Fascinating Thursday New York Times front page report about the heretofore-largely-unremarked Judith Rothschild Foundation.

Lede:

Like the abstract painter who created it, the Judith Rothschild Foundation has never had a very high profile in the art world. Ms. Rothschild, who died in 1993, established the foundation in her will and assigned a friend the mission, as trustee, of using her collection of artworks by masters like Matisse and Mondrian to promote underappreciated artists — a category in which she included herself.

That friend, Harvey S. Shipley Miller, has since donated or sold many of these artworks and used the proceeds to benefit cultural institutions across the country.

Another major beneficiary of the foundation’s efforts over the years, though, has been Mr. Miller himself.

The obligatory “to be sure” graf:

To be sure, foundation trustees often enjoy wide latitude on how they operate, and Ms. Rothschild’s will gave Mr. Miller broad authority to interpret the foundation’s mission and to donate to a range of charitable and educational causes. No one has alleged financial misconduct by Mr. Miller, whose civic-mindedness has impressed many, and who says he has labored faithfully to serve Ms. Rothschild’s interests.

Mr. Miller, according to the Times piece, has “done an extremely good job,” been “tireless”  in his efforts for the Foundation, and has a “history as a supporter of the arts [that] is lengthy.”

So what’s the problem?

Just this, the Times report says:

The foundation . . . failed to make promised grant payments to arts groups last year. And now the New York State attorney general’s office is undertaking a broader review of the foundation and Mr. Miller’s stewardship even though the grants have since been paid.

Pretty thin gruel.

The question is:

Who knows who at the Times who put a bug in who knows whose ear?