Monsanto job prompts legislation that would outlaw such arrangments. Legislation to be utterly ignored, considering the source.
Frank Kloucek is proposing legislation.
Good for Frank. He can propose. Too bad it’s likely misspelled, and written in crayon:
A state senator from Scotland says he is drafting legislation that would stop or limit university presidents in South Dakota from serving as highly paid board members for business corporations.
and…
“To me, it just smacks of conflict of interest,” Kloucek said Friday. “Will this influence Monsanto’s research at SDSU? I don’t know. But it just seems plain wrong to me. Chicoine should know better.”
The SDSU president said the state’s Board of Regents has a policy that is standard for many higher education institutions and allows presidents to sit on corporate boards.
“I know that all legislators have views and opinions, and I respect the opinion they have,” Chicoine said. “I also know that the collective will is probably different than any individual legislator.”
Well – good news for Frank from this article. At least one person in SD goes through the motions of momentarily pretending to respect Frank’s opinion. The rest consider him the vehicle through which Czech days in Tabor is recognized each session.
With the remainder of his legislation consigned to file 13.
If you recall, Frank also didn’t want SDSU becoming a Division 1 school, either. Which prompted one local columnist to nominate him to be Dean of the School of Alchemy.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Shuddaup and pass the herbicide laced sweetener so I can mix it with my contaminated cornflakes, while I scratch my old Agent Orange injury. There’s nothing wrong here. It’s business as usual, corporate agriculture that can kill us – under the guise of public support and acceptability. Quit yer griping and support bidness.
Well I am pleased that Chicoine sits on corporate boards! What a fantastic honor! See, you can go anywhere from here….even sitting on large corporate boards.
And yes, it does benefit all of South Dakota. We all know how important the “right contacts” are for South Dakota. Just as I think it’s important for President Chicoine to make the right contacts at Czech days in Tabor, he needs to make those same contacts with business leaders. What better way to do it then sitting on corporate boards!
I would rather be fishing: What about competing companies? Should they be pleased that the president of a university that tests their products is receiving $195K/yr from a competitor. How blatant does conflict of interest have to be before some one says too much?
Sure PP, go ahead and make snide comments about Frank. But you know what, the guy keeps winning in a district your guys have gerrymandered to be absolutely yours/theirs. How funny is that?
How does this work with Frank already looking for lobbying contracts? Dakota Rural Action will be well served (kidding)with their new choice. Of course, I don’t think Regents will be hiring Frank, nor will anyother entity that wants to accomplish anything in Pierre.
Tabor is a laughingstock. I like Czechs, but re-electing a totally useless legislator is insane. Frank could propose a “bill” declaring that saving kittens from a burning building is good, and that resolution would be doomed.
I realize that it might be hard to work in, but some how the reporter should include a sentence like, “Kloucek, who has sponsored more unsuccessful legislation than anyone in history, says…”
…while a majority of the anons enjoy ridiculing a fellow South Dakotan, Monsanto buys SDSU. Ah, priorities….
Happy Fathers Day Pat I forgive you!
One of the major reasons for paying a university president in South Dakota a $320,000 salary is because it takes a lot of money to hire a great talent with the right skills, credentials and experience to serve as president. If the state paid a salary of less than $50,000, then you’d expect that a person of great stature and ability with full time responsibilities would need to seek out other income sources, such as an additional salary of $195,000 plus a one-time stock option pay off of about $200,000 to sit on the Board of Directors of a multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. But that’s not the case.
Monsanto’s gain is South Dakota State University’s loss. This $400,000 pay off creates a perceived conflict of interest not only for the university president, but also for the quality of the research results coming from SDSU. How are the results of research investments at SDSU to be taken seriously when one of Monsanto’s competitors can point to the university president’s $400,000 purse from the corporation and declare the research is skewed? If the perception is tainted, why would benefactors invest in the research services of SDSU or any other South Dakota university if it appears our university presidents can be bought and it becomes tolerated? What message does this send to students and parents faced with ever increasing tuition and fee increases? What message does this send to our SDSU research teams?
Personally, I like President Chicoine and consider him a good friend. I strongly supported and campaigned for him to come to SDSU. When he was hired, I felt SDSU had made a major leap forward in its growth as a prestigious institution. The job is full time, requiring the full devotion of talents and energies of the president. If a $320,000 salary isn’t enough to keep Chicoine on the job at SDSU, it should be negotiated so that we can retain a great talent whose full time energies are devoted to SDSU. If President Chicoine has spare time to promote the interests of a multinational corporation, he should refuse the pay other than to cover his expenses for travel, food and lodging. Service to academia should not appear as an opportunity to cut a fat hog at the expense of the university’s future. As a leading national land grant research university known for its excellent non biased research we must do all we can to keep its credibility intact. What message does this send to other university presidents? What message are we sending to corporate America?
We should not turn this debate into nitpicking about conflicts of interest. If President Chicoine received a salary of $1,000 a year to sit on Monsanto’s board, there would probably be no discussion. That clearly is not the case here. The Board of Regents needs to resolve this matter immediately. If the board does not act, this issue will be presented to the South Dakota Legislature for a more permanent solution that will address it fairly and reasonably.
Senator Frank Kloucek
29966 423rd Ave Scotland, South Dakota 57059 phone 605 583 -4468
I think anon had it right….
“Kloucek, who has sponsored more unsuccessful legislation than anyone in history, says…”
I think ol’ Frank is still torqued that SDSU made the move to D-I without the legislature sticking its nose in it.
Frank, let the Board of Regents do what it does best. They watch the presidents like hawks and they’ll put their collective foot down if there’s conflict of interest.
This is exactly why we have a part-time legislature in South Dakota.
We have hit an age where payoff’s are not only public, but accepted by the public as the norm of the day. Let the regents do what the regents do best? Now that is the statement of the day!! Fishing, you’re eatin Carpe and don’t know the difference. As far as PP goes, you have been all over the map in the last six months, I’d get a line and walk it if you are going to do any good for Scott!
(Les, how have I been “all over the map?” For years, I think I’ve been quite consistent with the assertion that Frank Kloucek has one of the worst records of getting legislation passed among the elected officials in Pierre. -PP)
Always remarkble, isn’t it, Les, when “libertarians” like jackrabit1 think unelected government officials should be allowed to do what they want without oversight by elected representatives of the people.
You know what I agree with 9:15. Are there any rules or laws this guy has broken or pushed to the max? When you have a job like this you shold know the does and don’t of this postion before you take it. If there are no rules about it then there should be.
Pat, unless I read Franks little dissertation here with a confused mind, I find it a very solid piece. I agree with you on your opinion of some of Franks legislative attempts, but when he hits a good ball, let’s put state interests ahead of partisan BS. I respect your stance on more issues than I don’t, but I have an uncertainty with you putting state welfare above politics at times Pat. ({Detroit, I’d disagree with that statement. I’ve known John, and had even worked for him at the SDGOP many years ago. He’s a pretty straight shooter. I think your partisanship is showing, despite your claim of being “independent.” -pp)}
So, if we look beyond the source and focus on the actual issue (a challenge for some folks here, but bear with me), is there a problem with a a public university president receiving more compensation (at least in the first year, including stock options) from Monsanto than from us?