Perhaps donors’ trust in Iowa State was boosted after this week’s revelation that College of Agriculture Dean Woteki will use college funds to repay a gift account in order to more closely follow the wishes of the donor.

The gift in question is a farm given by an ISU alumna Jessie Coles. Coles specified that her farm should be used to fund undergraduate scholarships and research and allowed the dean discretion in disbursing that money.

At the behest of President Gregory Geoffroy and the committee, he formed to review gifts made to Iowa State, Woteki is examining all 259 gift accounts held by the College of Agriculture to determine if the wishes of the donors were respected.

In the case of the Coles gift, Woteki uncovered two major discrepancies. Some of that money meant for scholarships and research was used to pay for international travel, staff support and fuel and maintenance for a car used by the dean’s office. Secondly, the reason that only 1 percent of the gift was used for research and 23 percent for scholarships was a memo which abbreviated Coles’ wishes, allowing the dean far too much discretion in using the money.

Woteki pledged to replace over $200,000 from the fund used for neither scholarships nor research. She has sold the car previously used by the dean’s office. She is setting a precedent for accountable use of generous gifts as well as responding with integrity when a potential indiscretion comes to light by agreeing to backtrack and honor the wishes of the donor.

Unfortunately, questionable appropriation and outright mishandling of gifts made to Iowa State are not isolated in the College of Agriculture. No example more infamous than the Marie Powers farm fiasco involving the Iowa State Foundation exists to show the unconscionable way in which at least one gift has been received.

When people consider giving generously of a legacy they have taken a lifetime to build, stories like their land being sold and their tenants evicted would make them seriously consider whether Iowa State is a worthy repository of their trust. During a time of budget cuts, double-digit tuition increases and slashes in research funds, vigilant oversight of gifts intended for scholarship and science is essential.

Geoffroy’s review initiative and Woteki’s compliance with his suggestion to investigate gifts to the college is a good first step.

However, university-wide, only a sample of the 1300 gifts have been reviewed. By forming a gift account review board that does not consist of stakeholders, more strict interpretations of donor wishes can be assured.

Woteki’s actions should challenge the rest of the university and the Foundation to agree to a policy of transparency.

Editorial Board: Dave Roepke, Erin Randolph, Charlie Weaver, Megan Hinds, Rachel Faber Machacha