TMCnet News
Oklahoma State U. tries to gain land through eminent domain(Comtex Business Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) STILLWATER, Okla., Oct 09, 2006 (Daily O'Collegian, U-WIRE via COMTEX) --The court delayed a motion Thursday to dismiss the claim the Oklahoma A&M Board of Regents is violating the state constitution because none of its members are farmers. McClosky Brothers Inc., a real estate firm that owns the last piece of property standing in the way of the athletic village, claims because the regents are operating unlawfully, they cannot use the power of eminent domain. The firm turned down the Oklahoma State University Foundation's first offer for the property south of McElroy. "The first offer was so far below market value that we didn't have a whole lot to use [for reinvestment]," said Kevin McCloskey of McCloskey Brothers. "We just want to be fairly compensated." Although the $62,000 offer was more than double what his firm paid for the property, most of the places around campus where they could reinvest run from $90,000 to $120,000, McCloskey said. After hearing statements from both parties of the lawsuit, District Judge Donald Worthington decided to continue proceedings Dec. 7 to decide whether the question of the board's constitutionality is relevant to this case. Worthington appointed three commissioners this past month to appraise the property to determine a reasonable price, according to court documents. The commissioners evaluated the property Thursday. Before the next hearing, they will come up with a price, which either party may accept or contest. "Maybe it can be settled between now and then," McCloskey said. "There are several different options." Agricultural and rural communities have known about the issue questioning the board's agricultural reputation for years, said Harlan Hentges, the attorney representing the Stillwater, Okla., firm. "I was told all major ag organizations in the state went together to work with the governor's people to have just one agriculture producer (on the board) -- and they got the pharmacist from Stillwater," Hentges said. Several state agriculture organizations have discussed this topic even before it was brought to the court's attention. The Oklahoma Farm Bureau has adopted a formal policy urging the senate and governor to follow the law, said Marla Peek, director of regulatory affairs of the bureau. When a seat opened up for a new board member, there were efforts among organizations to secure the seat for someone in agriculture production, she said. "And obviously that didn't happen this time around," Peek said. To the bureau's knowledge, besides Terry Peach, the president of the State Board of Agriculture -- whose position is specifically required to be the ninth board member under the Oklahoma Constitution -- there's not one person whose primary occupation is farming or ranching, Peek said. Mason Mungle, the government relations spokesman for the Oklahoma Farmer's Union, said this hasn't been a resolution to this issue yet. "Then all at once we've got a whole new player because of the eminent domain issue," he said. "We'd rather set these two off as separate issues." The most recent appointment to the board is Calvin Anthony of Stillwater and owner of Tiger Drug. Mungle said although Anthony is a "fine gentleman," his qualifications regarding farming needs to be clarified. Sen. Ron Justice, R-Chickasha, an education committee member, said he had no questions about Anthony's character, but based on his biography sheet, he didn't meet the required qualifications for a board of regents member. "It was my understanding when I was reviewing was that a primary source of income was to be derived from farming," Justice said. "That's the way I interpreted it. However, there was a lot of debate on the senate floor, he said. "Personally, I think the constitution is outdated," said Sen. Cal Hobson, D-Lexington. "I think the constitution should be interpreted broadly to give the governor latitude." Anthony owns at least 1,000 acres of farmland and runs a cattle operation, Hobson said. "He was clearly qualified for the job," he said. "Mr. Anthony is probably more farmer than some other members on the board." There is no information regarding income or history of owning a farm or ranch, according to Anthony's application for appointment to a gubernatorial board or commission. The only question pertaining to financial income asks "do you have any financial or other interests that might present a conflict of interest, or the appearance of such conflict if you were to be appointed to the position for which you have applied," to which Anthony checked "no," according to the application. Although the form does not specify how much money Anthony makes from his ranching or pharmaceutical business, Hobson said he thinks as long as the appointee can show an in-depth involvement in farming or ranching, he or she meets the requirement. "I believe we're in full compliance," Hobson said. Hobson also said he thinks this lawsuit has nothing to do with the makeup of the board of regents. "I think this is a red herring to extract more money for that piece of property," Hobson said. "I think this is pure greed on the part of the landowner." OSU President David Schmidly said the university has been fair and has paid good prices to settle with people during this process. The land acquisition process has gone smoothly aside from this litigation, Schmidly said. "From our perspective, we made a more than fair offer to that man," Schmidly said. "He's asking a ridiculous amount of money. I think it's a slap in the face to those who went through the (acquisition) process." The company's attorney said the McCloskey Brothers made an offer within $30,000 of what the university suggested to pay for the land. Asked about the constitutionality of the board, Schmidly said he thinks a lot has changed since the constitution was drafted in 1907. "In my opinion, there should not be a strict interpretation," he said. He also said he thinks there is a strong agriculture presence on the board of regents. Hentges said these are excuses for not complying with the law, as well as words that undermine the mission of land-grant universities. "It's asinine of him to say those things," Hentges said. The purpose of a land-grant university is instruction, research and extension. Yet, Schimdly's biography on the OSU Web site states the campus master plan will help OSU become more competitive in academics, campus life and athletics, he said. Hentges said there is a nationwide discussion on whether land-grant universities have strayed from their original purpose. The National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges created a commission to report on the future of land-grant universities. In its latest report, the Kellogg Commission stressed states must play a role in recommitting to the basic elements of public higher education. "We also invite state leaders to understand that patronage and politics have no place in appointing governing boards or administrative leaders, because first-rate public institutions require first-rate leadership committed to the institutions' overarching goal of advancing the common good," according to the report. Several state agriculture organizations have similar views on land-grant universities and the Oklahoma A&M Board of Regents. Marla Peek, director of regulatory affairs of the Oklahoma Farm Bureau, said although there has been discussion on the future of land-grant universities, there have been no conclusions. However, the bureau has adopted a formal policy urging the senate and governor to follow the law, she said. "We believe the letter of the law is not being followed on this," Peek said. When a seat opened up for a new board member, there were efforts among organizations to secure the seat for someone in agriculture production, she said. "And obviously that didn't happen this time around." Peek said to the bureau's knowledge, besides Terry Peach, the president of the State Board of Agriculture (whose position is specifically required to be the ninth board member under the Oklahoma Constitution), there's not one person whose primary occupation is farming or ranching. "Speaking on behalf of the farm bureau, if we felt like the law was being followed, this wouldn't be an issue," Peek said. "And I think clearly, this is an issue to us and other ag organizations." Roy Lee Lindsey, the executive director of the Oklahoma Pork Council, said today's need to provide research to the general public -- a purpose of a land-grant university -- is crucial. "At a time when agriculture is becoming increasingly more complex -- that need to share that information back to the public is only getting bigger," he said. "It's not going away. So whoever is sitting on the board needs to have a good grasp on agriculture." The Oklahoma Agriculture Co-Operative Council also supports the constitution's requirement for board members to be farmers. Although agriculture is an evolving industry, the constitution clearly states a majority of the board members' income should come from farming, said R.J. Gray, executive director for the council. "It's important the folks who serve on the board of regents have a good understanding of agriculture and the mission of a land-grant university to support agriculture," he said. Phil Bacharach, press secretary for Gov. Brad Henry, said the governor's appointments, past and present, have been in compliance with the law because the appointees have some sort of investment from an agricultural standpoint. OSU maintains the process used in selecting the regents has resulted in members who volunteer an enormous amount of time to better the university, Gary Shutt, director of OSU communication services, stated in an e-mail. "Based on prior opinions issued by the Attorney General's office any suggestions the Boards actions are invalid or unlawful is completely off base and without merit," he wrote. However, the McCloskey Brothers filed a response to the board's motion to dismiss its counterclaim, stating there is no statute, case or court rule that grants the court any authority to dismiss their pleadings that seek affirmative relief in this process, according to court documents. Oklahoma courts have also allowed such relief sought by those whose land is being condemned to be tried during the condemnation proceeding, according to the response. Eminent domain cases can be tough, Hentges said. He said his clients are fortunate they aren't fighting to save a house they have lived in all their lives, and it takes a younger, ambitious spirit to take on this kind of challenge. "They are, however, fighting for something that is much bigger than they are," Hentges stated in an e-mail. "They should be commended for doing their part when the Governor, Senate, Attorney General and the Regents have failed to do theirs." "The claim on regents is irrelevant to the case," Gary Shutt, OSU director of communications, said. He said he is happy the issue will be dealt with at the proper time, as the eminent domain case continues. Shutt said the property is the only one not purchased out of 87 selected to make way for the athletic village. It lies at the end of an area intended for football practice fields. It also lies outside of the footprint for the university's next project, an indoor multi-purpose facility scheduled to begin construction in 2007. Copyright (C) 2006 Daily O'Collegian via U-WIRE |