OSU regents shouldn't live high on the hog while serving the public interest
The melodious sounds of a string quartet. The delightfulness of a smoky whiskey. Open bars. More flowers than you'd see at a funeral. It has all the makings of a lavish, big-budget wedding.
But don't cue 'Here Comes the Bride.'
These luxurious accommodations and the spending that goes with them are happening in conjunction with public board meetings
A nine-member oversight board Oklahoma has entrusted to ensure that many of our public colleges and universities are spending money wisely apparently feels entitled to live high on the hog while doing so.
It would be delightfully ironic, but for the fact that an Oklahoma Voice analysis of receipts provided in response to an open records request found that the sumptuous tastes of the Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges have resulted in over $69,000 in combined costs connected to just 13 meetings. And, that excludes mileage reimbursement requests, which adds another $11,000 to the tab.
In short, every time these regents meet, it costs an average of over $6,100, including mileage.
These board members are entrusted to oversee the Oklahoma State University system, along with Connors State College, Langston University, Northeast Oklahoma A&M College and Oklahoma Panhandle State University.
This spending is problematic in part because our regents are doing nothing to curtail the expectation that presidents and schools must pay dearly for board members to attend obscenely expensive junkets and entertain them while they're doing the taxpayers' business.
Records indicate that most often the bulk of those tabs are born by the college or university that is hosting them. That means our tax dollars are paying for them to hold elaborate feasts that serve dozens of unnamed people items like 8 oz. filet, salmon, boneless beef short ribs, pit ham and stuffing, roasted garlic whipped potatoes and gravy and cast iron butter cake.
Somehow when the regents met over two days in September, officials managed to spend close to $6,600 on dinner, $250 on breakfast and almost $1,100 on lunch.
Most cost-conscious boards would order a few pizzas, get a box of doughnuts or a fruit tray from the local grocery store, or bring their own peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
This king- and queen-like gluttony is tone-deaf to the fact that over 1 in 5 college students are food insecure, meaning they're skipping meals or eating less because they can't afford it. OSU's fundraising arm reports that the university's food insecurity rate is actually closer to 1 in 2 students. The spending is also outrageous given the struggles many Oklahoma families currently face to pay their bills.
And while these officials are living large, four of the five schools that these regents oversee increased tuition. While OSU did not, Northeastern Oklahoma A&M College, which hosted one of these board meetings, increased its tuition 5.5%.
So while some of these campuses are forking out thousands to wine and dine their governing board, students are suffering with higher tuition rates or fees.
How is that a good use of money?
It's further troubling that none of the sitting members could be bothered to answer specific questions about the expenditures. Only one, now a former member, was willing to talk with a reporter about the rationale behind the spending. Additionally, we discovered that these regents don't have individual public email addresses clearly listed on their governing board's website. That sends a clear signal that they have very little interest in being accountable to the public they're tasked with representing.
More: The safety of groundwater is in danger with EPA's proposed closure of Oklahoma lab | Opinion
The board has faced increased scrutiny in recent days following the abrupt resignation of OSU's former President Kayse Shrum in February.
And while there are no specific receipts related to alcohol purchases, the former board member said they have access to open bars, and records show we've paid for them to have a bartender. There's no reason people should be drinking alcoholic beverages while participating in state business.
If that's not gross enough, some of our board attended a 'Board of Regents Night Cap' 'social,' and records show the OSU Foundation, which is supposed to use donor dollars 'to make a lasting impact on the students, faculty and programs that inspire us,' imprudently used funding to buy regents shot glasses and other items to facilitate a 'Whiskey Tasting.' They also paid over $1,000 to host a hospitality suite for these regents and even bought them personalized cookies.
Is that what donors intended their money to pay for? If I were a donor, I wouldn't want my money spent on that.
Enough is enough.
There's a certain sick humor to the situation given the fact that this D.C. swamp-level of extravagance is apparently happening under the noses of Republicans who are on a quest to reduce waste. Gov. Kevin Stitt, who appointed all these folks, in particular is focused on it.
This is not an acceptable way to spend money. Board members should certainly be compensated for their mileage, and possibly a reasonable hotel stay if they live two hours or more away from a meeting site. And perhaps they should get a $30 meal voucher. But these meetings should not be wracking up over $50,000 in catering costs and thousands more in other expenses like purchasing fresh flowers.
If regents don't want to serve without all the frippery, that's fine. Stitt can find someone else who will.
Janelle Stecklein is editor of Oklahoma Voice. An award-winning journalist, Stecklein has been covering Oklahoma government and politics since moving to the state in 2014.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: OSU regents should avoid excessive spending for meetings | Opinion

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Former UCLA AD expects Elliott to thrive at UH
The University of Hawai'i Board of Regents will meet on Monday, June 16, to vote on the approval of Matt Elliott as the next athletics director for the Rainbow Warriors. Elliott, most recently with the Hawai'i Community Foundation, spent 13 years in athletic administration at UCLA, including as chief strategy officer. He played a key role in leading the Bruins into the Big Ten Conference. According to former UCLA athletics director Dan Guerrero, Elliott is well prepared to thrive in his new role at UH. 'Well, it became very obvious the first time I met Matt that he had something special,' Guerrero said. 'Over the course of 10 years that he was with me, he proved that he was one of the finest administrators that I've had the ability to work with.' Guerrero, who was inducted into the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics (NACDA) 2021 Hall of Fame class, noted that Elliott's path into athletics administration was unconventional. 'When I first met him, he was a very successful attorney working for Ropes & Gray out of Boston in their sports practice,' Guerrero said. 'He was working with agents, writing contracts, doing compliance and infractions issues, all those kinds of things. But he wanted to work on a campus, to be involved with student-athletes. For him to leave a prestigious law firm and a great salary to essentially walk into an entry-level compliance role at a major university took a huge leap of faith. We sort of bet on each other, and it all turned out exactly as I thought it would. He'll be special for Hawai'i.' Guerrero believes Elliott's nontraditional background is a particular strength in today's rapidly evolving college athletics landscape. 'For him to bring experiences from outside the traditional world of college athletics adds value,' Guerrero said. 'In the 10 years he was at UCLA, he was among the very best. He knows how to win. He's been around it, working with national championship coaches and student-athletes. But he also knows the other parts of the business, the parts that can make or break you. 'I put him in charge of all our risk management. It was a natural fit with his background, and the policies and protocols he implemented saved us many times. He brings that perspective while also managing budgets, working with coaches and student-athletes, and building relationships both internally and externally.' Looking ahead to Elliott's transition to Hawai'i, Guerrero acknowledged the unique challenges of running a Division I program in the islands. 'Obviously, the geographic situation creates an innate challenge for any athletics program there,' Guerrero said. 'It takes a village, no one does this in a vacuum. You have to build authentic relationships to get the support you need. That requires hard work, really busting your tail to make inroads with the right people. 'One of Matt's strengths is in governmental relations. At UCLA, he was my point person on that. He often testified to the state legislature on my behalf. He understands that politics play a big part in being successful on any campus, but especially in Hawai'i, where everyone is invested in the welfare of the university and the athletics department. Matt can navigate those waters successfully.' Elliott was selected by UH president Wendy Hensel to be the next athletics director. If approved by the Board of Regents on Monday, he will officially take over the role. Stay with KHON2 Sports, on-air and online, for continuing coverage. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Smithsonian rejects Trump's attempt to fire National Portrait Gallery director
The Smithsonian Institution asserted its independence Monday evening in a statement that could be read as a rejection of President Trump's late-May firing of National Portrait Gallery Director Kim Sajet. The Smithsonian's statement said the organization's secretary, Lonnie G. Bunch, "has the support of the Board of Regents in his authority and management of the Smithsonian." The statement suggested that all personnel decisions will be made by Bunch, not Trump. The announcement came after a much-anticipated Board of Regents meeting to discuss the fate of Sajet. The Washington Post had reported that Sajet quietly continued to show up for work each day after Trump's social media post, which said he was firing Sajet for being 'a highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI.' The Smithsonian's statement Monday did not explicitly state that Sajet would remain in her position, and the institution did not respond to a Times question on that subject. But the text of the statement is clear in its intent, beginning: "In 1846, the Smithsonian was established by Congress as an independent entity." It continues: "Throughout its history, the Smithsonian has been governed and administered by a Board of Regents and a Secretary. The board is entrusted with the governance and independence of the Institution, and the board appoints a Secretary to manage the Institution." The Smithsonian's move comes shortly after the White House proposed a 12% reduction in funding to the Smithsonian in the 2026 budget — including the elimination of funding for the National Museum of the American Latino, which is in the development stages and aims to open on or near the National Mall; and the Anacostia Community Museum, which opened in 1967 and honors Black culture. The Smithsonian became a target for Trump beginning March 27, when he issued an executive order titled "Restoring truth and sanity to American history." That order demanded an end to federal funding for exhibitions and programs based on racial themes that 'divide Americans.' "Once widely respected as a symbol of American excellence and a global icon of cultural achievement, the Smithsonian Institution has, in recent years, come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology," the order read. It also instructed Vice President JD Vance to remove 'improper ideology' from the Smithsonian's 21 museums and the National Zoo in Washington. The order followed Trump's ongoing attempts to reshape federal cultural institutions, including his February takeover of the Kennedy Center. One major difference between the Kennedy Center and the Smithsonian: The Kennedy Center's board is appointed by the president, but the Smithsonian's board consists of officials representing all three branches of government. Vance is on the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, as is Chief Justice John G. Roberts. "Since its inception, the Smithsonian has set out to be a nonpartisan institution," the statement Monday read. "As the nation's museum, the Smithsonian must be a welcoming place of knowledge and discovery for all Americans. The Board of Regents is committed to ensuring that the Smithsonian is a beacon of scholarship free from political or partisan influence, and we recognize that our institution can and must do more to further these foundational values. "To reinforce our nonpartisan stature, the Board of Regents has directed the Secretary to articulate specific expectations to museum directors and staff regarding content in Smithsonian museums, give directors reasonable time to make any needed changes to ensure unbiased content, and to report back to the Board on progress and any needed personnel changes based on success or lack thereof in making the needed changes." Get notified when the biggest stories in Hollywood, culture and entertainment go live. Sign up for L.A. Times entertainment alerts. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.


Washington Post
5 hours ago
- Washington Post
Amid Trump standoff, Smithsonian says only secretary can hire and fire
The Smithsonian's Board of Regents said on Monday night that 'all personnel decisions' are directed by Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, 10 days after President Donald Trump claimed that he had fired the director of the institution's National Portrait Gallery. The board, which issued its statement after an all-day meeting Monday, also said that it supported Bunch's 'authority and management' of the Smithsonian.