Heard a rumor

Date: May 20, 2004

Heard a rumor

Date: May 20, 2004

Don't know if it's true, but it's been reported on this board before.

Date: May 20, 2004

Do a little checking and you will find that the rumor is true

Date: May 20, 2004

I have also heard this rumor, although not on this board. Does anyone else see a problem here?

Date: May 20, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: concerned
" I heard a rumor that the Dvorak's are renting Shelby's house while he lives in the president's house.. Is this true? "

But of course it's true. As was posted earlier on a different thread, there are many layers of motive behind each SFT action. He hires a marginally qualified sycophantic husband and wife team, rents them his own vacant quarters (the rent, it could be argued, is paid from USM's coffers), and takes depreciation and operating expense writeoffs on his house. A very cozy arrangement indeed.

Date: May 20, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Gossip Monger
"

But of course it's true. As was posted earlier on a different thread, there are many layers of motive behind each SFT action. He hires a marginally qualified sycophantic husband and wife team, rents them his own vacant quarters (the rent, it could be argued, is paid from USM's coffers), and takes depreciation and operating expense writeoffs on his house. A very cozy arrangement indeed."

I'm sure this arrangement is perfectly legal, and I didn't intend to imply otherwise. It just "looks" a little fishy.

Date: May 20, 2004

One point to consider, given Shelby's high greed factor, is he wants to keep Angie & Mark on board as he is making several thousand dollars per month off their being at USM. I am counting the current monthly rental income plus the yearly depreciation of the house.

I would guess the yearly depreciation on his house is, at a minimum, at least $15,000 per year. If he accelerated his depreciation it could be significantly more. But I do not know if accelerated depreciation is allowed for a rental house.

Date: May 20, 2004

I'm confused at to why this is an issue . . . do we really care where the Dvoraks live or to whom Dr. Thames rents his house? Unless it directly concerns some misuse of University funds, which it probably does not, What's the point?

Date: May 20, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"I'm confused at to why this is an issue . . . do we really care where the Dvoraks live or to whom Dr. Thames rents his house? Unless it directly concerns some misuse of University funds, which it probably does not, What's the point?"

I didn't get the sense that this rental arrangement was introduced as an issue per se. The only point, from my distant perspective, is that the sweetheart landlord-tenant relationship is illustrative of the less than arms length deals which seem to characterize Dr. Thames good ole boy administration. He literally "owns" the Dvoraks, which makes their unflagging loyalty to him a given. As with the G&S lockouts and attempted termination, the rental deal may be perfectly legal, but it certainly doesn't pass the smell test.

AE