On their editorial page here. But given that they don’t seem to be able to get their facts about the match requirement straight without Diane Dietz around, you should probably discount this appropriately. Or so I hope.
On their editorial page here. But given that they don’t seem to be able to get their facts about the match requirement straight without Diane Dietz around, you should probably discount this appropriately. Or so I hope.
“By approving $100 million in bonds this year, the Legislature would signal to the Knights that the importance of their gift is understood and appreciated.”
It’s not appropriate to call this a “gift”. Gifts are given without expectation of a quid pro quo. This so called gift is apparently requires a monetary 9-figure “signal to the Knights” of the taxpayers great appreciation.
That’s asking a hell of a lot from a lot of folks. Never ceases to amaze me how emotionally needy some ultra-wealthy people are.
I’m no anthropology professor but I believe that most human giving involves a genetic relationship or some sort of a quid pro quo, whether explicit or not. We still call those transfers “gifts”.
I don’t believe the $100 million from the stateis “required,” it is something that UO is “asking” for to make the Knight gift go further. The state has certainly supplemented smaller gifts, look around campus.
The trouble is that the state wants to stretch the $100 million over 6 years and this somehow limits the scope of the building project.
Hard for me to see why UO, Zthe Knights, and the state can’t find a way to bridge the money for an optimal project.
Especially given that it’s a bond. The state just needs to make the payments. The diff between borrowing now and spreading it over a few years is small change. And this is a legislature that was willing to give us $25M for a track meet?
Gifts aren’t given with expectation of quid pro quo? What? You’ve never been on the giving or receiving end of a gift that didn’t have some sort of expectation attached? At least in this case its not a sexual favor. It is my understanding, that since our chintzy state will only provide 50% funding for education buildings that UO is just trying to leverage the state’s laws to UO’s advantage by asking the state to provide funding for half of the costs of educational buildings.
Despite what I said above, if I were acting on behalf of the state, I would be asking some obvious questions.
In return for the $100 million, what does this project do for undergraduates? Are there any classrooms planned? How is the “old” campus impacted? Is there a plan to bring the old and new campuses to similar levels of excellence and utility?
A plan? surely you jest – this all about impact, and most likely a perceived one.
I know, I know, just spinning a fantasy! This state hasn’t had a plan for higher ed in forever.
The state has a plan. It’s starve k-12, then send the few HS students who graduate anyway to community colleges, and ignore higher education completely. I think it was the inspiration for the Hunger Games.
Meanwhile rich Californians and Chinese are sending their children to UO for a liberal arts education – or at least economics & business – because they understand that “an investment in knowledge pays the best interest”, to quote Ben Franklin.
will maintenance, upkeep and personnel costs of the new campus drain existing programs, thereby increasing tuition?
No, I’m told the gift covers all these things. Of course it will divert scarce administrative attention and love from the rest of the university, just as athletics does.
Well, the hope is to raise another $500 million to match the Knight gift. Included in that extra 500 is the $100 million UO wants from the state for buildings across Franklin. Do you think the state will not remember that $100 million if UO ever asks for, say, a big new classroom center on campus?
The rest of that $500M fundraising is likely to drain private support from the “old” campus. (Unless the Knights finally uncork the bottle for the old campus.)
And what about the special status that the Knight campus already is asking for its faculty, in terms of salary, teaching responsibilities, service, etc. etc. Do you think that will not affect the old campus?
How about some $ just to keep our existing University running, instead of opening a Vanity U?