A bill calling for more transparency in financial reporting from Massachusetts higher education institutions was heard before the Joint Revenue Committee on June 9, according to Director of the Division of Higher Education at Local 615 Wayne Langley in an interview with the Justice.

The bill, which would be applied to public charities including colleges and universities such as Brandeis, would require reporting the names of and amount paid to any employees or consultants who earned over $250,000, as well as those of all service providers that were paid $150,000 or more during the preceding fiscal year.

In addition, public charities would be required to include a brief description of the services provided.

Langley, who is a strong advocate for the bill, said that all colleges, whether for-profit, nonprofit, public or private, rely on taxpayer money and that individuals should have access to information about how institutions use their money.

In an email to the Justice, Senior Vice President of Communications and External Affairs Andrew Gully wrote that the University, along with the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, believes that the legislation is unnecessary.

"Like all other colleges and universities, Brandeis provides significant disclosure annually at both the state and federal levels," wrote Gully. "In fact, last year, this disclosure was expanded by the IRS."

He continued, "There is now a tremendous amount of financial information available to the public, including things like senior administrative compensation levels, conflict of information data and outside vendor contracts, all of which provides a great deal of transparency and safeguards."

Third-party payments to employees would also have to be reported, as well as who the third parties were, how much money they paid and the reasons for each payment.

The bill also states that public charities that owe more than $10 million in investments or property must report what the investments are and how much they are each worth.

The financial report must also include any local, state and federal taxes paid by the charity if it was not tax exempt.

A report would also be filed with any directors or trustees of the public charities, detailing any transactions between the institution and the trustee or his or her family members, anything controlled by the trustee or any employment of the trustee or family members.

Langley said that the bill was one of several that was heard before the committee.

According to Langley, about 15 people testified in favor of the bill while lobbyists on behalf of Massachusetts colleges and universities argued against it.

According to Langley, taxpayers would feel better if they had more access to information about university finances.

"Colleges, as public charities, need to set a standard of openness that's higher than the general society, but they don't," said Langley. "They have a very low standard. We think that's inappropriate."

Langley said that increased disclosure from universities would be beneficial for both taxpayers and the universities themselves.

"Secrecy actually harmed all of these colleges and these investments. As a basic market principle, you want disclosure ... to make a rational judgment," said Langley.

He also stated that hidden financial decisions were harmful to institutions.

"The contention of the bill's sponsors that all universities suffered from poor endowment investment decisions does not apply to [the University]," wrote Gully.

Gully continued to write, "We have followed a conservative investment policy that protected the University during the worst of the economic crisis; today, the endowment is virtually back to the pre-crash high of $712 million in Jun., 2008."

According to Langley, universities are generally opposed to the legislation.

AICUM President Richard Doherty said in an April 23 Boston Globe article that it was "unclear" what problems the bill would solve and would actually harm the universities.

Doherty continued to say that if schools were to disclose more financial information to the public, they would lose their "competitive advantage."

Langley said that the bill is scheduled for another hearing this fall, this time in front of the Judiciary Committee and that he will work on putting forth more disclosures about university finances this month and generating more public interest in the bill.