By 2005, the University Athletic Department will no longer receive its $2 million subsidy from the University’s general fund to cover its operating costs, according to an announcement by University President Dave Frohnmayer. A spokesman for the department says cutting the subsidy is fine with them.
“That’s good,” said Dave Williford, assistant athletic director of media services. “It’s proof that the Athletic Department is concerned and understands where the faculty senate is coming from.”
The Athletic Department will have to cover the hole opened in its nearly $30 million budget by the administration cutting the subsidy, but Williford said that won’t be a problem. By the time the subsidy is eliminated, he said, the Autzen Stadium expansion will be completed, and more revenue will be coming into the department.
“That’s why we think the Autzen Stadium expansion is so important for the Athletic Department and the UO,” he said.
Williford also said that having the subsidy phased out shows that the Athletic Department is a true part of the campus and not a separate entity from the University’s educational mission.
Frohnmayer’s announcement Wednesday that the Athletic Department’s subsidy would be eliminated is the latest installment in a long-simmering debate over the millions of dollars supporting intercollegiate athletics.
Many professors, including former faculty senate president James Earl, a professor in the English department, have become outspoken critics of the growing athletic spending at the University and at other institutions across the country.
In his final remarks as president, Earl called the Autzen Stadium expansion a “misjudgment on a titanic scale” and said the project’s nearly $80 million price tag could fund the Honors College for 140 years.
The $2 million subsidy has long been a focus in the debate, as educators have questioned the need to give money to athletics when, they claim, academic programs are underfunded and faculty members are leaving Oregon for better-paying posts elsewhere.
During his announcement, Frohnmayer said cutting the subsidy would open up $1 million for professors’ salaries.
Richard Sundt, an associate professor of art history, has been one of the most outspoken critics of athletic funding, and he said he was pleased with the announcement.
“I’m gratified to see we’ll get some of that money back,” he said. “I could see any number of programs that could benefit from this money.”
Sundt said he first began criticizing the subsidy when it was introduced in the early 1990s by then-University President Myles Brand. Sundt said he finds it ironic that Brand, who is now the president of Indiana University, has become one of the country’s leading administrators to speak out against inflated athletic budgets.
While Sundt said the move was a good one, he added that he was displeased that it only came about because of intense faculty lobbying and not through the administration itself.
“This happened simply because of the movement of the faculty,” he said. “We haven’t had the support of the administration.”