Guggenheim Helsinki Plan was an initiative to establish a Guggenheim museum in Helsinki, Finland. A proposal was introduced to the Helsinki City Council in 2011. After rejection of the initial plan in 2012, a new plan, introduced in 2013, was considered and finally rejected in 2016.
Following the 2011 proposal of a plan by the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation for a museum next to South Harbour, Helsinki, a debate was waged among local political and culture activists. The project's construction costs were estimated at 130–140 million euros to be paid by the city of Helsinki and the Finnish State. Guggenheim's license fee for the first 20 years was estimated as 23.4 million euros. Running costs of 14.4 million euros per year would outstrip annual admission fees of only 4.5 million euros. A survey found that 75% of citizens in Helsinki, and 82% of citizens in Vantaa, opposed the project. The Helsinki City Council rejected the plan in 2012. In 2013, Finland's Parliamentary Ombudsman issued a report concluding that Finnish investor and art collector Carl Gustaf Ehrnrooth, a member of the Board of Directors of the Guggenheim Foundation, and Janne Gallen-Kallela-Sirén, director of the Helsinki City Art Museum and a chief exponent of the Guggenheim plan, had conflicts of interest involving the plan and each other.
In September 2013, the Guggenheim Foundation advanced a revised proposal that sought to address the concerns. Operating cost estimates were revised downwards, while revenues were forecast by the Foundation to increase. In 2014, the city board agreed to reserve a new site for a potential museum at Eteläsatama and authorized the Foundation to hold an international architecture competition to design the potential museum. The competition, which was organised by London-based specialists Malcolm Reading Consultants, drew a record 1,715 submissions, and six finalists were announced. In June 2015 the French-Japanese architecture firm Moreau Kusunoki Architectes was selected as the winner. In December 2016, the Helsinki city council rejected the plan.
Initial proposal In 2009, then-Director of Helsinki City Art Museum, Janne Gallen-Kallela-Sirén, introduced to the city of Helsinki the idea to approach the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation in New York regarding establishing a museum in Helsinki that might stimulate tourism. In January 2011 the Guggenheim proposed a plan to the Helsinki City Council. The proposal was for a 12,000 square meter building, with the museum comprising 4,000 square meters. Helsinki would pay the construction costs, estimated as 130–140 million euros, plus the land costs."Helsinki city council reserves plot for Guggenheim", Yle Uutiset, 14 January 2014 The museum was planned to be supervised by a board with 4 members from Helsinki and 3 from the Guggenheim. Five to eight exhibitions annually were assumed. The museum would also provide pedagogical and educational programs highlighting Finnish art, architecture and design.HS 11.1.2012, p. A4
The Guggenheim Foundation persuaded the City Council to commission the Guggenheim Foundation itself, for a fee of 1.15 million euros, to study the feasibility of building the museum for the Foundation, a move that American professor of architecture Peggy Deamer summarized as: "Despite quibbles regarding which entity has more to gain in the marriage—the Guggenheim or Helsinki—there is no speculation about who operates under whose umbrella. This is a purely fiduciary undertaking in which the Guggenheim 'oversees' Finland’s financial performance."Peggy Deamer, "The Guggenheim Helsinki Competition: What is the Value Proposition?", The Avery Review, no.9, Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation. Berndt Arell, Director of the National Gallery in Stockholm, Sweden, supported the project and participated in the steering committee of the evaluation. Arell was a director of The Svenska Kulturfonden, which contributed 250,000 euros to support the Guggenheim evaluation. The Finnish Cultural Foundation also supported the project.Gyggenheiin varjo$$a, Kaarina Taipale (toim). 2012, p. 22; Guggenheim Study, pp. 12–13 The feasibility study, presented in January 2012, recommended building the museum in Helsinki’s South Harbor.Gulstad, Hanne Cecilie. "Guggenheim director back in Helsinki to revive plans for a museum" , The Art Newspaper, August 8, 2013. accessed September 14, 2015.
The Guggenheim's study was based partly on a survey, made by Boston Consulting Group, estimating the museum's annual attendance at 530,000 visitors, 200,000 more than existing museums."Report says Guggenheim museum could bring millions in tax revenues", Helsingin Sanomat, January 12, 2012, accessed February 7, 2014 Paavo Arhinmäki, Finland’s Minister for Culture and Sport, and a member of the Helsinki city council, doubted the estimate.Ajatko alas Helsingin taidemuseota, Janne Gallen-Kallela-Sirén? HS 3.2.2012 The report estimated the museum's running costs at 14.4 million euros annually. An estimated 530,000 annual visitor entry fees would cover 4.5 million euros of these costs. Costs for the city of Helsinki would be 6.8 million euros and for the State of Finland, 700,000 euros annually. Interest costs from the construction loan were expected to be 7.5 million euros annually.Selvityksen mukan museo lisäisi verotuloja miljoonilla, 1 December 2012, p. A13"Viikko lukuina", Suomen Kuvalehti, p. 9, February 2012 The study provoked fears that the Guggenheim Foundation would have all the decision-making power in the Guggenheim Helsinki plan, while the City of Helsinki would retain all of the expenses and risk. Initially, also, there was discussion that Guggenheim Helsinki might not have an independent art collection, but that the collection would be merged with that of the Helsinki City Art Museum. Later, the Guggenheim confirmed that the museum would have its own art collection.
In May 2012, the city council rejected the plan in a narrow vote of 8 against 7,"Helsinki City Council rejects Guggenheim project", Yle, 3 May 2012 citing the costs of the project, including the Guggenheim's licensing fee of 23.4 million euros, that would have been borne by Helsinki.Joonas Laitinen, Joonas and Aleksi Teivainen. "Architectural competition for Guggenheim Helsinki to begin this spring", Helsinki Times, 14 January 2014
Conflicts of interest In May 2013, Finland's Parliamentary Ombudsman issued a report concerning conflicts of interest affecting Sirén and Finnish investor and art collector Carl Gustaf Ehrnrooth, who has been a member of the Guggenheim Foundation board since 2008.Carl Gustaf Ehrnrooth avasi oven Helsingin Guggenheim-hankkeelle 15.1.2012 While serving as director of the Helsinki City Art Museum, Sirén acted on behalf of the city of Helsinki in the preparatory work for the Guggenheim proposal and was also the liaison with the Guggenheim Foundation. During this period, Sirén joined the advisory board of Ekoport Turku Oy, a Finnish oil company chaired by Ehrnrooth, and Sirén’s wife was employed by the oil company. Sirén helped to coordinate both the presentation of the feasibility study on the project and the Guggenheim Foundation's proposal to the City of Helsinki, and he advocated for the museum's plan.Dabkowski, Colin. "For Albright-Knox’s new director, a rocky journey from Helsinki to Buffalo", The Buffalo News, September 15, 2013"Helsinki Art Museum's directors impartiality was jeopardised in preparatory work for Guggenheim project" , Parliamentary Ombudsman press release, August 23, 2013
The report found Sirén's impartiality with respect to the project compromised and stated that he should have recused himself from participating in the proposal. Paavo Arhinmäki, who opposed the project, commented that "most decision-makers thought [Sirén] tried to push [the Guggenheim project] very hard". Nevertheless, he called the findings in the report "problematic but minor", saying: "Finland is [such a] small country that it's very difficult to even find people who are not connected with each other." Sirén pointed out that he had been cleared of wrongdoing by an independent investigation by the Helsinki City Council before the report was released. He stated that he had obtained permission from Helsinki's deputy mayor to serve on the Ekoport Turku Oy board and noted that Ehrnrooth did not participate in any consideration or decisions by the Guggenheim Foundation board concerning the Helsinki proposal. In any event, Sirén left the Helsinki City Art Museum in late 2012 to become director of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery in the US.
2013 proposal
In September 2013, the Guggenheim Foundation advanced a revised proposal under which the museum would focus on Nordic and international architecture and design in the context of other forms of modern and contemporary art. Educational programs at the museum would have provided opportunities for children and adults to expand their experience of the visual arts. The project's architect was to be chosen through an international competition."Guggenheim Foundation proposes architectural competition for Helsinki museum", YLE, September 24, 2013"Guggenheim Foundation presents a new proposal for a Guggenheim Helsinki", Art Daily, September 2013, accessed February 12, 2014 The proposal eliminated the controversial proposed merger with Helsinki Art Museum, although this resulted in the loss of the 700,000 euro government subsidy, and the new museum was envisioned to gradually build up a permanent collection from parts of its exhibitions. The Guggenheim's licensing fee was to be funded by private sources. Operating and administrative costs were estimated at about 10% lower than the original plan, and annual revenues were projected to be slightly higher, with annual visitors estimated at 550,000. Journalist Lee Rosenbaum called the new estimates, again prepared with the assistance of Boston Consulting Group, "speculative at best".Rosenbaum, Lee. "Guggenheim’s Modified Helsinki Proposal Reduces Costs, Keeps $30-Million Licensing Fee", CultureGrrl, October 10, 2013
In January 2014, the city council agreed to reserve a site for the potential museum at Eteläsatama (on the other side of the bay from the earlier planned location, and nearer to the city center), and the Guggenheim Foundation was permitted to hold an international architecture competition to design the potential museum, though no decision was then made about whether to proceed with the project. One of the factors cited for considering the new plan was the Guggenheim Foundation's pledge to arrange private funds to pay the licensing fee. Another was that the Helsinki City Art Museum would remain a separate institution. Members of the council stressed that they would make an independent assessment of the costs of the project. Leif Sevón questioned whether the financial support of the Swedish Cultural Foundation for the architectural competition complied with that foundation's rules, because the competition was open to architects outside the Swedish minority in Finland. The foundation's director, however, stated that its board had attached "certain conditions" to the proposed funding.Foundation’s Guggenheim support 'could be against own rules', yle, January 27, 2014