Florida Senate - 2013                        COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
       Bill No. SB 1276
       
       
       
       
       
       
                                Barcode 823060                          
       
                              LEGISLATIVE ACTION                        
                    Senate             .             House              
                  Comm: RCS            .                                
                  03/18/2013           .                                
                                       .                                
                                       .                                
                                       .                                
       —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————




       —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
       The Committee on Education (Montford) recommended the following:
       
    1         Senate Amendment 
    2  
    3         Delete lines 52 - 74
    4  and insert:
    5  necessity that any portion of a meeting of the board of
    6  directors of a university direct-support organization, or the
    7  executive committee or other committees of the board, at which
    8  the identity of a donor or prospective donor is discussed be
    9  exempt from disclosure. For the benefit of the state
   10  universities, and ultimately all citizens of this state, direct
   11  support organizations serve a vital role in raising charitable
   12  donations from private sources. This undertaking demands great
   13  sensitivity and discretion, as donors and prospective donors
   14  frequently seek anonymity and are concerned about the potential
   15  release of sensitive financial information. If direct-support
   16  organizations cannot protect the anonymity of donors or
   17  prospective donors, prospective donors may decline to
   18  contribute, thus hampering the ability of the direct-support
   19  organization to fully accomplish its mission. The state
   20  recognizes these realities by expressly making most of the
   21  records of direct-support organizations confidential and exempt
   22  from the state’s public records laws, including the identity of
   23  donors or prospective donors. Failure to close meetings at which
   24  the identity of donors or prospective donors is discussed would
   25  significantly compromise the confidentiality of such donors.
   26         (2) The Legislature further finds that it is a public
   27  necessity that any portion of a meeting of the board of
   28  directors