Besides having its newspapers all owned by out-of-state interests, corporate backwaters LA might now also see the Getty Museum partially decamping. See the below excerpt from the March 30th New York Times (which, of course, is the best newspaper to get news about... Los Angeles):
"The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, which opened its Richard Meier-designed complex eight years ago and is reopening its Malibu villa next winter to house Roman antiquities, is thinking about its own future with the aid of Mr. Ellis. As the Guggenheim Museum continues to expand with satellites all over the world, for example, "We're asking ourselves, does that pattern make any sense for us?" said Barry Munitz, the president and chief executive of the J. Paul Getty Trust. "Do we want other sites? Do we want other partners?"
To refresh your memories, when the Getty Trust became the richest arts institution in the world, it was widely assumed that we would - finally - have a world-class art museum in Los Angeles. Alas, that was never to be.
Instead of building a world-class art collection, the Getty money has been increasingly funneled into various (albeit, very worthwhile) programs all over the world as the last remaining masterpieces of many artists in private hands have been picked up by museums in other cities.
And now, inexplicably, the Getty appears to be considering not only even further cutting back on building its local collection, but to then also distribute its very small painting collection - compared with art museums in other world class cites - to other parts of the world.
Say it isn't so Barry!