ISU representatives are hoping for a quick resolution to a lawsuit regarding university records.

A ruling by the Iowa Supreme Court last month stated that donation records from the ISU Foundation are public, although an agreement has not been met about how far the open-records requirement reaches.

The ruling came after a lawsuit involving the handling of an estate given to the university by Kiley and Marie Powers.

Controversy developed after the Foundation sold the Powers’ estate against the wishes of Marie Powers, which launched university and community officials into a two-year battle for more stringent oversight of the ISU Foundation.

Although the court ruling established that the Foundation is subject to Iowa’s open-records laws, in its decision, the Supreme Court did not determine which of the Foundation’s records are confidential and which are open for review.

It stated the Story County District Court must make that decision.

Foundation officials said they are hopeful courts will no longer be involved. The litigation process appears to be on hold as both parties hope to find a workable solution to the open-records problem without returning to court. McCormick said discussions with opposing counsel, led by former ISU employee Mark Gannon and retired Des Moines businessman Arlen Nichols, are in the preliminary stages.

“We are attempting to determine what the plaintiffs believe under the decisions,” he said. “The Foundation is currently working on a revision of its open-record policy to work with the scope of the opinion. We will look at the request and produce documents that are consistent with the request and the Foundation’s open records policy. Whether there is any obstacle or not depends on the nature of the specific request.”

McCormick said it is possible that exceptions in Iowa’s open-records laws, like the privacy of trade secrets or confidential information, might apply to the ISU Foundation.

He said, however, that open-records laws apply only to the “lawful custodian” of the Foundation’s records.

“The university is the lawful custodian of the [Foundation] records, and it would be up to them to determine whether exemptions from open-records laws were applicable in each case,” he said.

Kathleen Richardson, executive secretary for the Iowa Freedom of Information Council, said she was unsure of how the district court would interpret Iowa’s open-records laws if an agreement is not possible without court intervention.

Richardson said she hopes the Foundation will take a more open approach to releasing information.

Jason Menke, assistant director of communications for the Foundation, said there would be a proposal to expand the Foundation’s open-records provisions sometime next month, at which time there will be a recommendation about which records will be publicly available.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Thomas Hanson, was not available for comment.