Does Dallas need a new law school in this climate?

[Harry]

Ellen Pryor started work in January as associate dean for academic affairs at the UNT Dallas College of Law, which is scheduled to open in August 2014 in downtown Dallas. The University of North Texas System didn’t have to go far to find Pryor, who had been the Homer R. Mitchell Endowed Professor of Law at SMU’s Dedman School of Law. Given that law school applications are down and grads are having trouble finding work, Points asked Pryor about starting the region’s first public law school during challenging times for legal education.

This must be a busy but exciting time as the law school’s opening nears. Is everything progressing as you would have hoped?

I would say that we feel comfortably challenged in meeting the goals and steps that lie between the present and a successful opening. And, yes, it is exciting as well as a little daunting. The source of both the excitement and the sense of challenge is the realization that we have a chance — and a responsibility — to build something that is different in ways that fit both the goals of UNT Dallas and the needs of the time.

What is the UNT System’s goal for a number of students in the first year and for the first, say, five years?

We think that it's important to offer a part-time evening option as well as a day option, which will be full time. Tentatively, we think that a good size for the first class would be 80 students in the day and 45 to 50 in the evening part-time division. We would keep this size through the near-term future.

Has the UNT System set a tuition rate for first-year students? And how will that number compare to costs at private law school competitors?

We haven't set the tuition yet. We expect it to be at or below the average public law school tuition in the state. Consistent with delivering the type and quality of education we are planning, we want to be as affordable as possible. To this end, we plan to focus scholarship money on financial need rather than, for instance, on increasing LSAT scores for outside ratings such as the U.S. News & World Report.

Is it possible to compare the quality of legal education a student should expect from a public law school to that from a private school?

That's an interesting question. I can't think of any accurate generalization about the nature or quality of the education in public vs. private law schools. Public and private law schools traditionally and currently share many of the same core features, and differences in certain aspects — for instance, extensive clinical education or intensive offerings in trial practice — appear in both.

What have you learned since January that you didn’t expect about the challenge ahead?

I didn't expect that the work of planning a new law school would so perfectly dovetail in time with the "high tide" of the national discussion about legal education reform. In the national conversation about legal education, there are two strands of critique or concern. One is pedagogical — the need for change in the teaching and learning model of law school. The second is cost and debt, especially in a shrinking legal job market.

Both strands are important. The first pre-dated the second, and the second has brought more attention to the first. The combined attention to both of these has never been higher, as reflected, for instance, in recent conferences about the future of legal education and the creation of an American Bar Association Task Force on the Future of Legal Education. I've not been surprised at these two strands of concern; in fact, my interest in joining UNT comes from the unique chance to help create something that responds to these concerns and other goals. But I've been surprised at how closely our work dovetails with the national conversation. For instance, in the same seven weeks during which I've been working here, the ABA task force has met, the ABA Section on Legal Education has met to continue its discussion of accreditation standards and dozens of newspaper articles on legal education have appeared.

Read more: http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20130308-qa-does-dallas-need-a-new-law-school-in-this-climate.ece

[shaft]

The fact that A&M bought Texas Wesleyan defeats any argument on why UNT needed to be in the law school business.

I love our school and all but UNT Law is a Texas Legislature pork barrel.

[Mean Green Matt]

The fact that A&M bought Texas Wesleyan defeats any argument on why UNT needed to be in the law school business.

I love our school and all but UNT Law is a Texas Legislature pork barrel.

Lee Jackson'd?

[wardly]

The fact that A&M bought Texas Wesleyan defeats any argument on why UNT needed to be in the law school business.

I love our school and all but UNT Law is a Texas Legislature pork barrel.

A Big Plus 1 !!

[FirefightnRick]

I don't know why there is ongoing interest on GMG.com about this waste of money and time they call the UNT Dallas College of Law. As far as the University of North Texas in Denton is concerned.....HOME OF THE MEAN GREEN....... it might as well be named the UCLA Dallas College of Law,...or the Duke Dallas College of Law,...or NYU Dallas College of Law. Because it won't serve The University of North Texas.....HOME OF THE MEAN GREEN....... one bit because it's in Dallas, not Denton. It's graduates, who mostly will have come from other schools, won't gain one ounce of care in the world for North Texas and will rarely if EVER donate a dime of any money they may make in the future back to our school. It will only serve as a drain of money and resources from our bank account to go somewhere else.. North Texas has lost a great chance to catch back up with other more grounded universities whose endowements will always dwarf ours by allowing the few goof ball politicians in Dallas and Austin to talk them into this sink hole in Dallas rather than going after Weslyan's and moving it to Denton back when we had the chance.

Rick

Edited March 12, 2013 by FirefightnRick

[GrandGreen]

I don't think the country needs another law school at NT or anywhere else. However, I don't buy the agrument that NT at Denton is losing anything because of it. Unless you count the lack of focus of our Chancellor on things in Dallas county to the detriment of the rest of the system.

Most of the seed money for the NT law school is coming from Dallas and it is not like those funds could be diverted to Denton.

Yes, things that happen in other system schools have little effect on NT. Just like UTA, UTD and the others have little effect on UT Austin.

[Harry]

I'm sorry guys, but it is frustrating when people clearly don't read the article and just use a thread to espouse a hardwired opinion.

The new law school is going about things a different way, shorter graduation time and less debt...etc.. that was the point of posting the article.

[MeanGreenWithEnvy]

I'm of two minds on this topic: first, I don't think anyone, least of all the UNT System, needs to be pouring money into opening a law school. We have a historic glut of lawyers at the present time, and I feel that it is an inefficient allocation of scarce resources to invest in opening a law school. We already have a legal education system on our hands that has drastically overproduced lawyers; even if UNT Dallas Law School does it differently, we will still be spending money to educate people who will graduate into a historic glut. I simply don't think that's a wise investment for the UNT System.

In my opinion, opening a law school is part of the system-wide push to get serious about alumni engagement and about building an alumni base that will support the university with gifts and donations. To really get serious about that, historically, you need to produce a lot potential high wage earners, which means lots of MBAs, M.D.s, and J.D.s. Produce lots of them, hope a handful make it big, and hope that you'll find a Joe Jamail somewhere in the pile. That's the historic model; whether or not the J.D. plank of that model holds true anymore is anyone's guess.

Second, you have hit upon something very important here, Harry. It's not just the law school that is going about doing things in a different way; my impression from here inside UNT in Denton is that we're all starting to re-orient ourselves in a different way. From talking with people higher up the food chain than myself and from hearing and reading lots of inside baseball stuff, I would characterize what's going on here like this: We're not going to compete with the UTs and the A&Ms of the state, but the territory we do want to stake out is that we're a competitive third best option in the state, shoulder-to-shoulder with UH. UH has the Houston metro area; we want to stake out the D/FW metro area. We're not going to hang our hats on National Merit Scholars or how many top tier HS students we recruit; we want to be the school of first choice for the second tier HS students and for the hard cases, first-in-the-family students and single parents and whatnot.

We're not going to try to be something we can't; we're going to try to be the best that we can be, which is to say the dominant public higher education and post-graduate professional education (M.D.s and J.D.s) destination in the Metroplex.

I wasn't on board with this plan when I first got the idea that this was our future. You know something, though? We're in the biggest period of disruption for higher education right now that we've ever faced since the first public universities opened. I think cutting state support for public education, including public higher education, is buying our towns, cities, and state a delayed disaster, but continuing declining support is the reality. Our support levels aren't going to go back up, so we have to figure out how to make the most out of what we have and how to fund what we are currently doing and all we want to do in the future. Being realistic about our future student base, getting them Mean Green'd while they are here, getting them graduated with non-soul-crushing levels of debt and the skills and education they need for good jobs and productive citizenship is the plan. Happy, engaged alumni then give to their alma mater, we lasso enough grant money to keep research hopping, and everyone rides off into the sunset.

At least that's my opinion of where we're headed.

[GrandGreen]

I'm sorry guys, but it is frustrating when people clearly don't read the article and just use a thread to espouse a hardwired opinion.

The new law school is going about things a different way, shorter graduation time and less debt...etc.. that was the point of posting the article.

I have read the article, in the newspaper, and I don't understand your point. An article about a controversial subject is going to get attention. It is like trying to limit a MBB discussion to the players, not the coach; it is a big challenge.

She is in trying and failing IMO to justify why the region needs another law school. How does that not lead to followups about "does the region need another law school" and why is NT involved.

[GL2Greatness]

I don't think the country needs another law school at NT or anywhere else. However, I don't buy the agrument that NT at Denton is losing anything because of it. Unless you count the lack of focus of our Chancellor on things in Dallas county to the detriment of the rest of the system.

Most of the seed money for the NT law school is coming from Dallas and it is not like those funds could be diverted to Denton.

Yes, things that happen in other system schools have little effect on NT. Just like UTA, UTD and the others have little effect on UT Austin.

this is factually 100% incorrect

there is ZERO seed money coming from the city of dallas.....the ONLY money dallas promised was money to renovate the former muny building and even that money was only enough to do outside repairs and a SLIGHT amount of repairs/renovations to the inside to turn the building into a shell for north Texas to then renovate for full use.....and the WORST part of that is dallas has now welched on a large portion of that money and at this time dallas is only willing to do the smallest amount of renovations to the OUTSIDE ONLY to make the building weather proof so that is does not sustain more weather damage because of leaks and other issues.....they are not going to fund anything for exterior beautifucations or renovations and they are going to fund ZERO for anything on the interior

and they are so far behind on the bare min of exterior renovations for bare min weather proofing that the north Texas "system" is having to renovate the upper floors of the UCD building to hold class until dallas completes the exterior work on the muny building and in hopes that dallas will one day come through with the rest of the money the promissed for the further renovations of the muny building

and the renovations for the UCD building are cming 100% at the expense of the north Texas "system"......dallas and The state of Texas have not contributed one single dime to those renovations that are going to cost about 20 million+

I refer you to page 13 and 19

http://untsystem.edu/pdfs/chancellor-presentations/DowntownDallas_06-07.pdf

you can also note that there is no mention of the UCD building for law classes on any of those pages (the "legal") entry is for the system legal services

so in the above article it states dallas will pay HALF of a 30 million dollar renovation

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/print-edition/2010/12/03/unt-law-building-awaiting-funds.html?page=all

now in the above article we see that the "system" is trying to get 46 million to renovate just the interior.....and there are dallas morining news articles out there (from befoe the DMN went paywall) that specifically state that dallas had welched on their 16 million dollar committment to pay for HALF of the renovations and instead was going to do 8 million in weather proofing just so the building does not fall further apart

so in typical north Texas system fashion a projject went from 30 million with half covered by dallas to 32 million with dallas giving 16 million to a request for state funds of 46 million with dallas doing 8 million in turd polishing......so the are 30 million over budget of what they said it would take JUST TO GET CLASSROOM SPACE for an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL......that is 46 million in state tax dollars and state education dollars being FLUSHED DOWN THE DAMN TOILET and we all know what the TWU law school would have cost in the past and DID cost TAMU......and it was NOT 46 million (+8 million of turd olishing and weather proofing)

oh yea and then there is the little fact of using 20 million for planning and construction for TWO FLOORS OF TEMPORARY HOUSING IN THE UCD BUILDING for the damn law school that IS NOT NEEDED

so now we are at 20 million in "SYSTEM" funds for TEMP housing of two floors....NONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN FUNDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS and 100% of which came from "SYSTEM" funds.....in other words DENTON STUDENTS MONEY because there is no magic "system" slush fund and there is no line item budgeting or budget from The State of Texas to cover that 20 million renovation of 2 floors of the UCD building for TEMPORARY housing of an UNNEEDED law school

so now we are at 20 million spent (see wasted) for an unneeded law school of "system" (see Denton students) money and 8 million in turd polishing and weather proofing (half of what dallas promissed) and an attempt to get 46 million from The state of texas for interrior work on the muny building......so we are at 74 million to open an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL and that is not hiring a single warm body or holding a single class or buying a single law library book.....and oh yea there was the 5 million in "start up" funds that was given in 2009 to hire a dean and associate deans (none of which was for building renovations or any such thing)......so now we are at 20 million spent for renovations (funded by the "system").....5 million for "startup" (actually funded by The State of Texas).....and 8 million in turd polishing by dallas (half of what they promised of what was said to be a 30 million dollar total renovation to make the building ready to use)

so we are at 33 million spent and 46 million mre requested or 79 million damn dollars total for an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL.....and the city of dallas has only provided 8 million total of that and that is HALF of what they said they would origonally provide......when an open, operating, and accrediated law school around the way was available for 20-25 million....

oh yea and that leaves out the fact that the UCD building was purchased (against the wishes of the THECB) from the dallas non-profit consortium (mostly DISD and some others I believe) again using "system" (see Denton students) money.....and at the time of that purchase the THECB required that the UCD be open and available to all universities that wished to use it

and then the "system" informed the Denton camous that the rent was going up......even though "system" dollars (ZERO STATE SPECIAL APPROPRIATED FUNDS) were used to buy the building

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2010/apr/05/open-records-request-university-north-texas-batail/

here we see that Dr. B got crosswise with lee the idiot over the UCD lease at a time when the Denton campus was already short on space......lee the idiot is spinning as if there is plenty of space and that he had no knowledge of any type of space or rent issue with TAMU-C or north Texas-Denton

http://www.theeasttexan.com/dallas-a-m-commerce-students-face-potential-displacement-1.2128163#.UT-sPsVbk6g

but here we can CLEARLY see that the north Texas system was telling Denton, TAMU-C and UTA that they were going to start using the lower floors for administration and that those entities could either move, purchase the upper floors and renovate them, or figure something else out.....but of course now the upper floors are being renovated using "system" money for 5-8 years of law classroom space......so really the UCD members are being pushed out PERIOD and lee the jackass is lying about it the whole time

http://www.theeasttexan.com/2.5963/unt-to-purchase-universities-center-1.890187#.UT-sQMVbk6g

and in this article we can see that a "federation" of schools consisting of north Texas, TAMU-C and TWU was suppose to all cooperate on UCD decisions.....but of course we can see that has not happened and we also see where there were 5 universities participating in the UCD at that time and as of now TWU is gone, UTD is gone, Midwestern left before that, and UTA is down to one program offering which means it is north Texas and TAMU-C that is being told to GTFO by jackass lee and really the Denton campus is being told to GTFO

all after the "system" (see Denton students) coughed up money to buy the building when the reality was there was never a need to purchase it other than to set up camp in dallas and start a waste of state education dollars downtown failed redevelopment project

so again there has 100% been a MASSIVE diversion of funds from the Denton campus to dallas......it has happened with the unneeded and ill advised purchase of the UCD......it has happened with the "system" (see Denton students) funding of the renovations for the two upper floors of the UCD for the law school

and HERE is proof

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2012/09/25/unts-downtown-dallas-campus.html

and oh yea that "system" funded 20 million dollar renovation.....it is now 25 million so we have spent 38 million so far on a law school that is not needed and we want 46 million more....so 84 million.....and as of now dallas has paid 8 million to turd polish a building (half of what they promised) that is not even usable and will take 46 million (over 80% more than first estimated at 30 million total) and The State of Texas has so far kicked in 5 million for "start up" cost in 2009

again in the above article it CLEARLY says the system is awaiting funds for capital projects.....and while it refers to the muny building that INCLUDES the (now) 25 million dollar renovation of the upper two floors of the UCD.....because again it is clear as day that the ONLY money ever appropriated for ANYTHING do do with the law school was the 5 million for "operations" in 2009 from The State of Texas......100% of everything else has come from "system" funds (see Denton Students)

you can search and search and search the state appropriations records and you will see ZERO money for UCD renovations ever appropriated and the only law school money you will ever see is 5 million for "opearations" in 2009

so a law school that needed 30 million to get a nice new free standing building is now spending 25 million (with ZERO from dallas and 100% from the "system") to renovate two floors of a building that the "system" (see Denton students) bought when they did not need to for TEMPORARY classroom space

quite the bargin there when an open, operational, staffed and accrediated law school could have been had for those same dollars....lee the idiot is quite the deal maker and bargin shopper!.....one hell of a leader there lee!!!.....84 million spent or requested and not a single faculty or staff member hired, not a single book or journal purchased, not a single tility bill paid and not a single student yet enrolled!!!!......and so far of that 84 million 38 million has been spent, only 5 million has come from the state and only 8 million has come from dallas and that is for a building that may never be used for the law school because it needs 46 million more in renovations that The State of Texas has yet to approve!

and just to prove that the "system" screws Denton students

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2009/06/15/story11.html?page=all

read the above article.....where The State of Texas said NO to building a second building bigger than state formula funding allowed, but the "system" wanted it bigger because "they are running out of space" and "growing so fast

so they used "belt tightening" and made a "calculated risk" and spent the 14.5 million of "system" funds and to quote the idiiot lee directly

At any rate, “the UNT System will tighten its belt and be prepared to cover the cost of this project over its life if that is necessary,” Jackson said.

ok well what happened in 2011....well guess what did NOT happen.....what did NOT happen is The State of Texas did NOT cover the additional cost of that building being larger than needed.....why you ask.....well because that larger building was NEVER NEEDED and so far the "system" is coverign that "calculated risk" of 14.5 million of "system" (see Denton students) money with "belt tightening" (see doing less on the DENTON campus)

and this year in 2013 will The State of Texas cover that additional 14.5 million.....well the magic 8 ball says HELL NO.....why you might ask.....because the "growth" at the dallas campus since it opened goes like this:

2008 to 2012

2,109 2,084 2,032 2,100

so that is correct folks....that "GROWTH" over 4 years of being a free standing university that required that "calculated risk" and "system belt tightening" was a massive NEGATIVE 9 STUDENTS.....NEGATIVE GROWTH.....14.5 mlllion system dollars WASTED and The State of Texas 2 years later saying lee the fing idiot Kiss My Ass we are no longer covering your stupidity so go ahead and dump it on the backs of Denton students

so we have 14.5 million of "calculated risk belt tightening" for a "needed" building in south dallas for a NEGATIVE 9 "growth" of the student body over 4 years and 25 million of UCD upper floor renovations for temporary law school renovations all out of the "system" (see Denton) students budgets and at the same time in lil' ole' Denton Texas on the "flagship" campus of the north Texas "system" the fashion merchandising students are having their fashion collection placed into long term storage and their classes are being moved to temp shacks along with the dance majors classes also going to temp shacks because there is no money for a new building to replace the two buildings being knocked down to make way for the new union building

golly gee lee the fing moron I bet 25 million of "system" funds and 14.5 million of "system funds" could have been combined to build a nice 39.5 million dollar buildng on the Denton cmpus to house those tow MAJOR (soon to be formerly major) programs on the Denton camus instead of WASTED on "temporary" housing for an unneeded law school and on a larger than state approved building in south dallas for -9 student growth over 4 freaking years

so again it is CLEAR AS DAY and has been 100% presented and factually backed up that dallas has come up with next to ZERO money to get the law school going and it has been 100% proven that the "system" has wasted 39.5 million of "system" (see Denton students) dollars that were not directly appropriated by The State ofTexas for larger buildings on south dallas and for TEMPORARY law school classroom space while a FULLY FUNCTIONAL law school was available for 20-25 million across the way and while Denton students have their resources placed into storage and unavailable for use and go to classes in temp shacks littering the middle of campus

and as for the "new paradigm" of the law school

1. it has not been accrediation agency approved for 2 year law degrees

2. there has been no accrediation agency approval for a new paradigm in instruction

3. it is highly doubtful that faculty that are worth a damn will leave a current legal job especially in todays environment to come to a place to teach a "new paradigm" especially when those methods and ideas are not accrediation agency approved

4. unlike in some states (cali specifically) in Texas you need to graduate from an accrediated law school to take the bar so it is not possible in Texas to say screw accrediation we have a new paradigm

5. it is highly unlikely that you will get an entirely new faulty body that all agrees on what the new paragidm is even if you can teach it and have it accrediated....which means you will have to argue for years (with legal faculty no less) to decide what the new paragidm is.....because it is as yet undefined

6. if you want to see an example of taking the "new paradigm" route to education of any type the GREAT news is you only have to look right within the cozy confines of the north Texas system......right at south dallas.....because the have had massive fculty discent and fighting over what was stated and how they were to teach and operate when various faculty members were hired and it has caused a great deal of faculty turnover

here are some articles on it

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20121120-editorial-unique-vision-of-unt-dallas-is-good-for-north-texas.ece

http://chronicle.com/article/U-of-North-Texas-Dallas/133137/

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/print-edition/2012/10/05/unt-dallas-rewriting-curriculum-rules.html?page=all

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20120823-unt-dallas-wants-to-keep-faculty-s-response-to-consultants-recommendations-secret.ece

and of course CLEARLY the "new paradigm" concept (either discussed or actually implemented) is a MASSIVE success.....because enrollment in south dallas is down 9 students over 4 years (nearly 100% of the students are half time or less) and new buildings are being built!!!!!!

SUCCESS!!!! we have done it we have broken the mold.....on how to flush millions and millions of dollars down the toilet on BS that is not needed or that is a flat joke

WELL DONE LEE!!!!

[GrandGreen]

this is factually 100% incorrect

there is ZERO seed money coming from the city of dallas.....the ONLY money dallas promised was money to renovate the former muny building and even that money was only enough to do outside repairs and a SLIGHT amount of repairs/renovations to the inside to turn the building into a shell for north Texas to then renovate for full use.....and the WORST part of that is dallas has now welched on a large portion of that money and at this time dallas is only willing to do the smallest amount of renovations to the OUTSIDE ONLY to make the building weather proof so that is does not sustain more weather damage because of leaks and other issues.....they are not going to fund anything for exterior beautifucations or renovations and they are going to fund ZERO for anything on the interior

and they are so far behind on the bare min of exterior renovations for bare min weather proofing that the north Texas "system" is having to renovate the upper floors of the UCD building to hold class until dallas completes the exterior work on the muny building and in hopes that dallas will one day come through with the rest of the money the promissed for the further renovations of the muny building

and the renovations for the UCD building are cming 100% at the expense of the north Texas "system"......dallas and The state of Texas have not contributed one single dime to those renovations that are going to cost about 20 million+

I refer you to page 13 and 19

http://untsystem.edu/pdfs/chancellor-presentations/DowntownDallas_06-07.pdf

you can also note that there is no mention of the UCD building for law classes on any of those pages (the "legal") entry is for the system legal services

so in the above article it states dallas will pay HALF of a 30 million dollar renovation

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/print-edition/2010/12/03/unt-law-building-awaiting-funds.html?page=all

now in the above article we see that the "system" is trying to get 46 million to renovate just the interior.....and there are dallas morining news articles out there (from befoe the DMN went paywall) that specifically state that dallas had welched on their 16 million dollar committment to pay for HALF of the renovations and instead was going to do 8 million in weather proofing just so the building does not fall further apart

so in typical north Texas system fashion a projject went from 30 million with half covered by dallas to 32 million with dallas giving 16 million to a request for state funds of 46 million with dallas doing 8 million in turd polishing......so the are 30 million over budget of what they said it would take JUST TO GET CLASSROOM SPACE for an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL......that is 46 million in state tax dollars and state education dollars being FLUSHED DOWN THE DAMN TOILET and we all know what the TWU law school would have cost in the past and DID cost TAMU......and it was NOT 46 million (+8 million of turd olishing and weather proofing)

oh yea and then there is the little fact of using 20 million for planning and construction for TWO FLOORS OF TEMPORARY HOUSING IN THE UCD BUILDING for the damn law school that IS NOT NEEDED

so now we are at 20 million in "SYSTEM" funds for TEMP housing of two floors....NONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN FUNDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS and 100% of which came from "SYSTEM" funds.....in other words DENTON STUDENTS MONEY because there is no magic "system" slush fund and there is no line item budgeting or budget from The State of Texas to cover that 20 million renovation of 2 floors of the UCD building for TEMPORARY housing of an UNNEEDED law school

so now we are at 20 million spent (see wasted) for an unneeded law school of "system" (see Denton students) money and 8 million in turd polishing and weather proofing (half of what dallas promissed) and an attempt to get 46 million from The state of texas for interrior work on the muny building......so we are at 74 million to open an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL and that is not hiring a single warm body or holding a single class or buying a single law library book.....and oh yea there was the 5 million in "start up" funds that was given in 2009 to hire a dean and associate deans (none of which was for building renovations or any such thing)......so now we are at 20 million spent for renovations (funded by the "system").....5 million for "startup" (actually funded by The State of Texas).....and 8 million in turd polishing by dallas (half of what they promised of what was said to be a 30 million dollar total renovation to make the building ready to use)

so we are at 33 million spent and 46 million mre requested or 79 million damn dollars total for an UNNEEDED LAW SCHOOL.....and the city of dallas has only provided 8 million total of that and that is HALF of what they said they would origonally provide......when an open, operating, and accrediated law school around the way was available for 20-25 million....

oh yea and that leaves out the fact that the UCD building was purchased (against the wishes of the THECB) from the dallas non-profit consortium (mostly DISD and some others I believe) again using "system" (see Denton students) money.....and at the time of that purchase the THECB required that the UCD be open and available to all universities that wished to use it

and then the "system" informed the Denton camous that the rent was going up......even though "system" dollars (ZERO STATE SPECIAL APPROPRIATED FUNDS) were used to buy the building

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2010/apr/05/open-records-request-university-north-texas-batail/

here we see that Dr. B got crosswise with lee the idiot over the UCD lease at a time when the Denton campus was already short on space......lee the idiot is spinning as if there is plenty of space and that he had no knowledge of any type of space or rent issue with TAMU-C or north I frequently have to go to the doctor to have foreign objects removed from my rectum

http://www.theeasttexan.com/dallas-a-m-commerce-students-face-potential-displacement-1.2128163#.UT-sPsVbk6g

but here we can CLEARLY see that the north Texas system was telling Denton, TAMU-C and UTA that they were going to start using the lower floors for administration and that those entities could either move, purchase the upper floors and renovate them, or figure something else out.....but of course now the upper floors are being renovated using "system" money for 5-8 years of law classroom space......so really the UCD members are being pushed out PERIOD and lee the jackass is lying about it the whole time

http://www.theeasttexan.com/2.5963/unt-to-purchase-universities-center-1.890187#.UT-sQMVbk6g

and in this article we can see that a "federation" of schools consisting of north Texas, TAMU-C and TWU was suppose to all cooperate on UCD decisions.....but of course we can see that has not happened and we also see where there were 5 universities participating in the UCD at that time and as of now TWU is gone, UTD is gone, Midwestern left before that, and UTA is down to one program offering which means it is north Texas and TAMU-C that is being told to GTFO by jackass lee and really the Denton campus is being told to GTFO

all after the "system" (see Denton students) coughed up money to buy the building when the reality was there was never a need to purchase it other than to set up camp in dallas and start a waste of state education dollars downtown failed redevelopment project

so again there has 100% been a MASSIVE diversion of funds from the Denton campus to dallas......it has happened with the unneeded and ill advised purchase of the UCD......it has happened with the "system" (see Denton students) funding of the renovations for the two upper floors of the UCD for the law school

and HERE is proof

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2012/09/25/unts-downtown-dallas-campus.html

and oh yea that "system" funded 20 million dollar renovation.....it is now 25 million so we have spent 38 million so far on a law school that is not needed and we want 46 million more....so 84 million.....and as of now dallas has paid 8 million to turd polish a building (half of what they promised) that is not even usable and will take 46 million (over 80% more than first estimated at 30 million total) and The State of Texas has so far kicked in 5 million for "start up" cost in 2009

again in the above article it CLEARLY says the system is awaiting funds for capital projects.....and while it refers to the muny building that INCLUDES the (now) 25 million dollar renovation of the upper two floors of the UCD.....because again it is clear as day that the ONLY money ever appropriated for ANYTHING do do with the law school was the 5 million for "operations" in 2009 from The State of Texas......100% of everything else has come from "system" funds (see Denton Students)

you can search and search and search the state appropriations records and you will see ZERO money for UCD renovations ever appropriated and the only law school money you will ever see is 5 million for "opearations" in 2009

so a law school that needed 30 million to get a nice new free standing building is now spending 25 million (with ZERO from dallas and 100% from the "system") to renovate two floors of a building that the "system" (see Denton students) bought when they did not need to for TEMPORARY classroom space

quite the bargin there when an open, operational, staffed and accrediated law school could have been had for those same dollars....lee the idiot is quite the deal maker and bargin shopper!.....one hell of a leader there lee!!!.....84 million spent or requested and not a single faculty or staff member hired, not a single book or journal purchased, not a single tility bill paid and not a single student yet enrolled!!!!......and so far of that 84 million 38 million has been spent, only 5 million has come from the state and only 8 million has come from dallas and that is for a building that may never be used for the law school because it needs 46 million more in renovations that The State of Texas has yet to approve!

and just to prove that the "system" screws Denton students

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2009/06/15/story11.html?page=all

read the above article.....where The State of Texas said NO to building a second building bigger than state formula funding allowed, but the "system" wanted it bigger because "they are running out of space" and "growing so fast

so they used "belt tightening" and made a "calculated risk" and spent the 14.5 million of "system" funds and to quote the idiiot lee directly

At any rate, “the UNT System will tighten its belt and be prepared to cover the cost of this project over its life if that is necessary,” Jackson said.

ok well what happened in 2011....well guess what did NOT happen.....what did NOT happen is The State of Texas did NOT cover the additional cost of that building being larger than needed.....why you ask.....well because that larger building was NEVER NEEDED and so far the "system" is coverign that "calculated risk" of 14.5 million of "system" (see Denton students) money with "belt tightening" (see doing less on the DENTON campus)

and this year in 2013 will The State of Texas cover that additional 14.5 million.....well the magic 8 ball says HELL NO.....why you might ask.....because the "growth" at the dallas campus since it opened goes like this:

2008 to 2012

2,109 2,084 2,032 2,100

so that is correct folks....that "GROWTH" over 4 years of being a free standing university that required that "calculated risk" and "system belt tightening" was a massive NEGATIVE 9 STUDENTS.....NEGATIVE GROWTH.....14.5 mlllion system dollars WASTED and The State of Texas 2 years later saying lee the fing idiot Kiss My Ass we are no longer covering your stupidity so go ahead and dump it on the backs of Denton students

so we have 14.5 million of "calculated risk belt tightening" for a "needed" building in south dallas for a NEGATIVE 9 "growth" of the student body over 4 years and 25 million of UCD upper floor renovations for temporary law school renovations all out of the "system" (see Denton) students budgets and at the same time in lil' ole' Denton Texas on the "flagship" campus of the north Texas "system" the fashion merchandising students are having their fashion collection placed into long term storage and their classes are being moved to temp shacks along with the dance majors classes also going to temp shacks because there is no money for a new building to replace the two buildings being knocked down to make way for the new union building

golly gee lee the fing moron I bet 25 million of "system" funds and 14.5 million of "system funds" could have been combined to build a nice 39.5 million dollar buildng on the Denton cmpus to house those tow MAJOR (soon to be formerly major) programs on the Denton camus instead of WASTED on "temporary" housing for an unneeded law school and on a larger than state approved building in south dallas for -9 student growth over 4 freaking years

so again it is CLEAR AS DAY and has been 100% presented and factually backed up that dallas has come up with next to ZERO money to get the law school going and it has been 100% proven that the "system" has wasted 39.5 million of "system" (see Denton students) dollars that were not directly appropriated by The State ofTexas for larger buildings on south dallas and for TEMPORARY law school classroom space while a FULLY FUNCTIONAL law school was available for 20-25 million across the way and while Denton students have their resources placed into storage and unavailable for use and go to classes in temp shacks littering the middle of campus

and as for the "new paradigm" of the law school

1. it has not been accrediation agency approved for 2 year law degrees

2. there has been no accrediation agency approval for a new paradigm in instruction

3. it is highly doubtful that faculty that are worth a damn will leave a current legal job especially in todays environment to come to a place to teach a "new paradigm" especially when those methods and ideas are not accrediation agency approved

4. unlike in some states (cali specifically) in Texas you need to graduate from an accrediated law school to take the bar so it is not possible in Texas to say screw accrediation we have a new paradigm

5. it is highly unlikely that you will get an entirely new faulty body that all agrees on what the new paragidm is even if you can teach it and have it accrediated....which means you will have to argue for years (with legal faculty no less) to decide what the new paragidm is.....because it is as yet undefined

6. if you want to see an example of taking the "new paradigm" route to education of any type the GREAT news is you only have to look right within the cozy confines of the north Texas system......right at south dallas.....because the have had massive fculty discent and fighting over what was stated and how they were to teach and operate when various faculty members were hired and it has caused a great deal of faculty turnover

here are some articles on it

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20121120-editorial-unique-vision-of-unt-dallas-is-good-for-north-texas.ece

http://chronicle.com/article/U-of-North-Texas-Dallas/133137/

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/print-edition/2012/10/05/unt-dallas-rewriting-curriculum-rules.html?page=all

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20120823-unt-dallas-wants-to-keep-faculty-s-response-to-consultants-recommendations-secret.ece

and of course CLEARLY the "new paradigm" concept (either discussed or actually implemented) is a MASSIVE success.....because enrollment in south dallas is down 9 students over 4 years (nearly 100% of the students are half time or less) and new buildings are being built!!!!!!

SUCCESS!!!! we have done it we have broken the mold.....on how to flush millions and millions of dollars down the toilet on BS that is not needed or that is a flat joke

WELL DONE LEE!!!!

Well I read as far as I am totally incorrect and that will have to do.

Edited March 13, 2013 by GrandGreen

[FirefightnRick]

I read the article also, and the first thing that jumped out at me when I did was this qoute in the first paragraph.

Given that law school applications are down and grads are having trouble finding work

Yeah, grads are having a hard time finding jobs.....except for the grads who come from wealth, prestige and endless connections. Those grads seem to always have a job waiting for them. It's rarely what you know, but WHO you know. But the problem for the UNT Dallas campus is THOSE grads rarely attend the "AFFORDABLE" Law School down the street.

With that said, for once, I gotta agree with Check-Facts here. The answer to the original question is: NO!!!!

Rick

Edited March 13, 2013 by FirefightnRick

[MeanGreenTexan]

So are you guys saying that UNT should scrap the law school into which millions of dollars have already been invested?

Also, lawyers tend to make alot of money (when they are hired) and would be a nice pool of money to approach for future donations.

So, to be clear, Texas A&M buys Texas Wesleyan's Law school, and now it's a horrible idea for UNT to open a law school?

[GrayEagle]

I'm of two minds on this topic: first, I don't think anyone, least of all the UNT System, needs to be pouring money into opening a law school. We have a historic glut of lawyers at the present time, and I feel that it is an inefficient allocation of scarce resources to invest in opening a law school. We already have a legal education system on our hands that has drastically overproduced lawyers; even if UNT Dallas Law School does it differently, we will still be spending money to educate people who will graduate into a historic glut. I simply don't think that's a wise investment for the UNT System.

In my opinion, opening a law school is part of the system-wide push to get serious about alumni engagement and about building an alumni base that will support the university with gifts and donations. To really get serious about that, historically, you need to produce a lot potential high wage earners, which means lots of MBAs, M.D.s, and J.D.s. Produce lots of them, hope a handful make it big, and hope that you'll find a Joe Jamail somewhere in the pile. That's the historic model; whether or not the J.D. plank of that model holds true anymore is anyone's guess.

Second, you have hit upon something very important here, Harry. It's not just the law school that is going about doing things in a different way; my impression from here inside UNT in Denton is that we're all starting to re-orient ourselves in a different way. From talking with people higher up the food chain than myself and from hearing and reading lots of inside baseball stuff, I would characterize what's going on here like this: We're not going to compete with the UTs and the A&Ms of the state, but the territory we do want to stake out is that we're a competitive third best option in the state, shoulder-to-shoulder with UH. UH has the Houston metro area; we want to stake out the D/FW metro area. We're not going to hang our hats on National Merit Scholars or how many top tier HS students we recruit; we want to be the school of first choice for the second tier HS students and for the hard cases, first-in-the-family students and single parents and whatnot.

We're not going to try to be something we can't; we're going to try to be the best that we can be, which is to say the dominant public higher education and post-graduate professional education (M.D.s and J.D.s) destination in the Metroplex.

I wasn't on board with this plan when I first got the idea that this was our future. You know something, though? We're in the biggest period of disruption for higher education right now that we've ever faced since the first public universities opened. I think cutting state support for public education, including public higher education, is buying our towns, cities, and state a delayed disaster, but continuing declining support is the reality. Our support levels aren't going to go back up, so we have to figure out how to make the most out of what we have and how to fund what we are currently doing and all we want to do in the future. Being realistic about our future student base, getting them Mean Green'd while they are here, getting them graduated with non-soul-crushing levels of debt and the skills and education they need for good jobs and productive citizenship is the plan. Happy, engaged alumni then give to their alma mater, we lasso enough grant money to keep research hopping, and everyone rides off into the sunset.

At least that's my opinion of where we're headed.

I also have an ambivalence toward whether we should have a law school or not. I'll let the people with a lot more information than I (i.e. BOR) make that decision. One factor that is unknown to me is how deep we are committed financially to the completion of this project? How much has already been spent and are certain factions helping to underwrite these costs?

I do believe that this law school will be like no other and will more directly the challenges of today. That alone, could be an attraction. It could also make law school affordable for many who could not otherwise afford to enter that career. Those two factors could make the UNT College of Law very popular to the deprivation of "old school" institutions.

None of us want a cheap, me-too, institution but I don't see that in this law school. For my money, the Board of Regents will decide this issue with all of the facts that they have at hand.