From Public Trust to Private Control: Dr. Censky’s Case for a New Museum

Photo Citation Example:Photo: Dr. Ellen Censky presenting to Milwaukee Rotary on the new museum project (Milwaukee Public Museum, courtesy of Rotary Club of Milwaukee, 2023).ideo Citation Example:Video: “Dr. Ellen Censky, President & CEO, Milwaukee Public Museum – Rotary Club of Milwaukee Presentation,” recorded 2023. Transcript on file with PreserveMKE.

When Milwaukee Public Museum President & CEO Dr. Ellen Censky spoke to Rotary members, she offered one of the clearest presentations yet of how MPM frames its argument for abandoning the current building and moving to a new facility. Her remarks reveal the themes she has used repeatedly with County supervisors, legislators, and donors.

Why Build New?

Dr. Censky told the audience that “the building that we’re in right now is owned by the county and it has a hundred million in deferred maintenance. It is not going to take us into the future.”

She added that “it turns out that building a museum is actually cheaper than repairing the building that we’re in,” while insisting that “the county doesn’t have the funds to repair this building nor are there donors who are going to put money into a County facility.”

This argument is meant to shut the door on any possibility of renovation or reuse, even though it is based on shifting cost estimates.

The Relocation Vision

Moving away from dollars and cents, Censky pointed to MPM’s holdings: “Those collections are three million Natural History items from birds to mammals to insects and another million cultural items.” The new museum, she explained, will focus on “telling the stories that are at the intersection of Nature and culture.”

She stressed repeatedly that “every single step of the way is to engage with the community and get feedback so that the community is helping us to design and build this building,” and framed the museum’s purpose as “using the past to inform the present so that we can talk about the future.”

Exhibits as “Outdated”

One of the clearest justifications for change was her portrayal of existing exhibits as obsolete. “Several exhibits have not been updated since the building opened in the 1960s, are culturally and scientifically outdated.”

At the same time, she claimed MPM is working to reuse elements: “We start to look at the current exhibits and bring them over into the new galleries and make sure that we are repurposing as much… as possible.”

The repetition of “outdated” becomes the central defense for dismantling well-loved exhibits like the Streets of Old Milwaukee or the European Village.

Ownership and Control

Censky also drew a sharp line between the current and future arrangements: “The County still owns those collections so they are held in trust for all of you and the County owns the building we’re in. The new building will be owned by the museum.”

This statement underscores the shift from public ownership of the facility to private control of the new building — even as public dollars finance its construction.

Funding and Public Money

She emphasized the size of the project: “It is a $240 million dollar project, the largest cultural project in the state of Wisconsin to date. We have divided that up into $90 million in Public Funding… $40 million from the state, $45 million from the county.”

But when it came to the private share, the numbers grew vague. “I’m not prepared to tell you where we are now [in fundraising] but we have made progress,” was all she offered.

Managing Public Opinion

Finally, Dr. Censky made clear that controlling the narrative is central: “We have partnered with Miller Communications… to keep the community engaged throughout this whole process.”

She ended by asking the audience for help: “I’m going to ask all of you to be our ambassadors… there are going to be periods where it looks like nothing is progressing… assure people that in fact this thing will come to fruition.”

The Takeaway

Dr. Censky’s talk presents the museum’s strategy in her own words: the building is portrayed as unsalvageable, the exhibits as outdated, the collections as a foundation for reinvention, and the process as “community engaged” even as ownership shifts from public to private hands.

The public has been told to trust the professionals. The transcript shows exactly how that trust has been framed — and how much remains unsaid.

Watch the full video here.

PreserveMKE