You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 1:22 p.m.

Dave Brandon on Big House Big Heart: U-M would rather organize its own charity run

By Kellie Woodhouse


Dave Brandon

Lon Horwedel |

Related Article: Canceled: Big House Big Heart race forced out of Michigan Stadium

Related article: Big House Big Heart coordinator 'baffled' by why race can't finish in Michigan Stadium

University of Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon told 1290 WLBY radio host Lucy Ann Lance Wednesday morning that he supports hosting a fundraising race that ends at Michigan Stadium, but says he no longer wants to partner with Champions for Charity.


Participants running during the 2012 Big House Big Heart race.

Joseph Tobianski I

For six years Champions for Charity organized the Big House Big Heart run, which ended in the stadium. On Tuesday Champions for Charity announced the 2013 race would be canceled because the U-M athletic department no longer wanted to be involved.

"As it relates to putting our name on it and having our facility be used, we'd rather go in a different direction and that's for reasons that we all feel are important and valid and the community should know we are going to continue to support charitable causes," Brandon offered, also saying: "We think a race that ends in the Big House is a good idea."

In his interview with Lance, Brandon said the university would rather organize a charity run through its own channels. He said when partnering with a charitable organization, the athletic department looks at an organizations's management structure, financial transparency, overhead and ability to work with the department well.

"If we can get more money routed to the charities because there isn't a profit motive, we're always going to prefer to go that route," he said. "Since we are in the business of athletics we know how to put on athletic events, because that's what we do. So if we can come up with ideas and ways that we can put on events and more net dollars and proceeds go to the charities that are a part of it, then we think that's better for everybody involved."

In an interview with Tuesday, Champions for Charity director Andrea Highfield said she told athletic department administrators they could absorb the event as their own, but they declined.

"I even offered to say 'Hey does U-M athletics want Big House Big Heart, you can have it. We'll do all the work and you can have the profit,' " she said. "It's not for any financial gain or profit at all, it's a service on our part."

Listen to the full Dave Brandon interview.

Kellie Woodhouse covers higher education for Reach her at or 734-623-4602 and follow her on twitter.


Bill B

Fri, Dec 14, 2012 : 1:16 a.m.

Some of this may be explained by a quick visit to the State of Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulation, Corporation and Securities Bureau. There are two Champions for Charity. There is the Champions for Charity Foundation, Inc. set up in Jan 2008 by a person well known in the local running community for strictly non profit purposes. There is Champions for Charity, LLC set up in July 2009 as a for profit LL corporation. So since the LLC apparently didn't exist when the first BHBH run took place, the UM had entered into an agreement with a non profit foundation. At some point the for profit corporation with the same name took over the race. Since the race organizers have used the two names imprecisely, it is difficult in retrospect to know when exactly that switch took place. But in any event the rules were changed on the UM and they reasonably decided they no longer wanted to be part of the new arrangement. Frankly I think any for profit corporation with the name 'charity' as part of its name has an extra responsibility to be ethical and transparent in its dealings. That the for profit has a name the same as a previously well respected non profit makes this responsibility that much greater. I'm afraid Champions for Charity, LLC has fallen short in that regard.


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 4:28 a.m.

Just a day or two ago the event was "a very challenging event . . . to fit into our stadium." Now it isn't? I have no idea about Champions for Charity's books, but it seems to me that if the University had concerns they could have either set guidelines such as a certain percentage going to charity or taken up the offer of absorbing the race. Cancelling the race abruptly with a rationale that is walked back in 2 days makes no sense.


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 3:35 a.m.

OH! Well that makes sense! "The money isn't going where we want it to" does sound like waaaay more of an honest answer than the ones previously given.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 8:57 p.m.

Actually the entry fee for this event is on the low side for such events. Most of the fee is eaten up by timer equipment rental and facility costs. Also races usually include a t shirt or a performance shirt. So I can see why they only donated 25% of the run fee, but on the other hand they donate 91% of the money collected by donations to the race. I haven't run this race but I have run in other events organized by CFC. They seem to be on the up and up. I'd like to compare the books on this event to the Dexter to AA run or the Brooksie Way.

Debbie Green

Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 8:52 p.m.

Very poorly handled!!!! This race has been going on for 6 years. Why does the rug have to be pulled out 3 months before the next race?! At this point, Brandon should have let the race happen and then started negotiations for UM to take it over in 2014. There isn't time for the UM to figure out how to put it back together even for a fall race. This is the biggest fund raiser for many charities, not mine, sadly, but I get it. Most small charities like mine rely on events like these where we only have to supply volunteers to participate and not set up the entire event. The only other option for us is charity poker. We pulled out of that this year for political reasons. I don't know what the issue is between CFC and the UM, but was extremely pleased with CFC the two times we participated as a charity. The blow to local charities will be tremendous for 2013!! Please Mr. Brandon, can't you reconsider for the spring while you figure out how to have the UM put it on?

Rick Markham

Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 9:19 a.m.

You are 100% correct. They should have let the 2013 event go on as planned. It will be difficult for UM to get another run setup for this year - especially with all the road closures needed.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 6:35 p.m.

With fear and trepidation, I wish to say that I hope the event is cancelled. It made the traffic miserable. Many streets were blocked off and you did not know it was until you drove down the given street. I was involved in an accident that morning when an out of towner tried to get around me to exit the blocked street and did not have enough room. The traffic problems from blocked streets for several hours are too much for this kind of event in Ann Arbor.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 4:03 p.m.

In the interest of clarity, integrity, transparency and answerability to the public (UM is a public institution), can someone tell me what is the truth?


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 2:26 a.m.

Not until Champions for Charity is willing to publicly post their financials (and not just BHBH financials)...


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 3:24 p.m.

According to the coordinator of the event, the run is not for financial gain or profit--so still do not understand the UM's position. Still feel Big M, Little Heart. Sorry.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:48 p.m.

For more more information, see the Michigan Daily stories:

Steven Murphy

Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 1:41 p.m.

With all the sweet dough David Brandon is kicking up for the UofM, he might well go down as the greatest Wolverine in history at the rate he's going!

Ren Farley

Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:38 p.m.

Champions for Charity is a for-profit organization. A quite small fraction of a runner entry fee, presumably, goes to charity. The U of M Athletic Department could organize a run and offer slightly lower entry fees. However, organizing a run through city street with several thousand participants is quite a large and costly endeavor. Charities are unlikely to get a great deal of cash from a running event.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 1:47 a.m.

Remember when you could just walk into Michigan Stadium at any time and the gates were always unlocked?


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 12:38 a.m.

Looks like the national news media is returning the favor of pasting links.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 1:29 a.m.

Too bad it's Fox News though...


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 12:30 a.m.

This is reminiscent of the Don Canham era. Although he had been the track coach, he put a fence around the UM track and banned local runners from using it.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:29 a.m.

Local runners can use the track except 9-11 AM and 1-7 PM weekdays. There is a fence around the track but it has 4 gates.

Joe Mize

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 11:40 p.m.

My disappointment will end when I see the replacement event that Mr. Brandon develops for BRAND Michigan. No one comes off looking good on this one. To bad for all parties involved.

Joe Mize

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 11:38 p.m.

It is just too bad :-(. I am very disappointed still with the cancellation and, very disappointed in the Michigan "BRAND" at this time.

Cindy Grier

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 11:25 p.m.

Colleges are being told not to do charity work if they want to be funded by the government. All charities are under attack as the government wants you to have to give them your money and they will provide for the citizens.

Charley Sullivan

Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 4:52 a.m.

Say what??? That's just plain delusional. Anything from a reputable source to back up this craziness?


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:27 a.m.

The election is over.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 11:17 p.m.

But remember - if the runners need water during the UM-sponsored race, it will be $6 a bottle.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10:54 p.m.

I'll believe it only when I see it. Hopefully it's for a good cause and not just for padding some bigwig U of M'ers wallets.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10:25 p.m.

For any replacement event to be inclusive and a community event, the one mile race needs to be included, both for runners/walkers and for participants needing assistance.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:55 p.m.

This is just spin.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:35 p.m.

Now hold on. Yesterday Associate AD Ablauf said the run had become "a very challenging event ... to fit into our stadium." Now today Brandon said, "We think a race that ends in the Big House is a good idea." Really? You people are buying this?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:29 p.m.

Perhaps Brandon will create an event to replace the BHBH event to support the same charities plus more that would have been supported by BHBH. This would certainly be a step in the right direction toward making a positive statement about how much the U of M Athletic Department supports charities.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:25 p.m.

Kudos to LAL for a timely radio interview and to DB for doing this. Lets get this out in the open and discuss as the caring community that we are.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:23 p.m.

Let's see if Brandon will organize a race himself. He's on public record so hopefully he will be held to his word. I think most folks don't care who organizes the race...they just want to finish in the Big House and help some charities in the process.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 1:40 a.m.

For the most part I think you're right, but I also think people want to know their money is going to an actual charity. The ratio at CFC is too low! I'm quite please how people are (for the most part) reading this and reacting. CFC was in this for the money. I really think this blew up in their face. UM attempted with their initial response to let CFC off the hook nicely. CFC goes public attempting to embarrass the University and ends up getting "exposed" as a for profit organization that donates only 25% of proceeds. Michigan via Dave Brandon responds with the truth. BOOM! CFC website down hmmmm nice timing for "maintenance"

Joe Mize

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 11:35 p.m.

you are right on.

Ron Granger

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:04 p.m.

The "heart" business is big business. And umich hospitals do a lot of "heart" business. I'd hate to think this is just an attempt to co-opt this existing charity's event and re-brand it to promote those substantial commercial interests.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:58 p.m.

It's not the entry fee money that the charities are going to miss; it's the donations that runners elicited from friends and family. Those donations went 91% (I believe, someone correct me if this is wrong) to the charities the donors specified.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:48 p.m.

"...He said when partnering with a charitable organization, the athletic department looks at an organizations's management structure, FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY, overhead..." Financial transparency is probably the red flag.

Ron Granger

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:47 p.m.

Will someone please post a link to the Champions for Charity audit results? What were the numbers on their last event? Also, does anyone have audit results for comparable athletic department charity events?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10:43 p.m.

Chris, a2comments is referring to the CFC website, which has been down most of the day.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10:27 p.m.

The PDF loads for me. Holler on this thread it won't load for you and you would like a copy.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:11 p.m.

Their website is down for maintenance....


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:06 p.m.

Brandon will post the audit results for an Athletic Department charity event when they determine the value of Denard sitting down for 15 minutes with a sick kid at Mott. But is $17.2 million in direct financial aid to students considered charity? Champions for Charity, that's a different story. No telling what kind of company vehicles their employees drive.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:44 p.m.

Ironic that after 6 years of allowing the charity to rent the stadium, the year they put in new turf at the Big House they uped the fee for the run to use the stadium and then cancelled it all together. UofM is a company just like anything else, and of course theyd rather put on their own run and events because that would end up making them more. Way to make your city disappointed in you Michigan.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 10:53 a.m.

At what point did you wake up to UM not caring about Ann Arbor?? They do not and have not since the 1800's...


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:17 p.m.

What does President Coleman have to say about this? Or does she not get a say since her salary is lower than DB's?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:06 p.m.

It's all about control and the Athletic Department bottom line. Brandon has little charitble interest beyond improving the cashflow for the department. As lord on high of the U of M athletic Universe he seeks to create total control with his relentless drive for profitabilityand not let mere community commonweal. Seems like he's writing himslef into the Chrismas Carol.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:43 p.m.

There is too much distrust for Dave Brandon and it is shameful. Some people simply have an all of nothing attitude. U of M athletics and Mott go back more than 20 years. There's more to it than just that.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:25 p.m.

Actually Dave Brandon has made a huge push to get the department more involved in charities. He started a competition amongst the teams to see who could put in the most community service hours, and he's involved in several fundraisers that the student athletes do for Mott Children's hospital.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:57 p.m.

The Big House is a brand that Brandon wants to manage with pure Michigan hands. This whole story is sordid and it's just unfortunate that while it's in their right to severe relationships with a charity, I think they went about it in a rude manner. Let's see what this replacement event looks like and the entry fees, and how the funds are distributed to the charities. If there's an improvement, then we'll just move on from this.


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 2:20 a.m.

They didn't sever a relationship with a charity, they severed the relationship with a *business*, a race management company that happens to send part of entry fees to chairities.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:44 p.m.

let's think about this. Who benefited the most from BHBH? Who is in a lot of trouble in the University? Neurology Department


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:43 p.m.

I will at least give Dave Brandon credit for going on the local airways and explain why the BHBH event was cancelled. Sounds like the Athletic Department would rather deal with or have control over where the profits of the entry fees go. It all simply means that the charities would get a much bigger slice of the pie. Likewise, the entry fees might even be a little lower if the Athletic Department handles this and partners with say, the Ann Arbor Track Club. There could be something in the works for late 2013 and it would be better to return the event in during the fall months if we're lucky.


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 4:32 a.m.

It would have been more effective had the real reasons been stated at the beginning. Instead it seems like a new rationale offered because the original rationale didn't work.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8 p.m.

Yeah, except that, at least per the quotes provided in this article, he didn't explain ANYTHING. What does "As it relates to putting our name on it and having our facility be used, we'd rather go in a different direction and that's for reasons that we all feel are important and valid and the community should know we are going to continue to support charitable causes," mean to you, exactly? To me, it means, "I swear we have good reasons for doing this but I don't feel like telling you."


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:43 p.m.

This is the usual UM schtick. I don't think they care as much about how an organization uses the money they raise as they do about how much UM will benefit - be it financially or in a promotional sense. Honestly, I think UM saw that this was a profitable and popular event and instead of feeling good about being a part of that they want to recreate it as their own. If they did not like the way the funds were used, they should have looked into that before they even allowed the event to take place at the stadium. Like I said, though, that was not the issue. The issue has more to do with power and control - making sure the big blue is the big boss in this town.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:40 p.m.

Hmm, when he talks about profit making is talking out of both sides of his mouth? Isn't this the same university athletic administration that fought to limit the amount of wheelchair accesible areas in the Big House because it would diminsh their return to give up that much space?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:38 p.m.

What if David Brandon held a run and no one showed up?


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 5:46 p.m.

But, Halter, if twice the number of runners show up, wouldn't that make a mockery of one of the reasons for cancelling the event - it was getting too large and was taxing the facilities? Who will handle concessions? UM's contracted caterer, with the usual prices and exclusivity?


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 10:51 a.m.

Not would outnumber the current run twofold...UM might own 23% of Ann Arbor, but they own 70% of the people who live here..


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 5:53 a.m.

You would want that?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:18 p.m.

Champions For Charity is not a charity, but is instead just a small business. While it has produced a popular, and on the face of it, successful event that provides a platform for a number of charities to raise money, it has also engendered lots of ill will in the community with the first Ann Arbor Marathon last year. Ask the organizers of the Dexter-Ann Arbor Run how they felt about CFC's approach. CFC is organizing the marathon again (ostensibly benefiting the AAPS). Should the University opt to create its own event tied to Michigan Stadium, and which provides a platform for charities to fundraise, all the better.

Rick Stevens

Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 5:22 p.m.

And CFC continues to do a half marathon ONE WEEK after the Dexter-Ann Arbor Half Marathon (started in 1973). It's a mystery to me (aside I guess from the purely economic reasons) why they have a half. You'd think they have their hands full (based on last year's race) with the marathon and other races and would want to avoid more hassles. My only conclusion is that they hope to eventually push the Dexter-Ann Arbor race out of the way so they have the earlier date and the only local half.


Fri, Dec 7, 2012 : 2:18 a.m.

BHBH always seemed well run, but the most recent CFC event we participated in was a mess (the Turkey Trot out at Hudson Mills). They play up the charity angle, but only a tiny % of the registration fees go to the charities.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:36 p.m.

You make a very good point about the Ann Arbor Track Club disassociating with CFC per Dexter to Ann Arbor Run...after only one year of partnership. I wish others would stop taking the BHBH cancellation personally and begin to connect some of the dots.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:52 p.m.

This doesn't make any sense and isn't what was said yesterday. If you don't want to do business with Champions for Charity just do the adult thing and admit it. Don't try and take the event from them. That's just in bad form. Especially since Champions for Charity has stated U of M declined the opportunity to host the event themselves. Now you want it? Sorry aren't going to save any face here. Also, it needs to be pointed out that just because an agency isn't a "non profit" doesn't really mean anything. There are plenty of 501c3 not for profit agencies that are very much for profit organizations. For example, U of M holds a 501c3 status. All a "non profit" status really means is a reduced tax responsibility.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10:04 p.m.

The term "non profit" is a bit misleading. To be considered a "non profit" a 501c3 tax status has to be obtained. This status can be applied for, and granted to, any business. This is why BCBS and U of M can obtain 501c3 status and accurately (albeit technically) describe the organization as a "non profit." It's obvious both BCBS and U of M are "for profit" organizations. Back to my original point, a 501c3 status is for tax purposes only. It's only relevant to taxes. Historically "non profits" have been small grassroots style agencies providing local services to surrounding areas. There are huge non profit organizations (sometimes called "Corporate Non Profit") agencies like the United Way, who disperse a tremendous amount of money directly to the small agencies providing the actual services to a community. This funding is the direct result of national campaigns. Relay for Life is a good example. The smaller grassroots agencies rely on direct appeals to members of the communities they are serving. As I'm sure you can imagine, the monetary amounts are very different. This is where Champions for Charity comes in, as a fundraising agency raising money for (I assume) charities in our community. No where is it written that Champions of Charity has to hold a 501c3 status to do this.

Ron Granger

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:43 p.m.

And yet somehow CEO Dan Loepp of non-profit Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan earned $3.27 million in 2011. That's non-profit?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:22 p.m.

Actually CLX, if you read my comment clearly I'm not making reference to "charities" only the 501c3 tax status which is required to be a "non profit" organization. As I said, U of M has a 501c3 status but clearly is not a charity.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:17 p.m.

No, dancing, that's not what being a non-profit means. A non-profit cycles its profits back into its organization; a for-profit is allowed to take those profits and disburse them to individuals like stockholders. Non-profit charities, at least the good ones, are transparent about their overhead expenses. For-profit companies have no such responsibility, and have a number of options to move around profits and hide where they are going.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:52 p.m.

Champions for Charity must've wanted a night game.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:51 p.m.

Whatever the reason for backing out, U of M needs to know that nonprofits already have their budgets in place and were counting on BHBH to play a part in funding their work for the year. Canceling this major fundraiser with 4 months notice is something I would have thought beneath the U. Would very much like to see an announcement of this new charity event ASAP.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:19 p.m.

Perhaps Champions for Charity should not have represented the race as a done deal if it was not. Champions should have had a contract in place so that it could insure groups like yours that the event would happen, and groups dealing with Champions should have known to ask for such reassurances. That is one of the many reasons that dealing with Champions was not a consideration for several groups.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:45 p.m.

Uh, OK. So, when is the first U of M-sponsored "Big House" run expected to be held?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:59 p.m.

Yes, that is the question. Furthermore, will 100% of the proceeds go directly to the charities?


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.

This was poorly handled by Brandon and the athletic department. Whether or not fans of the race agree, cutting ties with Champions For Charity because they're not a non-profit organization is a legitimate reason for no longer backing this race. Unfortunately, this is not the reason Dave Brandon and Dave Ablauf chose to float to the media, at least initially. Had they done a better job of explaining this situation from the outset, they might have avoided sparking the outrage that inevitably followed the announcement.

Macabre Sunset

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:03 p.m.

Dave didn't have a chance. This blog was so anxious to get out the lynch mob that no one had time to prepare a response. And when you're representing a community like the U, you need time to respond. I think this was an example of yellow journalism, which is making a comeback as the profit model for newspapers was eliminated.

Soulful Adrenaline

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:59 p.m.

Oh yeah!

L. C. Burgundy

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:42 p.m.

Less than 25% of the entry fee going to the charities for an erstwhile charitable event is pretty darn lousy. I'm not surprised UofM was not interested in partnering or playing host to the event anymore. I think they wanted to back out quietly so as to not embarrass CFC, but they went and made a big deal about it so DB had to say more.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:31 a.m.

Calmdown: it was from one of the previous articles.


Thu, Dec 6, 2012 : 2:28 a.m.

I concur with L. C. Burgundy's post, particularly the final sentence.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 10 p.m.

That's because Michigan Charged BHBH $7,000-16,000 to hold the event at the Big House (Depending on the year). Plus add in all the other expenses associated with a race. If they would just walk around with cans or bells asking for money I guarantee they would not come close to the profit they make with the race. People want something for their charitable donations, especially this year since charitable donations ar no longer tax deductible!


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:29 p.m.

Not true, Macabre. The Associate AD indicated this: "That partnership, Ablauf said, has become the department's priority. Ablauf said the run had become "a very challenging event ... to fit into our stadium." A challenging event to fit into the stadium? But yet Michigan could fit the same type of event into it if they ran it themselves? Complete double-speak.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:08 p.m.

Where does this fraction of 25% come from? I don't see it in the article above.

Macabre Sunset

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 9:01 p.m.

That's almost telemarketer-level lousy when it comes to charity. Here's a valuable tip for those of us who like to give to the major charities: do not give when they call you. That's usually a subcontractor from a telemarketing company that takes up to 85% off the top for its own profit. Instead, say, "please take me off your call list" and take the time to donate on your own, directly to the charity (through calling or the mail, or through the internet). That way, a much higher percentage reaches the charity.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:14 p.m.

Wow -- less than 25% to the charities. Is that number from CFC's financial reports?

Ghost of Tom Joad

Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 7:09 p.m.

I think you hit the nail on the head.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:38 p.m.

Something is not being communicated to the public here. Brandon's comments are not clear to say the least: "As it relates to putting our name on it and having our facility be used, we'd rather go in a different direction and that's for reasons that we all feel are important and valid and the community should know we are going to continue to support charitable causes." Huh? Let's have some specifics, Dave. What does this mean? "That's for reasons that we all feel are important and valid....." Just what are these reasons, Dave? Not specified. UM probably would not get a bug enough cut of the $$, or wants to "control" it, though the sponsor offered to give UM the race. Brandon only offered some bureaucratic fluff and no specific reasons for not wanting to absorb this race. We are not being told everything here.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 8:15 p.m.

I think it's pretty clear--they actually want the money to go to charities, not to a for-profit organization (which Champions for Charity is). If they run it themselves, more of the profits will actually go to charitable organizations.


Wed, Dec 5, 2012 : 6:31 p.m.

hmm sounds like someone at that charity rubbed someone at UM the wrong way..or they just are not pleased with the amount of money that is skimmed off of the top.