Quote of the Day

Thursday, November 5, 2009

George Wythe Alum Elected Mayor of Leeds, Utah

hat tip: RC

It appears the school has born some positive fruit: out of 316 votes cast in Tuesday's Leeds, Utah, mayoral race, 185 were for 2006 GWC graduate Hyrum Lefler. His 59% to 41% margin over opponent Elliott Sheltman is a landslide by any measure.

Congratulations to the 27-year-old Lefler (born in 1982)! Hopefully the principles he ran on--transparency and fiscal responsibility--will rub off on his alma mater!


James F. said...

"Hopefully the principles he ran on--transparency and fiscal responsibility--will rub off on his alma mater!"

Yes RGW, if only private universities operated the same way as citizens running for public office. That would be great.

The Real George Wythe said...

James, are you saying that George Wythe "University" is incapable of operating transparently and exercising fiscal responsibility? I know it hasn't in the past, but these are certainly ideals worth striving for.

James F. said...

Well it is an interesting point. Certainly we hope and expect our Cities and States to operate with transparency and fiscal responsibility--and furthermore any tax funded organizations under funding and jurisdiction of said governments. We can expect this, because we pay for them and have no choice but to pay.

Privately funded organizations are an entirely different story. They have no real obligation to be "transparent" unless it is something they represent and agree upon with customers or investors/funders. I mean take BYU for example, good school, but the word "transparent" isn't something that comes to most people's minds when they think of the school. But do they have to be transparent? Is this something that the world expects of them? It really is up to them--that is one of the benefits of being a "private" organization. The word "private" actually is kind of antonymous of "transparent", eh? Some organizations may benefit from being more transparent in their operations. It might instill more confidence in their customers and investors/funders and eventually lead to more success. But still it is their choice, is it not?

As far as "fiscally responsible"--I think it is blatantly obvious that you don't really care about GWU being financially secure. You really see an opportunity to exploit perceived financial instability to further your argument that GWU is inept and even illegitimate. Once again though, in a free market, if a private organization chooses to be unwise or risky with their finances, they will face the consequences often going bankrupt and disappearing. So while I appreciate your very caring concern for GWU's finances, as a complete outsider I really don't think you have the information necessary to assess their financial standing.

I too hope that they are being wise with their money. But if not--no skin off my back. They'll much sooner be gone if that is the case. And isn't that what you have wanted all along?

The Real George Wythe said...


By transparency I meant the opposite of the obfuscation that tends to rule the day at GWU. Certainly non-murky histories and press releases are not too much to ask of any organization.

As far as your assertion that I am "a complete outsider [without] the information necessary to assess their financial standing," I beg to differ. The George Wythe Foundation is a quasi-public institution in that it is a registered non-profit (and, thereby, indirectly tax-funded). It is required to file yearly financials with the government, which then become publicly available. I discussed this in an earlier post and included the latest financials.

Anyone with a cursory knowledge of finance can see from those financials that the organization probably has huge debt payments on its Monticello land. That can't be good in a time of dwindling enrollment.

Do I want GWU to fail? No. Do I want it to fail in its obfuscations? Yes!