This was released to 180 museums across the nation.
New York, NY, October 3, 2007 –
In response to Randolph College's decision to sell works of art from its Maier Museum of Art, the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) made the following statement:
The AAMD, an organization representing some 180 leaders of North
America's leading art museums, expresses grave concern about the
proposed sale of paintings owned by the Maier Museum of Art for the
purpose of supporting the college's general operating endowment. The
prohibition against the sale of collection objects for general
operating purposes is a fundamental covenant between museums and
donors. It is a promise that exists across generations, to prevent the
financial challenges of a given time – no matter how pressing or how
valid they may be – from depriving future beneficiaries of such gifts.
The AAMD was deeply disturbed to learn of the removal this week of
important paintings by George Bellows, Edward Hicks and others, for
sale at auction for the purpose of replenishing your college's general
operating endowment. In the Association's judgment, such a sale
violates the fundamental integrity of the Maier Museum of Art, and by
extension, Randolph College.
The AAMD condemns Randolph College's sale of paintings from the Maier
Museum of Art.
###
Association of Art Museum Directors
120 East 56th Street
Suite 520
New York, NY 10022
Tel: 212.754.8084
Fax: 212.754.8087
05 October 2007
03 October 2007
02 October 2007
Art Raid
STUDENT/ALUMNAE/ DONOR GROUP
ASSAILS RANDOLPH ART "RAID"
LYNCHBURG, VA, OCT. 2, 2007 - An organization representing students, alumnae
and donors of the former Randolph-Macon Woman's College - now known as
Randolph College - assailed Randolph College officials today for their
"dishonorable raid" on the Maier Museum of Art collection, portions of which
were secretly hauled off under armed guard yesterday, to be auctioned off
next month by Christie's New York. The college announced the controversial
move after the fact, triggering the resignation earlier today of Museum
Director Karol Lawson.
In a joint statement, Anne Yastremski, executive director of Preserve
Educational Choice and Ellen Agnew, former associate director of the Maier
Museum, said, "Randolph College officials have shown why they are not to be
trusted with the finances or future of Randolph College or the Maier Museum
of Art."
"To divert attention from their own mismanagement and continuing poor
judgment, they are now putting at risk the treasure and legacy of
Randolph-Macon Woman's College and the Maier Museum, one of the leading
institutions of its kind and one of South Central Virginia's most important
cultural assets."
The college, which promised that such decisions and actions would be
"transparent, " instead secretly removed the pieces from the museum yesterday
afternoon and delivered them to Christie's, where they will be auctioned
publicly in November.
The college's thinly-lined excuse for what most in the art
community consider a highly unethical decision? An email sent to alumnae
defending the college's need "to make a substantial infusion into the
endowment and reduce our endowment spending rate."
But even a brief look at the facts reveals no endowment problem,
leaving one to conclude that college officials are, in reality, only robbing
Peter to pay Paul.
Randolph College - with a student body of only 665 students --
has an endowment of $153 million. This is an endowment that is the envy of
its peers, and larger than many colleges twice its size.
According to the 2006 endowment rankings survey conducted by the
National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO),
only 291 colleges had endowments larger than Randolph College's. (At $153
million, its current value, only 278 would have larger endowments.) This
survey includes universities with tens of thousands of students (and often
multiple campuses), such as Ohio State University, the University of Texas
system, and the University of California system. The average endowment of
all of the colleges and universities surveyed: approximately $79 million.
So why does Randolph College keep crying poor?
Because it is trying to mask the real problem: out-of-control
spending and financial mismanagement, neither of which will be fixed by
selling pieces from the art collection.
It is true that in December 2006, Randolph College was put on
warning by its accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools (SACS), for not complying with Core Requirement 2.11, which requires
that member schools have a "sound financial base, demonstrated financial
stability, and adequate physical resources to support the mission of the
institution and scope of its programs and services."
But the College insinuates that SACS told them they need to
increase their endowment. This is not at all what they said. The specific
issues that SACS cited the college for - astronomical tuition discounting
(in the mid-60 percent range instead of the 30 percent range which is
considered normal), excessive deferred maintenance, and operating deficits -
are all signs of fiscal mismanagement, not a too-small endowment.
The actions that Randolph College officials have been taking
show they have little understanding of how to fix their problems. The
consequences of the administration' s actions will be extremely negative, and
could permanently damage the College's viability.
First, Randolph College will become the pariah of the art world,
as selling off portions of an art collection to support a general operating
budget is considered highly unethical and violates the ethical code of
museums.
Second, the Maier Museum art collection is one of the finest
collections of American art in the country and, with the college's related
programs in studio art, art history, and museum studies, has helped attract
many students over the years. De-accessioning some of the most important
works from the collection will likely discourage students from choosing the
college and have a negative impact on its ability to attract students - an
impact already being felt this year as the student body dropped nearly 8% as
a result of the decision to adopt coeducation -- further harming the
college's ability to generate revenue from student tuition and fees, the
backbone of a well-run institution.
Third, the College's decision to sell these four paintings will
harm future fundraising efforts. Several major donors have already said
they would stop giving to the College if they sold part of their permanent
collection.
Fourth, the College's relationship to the Lynchburg community
will be irreparably harmed, particularly with the sale of George Bellows'
"Men of the Docks." The Maier Museum of Art is a community treasure, and a
major cultural attraction in central Virginia. The Lynchburg community
banded together in 1920 to buy the Bellows painting, raising 72 percent of
the needed funds.
The College's actions are even more questionable in light of the fact that
two court battles are currently being waged to decide whether the College's
Board of Trustees can properly sell or divert its assets away from their
original charitable purposes, and whether donors, students, or others have
the ability to challenge those actions.
In one case, the Supreme Court of Virginia just agreed to hear an appeal of
two lawsuits brought by students and donors that challenges the College's
decision to change its charitable purpose last fall, one of which has the
potential to restrict the use of all assets of the college to the purpose of
women's education.
Moreover, just last month, the College filed a lawsuit seeking to break the
will and trust of Louise Jordan Smith, a trust that governs a large number
of the most valuable paintings in the Maier collection. Students, alumnae,
former faculty and museum directors, art donors, Lynchburg citizens and
teachers, and relatives of Louise Jordan Smith have filed an Motion for
Leave to Intervene in the College's suit, and a hearing on that motion is
scheduled for November 9.
"Randolph College's administrators and Board must to be taken to
task for their actions," said Yastremski and Agnew. "What they have done is
unacceptable and cannot be allowed to go forward."
ASSAILS RANDOLPH ART "RAID"
LYNCHBURG, VA, OCT. 2, 2007 - An organization representing students, alumnae
and donors of the former Randolph-Macon Woman's College - now known as
Randolph College - assailed Randolph College officials today for their
"dishonorable raid" on the Maier Museum of Art collection, portions of which
were secretly hauled off under armed guard yesterday, to be auctioned off
next month by Christie's New York. The college announced the controversial
move after the fact, triggering the resignation earlier today of Museum
Director Karol Lawson.
In a joint statement, Anne Yastremski, executive director of Preserve
Educational Choice and Ellen Agnew, former associate director of the Maier
Museum, said, "Randolph College officials have shown why they are not to be
trusted with the finances or future of Randolph College or the Maier Museum
of Art."
"To divert attention from their own mismanagement and continuing poor
judgment, they are now putting at risk the treasure and legacy of
Randolph-Macon Woman's College and the Maier Museum, one of the leading
institutions of its kind and one of South Central Virginia's most important
cultural assets."
The college, which promised that such decisions and actions would be
"transparent, " instead secretly removed the pieces from the museum yesterday
afternoon and delivered them to Christie's, where they will be auctioned
publicly in November.
The college's thinly-lined excuse for what most in the art
community consider a highly unethical decision? An email sent to alumnae
defending the college's need "to make a substantial infusion into the
endowment and reduce our endowment spending rate."
But even a brief look at the facts reveals no endowment problem,
leaving one to conclude that college officials are, in reality, only robbing
Peter to pay Paul.
Randolph College - with a student body of only 665 students --
has an endowment of $153 million. This is an endowment that is the envy of
its peers, and larger than many colleges twice its size.
According to the 2006 endowment rankings survey conducted by the
National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO),
only 291 colleges had endowments larger than Randolph College's. (At $153
million, its current value, only 278 would have larger endowments.) This
survey includes universities with tens of thousands of students (and often
multiple campuses), such as Ohio State University, the University of Texas
system, and the University of California system. The average endowment of
all of the colleges and universities surveyed: approximately $79 million.
So why does Randolph College keep crying poor?
Because it is trying to mask the real problem: out-of-control
spending and financial mismanagement, neither of which will be fixed by
selling pieces from the art collection.
It is true that in December 2006, Randolph College was put on
warning by its accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools (SACS), for not complying with Core Requirement 2.11, which requires
that member schools have a "sound financial base, demonstrated financial
stability, and adequate physical resources to support the mission of the
institution and scope of its programs and services."
But the College insinuates that SACS told them they need to
increase their endowment. This is not at all what they said. The specific
issues that SACS cited the college for - astronomical tuition discounting
(in the mid-60 percent range instead of the 30 percent range which is
considered normal), excessive deferred maintenance, and operating deficits -
are all signs of fiscal mismanagement, not a too-small endowment.
The actions that Randolph College officials have been taking
show they have little understanding of how to fix their problems. The
consequences of the administration' s actions will be extremely negative, and
could permanently damage the College's viability.
First, Randolph College will become the pariah of the art world,
as selling off portions of an art collection to support a general operating
budget is considered highly unethical and violates the ethical code of
museums.
Second, the Maier Museum art collection is one of the finest
collections of American art in the country and, with the college's related
programs in studio art, art history, and museum studies, has helped attract
many students over the years. De-accessioning some of the most important
works from the collection will likely discourage students from choosing the
college and have a negative impact on its ability to attract students - an
impact already being felt this year as the student body dropped nearly 8% as
a result of the decision to adopt coeducation -- further harming the
college's ability to generate revenue from student tuition and fees, the
backbone of a well-run institution.
Third, the College's decision to sell these four paintings will
harm future fundraising efforts. Several major donors have already said
they would stop giving to the College if they sold part of their permanent
collection.
Fourth, the College's relationship to the Lynchburg community
will be irreparably harmed, particularly with the sale of George Bellows'
"Men of the Docks." The Maier Museum of Art is a community treasure, and a
major cultural attraction in central Virginia. The Lynchburg community
banded together in 1920 to buy the Bellows painting, raising 72 percent of
the needed funds.
The College's actions are even more questionable in light of the fact that
two court battles are currently being waged to decide whether the College's
Board of Trustees can properly sell or divert its assets away from their
original charitable purposes, and whether donors, students, or others have
the ability to challenge those actions.
In one case, the Supreme Court of Virginia just agreed to hear an appeal of
two lawsuits brought by students and donors that challenges the College's
decision to change its charitable purpose last fall, one of which has the
potential to restrict the use of all assets of the college to the purpose of
women's education.
Moreover, just last month, the College filed a lawsuit seeking to break the
will and trust of Louise Jordan Smith, a trust that governs a large number
of the most valuable paintings in the Maier collection. Students, alumnae,
former faculty and museum directors, art donors, Lynchburg citizens and
teachers, and relatives of Louise Jordan Smith have filed an Motion for
Leave to Intervene in the College's suit, and a hearing on that motion is
scheduled for November 9.
"Randolph College's administrators and Board must to be taken to
task for their actions," said Yastremski and Agnew. "What they have done is
unacceptable and cannot be allowed to go forward."
Maier Museum Has Been Robbed
The Maier Museum of my beloved college Randolph-Macon Woman's College was robbed of four important American paintings. I am sickened by the college and it's continued underhanded way of doing business.
More news
More news
01 October 2007
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)