As long as Randy receives no money from his foundation, I don't see an ethical conflict. I wish the article would have mentioned this important part of the story.

The other article stated that his wife earned $10,400 as treasurer and secretary.

The guy is bending over backward trying to raise funds for cancer research and people are trying to find fault? Unless he's using it to line his own pockets (and no one has alleged that), get off the guy's back and give him a standing ovation for doing something good.

Thank you Randy and great job! We need more people like you, supporting a great cause. The jealously of this is ridiculous.

The time that the Shavers invest in this great cause, that 10k equates to three cents an hour. Give me a break. Applaud people that invest their lives in a great cause.

Professor Kirtley assumes he uses his broadcast to promote the foundation, I have not seen that occur. All I've seen is a real effort to help raise funds to fight cancer, absent some self enrichment the media should chase down the ponzi schemers and the self enrichment of Congress.

Professor Kirtley assumes he uses his broadcast to promote the foundation, I have not seen that occur. All I've seen is a real effort to help raise funds to fight cancer, absent some self enrichment the media should chase down the ponzi schemers and the self enrichment of Congress.

I'd like to respectfully disagree with the Star Tribune and Professor Kirtley on their analysis and judgment in writing this article. I am proud to be affiliated with this great charitable endeavor. I can assure you that it is ran with the most heartfelt respect in finding a cure than most any other charitable organization. All of the money raised is accounted for and shown to be redistributed towards research and community funds at a rate of 90+% every single year. I beg you to find an organization that gives back near that percentage when talking the figures presented here. The nominal yearly amount distributed to the chair is used and redistributed towards the annual golf event and other events involved with the fund. A simple phone call or email to any of its board members would have proven this information correct. As a long time reader of this newspaper and believer in it, I am greatly disappointed. I would have to label this article as a wild grasp at any news spun to make news. Please do your best in the future to print material actually worthy of news, such as all the good the fund does. I think we have enough negativity in the world, why not show the positive rather than struggle to find an unwarranted negative. I am saddened.

Jacket2011 is correct. What ever happened to real important investigations by journalists? Has anyone researched and reported the coziness of MN legislators to the ethanol industry? Has there been a comprehensive analysis of revenue received by MN legislators? I mean all revenue, salaries, per diums, lodging, and milage? No, instead an article about a reporter who raises a lot of money for a good cause.

unfortunately his tiny foundation is taking money for research that is already being conducted by a legitimate organizations such as the American Cancer Society, Susan G Komen, etc.. It is unnecessary duplication and ultimately undermines the cost effectiveness of how these funds might othrwise be deployed.