|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Stem Cell Agency Draws Ire Over Naming Plan NewsMax.com Wires SAN FRANCISCO -- What's in a name? Well, to the cash-strapped stem cell agency that Californians created with a 2004 ballot initiative, there could be tens of millions of dollars worth of contributions at stake. The board at the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine is considering a proposal to swap naming rights to research programs and office space in exchange for sizable donations. Officials hope deep-pocketed donors will be eager to attach their names to conference rooms, grants and most anything else related to stem cell research. One idea is to name "fellowship" programs after donors who contribute at least $10 million each. "No naming will be considered without a gift of substantial value," the proposed policy states. Officials compare the plan to public universities' practice of naming buildings, professorships and other programs after donors. Others see it more akin to municipalities selling stadium naming rights to corporations. Whatever the analogy, there's little precedent for a California agency raising money in this way, and the plan has raised concern among the stem cell agency's critics. Story Continues Below
"If they aren't careful, they are going to be seen as selling out to biotech," said John Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. The proposal, which was approved unanimously late Thursday with little debate by a subcommittee of the board that oversees the agency, would allow corporations to get in on the deal so long as less than 5 percent of the participating company's annual budget is dedicated to stem cell research. The full 29-member board is expected to adopt the scheme at its meeting in Los Angeles next Thursday. The plan would bar donors from applying to the agency for grants - a provision that backers say would eliminate conflicts of interest. But Jesse Reynolds, a longtime agency critic at the Center for Genetics and Society in Oakland, said even a grants ban wouldn't completely guard against conflicts. He said big donors could still influence how grants are awarded, perhaps pressuring research directed at diseases afflicting family members. "The potential for conflicts is there," Reynolds said. Proposition 71, approved by 59 percent of the electorate in 2004 to create the stem cell agency, authorized it to borrow $3 billion to fund about $300 million in stem cell grants annually for 10 years. It explicitly allows the agency to accept outside contributions. Sound-technology pioneer Ray Dolby and his wife have contributed $5 million, which has been used to hire staff and pay office bills because lawsuits have cut off its main funding source. In those cases, lawyers with connections to religious organizations that oppose stem cell research are challenging the agency's legality and its right to borrow the $3 billion, which will cost taxpayers $6 billion in principal and interest if paid back over 30 years. Until that litigation is resolved, the agency is barred from borrowing money, which prevents it from funding grants. A superior court judge in Hayward is expected to soon rule on the lawsuits after a one-week, non-jury trial that concluded March 15. Even if the judge rules in the agency's favor, it won't be able to borrow money until the expected appeals are exhausted sometime next year. Robert Klein, chairman of the board that oversees the agency, said he has secured $50 million in loans from philanthropic organizations and wealthy donors that will be repaid once the agency is able to sell its $3 billion in bonds. Klein, who has declined to identify the donors, said the loans could be converted into contributions and agency programs named after the donors.
© 2006 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Editor's note: Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2010 NewsMax.Com |