On Jan. 30, the University Board of Governors approved a $102 million stadium expansion. It was a disastrous moment. The proposed expansion reeks of hypocrisy, violates every known principle of financial responsibility, and shows a complete and utter disregard for dialogue and discussion within the University community.
Consider the hypocrisy. The administration continues to make self-serving pronouncements about the importance of transparency and open discussion. But behind everyone's back, it spent $5 million on stadium expansion plans. Three million dollars was spent without even bothering to get board approval. After this huge outlay, the University had completed only 50 percent of the design plans, meaning that 5 percent of the total construction budget was spent before blueprints had even been finished.
With the $5 million already spent, the administration held one open forum less than a week before the BOG was scheduled to vote. (By way of comparison, the University of Michigan deliberated for over four years before deciding to expand its football stadium.) Among Rutgers students and alumni, the same question keeps coming up. How can Rutgers purport to be an institution devoted to rational deliberation and open debate when its administration consistently chooses to make major decisions in secret?
Let's talk about finance. The board has been pushed into reckless behavior by the demands of the Department of Athletics. Now, they admit that they mean to start construction while the project is still $30 million short of financing. George Zoffinger, the only member of the board with real estate experience and the only one courageous enough to vote against the expansion, has said that the stadium project as it now exists puts Rutgers "on the road to ruin."
The board says it's going to raise the missing $30 million from private sources. This is a case, once again, where George Zoffinger's voice ought to be heeded. Last year, Zoffinger put in a good deal of time trying to scare up private donations for the football coach's $1 million raise. He couldn't do it. That experience no doubt has something to do with his opposition to the stadium expansion.
Where would that $30 million come from? Here's the essential point: If Rutgers doesn't raise the money (a very likely possibility during a recession), the administration will take it from funds otherwise being spent on academics. From this perspective, the board's vote for stadium expansion was a vote against library acquisitions, campus improvements, new or renovated classrooms, more livable dormitories, reasonable tuition costs for New Jersey students, and much more.
It gets worse. Rutgers has been selling this project as a way to end University subsidies to athletics. Their thinking is that more seats equal more revenue, which means less money the University has to give the football team every year. However, the football team will be using all the extra revenue to pay the debt service on the expansion. So for as long as football has to pay the debt - 30 years - the University will continue to subsidize the football team. And if the football team doesn't fill the stadium, a real possibility if there are injuries and losses, the University is financially obligated to increase its subsidy to cover the shortfall. Essentially, Rutgers is throwing caution to the winds by assuming that two winning seasons will translate into 30 years of success.
Given the nature of the stadium project, it must be asked if $102 million is actually enough. In large-scale construction projects, it's standard practice to agree on a guaranteed maximum price. Rutgers, however, failed to secure a guarantee from Gilbane, the construction firm with whom the University is dealing.
There is a good explanation for this. For large developments, cost overruns are the name of the game. In a jail it contracted to build for Bergen County, for instance, Gilbane originally projected a total cost of $45 million. Once the facility was actually under construction, according to The Bergen Record, cost projections rose to $65.8 million. Apply the same proportion to the Rutgers stadium project, and it might well wind up costing upwards of $150 million.
Many New Jersey newspapers have spoken out against stadium expansion. Thousands of Rutgers alumni and undergraduates are adamantly opposed. There's still time to stop the board's project in its tracks. All that's needed is a strong collective voice in favor of Rutgers' core ideals as an institution of higher learning. Let's hope that voice makes itself heard before the opportunity is lost.
Josh Ontell is a Rutgers College senior majoring in economics. He is also the Rutgers College 2008 Class president.
