SEMO'S AX MAY YET FALL; COCHRAN: ATHLETIC CUTS STILL POSSIBLE

Southeast Missouri State University's athletic budget for the 1992-93 fiscal year may still be cut, although not by the magnitude originally recommended, a university official indicated Wednesday.

Provost Leslie Cochran told the Faculty Senate that some recommendation for cutting the athletic budget could be made to the regents.

Faculty senators, including several on the university's Budget Review Committee, expressed dismay over a decision last week by the Board of Regents not to consider the committee's recommendation to cut $250,000 from the athletic budget.

Senators said they plan to circulate a petition among the university faculty in an effort to register their dissatisfaction with the regents' action, which they view as pre-empting the budget process.

Faculty members said they were upset over the fact the regents made the decision during a telephone conference call without even hearing from the budget committee. The decision was made at a meeting that was called to consider a tuition hike. The athletic budget issue was not on the agenda.

They complained that the regents acted before the budget process was completed. The entire budget package, they said, has yet to be finalized by the budget committee and forwarded to the administration and the regents.

Faculty members were particularly incensed over a remark made by board president Carl Ben Bidewell of Poplar Bluff, who said the regents oppose cutting the institution's $1.8 million subsidy of athletics by "1 red cent."

Allen Gathman, Faculty Senate chairman, said, "It's a pretty clear message from the board."

He said prior to the Faculty Senate meeting that it appears athletics is "a sacred cow."

Faculty senators said the regents seem more concerned about athletics than academics.

"They don't really give a hoot about what the faculty want," said senator Shelba Branscum. "They (the regents) had no data, no information and no input (from the committee).

"It's the way that things are done that alarms me," said Branscum.

"We wanted it (the athletic budget) trimmed back some, in a reasonable manner," she said.

Even with a tuition hike, the university still has a budget shortfall in the range of $100,000 to $150,000, which must be addressed in any final budget package, Branscum said.

Cochran was not in attendance when the Faculty Senate meeting began. He arrived near the end of the meeting after being contacted by a Southeast Missourian reporter.

Cochran assured senators that the budget process is continuing.

He said the budget committee will be meeting again to finalize a draft budget. The Board of Regents is expected to consider approving the 1992-93 budget at its June meeting.

Cochran said instead of a $250,000 cut, the university might want to consider a smaller cut, while, at the same time, calling on the athletic department to bring in an added $50,000 in outside revenue. He said the $50,000 figure is merely illustrative of a possible budget move, and not a specific proposal.

The university administration had opposed the proposed $250,000 cut. That was reflected in the narrow 12-to-11 vote by the budget committee last week against rescinding its earlier recommendation calling for the cut.

Cochran said the regents might consider a more modest cut in the athletic budget if jointly recommended by the administration and the university's budget committee.

"I am glad to hear that the administration has not abandoned the budget process," Gathman told Cochran.

But he added, "My concern is that what we do in the Budget Review Committee doesn't have a whole lot of meaning."

Cochran said he doesn't believe the regents' action puts a halt to the whole budget process, including the athletic funding issue. "I think you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the budget process."