George Beres - An Independent View: A messy marriage?

Could marriage of donor and university include a prenuptial agreement?


By George Beres
For the Beacon

A recent letter to the Beacon by Springfield's Arvid Freiberg gave credence to what this column previously revealed about funding of higher education in Oregon: too much is going to non-essential, intercollegiate sport, while academics continue to suffer. He recognized the financial devolution of academia compared to varsity athletes with these words:

"Hold on to your hats as "big donors" ram a new basketball complex down our throats."

It was ironic when that same week, the University of Oregon announced the State System of Higher Education again had given in to its funding subterfuge. Many buy the oft-used lie that varsity athletics support themselves through major gifts and gate receipts. Truth is, much of such funding is tax money many citizens – from Portland to Springfield to Klamath Falls – are on the line to pay. That was evident with the announcement that the legislature's Ways and Means Committee agreed to use a bond measure to guarantee payment of what now looms as a cost of more than $200 million.

Cost of construction is one thing. Payment of bond interest is another, estimated at $14.5 million annually for what in effect is a 30-year mortgage. The UO had wanted 40 years to pay back that massive bill, but the committee – with a limited sense of responsibility – ruled it had to be 30 years. The University, committed to deficit spending on a facility I believe is not needed, chose to take a pollyanish positive view of the restricted years in which to pay. Alan Price, Vice-President for University Advancement, said: "By going on 30 years instead of 40, we'll save substantial in the long term."

On the other side, there are those who find Mac Court would be serviceable and more than adequate for decades to come if the equivalent of one year's interest in new gym bonds provided the old gym money for upgrading it for more years of use.

A misleading view often given to justify spending on varsity athletics and their facilities is they support student activities. That becomes ludicrous when you calculate the small proportion of students served by multi-millions spent on Autzen Stadium expansion and a new gym. On the same page of the Oregon Daily Emerald that announced legislative agreement on bonds for the gym, a chart illustrated money proposed for several non-athletic student programs:

•Jewish Student Union, $6,764.
•Honk Kong Student Assn., $4,178.
•Japanese Student Union, $6,601.
•Ecological Design Center, $279.
•Sexual Assault Support Services, $43,957.
•Global Talk, $300.

Irony of the claim of serving students is clear, reinforcing an image of duplicity the UO builds for itself in financial matters with a pliable State System. It was equally evident some years ago when an incensed Phil Knight said he'd take back the many millions he pledged for work on Autzen if the University did not withdraw from the Worker Rights Consortium, the watchdog that monitors his Nike and other corporations for wrongdoing with its employees overseas.

The State System responded to the UO's potential loss by making membership in the WRC illegal. Then Knight again reversed himself, and gave the money. Now the UO points to another gift from Knight as backup in case it fails to meet payments on a new Mac Court.

I wonder: In this messy marriage between a corporate dictator and a state university, could there have been a prenuptial agreement allowing the donor to take back a pledge if he does not like the way things are going?