One Year Later, LACMA Still Seeks Director : Financial and staff chaos has scared away applicants, but the economic picture seems to be stabilizing; now the search may be getting down to the final stages.

A year ago this weekend Michael E. Shapiro announced his resignation as director of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. “I have reached the conclusion that it is time for another leader whose strengths might better fit the pressing financial needs of the museum to take the helm,” Shapiro said, after less than 11 months on the job.

His abrupt departure appeared to be the inevitable result of his own administrative inexperience and a countywide fiscal crisis that wreaked havoc on the museum. Shapiro’s brief tenure was marked by reductions in the museum’s funding, staff and programs. Some galleries were closed on a rotating basis, and the entire museum went dark on Tuesdays in addition to regular Monday closures.

These difficulties were exacerbated by an exodus of curatorial talent and a lawsuit filed by senior curator Maurice Tuchman, whom Shapiro effectively demoted. (After Shapiro left, Tuchman was reinstated.) Amid the turmoil, a LACMA-commissioned study revealed that the museum doesn’t begin to measure up to its peers nationwide in endowment funds and trustee support.

It seemed that things couldn’t get much worse at the Wilshire Boulevard institution, and indeed they haven’t. But now--long after headlines about the disasters have faded--LACMA remains director-less.

Why?

“That museum is tainted,” says one prominent cultural leader who declined to be identified but expressed profound concern about LACMA’s ability to attract inspired leadership and move vigorously into the future. Moreover, he said, the longer the museum goes without a director, the more it reinforces a perception that nobody wants the director’s post.

“Who needs it?” asks one Southern California art dealer, reciting LACMA’s well-known litany of problems. “Anyone who might be predisposed to the position doesn’t want to deal with the trustees, who are notoriously difficult and have a reputation for pursuing their own interests.”

Indeed, skeptics throughout the arts community ask why any seasoned professional who is up to LACMA’s challenge would want the job. Museums all across the country--including the venerable Museum of Modern Art in New York--are going begging for directors in a climate of reduced public and private support, so top candidates can afford to be choosy. And, although LACMA is a high-profile museum that grew at a phenomenal rate in the 1980s under Earl A. (Rusty) Powell’s leadership, it needs a director with enormous energy and talent to turn it around.

“It’s a job for somebody who’s willing to roll up his sleeves and plow into it, not for somebody in his last five years before going out to pasture,” one local museum director says. “They have a lot of competition, but I think they will be able to get a first-rate director. LACMA is still one of the premier museums in the United States, and I think they have done a good job of putting a lot of their problems behind them. Most of the problems that remain are endemic to the field.”

Despite the challenges, William A. Mingst, president of the museum’s board of trustees and chair of a 12-member trustee search committee, expects the museum to have a new director by the first of the year. Although the committee has yet to formally interview a single candidate, Mingst says he expects the search to reach its final stages by the end of September. He attributes the long delay in appointing a new leader to a process of putting the museum back on track so that desirable candidates will be attracted to the position.

“The good news is that I have talked to many people who are enthusiastic about coming to Los Angeles,” Mingst says.

The process didn’t even begin until February--after Museum Associates, LACMA’s private support group, negotiated a new contract with the county to stabilize the museum’s public funding and after Mingst succeeded Robert F. Maguire as president of the board of trustees.

Mingst and his committee are working with consultants from Korn Ferry, an executive search firm that has helped find directors for two other Los Angeles County cultural institutions--Shelton g. Stanfill at the Music Center and James Powell at the Natural History Museum. The consultants, staff and committee have compiled about 150 names of potential candidates and advisers, Mingst says. Although he says that no short list exists, he expects to begin formal interviews within the next two weeks. As to specific individuals who may be under consideration, he declines to comment.

Candidates must be well grounded in art history and museums, he says. But the committee will consider “renaissance individuals” from foundations, universities and other institutions, as well as people in the museum community. However, the job will not be restructured now that county funding has been secured. “We still need a strong director and a deputy director who works with the county because there are many county issues to be dealt with, concerning maintenance, buildings and grounds,” he says.

Above all, the museum needs a chief who can inspire the staff and rally community support, Mingst says. “In all our discussions with staff and trustees, the word leader keeps coming up--almost to the point of charismatic leader . We have a large staff that needs a unifying force.”

Stephanie Barron, curator of 20th-Century art and coordinator of curatorial affairs at LACMA, agrees: “We need someone who can generate enthusiasm. No matter how great an art historian you are, if you don’t have leadership qualities, it won’t work.”

Although the museum appears to be in better shape now than it was a year ago, most of its gains come with strings attached.

In mid-December, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge approved the settlement of a $100-million legal dispute involving Christian Science literature, which awarded $23.5 million to the museum, but LACMA has not received the money because the suit is under appeal. If the original decision is upheld, the entire award will go directly to the museum’s endowment, Mingst says.

Late in January, the County Board of Supervisors approved a new contract with Museum Associates, establishing an annual base amount of $14.2 million in county support for the museum but requiring the private backers to contribute a sum equal to 80% of the public funding. Although the contract represented a $2.1-million drop in county funds from a peak of $16.3 million contributed in 1991-92, it provided much-needed stability.

At the same time, the Board of Supervisors agreed to provide interim funding for the museum’s acquisition of a vacant May Co. facility adjacent to LACMA, as the first step in developing an expanded art complex. The deal entails a bonded indebtedness of $25 million for the museum--$18.3 million for the purchase of the property and the remainder for construction.

LACMA expects to use part of the property for its own programs and operations, while renting space to complementary cultural organizations. Proposals are being entertained, but no plans have been adopted and development costs have not been estimated, Mingst says. As it stands, the project is both an enticing opportunity and a daunting fund-raising burden for the museum and its new director.

Meanwhile, a $5-million county bond issue has launched a sculpture garden surrounding LACMA and the George C. Page Museum, which is expected to break ground this fall. And plans are afoot to reopen the museum on Tuesdays. To that end, LACMA’s 11 volunteer councils have joined forces to sponsor “The Art of the Palate,” a series of 46 fund-raising dinners on Sept. 29-30.