ADVERTISEMENT

OT: President Whittaker to Resign?

Are we talking about funds for building construction on campus?

How disgraceful...that's not nearly as bad as using education funds to finance prostitution for recruiting purposes...much better ROI*


"He and Hitt wrote to the firm saying that they, along with Whittaker, decided to use leftover operating dollars to build a new classroom and office building to replace an aging one they feared had become a hazard to students and employees."
 
Are we talking about funds for building construction on campus?

How disgraceful...that's not nearly as bad as using education funds to finance prostitution for recruiting purposes...much better ROI*


"He and Hitt wrote to the firm saying that they, along with Whittaker, decided to use leftover operating dollars to build a new classroom and office building to replace an aging one they feared had become a hazard to students and employees."
Yeah I don’t understand the controversy. How dare you build a classroom
 
"Additionally, UCF leaders failed to clearly disclose the funding sources of construction projects to trustees or the Board of Governors". Don't the trustees or Board of Governors know how to ask questions? You're telling me tens of millions of dollars are spent on construction projects that take years to occur but nobody bothered to check where the funds are coming from and what type of money it is? Who from the State should be auditing that?

If there were tens of millions of dollars that were earmarked as a certain type, then why did nobody from the State identify the money as such when the request came in for these new construction projects?

When schlubs like us buy houses we have to show banks what assets/money we have, and where it came from, in order for them to approve our loans. That way you are not trying to buy something they know you can't afford (or are more likely to default on if anything goes wrong in life). For instance, $100k shows up in your account two months before requesting a loan and that is the reason you are able to afford the loan. That sends up lots of red flags. I mean maybe they showed the bank(s) where the money is and it is not the banks job to justify approval of those funds being a certain type of money, but somebody from the State should have approved the money being earmarked for these projects.

I've worked in the DoD for two decades and this could be a case where the school tried to use money allocated for one bucket (let's call it "sustainment"), when the money was earmarked for a different bucket (let's call it "development"). There is certainly sometimes grey areas for performing work that is deemed "development" versus "sustainment" but I don't see how building a new building would fit into "sustainment". Typically "sustainment" dollars are easier to come by then "development" dollars because "sustainment" dollars are already part of yearly budgets and have to just be adjusted up and down, whereas "development" money has to go through a different justification process.

That said, we should just let it all play out before coming to our own conclusions, especially since 99% of us on here (and out in the general public) don't know construction finance, University budgets, rules/regulations on how to use State funding, etc... Let the lawyers argue their cases and if there was wrong-doing, then heads should roll. If not, maybe there are some budgetary grey areas where additional refinement of the rules/regulations need to be made so that all the time, effort, and expense of this investigation doesn't happen again in the future.

I think this quote in the article is the only real content at this point, “Without a thorough and complete investigation, we can’t even speculate on what the remedy would be or what the limitations of a remedy would be,”
 
Last edited:
The government has a Public Integrity and ethics committee. The people that steal money from your paycheck, continue to build toll road after toll road without an end in sight, support shady military actions, tell you how free you are and then create laws to limit that freedom, take political donations from anyone with a pulse...
 
Seems like a lot of controversy over nothing.

Hitt says they were authorized to use operating funds for new construction in the past and the old building needed to be condemned. If we agree that the University needs the functions of that building to continue in order to sustain its operations, this was an emergency.

I do find it troubling that Hitt, Whittaker, etc. let the old building get in such bad shape.
 
Seems like a lot of controversy over nothing.

Hitt says they were authorized to use operating funds for new construction in the past and the old building needed to be condemned. If we agree that the University needs the functions of that building to continue in order to sustain its operations, this was an emergency.

I do find it troubling that Hitt, Whittaker, etc. let the old building get in such bad shape.
Which building was it? The old music building? The one next to it, between the library and Millican Hall?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoKnights2003
The government has a Public Integrity and ethics committee. The people that steal money from your paycheck, continue to build toll road after toll road without an end in sight, support shady military actions, tell you how free you are and then create laws to limit that freedom, take political donations from anyone with a pulse...

Careful Happy! People don't like hearing the truth...esp. on this board. We wouldn't want them to start questioning things....god forbid, their "elected" government.

Anyways...UCF used funds they shouldn't've to build a building. It was illegal, no matter how decrepid Trevor Coulborn Hall was. It's serious especially when you have current and former staffers speaking out of both sides of their collective mouths.
 
"University uses university money on university building" oh the scandal!

Money was appropriated for one kind of University spending, but some of it was used for a different kind of University spending. They shouldn't have done that without first consulting with the Board of Governors. But neither Hitt nor Whitaker personally benefited. It's a issue of bureaucracy, not ethics.

This scandal is like a breath of fresh air compared to Washington.
 
It was a major accounting issue, but fixable. The problem is that the entire State University System is complicit.

I hope Whittaker doesn't resign, just accepts fault. Let's move on, all universities have been put on-notice that it won't be tolerated any more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoKnights2003
Yeah the whole thing is weird. It's certainly not a good look for the university.
Its politics. I wouldn't jump to too many conclusions just yet. I'd hardly say there was any intent on Whittaker or Hitt without al the facts. Isn't Corcoran a west Florida boy btw?
 
I do find it troubling that Hitt, Whittaker, etc. let the old building get in such bad shape.
The problem was the old buildings envelope had failed and was having water intrusion issues, and basically all the brick needed to be removed, the building resealed, and all the brick put back on, and a new roof, and then I believe there was also water issues on the balconies that would be even more complicated to deal with. This all started to occur just as the economic downturn began, so there was no funding for that at all, which would be a significant percentage of the buildings value.

By the time we were out of the recession, water had gotten so far into the building that it would be nearly as expensive to renovate it as build a new building, especially considering they needed alternative accommodations for the buildings usage while that process was taking place. The plan was originally build a new building, move everyone to it, and try to renovate it while nobody was in there, then finally end up with some more needed space, but it took too long to make that happen that the damage was too extensive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stormthecourt?
The government has a Public Integrity and ethics committee. The people that steal money from your paycheck, continue to build toll road after toll road without an end in sight, support shady military actions, tell you how free you are and then create laws to limit that freedom, take political donations from anyone with a pulse...

Well said.

Personally I believe theft is worse than re-appropriating dollars saved. But that’s just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Happy Hands
Well said.

Personally I believe theft is worse than re-appropriating dollars saved. But that’s just me.

No matter, what they did was still "against the law". Despite the condition of the building, that money should never have been allocated for the new building.

Not sure how many of you actually had class there but the layout of that building made no sense at all. It was a twisted maze of dark, brick hallways with very little natural light. Utterly terrible and obviously a far cry from what they are building nowadays.
 
It’s worse than that. They saved money presumably through operational efficiencies, and then reinvested the money to rebuild a hazardous building.

This is why I hate government. No good deed goes unpunished.
Let's hope the shutdown continues. (Yes I know its state funding not fed, but wouldn't it be nice!)
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFhonors
No matter, what they did was still "against the law". Despite the condition of the building, that money should never have been allocated for the new building.

Not sure how many of you actually had class there but the layout of that building made no sense at all. It was a twisted maze of dark, brick hallways with very little natural light. Utterly terrible and obviously a far cry from what they are building nowadays.

Breaking dumb laws is a morally righteous thing to do.
 
Careful Happy! People don't like hearing the truth...esp. on this board. We wouldn't want them to start questioning things....god forbid, their "elected" government.

Anyways...UCF used funds they shouldn't've to build a building. It was illegal, no matter how decrepid Trevor Coulborn Hall was. It's serious especially when you have current and former staffers speaking out of both sides of their collective mouths.

Careful Happy! People don't like hearing the truth...esp. on this board. We wouldn't want them to start questioning things....god forbid, their "elected" government.

Anyways...UCF used funds they shouldn't've to build a building. It was illegal, no matter how decrepid Trevor Coulborn Hall was. It's serious especially when you have current and former staffers speaking out of both sides of their collective mouths.

Illegal? About as much as using my neighbors hose to save his house from burning. Common sense needs to be acknowledged.
 
No matter, what they did was still "against the law". Despite the condition of the building, that money should never have been allocated for the new building.

It's illegal to have your hazard lights in a moving vehicle in Florida, but that doesn't stop a bunch of idiots from doing it.

In my town, you technically need a permit to have a garage sale. You think people are doing that correctly as well? Gimmie a break.
 
It's illegal to have your hazard lights in a moving vehicle in Florida, but that doesn't stop a bunch of idiots from doing it.

In my town, you technically need a permit to have a garage sale. You think people are doing that correctly as well? Gimmie a break.
I would consider those as being relatively minor compared to a public institution and public funds. Our administration should know they’re under scrutiny and should play by the rules IMO.
 
Do I have this right? In reality land, money was allocated for rooms for education. Rooms for education were/are made, and the only law broken was a law simply made to be a law? End results don't matter? Like said above, money for rooms for education didn't go for a football stadium, or for some pathetic politician to travel to China to see how they make rooms, but actually went to rooms for education. Is that simple enough for even a politician to understand?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoKnights2003
I would consider those as being relatively minor compared to a public institution and public funds. Our administration should know they’re under scrutiny and should play by the rules IMO.

While not a good look and while we should strive to always follow the rules, they didn't buy gifts or take expensive trips; our government is doing way worse with our tax dollars than building a new building to replace a dilapidated one. Cut their budget for the difference and call it a day. Sounds like making a mountain out of a mole hill.

giphy.gif
 
ADVERTISEMENT