 |
 |
|
 |
|
McDavis diverted fee, Hudson money to Athletics
| | 11/9/2009 2:01:00 AM | Email this article • Print this article |
Dylan Scott • For The Post • ds783006@ohiou.edu
Ohio University poured money from its run-down student health center and an unexpected surplus of student fee money into its Athletics Department last spring, against the wishes of a student fee advisory committee.
Hudson Health Center, the university's aging medical center, returned almost half of its university funding, $700,000, to OU's general fee pool. And in one of the year's few fiscal bright spots, an extra $1.6 million flowed into the fund thanks to increased enrollment and retention.
OU President Roderick McDavis funneled nearly all the money, $100,000 from Hudson and $1.2 million of the new fee money, straight to the Athletics Department - which still plans to overspend its $18.7 million base budget by $947,000 this year. Without the extra money, Athletics would have overspent by nearly twice that much.
A student fee committee recommended that McDavis return $150,000 to Hudson, reasoning: "it is vitally important that (Hudson) continue to offer improved services." It didn't recommend any of the money go to Athletics.
Of the seven recommendations for Hudson's $700,000 gift, the return of $150,000 was the only suggestion McDavis ignored.
Kent Smith, vice president for Student Affairs, said he wouldn't have returned Hudson's money to the fee pool if he'd known about the new fee money. Chauncey Jackson, chairman of the fee committee and a student trustee, said no one told him about the extra funds.
"That's not acceptable," Jackson said.
McDavis defended the decision, saying he asked the Board of Trustees to give the money to Athletics to help end its deficit spending. Athletics relies on the general fee for more than 65 percent of its spending money and can't access state money, which is earmarked for academics.
"That's why students are admitted into athletic events free of charge, because they're paying," McDavis said. "General fee was a fund where money could be justifiably used to bring down the deficit in (Athletics)."
Professors have repeatedly slammed McDavis for prioritizing athletics over academics. A recent survey found faculty aren't satisfied with McDavis' leadership in nearly every category.
The transfer of money away from Hudson comes at a perilous time for the health center. Though insurance payments and a $40 quarterly plan for students, called the Wellbeing Program, have generated $2.1 million for the center, few dispute it needs to be renovated or replaced immediately.
In an April 2008 presentation to the trustees, Smith called the center "unhealthy." His presentation showed cramped exam rooms and an aging building that can't accommodate the university's growing student body.
A study by Keeling and Associates in 2007 found Hudson understaffed and underfunded. Wait times have always rankled students, but the temporary loss of two doctors this fall - amid concerns about swine flu - pushed waiting times to two hours or more.
OU recently hired two Ohio Health employees to run Hudson and spent $57,000 on new equipment. Smith has said that until enough money can be found to renovate or replace the center, he will work to update it room-by-room.
Trustees have been reluctant to replace Hudson, hesitant to add more debt to OU's balance sheet.
Smith said if he had known about the extra fee money, he would have placed the $700,000 into a holding account for the renovation of Hudson or the construction of a new building. He said he does not anticipate giving money back next year.
Students pay $1,569 in general fees each year. Nearly 40 percent went to Athletics last year. Hudson received less than 3 percent.
Fee money pays for all non-academic university functions such as Hudson Health Center, Athletics, the Division of Student Affairs, Career Services, University Judiciaries and the Marching 110.
McDavis e-mailed the $684 million budget he endorsed to all faculty before he sent it to the trustees for approval. In the email, which did not mention Hudson, he said Athletics would do its part to fix the deficit by spending $1 million less this year.
But the Athletic Department's base spending increased from $18.5 million to $18.7 million, a result of increased spending on scholarships to counter the tuition increase. Athletics did reduce spending on administration and athletic programs by $170,000 combined.
McDavis, who oversaw the elimination of four sports in 2007, said OU should remain a Division I-A program. That means the department must support all 16 remaining programs.
Athletics used the $100,000 to fund OU's golf and swimming programs.
|
Reader Comments
Posted: Friday, November 13, 2009
Article comment by:
Steve Hays
W comments: "Everyone has heard the line, 'You have to spend money to make money.' That is no different from intercollegiate athletics. ... People commenting on here most likely have no relationship to any athletic dept. or ever had in the past. Therefore, you are blindly making extreme excuses about funding athletics."
Blindness about funding realities has nothing to do with whether or not one is associated with athletics. One can be just as blind in defense of athletics as in opposition to it. The fact is, though, that OU's athletics program has no hope of making money, no matter how much we spend on it. Even our AD has said as much. The net cost of Intercollegiate Athletics at OU is about $15 million per year. That's just a fact, no matter one's level of affection for athletics.
Posted: Thursday, November 12, 2009
Article comment by:
W
I get really tired of everybody who states that it's the parent's money now, but when student's go out and blow their loan money on other things, i.e beer, it suddenly is ok to divert that money. How about those students that are footing their own education?? I trust that a state funded university is following the protocols set for them for where income is allowed to go. Athletics is a very expensive project. Everyone has heard the line, "You have to spend money to make money." That is no different from intercollegiate athletics. They have very strict compliance rules and regulations they absolutely have to follow or there are many serious consequences. People commenting on here most likely have no relationship to any athletic dept. or ever had in the past. Therefore, you are blindly making extreme excuses about funding athletics.
Posted: Thursday, November 12, 2009
Article comment by:
Parent
There is one point that I don't think has been covered. This is PARENT money that I send in as part of my child's fees. I expect that money to be used for what is designated for. Not for the president to divert it anywhere else especially athletics sincce 43% of that fee goes to athletics anyway. Shameful.
Posted: Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Article comment by:
Steve Hays
All parts of the OU community--faculty, students, staff, and alums--need to stop, take a deep breath, clear our minds, and focus on the question of the athletics budget. We should do that not because athletics is inherently bad (it isn't), nor because our teams are incompetent (they're not), but because participation in the NCAA costs us about $15 million (net) every year. To put that in perspective, the net cost of athletics is more than the total budgets of either the College of Business or the College of Communication. (http://www.ohio.edu/finance/bpa/book.cfm)
When budget cuts threaten the core educational mission of the university, we owe a debt of gratitude to The Post for calling our attention to a huge source of potential budget savings.
All of us in the OU community (including alums, who should understand the importance of tough decisions in the real world) need to honestly consider why OU should continue to tax students at the rate of $150 million per decade for spectator entertainment--particularly when the quality of an OU education is being dramatically eroded by continuing cuts to the academic mission.
Posted: Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Article comment by:
Squiggy
I believe in investing money in things that actually make a difference, such as the health and well-being of a school's students. Now, I'm not saying athletics are pointless, but should they take priority over academics or the Hudson Health center? Of course not.
I mean, hate to burst everyone's bubble, but athletically OU is not Ohio State, and never will be. Let's be realistic. So, help me out here... what's the benefit of funneling all this money to athletics?
What's even more troubling (to me, at least) is that EVEN WITH THESE NEW FUNDS, the Athletic department is set to exceed their budget by almost one million dollars. One million dollars! Why aren't we seeing pressure for the Athletic department to reduce their budget (it's only 16 million, right?)? It seems that every other department on campus has had to make
Let's stop commenting on how uninformed other commentators in this story are and start discussing the matter at hand. If anybody has ever been to Hudson, it's clear they could have used the money. Why didn't they get it? What major thing did McDavis gain by doing this? Personally, I think his argument of "well, this is why students get into football games for free" is completely pointless. I can't very well go see a football game if I'm sick in my dorm because the health center didn't have enough staff or resources to keep me healthy.
Just saying.
|
|
The Post Comment Form
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
The Post
325 Baker University Center
Athens, Ohio 45701
Newsroom: (740) 593-4011
Front Desk: (740) 593-4010
Advertising: (740) 593-4018
Fax: (740) 593-0561
E-mail: posteditorial@ohiou.edu
Software © 1998-2010 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved
|
|
|
|
