We are apparently much closer to State control of

[Porkchop.sixpack]

Private University foundations than apparently everyone realizes. I don't know all the details, but I'm sure someone can fill them in.

Apparently, the college board has voted unanimously to force the foundations to ink an agreement with the college board and their respective universities that mandates college board oversight of the foundations.

I know this has been a topic of discussion, but it appears this deal is just about done.

Unfreaking believable. Money given by private citizens to privately controlled foundations is now going to have state oversight. Huge power grab, and I am wondering why graduates of MSU or OM on the college board would vote for such ********.

 

[DerHntr]

i don't see what good can come of it. </p>

 

[patdog]

I am wondering why graduates of MSU or OM on the college board would vote for such ********.

Maybe because those graduates of MSU and UM are going to be the ones who get control of all that money. It's not exactly like they don't have a huge vested interest in this.

 

[cowbell9]

nm

 

[FlabLoser]

What REALLY PISSES ME OFF, is that the state funds, what, 20% maybe of MSU's total budget? Yet they want to act like they own the damn place.

 

[8dog]

501c3

 

[cowbell9]

nm

 

[Ivehadbetter]

A lot more if you count all the research stuff.

 

[lawdawg02]

i don't see how the college board could force the foundations into this. they are wholly separate entities. maybe they can go through their control of each institution. i really don't see why the college board would be intent on doing this (other than a simple power move).</p>

 

[8dog]

to either do this or lose funding.

 

[Ivehadbetter]

IHL does distribute some money but the Legislature would have the opportunity to act before it came to that.

 

[weblow]

 

[Porkchop.sixpack]

they are pissing off a bunch of legislators with this power grab.

Again, I'm real spotty on this. But, as I understand it, the tax status is a result of their affilliation with the university through that agreement. I think the hammer the college board has here is that they do have the power over those agreements, and thus can threaten tax status without them. Again, I'm real spotty on this.

But, that was my question: What power does the college board have to force this issue? Why can't the foundations essentially say, "screw off?" And the affilliation agreement is the answer.

I guess they haven't stopped to consider how this will effect fundrasing in those foundations, and how critical those funds are to the budget of the school, particularly in these times of want.

 

[therightway]

have heard? All this would do is reduce the amount of money that people donate to the foundations because they would feel like they would have less control of where the money goes.

 

[Ivehadbetter]

Have you talked to Davis about this? I might ask him about it next time I see him.

 

[dudehead]

posts like that are why I read this board.

 

[Porkchop.sixpack]

and although I might have some of the details wrong, I can tell you that the source is beyond reproach. In fact, part of the alarm is the lack of coverage this is getting.

And speaking of people giving, I guess there would be a question, if the IHL starts keeping records on the foundations and the particulars of their spending and revenue, if all that information would be discoverable as public information. Now, talk about scaring some contributions away.