Valpo Strategic Plan

[valpopal]

Do you know the extent of the scope? None of us (on this board) know but the Valpo Board and President do and as a result took a very big step, which in their, very educated mind, was required.... The fact remains that this proposed action was determined as the best use of assets of the university.  If you accept the fact that this, in the view of the board and president, is a necessary action, then we go back to the question: What alternative plan would you suggest?

I have already agreed with you that none of us know the extent of the scope, but that is why it is disingenuous to ask for an alternative solution. You seem to place blind faith in Padilla and the Valpo Board. I do not. As Valpo95 recently noted, the administration has made a number of missteps in recent years. Additionally, from knowledge of the process in this situation, I agree with the accrediting associations and oversight organizations who have stated Valparaiso University is acting unethically in this matter. Consequently, even if there is agreement between us that the use of money from the art sale would benefit VU, I still object to the unethical manner in which the administration has proceeded and tainted the university's reputation.

[vu72]

I certainly agree that the messaging/transparency shown by the administration has been something south of bad.  They are however between a rock and a hard place in that disclosing their study showing the immediate need for new freshman dorms, while seemingly distracted from academic urgencies, could lead some to question the entire viability of the university. It has led to all sorts of new questions that could have been avoided/mitigated by much better communication with stakeholders from the beginning.

[crusader05]

These are not new dorms that are being created. They are updating and renovating current dorms which will become the primary dorms for freshman. Many of our dorms, especially for first years are old, falling apart, and woefully behind other institutions and are constant areas of complaint and frustration for students and staff. With low enrollment now is a good time to renovate because you have the space to do this all at once vs trying to do it bit by bit. WE have the space to move students around and get these done in a year:  that is a good call. 
Renovating dorms to meet peer standards was a part of the campus plan and what the selling of the paintings is planned to go towards.

[crusader05]

Also, it seems weird to act like we are unsure of the extent of the crisis when we have seen program discontinuance and staff and faculty layoffs as well as a decrease in our bond ratings as well as perpetually hearing how cash strapped the university it and concerns that they don't have the desire of motivation to make bold decisions to move us forward.

Padilla in his own words has made it clear he believes the university is at a cross roads and needs to make changes.
I think there can be clear criticism of the way the sale might have been handled but the actual decision to sell to invest in current structures to help us meet the moment and try to provide things to our students that are no longer subpar or below seems a very valid and commendable thing to do.

[valpopal]

For those who wonder about the ethical obligations of the university, here is a joint statement addressed to Valparaiso University by four prominent organizations, the American Association of Museum Directors, the American Alliance of Museums, the Association of Academic Museums and Galleries, and the Association of Art Museum Curators:


"College and university art museums have a long and rich history of collecting, curating, and educating in a financially and ethically responsible manner on par with the world's most prestigious institutions. That a campus museum exists within the larger ecosystem of its parent educational institution does not exempt a university from acting ethically, nor permit them to ignore issues of public trust and use the museum's collections as disposable financial assets."


Here are relevant recommendations by the College Art Association with guidelines for sale of artworks:


"Deaccessions may be made only for the purposes of future acquisitions. Deaccessions may be accomplished through sale, exchange, or donation with another public trust, repatriation, physical destruction, return to the donor, or any combination thereof. If a work is sold, the resulting income may be used to establish an acquisitions endowment or expendable-fund account for future art acquisitions; it may not be used to support costs such as operating expenses or building funds of the public trust."


"The governing body of a public trust, i.e., its board of directors or trustees, is ultimately responsible for deaccessions from collections that it oversees. That body may delegate to members of the organization's professional staff the authority to deaccession works. However, each person participating in deaccession decisions, regardless of her or his position within an organization's governance or management structure, is responsible for assuring that deaccessions are conducted in accordance with these policies."


Other ethical questions are raised by the secrecy and lack of candor by the university in the hiring of the new director of the museum, who was not informed of plans already in the works to sell the artworks. Neither were members of the search committee informed. (Indeed, all faculty and staff were kept in the dark and not consulted for advice, and a statement by Padilla was only forthcoming when the Tribune article was released.) Would the individual have accepted the position of director if aware of the situation, which he would likely deem unethical? In fact, he has refused to endorse the sale thus far, perhaps because his professional status would be compromised by such support.


Additionally, the plan seems to be to have a questionable private sale rather than an auction, which would normally result in higher sales income. Private sales are sometimes sought to avoid embarrassment during a public auction and open criticism from other university museums. Unfortunately, this process also could result in the paintings being removed from public view.


Richard Brauer, who is the most knowledgable individual about works in the museum, which is named after him, further asserts that the sale would violate the 1953 Sloan Trust Agreement under which the paintings were purchased.


We all would like to have a large sum of money available for use, but there are concerns about tarnishing the reputation of the university, alienating many loyal and generous individuals, breaking trust with a significant portion of the Valpo community, and causing damage from the resulting harmful publicity.

[wh]

Do you know the extent of the scope? None of us (on this board) know but the Valpo Board and President do and as a result took a very big step, which in their, very educated mind, was required.... The fact remains that this proposed action was determined as the best use of assets of the university.  If you accept the fact that this, in the view of the board and president, is a necessary action, then we go back to the question: What alternative plan would you suggest?

I have already agreed with you that none of us know the extent of the scope, but that is why it is disingenuous to ask for an alternative solution. You seem to place blind faith in Padilla and the Valpo Board. I do not. As Valpo95 recently noted, the administration has made a number of missteps in recent years. Additionally, from knowledge of the process in this situation, I agree with the accrediting associations and oversight organizations who have stated Valparaiso University is acting unethically in this matter. Consequently, even if there is agreement between us that the use of money from the art sale would benefit VU, I still object to the unethical manner in which the administration has proceeded and tainted the university's reputation.

My interest in individual works of art and their historical significance is nearly nonexistent; thus, whether the art in question hangs at Valpo or hangs somewhere else matters not to me. That said, a national university selling art pieces that it has been entrusted with for generations in order to generate cash has a pretty desperate feel to it. I thought that's what yard sales and pawn shops are for.

[historyman]

Do you know the extent of the scope? None of us (on this board) know but the Valpo Board and President do and as a result took a very big step, which in their, very educated mind, was required.... The fact remains that this proposed action was determined as the best use of assets of the university.  If you accept the fact that this, in the view of the board and president, is a necessary action, then we go back to the question: What alternative plan would you suggest?

I have already agreed with you that none of us know the extent of the scope, but that is why it is disingenuous to ask for an alternative solution. You seem to place blind faith in Padilla and the Valpo Board. I do not. As Valpo95 recently noted, the administration has made a number of missteps in recent years. Additionally, from knowledge of the process in this situation, I agree with the accrediting associations and oversight organizations who have stated Valparaiso University is acting unethically in this matter. Consequently, even if there is agreement between us that the use of money from the art sale would benefit VU, I still object to the unethical manner in which the administration has proceeded and tainted the university's reputation.

My interest in individual works of art and their historical significance is nearly nonexistent; thus, whether the art in question hangs at Valpo or hangs somewhere else matters not to me. That said, a national university selling art pieces that it has been entrusted with for generations in order to generate cash has a pretty desperate feel to it. I thought that's what yard sales and pawn shops are for.

I'm afraid the actual existence of the University is a matter coming into question if these drastic measures are being planned.

How much actual time did St Joseph College in Rensselaer, Indiana have before their board of directors made the decision to close it's doors?

[historyman]

St. Joe's College solves $27M debt, saves closed campus in Rensselaer (jconline.com)

[vu84v2]

The extreme rationalizations in some of these posts are amazing. The university came to the conclusion that some infrastructure (dorms, etc.) are insufficient to compete with peer universities (i.e., universities that students choose to attend when they decide against Valpo). Note: non-competitive does not mean crumbling. The university then faced a strategic choice: 1. live with the non-competitive buildings, 2. raise money from donors...which would take years, 3. take out debt, 4. use assets that do not directly contribute to the mission of the university. This does not mean, in any way, that the university is facing its demise...it just means that they don't have assets that are liquid or can be easily liquidated to cover an immediate strategic need. And this is a responsible, albeit difficult, strategic decision.

A few other thoughts:
-Again, i am assuming that there are not written agreements that prevent the sale of art. That would dramatically change my arguments.
-Valpo should not care what a group of art museum associations think of Valpo's strategic directions. The motivation of everyone in those associations is the advancement of art, not the success of Valpo (or any university).
-One reason that I am confident that Valpo's financial situation is not dire is that the university has not claimed exigency. When a university is in a dire financial situation, it can claim exigency - which suspends policies like being unable to dismiss tenured faculty and allows some access to restricted endowment funds. Further, I have no knowledge that (short of exigency) Valpo approached donors associated with endowment funds to repurpose those funds.
-I realize that this is unlikely for a private university, but Valpo may want to stifle these rationalizations by more open disclosure of its financial situation. Valpo, like most (if not all) private universities, releases only high level reports in which little can be gleaned. The debt level and the obligations for how the debt is serviced, along with operating annual cash flow over the last several years, would provide a clear indication.
-I also feel that Valpo could have done a better job of getting out in front of this. Make an announcement, with clear rationale and clarification of the financial situation, prior to some other media report.

[vu84v2]

I think that the positive nature of this strategy decision is pretty clear. The greatest revenue sources, far and away, are tuition and related revenues from housing, etc. This is driven by the ability to get students and retain them. Valpo. like any business, needs to emphasize its resources and capabilities which yield advantages and eliminate areas in which it is disadvantaged. I have not seen the dorms, but I trust that the quality of housing for first and second year students is not competitive (note: not competitive does not equal crumbling). If students are choosing not to go to Valpo because of this, it needs to be fixed. Raising tuition is not feasible to fund the improvements and telling prospective students that "housing quality is not that important" would be an utter mistake.

[David81]

Teaching at a university similar to VU in financing structure that recently went through its share of financial challenges, I see on this discussion thread the kind of speculation very similar to what our grapevine conversations were like during the most acute and difficult stages of our bloodletting.

FWIW, boards and central administrations can make panicked decisions in this mode. At my school, for example, many of us questioned whether certain cuts and program closures were necessary. Even without access to all financial data, some of the decisions seemed unwise. And within a year or two of the worst point of that crisis, our doubts were validated. In making this observation, I fully recognize the difficulty of making the right decisions at the right time. It's easier to make the wrong decisions at the wrong time.

My sense is that VU is not in danger of suddenly closing up shop, largely due to the earlier, very painful decisions already made. That may well have been the point of existential crisis at its worst. Indeed, it is noteworthy on this question that VU is not contemplating the sale of Brauer art works to cover everyday operating expenses, which -- aside from the merits of the decision itself -- is good (or at least better) news in the current context.

Also FWIW, debt service is a very common way of funding new residence halls. Dorms generate revenue through student housing fees. Also, this approach buys a school time to solicit donations, including naming opportunities.

[crusadermoe]

Indeed bond funding seems to align best with dormitories for those reasons. The lump sump cash in to fund long-term steady payoff isn't usually a preferred move.

So, the dark question is fair. 

Do they no longer have any borrowing capacity?  Or is their credit rating low enough that the interest rates would be prohibitive (in this new 2023 rate scenario)?  Long-term debit is approximately 6-7% vs. 3-4% and that is for good or excellent credit. 

[FWalum]

Such wild speculation on this board is not helping the situation and as someone who works in the business side of higher education I find it almost malicious. All this speculation about ethics and not one question about the ethics of holding an asset that has increased in value at least 166,666% (if I read correctly the O'Keeffe painting was purchased for less than $6,000 and I am assuming it to be worth at least $10,000,000). This would be like having a $10,000,000 endowment that never made a distribution! Would all those worried about VU academics feel better if the $20,000,000 from the sale of the paintings was used to establish 5 new endowed academic chairs? I believe that David81 is correct in saying

My sense is that VU is not in danger of suddenly closing up shop, largely due to the earlier, very painful decisions already made. That may well have been the point of existential crisis at its worst. Indeed, it is noteworthy on this question that VU is not contemplating the sale of Brauer art works to cover everyday operating expenses, which -- aside from the merits of the decision itself -- is good (or at least better) news in the current context.

If you would review the data from NACUBO (National Association of College and University Business Officers) you could probably conclude that if VU is in danger of closing, then a VERY large number of smaller universities and colleges are in peril. While VU is still too dependent on tuition, we are not as dependent as MANY other colleges and universities. If the Valpo and other art communities wish for the paintings to remain in our museum then lets see how much money they can raise to make that happen.

[VULB#62]

Such wild speculation on this board is not helping the situation and as someone who works in the business side of higher education I find it almost malicious. All this speculation about ethics and not one question about the ethics of holding an asset that has increased in value at least 166,666% (if I read correctly the O'Keeffe painting was purchased for less than $6,000 and I am assuming it to be worth at least $10,000,000). This would be like having a $10,000,000 endowment that never made a distribution!

^^This^^

The art itself shall never lose its intrinsic value regardless who "owns" it.  The sale of a VU "asset" for the purpose of the greater good of the university does not constitute a betrayal of the greater mission and values of the institution. It betrays the emotional needs of a narrow, vested group where possession is 9/10s of the arguement. On the contrary, it enables that institution as a whole to continue to pursue their stated mission and values.

Now, if the Brauer were the Louvre and possessed the Mona Lisa and millions of people came to Valparaiso from around the world and paid $30 bucks a head to view it, thus bringing millions annually into the university's coffers, and the BofT decided to sell it for a set price, say $10 million, for a quick, one-time hit, that would be an unethical abandonment of their fiduciary responsibility to the university.

Folks, let's keep our eyes on the big picture (pun definitely intended).  A university is a business. Yes, there are intangibles that set it apart from the Amazons and Intels, but it's still a business that must maintain a competitive edge in the marketplace in which it resides. 

[David81]

Such wild speculation on this board is not helping the situation and as someone who works in the business side of higher education I find it almost malicious. All this speculation about ethics and not one question about the ethics of holding an asset that has increased in value at least 166,666% (if I read correctly the O'Keeffe painting was purchased for less than $6,000 and I am assuming it to be worth at least $10,000,000). This would be like having a $10,000,000 endowment that never made a distribution!

^^This^^

The art itself shall never lose its intrinsic value regardless who "owns" it.  The sale of a VU "asset" for the purpose of the greater good of the university does not constitute a betrayal of the greater mission and values of the institution. It betrays the emotional needs of a narrow, vested group where possession is 9/10s of the arguement. On the contrary, it enables that institution as a whole to continue to pursue their stated mission and values.

Now, if the Brauer were the Louve and possessed the Mona Lisa and millions of people came to Valparaiso from around the world and paid $30 bucks a head to view it, thus bringing millions annually into the university's coffers, and the BofT decided to sell it for a set price, say $10 million, for a quick, one-time hit, that would be an unethical abandonment of their fiduciary responsibility to the university.

Folks, let's keep our eyes on the big picture (pun definitely intended).  A university is a business. Yes, there are intangibles that set it apart from the Amazons and Intels, but it's still a business that must maintain a competitive edge in the marketplace in which it resides. 

Honestly, I don't see a lot of "wild speculation here." In fact, I've read a lot of informed speculation that attempts to make up for the lack of hard numbers due to what's being shared or not shared with university constituencies. How much financial information to reveal is, of course, VU's choice. But when it comes to controversial decisions, less info shared = more speculation.

And I respectfully but strongly disagree that this is about "the emotional needs of a narrow, vested group." There are broader issues about what a university should value and protect that are captured in a decision like this. It is why national organizations representing the art world are so roundly critical of this announcement. If VU wants to be taken seriously as an institution of higher learning in important cultural circles, then these criticisms should not be taken lightly.

I confess that I feel much differently about this matter than I would've many years ago. I kid you not, my lowest grade at VU (by far) was in -- drum roll -- Art Appreciation! (The course fulfilled a fine arts distribution requirement, and let's just say that I had very little appreciation for art at the time. I've expanded my cultural horizons since then.) But as I've grown to appreciate what distinguishes VU from other, more standard-brand private universities, the integrity of this art museum and the symbolism behind this particular announcement become more significant to me.

So....am I saying that VU absolutely, positively shouldn't do this? Not quite. But the President's announcement did not persuade me that other viable options have been thoroughly vetted. And if they go ahead without spelling out more specifics to justify the decision, then the cost may be a lasting one in ways that some who are defending this as a necessary, "practical" decision could come to regret. This creates further precedent that there are no sacred cows (already messaged by the recent layoffs and program closures), signaling that anything is potentially on the chopping block to keep the ship afloat.

[valpopal]

Since I am someone who published a couple books that included images of two of the paintings for sale as cover art, as well as a journal article chronicling the history of the O'Keeffe painting, I need to respond to comments that seem to misunderstand the productivity of the artworks, their continuing value for VU, and the history of their acquisition.


Some messages appear to give the impression the pieces just sit and gather dust. Actually, the O'Keeffe has reaped as much benefit for the university as a prime donor would. It has traveled the world and exhibited in the most prestigious museums, internationally and nationally, each time spreading word about VU and enhancing its reputation. It has been included in numerous publications—books, magazines, brochures, pamphlets—always crediting Valparaiso University. It has served in exchanges to bring other famous artworks to Valpo, and its stature has been cited for reasons various museums want their works displayed here. The O'Keeffe has earned its keep, easily producing millions of dollars of value in public relations and art exchanges, as has the museum as a whole.


Additionally, if you look online at the specs about the three artworks for sale, you will see that one was donated by Percy Sloan, and the other two were purchased through the Sloan Fund, which was endowed specifically for maintenance and expansion of the museum's art collection, not to be used to build or renovate a dorm. As much as all of us, myself included, would want to use the proceeds from the art for such a purpose, it clearly would be an unethical move. Since Valparaiso University recently established an endowed chair in ethics and is boasting about working further toward an ethics program on campus, this should be a concern of all.

[VULB#62]

The more we know, it seems, the more we don't know.

This is turning into a bowl of informational spaghetti. Maybe we all should just refrain from commenting until there is a more formal release of more substantive facts. Conjecture and speculation can twist things into some interesting contortions.

My suspicion, however, is that the kerfuffle over this will eventually blow over IF the end result is positive. That's the litmus test, and that, my friends, is in the future. In the meantime, what will be the actual impacts to the Brauer (can it no longer function as a center for the arts?), what will be the actual impacts to the campus (does the upgrade to facilities produce increases in enrollment?), and what will be the impacts to the University in general (is it considered a tanking institution or respected for innovative leadership?)?  Big factor here is time.

Peace/out.

[historyman]

The more we know, it seems, the more we don't know.

This is turning into a bowl of informational spaghetti. Maybe we all should just refrain from commenting until there is a more formal release of more substantive facts. Conjecture and speculation can twist things into some interesting contortions.

My suspicion, however, is that the kerfuffle over this will eventually blow over IF the end result is positive. That's the litmus test, and that, my friends, is in the future. In the meantime, what will be the actual impacts to the Brauer (can it no longer function as a center for the arts?), what will be the actual impacts to the campus (does the upgrade to facilities produce increases in enrollment?), and what will be the impacts to the University in general (is it considered a tanking institution or respected for innovative leadership?)?  Big factor here is time.

Peace/out.

You really are no fun today. Did you spill your cheese?

[VULB#62]

i hear ya. But I am probably just too simplistic.  Regardless of the environment, if it involves revenue and expenses, (non)profit and loss, it's a business.  Pure and simple, insufficient revenue, too many losses and you go outta bizniz no matter your mission, values or principles.

[FWalum]

Honestly, I don't see a lot of "wild speculation here." In fact, I've read a lot of informed speculation that attempts to make up for the lack of hard numbers due to what's being shared or not shared with university constituencies. How much financial information to reveal is, of course, VU's choice. But when it comes to controversial decisions, less info shared = more speculation.

If there is a "lack" of information how can the speculation be termed as "informed"? All I have seen is uninformed speculation.


Here is information, some of which has already been said in this thread... Nearly every university in the country has taken measures to counter what some perceive to be a paradigm shift in higher education. Valparaiso, because it has a moderately sized endowment of approximately $350,000,000 with additional bequest gifts around $150,000,000, appears to be in better shape then many other institutions of our size.

This is wild speculation

If the university is in some desperation cycle towards closing, it shoudl be decided and communicated quickly, while there is still money to give staff and students time to find other jobs or discern where else to finish their studies. It all sounds pretty bad, looking at cutting academic programs and crumbling dorms and selling of donated assets. But I feel even worse about the cases in the news where colleges have just closed abruptly mid-year and then students end up scrambling to transfer. In some cases these places were recruiting students and faculty and doing construction right up until the announcement to close the doors, which is insane and so unfair to those freshmen or sophomores who went in good faith. Luckily, Valpo still has a hefty enough endowment (and enough art assets?) to pay for some years' of employees salaries to give them a couple cycles or academic year job market seasons and to teach out whatever current students there are. But it would be important to stop hiring some years in advance and to not accept applications for after year 202X.

I'm afraid the actual existence of the University is a matter coming into question if these drastic measures are being planned.

How much actual time did St Joseph College in Rensselaer, Indiana have before their board of directors made the decision to close it's doors?

Don't get me wrong, I am a business person working to fund higher education who would love it if the hard decisions about university assets did not have to be made. I would love it if VU could keep these paintings!


Until this week I had no idea that the Brauer Museum had such a stellar national and even international reputation. It appears that it was one of the things VU has hidden under a bushel. The O'Keeffe painting probably has produced some revenue for VU, but unless we are getting over $500,000 per year for it to be displayed in other museums then it is underperforming. Does the revenue received from the loaning of paintings go back to the general fund of VU or does it stay in the budget of the museum? It would be unethical to put a $15,000,000 endowment into a standard savings account earning 3.5% interest yet it seems it is uber ethical to hold a painting of the same value that has had little if any effect on the admission and retention of students to VU.


There is more and more discussion among those involved in university development about the ethics of holding assets that do little to support the real mission of higher education. It is ironic to think that these 3 paintings have garnered more attention, albeit negative attention, to the general population and potential future students than at any time during their possession by VU.

[David81]

There is more and more discussion among those involved in university development about the ethics of holding assets that do little to support the real mission of higher education. It is ironic to think that these 3 paintings have garnered more attention, albeit negative attention, to the general population and potential future students than at any time during their possession by VU.

FWalum, we may differ on what constitutes the "real mission of higher education." I see it as multifaceted, encompassing both the liberal arts and vocational preparation. It also reaches beyond the immediate student body and engages the broader community, both geographically and -- as in here -- specific cultural, civic, and business communities.

But my viewpoint is hardly exclusive, and it concededly has trouble wrapping itself around the notion that prospective students  might regard the availability of fancier housing options as potential deal makers/breakers in choosing a college. Not long ago, it was more or less assumed that if residence hall options included a serviceable bed, desk, and indoor plumbing in a safe environment, that checked the box and the rest was about what the school could do for you outside of your dorm room.

Visit some of the elite universities in Europe, and you'll see what I mean. Over the years, I've attended summer school sessions at both (as an adult, continuing ed student). Many residence halls and facilities in places like Oxford and Cambridge are pretty old and plain. Some are living, breathing examples of deferred maintenance.

So yeah, fancy dorms aren't a part of how I regard the real mission of higher ed. But I understand that I'm running contrary to consumer expectations these days. And those expectations are driving up the costs of American higher ed relentlessly and prompting unfortunate decisions like the present one.

[vu84v2]

ValpoDiaspora - While you bring a lot of wisdom and deep thought to these discussions, I do not think that your parable is applicable to this argument. The quality of the wine is central to the continued success of the vineyard and any steps to reduce quality are likely to lead to the demise of the vineyard. The art is not central to the continued success of Valpo, since being a high quality art museum is not central to the university's mission. Again, my wife and I are closer to the university than most and I have had countless engagements with the university...and we never knew the O'Keefe and other million dollar plus paintings existed. Further (back to your parable and to David81's points), prospective students and their families are using housing as a primary factor in choosing where to attend - just like people choose to buy wine based on quality.

Some have raised points frequently raised by some in academia that universities are not businesses. I disagree for the reasons raised by VULB#62 and others. I will add that the arguments that universities are not a business are usually accompanied by an assumption that some resource or program cannot be valued...and thus it has infinite value. I really feel for Brauer, Ruff and valpopal (see the prior post) as they have invested significant portions of their time and attention to the artwork. But good strategic leadership must look forward and consider maximizing the return from assets.

[valpopal]

For those who commented they had been unaware of the O'Keeffe painting:

[crusader05]

It feels like Valpo, among many other colleges are clearly in both a "batten down the hatches" mode in regards to anticipating some time with low enrollment and some difficult times ahead in the Higher Ed Landscape. However, they also seem to clearly be assessing what their immediate needs will be to either help shore up the university now and will be helpful in the future. In the past year I have seen articles about multiple colleges and universities making cuts and eliminating programs/faculty. Indiana State has just announced cuts to programs, DePauw dipped into their endowment to do a large buyout of faculty.  I have heard that the actual physical campus of many Concordia Campuses are struggling and have seen a lot of anger from many Music Alums from the Mequon Campus due to an elimination of a short term semester that was often utilized for trips and other music based events. Things change for many reasons and there are future and current students/faculty/staff that must be factored in, even if things anger donors or other alums.
In that light, something like the paintings probably seem like a really nice thing to have but not a necessity and so their value in helping the university move more quickly in aiding in the near term may seem more important.

Do I like it. No.  Does it seem like it might be hard to pass up an opportunity to complete a dorm renovation that is viewed as a high need item without either 1. asking donors who you are most likely already looking to help fund the new arena and new nursing school or who just came up big for the endowment drive or 2. having to take out more bonds at a time of high interest rates? Plus the ability to get moving on the project now vs two years later? Yes.

[valpotx]

St. Joe's College solves $27M debt, saves closed campus in Rensselaer (jconline.com)

Thanks for sharing!  I didn't know that they were able to save the school in any form.  Even though it is not the same, it is good to know that the school still exists, and has been offering classes in Rensselaer again, even though it is just certificate programs and Associate degrees.  I always enjoyed our VU Baseball games on their campus, and played with several of their team during my college summers in Indiana:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Joseph's_College_(Indiana)
https://www.saintjoe.edu/