Oral Roberts University, with $70 million coming its way soon, has a chance to pursue the revival track thanks to a donor who, true to venture philanthropy ways, is also requesting two family member seats on the university's board of regents.

So, clearly this is a donor who has a vision for an institution that has gone astray.  Good for the university and good for the donor but really -- the world needs Oral Roberts University?  And, the $70 million isn't going that far given that the University is $50+ million in debt and getting ready for a long legal battle over getting back some of the mis-spending of Dr. Roberts' son not to mention trying to hold its head up with a whole lot of donors who can't help but think that their trust is broken beyond repair.

Certainly the donor is right to bargain for a couple of seats but this is a board of regents that has failed miserably and the next best step, if revival is indeed possible, should focus on replacing the regent membership with competent, trustworthy individuals who can be counted on to pursue mission vigorously and with high standards.

On the other hand, should a donor have a right to bargain?