Follow us on Instagram
Try our daily mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

University reimburses Robertsons for defunct graduate program

Correction appended

ADVERTISEMENT

The University has returned close to $800,000 to the Robertson Foundation, acknowledging that it did not adequately inform the foundation's trustees of the short-lived Graduate Funding Agreement.

Compared to the foundation's $800 million endowment and the $207 million the Robertsons are demanding that the University return, the $782,375 reimbursement seems paltry. It is not the relatively small size of the reimbursement, but the larger dispute over the Graduate Funding Agreement (GFA) that has both sides still up in arms. The University maintains that the GFA program was an appropriate use of the foundation's money; the Robertson family says it was not.

"Very disturbingly, even as they give [the money] back, they say there was nothing wrong with using it the way they did," Robertson family attorney Frank Cialone said, adding that the reimbursement was "an admission of liability" by the University and that he would represent it in court as a victory for the Robertsons.

University lead trial counsel Douglas Eakeley said that the GFA program was drawing a disproportionate level of attention by critics of the University's case, and that the return of the money would "lower the decibel level" of the protests over this particular issue.

This is not the first time that the University has returned money to the Robertson Foundation, nor is it the largest amount, Eakeley added.

Former Wilson School dean Michael Rothschild created the GFA as a three-year trial program in 2000, funding doctoral students in three departments deemed "contiguous" to the Wilson School: economics, politics and sociology. After becoming dean of the Wilson School in September 2002, Anne-Marie Slaughter '80 opted not to make the temporary program permanent.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Robertson family has fiercely criticized the GFA as a typical instance of the University ignoring the intent of foundation donor Charles Robertson '26. The foundation's charter stipulates that the money be used, among other things, to prepare graduate students for government service.

It is still unclear why the University never made adequate disclosure to the foundation about use of its funds for the GFA program. The Robertsons allege that the University deliberately avoided disclosure.

University Vice President and Secretary Bob Durkee '69 said that the inadequate disclosure was "just a mistake that was made at the time. I'm not sure it would help at this point now that we've reimbursed the foundation for the funds to go back into the history."

"The more that we thought about how this had been handled at the time, [the more] we didn't feel that the notification had been made as it should have been," Durkee said.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Eakeley said he has submitted a letter to Mercer County Superior Court Judge Neil Shuster detailing the reimbursement.

The University has been embroiled in the high-profile dispute over the $800 million Robertson Foundation endowment since 2002. The Robertson family alleges mismanagement of the endowment in addition to willful disregard for Charles' intent, and it wants the University to return $207 million of the foundation's money that it has spent over the years. Furthermore, the family would have the court remove the four University-appointed trustees from the foundation's seven-person board and allow the foundation to give its money elsewhere. The family says it is unlikely to ever donate to the University again.

Cialone said using the foundation money for the GFA program was "really indicative of the problem. I think if most people gave money to the Woodrow Wilson School, they would not expect that that money would be handed out to other departments for other people to get."

Eakeley said the plaintiffs have tried to portray departments as less "contiguous" than they really are, noting that Wilson School faculty are "almost all jointly appointed."

In what has become a hallmark of the Robertson case, acrimony between the parties extended to minor details.

Seth Lapidow, one of the Robertson family attorneys, said the University's announcement yesterday came as a "total surprise" to the plaintiffs and called it an instance of "governance by press release."

"There was a foundation board meeting on Thursday that was attended by the University-appointed trustees and the family-appointed trustees, and no word was mentioned of this reimbursement," Lapidow said.

But Eakeley said he emailed the Robertsons' attorneys a copy of the letter to Judge Shuster that detailed the reimbursement but has not yet received a response.

Eakeley added that he also called the Robertson family attorneys before he sent the email. "I didn't get a call back," he said. "Still haven't."

The suit is on hold for the moment, as both sides prepare for trial while awaiting Shuster's rulings on each side's motions for summary judgment. A trial is at least several months away.

Correction

The original version of this article attributed comments made by University counsel Douglas Eakeley to vice president and secretary Bob Durkee. The Daily Princetonian regrets the error.

> Related: The Daily Princetonian's coverage of the Robertson suit.