UCAFANS.COM | GO UCA BEARS!

Don't think you can argue too much with this editorial from today's ADG:

There they go again

How many lessons does UCA need?

YOU WOULD think that after L’Affaire Hardin, the University of Central Arkansas at Conway would insist that all its financial dealings be open and accountable to the taxpaying public. It is a public university, after all. Yet of all state universities, UCA is the only one with a fund its board of trustees can spend at their own discretion. That’s the same fund that Mr. Hardin, now its ex-president, used to extract a secret $300,000 bonus that led to his conviction on charges of money-laundering and wire fraud.
This discretionary fund totaled more than $447,000 at last report, and the chairman of the school’s board can allow expenditures of up to $25,000 a year without the board’s approval. That’s asking for trouble. To quote Richard Weiss, the director of the state’s Department of Finance and Administration, letting a single member of the board draw from such a fund on his own say-so “would not have the transparency” or accountability a public university should. “I can’t imagine it being good public policy,” he adds. “I imagine that’s why the other four-year public colleges have not done it.”
Shane Broadway, who’s now interim director of the state’s Department of Higher Education after he lost his race for lieutenant governor last year, says boards of trustees have the authority to maintain such discretionary funds. But, he adds, “It’s important that they have policies in place for transparency and accountability to ensure that public dollars are expended, accounted for, and audited properly.” The best way to do that would be to require that the entire board of trustees approve such expenditures, rather than leaving the decision to just one trustee. That way, UCA could guard against any repeat of L’Affaire Hardin. One of those was quite enough, thank you.
UCA needs to demonstrate that it’s learned its lesson. But its discretionary fund leaves entirely too much discretion to a single member of the university’s board. There’s a reason responsible organizations require that all checks be countersigned by some member of their governing boards, rather than leave such decisions to a single official.
Art English, a poli-sci professor at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, offers this cautionary word about such discretionary funds: “Those kinds of things perhaps do not necessarily lead to corruption, but they could lead to abuse. It’s much better to have full transparency and checks and balances.” That’s good advice—and UCA’s board should take it.

So when they get done with this issue, they can piss on UCA with another issue. It's an addiction for the ADG writers. Pure trash for writers and editors. The first reason I never buy the paper. What did my professors at UCA say? Newspapers will soon go the way of the dinasaur.

The only time the Board Chair has ever used those funds for any purpose, it was voted on and approved in a public session with a reporter from the AR Dem Gazette in attendance. The only thing I can remember is 25,000 for improvements to the President's home, some money for the Snow Art Center, and some help with championship rings for one of the athletic teams. We don't try and hide anything.

It's not that you have hidden anything...it's that you have the power to hide something. Kinda like the press has the power to put a slant on a story any way they want. Of course the "professionals" at the D/G don't know how to pick up a phone and ASK for the info you just told us! Simple huh? Lazy rumor-mongers.

Well if that's the case, then there should be a retraction from the D/G for letting that article get printed. Yet again, more proof of the lack of professionalism shown by the writers and editors at the rag.

I bet that will happen.

Or better yet, someone from the Board should demand an interview from Shelton, seeing how she is the designated reporter of all things that are presumedly bad at UCA, about the subject and if she refuses to grant one then it would be a cold day in hell before I'd answer any more of her questions when she wanted to ask them. If everything is on the up-and-up about these expenditures then I would think the Board would want to clarify the content of the article.

Hell Yeah!! Don't take her crap laying down, put her feet to the fire.

I'll bet the media had the full story but only chose to report one sliver. How exciting would the story be to say "UCA BOT discusses and approves spending for x, z and z" ?