Regents report recommends president’s executive team disclose conflicts of interest
File photo – President John Bardo
A routine audit of Wichita State’s management presented to the Kansas Board of Regents this month found that members of the president’s executive team did not provide conflict-of-interest disclosures to the auditors.
At a Wichita State Innovation Alliance, or WSIA, board meeting Thursday, board members called an executive session to discuss the audit for reasons of “attorney-client privilege.” WSIA is the non-profit company that manages innovation campus. Executive sessions are closed to the public, so The Sunflower had to leave. The six other attendees of the board meeting who are not members of the board were invited to stay for the executive session.
The audit was not provided to The Sunflower by Wichita State following the board meeting but was obtained through an open records request to the board of regents.
In its report, the auditors said Innovation Campus “is being accomplished in a unique and cutting-edge manner.”
“However, the uniqueness of the Innovation Campus, and its ongoing development, have raised some questions and concerns,” the report said.
“We recommend WSIA’s board amend the Conflict of Interest Policy to more closely align with Kansas Board of Regent’s disclosure levels for significant financial or managerial interests,” the report said.
Wichita State policy requires its faculty and unclassified staff to file annual declaration and disclosure forms “to disclose whether they or their immediate family, personal household or associated entities have consulting arrangements, significant financial or managerial interests or employment in an outside entity.”
John Tomblin, president of the board, declined to comment after the executive session on the specifics of the audit or how the university will implement the recommendations of the auditor.
“They are recommendations and not requirements,” Tomblin said.
Several members of the president’s executive team did not provide those forms to the auditors for examination.
“We requested all of the conflict of interest disclosures made by Presidents Donald Beggs and John Bardo or members of the President’s Executive Team,” the audit said. “We were provided disclosures for the affiliated entities, but not for the University for the following individuals.”
—John Bardo (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—Donald Beggs (FY 2012)
—Tony Vizzini (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—Mary Herrin (FY 2012, FY 2014, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—John Tomblin (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—Lou Heldman (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—Andy Schlapp (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015, FY 2016)
—David Moses (FY 2016)
—Ted Ayres (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015)
—Darron Boatright (FY 2016)
—Eric Sexton (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015)
—Wade Robinson (FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2015)
The auditor, BKD LLP, recommended members of the president’s executive team follow university policy and provide yearly conflict-of-interest disclosures. BKD LLP is one of the largest accounting and advising firms in the United States, with such past clients as The Clinton Foundation.
President John Bardo did not respond to The Sunflower’s questions Thursday about the audit and whether his executive team plans to follow the recommendations of the report. Bardo is the chair of the innovation alliance board.
David Moses, Wichita State’s attorney, did not respond to The Sunflower’s questions Thursday about the audit. Moses is also an ex facto member of the innovation alliance board.
The Kansas Board of Regents selected the auditor “to ensure there is no conflict of interest or improper management or use of funds” by state universities, said Breeze Richardson, spokesperson for the board of regents. Wichita State paid for the audit.
Based on its assessment, the auditor found that “identified potential conflicts of interests are currently being properly managed and monitored.” For the most part, the president’s executive team’s potential conflicts of interest were not provided to be included in the assessment.
“During our interviews, some individuals expressed a variety of concerns regarding a perceived lack of transparency and possible conflicts of interest regarding the development of the Innovation Campus,” the report said. BKD interviewed members of the president’s executive team for the report.
According to the report, one common topic was the potential conflict of interest created by use of the developer MWCB, LLC on innovation campus. The development company is owned, in part, by Regent David Murfin. BKD said Murfin’s role as a developer on innovation campus “appears to have been appropriately identified and managed.”
“However,” the audit continued, “based on our interviews with members of the President’s Executive Team, other concerns remain.”
President Bardo did not respond to questions about the nature of those “other concerns” or what steps, if any, would be taken to address them.
Lou Heldman, vice president of strategic communications, provided a statement on the audit.
“State conflicts of interest forms have been filed electronically each year by members of the executive team and are available online for public inspection,” Heldman said.
Heldman also provided links to the Kansas Secretary of State website to Statement of Substantial Interests filed by university employees.
A Statement of Substantial Interests is different from conflict of interest disclosures. According to the Wichita State website, both are required by certain employees for the university to continue receiving federal funding.
The audit also recommended WSIA change its conflict of interest policy to better align with board of regents policy.
“Currently the (WSIA) policy requires a conflict to be disclosed if there is one person with a greater than 35% ownership in an organization, two people with a 10% ownership in the same business or investment equity, or business transaction involving value in excess of $10,000. We recommend these benchmarks be reduced to significant financial or managerial interests defined as holdings greater than $5,000 or 5%,” the audit said.
Some members of the WSIA board did not disclose their position on the board on their statements of substantial interests to the Secretary of State; others’ statements are not available because they serve an affiliate of the university, such as the foundation.
Heldman said in response to the audit Wichita State would update its conflict of interest policy to better reflect regents policy.
———
Read the full audit: Wichita State University External Management Review
Chance Swaim was the Editor in Chief of The Sunflower from fall 2017 to spring 2018.
Swaim was a graduate student in the English Department working...
Real Shocker • Feb 27, 2017 at 3:58 pm
Here is the link to the September 2014 WSIA Board minutes and the WSU people listed would be Board members who should have listed WSIA as an organization in April 2015 and April 2016. Oops.
http://webs.wichita.edu/depttools/depttoolsmemberfiles/wsia/9%204%2014%20WSIA%20Board%20meeting%20minutes.pdf
Real Shocker • Feb 27, 2017 at 3:19 pm
Just found the WSI Board of Directors listed on this link at the WSU homepage:
http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=wsia&p=/wsia_investment_corporation_members/
I don’t see Tomblin or Heldman listing WSIA as an organization on the SSI form where they hold a position. Were they on the Board when the 2016 SSI forms were completed?
ICT GUY • Mar 14, 2017 at 7:56 pm
Well since Tomblin allegedly founded it, you would think so. From the looks of this article, sounds like he thinks the rules are optional.
Real Shocker • Feb 27, 2017 at 3:05 pm
What is the value of the company Tomblin and his wife own that is associated with Innovation Campus? How many men’s basketball tickets and Champion’s Club passes does Tomblin have and what is the value? Aren’t those gifts? Are there WSU employees who didn’t disclose their positions on the WSIA Board? I remember the administration firing a guy back in the Spring 2015 semester because of something he did not disclose on the form? Is that happening to anyone at WSU who did not list that?
Evan Waller • Feb 26, 2017 at 5:51 pm
How are these people still working for WSU? Who fires the President? Or the Lawyer? These people are in control. How do we get rid of them?
It’s is seriously disturbing that WSU’s own lawyer David Moses is hiding things he’s doing from us.
If all of the people at the top are in control, how do we get them to leave? This is exhausting to read about. They are the absolute powers that corrupt absolutely.
What can we do?
Wilf • Mar 13, 2017 at 7:53 pm
Hopefully WSU got a free case of salsa when they hired Moses, he is quite possibly the worst attorney in the state.
99 probs Dave Moses is 1 of them • Mar 29, 2017 at 11:59 pm
Wilf, David truly is as bad as you say. And his better half Teri Moses is equally horrible. They have a really disturbing power trip…and have definitely Conflicting Interests with how they use one another’s jobs to benefit themselves.
What can you do wrong when your wife is in control of the Wichita Police Department?
Teri, who is actually a racist mind you, was head hancho of the Wichita Police Department for waay too long until Ramsay relieved Wichita from her.
And then her husband,
David Moses, lives and breathes and works a life of corruption. He bullies students, teachers, and honest working employees around. He tries to get people behind closed doors so that he can threaten them and have no record or accountability for what he did. He uses intimidation to shut people up and push people out.
If someone tapped David’s office, you would all be sincerely appalled.
And he has been even more powerful in the sense that his wife has always had a position of undeserved high authority with Wichita’s Police force.
The commonality?
They both used high and important positions to push their own agendas and corruption.
Start watching out for Davidz He is a force of great power within the Administration.
David is the administration’s “legal counsel.”
David Moses IS the one who tells the administration that everything they are doing is okay.
Real Shocker • Feb 26, 2017 at 3:50 pm
Everyone should read the full audit as it explains a lot. The part about John Tomblin and his ownership in entities explain a lot. In the part about the Foundation findings, why not detail who those are related to? Like who had a subordinate sign for a reimbursement which is against policy, who had about $2,500 reimbursed to them without the itemized receipt which is against policy, and who got reimbursed with NO signature or approval which is against policy. Wouldn’t/shouldn’t BKD find that of great concern? Not having an itemized receipt for $2,500 since it could mean it was something for personal use and not University business.
Real Shocker • Feb 25, 2017 at 10:45 pm
BDK really missed an opportunity. They should have said Innovation Campus is being accomplished in an……wait for it…..innovative manner! Saying unique and cutting edge is so……blah! So when Tomblin says it is a recommendation and not a requirement I guess we won’t be seeing his conflict of interest information in the near future.
Lou Heldman • Feb 25, 2017 at 8:26 pm
From Lou Heldman, WSU vice president for strategic communications:
State conflict of interest forms have been filed electronically each year by members of the executive team and are available online for public inspection.
The forms are filed directly to the State of Kansas, Office of the Secretary of State. You can learn more here, http://www.kssos.org/elections/ssi_online.aspx, and get a login to check forms here, https://www.sos.ks.gov/elections/ssi/examiner_entry.aspx
In response to the audit, University policy 3.04 will be updated to reflect current Regents policy. The old policy said copies of the reports were to be maintained in individual personnel files. Since the “Substantial Statement of Interest” forms are filed electronically and are retrievable, they don’t need to be printed out and placed in files.
A report referred to by BKD, “Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Conflicts of Time Commitment,” requires similar information as the Secretary of State report and is largely geared to researchers applying for federal grants. That report hasn’t been collected in recent years except from those applying for grants. It is being revised with the goal of creating a version that is easier to complete, review and retrieve.
Real Shocker • Feb 28, 2017 at 7:59 am
Lou,
Your name is listed in the September 4, 2014 WSIA Board minutes (below) as a Board member present. Why isn’t WSIA listed on your State of Kansas SSI form for 2015 and 2016?
WSIA Board Meeting
Thursday, September 4, 2014
9:00 am.
Morrison Hall Boardroom
In attendance were members John Bardo, Ruth David (teleconferencing), Lou Heldman, Elizabeth King, Rodney Miller, David Mitchell, Bill Moore, John Tomblin, Scott Redler and Tony Vizzini. Also present were Andy Schlapp, Harvey Sorensen, Alan Goodnight, Anna Weyers, Lois Tatro, Kevin Arnel and Susan Johnson.
Bardo called the meeting to order at 9:10 am.