MGB: Auditors recommend UNT pay back $75.6 million

[cdizzle86]

Let's just sign a deal with UT to open our next 76 football seasons in Austin. Right guys?

[VideoEagle]

I heard on part of a story on KERA-FM that the auditors traced the problem all the way back to a decision make in the 70s on allocating costs.

Anyone know about that? I'm shocked the problem goes back that far and had not been noticed before! Actually, I'm doubtful the problem goes back that far and no one ever noticed!

[UNTLifer]

Just love Chancellor Jackson's quote claiming innocence for the BOR and his office. Please, someone, anyone tell me what he does?

[Christopher Walker]

My buddy at UNT said his professor heard one idea being thrown around is doing a 1/3 2/3 plan and making 2/3 of an incoming class completely online so that they can increase enrollment without building new classrooms. I really hope his professor has some wrong information.

There is no basis to this whatsoever.

[GL2Greatness]

1. the athletics fee can only be increased a single time for 10% of the amount of the orignal fee of $10 dollars without a student vote

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth149675/m1/2/

the legislation is very clear in section G that the fee cannot be increased over the amount ofr 10% one time without a student vote

2. if a student vote is held that will put th university budget to further scrunity and people will see that the university still subsidizes athletics to the tune of $7 million per year IN ADDITION TO the student fee

on page 5 of the budget here

http://www.unt.edu/ereports/pdffiles/FY14%20Budget%20Summary.pdf

DES FUND SUPPL- ATHLETICS
6,920,647
6,920,647
6,920,647

then when you get to page 91

INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS FEE 60228 7,900,000
7,900,000

and when you scrool down to page 93 you see the income side of the equation is $20,215,719 including the $7.9 athletics fee and then over from there espenses are $27,136.366

which happens to be $20,215,719 + $6,920,647

so there is no interest in letting students know that the $10 dollar fee they are paying for "athletics" that was passed with a reduction of $3 dollars from the previous student services fee is really only half of the total university support provided for athletics and that in addition to $14,820,647 in total student subsidies the university now wants more money from students from athletics

this is why the fee is not raised and this is why a vote to raise the fee past 10% (1 dollar) will not happen

3. RV made very clear in his past podcast that baseball pretty much required that the stajium either be 100% funded by donors or that it has enough guaranteed donations over the long term of finaicing and paying for the stajium for it to e paid for and there was no room for error or people not coming through on donations because of the budget sutiation and until the unversity is 100% sure the facility is 100% paid for or that donors that are guaranteed are in line the facility will not move forward

4. it was already well publicized that north Texas was concerend about their financial bond ratings even before the financial improprieties were announced

here is an article from early 2013 that discusses the issue and this was well before the financial issues were announced

Some regents expressed concern the bond rating could drop because of an increased amount of debt, but Allen Clemson, vice chancellor for administration and interim vice president for finance, said a lowered rating was not as important as ensuring these projects are completed as soon as possible.

To move forward with the projects, Clemson reported the university would review project cash flows, develop funding and financial plans for each project, and schedule a finance committee meeting to continue the funding discussion. Additionally, they will consult a financial adviser to review funding and financing options and alternatives.

so even before the financial issues and the bond outlook change to negative there were concerns that additional debt for housing and other projects would lower the bond rating (not just the outlook for the rating).......this is why the dorm and meal cost were raised so dramatically to have a larger pool of income to hopefully support those bonds without the ratings downgrade.....but that was before the financial issues were announced/discovered

5. there are multiple issues with the finances as well that are not being really fully discussed in a clear way

in addition to having to pay the money back there is the fact that for a long time north Texas has had legitimate employees on the payroll getting paid with state funds that should not have been getting funded through state funds......that money will no longer be coming in from state funds, but those people are still employed by the university and the money to pay them will have to come from somewhere so that means that other areas will have to take a hit or additional revenues will have to be found.....or employees let go.....in addition to finding the money to pay the state back

also as Dr. S has stated in the past 100% of anticipated income was budgeted to be spent and that is not financially sound, but what he has also stated that was much less covered was that for a long time north Texas was forcasting budgest with very agressive growth and that growth has not materialized as hoped for

this goes back to at least the time when VLR had rasied tuition specifically for new faculty, but when the next fall enrollment dropped slightly new faculty hires were put off even though money for that had already been collected

here is where it as raised

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20110321-unt-regents-approve-second-increase-in-tuition-fees-.ece

here is where it was put off

https://ntdaily.com/unt-to-hire-new-faculty-by-next-fall/

2010 enrollment was 36,067 2011 was 35,694 so not a huge decrease, but when you budget for growth and at 100% you have no margin for error and this is where you end up.......especially when you have a high turnover of higher administration and "place holders" like VLR "running things"

enrollment for 2014 is 36,216, but over a 5 year period 2010-2014 from 36,067 to 36,216 is not major growth (149 students)

https://news.unt.edu/news-releases/unt-fall-enrollment-remains-strong-36216

Texas Tech on the other hand is from 31,587 to 35,134

http://today.ttu.edu/2014/09/texas-tech-enrollment-figures-shatter-previous-numbers/

UH from 38,752 to 40,959

http://www.uh.edu/news-events/stories/09122014Enrollment.php

so there are issues beyond just the money to be paid back and those will have to be rectified at the cost of something somewhere

[ntmeangreen11]

^^ Too long didn't read

Eat a bag of dongs troll

[UNT90]

Don't even bother to read that troll's post. Flier, who basically wrote the athletic fee, has proved trolly trollerson wrong in several previous athletic fee debates.

[Rudy]

Just love Chancellor Jackson's quote claiming innocence for the BOR and his office. Please, someone, anyone tell me what he does?

He Effs the university right in the P

[Cerebus]

Going online heavy is idiotic and I'll explain why.

In the late 90s/early 00s newspapers and magazines got worried about online media. They were afraid people would go to the free web and not pay for paper content. They made the bad decision to compete on price. Well newsflash: You can't compete with free. Websites now rule and print media is in deep trouble.

What they should have done is competed on quality. Hell, they could have put the information online, but make people pay and make it high quality.

Universities are now starting to make the same mistake. U of Phoenix and other online school are cheap. If we try to compete with them on price we will get buried. Focus on quality. Make the online only choices so second rate that most consumers will choose the extra expense of real schools. You can throw some classes online, but the majority of a Universities' QUALITY comes from professors who can educate face to face, and researchers who can not only produce by also include their students in that research.

I am very concerned because ever since the system level was created by the chancellor, the only words coming out of system level leadership is EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY. That is the modern buzzword for cost. We can't out low cost the online schools, do that and the we'll be the next great industry to sink.

Leadership should be focused on QUALITY, QUALITY, QUALITY.

[Harry]

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/09/25/audit-proves-unt-manipulated-millions-in-payroll-collections/

Jackson adds that five financial administrators have been replaced and a new central controller is coming on. But even state-mandated reviews missed the discrepancies, he said. “Years, maybe decades ago, we were told that it didn’t conflict with any state law — it’s perhaps in a gray area but it’s something the state’s not going to object to, we have no evidence that anyone in state office ever said it was okay.”

So how big a hit is $75-million? About the same amount as it cost to build the new Apogee football stadium, which was $78-million when completed in 2011. Students are wary the cost will be passed on to them.

[eulessismore]

Going online heavy is idiotic and I'll explain why.

In the late 90s/early 00s newspapers and magazines got worried about online media. They were afraid people would go to the free web and not pay for paper content. They made the bad decision to compete on price. Well newsflash: You can't compete with free. Websites now rule and print media is in deep trouble.

What they should have done is competed on quality. Hell, they could have put the information online, but make people pay and make it high quality.

Universities are now starting to make the same mistake. U of Phoenix and other online school are cheap. If we try to compete with them on price we will get buried. Focus on quality. Make the online only choices so second rate that most consumers will choose the extra expense of real schools. You can throw some classes online, but the majority of a Universities' QUALITY comes from professors who can educate face to face, and researchers who can not only produce by also include their students in that research.

I am very concerned because ever since the system level was created by the chancellor, the only words coming out of system level leadership is EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY. That is the modern buzzword for cost. We can't out low cost the online schools, do that and the we'll be the next great industry to sink.

Leadership should be focused on QUALITY, QUALITY, QUALITY.

Exactly. I have worked in municipal government from almost the moment I left UNT as a grad student. I went to our manager once to talk to him about numbers, as I felt sometimes I could get sucked into issues that didn't produce the numbers. His message: forget the numbers; focus on whether the results of your work will stand the test of time. In other words, without quality, you have nothing! If you are in government work and want numbers to be what works for you, you have chosen the wrong employment sector. No government entity can do efficiency like the private sector. No private sector entity can do the roads, drainage features, water and sewer, public safety, and information systems that support them like the government.

Edited September 26, 2014 by eulessismore

[flyonthewall]

So who is going to bear the cost? If not the students then who? If the cost of hamburger meat goes up, in the long run, prices of hamburgers either go up, or hamburgers get smaller, or other cost are cut to make the model work. Less people may be asked to produce the same amount of hamburgers. Translation, in a very simplistic way, either cost of education goes up and is passed on to the customers (ie the students). Or in some way the quality of service and or product goes down. That is just the way it is.

Usually the C.E.O is eventually replaced in the real world, but i digress, this is "government" state run.

[cdizzle86]

So who is going to bear the cost? If not the students then who? If the cost of hamburger meat goes up, in the long run, prices of hamburgers either go up, or hamburgers get smaller, or other cost are cut to make the model work. Less people may be asked to produce the same amount of hamburgers. Translation, in a very simplistic way, either cost of education goes up and is passed on to the customers (ie the students). Or in some way the quality of service and or product goes down. That is just the way it is.

Usually the C.E.O is eventually replaced in the real world, but i digress, this is "government" state run.

When the pain is self inflicted then the person(s) who oversee need to be fired. It's plain and simple. If I were to lose my company millions of dollars I would be gone. It's called accountability.

[flyonthewall]

When the pain is self inflicted then the person(s) who oversee need to be fired. It's plain and simple. If I were to lose my company millions of dollars I would be gone. It's called accountability.

Yep. This

[flyonthewall]

Eric Holder would have tried them in a court of law.

[Green Mean]

Going online heavy is idiotic and I'll explain why.

In the late 90s/early 00s newspapers and magazines got worried about online media. They were afraid people would go to the free web and not pay for paper content. They made the bad decision to compete on price. Well newsflash: You can't compete with free. Websites now rule and print media is in deep trouble.

What they should have done is competed on quality. Hell, they could have put the information online, but make people pay and make it high quality.

Universities are now starting to make the same mistake. U of Phoenix and other online school are cheap. If we try to compete with them on price we will get buried. Focus on quality. Make the online only choices so second rate that most consumers will choose the extra expense of real schools. You can throw some classes online, but the majority of a Universities' QUALITY comes from professors who can educate face to face, and researchers who can not only produce by also include their students in that research.

I am very concerned because ever since the system level was created by the chancellor, the only words coming out of system level leadership is EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY. That is the modern buzzword for cost. We can't out low cost the online schools, do that and the we'll be the next great industry to sink.

Leadership should be focused on QUALITY, QUALITY, QUALITY.

Times are changing and cost is critical for the customer. There are plenty of reputable and accredited online programs. I don't know how much U Phoenix is but from what I remember way back when it's not as cheap as many people might think. The way online education is being administered is also changing and will continue to go through innovation. 20-30 years from now the education industry will be different and I can see it a great deal of it being relied on online classes and programs. It's no coincidence that slowly but surely many schools are starting to adopt these programs because that is what the people want as an option at least. The material is there for people to learn and whether it's in person or through a webinar it's up to people on how they want to consume it and apply it in the real world. I'm surely not saying every school needs to go majority online but if the demand for those keeps on increasing which is likely then that will just naturally cause a shift in how traditional universities operate as well.

[JRock]

Jackson needs to be fired. If this happened in any other industry, the leader is shown the door. Someone needs to be held accountable for this obviously and it starts with Jackson.

[ChristopherRyanWilkes]

There is no basis to this whatsoever.

You don't trust my super legit source of a buddy who heard it from a professor? Of course take it with a big grain of salt but just something that's evidentially out there.

[ChristopherRyanWilkes]

Whether it is as high as the 2/3rd number is obviously questionable to me, but I have no doubt they are exploring options to increase revenue without having to build new infrastructure. They offered more and more online classes even just during my time there.

[Ben Gooding]

Well it is what it is. They need to start putting asterisks on undergraduate degrees earned solely online.

[UNTLifer]

Jackson needs to be fired. If this happened in any other industry, the leader is shown the door. Someone needs to be held accountable for this obviously and it starts with Jackson.

This

[oldguystudent]

Why does this whole situation bring this to mind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdF_Vo4B6Ms

[oldguystudent]

So who is going to bear the cost? If not the students then who? If the cost of hamburger meat goes up, in the long run, prices of hamburgers either go up, or hamburgers get smaller, or other cost are cut to make the model work. Less people may be asked to produce the same amount of hamburgers. Translation, in a very simplistic way, either cost of education goes up and is passed on to the customers (ie the students). Or in some way the quality of service and or product goes down. That is just the way it is.

Usually the C.E.O is eventually replaced in the real world, but i digress, this is "government" state run.

One simply goes to the Hamburger Convention in Vegas, throws back a few cocktails, takes Marion Barber to the cleaner's at poker, and finds hamburger of reasonable quality for a low price that can be purchase in bulk by the roll, then introduces it to the masses at home. A good, sound product, for a reasonable price. Cocktails, poor decisions on college baseball sportsbook, and free money from Dallas Cowboys running backs are just a bonus.

[Cerebus]

Times are changing and cost is critical for the customer.

The buzzwords and the "hot new thing" are changing. You know what hasn't changed? All the studies that show that in person learning understanding and retention are much higher than online only or even mixed mode classes. You know what else hasn't changed? Parents and students desire to have a university experience that includes extensive face to face interaction with experts in the classroom and in the field.

People who can't find the time to go to a traditional university are the ones who go to online schools. Fine. Let them. The majority of students,parents, and employers prefer a high quality face to face education. That is out market, don't forget that. Convenience is a consideration, but again studies show that students preference for education plummets when the course material is in their major. In other words they don't mind taking an online or mixed mode class if its an intro to world history class, but once it gets to their major coursework they want to have a class with an expert who can guide their learning.

[flyonthewall]

One simply goes to the Hamburger Convention in Vegas, throws back a few cocktails, takes Marion Barber to the cleaner's at poker, and finds hamburger of reasonable quality for a low price that can be purchase in bulk by the roll, then introduces it to the masses at home. A good, sound product, for a reasonable price. Cocktails, poor decisions on college baseball sportsbook, and free money from Dallas Cowboys running backs are just a bonus.

The poker community misses marion barber