Also

The college administration wrote their own response to the article long before I finished mine. Here is theirs:

To: The Bennington College community and the wider Bennington community

From: Elizabeth Coleman, President, Bennington College

Date: March 23, 2009

Re: The facts about conversations between Bennington College and North Bennington Trustees

A recent article (Friday, March 20, 2009) in the Bennington Banner regarding Bennington College’s discussions with trustees from the Village of North Bennington demands a response from the College because of the importance of the issues involved and the extent to which the statements in the article misrepresent the facts. The discussions focused on a voluntary contribution of funds by Bennington College to the Village of North Bennington beyond the taxes and fees the College already pays.

The College has been in conversation with North Bennington trustees for several months about the College making a voluntary financial contribution to the community because of the acute fiscal pressures they are facing. Although we are under no legal obligation to do so, we entered those conversations in good faith while working within the context of several critical constraints: A significant increase in financial aid over the last decade (currently 75% of Bennington students receive financial aid) has meant that tuition revenues account for less and less of the College’s operating budget. This puts ever-increasing pressure on annual fundraising to fill the gap. In addition, during a time of tremendous national economic contraction, the College is grappling with a much more challenging fundraising environment; helping families of its students who are under greater financial strain; and, as a major employer in the community, maintaining its commitment to its employees.

We appreciate that the North Bennington trustees are also facing difficult economic times. In our most recent meeting, we offered a contribution to the village of $20,000 annually (with consideration of a cost of living increase) for the next five years. To put that in the context of comparably sized institutions in the state of Vermont that are making any such contributions, Vermont Law School contributes $16,000 annually to its local town and Landmark College contributes $25,000.

What follows is a response to a series of assertions by members of the North Bennington trustees in the article that are singly or together untrue, misleading, or inflammatory.

At the end of our last meeting, the North Bennington committee said that they would get back to us after further consideration of the College’s offer. The first we heard of their rejection was when we read about it in the Bennington Banner. Moreover, we did not fail to respond to an invitation to attend the Town Meeting at which the offer was apparently discussed, as a statement in the article alleges. The fact is we were not invited to the meeting.

In the article, the trustees’ selected Tufts University in Boston as an example—Tufts contributes $135,000 as a voluntary contribution. Not only does Tufts have a billion dollar–plus endowment, it has nearly 10,000 students. Prorated by enrollment income or by number of students, an equivalent annual contribution from Bennington College to the Village of North Bennington would be $10,500. Prorated by endowment, the equivalent Bennington College contribution would be $1,350.

Throughout the article, the trustees suggest that the relationship between the College and the wider community has been one-sided. In referring to the allocation of funds to Bennington College through the Vermont Economic Development Authority Tax-Exempt Revenue Bond Program, for example, they fail to mention that the purpose of that program is to help enable institutions to fund building and renovation projects, thereby providing jobs and fortifying the local economy. What they did mention—that making use of this program “saved” the College $3 million—is hypothetical and, under any hypothesis, wildly exaggerated. Would that it were so.

In discussing the upgrading of a water system some years ago to accommodate the College—the trustees’ statements are, in every respect, at odds with the truth. The village had nothing to do with that transaction. The College worked directly with the Water Board and assumed responsibility for all of the ensuing expenses. This has been the case in all of our transactions with the Water Board. The North Bennington trustees have no authority over the Water Board nor have they played any role in the working relationship between that board and the College, which, by all measures, has been noteworthy for its cooperation.

In addition, the charge that the College is fostering a “culture of elitism” and student isolation by directing students away from their desire “to do things in the community” is both untrue and unhelpful. I cannot speak for what has happened to attendance at Kevin’s Sports Pub by Bennington College students (an example used as evidence in the article) but I do know that Bennington students, faculty, and staff are deeply proud to be part of this community. Last year nearly 20% of Bennington students volunteered at community schools—including the North Bennington Graded School— and other local not-for-profit organizations, in addition to faculty and staff who volunteer regularly in the community. Moreover, far from fostering greater isolation, this coming winter 30–35 first year students will remain on campus during Field Work Term—a term where students are normally required to work off campus—in order to work with organizations in this community.

And, as is common knowledge, performances in dance, music, theatre, lectures, readings, and art exhibitions take place non-stop at the College and are open to the community free of charge.

Finally, the claim that the community would be much stronger financially if there were no Bennington College is manifestly thoughtless as well as extremely provocative. In addition to the number of people the College employs, there is the substantial economic contribution of the students and non-residential faculty to the local economy.

This would be a difficult matter to resolve under the best of circumstances—the current economic pressures make it all the more so. We deeply regret the decision by the North Bennington trustees to reject our offer and to do so in a way that undermines the good faith that is essential to the success of our shared enterprise.