Strange story in today's New York Times involving a Farifield County Historic District Commission's insistence that the owners of a large sculpture by Anselm Kiefer obtain a "certificate of appropriateness" in order to display the work on their front lawn. A lower court ruled in favor of the town but stayed enforcement pending appeal. The Connecticut Supreme Court will hear the case next month. The article doesn't really explain why the owners have refused to apply for the certificate -- did they object on principle, or is there a real likelihood that they would have been turned down? All it says is that "the couple had initially sought a certificate of appropriateness but withdrew the application after consulting a lawyer and went ahead and installed the [work] in August 2003."
I think this is an image of the work, before installation. The owners of the work, Christine and Andrew Hall, are very serious collectors.