October 2010, and the controversy continues...

The Des Moines Register recently gave a "thistle" to the University of Iowa, for running the institution "like a private club." While the issue at hand was the UI's failure to request Board of Regents approval for football coach Kirk Ferentz' new contract, the problem goes far deeper. The Register pointed out that the UI acted as though the Regents did not have a "need to know" in the Ferentz matter. The evidence shows that this is not an isolated instance.

The most egregious such matter involves the Hancher Auditorium complex, damaged by the 2008 floods. Since then, the University has stalled and delayed repairing the complex, hoping to somehow win state and FEMA funding for an unnecessary new building. The UI has trotted out various excuses, ranging from an alleged inability to insure the repaired structure to a mysterious overcrowding problem which somehow developed after the flood. Until at least the spring of 2009, UI President Sally Mason acknowledged that the existing complex could be repaired. Now, however, the University's official line is that the facility was "destroyed" and must be replaced.

At my request, Senator Charles Grassley's office contacted FEMA for more information. FEMA’s response stated its determination that Hancher could be restored to its pre-flood condition and protected from future floods. Insurance would provide the bulk of the funding; a modest FEMA grant the remainder. Under current Federal rules, if the cost of repair exceeds fifty percent of the cost of a new structure, the agency may apply to FEMA for an "Alternative Project". If the agency wants to include features not present in the existing structure, it's known as an "Improved Project". Essentially, this is made possible by a loophole in the law, which the UI is trying to exploit. As of January 2010, the UI had not filed an application for either an "Alternative" or "Improved Project". It should be noted that the UI's 2006 General Plan called for the Hancher complex to receive a midlife renovation at a cost of around $25 million. That plan made no mention of any need for expanded facilities for the School of Music. Essentially, repairing the existing facility with insurance and FEMA proceeds would fund that renovation.

In October 2009, I wrote an "Iowa View" opinion believing, as I still do, that spending tens of millions of dollars on a non-essential project--the replacement--is a waste of state and Federal funding. I received several interesting responses. One was from a legislator who told me that the Legislature had never been told that FEMA had approved repair funding, prior to a vote on a $100 million bond issue, much of which was intended for a Hancher replacement. Evidently, the UI did not believe that the Iowa Legislature has a "need to know".

Another correspondent is a music faculty member of another Regents institution, who is well-acquainted with his UI colleagues. This writer tells me that the UI music faculty is overwhelmingly in favor of repairing the existing facility. Apparently, they don't see the problems alleged by the UI administration. Mason and her staff apparently feel that not only does the faculty not have a "right to know", they have no right to even be involved in the discussion. Parenthetically, this same correspondent tells me that his institution's president agrees that the Hancher replacement is unwise.

Add to that lesser issues such as the UI's refusal to disclose a proposed name of a campus building before Regents' action, and much more substantial issues such as the institution's reluctance to deal with law enforcement on a well-known sexual assault case, and there is every indication that Sally Mason is presiding over a "private club". This is intolerable.

The University of Iowa needs to be managed with total transparency. If Mason is unable or unwilling to do so, the Regents should ask for her resignation at once.