Faculty Senate Meeting 4/8/05 - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 8, 2005

Faculty Senate Meeting 4/8/05

Date: Apr 8, 2005

I find this meeting with the USM faculty leadership to be very good news. I anticipate that Croft will be on campus many times to meet with other people including those responsible for financial issues. My reasoning is that Boards are usually reluctant to fire presidents because faculty do not like him/her. If faculty are successful in getting a president fired, the thought is they will engage in attempts to fire presidents with regularity. In the case of SFT, it is beginning to appear that the Board and Board office is looking for supporting evidence that they can use to oust him. One of those avenues is lack of fiduciary responsibility. There is prima facia evidence that the financial accounting at USM has been creative since SFT became President. There may be a call for an audit, at least of some financial records. Certainly the claims of savings due to SFT actions are very suspect. It likely is the result of moving money from place to place and calling is savings. The savings is illusionary. Yes activity XYZ costs less, but only because ABC now costs more. There is not any net saving from the activity. By reporting these false numbers to the Board and the press, it is equivalent to the kind of accounting used by Bernie Ebbers. It can stand a casual look, but detailed scrutiny. I would like to know what others think, especially those who have more knowledge about the bookkeeping at USM and the history of what has transpired.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

Finally the faculty is providing input to a decision before the decision is to be made. Finally the faculty input will be heard by someone with a academic background and know the meaning of the term "Shared Governance". Finally the input contains the evaluation by of all the faculty and can't be dismissed as the opinions of a few troublemakers.

Things are starting to look up just when I'm leaving. I sure hope SFT will be joining me. We could even help one another pack.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

Also presented at the faculty senate meeting was a very thorough in-depth analysis of the reorganization "cost saving" that Shelby has repeatly bleated about. As you recall, he continually brayed about "1.8 million in reallocated savings" due to reorganization. Dr. Gunther, former Dean of COB and an accountant by trade, reviewed the cost savings and determined, with substantial evidence, that the actual cost savings was approximately $750,00 rather than 1.8 mil. Like the enrollment figures, another attempt by Shelby to falsify and manipulate numbers to match the goals he says he can reach.

The American was at the FS meeting. I hope they don't drop the ball on this SFT lie.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

It seems to me that the cost of the administration has skyrocketed under SFT.
Has there ever been an admin flow chart, or even admin staff chart published, released? Is not the cost of the admin in the past three years not at least an exponential level higher than in the fleming or lucas admin? Why does no one chart how much the admin itself costs these days under sft: dvoraks, hanbury alone were insanely overpaid and they each had a staff. Furthermore, what of exline and other admin related to the failure of the admin to do basic SACS follow up work? WHY DOES THE COSTS, STAFF CHART, AND TOTAL SALARY OF THE USM ADMIN NEVER GET PUBLISHED??????? HOW HARD CAN THAT BE? AND WHY NOT COMPARE THAT TOTAL COST TO THE COST OF ADMIN IN THE FLEMING OR EVEN LUCAS PERIOD JUST PRIOR TO SHELBY. COST SAVINGS? HA

Date: Apr 9, 2005

Didn't the Faculty Senate finally get an organizational chart out of Thames in May of last year, after filing a Public Records Act request for it? Of course, it's out of date by now.

As for administrative expenditures... no state university reports these in full. State university accounting standards are similar to accounting standards for other government agencies. Which is to say they are extremely loose.

While state universities are required to report how much they spend on their central administration, they are free to limit their definition of central administration to the president's office, the provost's office, and the offices of some, but not all, of their other vice presidents. Even then, no one's looking over their shoulders to see what they're including, and they're not required to include obvious items like travel money for upper and middle-level administrators. Expenditures on the student affairs bureaucracy are most often thrown into the student services pot; expenditures on the VP for Research and entourage into, you guessed it, the research pot; expenditures on deans' offices thrown into the instruction or research pots, and so on. Salary and benefits for administrators who are officially employees of the university's foundation are typically kept "off the books" entirely.

Simply on the basis of new administrative positions created, it's clear that Thames is spending more on administration than Fleming or Lucas II did. But getting precise numbers on what Thames has been spending, and on what his predecessors were spending, would require a major reform of the university's accounting procedures.

Developing and promoting a new set of accounting standards for state universities would be a huge step forward. But only a minority of administrators (those who want to be better informed about where the money is going so they can make better decisions) support such a move, and even they are usually not enthusiastic about releasing such information to the public. I also wonder how many faculty bodies are ready for accounting that would not just pinpoint administrative expenditures but also reveal cross-subsidies from some academic units to others

Robert Campbell

Date: Apr 9, 2005

I forgot to post one of the more important announcements at the FS meeting. The infamous Dr. Robert Campbell, the wonder blogger of the AAUP Message Board, will speak on the USM campus soon (April 15???). Everyone who can get to Hattiesburg should make the trip to hear Dr. Campbell speak on that novel idea of "Shared Governance". I hear that SFT may ask the governor to let the National Guard help with crowd control.

Seriously, Robert, please give us the correct time and date of your visit.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

I will be speaking next Friday, April 15.

I don't know the time or the location yet. Could Michael Forster or Amy Young fill us in?

RC

Date: Apr 9, 2005

As for administrative expenditures... no state university reports these in full. State university accounting standards are similar to accounting standards for other government agencies. Which is to say they are extremely loose.

The accounting standards for public-sector universities would make an investor in Canadian penny stocks puke. There is no excuse for universities not publishing quarterly and annual statements. You want universities to be more "businesslike"? Fine, let's start with proper accounting standards.

An examination of USMs books would no doubt show that the ratio of administrative costs to total costs has risen substantially. If GSA is rising rapidly for a private-sector entity, this is usually a yellow flag.

Given that universities have such lax accounting standards, it is critical for the state auditor to be putting the appropriate amount of fear into government agencies via fear of an audit. USM does not act like an entity that has any such fear. Wonder why?

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: locust
"You want universities to be more "businesslike"? Fine, let's start with proper accounting standards."

Excellent point; thanks!

Date: Apr 9, 2005

More news from the FS meeting:

Two meeting ago the FS asked that someone come from Continuing Education to address the Senate and answer questions. At the last FS meeting Sue Pace was suppose to do this, but Malone said he would come instead. Then at the last minute Malone had a "schedule conflict" and didn't attend. President Beckett tried again to arrange to have someone address this issue at yesterday's meeting. He was told by SFT that, because of SACS, "only one voice should speak" on this. That one voice will be Exline.

At three meeting of the PUC last year SFT promised to have Malone attend to answer questions. In the end it never happened. The same run-around is going on with request from the Faculty Senate.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

It's time for the Faculty Senate leadership to make a statement to the press about Malone's refusal to come and talk to the Faculty Senate.

RC

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"More news from the FS meeting:
TThen at the last minute Malone had a "schedule conflict" and didn't attend.
"

Unless Malone's "schedule conflict" required him to be at the IHL, there could be nothing that should take precedence over a scheduled meeting with the faculty short of a medical emergency. This administration consistently thumbs its nose at legitimate faculty representatives and Shelby Freekin Thames should be rewarded with a big "no thank you" when it comes up contract renewal

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Rod_Sterling
"Shelby Freekin Thames should be rewarded with a big "no thank you" when it comes up contract renewal"

And just why should we say no to his generous offer renew our contracts? Jobs aren't that easy to come by.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Dufus
"And just why should we say no to his generous offer renew our contracts? Jobs aren't that easy to come by. "

Well, at least you got your name correct.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

If the IHL wants to bring in someone who knows where every penny ought to be, we should recall that Linda McFall, USM's former VP for Business and Finance and one of those who had no choice but to get out shortly after Thames came in, now works for the Board. She's the Asst. Commissioner of Finance and Administration.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: info
"If the IHL wants to bring in someone who knows where every penny ought to be, we should recall that Linda McFall, USM's former VP for Business and Finance and one of those who had no choice but to get out shortly after Thames came in, now works for the Board. She's the Asst. Commissioner of Finance and Administration."

Wasn't Dana Kieth, currently Associate VP of Finance at Alabama, McFall's assistant? She just left recently and may also know something.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

Except for foundation money, Dana Keith knew where every penny went. She is one sharp accountant--and ethical as the day is long.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: "balancing" act
"Except for foundation money, Dana Keith knew where every penny went. She is one sharp accountant--and ethical as the day is long."

Meanwhile, her replacement as budget director is a University of Phoenix buddy of Lassen's.

It should be reiterated that there is virtually no institutional memory (in terms of administrative unit heads) remaining in the financial area. It makes one wonder what these people truly know.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

You might be able to get it back fairly fast. The former chief grant accountant at USM is hanging out at IHL with Ms. McFall. Really strange coincidences, Tonto.

Date: Apr 9, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Three Ledger Sheets to the Wind
" "

You make me long for the days pre-Voter's Choice when the committee could just choose an Nd'A at the last minute....you must wait until next week when the people choose!

Gosh, this is good!

Date: Apr 10, 2005

When faced with the $14 million in budget cuts in 2000 Fleming reduced vacant positions, all of which were administration and not faculty positions. That has been rebuilt under Thames. Nobody was forced out when this was done. But a lot of positions went away, as they should have.

Date: Apr 10, 2005

See www.usm.edu/ir for organization chart