On Wednesday, October 28, the Minneapolis StarTribune published a story by Jenna Ross, titled "Appeals Court hears WCAL radio trust case" in the Strib's South Metro Edition. Among other things, Ross reported:
St. Olaf agrees that if a donor gives money for a specific purpose, such as building a radio tower, it must — and did — use the gift for that purpose.
Amazing. The argument of St. Olaf is that it is required to use a charitable gift for the purpose intended by the donors — until it decides to do otherwise!
An astute commenter noted on a previous post where a number of people were at the hearing have posted comments:
My question [re St. Olaf's position]: [W]hat good is a radio tower if there's no radio station and building to use that tower? How is a tower-specific donation different from a radio station-specific donation? Or [a donation] to build the WCAL building? Makes no sense.
Makes no sense to us, either — which is why this case is now before the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Can't believe it! The article completely ignores the issue of the Minnesota Attorney General's dereliction of duty! When pressed by the judges about why the AG has done nothing, the AG attorney basically said. "We HAVE done something. We decided to do nothing." Unreal.
Hmm, are we going to end up with a radio building, a tower, and no cash? ; )
Actually . . .
there were 2 grants given WCAL for digital upgrades at the very same time this deal developed.
I believe worth about $200,000 – – what became of that?
Hmm
WCAL received three grants to convert to digital technology. There was a CPB grant for $66,000 or more awarded on April 15, 2004 and two United States Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration 2004 PTFP Grants totaling $72,800 awarded on August 20, 2004 (days after the sale was announced).
The conversion project had been budgeted at $145,760. This means that WCAL would have need to raise less than $7,000 to completely pay for the project.
This is the same conversion that St. Olaf claimed was "too expensive" and used as a justification for the sale — despite the fact that the station already had significant funds in hand at the time of the sale announcement!
It is not known what become of those funds.