Let's do this: you guys decide how Perry Sook and 400 others are allowed to donate their disposable income and then get back with us and let us all know.
It's important to us to know how you feel we should spend our money.
D.A. i think you are missing their point. They aren't telling anyone how to spend their money or who or what to contribute to. What they are disputing is the university's priorities. Their only point as I read it is that they don't think we need an athletic academic center.
The university establishes funding priorities - what they want to build and fund. Then they solicit donors for those projects. In a few select cases donors come forward unsolicited and say "I want to give money for x,y,z." The university can either say great, we'll build one of those or thanks, but that isn't a priority for us right now.
That's the line of thinking for faculty senate.
And I think you/they are missing the point that this building is not governed by something over which they have any purview. This is an Intercollegiate Athletics building, with money raised by Athletics Development, and the Board of Trustees and President regulate ICA independent from the broader University and shared governance platform.
As Perry is a graduate of the College of Communication, FS should be upset with Scott Titsworth and his development team for not securing those $3.5MM of disposable income for a study center for CoC students, not upset with Rod, ICA or anyone else. As long as OHIO is in the ICA business, the President/Board SHOULD have a mission to improve the physical plant of ICA. FS lost, Ryan White won, now what is this, crying over spilled milk?
I am a CoC graduate, and I have never once been solicited for a gift to my college of graduation. That is something FS should be pissed off about.
So let me track this: the latest campaign just raised over $500MM, and faculty senate is spending their time formally disapproving of a $7MM project?! Time well spent, no doubt.
Last Edited: 5/19/2016 2:35:06 PM by D.A.