|
Par for the course, plus a free lunch
by LindaMarie Rouillard, UT-AAUP Executive Board
The Jacobs Administration annually projects budget shortfalls. Each year from 2008 to present, the Administration has let us know the sky is falling. Last year the FY 2012 Recommended Budget reflected a $32.5 million "budget challenge" for the academic enterprise. (http://www.utoledo.edu/offices/budget/pdfs/FY12_Combined_Budget_Book_06-23-11.pdf). The FY 2013 currently projects a $15 to $20 million shortfall. (http://www.utoledo.edu/offices/budget/pdfs/FY%202013%20Budget%20Development%20Instructions.pdf).
Because of these regularly projected shortfalls, faculty and staff have had to deal with shortages of basic supplies and services along with layoffs and cutbacks. Administration salaries, bonuses, and perks, however, continue to increase. The UT-AAUP has obtained the expense reports with supporting explanations by senior UT administrators. The reports indicate the top of the UT food chain is prospering. Administrator explanations from the reports are shown in italics.
While many faculty and staff are trying to come to grips with the fiscal reality of having to do more work with fewer resources and even fewer colleagues, the expense records reveal numerous Administration expenses at country clubs including Inverness and Stone Oak Country Clubs for meetings. According to one report, some senior UT administrators and their spouses needed to eat filet mignon in order to keep their strength up while reviewing "marketing strategies." According to another expense report, Scott Scarborough and others needed to lunch and play golf in order to discuss "university issues."
In another Scarborough report, the need "to discuss shared governance" leads to the necessity to play golf and eat lunch. While issues of shared governance certainly include financial issues, one would hope that the Chief Financial Officer of the university could find more economical and efficient ways of studying such issues. Creating "a more positive working relationship with the university's independent faculty senate" apparently can only happen after more golf and more lunch. Other expense accounts list a discussion of "physician issues" or the need "to solicit intelligence (from a lunch attendee) ...about ProMedica's plans to build an orthopedic hospital" as the justification for yet another round of free lunches and more golf. How did Mr. Scarborough think he could create "a better working relationship with the College of Arts and Sciences, where there has been a number of discontented faculty about accounting and budgeting changes"? You guessed it: more golf, more lunch.
More troubling are some of the guests invited to golf and lunch, particularly guests who work for Plante Moran, the independent auditors who review the financial statements for The University of Toledo. The expenses for one of these outings was justified as follows: "to brief Plante Moran on the audit risks pertaining to the hospital and its provider-based clinics. The major risks for the university pertain to hospital operations". And the reason given for another "meeting" with a Plante Moran employee was for Larry Burns to ask that Plante Moran employee "to serve as an advisor for the university's diversity program. Plante Moran has been recognized for innovative practices with regard to employee diversity." What happens to the "independent" component of the auditors as a result of such perks and such flattery? How does one review and consider audit risks and play golf at the same time?
The records obtained by UT-AAUP indicate that the UT Foundation paid for these expenses. The UT Foundation is described as follows on the UT website: "The UT Foundation is the official gift-receiving and fund-management organization of The University of Toledo. The mission of the University of Toledo Foundation is to receive and administer private gifts for the benefit of The University of Toledo; to provide effective investment management and fund stewardship; and to nurture increased credibility and donor support through active advocacy to help the University achieve its goals."
While it is clear that certain individuals including administrators benefit from these expenses described above, it is less clear how such expenses benefit Ohio taxpayers, The University of Toledo or how such expenses increase donor support. Now that our shortfall is "only" $15-20 million, will these expenses continue and perhaps even escalate? Is it necessary for the Foundation to cover golf and expensive meals and drinks as part of doing business? Is this a continuing practice at UT? Will the senior administrators at this university continue to eat steak while departments scramble to pay for paper, and plead for secretarial support, and while students sink into increasing levels of debt? Or has administrative excess become par for the course?
| 
