When last we left our good friends at Oral Roberts University, three former professors had sued the University, Board of Regents and Richard Roberts for various allegations of malfeasance, including diverting University money improperly, improper endorsement and support of politcal candidates, Mrs. Roberts improper use of the University jet for shopping extravaganzas and meeting underage males after hours. In other words, just what we have come to expect from the hard right Christian leaders.
But now, things are getting more interesting.
First of course, the lawyers. As in "This plantiff lawyer should recuse himself, this plantiff has sued too many people before, this defendant is not culpable, it's all a big misunderstanding, why can't we all just get along." Typical lawyering stuff. But the money flow is starting to surface.
It turns out that the university is some $54 million in debt, by its own admission. Now as a finance type person (CPA), I find that curious.
The school has been around for forty years, has not had a major construction project on campus for at least 20 years, and they certainly don't have the local reputation of paying above avarage wages to the rank and file employees. There are some 5,000 students on campus, and tuition and fees are in excess of $20,000 per year, which is not out of line for a private university. Now, I realize that there are scholarships and such, so that every student doesn't pay the full fare. But there are also donations from alums and friends, so that by taking the total number of students times the total tuition and fees, you should get a rough idea of the amount of revenue. In this case, about $100,000,000 per year. The school, in public statements is admitting to only about $75,000,000 per year. Not necessarily indicative of anything except, hmmm, why the big difference? So far, no explanation has been forthcoming. Then, a tidbit in one of the legal filings was that the school must support other charities. Could this be to the Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association? Again, I know of no prohibition of one charity giving to another charity, but why would an institution which is apparently in financial straits give money to another charity? You would expect them to be on the receiving end of charity, particularly if they have a $25,000,000 revenue shortfall.
Then today we get the news that Senator Grassley (a Republican!) is tageting certain mega church pastors for information on how the charitable dollars they receive are spent. Three of these fleecers of the flock (or do they prey over them?) are on the Board of Regents of ORU. Talk about letting the foxes in the henhouse. Can't remember all three, but Benny Hinn and John Hagee are two of them. Two more reprehensible people can hardly be found.
It looks like this is about money, or more precisely, protecting the take. Current IRS rules and court cases make clear that a charity may not provide a lavish lifestyle to its officers. While the definition of lavish may be in the eye of the beholder, I would wager that most folks would see these people as living lifestyles more befitting a rock star than a monkish ascetic.
Here is a prediction, based upon observation of ORU for many years. Settlement talks are already underway, plenty of money will be found to make a confidential settlement, and the hope will be that things quickly return to normal. It has worked before. But the cat is clearly out of the bag now, so the question is, will it work again? Will Senator Grassley and the IRS follow through?
Stay tuned.