A difficult choice

Detroit has extraordinarily difficult problems and has long been on a slide of poverty, losing population, and fleeing businesses.   The city's population is now 80% African-American, mostly low income.  City services cannot continue to meet needs.   Police and fire fighters are spread way too thin.    Calls to 911 for emergency responses may take an hour or more.

The governor stepped in and appointed a special manager to take over the running of the city from elected officials.  After a six month evaluative period, he has now filed for bankruptcy for the city.

One of the things in dispute is what happens to former government workers who depend on  pensions from the city.   Will that go into the bankruptcy settlement?  Or is it protected?

Here's where the difficult choice comes in.

The city of Detroit is said to be in debt about $18 billion.

Unlike most cities where the art museums are owned and held in trust for the citizens by a nonprofit corporation, the city of Detroit owns the Detroit Institute of Art.

An off the cuff estimate of the value of the art work in the museum is $20 billion.

Do you sell a first class art collection (including works by Carravagio, Rembrandt, and Van Gogh) to pay off a city's debt?     What if it means people lose their pensions?   Schools have to close?   Libraries are defunct?    I am a great believer in the value of art and music and sports to the life of a city.    But how do you decide priorities?   Short term goals vs long term goals?   Present misery vs irreplaceable treasures?   Especially when selling the art would not directly provide city services and pensions;  instead it would go into the pot to give other creditors a better return in the bankruptcy division.

Ralph