As the University struggles to deal with budget cuts, laying off faculty and cutting services, new construction throughout campus may have some students scratching their heads.
The construction may seem inappropriate, but administrators say there are reasons the construction continues despite cutbacks.
“The fact is these projects come from a different pot of money,” said Paul Favaloro, director of resources at Facility Services.
Favaloro says the most expensive construction projects on campus — those costing more than $500,000 — are funded through capital outlay, money flowing directly from the state.  
Political realities and legislative structural hurdles mean the money that goes to capital outlay will always go to capital outlay, according to Jason Droddy, director of External Affairs.
“Could the Legislature use some capital funds for the operating budget? There are some significant obstacles that would have to be overcome before capital funds could be used for operating, and in the end, it’s not much to speak of,” Droddy said.
Droddy also said the University has to use capital outlay money for the specific projects for which the money is dedicated by law, or the money will go elsewhere.
“It’s like a coupon. It counts as real money, but it isn’t really because you have to spend it for something specific,” he said.
Droddy cited construction on the Student Union as an example.
“If we wanted to stop construction on the Union, I guess we could,” he said. “But that money can’t go to anything else.”
Projects with capital outlay funding cost significant money. The new business school facility, for example, cost $39.9 million in construction costs. But because the funding for those projects comes as line items in bills from the Legislature, they can’t be used to pay professors — or for anything else outside the strict bounds of the project.
The business school construction and construction on the new band hall were both funded by a 50-50 state-private match — the University raised half the funds in donations, then the state matched those funds.
Not only are the funds for many of these projects drawn from dedicated funding sources, they’re also the result of years — sometimes decades — of planning.
Once approved, the state usually doles out funds for the construction in increments, which draws out the process.
Some projects are now coming to fruition because they have only now gotten far enough in the process, said Emmett David, director of Facility Development.
Money for most smaller projects that don’t require capital outlay funding also come from dedicated sources of funding, David said.
For example, the parking lot near the Indian Mounds is paid for with auxiliary funds — in this case, money Parking, Traffic and
Transportation raised from fees and parking tickets.
“This is money that you couldn’t use to, say, pay professors,” David said.
Kevin Cope, Faculty Senate president, says he’s heard complaints from faculty about the work.
Cope said he’s aware of the dedicated funding sources that          prevent construction funds from going to the academic core.
“The fundamental problem is the priorities in the way the state allocates funding,” Cope said. “The state is handing campus a deal with the devil.”
Cope criticized the state Legislature for being historically stingy in funding the University.
“History doesn’t come from just barely hanging on – it comes from proper funding,” he said.
David said while some might wish the money his department uses could go to other projects, much of the new construction is essential to the goals of the University.
“As academics is responsible for educating students, it’s Facility Services’ job to get students from their parking lot to a clean campus,” he said. “Students want that service. Students pay for that service.”
—-
Contact Matthew Albright at [email protected]