FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Student/Alumnae/Donor Group Assails Randolph Art "Raid"

Lynchburg, VA, October 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 median 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 be taken to task for their actions," said Yastremski and Agnew. "What they have done is unacceptable and cannot be allowed to go forward."

Preserve Educational Choice, Inc. is a tax-exempt, non-profit organization founded in September 2006 to oppose the R-MWC Board of Trustees' move to make the college coeducational and adopt "global honors" as a curricular focus. Supporters include more than 1,000 R-MWC alumnae, students, parents, faculty, staff, and former trustees united by a concern for the college's future. For more information about PEC please see www.preserveeducationalchoice.org.