being systematically destroyed and sorry for not hiding behind an internet alias, sorry for not doing decent reporting on this like Christopher Knight calling out the board of trustees three years ago when it mattered, oh wait I mean three months ago when it was too late.

[Donald Frazell]

Mat, are you that Caligula Mag guy? I really would think you more revolutionary, but then, Caligula was one of the most decadent of all Roman Emperors, not cute or learned at all. You are only angry about personal stuff, not art. It doesnt matter who did what to who, or gets to show what Contempt Garbage,, it pretty much all is, as it does not look to add to human culture, but glorify the individual. Decadence personified, for virility is in adding, growing, becoming more. Not posturing, self worshiping, exhibitionist nonsense based on human vanity.

You seem like a good and intellgent guy, realize this, Contempt art is over, dead, and was merely absurdist entertainment for the self styled elite, not of humanity, for humanity, with humanity, it is fractionalizing and vain. WAS.
It is dead, but atually was DOA. Dead on Arrival.
1962-2008. Time to move on, embrace erspoonsibility, and grow up.

art collegia delenda est