The 4 pieces, including two pieces from Winslow Homer and Andrew Wyeth, were expected to cover the museum’s 19.8 million dollars in bond debt that it acquired during its 2005 expansion plan. The museum chief did make an effort to inform the public through the media, but the museum was still faced with criticism from members of the public as well as its peers. “The Association of American Museum Directors (AAMD) warned Delaware that selling artworks for purposes other than acquiring new pieces for the collection was a "serious violation" of its code of ethics and professional standards, but the museum was undeterred” . Even with a warning from the AAMD, the Delaware museum’s continued with the sale of the …show more content…
If there was still debt from 2005 expansion deal in 2014, then the expansion did not bring in the revenue that the museum predicted. Instead of becoming a bigger institution, maybe the Delaware Art Museum should have focused on expanding it community programs or refining them. Bigger institutions are not always better, it is the quality of institutions that matter. Focusing on refining their existing programs or creating new programs would have cost less than $19.8 million and would have brought them closer to their community. As for the Randolph College and its Maier Museum of Art, the Maier should form a plan that help it move away from being completely defendant on the college. The Maier has no control over the collection that is in its possession and it is at the whim of the college’s interests. It should focus on funding raising efforts and creating a student board that will work on preserving the museum’s and the college’s