Regrets… I have a few……..
Just in time to add more fuel to the discussion about the future of higher education and possible paths that Valpo needs to follow in order to sustain and grow. USAToday just published the following timely article on regretted majors. It is a concise, informational article that is worth reading. It’s based on a recent Federal Reserve study.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/08/29/most-regretted-college-majors/74908310007/
It’s worth noting that there are many regretful choices that were made in college, yet the vast majority do not regret going to college and generally believe it was worth the investment.
Then there’s the perspective of this dude…which provides a great discussion
Richard Brauer has withdrawn his petition to the court blocking sale of the paintings in the Brauer Museum. The petition correctly declared the university was in violation of the trust that funded the art purchases, but as expected, it seemed clear the judge would allow VU to amend the trust because of legal loopholes. As part of their tactics, the university has targeted Brauer and falsely damaged his reputation, charging he acted illegally in the purchases and threatening to follow a decision to amend the trust with insistence on vengeful punitive sanctions, effectively bankrupting the 97-year old wheelchair bound namesake of the museum.
By dropping his petition, Brauer's lawyer seeks "to avoid a judicial determination" (as the court document reads) and thus sidestep the university's course of retribution. Brauer's lawyer: ""One of the hardest situations in the practice of law is acknowledging that wealthy litigants can force folks with lesser resources to blink." The VU lawyers declared the university will allow the withdrawal of the petition, which was the goal of their threat.
Brauer likely will continue to insist his name be removed from the museum, which has ceased functioning as a museum, closing its doors with no plans of reopening to the public. As predicted from the beginning, the administration lawyers will get their way but tarnish the reputation of Richard Brauer and Valparaiso University in the process, permanently shutting the entire museum to the public and possibly tainting the named artworks' value as well. Brauer's lawyer stated "interest in art with such a toxic historical record may disappoint."
The universities reputation was tarnished when someone tipped off the Tribune that something was going on. As for anything else related to the art sale. Those conversations always devolve into less-than-cordial affairs. My final statement about the art sale is that I believe the sale to be ultimately a good choice. Art is educational, but it is also an asset.
The universities reputation was tarnished when someone tipped off the Tribune that something was going on.
I agree. The university's action violating the trust and its deceptive behavior, especially toward museum officials and committees, was something that could not withstand transparency and public scrutiny.
That is not what I meant, and I think you understand that, but once again. This kind of conversation never goes well on this page. Many users exhibit strong beliefs surrounding the museum and the art. Those beliefs are not subject to change as displayed here many times. Therefore all I can say is thank you for the information, and my only comment is that I believe the sale to be a good choice.
"One of the hardest situations in the practice of law is acknowledging that wealthy litigants can force folks with lesser resources to blink."
And just maybe said litigant shouldn't have brought an action without fully understanding the ramification and costs of doing so.
On a practical and less emotional perspective, at dinner last night with my wife and daughter discussing the art sale, they strongly emphasized the need for universities to have decent dorm facilities to sell students to come to Valpo. Students, particularly female students, consider residential facilities a significant factor in their decision making. When I took my daughter to Valpo on a campus tour, they showed a furnished example dorm room at Brandt Hall, and that was a big turn off to her, not to mention in addition the requirement to live on campus for 3 years at facilities reflecting this. Art lover and supporters are pissed and it sucks to sell such valuable assets. People will tend to forget 3 pieces of art being sold to stay afloat, people will certainly remember if their beloved Alma doesn’t stay afloat.
On a practical and less emotional perspective, at dinner last night with my wife and daughter discussing the art sale, they strongly emphasized the need for universities to have decent dorm facilities to sell students to come to Valpo. Students, particularly female students, consider residential facilities a significant factor in their decision making. When I took my daughter to Valpo on a campus tour, they showed a furnished example dorm room at Brandt Hall, and that was a big turn off to her, not to mention in addition the requirement to live on campus for 3 years at facilities reflecting this. Art lover and supporters are pissed and it sucks to sell such valuable assets. People will tend to forget 3 pieces of art being sold to stay afloat, people will certainly remember if their beloved Alma doesn’t stay afloat.
Art lover and supporters are pissed and it sucks to sell such valuable assets. People will tend to forget 3 pieces of art being sold to stay afloat, people will certainly remember if their beloved Alma doesn’t stay afloat.
I am surprised to hear even now the false dichotomy of art sale vs. survival of the university. This polarity was introduced as a tactic by Pres. Padilla (who as a lawyer and politician knows how to create division to weaken opposition), as was his false message about urgency delivered two years ago now. He said the immediacy of the art sale (and no other option) was critical because the dorm work had to begin in the spring of 2023, and many people fell for it.
In the meantime, the university has spent millions in purchasing new property, the 3D lot apparently has been sold for somewhere between $3 and $5 million, and another parcel is currently on the market for millions more, yet none of that money is going to be devoted to renovating the dorms that were supposedly so crucial they had to be fixed two years ago.
Also, the other myth repeated frequently by Padilla, and by art sale proponents on the forum still today, said that this issue was only about 3 artworks. After all, we were told the museum could easily exist without them. How often was that phony argument stated, and even now that it no longer applies? However, as those opposing the sale on campus who knew the truth and steadily warned about the deceptiveness, and now have been vindicated, Padilla's actual goal was to close to the public the entire museum, one of Valpo's greatest success stories, a universally prestigious and respected facet of the university.
Now that we are near the end of the process, we can admit the truth. We were told "art sale vs. survival of the university." False. We were told the renovation had to begin in spring 2023. False. We were told there were no other funds. False. We were told the issue was only about 3 artworks. False. We were told the art sale did not violate the legal trust. False. We were told the art sale would help retain the museum staff and facility. False. We were told the administration would support the museum moving forward. False.
I find it interesting you claim all these admittances by the administration to be false, but fail to provide any proof as to how these admittances were false to begin with. Please try to use a practical mindset as opposed to an emotional mindset with discussions.
Lets run some numbers. The school as of right now has 3 major projects they wish to complete. Dorm renovations, Nursing building, and the Victory Village. VV has been put on the backburner, as it should be, leaving dorm renovations and the new Nursing building the major projects. Now my consultant is google, so according to Credo Higher Education Consulting, it would run a university about 25-35k per bed to renovate a dorm. It is also more environmentally sustainable to renovate an old building as opposed to paying a wrecking crew one sum, and a construction company another sum. I am unaware as to which dorms are the ones in question, but do the math. Its a large sum of money to renovate dorms.
Now onto the CONHP. Seeing as the school is wishing to build an entirely new building with an entire floor dedicated to a running medical center, this project is not going to come cheap. I was unable to find any similar builds, but with the equipment costs and the building costs, I would not be surprised if the sum exceeds 50 million dollars and may even cost north of 100 million dollars. The school cannot afford to go into more debt over building costs. I understand every college amasses debt to fund projects, but VUs debt has been put into the public spotlight, therefore it would be silly to amass more debt and sour the pot even more.
I wont even account for VV seeing as this project has taken a step back with the priority being set on the prior two projects, but similar projects have been done for the sum of 62 million dollars. This not accounting for the cost of building a new grandstand for Brown field, or even the demolition of the old nursing building. Which would be on the docket for the current plans of VV.
My question is then, where is the school to get this money? Alumni relations have been abysmal in recent years, particularly on the academic sector. You can't just go up to alums and ask for cash when you haven't been in close contact with them for a while and even exclude alums on school surveys. Even then, the general public does not see art as educational, or even knew about this museum to begin with. Even alumni who I have polled and are enjoyers of art have claimed they had no knowledge of this museum even existing even during their time on campus. But wait, I forgot, apparently you cannot be an art fan unless you have gone to this museum. If you were to ask a member of the general public for money, or even an alumni, the answer you would get would be "Why should I give you money, you are sitting on so much money in art pieces?" Art is an asset to most people, whether you display distain for such ideas is trivial. You cannot change the publics mind on this front.
To be honest, I am a bit confused about the whys of a complete closing of an existing, functioning, modern building that contains, what, 5,000 pieces of art. Is it to save a few bucks on the utility bill?
While I found the original rationale for the sale of some highly prized art works for the benefit of the university reasonable, I’m scratching my head over why students and visitors alike are now deprived of the ability to enjoy what’s already inside that building. That almost sounds like a vindictive move of some sort.
To be honest, I am a bit confused about the whys of a complete closing of an existing, functioning, modern building that contains, what, 5,000 pieces of art. Is it to save a few bucks on the utility bill?
While I found the original rationale for the sale of some highly prized art works for the benefit of the university reasonable, I’m scratching my head over why students and visitors alike are now derived of the ability to enjoy what’s already inside that building. That almost sounds like a vindictive move of some sort.
Amid the rationale presented by some, VU cites climate protests across the globe and that the school cannot hire the security necessary to keep their artworks save. The school claims that professional guards at the museum as opposed to student guards would cost the school too much money. The court petition also cites that that VU claims the artwork to be "too valuable for the school to protect". While this rationale may just be fluff, it is a very real concern amongst small time art museums from what I have researched. Many of these smaller facilities cannot afford the high tech security measures needed to protect their pieces. In VUs case, these pieces, and their worth, have been thrust into the national spotlight. There is a very real concern of would be thieves attempting a heist of said work. Which is probably an internal reason for the deaccession of these works.
Some also blame the university for the changes, but not RPK group. RPK group is cited in many articles as the mastermind behind the sale of art. Selling assets is a very common reccomendation from these firms and RPK group would be a group that views art as an Asset as opposed to an educational piece. The art museum is expected to reopen sometime in the fall.
The art museum is expected to reopen sometime in the fall.
If you really believe this, then your "rationale" about the museum closing because art may be stolen or as "an internal reason for deaccession" is false, since there are about 5,000 pieces, many worth millions of dollars, still in the collection. Also, the RPK group did not do research and present findings until well after the art sale was proposed. I attended RPK presentations, and nothing was mentioned about the artworks.
I have been told by someone among the highest officials in the administration with full knowledge that there is no plan to reopen the museum to the public. Legally, it cannot reopen for the public without a director, who was terminated this summer. Faculty and students cannot even selectively use the art resources right now because the museum's staff members have been fired, and someone must be in place to supervise visits. Any student who had registered for art independent studies has had to drop those credits, and I know at least one who has chosen to leave the university.
Rez is corret in framing the real issue at hand. Valpo needs new dorms and a new nursing building and the total cost of those two projects is likely close to $100M. I don't inherently feel these projects are about survival, but they are critical for turnaround - especially given the upcoming decline of graduating high school students. So valpopal's comments about "Valpo is disingenuous because it gained funds from other sources" is invalid because it needs the art sale, property sales and more to get to $100M.
The museum is one of Valpo's greatest success stories? I suspect very few alums would agree with that...and (as Rez reiterated) it seems most didn't even know that the university possessed highly valuable art.
Could problems with the cost of reopening the museum be associated with insurance costs (which likely relates to security costs)? Insurance costs on the whole have gone up dramatically
I think Rez is partially correct regarding alumni relationships. Rez is likely correct that a majority of alums would be hesitant to donate when the university is sitting on highly valuable assets that yield little value toward the university's mission. However, the alumni relationship is mixed. University advancement seems to do a good job building relationships that foster donations and, on the whole, are good to work with (though I would frame these relationships as transactional - they work well if the alum/potential donor has a specific area they want to help fund). Colleges can be effective on a case-by-case basis (when I contact leaders in Engineering or Business, I always get a fast response). The university struggles with having events that help alums reconnect.,,I wonder why they don't ask alums what they might like. As stated previously on this site, the biggest issue is that the university seems to have no willingness to engage with alums on strategic issues facing the university (maybe they do this with the largest donors, but I am not in that group). They also do not engage alums to help with student recruiting. By not engaging alums in those issues, they fail to help alums connect with the university and see the university's problems as critical. This is a big mistake.
