|
Post by CHC8485 on Sept 16, 2023 15:03:21 GMT -5
I don't know why the College did not provide an accounting of the funds it was holding or why the concert was cancelled but those seem like legitimate reasons to be upset and at this point, without Holy Cross' side of the story, it seems silly that they would not have done either. IMO the crux of the matter goes back to the history of the initial gift as summarized in paragraph 20. In other words, the College did not include a PAC in Become More campaign against the recommendations of a faculty group and the President's Advisory Council that included Mr. Prior. Despite that, Mr. Prior wanted it in the plan and so paid to get it included. In other parts of the complaint he actually seems a bit upset that he "had" to donate to other projects he really thought should be lower priority in order for the college to get to his pet project. So a last minute addition to the Capital Campaign experienced many delays. Not exactly shocking. Particularly if you have 67% funding threshold and constantly escalating cost. In addition, having been part of multiple large capital construction projects in my career, this job suffered a significant lack of funding due to a lack of enthusiastic donors and scope creep - i.e., adding more to the building and building with much more costly products and finishes If you follow the timeline below, I think you'll get a little more clarity on what's going on, when you combine it with information from the complaint. Date | Event | Estimated Cost | Feb 2013 | Neil Prior's $25M gift announced:
| ---- | Mar(?) 2013 - Jan 2015
| Invited Design competition and architect selection | ---- | January 2015
|
Diller+Scofidio is selected as Architect. Cost announced (estimated) at $62M and 62,000 sq.ft.
A quote from the T&G story linked below | $62 million | July 2017 | Design revealed and cost is up to $92M. Assume the final size of 84,000 sq. ft. (35% larger than at time of the award) is the size in this design but I can not find confirmation. However, this quote from the HC story is telling. Perhaps the College understood appetite of potential donors not named Neil Prior to support a performing arts center. news.holycross.edu/blog/2017/07/28/holy-cross-announces-building-plans-for-new-center-for-arts-and-creativity/
| $92 Million | December 2019 |
Construction begins. Cost now at $107M
I get inflation and the way construction material cost soared, but from $62M (presumably based on the basic design from Diller+Scofidio) to $107M in 5 years and pre-pandemic??
| $107 Million | September 2022 |
Prior Performing Arts Center Opens. Final Cost is $110M. That's $48M (77% more than original "budget')
| $110 Million |
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Sept 16, 2023 15:20:13 GMT -5
Agree with others that we need facts but it’s starting to feel like the BG thing where it didn’t have to come to this. Hope President Rougeau knows what he’s doing here.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 16, 2023 18:38:50 GMT -5
The 2007 Campus Master Plan (yes, there was one) had a new Performing Arts Center where the tennis courts are. That Campus Master Plan was folded into a strategic plan for the College, and the strategic plan was approved by the BoT in December 2006.
In the 2007 campus master plan, the new and renovated facility projects appear to be priority ranked by letter, and scheduled into a) Within three years timeframe; b.) within a seven year timeframe, and c.) within a 20 year timeframe.
Project F, the first in the four-to seven year timeframe (roughly 2011-2015) was the new fieldhouse, featuring the 200 meter indoor track. This was to be built as a wing off Hart, extending off the northeast corner of the Hart court. (This was the design killed by ADNP soon after he arrived at HC.) Project G was renovations to existing Hart, but not the rink or pool. Project H. was renovations to the old field house.
In the 20 year timeframe, Project K was to relocate the tennis courts. Project L is a new Performing and Fine Arts Center on the site of the old tennis courts. This Center is to support Music, Theater and Dance, and Art. Project P is additional spectator seating for the rink. Project Q is a football team facility by Fitton Field; and demolition of the east stands, and the north and south stands that are east of the 10 yard line. (The last project to be listed is lettered U,, and not relevant to the conversation of Luth and the Prior.)
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 17, 2023 11:15:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 17, 2023 13:10:30 GMT -5
Unpleasantness?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 17, 2023 14:54:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 18, 2023 6:59:25 GMT -5
As for timing of HC demanding the $7 million, the private party who had bought the three land parcels on Kendig on which the residence was to be built applied, as property owner, for three building permits from the city of Worcester. These were applied for on October 6, 2022 for the building foundation, on November 1, 2022 for electrical work, and on November 28, 2022 for plumbing work. HC, as property owner, did not apply for a building permit for the Jesuit residence until February 1 2023 (for mechanical work).
The first two of the three permits issued to the private party were issued on November 2 and November 4. Merely coincident with HC's demanding the $7 million from Mr. Prior?
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 18, 2023 7:17:44 GMT -5
So, hard to follow the bouncing ball here but Prior supposedly committed $25M but initially put $18M in the kitty, $7M less than the total. I am aware that some anonymous donor put in +/- $3M to name the smaller theatre (now the Boroughs theatre). Presumably others donated as well and perhaps enough to complete the PAC but HC then may have wanted Prior to pay for other construction from his prior (pun intended) $7M commitment.
I just hope this gets resolved quickly and surprised that I haven’t seen anything in the T&G yet.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Sept 18, 2023 7:34:30 GMT -5
So, hard to follow the bouncing ball here but Prior supposedly committed $25M but initially put $18M in the kitty, $7M less than the total. I am aware that some anonymous donor put in +/- $3M to name the smaller theatre (now the Boroughs theatre). Presumably others donated as well and perhaps enough to complete the PAC but HC then may have wanted Prior to pay for other construction from his prior (pun intended) $7M commitment. I just hope this gets resolved quickly and surprised that I haven’t seen anything in the T&G yet. Money is money no matter where it is spent and they are always trying to raise more of it. Since Prior's gift of $25 million was never enough to pay for the whole building, the College was always fundraising, either for the building directly or for the endowment or annual fund out of which it would ultimately pay for the place. We need to see the original pledge agreement and any subsequent modifications to get a fuller understanding of this, but I suspect the earliest we will ever see those is in a motion for summary judgement with the possibility that we will never get to see them at all. None of this explains why we the concert was cancelled. I, too, hope that they can find away to make this go away. Right now, the College and its attorneys are likely weighing the plusses and minuses of bringing a counterclaim against Prior for the rest of the money.
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on Sept 18, 2023 7:51:16 GMT -5
It's very hard to see any "plus" in bringing a counterclaim.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 18, 2023 7:53:08 GMT -5
So, hard to follow the bouncing ball here but Prior supposedly committed $25M but initially put $18M in the kitty, $7M less than the total. I am aware that some anonymous donor put in +/- $3M to name the smaller theatre (now the Boroughs theatre). Presumably others donated as well and perhaps enough to complete the PAC but HC then may have wanted Prior to pay for other construction from his prior (pun intended) $7M commitment. I just hope this gets resolved quickly and surprised that I haven’t seen anything in the T&G yet. The Luths' name is on the main theater, so they kicked in for that. A tax attorney read the complaint, and calculated that Prior paid $23 million in conjunction with the project (including the $3.1M for Luth because HC wouldn't move forward on the Performing Arts Center until Luth was under construction). He notes that Prior also provided a $10 million security agreement to cover the outstanding $7 million because he needed to sell stock. Also, Prior's assets were being managed by Harvard's endowment office, which was investing those assets in conjunction with their management of Harvard's endowment, and it is not clear how liquid those assets are. And recall that EBW's estate was invested and managed by a fiduciary in NYC, and not by Alice or their children.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 18, 2023 8:04:49 GMT -5
It's very hard to see any "plus" in bringing a counterclaim. Prior offered a $10 million security agreement until the stock was sold. HC never acted on that offer, because it had already cancelled the concert. Prior was on campus on November 3 but HC chose not to meet with him. On November 4, the two members of the BoT Executive Committee phoned Prior and demanded the $7 million, and giving him five days to pay. Prior then began working on the $10 million security agreement as an interim vehicle to cover the $7 million. On November 5, HC cancelled the concert. IMO, incompetence of a high order starting with the BoT.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Sept 18, 2023 8:37:03 GMT -5
It's very hard to see any "plus" in bringing a counterclaim. $7 million? I don't think I would do it, but I think it needs to be discussed.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Sept 18, 2023 9:25:11 GMT -5
It's very hard to see any "plus" in bringing a counterclaim. Prior offered a $10 million security agreement until the stock was sold. HC never acted on that offer, because it had already cancelled the concert. Prior was on campus on November 3 but HC chose not to meet with him. On November 4, the two members of the BoT Executive Committee phoned Prior and demanded the $7 million, and giving him five days to pay. Prior then began working on the $10 million security agreement as an interim vehicle to cover the $7 million. On November 5, HC cancelled the concert. IMO, incompetence of a high order starting with the BoT. Read the complaint carefully. It doees not say that he had agreed to make the $7 million payment. Rather it says in paragraph 35: "Unaware that the College had already cancelled the Opening Concert, Mr. Prior undertook significant efforts and expense to prepare a proposed security interest in stock holdings valued at $10 million that would be more than sufficient to cover any additional donation he might
make and would give him time to consider the information he requested regarding the investment of, earnings from, and uses of his Conditional Donations."
I remain perpelexed as to why they would not meet with him.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 18, 2023 10:36:56 GMT -5
Prior offered a $10 million security agreement until the stock was sold. HC never acted on that offer, because it had already cancelled the concert. Prior was on campus on November 3 but HC chose not to meet with him. On November 4, the two members of the BoT Executive Committee phoned Prior and demanded the $7 million, and giving him five days to pay. Prior then began working on the $10 million security agreement as an interim vehicle to cover the $7 million. On November 5, HC cancelled the concert. IMO, incompetence of a high order starting with the BoT. Read the complaint carefully. It doees not say that he had agreed to make the $7 million payment. Rather it says in paragraph 35: "Unaware that the College had already cancelled the Opening Concert, Mr. Prior undertook significant efforts and expense to prepare a proposed security interest in stock holdings valued at $10 million that would be more than sufficient to cover any additional donation he might
make and would give him time to consider the information he requested regarding the investment of, earnings from, and uses of his Conditional Donations."
I remain perpelexed as to why they would not meet with him. Thank you for clarifying that. Maybe it was a consequence of Tracy Barlok leaving her position as head of Advancement at the end of June, and the office being overseen on an interim basis by a consultant? In other words, no one minding the store. I do not know who the 5-6 members of the Executive Committee are, but as I understand the functions of the Committee, it seems to me that the members are likely to be free, time-wise, to give x hours per week to overseeing what's happening on the Hill, and to act for the full Board on routine or secondary matters.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 23, 2023 17:08:24 GMT -5
The 2023/24 season schedule of the Prior Performing Arts Center just arrived. Lovely glossy magazine loaded with photographs. A great advertisement for HC.
|
|
|
Post by mm67 on Sept 23, 2023 17:33:24 GMT -5
It would be great if Mr. Prior & HC could come to a meeting of the minds and work to heal the wounds. Mr. Prior clearly loves HC and has contributed so much to alma mater. No doubt the school leadership team must have a tremendous amount of gratitude for the contributions of our fellow alum. Mr. Prior is so much a part of HC and means so much to HC. It would be so sad if the rupture cannot be healed.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 23, 2023 17:46:39 GMT -5
There's a baseball analogy for everything. In this case my emotions say "Tie goes to the donor" but emotions will be irrelevant if this case goes to trial.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Sept 23, 2023 19:32:16 GMT -5
The attorneys have to love this sad affair
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on Sept 23, 2023 19:58:38 GMT -5
The attorneys have to love this sad affair Not this attorney. I doubt any attorney does.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Sept 23, 2023 20:22:58 GMT -5
The attorneys have to love this sad affair Not this attorney. I doubt any attorney does. I’m surprised-I’d have guessed that the attorneys racking up the billable hours would be happy
|
|
|
Post by mm67 on Sept 23, 2023 20:39:45 GMT -5
It is an extremely sad affair. Realize it may be hard for some to believe but attorneys are people, too. I'm not sure about computer engineers. Hope the lawyers can bring the two sides together & settle this mess out of court. An out of court settlement might be in the best interests of their clients. Dream world scenario, HC extends a hand & Mr. Prior reaches out for it.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Sept 24, 2023 5:42:48 GMT -5
Not this attorney. I doubt any attorney does. I’m surprised-I’d have guessed that the attorneys racking up the billable hours would be happy Cases can be intellectually interesting because of the legal issues or factual questions and they can be profitable but when you get to know your client and you see how the subject of litigation affects them personally, you feel for them. I represent individuals or, on occasion, very small businesses. No matter how the client feels going into a case, by the end, they are drained by litigation and almost always want you to find a way to make it go away sooner than later. From the outside looking in, this case resembles a divorce or an ugly intra family dispute over a will.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 24, 2023 9:32:21 GMT -5
I’m surprised-I’d have guessed that the attorneys racking up the billable hours would be happy Cases can be intellectually interesting because of the legal issues or factual questions and they can be profitable but when you get to know your client and you see how the subject of litigation affects them personally, you feel for them. I represent individuals or, on occasion, very small businesses. No matter how the client feels going into a case, by the end, they are drained by litigation and almost always want you to find a way to make it go away sooner than later. From the outside looking in, this case resembles a divorce or an ugly intra family dispute over a will. I concur with the analogy. I set up a Google alert week before last regarding this. So far, crickets. This leads me to think that this is being handled quietly, and hopefully resolved in the same manner.
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on Sept 24, 2023 11:25:45 GMT -5
I’m surprised-I’d have guessed that the attorneys racking up the billable hours would be happy Cases can be intellectually interesting because of the legal issues or factual questions and they can be profitable but when you get to know your client and you see how the subject of litigation affects them personally, you feel for them. I represent individuals or, on occasion, very small businesses. No matter how the client feels going into a case, by the end, they are drained by litigation and almost always want you to find a way to make it go away sooner than later. From the outside looking in, this case resembles a divorce or an ugly intra family dispute over a will. I agree with this. I always tell people that litigation should be a last resort because it is not a great way to solve a dispute. You get a result, but not necessarily justice. I've been involved in probate disputes and I've seen how the death of a parent can re-open old wounds. When people come to me to contest a will I tell them to try and work things out (this advice is rarely followed). Are there lawyers who promote discord and thrive on courtroom battles--yes--but I think this is a small number. If this particular case went to trial my prediction is that both sides would be unhappy.
|
|