Valpo Strategic Plan

[vu84v2]

ValpoDiaspora - As usual, you bring a highly intelligent and carefully considered perspective.

It is important to clarify what is meant by Valpo being a business. Fundamentally, this means that revenues need to equal or exceed expenses in the short and long term. You correctly assert that many companies fail because of their excessive short term perspective, and that is not what I (nor, I believe, the university) is advocating. But I will also caution that the knee jerk reaction to this is to only consider the long term...which can create a snowball effect from continued shortages that ultimately puts long term performance at risk.

Universities are a different kind of business and, thus, it is important to consider the outcomes associated with that business - which should be related to both its mission and revenues that are necessary to cover expenses. Primary outcomes by which Valpo, and most universities, should measure itself: new student enrollment, discount rate, first-year student retention; four and six year graduation rates; percentage of students who, within six months of graduation, get placed in jobs in their desired careers or begin graduate school or begin military service; starting salaries for new graduates. Obviously, it would be great to measure more intangible outcomes (e.g., long term career success, happiness), but these are nearly impossible to measure (but should be given some, though not excessive, consideration). Donations is another important outcome to consider, but there are many exogenous factors that influence donations. Investment decisions, which are difficult to make - but important for any strategy, must be prioritized towards those outcomes. These investment decisions also need to take a longer term perspective, otherwise a university (like any business) is constantly reacting (lots of research data shows that reactive leaders and organizations underperform). This is the fundamental premise of my strong feelings regarding selling highly valuable artwork...it does not meaningfully contribute to these outcomes.

In my current position (at another university), I have seen a lot of this "a university is not a business" behavior from some groups within the university. Their argument ultimately becomes, "everything needs to be fair". My college (professional) within the university felt that it needed a new building and other substantial improvements to be competitive versus other colleges in the profession. So we, specifically our Dean, raised almost $100 million from alums, companies, etc. to provide all funding for the new building, program improvements, etc. The reaction from the people who say "a university is not a business" was that it was not fair that we got a new building and they did not...and that they should get 50% of the classes offered in the new building (this was ultimately rejected). On top of this, our college's revenues exceed expenses - but we are 'taxed' by the university to maintain the financial viability of other colleges (specifically, liberal arts). We recognize their value and want them to succeed, so that 'tax' is appropriate (within reason, but not so much that it reduces motivation to start new program) - but those colleges also need to take steps to shore up their business (again, versus the outcomes listed above). Bottom line here is that colleges need to behave more like businesses, rather than just relying on the university to dole out resources in a fair manner.

A last point regarding a university being a business: it needs to proactively respond to trends associated with the economy, behaviors, demographics, etc. I do think that liberal arts is important to a meaningful career and life. I have a professional degree from Valpo, but I would argue that a liberal arts class was the most impacting on my prior career (never imagined at the time it would be). I also hired Valpo grads for other groups within my prior employer and the consistent differentiator cited by their managers was that Valpo grads have excellent written and verbal communications skills. But a university needs to respond to trends with a long term orientation. Most families are making investment decisions regarding attending colleges based on return. Even if a university thinks this might not be in the student's best interest, it cannot change how parents and prospective students think. A major strategic flaw would be for a university to make investment decisions solely based on what they believe is good for the student....many businesses fail when they make that rationalization.

As someone who lived outside of Kansas City for five years, I enjoyed the Super Bowl very much.

[78crusader]

Beginning in 2025 the number of high school graduates will begin to decline, a trend that demographic experts expect will last until 2037, and is expected to be more pronounced in the midwest. I've seen various projections about the decline but most fall in the 10-15% range.

VU's freshman dorms are simply not on par with most of our peer institutions.* I don't think it is crazy to think this is costing us students - which we can't afford, especially when 2025 rolls around.

* If anyone doubts me on this last point, check out Irvington House or ResCo at Butler and then tell me what you think.

The administration wants to raise funds to build a new nursing building - which is needed - and a new basketball arena - which makes sense if we want to be competitive in D1.

There is only so much money VU can raise.

The funding, not to mention construction, for the nursing and athletic buildings will likely take years.

The dorms needed to be renovated 20 years ago.

What other choices does the administration have? And can we really blame them for making the decision they have apparently made?

Paul

[valpopal]

Here is an example that displays why some high school students have high expectations for college facilities:
[tweet]1624179294627848194[/tweet]

[FWalum]

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.

You and I think very much alike in how we wish things could/should be. I have recently been brought into a church related higher ed institution to help them on the "reality or business" side. We wish for things, but now I have to help them figure out the reality of finding dollars for that "wishlist" while continuing day to day operations.

[valpopal]

Beginning in 2025 the number of high school graduates will begin to decline, a trend that demographic experts expect will last until 2037, and is expected to be more pronounced in the midwest. I've seen various projections about the decline but most fall in the 10-15% range.

VU's freshman dorms are simply not on par with most of our peer institutions.* I don't think it is crazy to think this is costing us students - which we can't afford, especially when 2025 rolls around.

* If anyone doubts me on this last point, check out Irvington House or ResCo at Butler and then tell me what you think.

The administration wants to raise funds to build a new nursing building - which is needed - and a new basketball arena - which makes sense if we want to be competitive in D1.

There is only so much money VU can raise.

The funding, not to mention construction, for the nursing and athletic buildings will likely take years.

The dorms needed to be renovated 20 years ago.

What other choices does the administration have? And can we really blame them for making the decision they have apparently made?

Paul

I basically agree with your premises, and I see the attractiveness of the proposal, but I would especially expect you to understand the troubling aspect of engaging in an act that your peer professional credentialing or oversight organizations declare unethical. In this case, 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 already have issued a joint statement against Valparaiso University.

Also, among the backlash from selling the artworks, I can assure you it is going to be even more difficult to get the Valparaiso community behind funding a basketball arena.

[valpo95]

Jim Collins writes in "Good to Great" that truly great organizations know 1) What they can be best in the world at 2) What they can be deeply passionate about and 3) What drives their economic engine. The great organizations do (or at least try to do) all three at the same time.

For universities, there is a lot more leeway to point #1 as excellence in education and scholarship can come in many forms - schools like Valpo, Drake and Butler are not directly competing against MIT, Carnegie Mellon or Northwestern in all respects. At least when I was at Valpo, there were many faculty who were very passionate and committed to excellence in the classroom, which made for an excellent undergraduate experience. The economic engine (point #3) is no less vital - That is the reason that Valpo has had to cut some programs like Theatre, Secondary Education and Asian Studies - these were seemingly well-respected programs, yet did not have enough students in them to support the costs of the programs. 

So, one piece of good news is the growth in the Nursing program - Valpo is well-positioned to have an excellent Nursing program that serves the region. A growing program can more easily attract both faculty and students who are passionate about health sciences. Finally, this can drive the economic engine of the University.

[historyman]

Here is an example that displays why some high school students have high expectations for college facilities:
[tweet]1624179294627848194[/tweet]

The Greyhounds are at 5,400 students.

Ben Davis = 2,956
Warren Central = 3,821
Center Grove = 2,754
Pike Township = 3,392
North Central = 3,754
Portage = 2,443
Valparaiso = 2,054
Lake Central = 3,344
Lawrence North = 2,754
Crown Point = 2,784
Lawrence Central = 2,300
Franklin Central = 3,064
Decatur Central = 1,845
Penn = 3,877
Fishers = 3,689
Evansville Harwood Prep = 3,414
Hamilton Southeastern = 3,405
Elkhart = 3,262
Avon = 3,201
Noblesville = 3,116
Brownsburg = 2,886
Westfield = 2,527
Indiana Connections Academy (Charter) = 6,687

[vu84v2]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities? Their mission is completely different than Valpo's mission. However, you do make a good point about how using long-held assets may make it more difficult to gain community acceptance to invest in capital spending that is not directly related to Valpo's core misson (i.e., basketball stadium). Still, most of those people probably would not accept capital spending on sports regardless of whether art is sold.

[valpopal]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities?

Those associations have the power to sanction Valparaiso University, instructing its members not to loan work to or collaborate with the Brauer Museum in the future.

[crusadermoe]

It will be interesting to see Padilla build support for a sports facility (also not a core mission venture) while cashing in some major works of art. But I hope he can do it. I am convinced there are intangible brand benefits in D-1 basketball. But you need to generate a direct net operating gain in your flagship sport. And the giving for sports needs to come from donors whose VU interest is highest in sports.

[VULB#62]

Here is an example that displays why some high school students have high expectations for college facilities:
[tweet]1624179294627848194[/tweet]

I wanna go back in time (chronologically - me only) move to Indiana right now, and go there! 

Seriously, Pal, you've quite accurately characterized what a small private university is up against. To paraphrase: "When you've seen the big city lights, why would you go back to the farm?" 

And in many respects, despite having some super things to offer young people, there are some eye candy things we just can't approach. David81 alluded to European classic universities and how basic their facilities are, which is true, but one has to also recognize where prospective students come from and the expectations they bring with them. There is no "Carmel HS "anywhere in Europe, but there are plenty of them to varying degree and size here in every state - and new ones being built regularly.

[vu84v2]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities?

Those associations have the power to sanction Valparaiso University, instructing its members not to loan work to or collaborate with the Brauer Museum in the future.

OK, but I don't see how that is worth $20M (or anything close to that) for the university.

[valpopal]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities?

Those associations have the power to sanction Valparaiso University, instructing its members not to loan work to or collaborate with the Brauer Museum in the future.

OK, but I don't see how that is worth $20M (or anything close to that) for the university.

I fully understand that opinion, but it also reminds me of a variation on an old joke. VU: "What kind of an institution do you think we are?" Answer: "We've already established that. Now we're just haggling over the price." 

[David81]

Hi VU 84v2!

Thanks for your response.

Yes, I am convinced by your point made here and before on this board that the liberal arts departments and colleges need to 'step up' and be more financially responsible for ourselves! I agree it is unfair for to be a perpetual tax and drag on other units of the university. I'm still early-career but I am committed to doing the work of student-recruitment and grant-seeking and job-connecting for students in order to keep helping my department move towards self-sufficiency and to make sure that students are set up for viable careers after they leave our programs.

I guess what I am trying to figure out is how to get the financial-responsibility piece of business without the extractive or race-to-the-bottom culture of it. Granted, I saw mainly the old administration (so don't take this as a characterization of the current Valpo which I imagine is turning a new page!). But so often the business talk went hand in hand with a justification of low performance. The then-Dean was not too keen on the life-of-the-mind stuff -- and probably understandably, for all the valid reasons you've cited about the life of the mind not paying its own bills! But instead Arstci/uni sometimes seemed to settle for a wholly reductive picture of education as merely transactional, faculty as merely labor, and students as merely consumers: faculty are "a dime a dozen" so the institution is justified in paying low salaries and not really have to worry about retaining them; students are not really thinking beings but consumers guided by purchase price, so you might as well keep tuition high or they "won't value what they're getting"; etc. Obviously, there are a lot of folk at Valpo who DO care about continuity in program development and education in the transformational sense, but the administrator business-speak was disturbing to me. There are some things that administrators should not say out loud, and ideally not even think... or else the school-business can descend into extracting as much labor from staff and as much tuition from students as possible, with no leaven in the bread. Where in that is the quest for quality and excellence that any institution [whether innovative business? or thought-provoking school? or both?] needs to run? So maybe it is less the structural responsibilities of business and more a culture of fiscal extraction that I'm worried about? This is not just Valpo, but a whole higher ed thing, and I don't imagine my current institution (though richer) is impervious to this over the long haul. I want US higher ed to stay functional and meaningful for another 30 years.

On a happy note, I saw that the Lilly Fellows Program is committing $2,000 a year to encourage two Valpo undergrads to ponder questions of faith and reason. This is a nice move: http://www.valpotorch.com/news/article_c00968f0-a309-11ed-888e-ff5281db6283.html?fbclid=IwAR1xUC3lKGACpKy8guyyMiHGb7YlpbHgxzfU9XRtwZX9dFODEeI-k8Gj-yg

Since 1994, I've taught at a law school that has been so heavily "taxed" at times by the parent university that the impact has severely limited our programmatic potential and financial aid and caused our specialized accreditors (American Bar Association and Association of American Law Schools) to express alarm after site visits about how much money has been drained from us. During my early years at this school, the tax was as high as 40% of tuition revenue, so much of which was given to the College of Arts & Sciences that it started to appear on one of the "best value" lists by a popular college guidebook! In the meantime, those who occupied the Dean's position in Arts & Sciences accomplished little in terms of significant fundraising. I used to quip that they couldn't (or wouldn't) raise a quarter if you spotted them a dime.

So, I do hear what vu84v2 is saying about professional schools picking up the tab for the liberal arts. However, such tax systems are common at universities where there are successful professional schools. The question is when does it become too much, and when does the tax become a disincentive for senior admins in the liberal arts and for the University central admin to do their share of fundraising? FWIW, each of VU's past three Presidents has led successful fundraising campaigns. I don't know enough to assess how the efforts of Deans of VU's College of Arts & Science have contributed to those campaigns and other fundraising initiatives.

Again, when it comes to fundraising, we need to keep in mind where VU has come from: In its post-war era, the VU Board gave the OK to a student group to raise money for a new engineering building, as recalled by Paul Oren in this Victory Bell piece:
https://www.thevictorybell.com/p/venture-of-flames

[vu72]

I don't know enough to assess how the efforts of Deans of VU's College of Arts & Science have contributed to those campaigns and other fundraising initiatives.

I don't think there were "Deans" but rather one Dean of Arts and Sciences--Jon Kilpinen, who was dean for 16 years until last August when he left to become Provost at Black Hill s State University. A permanent dean has yet to be named.

[vu84v2]

The going rate for the tax placed on professional colleges by the university seems to be 40% of tuition. That is the same number that I have heard at other schools. This is an extraordinary burden, especially for graduate programs in the professional colleges (since graduate students in professional colleges like law or business don't take any liberal arts classes). Imagine developing a business plan to support a new program, in which you estimate revenues and expenses over the next 5-10 years for the program...and you need to include an expense of 40% of tuition. There is no way to make the business model work and thus many promising programs are discarded. When people in universities say "a university is not a business", some it if (frankly) comes from the substantial benefit they get (via subsidies) from it not being considered a business.

It is interesting (and probably positive) that Valpo's provost is not from Arts & Sciences or another college that needs substantial subsidies. Eric Johnson is from Engineering.

[FWalum]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities?

Those associations have the power to sanction Valparaiso University, instructing its members not to loan work to or collaborate with the Brauer Museum in the future.

I mean no disrespect and would prefer that VU not feel that this action is necessary, but I don't see how sanctions or collaborations from or with these groups significantly impacts the university. I conceded that the negative publicity they have generated has certainly cast a pall over VU, have they expended as much energy in the past to promote the Brauer Museum? I have no knowledge of the financials, but I would have to believe that the Brauer Museum does not generate significant income for VU. Is the art community outside of alumni a significant donor base for VU? I tried to find videos featuring O'Keefe and the painting and was able to view several, but the painting was never attributed to VU other than the PBS video that was posted. Would the average art "person" know that VU has this piece and be inclined to donate something for its preservation? How much does the museum get for loaning out a painting and to what budget does that money go to? Are donations to the museum considered donations to VU or strictly to the museum?

[David81]

I don't know enough to assess how the efforts of Deans of VU's College of Arts & Science have contributed to those campaigns and other fundraising initiatives.

I don't think there were "Deans" but rather one Dean of Arts and Sciences--Jon Kilpinen, who was dean for 16 years until last August when he left to become Provost at Black Hill s State University. A permanent dean has yet to be named.

vu72, I assumed that during the presidencies of Schnabel, Harre, and Heckler referenced in my comment, there was more than one person who occupied the deanship of CAS. Hence, "Deans." 

[David81]

I really appreciate all your insights about the unsustainability of the subsidy system. Does anybody know (I don't have the memory nor have studied past decades or centuries of higher ed to have any sense of it) how the liberal arts and art museums were sustainable in the past? When we think of college life of yore when things seemed to work better (like 19th and 20th century).. were the liberal arts units somehow self-sustaining at that point? If so, how?

The optimistic part of me wants to think that liberal arts colleges and comprehensive universities used to be sustainable, and could be again if liberal arts folk could get their/our act together in demonstrating to prospective parents and students that the liberal arts are actually valuable for the kind of society we want to live in, and if administrators navigate wisely the desirability elements of the modern education industry where (whether one likes it or not) people's willingness to pay for private liberal arts education is largely tied to perceptions of prestige and the institution's ability to deliver on personalized attention and an experience of intellectual levity with students.... thus the experience of elite/private education being itself a sort of crucial 'asset' to safeguard or at least not throw away too easily. It's an uphill road for the liberal arts units to get the right combo of savvy and winsomeness, but if it existed in the past then hopefully there's a way...

On the other hand, the pessimistic part of me wonders if the 19th and 20th century liberal arts institutions actually were NEVER self sufficient, and perhaps the only functioned because many of them were operating on or selling unethical assets (I know many private universities relied on slave labor or sale of slaves for cash windfalls, or land-grant public universities got built up and ran for a long time on tremendously lucrative proceeds from the sale of land taken from Native Americans, etc). So what if now all the lateral efforts to prop up the liberal arts (selling campus assets, taxing the professional schools) is just an effort to back-and-fill for a system that only ever worked on exploitation? That's a depressing thought! Maybe all the critics of Western education (Willie Jennings etc) are right that the whole system was pretty shot-thru with exploitation and we shouldn't be so surprised that the liberal arts rely still today on taking others' resources.

What do you think? Is your sense that the liberal arts are not self-sustaining now because they never were in the past either? Or can somebody explain how universities used to be able to maintain English and Philosophy History and Theology/Religion departments?

Those of us discussing the liberal arts subsidy that occurs at many universities with lucrative professional schools may have strayed off into a tangent. In VU's case, it's not clear how much money, if at all, the Engineering and perhaps Business are being taxed to support Arts & Sciences.

To Diaspora's point re sources of exploitation for the liberal arts....as for VU back in the day, the exploitation or taxing occurring was likely on the backs of full-time faculty in all of the schools who carried herculean teaching loads for extremely modest pay, with scant time to do research and writing leading to publication. Valpo's reputation as a solid academic institution was built on their labor, even as they sacrificed the individual recognition that can come with noteworthy scholarship.

(As a side note, I should add that it's highly unlikely that the Law School was being taxed, either. In fact, it's more likely that keeping the Law School open would've required heavily taxing other University units, which is the more probable explanation for the Board's decision to shut it down.)

[valpopal]

valpopal - As I stated in a prior post, to what degree should Valpo consider the opinions of four art museum associations when making decisions regarding strategies and priorities?

Those associations have the power to sanction Valparaiso University, instructing its members not to loan work to or collaborate with the Brauer Museum in the future.

I mean no disrespect and would prefer that VU not feel that this action is necessary, but I don't see how sanctions or collaborations from or with these groups significantly impacts the university. I conceded that the negative publicity they have generated has certainly cast a pall over VU, have they expended as much energy in the past to promote the Brauer Museum? I have no knowledge of the financials, but I would have to believe that the Brauer Museum does not generate significant income for VU. Is the art community outside of alumni a significant donor base for VU? I tried to find videos featuring O'Keefe and the painting and was able to view several, but the painting was never attributed to VU other than the PBS video that was posted. Would the average art "person" know that VU has this piece and be inclined to donate something for its preservation? How much does the museum get for loaning out a painting and to what budget does that money go to? Are donations to the museum considered donations to VU or strictly to the museum?

The sanctions would mean that all member museums would be expected to refuse loans or exchange arrangements with the Brauer Museum for its unethical action, leaving only permanent art collection holdings for display and eliminating all special exhibitions that occur throughout the year. Donated works would dry up because of the uncertainty and lack of trust this would create. Donated funds would diminish because that income is intended specifically for artworks and maintenance, not to be looted by the university for dorm renovation. Imagine a law school or a business school or a nursing school sanctioned for ethical infractions. Also, it would be like the NCAA refusing to allow other teams to compete against Valpo; therefore, VU must resort to playing intramural teams.


The community that donates to art, especially Friends of Art, contributes quite a bit to enlarging and enhancing the VU art collection, which started from modest beginnings and now includes more than 5,000 pieces. Additionally, the museum itself was the result of a donation, which stipulated it must be named after Richard Brauer.


The O'Keeffe painting is famous worldwide, and as Gregg Hertzlieb says in the video, if it were loaned to every national or international museum in the world that wants it, the work would be on tour 52 weeks of the year. I can't speak specifics about the income of the museum; however, when you consider just the three paintings considered for sale are worth at least $20 million, and then extrapolate the value of the entire collection, you can guess that the museum might be a top candidate as among the best managed and most valuable assets on campus.


On another level, the schism created in the Valparaiso community and damage to VU's reputation likely will be even greater than that caused by the Crusader debacle. The following article is from Indiana Economic Digest:
https://indianaeconomicdigest.net/Content/Default/Major-Indiana-News/Article/Art-museum-and-Valparaiso-University-communities-react-to-art-sale-for-dorm-improvements/-3/5308/113370

[vu84v2]

The tax is not that much of a tangent, to be honest. First, I am highly confident that engineering and business, and possibly nursing, are being taxed at Valpo. Law, in its later years, was probably not - the intention was to sustain it and use funds from elsewhere in the university to keep it afloat.

As stated in my prior posts, taxing (at some level) is probably appropriate (but the colleges who cannot sustain themselves financially need to take more personal ownership of developing their own revenues). In the case of the artwork potentially being sold, the fundamental argument being made by those who are against the sale is, "our colleges, centers, programs, etc. are important, so centralizing decisions on how resources are distributed is appropriate and fair. It is fine to take the proceeds of other colleges who have better financial performance to make this happen, but it is not fine to ever use our resources to fund other university needs."

[crusadermoe]

This is very interesting and can be boiled down to two conclusions: 

Higher education (except the elites and many of the wealthy flagships) now faces a looming enrollment downturn. When operating revenues fall, you have to make tough calls. The economic model is becoming an oligarchy rather than hundreds of schools working on a more equal footing.

The other takeaway is that the business model of higher education is a complex one and many might say an efficient one. I have heard the term "shared governance" more than once.  Anyone with broad business experience knows that ultimately that is a myth.  The great complexity of non-profits is that businesses have a clarity in their end goal, profit for shareholders.  The goals of non-profits have to be managed into focus every 3-5 years, if not annually.  Herding faculty and their tenure tracks toward a unified goal must resemble in some ways the goal of "herding cats."

[valpopal]

In the case of the artwork potentially being sold, the fundamental argument being made by those who are against the sale is, "our colleges, centers, programs, etc. are important, so centralizing decisions on how resources are distributed is appropriate and fair. It is fine to take the proceeds of other colleges who have better financial performance to make this happen, but it is not fine to ever use our [restricted] resources to fund other university needs."

I have amended your comment by adding "restricted." The objection is to the use of resources restricted by prior agreements. The university rightfully states it cannot use restricted endowment funds for general expenses. Why should it be able to raid restricted assets from the art museum?

[vu84v2]

In the case of the artwork potentially being sold, the fundamental argument being made by those who are against the sale is, "our colleges, centers, programs, etc. are important, so centralizing decisions on how resources are distributed is appropriate and fair. It is fine to take the proceeds of other colleges who have better financial performance to make this happen, but it is not fine to ever use our [restricted] resources to fund other university needs."

I have amended your comment by adding "restricted." The objection is to the use of resources restricted by prior agreements. The university rightfully states it cannot use restricted endowment funds for general expenses. Why should it be able to raid restricted assets from the art museum?

It is all about whether there is a written agreement signed by the university and other parties. If someone donates $1M to endow nursing scholarships, the parties sign an agreement and  the money and any return from investment of that money is restricted to that purpose. In any of the media articles, concerns expressed, etc., no one has produced evidence that the university signed an agreement that restricts the use of the artwork. Hence, by definition the artwork is not restricted (unless such a signed agreement exists). You cannot say, "we think it is highly valuable, therefore it is restricted".

[valpopal]

In the case of the artwork potentially being sold, the fundamental argument being made by those who are against the sale is, "our colleges, centers, programs, etc. are important, so centralizing decisions on how resources are distributed is appropriate and fair. It is fine to take the proceeds of other colleges who have better financial performance to make this happen, but it is not fine to ever use our [restricted] resources to fund other university needs."

I have amended your comment by adding "restricted." The objection is to the use of resources restricted by prior agreements. The university rightfully states it cannot use restricted endowment funds for general expenses. Why should it be able to raid restricted assets from the art museum?

It is all about whether there is a written agreement signed by the university and other parties. If someone donates $1M to endow nursing scholarships, the parties sign an agreement and  the money and any return from investment of that money is restricted to that purpose. In any of the media articles, concerns expressed, etc., no one has produced evidence that the university signed an agreement that restricts the use of the artwork. Hence, by definition the artwork is not restricted (unless such a signed agreement exists). You cannot say, "we think it is highly valuable, therefore it is restricted".

As some news articles state, former VU law professor Phil Brockington and founding director of the museum Richard Brauer believe the sale would violate the terms of the 1953 Sloan Trust Agreement that funded the purchase of the works. In addition, the action would violate protocols agreed to by members of national art organizations, to which past and present Brauer Museum directors have belonged, who are condemning the decision as unethical. In any case, I do not doubt Valpo lawyers could find a way to make the sale legally, which is why I have maintained objections on ethical grounds.