{"id":2037,"date":"2007-07-30T17:16:00","date_gmt":"2007-07-30T23:16:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/07\/new-foundation-agreement-raises-more-questions\/"},"modified":"2007-07-30T17:16:00","modified_gmt":"2007-07-30T23:16:00","slug":"new-foundation-agreement-raises-more-questions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/07\/new-foundation-agreement-raises-more-questions\/","title":{"rendered":"New foundation agreement raises more questions"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>The new agreement between the New Mexico State University Foundation<\/a> and the university<\/a> raises some new, interesting questions. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Perhaps most interesting \u2013 at least to me \u2013 in the new agreement<\/a> is the statement that the agreement supersedes and replaces the Feb. 11, 1991 agreement<\/a> between the NMSU Foundation and university and additional agreements dated June 1, 1993 and Aug. 25, 2005.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

That\u2019s interesting because, in May, when I formally requested a copy of the agreement between the foundation and university, foundation Director and university Vice President Rebecca Dukes told me the most recent agreement, which she called \u201cold,\u201d was from 1991. She provided me with a copy of it.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Why didn\u2019t she provide me with the 1993 and 2005 documents? Was that a violation of the state\u2019s Inspection of Public Records Act?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve submitted an addendum<\/a> to my Thursday request<\/a> to the attorney general asking that question \u2013 was the university\u2019s failure to provide me with those records a violation?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In addition, I\u2019ll be filing a request with the university tomorrow for those two records that I was not provided in May.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Procedure is important<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\n

I realize I\u2019m raising a lot of procedural questions here, but the point is not only that I get my hands on these records, but that the university follows government transparency laws so that the public has access to them.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

I was given a copy of the new agreement between NMSU and the foundation today only after I hand-delivered a copy of my records request to the office of university Attorney Bruce Kite. The university still does not consider the e-mail request I filed last week to be valid.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The university did, however, cave on its prior claim that the agreement wasn\u2019t public because it wasn\u2019t yet signed by all parties. The university made that claim last week even though the agreement had already been approved by the regents on July 23. The copy I was given is signed by the foundation president and secretary and the regents president, but not the regents secretary.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

What the agreement states<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The agreement specifically states, in many places, that the foundation is separate from the university and that the foundation\u2019s records, including donor lists, are confidential. As it has done in the past, the university will pay employees of the foundation, but the foundation and university may enter into an agreement whereby the foundation reimburses NMSU for some of those costs. The foundation has not reimbursed the university for employee compensation in recent years.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In addition, as was true in the 1991 agreement, under the new agreement the university pays for foundation office space, furnishing, utilities, Internet and phone access, building and grounds maintenance and repairs and property insurance.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

That\u2019s important because some state university foundations across the nation have been ordered to open their records after court determinations that they were operating as de facto state agencies in part because they didn\u2019t pay fair-market value for rent and other expenses. You can read more about the gray area of whether foundation records are public by clicking here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The new agreement also states that the foundation can\u2019t accept any federal or state grants without approval of the university president. That\u2019s important because courts in other states have considered the handling of public money a factor in favor of opening foundation records.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The new agreement raises two additional questions in my mind. It specifies that university employees who do foundation work are responsible for \u201creceiving, receipting, recording and reporting gifts.\u201d In addition, it states that the university will conduct reviews of gift funds transferred from the foundation to the university each year to \u201censure compliance with donor restrictions.\u201d The foundation is required to provide \u201caccess to its records regarding specific gifts and donor imposed criteria\u201d so the university can produce an annual, written report to provide to the regents.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

These are my questions:<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 If public employees are handling the gifts, can they legally be kept secret?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 If the university is reviewing what the foundation considers secret records to produce a written report to present to the regents, wouldn\u2019t that report be public? Would the donor records be public, since they\u2019re factors in the report?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The bottom line<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

So, the release of one document produces more questions than answers. What is contained in the 1993 and 2005 agreements, and why wasn\u2019t I told about or provided with them when I formally requested records? What impact does the new agreement have on whether donor information can be kept secret?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

We\u2019ll see what happens. Check out the new agreement by clicking here<\/a>, and the 1991 agreement by clicking here<\/a>, and let me know if you think of any other questions I should raise. You can e-mail me at heath@haussamen.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The new agreement between the New Mexico State University Foundation and the university raises some new, interesting questions. Perhaps most interesting \u2013 at least to me \u2013 in the new agreement is the statement that the agreement supersedes and replaces the Feb. 11, 1991 agreement between the NMSU Foundation and university and additional agreements dated […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2037","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2037","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2037"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2037\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2037"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2037"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2037"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}