Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="reedny, post: 3079515, member: 1423"] I'll throw in a few observations: 1) unlike the case you referenced, the only charity in our case is SU (quasi-charitable NFP educational institution); 2) UT/Carrier is not only for-profit, it has (largely) vacated the region and left a sour taste; and 3) as a general proposition "perpetual" contract terms are against public policy. They go over like lead balloons in state supreme court, especially those that produce unbalanced benefits and are 40 years old. The contract is not public. It could say lots of things that might change the equation, dragging the situation towards a gift or the other way to a commercial branding agreement. I'm sure the U has been above board in negotiations, but its recent actions ("Syracuse University Dome") seem to be an important signal. [/QUOTE]