Embattled Chancellor Hamid Shirvani seemed to have a majority of the State Board of Higher Education behind him on at least a couple of issues.

First, the board voted 7-1 to scale back previously-approved tuition increases to something more on par with what Shirvani had requested (only board member Kari Reichert voted no):

North Dakota’s Board of Higher Education decided Thursday to change tuition guidelines that the board approved earlier this month.

It means smaller possible tuition increases this fall at North Dakota State University and the University of North Dakota.

The maximum tuition increase at NDSU was trimmed from 4.23 percent to 3.28 percent. At UND, the top increase has been reduced from 4.9 percent to 3.72 percent.

At North Dakota’s nine other public colleges, the tuition increase limits were set between 2.18 percent and 4.76 percent.

Also, while Forum Communications did their best to make this sound like bad news for Chancellor Shirvani with the headline “ND higher ed board rejects report clearing Shirvani of fraud,” in reality what the board did was cast a vote in favor of findings from University system Chief Information Officer Randall Thursby which illustrated problems in the report in question. While former auditor Bill Eggert’s report did clear Shirvani of fraud, it also accused him of being misleading to the legislature.

Thursby’s report indicated a worrisome level of collusion between Eggert, “whistle blower” Linda Porter and certain members of the SBHE:

Thursby said he looked into that report because of questions he had about how Eggert portrayed a March 20 email from Laura Glatt, vice chancellor for administrative affairs.

“The context in Mr. Eggert’s report leaves one with the impression that only Chancellor Shirvani’s slide was in question, when actually both Ms. Porter’s document and the slide were in question,” he said.

Thursby also questioned a sharing of information between Porter and board member Kari Reichert, staff adviser Janice Hoffarth and now-President Kirsten Diederich in the days before Porter testified to legislators on March 27 regarding the fraud allegation. He said they never shared that material with the rest of the board or appropriate university system staff.

Thursby also questioned why Eggert sent Porter a copy of his report on April 23 — a day before its release — with the statement, “Verify for accuracy. If you want to change or add use track changes.”

Neither Reichert nor Diederich were happy about Thursby’s report:

After the meeting, Reichert told Forum News Service she was frustrated that she had “basically been accused” of improper behavior. She said if the board questioned Eggert’s integrity, they should launch a proper investigation through an independent auditor instead of using Thursby’s claims “as a platform to accuse board members of participating in undermining our auditor’s report.”

She also said she, Diederich and Hoffarth “never once” accused Shirvani of fraud or misleading legislators.

“What difference is it to me if this chancellor goes or stays, as long as he’s effective?” she said. “That’s all I care about, is that we have an effective chancellor.”

Diederich, who was elected at the start of the meeting to be the board’s new president beginning July 1, said what happened Thursday can’t happen again and that she would work to “mend” the board.

“I don’t want any more secret talk going on,” she said. “If we’re going to be an open board, open records, open meetings, this has to stop.”

Here’s Thursby’s full report which, frankly, doesn’t reflect well on Eggert, Porter, Hoffarth, Diederich or Reichert and is quite exculpatory as far as Chancellor Shirvani is concerned.

The post Chancellor Shirvani Scores Some Victories In Latest SBHE Meeting appeared first on Say Anything.

The North Dakota Supreme Court has reprimanded state Senator Connie Triplett (D-Grand Forks) for a second time for misconduct as an attorney in a state.

This time Senator Triplett apparently didn’t return a $500 retainer paid to her by a client, claiming that she was suffering from depression:

The Supreme Court says Connie Triplett must return her client’s $500 retainer and 11 years’ interest, and pay almost $3,000 in disciplinary costs.

Court records say a client hired Triplett in September 2002 to represent her after her divorce.

In 2007, the client’s ex-husband didn’t pay his share of expenses for medical and dental treatment for the couple’s daughter. The woman asked Triplett to pursue the matter. Triplett didn’t follow up, and did not respond to the client’s letters.

The client filed a complaint against Triplett almost two years later, and asked for her $500 back. She ended up resolving the dispute herself.

Triplett said she didn’t get some of her client’s letters. She said she was in Oregon part of the time working on an advanced degree program.

Triplett also said she has long suffered from depression, and has been prescribed anti-depressants at various times since September 2007.

Senator Triplett was somewhat erratic during the recent legislative session as well. She had to be reprimanded by Lt. Governor Drew Wrigley, in his capacity as President of the Senate, for verbally attacking fellow Senator Margaret Sitte, and during debate over one of the pro-life bills the legislature considered she brought the Senator chamber to a halt when she stormed off the floor and refused to return to the chamber to vote as required by the rules.

If Senator Triplett can’t perform her duties as an attorney because she’s suffering from depression, perhaps she’s not fit to help write the laws either.

The post Grand Forks Democrat Claims She Stiffed Client Because She Was Depressed appeared first on Say Anything.

Back in October, as officials at North Dakota State University refused to make public what discipline a group of Bison football players would face from either the university or the athletics department after they forged thousands of signatures on two petitions, I filed an open records request for the information.

Today Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem issued an opinion on my request, and found that NDSU did violate open records laws in denying my request, but even though I won that “battle” I lost the “war” for the information.

NDSU was in violation of open records laws for refusing to cite for me the specific law which allowed them to deny my request, according to Stenehjem (full opinion below). But, also according to Stenehjem, the records related to the punishments for these athletes aren’t public.

Here’s where things get weird.

Under FERPA – a federal law protecting student privacy – I could have obtained the records as long as there was no way for me to tell which disciplinary records belonged to which students. “It was widely reported in the media, as well as on Mr. Port’s blog, that there were 10 NDSU football players criminally charged in the matter,” reads the opinion. “The names of these players were also reported. If NDSU turned over 10 different folders of redacted materials, then it would still be known that each of the players had a disciplinary file on record with the University, and the existence of the disciplinary file is protected.”

That sounds like something out of a George Orwell novel. In order to find out whether or not these students faced any sort of punishment from the university or the athletics department, we can’t know the identities of the students. If we know the identities of the students, we’re not allowed to know if they faced any sort of team or university consequences for their criminal actions.

It’s a Catch-22, and a convenient one for administrators at NDSU who can use this legal mumbo-jumbo to give them plausible deniability when accused of giving these players a pass. Which they almost certainly did.

What’s also strange is that I specifically requested any information about discipline from the athletics department. The universities announce discipline for student athletes who break laws all the time. University of North Dakota hockey players had their team suspensions announced publicly after they threw a team party. At NDSU, a similar incident involving alcohol and a group of female softball players also resulted in public announcements of punishments.

Are the universities breaking federal law every time they announce these punishments? Apparently, according to this AG’s opinion. Maybe some of the players should sue.

Or maybe we should change the law.

If federal law really gives the universities the right to cover up accountability measures for student athletes – and apparently it does – then the federal law needs to be changed.

North Dakota Open Records Opinion

The post Attorney General Finds NDSU Broke Open Records Law In Responding To Petition Fraud Request appeared first on Say Anything.

In Bismarck the family of a disabled couple – the man in the wheel chair, his would-be wife with mental disabilities – are upset with a church because the pastor there wouldn’t marry the couple, arguing that they aren’t ready.

The couple is now getting married at another church, and the sister of the wife-to-be “says the church should be “inclusive and accepting of everyone,” according to the Associated Press.

This is an interesting topic, especially in light of states like Minnesota legalizing gay marriage. Does a given couple have the right to demand that a specific church marry them?

I don’t think they do.

My wife and I faced a similar situation. I’m an atheist, and she was a Catholic (she’s since converted to Lutheranism). She wanted a religious ceremony, but that wasn’t something we could get, because I wasn’t going to be dishonest about my beliefs and no religious leader was going to marry a non-believer. And nor should they have to. So we settled for a secular ceremony presided over by a justice of the peace.

Would we have had a right to demand that a church marry us, despite my being an atheist? Not any more than we’d have the right to walk into a vegetarian restaurant and demand that they make us a hamburger.

But I wonder, with the states legalizing gay marriage, how far we are away from lawsuits against churches that won’t perform gay marriage. I support gay marriage, but I don’t think the right of gays to enter into social contracts with one another extends to forcing churches to perform marriage ceremonies for them.

Yet, I think that’s probably where we’re heading in our entitled society.

The post Can A Church Be Forced To Conduct A Marriage Ceremony? appeared first on Say Anything.

As you could probably tell from the very light posting this week, I’ve been on half-way vacation since Monday. Now I’m heading out for some real vacation with the family over the weekend. Assuming we don’t get rained out.

I hope you all have a happy, and safe, weekend. Enjoy your family, and remember your loved ones who have passed on.

Regular posting will resume on Tuesday.

The post Memorial Day Weekend Open Thread appeared first on Say Anything.

During North Dakota’s Senate race last year then-candidate Heidi Heitkamp and her political party made a big issue out of her opponent Rick Berg’s wealth. Voters were treated to ads like this one casting Berg as being too rich to understand the needs of average North Dakotans. In fact, for a while during the campaign, it didn’t seem like Heitkamp or her political allies could run an ad without sneering about Berg being “one of the richest members of Congress.”

And, to put a cap on her class war campaign, Heitkamp hired an Occupy Wall Street organizer as her state director.

But according to Senator Heitkamp’s recent Senate financial disclosure forms, she’s definitely part of the 1%.

The full disclosure report, which you can read below, has Heitkamp owning a minimum of $1.881 million in stock and non-stock assets and a maximum of $4.794 million. On top of that, Heitkamp reported income of at least $30,431 from those assets, and as much as $88,900.

She also reported $35,900 in salary from Heidi Heitkamp, Inc. and from her service on the board of Dakota Gassification.

The only income directly related to her husband, who is a doctor with Sanford Health, is a salary reported somewhere north of $1,000 per year.

All together, that’s a hefty chunk of change for someone who ridiculed her political opponent for being wealthy during the last campaign. It’s a fraction of what Rick Berg reported for his net worth while a member of the US House, but it’s enough to plant Heitkamp squarely in the 1%.

Not a bad place to be for an unabashed class warrior.

The post Despite Class War Campaign, Turns Out Senator Heidi Heitkamp Is Part Of The 1% appeared first on Say Anything.

“[T]he IRS has harassed a number of pro-life groups, including at least one alleged demand that a pro-life group not picket Planned Parenthood,” writes David French for National Review. But even as the IRS was defending pro-abortion groups, they were targeting families who adopted children for audits.

“In 2012, the IRS requested additional information from 90 percent of returns claiming the adoption tax credit and went on to actually audit 69 percent,” writes French.

More from the Taxpayer Advocate Service:

During the 2012 filing season, 90 percent of returns claiming the refundable adoption credit were subject to additional review to determine if an examination was necessary. The most common reasons were income and a lack of documentation.

■ Sixty-nine percent of all adoption credit claims during the 2012 filing season were selected for audit.

■ Of the completed adoption tax credit audits, over 55 percent ended with no change in the tax owed or refund due in fiscal year 2012. The median refund amount involved in these audits is over $15,000 and the median adjusted gross income (AGI) of the taxpayers involved is about 64,000. The average adoption credit correspondence audit currently takes 126 days, causing a lengthy delay for taxpayers waiting for refunds.

For all the resources spent on audits, the IRS didn’t get much bang for their buck:

Despite Congress’ express intent to target the credit to low and middle income families, the IRS created income-based rules that were responsible for over one-third of all additional reviews in FY2012.

■ Of the $668.1 million in adoption credit claims in tax year (TY) 2011 as a result of adoption credit audits, the IRS only disallowed $11 million — or one and one-half percent — in adoption credit claims. However, the IRS has also had to pay out $2.1 million in interest in TY 2011 to taxpayers whose refunds were held past the 45-day period allowed by law.

One wonders how much the IRS spent on personnel and expenses to find that $11 million in disallowed credits. A figure more than $11 million, I suspect.

French has more, including details about what an excruciating process this was for the audited families, but the real story here (as it has been throughout this IRS controversy) is the double standard that has been applied.

Pro-abortion groups got most-favored status, but families taking unwanted children into their homes were targeted for audits.

Wow.

The post IRS Targeted Adoptive Parents For Audits appeared first on Say Anything.

A bit of a kerfuffle has erupted between Minnesota and North Dakota over the North Dakota Chamber of Commerce running billboards touting the western state’s lighter touch when it comes to taxes and regulations. At least one Minnesota Official, a Moorhead city council member, reacted with anger and threatened support for flood diversion from his side of the Red River.

According to the Bismarck Tribune today, arguing that “mocking your neighbor on his property looks childish,” the North Dakota Chamber ought to take down the billboards and apologize to Minnesota.

What utter bunk. What’s childish is the way some Minnesotans have reacted. Plus, an apology at this point would undermine one of the features of American governance that makes this country so great.

Far from scolding states for actively competing with one another, we should encourage it. North Dakota has a better tax and regulatory environment for businesses and individual citizens, as evidenced by the much larger populations living on the western side of the Minnesota/North Dakota border communities. Not only is advertising that fact what’s best for North Dakota, it’s what’s best for Minnesota too. Because the best way to convince Minnesota to change is to make their high-tax, big-government policies hurt by luring taxpayers and businesses away from them.

In the economy, competition among businesses produce the best results from consumers as each business tries to find advantages in quality, service and/or prices. The same is true of states.

When the states compete, we win. So let’s hope for more of the same from the North Dakota Chamber of Commerce. If Minnesota doesn’t like it, let them change their policies.

The post North Dakota Should Issue No Apologies For Lower Taxes appeared first on Say Anything.

The North Dakota University System data exposure report below details an incident in which the private information of students and university system employees was exposed, but apparently not reported to them as it wasn’t specifically required by law.

NDUS “whistle blower” Linda Baeza Porter was responsible for the breach according to the report. Porter was the NDUS employee who accused Chancellor Hamid Shirvani of manipulating data after he used peer comparisons for graduation rates and other data points that were other than the ones Porter and certain university presidents preferred.

Porter’s accusations against Chancellor Shirvani have always seemed…odd. Perhaps, in the context of Porter’s job being at risk as a result of this data breach, seeking whistleblower protections makes more sense.

The timing of the data exposure, and Porter’s accusations against Chancellor Hamid Shirvani, are interesting.

March 19th is the day this data exposure was detected. On March 20th, Linda Porter first contacted a member of the State Board of Higher Education about Chancellor Shirvani’s supposed data manipulation.

According to the document, Porter provided an after-action report on the data exposure on March 22nd. This same day she met with at least one, and possibly more, members of the SBHE in person.

The report indicates there was a meeting involving multiple staff members of the IT organization on Tuesday afternoon March 26 to begin the formal evaluation of the data exposure incident of which Linda Porter was the cause. This is the afternoon before she testifies to the legislative committee and makes her first public accusations against Chancellor Shivani for data exposure.

Even as Porter made accusations against Chancellor Shirvani – baseless accusations in the eyes of this observer – she was facing an inquiry over a data exposure incident that could cost her job. Now, with Porter claiming whistle blower status, that is a lot more complicated. Any termination at this point might be deemed retaliation for her supposed whistle blowing.

NDUS spokeswoman Linda Donlin, who also confirmed the authenticity of the report below, told me in an email that “the matter of disciplinary action is still being reviewed.”

Previous reports indicate that Porter has hired attorney and former North Dakota Democrat Party chairman Mark Schneider to represent her in a lawsuit against the university system.

The post Anti-Shirvani “Whistle Blower” Was Involved In Serious Exposure Of University System Data appeared first on Say Anything.

Here in North Dakota, since the last election cycle, Democrats have been attacking Republicans for supposed corruption stemming from financial relations between them and the companies they regulate.

Public Service Commissioner Brian Kalk, and former Commissioner turned Congressman Kevin Cramer, have been attacked for taking campaign contributions (perfectly legal and 100% disclosed) from coal industry interests. Governor Jack Dalrymple has been accused of bribery by liberal activists for accepting contributions from the oil industry, and stock he owns in a subsidiary of ExxonMobil has been questioned as well.

But I wonder if Democrats will keep singing this tune now that Senate financial disclosures show Senator Heidi Heitkamp owning big-money interests in companies she regulates?

Heitkamp’s press people wouldn’t comment on news that she owns stock in a company regulated by the Senate Banking Committee on which Heitkamp sits:

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) and her husband held between $50,001 and $100,000 in J.P. Morgan Chase JPM +1.15% & Co. last year. Ms. Heitkamp was elected in November and now serves on the Senate Banking Committee. A spokeswoman for Ms. Heitkamp declined to comment.

Heitkamp’s people also waved off questions about hundreds of thousands of dollars she owns in Apple stock, a company currently under investigation by another committee she sits on:

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., owns the most Apple stock among the 14 members of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, with her holdings worth at least $250,001 and up to $500,000, according to personal financial disclosure documents released today that cover calendar year 2012.

Heitkamp was one of six committee members to not attend Tuesday’s hours-long hearing, during which Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook defended his company against accusations of tax dodging. Regardless, the senator’s stock holdings do not pose a conflict, a spokeswoman said.

“Senator Heitkamp was selected to serve on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee because of her unique position being from a border state and her past experience as a state attorney general working along aside law enforcement,” spokeswoman Whitney Phillips said. “Her position on this committee is in no way impacted by her personal financial holdings.”

I honestly don’t have a problem with Heitkamp’s financial holdings. They’ve been disclosed (though I might quibble that the public is owed a bit more detail), and we voters can decide whether or not she’s unduly influenced by them. Or handing out special treatment or favors.

But then, I didn’t really have a problem with Cramer and Kalk’s campaign contributions, or Governor Dalrymple’s financial holdings.

Senator Heitkamp’s party attacked Republicans for doing the exact same things she’s doing as a US Senator. But something tells me that North Dakota’s Democrats only think this sort of thing is a problem when Republicans do it.

The post Financial Disclosures Show Sen. Heitkamp Owns Stock In Companies She Regulates appeared first on Say Anything.