The University of Arizona’s financial issues are surprising and concerning. But the underlying reasons for them — and the way the university’s leadership has chosen to deal with both the perception and the reality, with heedlessness and hubris — are far more worrisome.
The university has slipped below required levels of cash reserves and apparently miscalculated the time needed to build back its reserves after spending aggressively in financial aid and research, according to Lisa Rulney, the UA’s chief financial officer, who disclosed the “crisis” to the Board of Regents in early November.
UA President Robert Robbins told the faculty senate a week later that the “big miscalculation” would result in “Draconian cuts.”
Since then, Robbins has spent quite a bit of time assuring various campus constituencies that those cuts would not impact them — but has offered no real explanation to the public about how the university found itself in this pickle.
People are also reading…
On Dec. 15, Robbins must tell the Board of Regents specifically how he will manage the institution to recoup the cash reserves.
Ellie Wolfe, the ӰAV’s outstanding higher education reporter, has led the Star’s coverage of this situation, and stories she has broken over the last couple of weeks have shed a disturbing light, revealing among other things:
The university has lent its athletic programs $87 million to help fund their operations in recent years, which is yet to be repaid;
The university’s central administration has insisted that at least one college aggressively spend down cash reserves, disregarding warnings from college leaders that doing so could force the college into deficits — warnings that turned out to be accurate.
While Robbins initially blamed overspending on financial aid and in athletics, he has since acknowledged that the central administration has overspent at a higher rate than any other individual college or department.
The acquisition of Ashford University and its integration into the UA Global Campus have contributed to the university’s cash-flow woes.
Throughout the month, as each new aspect of the crisis has emerged, the university has responded with a strained silence. Robbins has spoken when cornered at an event like a faculty senate meeting, but the university has refused to answer many questions posed by the Star. Answers could have gone a long way toward defusing the perception crisis the university now faces, which is even larger than the financial one.
Faculty members have expressed concern and anger at the administration’s high-handedness and what they see as mission-threatening financial profligacy. University staff will inevitably feel the brunt of austerity measures. And students are rightfully worried about their financial aid and angered to have been labeled the cause of the problem.
But there is a larger group of concerned stakeholders: Arizonans, particularly Tucsonans, who depend on both the education and the great economic engine of the university. They deserve to hear directly from Robbins. We believe the university must strive for transparency and clarity and recognize that the entire state deserves answers.
With the regents’ preemptive declarations of support for Robbins as this matter has unfolded, we wonder if the president feels that he does not have to be accountable to the public — just to a group of elites who have already promised their support.
The university has harmed its brand by allowing confusing and conflicting narratives to play out, leaving all of us with questions, including:
Why were colleges instructed to spend down their reserves, against the advice of their leaders?
What are the plans to recoup the $87 million from UA athletics? And what do those loans mean for the prospect of athletics “paying its own way” going forward? If the pandemic was the cause of athletics’ cash crunch, why haven’t repayments begun post-pandemic?
What will the university’s central administration do to curtail its own spending even as it imposes austerity measures elsewhere?
If the crisis really was a quick-developing surprise, has Robbins instituted safeguards to assure that systems to provide earlier warning of financial storm clouds are in place?
On the other hand, if the university leadership was aware and did disregard warnings and did fail to disclose the growing difficulties, why should we continue to have faith in Robbins, Rulney and the swollen central administration? What does being accountable really mean if there are not consequences for such missteps?
As a corollary to the above, is the regents’ declared support even before hearing Robbins’ recovery plan a function of cronyism and defensiveness? The Board of Regents must be much more forceful in its oversight.
An outside audit of the university’s budget and cashflow situation seems necessary at this juncture. “Outside” meaning conducted by someone who does not report to Robbins. The Regents should commission one immediately.
Also, it’s not enough for Robbins to present a plan to the Regents. He must take immediate steps to regain control of both the perception and the reality, speaking directly to Arizonans about this situation and detailing significant, structural corrections to allow people to regain faith in the university’s ability to carry out its vital mission.