Some Misimpressions About Public-Radio Deal

To the Editor:

We at Minnesota Public Radio were enthusiastic about Jed Emerson’s recent Opinion piece (“Non-Profit Pay Scales: Getting What We Deserve,” My View, July 30) and his thoughtful perspective. In referencing Minnesota Public Radio, however, Mr. Emerson seems to have created two misimpressions that should be clarified.

The management team of the non-profit Minnesota Public Radio did not earn incentive compensation from the sale of Rivertown Trading Company. Only the management of the for-profit Rivertown Trading Company and its for-profit holding company Greenspring realized long-term compensation based on that company’s outstanding performance and growth in value over a decade.

As for-profit companies, Rivertown and Greenspring proceeded to employ all of the traditional mechanisms of capitalism, beginning with a strong, experienced, separate board of directors, state-of-the-art facilities, recruitment of top industry professionals, incentive compensation, equity participation by employees, and public reporting through annual reports similar to those of a public company. Greenspring’s ownership by a non-profit company did not change in any way its use of incentives to maximize performance.

Then, in his justifiable enthusiasm for the creation of more than $100-million in new wealth as a permanent endowment to serve the public-broadcasting mission, Mr. Emerson mistakenly includes public television in Minnesota as a beneficiary. Minnesota Public Radio and public television in Minnesota are independent organizations, and only the future of public radio is enhanced by the transaction.

Will Haddeland
Vice-President of Public Affairs
Minnesota Public Radio
St. Paul