The open-government group Californians Aware said it received a ruling in the mail by Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Roger Beauchesne ordering California State University, Stanislaus to release Palin's contract along with any documents related to the use of university property or services during her June 25 visit.
The judge determined the university's failure to produce the requested documents constituted a violation of its obligations under the California Public Records Act, CalAware said in a news release.
"This ruling upholds California citizens' right to maintain oversight and control of their government," CalAware said.
CSU spokeswoman Claudia Keith said Wednesday the university had not yet seen the ruling.
"If it is as it has been relayed to me, it's certainly perplexing how the judge could come to that decision," she said. "But if that's what it says, we would abide by that."
CalAware filed a lawsuit in April after CSU Stanislaus refused to disclose the details of Palin's contract.
The university has said negotiations with Palin were handled by its nonprofit foundation, which is not subject to the same public records requirements that apply to California's higher education institutions.
In July, the foundation revealed it had paid the former Alaska governor $75,000 for her 40-minute speech.
State Sen. Leland Yee, who has been an outspoken critic of CSU Stanislaus, said reports of Beauchesne's ruling were welcome news.
"This is a great day for transparency and accountability, but also a sad day for the university," the San Francisco Democrat said. "I hope this case is a lesson now for every single university campus that there is a California Public Records Act that you are responsible for."
My response was that I did remember the event (25April 1993).
In my heart and mind, the fact that Ms Hill spoke at the university, then the next morning, Sophie Sergei's body was found in a dormitory bath tub, are one memory.
Obviously you did attend Anita Hills speech, so you have first hand knowledge if what was said. I am relieved that you found nothing inflamatory in her talk that may have inspired some bigot to horrifically murder another minority woman.
As the speech was earlier in the evening, it could hardly be used to prevent violence; rather my question had been 'did it inspire it?'
My point is simply that Sophie's murder is still unsolved. After 17 years the person who murdered her should be found and brought to justice. The Sergei family deserve closure.
My apologies if I drifted too far off topic. As a backup point: How words develop into ideas depends on the quality of the mind they grow in.
Words can inspire hatred or love, depending upon the mindset of the person hearing them.
What's yours?
Do you think spending 10K for that speech was the best way for UAF to prevent violence on campus?
If so, please explain.
Sophie's family deserves to have her murder solved.
Does anyone remember when Anita Hill (of Clarence Thomas scandal notoriety) spoke at UAF?
UAF paid her a lot of money to drop in, give a short and uninformative speech, (IIRC, 10K), and then leave.
I didn't think it was money well spent, and it mattered to me. I definitely think twice about donating my hard-earned cash to UAF if that's the sort of thing they do with it.
I dropped a zero.
We would have been paying her 20 million per year.
Sorry about that, Sarah.
We were shorting you nearly 20 million per year--
That's gov't for you.
The market place rewards on a much more efficient basis.
Call it 75K for a day's work (there had to be some preparation (but minimal, if you've heard excerpts from the thing)and travel time involved.)
Say there are 264 work days per year.
We were paying Palin 125K per year to be governor.
Not so bad to a BA in communications with little professional journalism experience, a former mayor and councilman from Wasilla, with about 13 months on the state's OAGC (from which she resigned.)
But wait a minute! If we paid Palin 75K per day, we would have paid her nearly 2 million per year--we were shorting her nearly 2 million dollars.
No wonder she quit.
Dang, we're not generous at all. We're kind of stingy.
...guess I always thought speeches were pro bono.
(REAL celebrities find a non-profit to support, then go about paying them thousands of dollars so that they can have the honer of speaking at events)
Really, what's the big deal? Is anyone concerned about the paid speakers, artists, and musicians that UAF brings to Fairbanks?
This is obviously, the continuation of the persecution of Palin.
This situation with Palin is a little different, though.
The money Palin received ($75K IIRC) isn't a campaign contribution--it's a fee earned for the speaking engagement.
The money goes directly (and completely legally) into Palin's private bank accounts, to spend on makeup, 200K wardrobes, and self-promotion, or however Palin chooses.
The public deserves a full accounting from the UC administrators who approved this transfer of public money to private hands.
Did the tax payers receive 75K benefit from Palin's speech? We need to know how that's figured. If there are misdealings on the part of the administrators, I for one hope they are revealed.