Date: 19 July ‘06
Board Of Sedgwick County
Commissioners
Sedgwick County Court House
525 N. Main Ste. 320
Wichita, KS 67203 (8,H2)
RE: Public Agenda Presentation
1.5 City/County Mill Levy
Wednesday 19th, July 2006
The following is roughly the presentation made to the County Commission:
MAY IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION:
My name is Fred Marrs on behalf of the Shocker Black & Golds, and I am hear to speak to the issue of the
1.5 City/County Mill Levy for WSU.
The number one thing I would like to establish today is that football should not be blamed. The number
one problem for the last 20 years at WSU has been and is the continual loss of students. When in 1986 we
were even with KSU, we are now down 9,000 traditional students.
In our first meeting with president Beggs on July 8, 2004, I suggested we should just use the annual
addition to the mill levy fund, so that no existing programs would be effected, for athletic scholarships, and
also contingently sell season football tickets to reinstate football and solve our loss of traditional students
problem.
President Beggs advised Jim Meek and myself from our group, that he would bring back football if we
could show him how to pay for the football scholarships and the Title IX scholarships. My analysis
subsequently showed we could endow the scholarships with 2 years addition to the mill levy with a slot of
$1,250,000.
Mayor Mayans wanted to increase the amount slotted for football scholarships, for other related issues, by
the amount of the "contingency" line item on the mill levy, for the reason he said: because no one on the city
council could say how the contingency line item money was being spent, and if we used it for athletic
scholarships, at least we would know how the contingency money was being spent by the university
administration.
Therein I believe is the basis of the problem of Beggs refusal to properly consider the Mayor’s plan to
reinstate football and stop our continuing traditional student loss. I believe president Beggs could not use the
contingency fund line item, which the university identifies as for "unanticipated program needs", because I
suspect he may have already ear marked the FY 2007 "unanticipated expense" contingency funds.
In the FY 2006 budget, we had $2,721,241 in general scholarships supporting 2090 students, out of
14,229 students, or 14.7 percent of our students on scholarship. The mill levy supported 83.5 percent of
those scholarships, or $2,272,236 supporting 1683 students. One would think another 85 athletic
scholarships wouldn’t make much difference. But we continue to lose traditional students because we do not
solve the root cause of the loss of traditional students, and Don Beggs covers his loss of student problem, by
using our money to buy students. So last year we had 1,683 students on mill levy scholarships, but we can’t
have 85 athletic scholarships for football, to draw other traditional students to the university, a mere 5 percent
of the total students on mill levy supported scholarships, because Don Beggs perhaps has ear marked our
contingency gift moneys, the supposed "unanticipated contingency expenses".
The last fiscal year of president Hughes, he requested $7,091 for the contingency line item. President
Beggs in his first year increased the contingency line item 66.9 times, to $474,356. This was I submit an
unconscionable and unexplained increase.
In 8 years of Beggs tenure we have budgeted $4,323,653 for contingency and the university shows
actually spent in some manner $2,587,382 with a delta difference of $1,736,221 perhaps transferred to Don
Beggs "President’s contingency fund" not listed on the mill levy to my knowledge. No one can say how the
carry over contingency was spent, or for that matter, how any of the $4,323,653 in budgeted contingency was
spent.
The records I have so far produced from the university and provided you, show at least 3 contingency
accounts, and perhaps 4. The mill levy contingency account is 8823. The president’s contingency account is
9755 - 5068. The president says: "my contingency account 5068. Please note, not the mill levy contingency
account, but "my" contingency account. So it is clear to me that the president puts carry over moneys into his
contingency 5068, not the mill levy contingency account 8823.
There is also a "University Fund (president)". The records that I have so far produced do not identify the
number of this referred to account, although I suspect it may also be referring to account 5068. There is also
"Account RS3010 - 1PR001". I suspect this account may be a WSU foundation account. But only account
8823 is identified on the mill levy as the mill levy contingency account.
A university professor has recently advised me that president Beggs has a 5 percent contingency reserve
carry over policy requirement for all departments receiving mill levy funds. I suspect this 5 percent goes to the
president’s carry over account at the end of the fiscal year.
On June 16th last month in the next to last document I provided you, Don Beggs instructed the transfer of
$500,000 from "Account RS3010 - 1PR001" to the scholarship account. A mere 8 days later Don Beggs
advised the press that "The majority of the money" in the mill levy contingency account went to scholarships.
The contingency account for the mill levy is 8823, not RS3010 - 1PR001, which is probably a foundation
account.
In the 17th document I provided you, that I have presently produced from the university, in a missive dated
7/30/2002, Linda Gill advises Eric Sexton and Patsy Selby for the WSU foundation:
"Eric, Here’s the information you requested regarding FY 2002 mill levy carryovers ... University Fund
(president) $475,327.02"
The FY 2002 mill levy carry overs totaled $580,753.44. I submit that no one but the university can presently
tell were that $580,753.44 was spent in FY 2003.
In the 13th document I provided you, a memorandum from Don Beggs to Patsy Selby, the president states:
"Now that we know the final revenues form [sic] the FY 2002 mill levy budget, please transfer the amount of
$246,219 from the President’s contingency to the Welcome Center fund. In addition, for budget presentation
purposes for the FY 2004 mill levy budget process these funds should be presented as spent during FY
2002." (Emphasis added).
(Note: This budget presentation purposes president Beggs is talking about is the annual presentation to
the City comparing the Recommended up-coming FY Budget, last years FY Projected Budget, and the year
before Actual Budget. As I presently understand the document, I believe president Beggs is instructing that
carry over contingency moneys from the FY 2002 budget, that were not spent in FY 2002, are to be
transferred in FY 2003 to the Welcome Center fund, and "for budget presentation purposes" for the FY 2004
mill levy budget process with the City, presented to the City as spent during FY 2002. In short, the City is to
be advised that the moneys in question were spent in FY 2002, when in fact by the same document the
instruction is to transfer the moneys in question in FY 2003 to the Welcome Center Fund, for which transfer
the City is not to be advised.) (Note added).
The Organization & Development section contains a line item for oversight and accounting. For 8 years of
oversight and accounting by the WSU Board of Trustees, taxpayers have paid $1,741,900. Each year
consists of 2 letters, 1 summary sheet with three years numbers, and 9 pages of generalized item comments
or mental gymnastics. 12 total pages for an average cost of $217,737.50 per year. (Note: we could give
another 50 local students full tuition scholarships for this amount).
In his letter to County Manager William Buchanan, president Beggs states: "In addition, each proposed
program expenditure has identified goals to increase our accountability to taxpayers."
(Note: Anything outside of capital improvement debt service is a gift not an entitlement and not the
university’s money. I object to paying any money, let-a-lone $1,741,900 to oversee and account for the mill
levy expenditures. The university has a legal obligation to account for gifts and the university employees are
state employees, paid by the state. We shouldn’t have to pay them for a function they are legally required to
accomplish.) (Note added).
I’m a taxpayer.
When I ask for documents to review they tell me now, notwithstanding that we taxpayers have already paid
them $1,741,900 for accounting the last 8 years for Beggs tenure, for documents I wish to review, that I have
to pay them an additional $3000 just to find the documents, and perhaps thousands more if I want to look at
Roger Lowe’s accountings. Who knows how long it will take him to find his records. And, the breeding of
rabbits and ratcheting up of costs continues as I am advised the estimate is open ended and the final costs
could be thousands more.
But president Beggs is profoundly concerned with his accountability to the taxpayers, just apparently not
me. God forbid I should be allowed to knowledgeably look at what passes for the accounting of mill levy
moneys at WSU.
I have drafted a request for inspection and copying of documents for the Commission, along with a floppy
disk to change it however you like. Anyone on the Commission can ask WSU for inspection and copying of
documents. I would ask the Commission as a whole, and my Commissioner Dave Unruh specifically, to request
the inspection and copying of these documents from the university. If you will obtain the documents for me, I
will volunteer to review and copy selected documents, and provide my review, analysis, and report, to both the
County and the City, pro bono, for the good of the community.
Thank you for your time and attention to my comments.
cc: Mayor Mayans; Community leaders.