Are nonprofit museums a good investment of Stimulus Monies? That's the question presented in the LA Times noting that some legislators are seriously questioning such investments.
But after reviewing the article I'm not getting the issue. Stimulus funds are supposed to provide a direct, secondary and possibly tertiary economic benefit to a community. At least from the examples in the article, museums sure accomplish these objectives. And, maybe, even better than some of the public projects. Museums are, after all, run by citizens, mission-centered and focused on maximizing each dollar invested (maybe way better than the public sector).
So, what was the question?