Surprise! Trent University's DNA cluster building is $1.6 million over budget. Actually, nobody's surprised at all. Poor planning seems endemic to the current administration, particularly its building projects. The DNA cluster building is no exception. Plagued from the onset by a veil of secrecy and dubious pronouncements the cluster will bring innovation, prosperity and thousands of jobs, administrators have consistently been unable, or unwilling, to provide information to allow independent verification of those claims and have admitted the project was lacking a business plan. Taxpayers have forked over in excess of $10.7 million for the DNA building and now the project is in the hole an additional $1.6 million. Will administrative heads roll for that? Continue reading
 

The federal Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) hands out millions of dollars to universities. The problem is that CFI is not accountable to the public for its spending because it not subject to federal Access to Information legislation. In her new capacity as chair of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) Bonnie Patterson makes a plug to all political parties for more of the same. Having gussied up campuses, built corporate-friendly research facilities and embarked on branding campaigns, universities need funds for things like, well, teaching and basic research. Ah heck, what does it matter that earlier this year foundations like CFI were slammed by the Auditor General for being unaccountable for billions of taxpayer dollars - they still have cash to hand out! On the other hand when "the Auditor-General worries, Canadians have cause to worry." Continue reading
 

A past member of both Trent University's board of governors and Senate warns that Trent's distinctive nature areas are threatened by the apparent frenzy to develop commercial opportunities on campus lands. "In June, 2005 Trent's Board was assured that the proposed sports field would not be built in the Wildlife Sanctuary at the City's requested location, but Trent's administration seems to have subsequently flip-flopped on that assurance. With so many mosquitoes about, perhaps someone had an itchy back," writes Derrick McIntosh. Commenting on the "unbridled haste" with which Trent has entered into agreements with the City to prop up the DNA Cluster business park (for which no business plan exists), McIntosh notes the administration and Senate are playing fast and loose with policy and their respective responsibilities, to the potentially irrevocable detriment of Trent and the greater community. There is still time "for the University's governing bodies to rectify this short-sighted and reckless folly," he says. Continue reading
 

Outraged by Trent's plans to grab about a kilometer of the historic and scenic River Road for its own use, the local and regional community has raised considerable opposition. It appears wide spread public opposition has caused Trent to acknowledge the road grab is neither required or justified. The public has put Trent on notice that it will face active and vocal opposition in any future moves to pursue such plans. Continue reading
 

In an earlier article we asked Will the DNA Cluster deal with City impact the Trent Nature Areas? We looked at the potential of land use and ownership transfers portrayed as "Essential Components of the Memorandum of Understanding" between Trent and the City of Peterborough in February 2005. We raised concerns that, among other things, the Trent Nature Areas could be negatively impacted. The larger issue is to extract from Trent university administrators clarity and transparency regarding their overall development plans. In the absence of such transparency the full impact of potential development in and around Trent cannot be accurately assessed and evaluated. On July 4, 2005 the City passed by-law 05-146 and the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and Trent University has been signed. In the public interest we are posting the MOU at OurTrent. Continue reading
 

Always quick to shine the media spotlight on President Bonnie Patterson and itself, Trent has been uncharacteristically silent about this past weekend's "Public Symposium" billed to be attended by 130 of the world's top scientists, researchers and medical experts. Following a kick-off reception and hobnob at the Canadian Canoe Museum Thursday evening, the agenda scheduled Patterson to be the first speaker on Friday morning. Trent Chancellor and board member Dr. Roberta Bondar was to deliver the welcoming address following Patterson. Trent's efforts to inform the public in advance of the symposium appear to be limited to a scant notation in the "Upcoming Events" section of Focus Trent on September 8, 2005. That announcement conveniently left he word "public" out, provided no detail and simply pointed readers to the International Consortium on Anti-Virals (ICAV) website. Given Trent's normal predilection for publicity, one has to wonder why the silence in this case? Could this have been to deflect attention from some issues Trent would rather not have the public be informed about? Continue reading
 

In the fall of 2004 Bonnie Patterson told the board of governors that millions of dollars in public grant money would be lost if the DNA cluster buildings were not up and running by December 2005. Just yesterday Trent announced the beginning of construction, with opening scheduled for May or June of 2006. Was there a public statement by Trent of deadline extensions from CFI and other granting bodies? Was the public informed of the reasons for delays and what was being done to rectify these? Was any grant money lost? Is this another example of secrecy and lack of transparency that has, according to some, come to characterize governance and management of Trent? Continue reading
 

A former mayor of the City of Peterborough tells us we should get rid of the Greater Peterborough Area Economic Development Corp (GPAEDC). Douglas Galvin, a Peterborough lawyer, insists that within GPAEDC there a conflict of interest between the city and county in respect to industrial and commercial development. We at OurTrent note that GPAEDC is touted as a partner by the promoters of the DNA cluster project. Would you want a partner that is rife with conflicts of interest that can only be resolved by the dissolution of the organization itself? Continue reading
 

Trent students are concerned over the secrecy of Trent's administration, rising costs, private companies benefiting from public dollars, the erosion of student space and Trent's rising debt. Tired of the veil of secrecy surrounding the DNA cluster project they want it stopped until their concerns are addressed and the cluster's financial stability verified through the release of the project's business plan. Continue reading
 

Students wonder what's going on with the DNA cluster project and why there is so much secrecy. "It is time to stop the aura of secrecy with which the DNA cluster project has been covered... The question is, when exactly is the administration planning on releasing the business plan? And why are they holding it back so vehemently?" Continue reading
 

Trent University Nature Areas Committee is inviting everyone to an open meeting to discuss the draft Stewardship Plan for Trent University Nature Areas. The meeting is on March 1 at 7:30pm. The plan is a road map for the University for managing and protecting the Symons Campus Nature Areas for their teaching, research, recreational and aesthetic values. The meeting is timely given the potential impacts of the DNA cluster "deal" with the City upon the nature areas. Continue reading
 

The potential deal between Trent University and the City of Peterborough will, among other things, see Trent pass land ownership and use over to the City in return for the City contributing $2-million to the DNA cluster project. One question that has yet to be evaluated is the impact of these transactions on the Trent Nature Areas. To answer that question we must first understand how the nature areas are being used, their location and applicable University policies. Continue reading
 

Denis Ferkany admits that he and the DNA cluster promoters have not been able to explain how project will benefit Peterborough. And in another late breaking story - the world is round! But seriously, the public has been asking Ferkany and Trent president Bonnie Patterson to reveal the facts that explain in detail exactly how the cluster will allegedly benefit Trent University and the Peterborough region. Ferkany deserves some credit for his frank admission. Perhaps the facts will now be fully revealed for the public to independently analyze and verify? Continue reading
 

To announce the CFI award of $3.6 million a copy (available here) of the CFI proposal was distributed electronically to select individuals at Trent. According to a letter sent to Peterborough’s Mayor and councillors this is not the same proposal as was sent to CFI and it is missing key details like 8 pages that contain references to rabies and 15 pages of financial information. The missing details are alleged to be demonstrative of the project's reliance upon rabies-related funding together with the continued participation of the MNR, and the notable absence of private sector partners. Continue reading
 

So far, Trent university's DNA cluster project has received $13 million of public money and promoters claim it will create thousands of high-tech jobs in Peterborough. A very real obstacle to the project’s success is the continued absence of private sector participation. "Without it," to quote an Examiner editorial, "the cluster dream is just that... an unrealized dream." We agree that project promoters should get every chance to prove they’re right, but would add "before we gamble any more taxpayers' money." The time has come to show the public the cold, hard, verifiable facts. If the facts hold up to public scrutiny, enthusiastic support will naturally follow. Continue reading
 

Fred Gilbert, the President of Lakehead University in Thunder Bay Ontario is questioning public investment in Trent's DNA cluster project. According to an Examiner article, Gilbert says Lakehead's DNA lab is one of the top three mitochondrial labs in the world. In spite of having a better existing infrastructure to support a DNA cluster in Thunder Bay government money was sent to Trent where the only resource in place was the MNR. Is there something fishy with the dispensation of grant monies going on here? Continue reading
 

A number of groups are pleased Canada's auditor general has called for foundations like the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) to be accountable to the public and parliament. According to a press release, were CFI's recent $3.6-million grant to Trent University for its DNA cluster project to be reviewed by the auditor she would find a programme of little or no value to Canadians, a demand for funds with no available business plan and a money sink hole funded entirely by taxpayers. Continue reading
 

The City of Peterborough is touted as a partner in Trent's DNA cluster yet Trent won't show City councilors the business plan, if indeed a plan exists. Not much of a partnership, is it? Trent is exempt from Ontario's Freedom of Information legislation. The Canadian Foundation for Innovation is exempt from federal Access to Information legislation (the Auditor-general just blasted the feds for this) and they gave Trent $3.6-million for the DNA cluster. So far $10.7-million of public money given to the DNA cluster is neatly hidden behind a wall of secrecy built upon "accountability exemptions". Could it be, as the Peterborough Examiner suggests, Trent is afraid that if they release the DNA cluster business plan and other cluster details to the City that the public just might get their hands on it because the City is subject to Freedom of Information legislation? Continue reading
 

Continued secrecy appears to be the name of the game. The City of Peterborough is poised to fork over $2 million to Trent's DNA Cluster project. But last night Trent refused to disclose the business plan to City councillors during the Planning Committee meeting (Feb 14), adding to the speculation that the project still does not have a business plan. “I see no reason why we can’t have that,” one councillor said. Another councillor said he’s "not against the DNA concept, but council has to ask the questions that need answering in order to see how this project will be viable". The City is touted as a "partner" by the DNA Cluster promoters. Would you want to be a partner in a venture where you are not allowed to see the business plan? Should our City do so with our tax dollars? Continue reading
 

Rushed deals are usually bad deals. According to the Peterborough Examiner the City wants to move quickly on this one. It involves $2.0 million of taxpayer's money for the DNA Cluster project, subject to Trent's agreement to nine expectations from the City. Apparently the City has violated its own direct capital participation policies and Trent documents reveal that President Bonnnie Patterson "was conscious that the administration of this project had not followed the usual University process for tendering and for seeking Board approval of architect selection, preliminary design, etc." Why the rush? What is really going on here? Continue reading
 

Describing the Trent DNA Cluster project as "a vacuum that sucks money away from other important initiatives" watchdog groups have called upon the Auditor General to review the project, as well as the role of its primary partner and tenant, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). A spokesperson explains that the project is being "built on economic quicksand... The government had been duped to put money in, and that has to end. With a funding crisis in education and health care, you just can’t put money into this kind of research.” Continue reading
 

Lakehead University president Fred Gilbert used Lakehead’s Paleo-DNA lab as an example of poor government policies resutling in inappropriate distribution of funding. Gilbert claims that Trent's DNA lab cluster is in fact going to duplicate some of the forensic work they can do up there. He notes that the province put Lakehead at a disadvantage when it threw new capital at Trent's DNA venture when Lakehead's existing lab has been heavily supported by Lakehead, FedNor and the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund. We at OurTrent wonder: "Does the province need two DNA labs duplicating each other's work?" Continue reading
 

Press Release: "Wildlife organizations across Ontario have teamed up with Trent University students and concerned residents to demand an immediate halt to the proposed new DNA research building at Trent University. The organizations are calling on Ontario government’s Auditor General to review the project, as well as the role of its primary partner and tenant, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR)." Continue reading
 

Alarms are being raised that the only avenue for continued funding is directly related to the "rabies industry" and, being unjustifiable, will soon dry up and leave Trent and Peterborough holding the bag for the DNA Cluster. Members of the Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Center are critical of the DNA Cluster project which they say "is presented as one with major economic development potential for Peterborough, [yet] there is no substantiating evidence in the form of a business plan." In addition to other documents the group has produced a short summary of the questionable funding that keeps the DNA Cluster project alive. Continue reading
 

OurTrent researchers were looking for Trent's 2004 Institutional Report to the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI - you know, the folks who gave $3.6 million to Trent for the DNA Cluster project). We thought we could't find the report because of a broken link on the CFI website. What we discovered was Trent did not file a report for 2004 in spite of Prof. Brad White having received more than $3.6M from CFI for the DNA Cluster project! In fact, since July 2000 and the end of 2004 White has received in excess of $4.4M from CFI alone. Would a reasonable individual not wonder why Trent has not submitted a 2004 report? Continue reading
 

It is being alleged that the administration at Simon Fraser was in such a hurry to put the approved candidate into a Royal Bank-sponsored professorship that they ignored their own procedures for approving hiring decisions just to keep the corporate donors happy. Is this a warning the Trent and Peterborough communities need to heed in light of the controversies surrounding the DNA Cluster and accusations of questionable governance processes? Continue reading
 

Peterborough This Week put 10 questions about the controversial DNA Cluster Project to Bonnie Patterson and Denis Ferkany (Dec 29, 2004). Did they provide answers of any substance whatsoever, or just reiterate vacuous promotional hype? Judge for yourself. Continue reading
 

Local consultant Robert Salter (former general manager of Lakefield Research and chief administrative officer of the Otonabee Region Conservation Authority) warns Trent that "After overselling the cluster concept ... not to get swept away in all this promotion". He points out that there is in fact no cluster, and that clusters cannot be forced and that there's no business plan or definable return to Trent or Peterborough. Continue reading
 

In response to a formal request for specific and detailed documentation on the DNA Cluster project (submitted October 19, 2004) Trent university has released some documents. What we see so far does not fill us with confidence and raises a number of extremely alarming questions, particularly regarding the role of the board of governors to oversee the management of Trent University and the use/misuse of public funds. Continue reading
 

Concerned over issues of questionable governance practices surrounding the DNA Cluster project, the Trent Central Student Association (TCSA) asked the Trent Board of Governors on Friday November 26 to delay approval of the project. "The students' primary concerns with the DNA cluster project have to do with the questionable governance processes which have brought it about," says Shantel Ivits, TCSA vice-president of university affairs. "Millions of public dollars were secured from various levels of government without anything as basic and necessary as a business plan." Continue reading
 

Several Trent alumni, who are also Peterborough residents, have raised concerns over the DNA Cluster project to Trent's board of governors. Among their concerns are that; -the project is being rushed to board approval without sufficient consideration, -fear that the project, the way it stands, may be the end of Trent University, -there are many questions which have yet to be answered. They ask the board to "Please tread carefully now in case you are being led to lay waste this great, little university".... Continue reading
 

In giving its approval, if only in principle, Trent's board of governors has continued to ignore the documentation that demonstrating that President Patterson has acted outside normal university policy and practices in relentless pursuit of this project. This article is the first to mention that the board has "discussed" a business plan for the project when the absence of one until now has not, apparently, been of concern. If there is a business plan, then it should be disclosed to the public. Continue reading
 

According to documents released to the Trent Central Student Association by Trent University itself, Bonnie Patterson, President of Trent University, acknowledged that her administration did not follow usual university procedure in the development of the DNA Cluster Project. University documents reveal that Patterson did not follow appropriate university process for tendering and for seeking approvals from the University’s Board of Governors on the selection of architects and preliminary design teams. The project does not even have a business plan. Continue reading
 

Without notice President Bonnie Patterson failed to show up for the Public Forum on the DNA Cluster, even though she the date for the meeting herself some weeks in advance. Apparently Patterson did not apologize to student and community organizers either personally or through her designate, VP Apostle-Clarke. The Trent Arthur reports on the Forum and expands upon the no-show and its implications and offers the comment "Dear President Patterson: that is the most disrespectful act one could do to one’s community. Period." Continue reading
 

Oh, the games people play. When the proponents of Trent’s new DNA Cluster project were finally propped up in front of a crowd October 19 to answer all the simmering questions arising from the controversial and highly secretive plan, the result was a wild and playful romp. President Bonnie Patterson wasn’t there, of course, having cancelled at the last minute despite the fact that she picked the date and time of the event, leaving everyone to wonder what kind of game she was playing. Dave Tought of The Arthur reports on the Public Forum into the DNA Cluster. Continue reading
 

Doug Peacock writes: But combining business and academics is like mixing oil and water. Risking venture capital from the private sector does not mix all that well with academic purposes. Business acumen and intellectual ethics are a difficult fit. A recent public forum at Trent highlighted a number of these issues and president Patterson should heed the warnings that the project has the potential to bring disharmony to Trent unless handled with care. Questions relating to conflicts of interest, funding, governance, the impact on natural areas, sharing of revenue generated by intellectual research, and who will be responsible for a potential deficit require answers. Full disclosure of the concept and an independent, arm's-length audit of costs and benefits needs to occur before any public funds are allocated. The credibility and flexibility of the project must be analyzed within the context of Trent's financial position. Further public forums are essential. Trent can ill afford to repeat past processes used to resolve contentious issues. Continue reading
 

There appears to be a huge rush to obtain taxpayer's money. In order to do so they have to commit creating an operational building from concept to occupation by December 2005. That's about 13 months.Trent has a less than stellar record of managing building projects. Contractors have $9.2 million of liens against Trent and Trent has conceded they are $3.2 over budget on that project (unaudited). Does the DNA Cluster Project appears driven and rushed by the immediate prospect of Trent obtaining grant money? Continue reading
 

Even though the DNA Cluster project is without a business plan and no details have been released to validate claims of the benefits its proponents assert, the Trent board approved the site plan for the project. At the same time they cut Trent's budget by millions. Oh yes, President Bonnie Patterson expressed concerns over the initiative to include universities in the freedom of information act. Why? Continue reading