I was left a bit uneasy by the story in this morning’s Star-Advertiser describing expenditures from a special fund controlled by UH President M.R.C. Greenwood.
Several points bother me.
First, the newspaper doesn’t provide readers with the raw data, the actual documents or a full list of expenditures. There’s only a sidebar listing selected expenditures. Are we to presume these are the most questionable? There has been a shift in many online news sources towards providing supporting documents to accompany stories appearing in print editions. Not so much at the Star-Advertiser.
Second, although referring several times to unidentified “critics”, the story quotes two faculty members who are critical, but didn’t get reactions from elected faculty leaders, of which there are quite a few throughout the UH system.
Third, there’s no context. Are there any standards? What are comparable protocol funds at other major universities? Is there any reason at all to think these expenditures are out of line?
Still on the question of context, it should be noted that many large mainland universities have faculty clubs or other on-campus venues where guests can be entertained. The University of Hawaii does not have any suitable facilities, so those expenses for the Pacific Club and Waialae Country Club appear to be reasonable under the circumstances.
Fourth, the story clings to a “balanced” tone. There are critics and defenders. But the expenditures noted in the story certainly sound like routine fundraising, and there doesn’t appear to be any hint that they are personal or self-serving. Does anyone think the president should not send out Christmas cards as part of her public relations efforts, or that she should not meet personally with potential donors? Shouldn’t the reporter, under these circumstances, at least signal that the “critics” may be a bit off-base?
I would be far more interested in disclosure of similar funds controlled by various deans, which get far less scrutiny and oversight. Peter Crouch, engineering dean, discloses his protocol expenses in his annual gift disclosure filed with the State Ethics Commission. Expenditures by other deans remain largely a mystery. And how about a list of all the similar administrative funds that are out there, whether funded through the UH Foundation or other sources, and the total amount of money involved? Wouldn’t that be interesting?
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
In a perfect world donors wouldn’t require any ego-stroking. It’s dismaying that the UH President has to “waste” money on such creepy behavior. Whatever happened to giving merely because one believes in the donee’s work? This ties into the State Legislature’s inability to accept that they shouldn’t receive any gifts of any kind from anybody. Why must everything be greased?
Thanks for pointing out just a few of the stories glaring shortcomings. You must read to the very end to find a perfectly reasonable explanation for spending a few thousand on the outside speech writer “who did most of the work by email.” I am willing to bet the club memberships are at non-profit rates. No suggestion the expenditures are at over the going rates. $1700 for 1000 Xmas cards sounds like a bargain to me. A grad student and Noel Kent are 2/3 of the named critics. And front page teaser and big section front display hint at scandal while you have to read the story very carefully to learn it is not public money nor any hint of illegality. Ugh. Why do people mistrust and disdain newspapers? Hard to figure.
First of all, the fund is created by donations & gifts to UH – not from taxes we all pay or from tuition & fees students pay.
Second, the critics clearly do not understand the difference between capital and operating funds. From an accounting perspective , operating funds cannot be used for capital expenditures and vice versa. Building repairs beyond routine maintenance are capital expenditures while holiday greetings are an operating expense.
Finally, there are at least 100,000 UH grads still amongst the living. Asking the System President to spend $1.30 on my behalf to generate good will and eventually some $$$ is not out of line.
Seems like the SA has it in for MRCG. The article about her apartment was not long ago.
In the Advertiser comments a number of people said donors should just give because they have it to give, or the President should take potential donors to Zippies to save money. I can’t help but wonder if they have tried these two approaches on romantic dates and how much success they have enjoyed?
but isn’t the point of publishing an atricle like this to spark the debate and let those of us decide for ourselves what is appropriate and what is not?? btw, I belong to Waialae CC and I have NEVER seen the pres there. not even once. Also, did you miss the point that Dobelle was fired over things like this so there’s good reason to examine expenditures for the current regime. Doesn’t mean they re not legit…
Ian, you are assuming the paper cares about good journalism. Unfortunately that does not seem to be case since they killed the Advertiser and are the only game in town!
Norm, respectfully: Black Press didn’t kill the Advertiser. BP bought the Advertiser and killed the Star-Bulletin, then renamed the Honolulu Advertiser the “Star-Advertiser.”
The Star-Bulletin is the defunct paper. The SB “killed” Gannett (ran it out of town, you might say), but it didn’t kill the Advertiser.
This is a common misconception, though.
Note how the Star Advertiser made this molehill into a front-page mountain while it suppressed any news of the Nestor Garcia scandal. Think of the dangerousness and hypocrisy of engaging in class warfare against a public educational institution’s conventional fundraising practices while fawning before political and economic power. Thank goodness for Civil Beat and this website.
Ian–
Just simply bad journalism…..
aloha,
mike
Yeah, the UH pres story was not so much but what about the Vorsino story on the homeless kids?? That was well done and has 325 comments on line…..win some lose some…..it’s a big paper MM…something will float your boat.
Again, Ian, you play the role of media ombudsman. Good questions, well done!
Like the story a couple of weeks ago about Dennis Mitsunaga . . . where’s the beef? Or in this case, where’s the story?
A comment for the comments.
Wailua makes reference to “creepy behavior” and asks “why must everything be greased?”
So true about the creepy part. Don’t forget sleazy. To answer Wailua’s question “why must everything be greased”?
Short answer: “pay to play” is still the name of the game in this town.
Finally, as Ben C. points out, someone please explain why it took so long for Garcia’s ties to the Kapolei Chamber of Commerce to be made public? Wasn’t that supposed to be disclosed and made apparent for the public long ago? Why are we just learning about it now?
Garcia also makes $30,000 a year as a “safety officer” working for Dura Construction, one of the big developers behind the Kapolei Chamber of C0mmerce. So Garcia’s total salary is about $150,000. That is also being downplayed.
i think we are starting to see a pattern develop of pseudo scandals getting a lot of play on their front page and then like Jim says: Where’s the Beef??
pity the people still paying for it…
Nancy, sorry I can’t agree. What we are left with today is basically the Star Bulletin calling itself the Star Advertiser. Not only are the stories the same but after all the hype of a redesign it still looks like the Bulletin.
I always subscribed to the Bulletin and not the Advertiser, because:
1. The HSB had more stories,
2. The HA had more ads and fewer stories, and
3. The HSB had the better design.
The SA may be the only star in town, but I enjoy it — both online as well as the paper.