The Las Cruces Sun-News today endorsed my assertion that information about those who give to the New Mexico State University Foundation should be public.
Today’s editorial further pressures the university to do the right thing. In the media, I’ve been the lone voice calling for the release of such records since the university announced in May that it was using money given by secret donors to boost the compensation of President Michael Martin and former men’s basketball coach Reggie Theus.
Not anymore.
“Martin assures us that outside contributions to his compensation package would never factor into his decisions in guiding the university. We take him at his word, and certainly have no evidence to the contrary,” the Sun-News wrote. “But, this is not about one president or one ex-basketball coach. It’s about a system that promotes secrecy and that lacks the transparency needed to assure that abuses do not take place — now or in the future.”
“It’s about open government, and the belief that the public deserves to know where the funds flowing to NMSU are coming from and how they are being spent,” the Sun-News editorial states.
The Sun-News points out that the university has “gone to great lengths” to keep “its dealings with the foundation secret,” initially refusing to release the new agreement between the university and foundation even after is was approved in a public meeting, then “begrudgingly” releasing it, “charging the outrageous fee of $1 per page.”
“University officials now say they can’t release donor names because to do so would subject those donors to further solicitations. While that may be a possibility, we suspect that experienced fundraisers already know where the deep pockets are,” the editorial states. “This should not be an excuse to keep
That’s what I’ve been screaming. Thanks to the Sun-News for the support.
Here’s another interesting point: The university foundation, every year, provides to its donors a list of donors (using “anonymous” for those who don’t want their names released). I have the 2004-2005 report. As of that year, 96 percent of those who had given $5,000 or more to the foundation throughout its history allowed their names to be released publicly. Only 4 percent – 74 donors – sought anonymity.
During the 2004-2005 fiscal year, only 40, out of more than 740 donors who gave $1,000 or more, asked for anonymity. That’s about 5 percent.
It’s not the largest donors who are seeking anonymity. The anonymous contributors are fairly spread out among the various donor categories. For example, as of that year, there were 18 contributors who had given $1 million or more. Only one was anonymous. Of the 17 who gave between $500,000 and $999,999, only one was anonymous.
The university’s only argument for keeping its records secret is that donors won’t give if their names are going to be made public. Put in this perspective, we’re talking about 4 percent of donors versus the public’s right to be assured that its public officials have integrity and aren’t engaging in pay-to-play politics.
There should be no question. This is a public university. These are public employees. The university exists for the benefit of the public.
Open the blinds and let in the sunshine.