TO: City Council

County Commission

Selected Community Leaders

Board of Regents

 

FROM: Shocker Black & Golds

 

Date: 24 NOV. ‘06:BARE BONES

 

•In our Nov. 2nd response to the Eagle’s Suellentrop Oct. 8th article, p.30, we identified our presentation to the Board of Regents on Oct. 19th requesting that the Board take over the debt service of $900,000 per year to the year 2017, and also identified our letter to president Beggs asking if he would also now request the Board of Regents’ debt service for our new engineering lab buildings, thereby opening up $900,000 per year on the mill levy. We then said:

 

“Whether president Beggs will dither or will now request our fair share of the state Board of Regents capital improvements budget on behalf of the university he represents, thereby providing himself and the university an additional $900,000 annually to the year 2017 for flexibility to solve our local problems; or will evidence his prior commitment to Chancellor Hemenway and the KU folks, remains to be seen and is presently unknown. We should all pray for reason to prevail, but don’t gamble on it or hold your breath. By the November Board of Regents meeting, we will see.”

“Whether or not the Board of Regents will now properly take over the debt service of the new engineering lab buildings, as they should have in the first instance, or will thumb their collective noses at us, we will have to wait until their November meeting to see. Stay tuned. But be assured, if they do not, we will rigorously seek a remedy with local and state officials. As Sedgwick County tax payers, we do not intend to continue to be uniquely double taxed in the state, as opposed to all other counties, simply by the internal policy of the Board of Regents that has been on going for decades, with the Board not building a single new building for WSU in the 42 years WSU has been in the state system.”

 

•   I am sad to report that president Beggs has now written his response, and that while he avoids straightforwardly saying he will not even ask the Board of Regents for any money on the State’s Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget, the import of his letter is that he will not do so. And, our follow up letter confirming his position as not willing to even ask for any money on the State’s Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget, has not been clarified or responded to, clearly confirming that president Beggs, incredibly, will not even request any State moneys from the Capital Improvements Budget.

 

•   If there were any folks still with a scintilla of doubt, as to the control of KU chancellor Bob Hemenway over president Beggs and WSU, on the issues of the State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget, and on the return of football to WSU; any such doubt should now be beyond reasoned discourse.

 

•   I am also sad to report, that the interim general counsel of the Board of Regents advises that the president and CEO of the Board, Regie Robinson, will not place our request for the full Boards consideration of debt servicing WSU new engineering lab buildings on the Agenda for the full Boards consideration. Regie Robinson, KU undergraduate, KU Law School graduate, and apparently hand picked president and CEO of the Board by chancellor Hemenway; it seems is committed to chancellor Hemenway’s desires not to have any competition from WSU for State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget moneys.

 

•   It seems that when the Kansas Legislature voted 31 to 9 in the Senate, with the 9 no votes being KU alumni; and 91 out of 125 votes in the House, to preclude KU or any other institution having monopolistic control of the State Board of Regents, S.B. 345; chancellor Hemenway ignored the clear legislative message and statutory instruction, proverbially thumbed his nose at the legislature, and proceeded to control the Board by way of the power to set the Agenda, and the position of president and CEO of the Board. But enough is enough. It is time to put an end to this insidious embedded corruption of the Board of Regents.

 

•   In 42 years WSU has had no new building built by the State. Our mill levy funds were only to pay off the then existing outstanding capital improvement debt of WSU, so that the assets of WSU could be transferred to the State debt free. The capital improvement debt then existing and outstanding consisted of some $1.5 million debt on the round house. That debt has been paid off for decades.

 

•   At the time of WSU’s entry into the state system, 1964, the statute required the Board of Regents to have oversight jurisdiction only over the 1.5 mill levy, for the purpose of seeing to it that the $1.5 million then existing outstanding capital improvement debt was in fact paid off. While the statute still exists, the reason for the oversight jurisdiction by the Board of Regents has long since disappeared, and the statute to the extent of the oversight jurisdiction should now be repealed. Nor did the Board ever have any jurisdiction to dictate any additional uses of the 1.5 mill levy moneys, but only had oversight jurisdiction to accept or deny the gift, not to dictate the line item use of the moneys.

 

•   But the KU folks have apparently continually falsely advised new members of the Board that the legislature meant for WSU to only have use of the mill levy for capital improvements, and therefore no access to any state funds for capital improvements. Even as late as the Boards meeting on October 19th, KU regent Dick Bond, made the false assertion. However, WSU was admitted into the state system as a full member with no such restrictions, and is entitled to full and fair consideration as is any other university in the State for the State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget funds. Nor as I have advised above, will the KU folks even allow the issue to come to the full Board for consideration and determination. It’s all about money, in what can only be described as chancellor Hemenway’s piggish desires for State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget moneys for KU.

 

•   On July 26th ‘06, we put up our Bare Bones summary statement of State Board of Regents Capital Improvement Budget we obtained by way of Open Records Request of the Board of Regents. The total for projects approved was $727,197,150; projects completed, $291,978,282; and State moneys provided totaled $150,058,212. KU had approved $435,346,403 or 59.9 percent of the total, with 70.4 percent of the money for the presently completed projects being funded by State funds. KSU had approved $210,463,920 or 28.9 percent of the total. WSU has received zero, nada, nothing from the State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget; and only $145,000 in state general funds for a maintenance study.

 

•   Isn’t it just precisely the case that the 29 percent K-State number, that in fairness and equity should have also been the WSU proportionate share, in fact went to KU’s 29 percent number, to in effect produce twice as much money for KU? And if not, why isn’t that the practical affect? WSU received zero, and KU received WSU fair share, so as to double the moneys to KU.

 

•   In 42 years not a single new building for WSU was paid for by the state, while hundreds of millions of dollars have been provided to KU and K-State. But Sedgwick County sends more tax money to the State than any other county with perhaps the sole exception being Johnson County, the great beneficiary of the Kansas City KU center campus in Johnson County and the KU medical facilities in Johnson County. It’s called just being piggish, and building your own university’s empire, irrespective of any principle of fairness or conciliatory behavior vis-a-vis WSU. It is time for chancellor Hemenway to release his grip on the Board of Regents, WSU, and president Beggs neck, or to otherwise step forth and defend his position and actions publicly; thereby allowing a reasoned debate on whether or not the policy, clearly never intended by the legislature, should be allowed to be continued by KU.

 

•   This Board of Regent KU policy falsely determined by the Board when KU had monopolistic control of the Board, has continued since 2000 when we were able to statutorily de-pack the Board of Regents from KU’s control by use of the KU alumni majority of the Regents. KU now controls the Board by use of the power to set the Agenda, and the position of president and CEO of the Board. New regents are simply told the false policy exists, so that WSU is to receive no moneys from the State Board of Regents Capital Improvements Budget.

 

•   The affect of this Board of Regent policy is double taxation uniquely on Sedgwick County taxpayers alone in the state. Without question, double taxation uniquely upon Sedgwick County taxpayers should no longer be consonance, or tolerated by the legislature.

 

•   It seems that we have got very nearly to the end of the period when this insidious issue was unknown to the legislature, and the Sedgwick County public, and to when it may have been worth while endeavoring to conciliate the issue inter se the Board of Regents; and to when this established kind of perpetuated tyranny of policy – including chancellor Hemenway and the KU folks’s preclusion of WSU football, that has been so profoundly injurious of WSU, resulting in the loss of some 9,000 traditional students – needs to be vitiated by whatever means it takes; including the instruction of State Board of Regent Capital Improvement Budget funding, for WSU’s new engineering lab buildings.

•   VISIT: Alumnishockerblackandgolds.com

TO: The Wichita Eagle - Re: Response to Nov. 7th Bob Lutz’s Bill Snyder - Here’s Who Can Revive Shocker Football Opinion Article.

 

FROM: Shocker Black & Golds

 

Date: 7 NOV. ‘06:BARE BONES

 

•So Bill Snyder thinks football at WSU is, well, “It’s a fantastic idea”. Us poor rabble Black & Golds think so too. THANK YOU BILL SNYDER!

 

•And Mr. Snyder is willing to say: “[h]ow much I would respect the people who would attempt to do that.” Coming from a man of such high respect, who rebuilt a team essentially from ground zero, having previously won one game in 10 years in the then Big 8 Conference, it is indeed truly a high complement. THANK YOU AGAIN COACH SNYDER!

 

•The Black & Golds would love to have coach Snyder’s direction and involvement just for his wisdom, expertise, and advice in rebuilding a program, even if he no longer wanted to coach.

 

•What a great success and compliment, that coach Snyder would even be interested in WSU’s problems. But then Lutz uses the Eagle’s opportunity for optimism, as an occasion to be pessimistic and subjectively attack Marrs as the problem, as not being more “sensible” and “cooperative” (apparently with the Eagle). Lutz carps about Marrs’ response to the KU scribblers designated assassin Suellentrop article, that was not just about football, but was clearly meant to be and was a stalked attempt to personally attack not a public figure, but simply a common citizen, albeit rabble; for having the audacity to stand up and respond to the drive-by scribblers’ personal attack.

 

•They labor under a vacuum of principle, which lack of concern for principle is amazing. They can dish out criticism of folks disagreeing with them, as if it were some kind of God given right, but they can’t take it. And they criticize, devoid of any reasoned analysis of the substantive facts we presented, with the Eagle’s money, 55 gallon barrels of ink, and 1000 times more circulation than us poor folks under their personal subjective drive-by attack.

 

•They can criticize in the first instance, but they squeal and pretend they are innocently aggrieved, when confronted with a substantive response sculptured and based upon the facts they can not deny, and will not consider, as they can not argue their subjective case against the documented facts, and so must rely upon personal attacks. It’s just not fair you see, that we should stand up and defend our self against their scolding scurrilous personal attack.

 

•Why you should exhibit that you are so paranoid over comments submitted to over a 1000 times less circulation, is beyond reasoned concern and any normal sense of fairness. Maybe, as your “bunch of us in the office” are sitting around contemplating your self perceived eminence, you just naturally become angry and bitter that someone would consider your work product of such quality as deserving of your being exposed as scribblers. Do you truly view it as some threat to your monopoly and control of the Eagle’s money, machinery, and circulation?

 

•As we said in our response: “Meet Paul Suellentrop, designated assassin of the drive-by KU scribblers at the Eagle. So there you have it. The Eagle has prattled, and we common rabble should all just go away and let the Eagle carry president Begg’s water for him, and listen to the Eagle’s knee jerk KU scribblers rule on the issue, contra to the best interests of the community and our university; just like the Eagle, on the wrong side of history, editorially supported the KU Controlled Board of Regents attempt to tear down Cessna Stadium in 1995.”...

 

(Note: The Eagle in the first instance, at the admitted request of president Armstrong, also agreed and was only too happy to editorially support Armstrong’s subsequent announcement of the decision [truly, his quid pro quo agreement with the KU controlled Board of Regents] to suspend football.)

 

“Suellentrop no more than subjectively assassinates, intentionally avoiding any specific factual example of alleged wrongdoing, for the reason that none exist, and he can’t factually support his subjective argument. But then, what can you expect from a drive-by scribbler.

 

“Perhaps the major emphasis for the personal assassination attempt, is the use of the word “scribblers”. It’s a sharp knife in their ribs. It gravels them. It eats at their soul.”

 

•   And by the way, pardon us if we question your postured concern for the interests of WSU, as we readily recall your annual week before the NCAA College World Series team selections, bagging on our baseball team, and contending it is not good enough and should not be selected for the tournament. But we note you don’t mind the free tickets from your alma mater, and sitting high up in the media booth. It’s just that you aren’t treated and catered to like royalty as you are when you go to KU to watch football games.

 

•   But don’t go getting your scribblers pen heated up with moral indignation against us Black & Golds, it just gravels us that notwithstanding, you get free tickets. The rumor in Eck Stadium is that nobody has ever really liked what you scribble anyway, except maybe your fellow sit in the group scribblers, and even they have never expressly been genuinely enthusiastic about it that we know of. When someone says: “Have you read the latest WSU bagging by Lutz”, the answer is usually: “No, I don’t pay any attention to what he writes”, or: ”No, I don’t take the Eagle.”

 

•   We have now responded to the Eagle’s Brent Wistrom and Kirk Seminoff; Randy Scholfield; Paul Suellentrop; and now it’s Bob Lutz’s turn, amongst the group sitting around in the office, to subjectively attack. We intend to defend ourselves, even to a 1000 times less circulation, and we stand on the substantive facts stated and underlying each of the arguments we have presented. We know it gravels your ego. But get used to our factual criticism, just as we have to put up with your subjective criticism. We are reasonable, as exhibited by our position papers you can’t substantively respond to, but we don’t intend to be “more cooperative” with your exhibited lack of substance and subjective drive-by attacks, while you preen yourself and focus on your unbridled ego’s as to your own opinions; existing only at the sufferance of the Eagle and the Eagle’s money, machinery, and dissipating circulation, not on the factual or reasoned merit of your presentations. We would welcome a reasoned debate, but we are more than willing to respond to your present unmeritorious subjective attacks.

 

•   That sound of silence at WSU that you hear; this “strange feeling that something is missing at Wichita State”; “Because something is missing. That’s undeniable”; that you so correctly identify but can’t quite put your finger on; is not only the lack of fall football, music school students in the marching band, homecoming parades, fraternities and sororities related activities, the demise of the number of fraternities and sororities, the lack of being a traditional university, etc.; but the cause of not being a traditional university – the lack of a football team – results in the inability to attract traditional students. So the sound of silence you hear, that something that’s missing, is the loss now of some 9,000 students vis-a-vis our position with K-State of 442 less students and growing in 1986, when the KU controlled Board of Regents hired president Wefald and charged him with stopping the precipitous bleeding of students and to emphasis football, while at the same time suspending football at WSU. THANK YOU BOB LUTZ! There may be some hope for you yet.

 

 

 

4 Oct. '06

To read over a cup of coffee……..

 

Since 1996, the State High School track meet has been held annually at Cessna Stadium. The C.V.B. and the Sports Commission claim that each State meet has an economic boost to Wichita’s economy of $1,950,000.00 or $19,500,000.00 over the last ten years.

In addition to these monies, thousands of high school students and athletes along with their parents received a great view of the Wichita State Campus which positively influenced some to attend the University. It only takes 47 students to attend W.S.U. to graduation to equal $1,000,000.00 in tuition, surely more students than 47 out of the thousands who attended the State track meets did in fact attend W.S.U.

 

There have been many other groups since 1996 who have rented Cessna Stadium with the rental fees going to the University. The Wichita Convention and Visitors Bureau have used Cessna Stadium in some of their proposals to attract larger conventions to Wichita.

 

The Rolling Stones would not have given Wichita a second thought IF Cessna Stadium had not been saved and re-furbished. It is reported WSU made $100,000 from the Rolling Stones concert. Now, there are other “major” groups considering Wichita as a tour stop.

 

If the Board of Regents and the KU scribblers at the Eagle had had their way in 1996 and demolished Cessna Stadium turning the area into a parking lot, there would not be a men’s or women’s track team as there would be no track. It was the Black and Gold’s idea as to how the stadium could be structurally modified to allow the track to be expanded to eight lanes.

 

Our little group has worked hard and has had big victories and small defeats over the last ten years and we will continue to fight until football is once again part of the sports program at our university, and WSU is again a traditional university. Even though the media, especially the KU scribblers at the Eagle, and the W.S.U. administration along with the Athletic Director, have fought us and the Mayor -- once the Mayor gave his Chamber Policy Statement for football -- every step of the way, is it suspected we will go away? The answer is no. This is our home, community, and our university, and we will continue.

                                                                                    Shocker Black & Golds

 

                                                                                    By: Frank Chappell

 

 

1TO: The Wichita Eagle - Re: Response to Aug. 8th County Manager Bill Buchanan Opinion Article.

 

FROM: Shocker Black & Golds, by Fred Marrs

 

Date: 15 Aug. ‘06: BARE BONES

 

T Now then, observe Mr. Buchanan’s profound concern:

 

“Being a leader means making tough decisions that are not always pleasing to everyone. It also means there is a responsibility to deal with deceiving and dishonest misinformation being spread to the citizens of Sedgwick County....

“The Sedgwick County Commission takes its responsibility as steward of the taxpayers’ money seriously, as do I.” (Emphasis added).

 

Some folks have said that Mr. Buchanan’s exhibited profound concern is a rare and acute observation that is exhaustively true and profoundly wise; and that it should take its place on this community’s list of recognized and established wisdoms. But the Shocker Black & Golds and our fellow backwoods rabble, believe that if you are going to talk the talk, you need to act accordingly.

 

What is it then does the County Commission and the County Manager accomplish when it is they are advised that the only accountings provided by Don Beggs for the last 8 years under his watch, is the annual 10 page submittals, that do not properly account for: what the contingency line item moneys are spent for; the Campus land acquisition line item moneys are spent for; the carry over moneys from all line items and how said moneys are subsequently spent; whether or not our mill levy moneys are funding the Marcus Welcome Center; and whether or not our mill levy moneys are in any fashion funding the building of, or servicing the bonds for, the new engineering lab building, that should properly be funded by the state, or if not, at least the WSU foundation. These would seem to significant issues for determination, if you are in fact seriously taking your responsibility as stewards of our taxpayers money.

 

But even if Mr. Buchanan’s profound concern were a mere principle or law of predilection, rather than, in truth and in fact, a legal oversight responsibility and legal requirement, neither Mr. Buchanan, nor the Commission, nor any one single commissioner with the right to request the accounting documents, has seen fit to ask Mr. Beggs for a proper accounting. Even when their constituents ask for the accounting, the request is ignored and no such accounting is forthcoming. It gravels them, they can not bear it or hear of it, it spoils their pleasure and takes the bloom off of being a commissioner, and they furrow their brow at us from high on the commission bench, when they are reminded of their legal oversight responsibility for the expenditure of our taxpayers’ dollars. No one elected the commissioners, and Mr. Buchanan was not appointed, to be rubber stamps and potted plants for the Mr. Beggs.

 

So why then do you suspect no such accounting is even requested? Is it fair to suggest there may be some kind of quid pro quo provided to the Commission in exchange for not asking Don Beggs for even the shadow of a proper accounting pursuant to their legal responsibility in their representative capacity on behalf of their constituents? Some think it is possible that the quid pro quo has to do with the new Jabara Technical School project, and that WSU may have agreed to oversee and fund the operation of the Jabara Technical School, using a significant portion of the 1.5 WSU mill levy, thus alleviating the necessity of that funding otherwise by the regular overall County mill levy, and at the same time providing WSU an incentive for diverting WSU mill levy moneys to the Jabara Technical School project, by agreeing not to request accounting documents from WSU on the WSU mill levy. None of us great unwashed rabble paying the taxes know what is the basis for not asking for accounting documents. But then who are we but just common folks, and what do we know? Perhaps the commissioners or Mr. Buchanan, profoundly concerned with his and the commission’s oversight stewardship responsibility for our tax dollars, could bother to tell us, as Don Beggs doesn’t seem bent on providing any additional information as to the expenditure of our tax moneys. “Its my money”, and apparently his view is he doesn’t need to further account for his money, and how it is, and on what, he managed to spend his money upon; nor, how our public tax moneys managed to coagulate and morphosis into his money. Stay tunned, as if the case goes long enough, the truth will out; as they say down south.

T At the recent City Council meeting, Aug. 1st, adopting councilman Carl Brewer’s put Resolution, Mr. Brewer contended both Don Beggs and the Board of Regents had to make the decision re reinstating football at WSU. Just because Don Beggs, in seeking to get help for the responsibility for his unmeritorious rule by fiat authority upon which basis he is blocking and denying the return of football to WSU to solve our 20 year old loss of traditional student problem, is willing to advise councilman Brewer that in addition to himself, the Board of Regents has to make the decision re football, doesn’t make it legally true. The truth is, the Board of Regents has no subject matter jurisdiction over athletics for WSU, WSU-ICAA, KU, or K-State. The Board of Regent contributes not a dime to WSU athletics and has no subject matter jurisdiction over sports at WSU, KU, or K-State. While Don Beggs, in seeking to expand responsibility for his unmeritorious rule by fiat position, may claim a role for the Board of Regents in determining athletics at WSU, apparently the Board itself wants no part of the issue, or of claiming subject matter jurisdiction over athletics at WSU, K-State, or KU. In response to an open records request, if the Board of Regents did claim any subject matter jurisdiction over WSU, WSU-ICAA, KU, or K-State athletics; for identification of any document by which the Board of Regents claims evidences Board of Regents subject matter jurisdiction of athletics, or any document which refers to statutes, case law, or other authority, by which the Board of Regents claims evidence Board of Regents subject matter jurisdiction of athletics at WSU, WSU-ICAA, K-State, or KU; the General Counsel of the Board of Regents responded on August 8th:

 

“I have searched for any record, as defined by K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 45-217, that might be described or included by your request. No such records have been located in the possession, custody, or control of this office. Sincerely, Mary D. Prewitt, General Counsel.”

 

So, if the Board of Regents claims subject matter jurisdiction over athletics in Kansas, it isn’t evidenced by their response which appears to impliedly deny any such subject matter jurisdiction, or at least in fact denies any statute, case law, or other authority, or any document whatsoever, that the Board of Regents would rely upon to make any such assertion of subject matter jurisdiction over athletics at WSU, WSU-ICAA, KU, or K-State.

 

Accordingly, the responsibility for why we can’t have football at WSU, lies solely at the hands of President Beggs, and his own little patch of sovereignty.

 

T The word is that Don Beggs turned down a $10,000,000 gift for the return of football at WSU, by way of refusing to name the unnamed field after the contributor, and further saying he would have to “think about it”, in response to the question of whether he would even agree to meet with the contributor. Lets see, $10,000,000 cash; plus the equivalent of a $25,000,000 endowment fund by putting the football and Title IX scholarships on the mill levy; and now you are up to $35,000,000. Perhaps other major contributors would then contribute another 10 to 15 million, for a total of some $50,000,000 and we could then accomplish a contingent ticket sale drive to raise another $3,000,000. And it would all be real money, but God forbid we should allow the ball to start rolling, as we might then be committed to reinstate football and solve our 20 year old loss of traditional student problem. Only one man stands in his little patch of sovereignty precluding the reasonable possibility. And for what stated reason, do you suspect?

 

T The woman president of Old Dominion recently determined to reinstate football at Old Dominion with a current endowment fund of $5,000,000 and with a view of an ultimate $10,000,000 endowment fund for football. Where is such leadership at WSU? Perhaps she didn’t have to make any commitments to obtain her regal sovereign status. Some folks contend that Chancellor Hemenway and/or his surrogate KU chairman and KU co-chairman of the WSU selection committee, Frank Sabatini and Dr. Steve Jordan, hand picked and requested Don Beggs to apply for the position of President of WSU, upon the representation that he would be chosen if he would commit not to reinstate football at WSU, not to compete with KU for traditional students in Wichita, and to not compete with KU for state capital improvement budget moneys, but rather rely upon the 1.5 WSU mill levy for capital improvements. But what do us common rabble know? Don Beggs struggles to obtain a miserable $145,000 out of the state capital improvement budget, towards a $10,000,000 new engineering lab building that we Sedgwick County taxpayers apparently have to debt service the bonds on, thereby effectively being taxed twice compared to all other taxpayers in the state; while Chancellor Hemenway presently obtains $130,000,000 towards $185,532,000 in projects presently completed, with $435,346,000 in total in projects presently approved. There seems to be some kind of coadunative relationship that exists between President Beggs and Chancellor Hemenway that accounts for these facts and statistics, some say. We get the extreme miserable drippings from the State Capital Improvement Budget; are required to be double taxed to fund any capital improvements for the last 42 years; and we are limited by a contrived mission statement – developed when the Board of Regents was monopolistic controlled by KU – to an “urban” university notwithstanding KU sets in a valley of 81,000,000 people, and less than 30 minutes from Kansas City, and with K-State within the city limits of Manhattan, by which “urban” status it is meant that we are not deemed to be deserving of competing for even our own high school students seeking a traditional college experience with football, home coming, marching band, fraternities and sororities, etc. We are tired of genuflecting to the KU herd and their interest. It is time to move on in the best interest of WSU, and in resolving our 20 year old loss of traditional student problem.

 

 

 

Visit: Alumnishockerblackandgolds.com

cc: County Commission

City Council

Community Leaders

TO: Alumnishockerblackandgolds.com

Date: 26 July ‘06:BARE BONES

 

•There are those who contend that Chancellor Hemenway and or his surrogate KU chairman and KU co-chairman of the WSU selection committee, Frank Sabatini and Dr. Steve Jordan, hand picked and requested Don Beggs to apply for the position of President of WSU, upon the representation that he would be chosen if he would commit not to reinstate football at WSU, just as his predecessor president Gene Hughes admitted his first day on the job, July 1, 1993: “Neither I nor the Board of Regents have any interest in reinstating football at WSU.”

•Perhaps that commitment went further than just football and to not compete with KU for local Wichita traditional students; but also extended to effective competition with KU for WSU’s fair share of the state education capital improvement budget.

The Board of Regents FY2007 Capital Improvement Summary for the six state universities indicates, we believe from our understanding of the documents, the following:

UniversityTotalCurrent &Current &PriorProject Cost Prior Yrs Prior Yrs State

Provided Funds

KU

14 Projects$191,581,000$ 93,513,000$ 54,465,000

KU Medical Center

8 Projects$243,765,403$ 92,019,522$ 76,105,522

Total KU + KU Med. Center

 

22 Projects$435,346,403$185,532,522$130,570,522

70.4 % provided so far by state funds.

KSU

13 Projects$210,463,920$ 69,777,244$ 3,356,690

WSU

3 Projects$ 10,930,000$ 7,010,000$ 145,000

02.1 % provided so

far by state funds.

Emporia State

3 Projects$ 15,574,000$ 4,225,000$ 425,000

10.1 % provided so

far by state funds.

Pittsburg St.

9 Projects$ 43,082,827$ 18,233,516$ 15,241,000

83.6 % provided so

far by state funds.

Fort Hays St.

3 Projects$ 11,800,000$ 7,200,000$ 320,000

 

•So there you have it. After 8 years in the saddle competing with Chancellor Hemenway, standing up and pleading the case for WSU, Beggs by FY 2007 has obtained a paltry feeble $145,000 from the state for the latest capital improvements, compared to Hemenway’s $130,570,572 of state moneys, or one tenth of one percent as much, 00.1 percent.

 

•KU has $435,765,403 in total projects in progress, for which the state has currently funded 70.4 percent. KSU has about half of KU, or $210,463,920 in total projects in progress. And, WSU has $10,930,000 in total projects in progress, less than even Pittsburg St., Emporia St., and Fort Hays St.

 

•By the way, 10 years ago, the KU senior class of graduating doctors was 54 as I recall, and 8 percent, or 4 doctors stayed in the state to practice. How many doctors do you suspect we are getting for $243,765,403 in building funds as of this year, not to mention the cost of running the medical school? In FY ‘95 as I recall, the state gave KU $311,000,000 just to run the KU medical school. So in FY ‘95 it cost us $78,000,000 for each doctor KU graduated that stayed in the state to practice. This has to be the biggest rip off in the history of the state annually, year after year. And, the KU folks stole (excuse me, transferred), WSU’s budding medical school when they had monopolistic control of the Board of Regents just to avoid any competition.

 

•Do you suspect that it is because WSU is seen as a non traditional university with no football team, that Don Beggs can’t compete with the other state universities for our fair share of the State Educational Capital Improvement Budget, or is it rather just Don Beggs’ inability to plead the case for WSU. Which is it do you suspect. And, the Chairman of the Board of Regents is a WSU graduate, and we now have 2 WSU graduates on the 9 member Board of Regents for the first time in history.

 

•In 42 years of WSU being in the state system of higher education, the Board of Regents has not built a single new building for WSU, while spending hundreds of millions of state moneys on KU and KSU.

 

•Since president Beggs was only able to persuasively obtain $145,000 in state moneys towards WSU new engineering lab building, why didn’t the WSU foundation pay to debt service the revenue bonds funding the project? Either the State or in the alternative, the WSU foundation should have paid for the new engineering lab building. But no, Don Beggs submitted the bill to the Sedgwick County tax payers at least in part, thus:

 

“Campus Land and Facilities Development - $900,000. These funds will provide the Board of Trustees flexibility to acquire property surrounding the university as it becomes available. It will also be utilized to develop and maintain facilities directly related to the university’s outreach and research activities in the region. Any funds not utilized will be placed in a fund with other private giving and federal resources for the construction of the Engineering Research Building.” (Emphasis added).

 

You are required to guess as to how much will be used for flexibility to acquire property around the university, and how much will go to debt servicing the Engineering Research Building, they don’t say. And, the $900,000 is applicable year after year.

 

•We pay state taxes to support KU, K-State, Emporia St., Pittsburg St., Fort Hays St, and 20 some community colleges, as well as also WSU. But then we are uniquely taxed again to support WSU, because the Board of Regents thinks it’s only fair to give all the state capital improvement money to the other state education institutions, and WSU can build its own campus with local tax dollars. So our Sedgwick County citizens get taxed twice vis-a-vis the rest of the state.

 

•When it is we say for our tax money, we would like besides funding capital improvements the state should pay for in the first instance, and if not, the WSU foundation, and besides supporting 1683 scholarships on the Mill Levy; that we would also like to support another 85 football scholarships on the Mill Levy, the president thumbs his nose at us and says “its my money”. But in truth, our gift money is not WSU’s money, until we give it to WSU, and if we choose to condition the gift to require some of the addition to the Mill Levy to support 85 football scholarships to stop our loss of traditional student problem, why should we suffer the nose wave from a KU hired surrogate, who evidence suggests can’t effectively stand up and plead the case for our university, or is otherwise not allowed to?

Drop Kick the Eagle Drive-by

KU Scribblers

 

•Say, have you seen anything in the Eagle lately on the WSU contingency line item expenditures or carry over expenditures accounting gymnastics? The answer is no, for the reason that the bigoted Eagle Drive-by KU Scribblers don’t view it as in their KU interest. The Eagle covers the County Commission meetings, and was at the presentation on the 19^th of July. (See our, 19 July 2006 “MAY IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION” presentation ). The self proclaimed eyes, ears, nose, and voice of the people; the right to know advocates; the defenders of freedom of the press as an adjunct to the people’s right to know; the open records advocates; and the self proclaimed defenders of the realm, and the underpinning basis of our freedom and Republic; are nowhere to be heard. They sit silently by and hold their nose, cover their eyes and ears, and say absolutely nothing, in the face of a significantly large story they refuse to recognize; and do so because to recognize the story and deal with it, the process would require their scourging their intriguing partner against reinstatement of WSU football, for its illusory – how was it in fact spent – accounting. If it was an enemy, or even just not an anti-football soul mate, there would be hell to pay, and the Eagle drive-by KU scribblers would be profoundly incensed, and with a high degree of moral superiority, would be plummeting, skewering, and goring WSU like bodacious the rodeo bull. Just more evidence of selective indignation and bigoted scribbling by the Eagle.

 

•Say, have you heard the results of the Eagle web sight poll on the return of football at WSU? We know you haven’t, and the answer is no. For months now the Eagle has run the poll, and the result has been a consistent 68 percent plus want football returned to WSU. But the bigoted Eagle won’t print their own poll results on the issue, for the reason that the results are contra to the KU scribblers opinion, and they do not want the public at large to know the results. But in equity and justice, and in the exercise of their version of the Code of Journalistic Ethics, and obligation to the public, they continue to provide anti WSU football editorials. Punt the Eagle.

cc: County Commission

Mayor Carlos Mayans

Councilman Jim Skelton

Community Leaders

 
 Date: 19 July ‘06

Board Of Sedgwick County

     Commissioners

Sedgwick County Court House

525 N. Main Ste. 320

Wichita, KS 67203 (8,H2)

     RE: Public Agenda Presentation

     1.5 City/County Mill Levy

     Wednesday 19th, July 2006

     The following is roughly the presentation made to the County Commission:

MAY IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION:

     My name is Fred Marrs on behalf of the Shocker Black & Golds, and I am hear to speak to the issue of the
1.5 City/County Mill Levy for WSU.

     The number one thing I would like to establish today is that football should not be blamed. The number
one problem for the last 20 years at WSU has been and is the continual loss of students. When in 1986 we
were even with KSU, we are now down 9,000 traditional students.

     In our first meeting with president Beggs on July 8, 2004, I suggested we should just use the annual
addition to the mill levy fund, so that no existing programs would be effected, for athletic scholarships, and
also contingently sell season football tickets to reinstate football and solve our loss of traditional students
problem.

     President Beggs advised Jim Meek and myself from our group, that he would bring back football if we
could show him how to pay for the football scholarships and the Title IX scholarships. My analysis
subsequently showed we could endow the scholarships with 2 years addition to the mill levy with a slot of
$1,250,000.

Mayor Mayans wanted to increase the amount slotted for football scholarships, for other related issues, by
the amount of the "contingency" line item on the mill levy, for the reason he said: because no one on the city
council could say how the contingency line item money was being spent, and if we used it for athletic
scholarships, at least we would know how the contingency money was being spent by the university
administration.

     Therein I believe is the basis of the problem of Beggs refusal to properly consider the Mayor’s plan to
reinstate football and stop our continuing traditional student loss. I believe president Beggs could not use the
contingency fund line item, which the university identifies as for "unanticipated program needs", because I
suspect he may have already ear marked the FY 2007 "unanticipated expense" contingency funds.

     In the FY 2006 budget, we had $2,721,241 in general scholarships supporting 2090 students, out of
14,229 students, or 14.7 percent of our students on scholarship. The mill levy supported 83.5 percent of
those scholarships, or $2,272,236 supporting 1683 students. One would think another 85 athletic
scholarships wouldn’t make much difference. But we continue to lose traditional students because we do not
solve the root cause of the loss of traditional students, and Don Beggs covers his loss of student problem, by
using our money to buy students. So last year we had 1,683 students on mill levy scholarships, but we can’t
have 85 athletic scholarships for football, to draw other traditional students to the university, a mere 5 percent
of the total students on mill levy supported scholarships, because Don Beggs perhaps has ear marked our
contingency gift moneys, the supposed "unanticipated contingency expenses".

     The last fiscal year of president Hughes, he requested $7,091 for the contingency line item. President
Beggs in his first year increased the contingency line item 66.9 times, to $474,356.  This was I submit an
unconscionable and unexplained increase.

     In 8 years of Beggs tenure we have budgeted $4,323,653 for contingency and the university shows
actually spent in some manner $2,587,382 with a delta difference of $1,736,221 perhaps transferred to Don
Beggs "President’s contingency fund" not listed on the mill levy to my knowledge. No one can say how the
carry over contingency was spent, or for that matter, how any of the $4,323,653 in budgeted contingency was
spent.

     The records I have so far produced from the university and provided you, show at least 3 contingency
accounts, and perhaps 4. The mill levy contingency account is 8823.  The president’s contingency account is
9755 - 5068. The president says: "my contingency account 5068.  Please note, not the mill levy contingency
account, but "my" contingency account. So it is clear to me that the president puts carry over moneys into his
contingency 5068, not the mill levy contingency account 8823.

     There is also a "University Fund (president)". The records that I have so far produced do not identify the
number of this referred to account, although I suspect it may also be referring to account 5068.  There is also
"Account RS3010  - 1PR001". I suspect this account may be a WSU foundation account. But only account
8823 is identified on the mill levy as the mill levy contingency account.

     A university professor has recently advised me that president Beggs has a 5 percent contingency reserve
carry over policy requirement for all departments receiving mill levy funds. I suspect this 5 percent goes to the
president’s carry over account at the end of the fiscal year.

     On June 16th last month in the next to last document I provided you, Don Beggs instructed the transfer of
$500,000 from "Account RS3010 - 1PR001" to the scholarship account. A mere 8 days later Don Beggs
advised the press that "The majority of the money" in the mill levy contingency account went to scholarships.
The contingency account for the mill levy is 8823, not RS3010 - 1PR001, which is probably a foundation
account.

     In the 17th document I provided you, that I have presently produced from the university, in a missive dated
7/30/2002, Linda Gill advises Eric Sexton and Patsy Selby for the WSU foundation:

"Eric, Here’s the information you requested regarding FY 2002 mill levy carryovers ... University Fund
(president) $475,327.02"

The FY 2002 mill levy carry overs totaled $580,753.44.  I submit that no one but the university can presently
tell were that $580,753.44 was spent in FY 2003.

     In the 13th document I provided you, a memorandum from Don Beggs to Patsy Selby, the president states:

"Now that we know the final revenues form [sic] the FY 2002 mill levy budget, please transfer the amount of
$246,219 from the President’s contingency to the Welcome Center fund. In addition, for budget presentation
purposes for the FY 2004 mill levy budget process these funds should be presented as spent during FY
2002." (Emphasis added).

     (Note: This budget presentation purposes president Beggs is talking about is the annual presentation to
the City comparing the Recommended up-coming FY Budget, last years FY Projected Budget, and the year
before Actual Budget. As I presently understand the document, I believe president Beggs is instructing that
carry over contingency moneys from the FY 2002 budget, that were not spent in FY 2002, are to be
transferred in FY 2003 to the Welcome Center fund, and "for budget presentation purposes" for the FY 2004
mill levy budget process with the City, presented to the City as spent during FY 2002. In short, the City is to
be advised that the moneys in question were spent in FY 2002, when in fact by the same document the
instruction is to transfer the moneys in question in FY 2003 to the Welcome Center Fund, for which transfer
the City is not to be advised.) (Note added).

     The Organization & Development section contains a line item for oversight and accounting. For 8 years of
oversight and accounting by the WSU Board of Trustees, taxpayers have paid $1,741,900.  Each year
consists of 2 letters, 1 summary sheet with three years numbers, and 9 pages of generalized item comments
or mental gymnastics. 12 total pages for an average cost of $217,737.50 per year. (Note: we could give
another 50 local students full tuition scholarships for this amount).

     In his letter to County Manager William Buchanan, president Beggs states: "In addition, each proposed
program expenditure has identified goals to increase our accountability to taxpayers."

     (Note: Anything outside of capital improvement debt service is a gift not an entitlement and not the
university’s money. I object to paying any money, let-a-lone $1,741,900 to oversee and account for the mill
levy expenditures. The university has a legal obligation to account for gifts and the university employees are
state employees, paid by the state. We shouldn’t have to pay them for a function they are legally required to
accomplish.) (Note added).

     I’m a taxpayer.

     When I ask for documents to review they tell me now, notwithstanding that we taxpayers have already paid
them $1,741,900 for accounting the last 8 years for Beggs tenure, for documents I wish to review, that I have
to pay them an additional $3000 just to find the documents, and perhaps thousands more if I want to look at
Roger Lowe’s accountings. Who knows how long it will take him to find his records. And, the breeding of
rabbits and ratcheting up of costs continues as I am advised the estimate is open ended and the final costs
could be thousands more.

     But president Beggs is profoundly concerned with his accountability to the taxpayers, just apparently not
me. God forbid I should be allowed to knowledgeably look at what passes for the accounting of mill levy
moneys at WSU.

     I have drafted a request for inspection and copying of documents for the Commission, along with a floppy
disk to change it however you like. Anyone on the Commission can ask WSU for inspection and copying of
documents. I would ask the Commission as a whole, and my Commissioner Dave Unruh specifically, to request
the inspection and copying of these documents from the university. If you will obtain the documents for me, I
will volunteer to review and copy selected documents, and provide my review, analysis, and report, to both the
County and the City, pro bono, for the good of the community.

     Thank you for your time and attention to my comments.

cc: Mayor Mayans; Community leaders.
 
  

 

 
 1    July ‘06:

    When the university administration and the Eagle drive-by KU
    scribblers talk to each other in their totally subjective
    opinion speak, its like two clones talking to each other.
    There is no chance for any off the reservation linearly
    deductive thought processes.  Nor is there any principle or
    linearly deductive rationale that the university
    administration and the drive-by KU scribblers, self anointed
    protectors of freedom of speech and monopolistic protectors of
    their own subjective opinion, are not prepared to abandon and
    preclude, and always with a high degree of moral and
    instructive superiority, in order to damn the potential return
    of WSU football.  When coupled with the administration's
    gymnastic ability to present subjective opinion –  no matter
    how disjunct, distichous, or completely inconsistent with
    their prior statements of subjective opinion – as alleged
    rationale and excuses to justify doing nothing, and not
    attempting to solve the festering sore of our 20 year old loss
    of student problem; and not reinstating WSU football, the
    "suspension" of which caused the loss in the first instance;
    the result is simply amazing.

    In a recent WSU wichita.edu webb site General Government
    article, p.78, the administration contends concerning loss of
    enrollment: "The University attributes much of this loss to
    the improving economy and a loss of 546 part-time students."

    By June 24th, in the Eagle's drive-by KU scribblers "Mayans'
    Game Plan" article, they quote the university's administration
    thus: "University officials say declining enrollment relates
    to the area's economy, not the lack of football." Also on June
    25th, the KansasCity.com webb site quoted the university's
    administration thus: "But university officials say the city's
    economic fluctuations, rather than the lack of football,
    caused most of the declining enrollment."  Lets see if I
    understand the administration's rationale.  First, the loss of
    students is because of the improving economy.  Then, the
    festering continual loss of students for 20 years, is because
    of economic fluctuations, apparently an up and down economy.
    It's the economy stupid!!!  We are to believe we lose students
    because the economy goes up, and we lose students because the
    economy goes down.  This is mental gymnastic totally
    subjective opinion speak about which there is no empirical
    evidence in support.  As long as the administration is willing
    to say it, and it is consistent with the drive-by KU
    scribblers bigoted subjective opinion, the Eagle prints it
    unquestioningly.  However, the students we have lost are not
    part time students that work, or students that are students
    because they are out of work.  No, the students we have lost
    are young traditional students who want a traditional
    university experience when they chose a college, including
    football in the fall, marching bands, homecoming and
    homecoming parties and events, associated fraternity and
    sorority functions, etc.  And, the economy of Wichita has not
    gone south for 20 years, but the loss of traditional students
    has become a bleeding consistent problem, totally independent
    of the Wichita economy, or any "fluctuations" in the Wichita
    economy.  It is axiomatic that if you refuse to admit the root
    cause of the problem, you will never solve the problem.

    Yesterdays Friday June 30th Eagle, p. 1B, had a picture and
    article on T. Rex Sue to be exhibited at Exploration Place in
    September.  I should have taken it as a bad omen and prophetic
    sign for my 1:15 meeting the same day with my District II
    representative on the City Council.  More later on that
    meeting.  Say, if any body out there is considering running
    for District II representative in the next City election, E
    mail us, as we would be willing to walk the District in
    support of your candidacy.  Please, anyone at all.

 
  

 

 
 29 June ‘06:

    The drive-by KU scribblers at the Eagle have spoken with their
    totally subjective opinion.  Us great unwashed Eagle readers
    should genuflect, go away, and let Beggs' totally subjective
    opinion damage the university while he continues to fail to
    solve WSU's loss of student problem.

    The drive-by KU scribblers at the Eagle contend WSU football
    is "[a] decision for WSU leaders and fans to make, not
    Mayans."  We are WSU fans and alumni, and we want to solve our
    loss of student problem by reinstating football, the loss of
    which caused the problem in the first instance, some 20 years
    ago.  Who, by the way, are these WSU leaders?  Who are these
    "Thinkers, Doers, Movers & Shockers" who want to solve our
    loss of student problem?  It certainly isn't president Beggs
    who continues to lose students on his 7 year watch,
    notwithstanding buying students with taxpayers Mil-levy money.
    On the issue of football and the loss of students problem,
    president Beggs is the anthesis of "Thinkers, Doers, Movers &
    Shockers".

    The drive-by KU scribblers grudgingly admit since it's
    taxpayer money, the City "[s]hould have some oversight of how
    that money is used."  No, legally the City and County should
    designate how our gift moneys, other than capital improvement
    debt service, should be expended, with consideration of the
    university's documented requests.  Particularly is that
    legally so, since the taxpaying citizens and community never
    voted for, and never legally authorized, any thing other than
    paying off capital improvements at the time the 1.5 Mil-levy
    for WSU was approved in 1963, so that the assets of the
    university could be transferred to the state debt free, as
    required by the legislature for WSU's admission into the state
    system of higher education.

    With their initial "Punt" editorial, the drive-by KU
    scribblers at the Eagle demonstrated their bigoted adamant
    opposition to any plan to reinstate football at WSU, long
    before they had any idea of what the plan would consist of.
    The Eagle KU drive-by opinion only scribblers initially
    exhibited their bigoted opinion, and by that process lost all
    credibility on the issue, and presently do not deserve the
    community's consideration of their view on the issue.

    The Eagle KU drive-by scribblers carp about and are profoundly
    concerned with timing.  It's a timing problem.  But Mayor
    Mayans discussed the issue at a Chamber sunrise scrambler on
    January 19th, at a time when the recent Wrangler issue was
    unknown.  Simply more evidence of the Eagle's strident bigoted
    opposition.