UC Asks For VC Disclosure Reversal

The university has filed a motion inAlameda County Superior Court, asking the court to reconsider the disclosure ruling made on July 24 (See  CA Judge Orders UC Venture Capital Data Release ), because of two recent developments.   Those included a Menlo Park venture firm asking the University of Michigan to withdraw as an investor due to fears of disclosed information and another fund deciding not to invite the University to invest, according to San Jose Mercury News report.

Actions like this, the university says, only underscore its argument that venture capital disclosures could hurt its access to some of the premier venture capital firms.   Sequoia Capital, the Menlo Park firm, recently asked the University of Michigan to withdraw as an investor, saying it feared the Michigan university’s disclosure of performance and other data Sequoia considers confidential.   This after, the Michigan university disclosed Sequoia’s basic financial performance data, called “internal rates of return,” to comply with that state’s freedom of information laws in February.   Sequoia later accepted Michigan back as an investor, but it changed its mind again late last month.

The lawsuit prompting the latest ruling, filed in Aprilby the Coalition of University Employees and the San Jose Mercury News, argued that UC is required to disclose the information under state public records laws.  UC attorneys, meanwhile, say the information is a trade secret of the private consultants who calculated the investments and that making the information public would violate confidentiality agreements.

The court ruling last month came in response to a lawsuit filed in April by the Coalition of University Employees and the San Jose Mercury News, argued that UC is required to disclose the information under state public records laws.   “Apparently the Board of Regents still hasn’t learned anything,” said CUE President Claudia Horning in response to the motion. “We want to make sure the decisions that impact everyone who is contributing to the retirement fund – including President Richard Atkinson – are discussed and made in public.”

University attorneys, meanwhile, say the information is a trade secret of the private consultants who calculated the investments and that making the information public would violate confidentiality agreements.