Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Re: State review of proposals Sally Eckert-Tilotta (Sally Eckert-Tilotta) 08 Feb 1999 11:13 EST

Charlie, Barbara, Deborah, and others off-list:

Thanks for your responses.  It's good to know that our gut response on the
impact was valid.

The bill left the committee with a do not pass recommendation.  Which means only
the first battle is won.  There are about three more.

We're not sure where the bill came from.  The sponsors had no rationale except
vague remarks about the state "needing another level of review".  Interestingly
enough, the writer of the bill said that higher ed was never intended to be
included, although the language was all-inclusive, and she testified for the
bill as it stood.  She also thought that the fiscal impact of reviewing what
would most likely be well over 1000 proposals a year, would be none.  They would
send all technical proposals out for external review.  Can you believe that?

Sally
>>> Charlie Hathaway <xxxxxx@AECOM.YU.EDU> 02/08 8:46 AM >>>
Sally-

What was the rationale given for this new law?  Is it fiscal or sociologic?

Imagine Proxmire-inspired consensus required for all proposals!
Your universities will be facultyless by dawn.

Charlie Hathaway

At 01:23 PM 2/5/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Our state legislature recently introduced a bill requiring state-level
review of
>proposals submitted by all state agencies (including higher education) to any
>federal or nonfederal sponsor.  In this bill, the state office responsible
for
>such a review would have 30 days in which to review the proposal, write a
>detailed report, and either approve or reject the proposal.  If it is
approved,
>then it can be submitted to the sponsor.  If it is rejected, then it can't.
>
>We have gathered information on how this would impact our institution, and
>representatives have testified before the committee reviewing the bill.
You can
>imagine our testimony on this prospect.
>
>Now that we are in a lull in activity, I am curious.  Is there ANY other
state
>that  has such a requirement?  Any contemplating one?
>
>Sally
>
>
>***************************************************
>Sally Eckert-Tilotta, PhD, Assistant to the Director
>Office of Research and Program Development
>University of North Dakota
>Grand Forks, ND  58202
>email:  xxxxxx@mail.und.nodak.edu
>tel:  701-777-2049
>fax: 701-777-2504
>
>
>======================================================================
> Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
> subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
> via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
>======================================================================
>
>

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================