Pilfered from AJ:

Carmel, the famous little seaside town in California has decided that they have too many galleries and has imposed a moratorium on licensing new art galleries in the city. You can read the story here. This is the same silly town that passed a law in the 80s forbidding eating ice cream in public and then elected Clint as mayor.

61 galleries have opened in Carmel since 2000, bringing the total to about 120. Of the city's roughly 300 retail shops, approximately four out of 10 are art galleries.

When I lived there in the late 80s (I used to review books for the newspaper publishing this story), and I used to exhibit my artwork in a Carmel gallery that has since closed, and during my last visit in the late 90s, one thing was clear: A lot of them were and are crap galleries - that is, they are the type of galleries that sell a lot of reproductions, decorative art, gyclees by the millions, etc. Many others show the work of just one artist, or do not change shows regularly.

Because Carmel's main business is tourism, the galleries aim to tourists. And tourists come to Carmel because of its beauty, to play golf, see the Spanish mission, stroll around the beach, and because of... galleries.

Still, seems silly to pass regulations forbidding what obviously is the town's main attraction.

Locally, we have the same flavor of an issue around Dupont Circle, where the locals have decided that no more "new" galleries can be opened. As a gallery closes (such as Elizabeth Roberts will soon), it can be replaced by a new gallery in the same building, but no new galleries can open in a building that hasn't been a gallery prior to the sale.

And so we're all hoping that Elizabeth Roberts will be able to find a buyer for her building that wants to open a new gallery in that building. I've spoken to Elizabeth and she would prefer for that to happen as well.