Why doesn't Columbia just "buy out" Barnard?

[calmom]

<p>Well actually, a good deal of the leadership credit goes to a former President of Barnard, Ellen Futter, who not only helped set the terms of the affiliation going forward, but also set the strength for Barnard’s growth as a residential college:</p>

<p>

At the time of Futter’s inauguration at Barnard, she was, at the age of 31, the youngest person ever to assume the presidency of a major American college. Barnard survived the difficult decade of the 1980’s under her determined leadership. She preserved Barnard’s independence from Columbia when it’s leadership decided to admit women in 1983, and in light of the decision, Futter helped establish a new affiliation accord. She launched a major fund-raising campaign, accepted the recommendation of a faculty committee on a maternity- and parental-leave policy in 1985, and in a most daring decision, embarked on the construction of a new dormitory, Sulzberger Tower, for which Barnard did not yet have the funds. She was a provocateur for change, advancing the institution while staying true to its history and its mission.

</p>

<p>See: [Barnard</a> College, Past Leaders](<a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/president/inauguration/leaders.html#futter]Barnard”>http://www.barnard.edu/president/inauguration/leaders.html#futter)</p>

<p>Columbia’s President at the time was Michael Sovern, who is credited with resolving the financial issues the University then faced, through the sale of Rockefeller Center for $400 million, effectively creating Columbia’s endowment. See: [Michael</a> I. Sovern - WikiCU, the Columbia University wiki encyclopedia](<a href=“http://www.wikicu.com/Michael_I._Sovern]Michael”>Michael I. Sovern - WikiCU, the Columbia University wiki encyclopedia)</p>