David Anderson, president of the Northfield college, drew ire from a group that has fought St. Olaf over the sale of the school’s former radio station, WCAL, when he said that board members, including half a dozen St. Olaf graduates, could not have tickets to the college’s popular Christmas festival.

You see, charitable trusts and nonprofits are supposed to use the funds they solicit only for the purposes for which they are solicited. That is exactly the point of SaveWCAL’s efforts.

St. Olaf College solicited funds for the WCAL trust for decades to run a public radio station — a public trust. In 2004, they destroyed that trust so that they could “write a check” from the WCAL Trust fund to St. Olaf College and use the funds for purposes of their own choosing, unrelated to the Trust. St. Olaf’s intent to do this is clearly indicated in the Original Petition that St. Olaf College filed with the court in December 2006. And it’s against state law.

And note the timing of St. Olaf’s decision and announcement re local non-profits. It occurs just one week after SaveWCAL filed a Petition To Redress Breach Of Trust in Rice County District Court on September 24.

The Petition directly asks the court to void the sale because it was against state law, determine the full value of the trust (incuding pre-sale assets and/or value of those assets, which could raise the trust value to perhaps around $15-20 million or more) — and remove St. Olaf College as the trustee of the WCAL trust.

Also note that October 1 was the date that St. Olaf College President David Anderson ‘74 sent a personal email to a SaveWCAL board member (and fellow alumnus) declaring that it will deny any requests for tickets to the renowned St. Olaf Christmas Festival from certain SaveWCAL supporters.

Apparently, some people are not happy with SaveWCAL — but the College administration and Board of Regents have no one to blame but themselves, In his June 10, 2008 Order, Rice County District Court Judge Gerald Wolf wrote:

“The only watchdog looking out for the interests of the trust in this case was the Respondent, the non-profit organization SaveWCAL. SaveWCAL raised the alarm when they first learned of the sale of WCAL by St. Olaf, but neither St. Olaf nor the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office paid any heed to SaveWCAL’s warning.”

So Blodgett’s comment that “The two subjects are many, many miles apart and one has absolutely nothing to do with the other” rings hollow to those of us at SaveWCAL — and to others as well.

You can read more about this and read some of the comments SaveWCAL readers made on this topic (including one on how another institution handles the issues of donations to local charities) on the SaveWCAL blog at:
http://savewcal.net/2008/10/02/st-olaf-says-no-more-money-for-other-nonprofits/

SaveWCAL also sincerely hopes that members of the St. Olaf and Northfield communities will be able to meet the needs of the local nonprofits in the same way that WCAL donors generously did for WCAL for more than 80 years. Donor support matters!

Many people in town were very saddened by this, and searched for a way to visibly express their distress. Victor came up with a great visual idea, involving all of St. Olaf Avenue where we live.

There are about 90 boulevard trees on St. Olaf avenue, some very large. We purchased hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of yards of black and gold ribbon after counting and measuring all the trees. It was expensive but a local merchant gave us a discount because it was for the lost students. The kids from the Key worked with us all day to tie the school color ribbons on EVERY boulevard tree from Hwy. 3 to the college entrance. As we worked, people came out of their houses and insisted on giving ten and twenty dollar bills to share in the project.

Every tree was encircled, tied with a bow, and had long streamers of the school colors fluttering in the wind.

A day or two later, the students’ families and others driving up St. Olaf avenue to the college for the memorial service were greeted with a visible expression of sympathy from the residents of St. Olaf Avenue, and the Key kids who had given up their Saturday to help.

This happened because St. Olaf is part of “us”, and we are part of “them”.

As a Carleton alum, I also feel pride when I see its name listed as a sponsor of a local event or program. I think many alumni give to their schools with the expectation that the money will be used for students AND to help maintain and increase the value of their alma mater in the eyes of larger communities - locally, nationally and internationally.

Call it enlightened self-interest: when my school’s reputation increases in a positive direction; so does the perceived value of me being an alum. (Not the purest motive for giving, but a powerful motive nonetheless.)

Obviously, improving education on campus goes a long way toward that goal, but so does increasing the quality of their students’ experiences in the surrounding community. This is to say nothing of the benefits which accrue and rebound to the institution through the wider opportunities afforded to faculty and staff in a vibrant community.

Like Kiffi, I love what the colleges do for Northfield, all the tangible and intangible benefits. They have been integral to Northfield’s history. They should continue to be so for Northfield’s future.

I feel St. Olaf - although probably only St. Olaf’s current president, for I do not have the impression that much of the College’s student body, faculty, staff or Board of Regents has been involved in or even knew of this decision - has taken a step entirely in the wrong direction.

It is only President David Anderson’s specious reasoning on this topic and apparent disconnect he’s willingly creating between town and gown that I find “ethically troubling.”

I think those great philosophers, The Beastie Boys, said it best: “What goes around / comes around // what comes around / goes around.”

A point of correction though: the colleges (in Northfield) are not mandated by law to allow high school students to take classes at their institutions. Post Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) is a state-funded program that most (if not all) public colleges and universities and 14 Minnesota private colleges participate in. St. Olaf and Carleton both do not, but instead offer an Honors Program for qualified NHS and ARTech seniors to take one class per term at the schools to no cost to the student nor to NHS and ARTech.

One more note of interest: The Princeton Review ranks St. Olaf as #8 in the country for “Town/Gown Relations are Great.” Carleton is not ranked.

ArtOrg is giving as part of their mission. The examples you sited, David, are important to what ArtOrg does.

St. Olaf’s tax-exempt, not-for-profit purpose is to educate the students. I don’t see how giving to local charities educates the students.

Sean–if you look at the levels of charity under Buddha–you will find the highest level is when both the donor and donee know nothing of each other–like I would give money away and not worry or care where it went, and the charity receiving would not know where it came from. This is a philosophical mind-set that we would strive to achieve as we become better people.

However, if you talk to anyone in “development” (getting people to give them money for charitable purposes) they will tell you that it is very important to most donor’s that they feel they are directing where their money will go–and where it will not go. So charitable organizations, including St. Olaf, are careful to explain the schools uses of donors funds. Very few people do not care–so St. Olaf must be cognizant of these issues when they ask for donations.

I think St. Olaf is doing the right thing. I agree that St. Olaf benefits from a vibrant Northfield, both as a residence for employees and a future home for graduates. Plus, St. Olaf students and professors can participate in learning in a vibrant city. St. Olaf may be self-contained for the most part–but they need and want us as much as we need and want them.

As Northfield goes, so goes the fate of its colleges to a certain degree.

President Anderson, at his meeting with non-profit leaders, of whom my wife is one, commented that non-profits do not give to other non-profits. This is completely untrue, and a pretty tough sell in a group of non-profit leaders.

He also stated that St. Olaf got one request a week from non-profits. This is an insurmountable challenge for a college that netted 42.5 million dollars in FY 2006? That’s net income - income after expenses - not gross income. I get one request a DAY for money from local and national non-profits; I’m not netting anywhere near that much cash, I can assure you.

The organization to which I dedicate the lion’s share of my time and resources - the Northfield Arts Guild - of whom my wife is the interim executive director, asks St. Olaf for $1350 to sponsor a show. Let’s assume that this is the request one week matched by similar requests the other 51 weeks, and let’s round it up even higher, and say that they get requests for $100,000 a year. They don’t even have to grant all of those requests, but let’s say they do. That’s less than one-quarter of one percent of net income.

What does this piddling outlay buy St. Olaf in community spirit and goodwill? Probably way more than $100,000, if such a thing were to be measured.

I’m interested if alumni, especially alumni that live in Northfield and surrounding communities, will lessen their donations if they catch wind of this, and the wind they catch smells foul to them.

If the amount of money is not the issue, why are they so “ethically troubled”? How much money will they spend on advertising and PR spin to counter the negative effects of looking like a poor neighbor? How much money to massage away their troubled ethics? Not a good idea when they are still fighting off the negative publicity from the WCAL sale.

As an individual, I give money and a lot of time to non-profits. I expect employers, especially the largest employer in town to chose to do the same.

They have a duty to educate and serve their students, first and foremost, but I find it troubling that this duty obliterates any sense of responsibility to the community that provides their fundamental base of support. Most other organizations seem able to keep both in view at the same time.

Would we like it if for-profit companies claimed their duty was only to their shareholders and employees and not to the community in which they are based? Probably not, and most companies give a lot to those communities for good PR, good business sense, and the principle of reciprocity.

As for the $100,000 they give for Northfield high school students to take classes there, I believe that this is a state law dating back 20 years. Those classes would run whether the high school students were added to them or not. The increase in Olaf’s expenses, I believe, would be marginal, and considering those high school students are probably also buying textbooks for the course and food at Olaf (from time to time), they are probably not putting out even that much. These are sunk costs, to a very large extent.

I’m also curious if this was a decision made only by President Anderson. Were the Regents involved? What about alumni? What about faculty and staff? What about students? Do any of those constituencies even know about it? More importantly, did they know it was coming?

As a “College of the Church” does St. Olaf officially no longer recognize a central truth of most major religions: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”?

I fully - let me stress this, FULLY - understand that St. Olaf is not mandated to give money to the community and its organizations. They can do with their money what they will, but it doesn’t mean they are doing the right thing. There is a world of difference between “can” and “should”.

It gives me pleasure to know that my alma mater still gives generously to Northfield organizations. I sincerely hope they always recognize the overwhelming merits of doing so.

Besides the student’s studying and participating in sports and hikes around the campus and socializing amongst themselves, there is very little time really.

Collegians and all can always go into the cities for big concerts and plays, museums,etc. I am not saying Northfield offerings aren’t valuable, I am just saying they are not all That crucial to a good and beneficial college life.

When we make donations to any organization, we should know ahead of time how their funds are allocated, and decide whether or not we wish to
promote the same in kind. If not, move on, there is some organization that will gladly take your money and do things you like with it.

For example, ArtOrg has donated to the Laura Baker auction in the past, and the donated “Governors Ball” print raised $2000 for that group. The deal that we struck with the Sesquicentennial Committee resulted in another two prints being sold for $4600, and that money went to fund other things (Ray Jacobson’s sculpture or perhaps Fifth Bridge, I think). Still last Friday night a “Twenty Views of Dundas” print suite raised $2400 for the Friends of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts–at their huge “Art Perchance” fundraiser.

We have also donated the special set of the “Twenty Views” and the special print of the “Governors Ball” marked “Museum Proof” to the Dundas and Northfield Historical Society respectively.

We are a bit different perhaps than the discussion going on here. If its a good idea and makes sense, we will do it–even if it means donating to another non-profit!

I think Sean has a very good point, though. When we give to any organization, be it church, college, food shelf, or whatever, I don’t think we have a right to tell them they can’t do thus and so with our money unless it is specifically designated for a specific need. Just my opinion, there, but I agree with his point.

When I give my hard earned money to a college, it is not with the idea that they are passing it out to other non-profits–I intend my gift to go to the mission of the non-profit.

I don’t like the idea — presented both in the article and in your comment — that people who give money (via tuition or donation) have a claim to see how that money ought to be spent. Now if you’re explicitly donating money to, say, a science building, you have a reasonable expectation that it be spent on the science building. If you’re just donating to the college, though, I don’t think you should be able to reasonably expect that that money stay within the college.

(Incidentally, Carleton and St. Olaf presidents’ salaries are the first- and third-highest in the state, respectively. I don’t think donors have a right to demand their money not be spent on that, either, but I think if you’re going to attack something, this seems like at least as attack-worthy as community donations.)

So Sean, I completely disagree on your idea–you man not feel bad for the alumni who donate–you think St. Olaf should pass that on to the community–but if those that donate think that St Olaf is just passing it out to other charities, they will stop giving to St Olaf and just give to another charity of their choice–it is reallly not up to St Olaf to give away money that was given to them.

I also think they should try paying their staff a living wage so that they are more able to donate and support non profits. For some reason we have abdicated our personal responsiblity in supporting charitable organizations to our employers or other “non-person” entities. It is time for people–not corporations or colleges–to support charities, including churches, food shelf, and other worthy organizations.

St. Olaf should continue, of course, its “in kind” programs, including joint programs with the Historical Society, the NDDC and other organizations–(the publc schools, etc.) either as opportunities for student programs or for student volunteering. This furthers their mission in education and makes them a full participant in the community. Expecting cash hand outs is too much. I know St Olaf profs have served on different boards and committees in Northfield, including on the Historical Society–and that is a contribution to the community as well.

I know that their cash contributions have been minimal, but if it allows them to not raise tuition or to give their staff a small raise, I think we will benefit more as a community from those adjustmetns. (If it goes to give a raise to the President, I am dead set against it. Sorry David.)

Anyway, I find it ethically troubling that we rely on for profit corporations like Malt O Meal to support our charities–again, you have employees that think they don’t need to give donations since MOM does it for them. At the same time, I see the benefits to MOM employees of having a vibrant Historical Society or public school system–places MOM has contributed.

I think when you expect a “non-person entity” like MOM or St Olaf to act like a person–with compassion and generosity–you are projecting the human condition onto something that is not human.

Instead, eliminate the corporate income tax so quesions of compensation and contributions have no tax element–and let them make money like crazy so they can pay their employees more so their employees can make donations.

Just a note to say I put two updates on the story so far. See them at the bottom of the article. Thanks!

There is no question that Northfield would not be the town it is without the colleges.

There is also no question that the amount of money the colleges “donate” to the town each year does not cover the costs of their coverage by city services… or does it? Is it true that the only buildings that require the capacity/height of the new fire truck ($750,000)are the St. Olaf high rise dorms? Why is there not an accurate accounting of this so that it does not continue to be a town/gown issue ?

I love the colleges. I would not be living here if it were not for the colleges. On the other hand, I expect a college like St. Olaf, with their extraordinary commitment to sustainable, honest … and yes, “old fashioned”… core values to be what Sean has termed a little more “up-front” with their reasoning on this issue.

How much do they contribute to what non-profits in town and how does that compare with their overall charitable giving?

Is this action worth reactivating all the old town/gown negativity?

Is this “savings” worth the negative PR it will bring?

It would be harder for them to get professors who want to live in the town (an issue which I think they already face to some degree), and it would obviously be impossible to have student collaboration with nonprofits if those nonprofits don’t exist.

Both colleges contribute to the community with the resources they provide — and they should be appreciated for that. But the colleges also benefit from the nonprofits, and they should help pay for them. If they can’t afford to do it, that’s fine: I just want to hear that clear-cut truth.

This link shows a photo from John at St. Olaf.

This link shows the Illo. Minn. opening.

This link shows big 350-attendance The Bad Plus concert at Carleton. This was not sponsored by the colleges at all, we rented the space outright!

We approach both colleges in direct ways that will benefit their students and other stakeholders. Many of our events are designed to attract people from out of town, and that helps eveyone.

I think that St. Olaf College does a lot for the community offering arts to the community, most often free, and the many other programs and events that are open to the public. Carleton, too.

St. Olaf just built an incredible science center and the societal benefits of that should be coming forthcoming before too very long. Let’s not impose upon them. We should be able to find sufficient support for any worthwhile non-profit.