Knuckler

Treasurer on the hill

I faced some crooked-armed lefties over the years. Sprat Murray pitched for Bob Higganbotham’s Sunday afternoon Orioles; Don Mossi pitched for the Detroit Tigers, and the unhitable (at least for me) Wally Phillips pitched for our own Tigers. He is now relieved by Chris McCrudden, Princeton’s Treasurer, whose knuckler, delivered in an April 27, 2005, letter, contains the university’s defense of its refusal to eliminate tuition. The pitch begins, benignly enough, with a short history of Princeton’s endowment, conceding that “rates of return in the late 1990’s far exceeded our expectations...[because]...the Trustees were concerned that the elevated rates of return were not sustainable on the long term...” A few feet from the plate the pitch continues to look fat and slow. The letter concedes that “there is no doubt that one could decide to make Princeton free to all and eliminate tuition”. But there the straight-looking stuff ends, as if the concession were dangled only to confuse the batter. The ball veers irrationally out of the strike zone. Our crafty treasurer conjures up images of bases-loaded walks were Princeton to eliminate tuition or stop soliciting donations. He claims that “programs” would have to be “reduced”; the faculty no longer would be the “best”; “faculty-student ratios” no longer would allow an “intensive level of undergraduate independent work”; there would be fewer library books and athletic teams “per student”; buildings could not be maintained “appropriately”, and “adequate living expenses” could not be provided to students. To understand how absurd these claims are, note that the university collected $34 million in net tuition last year, and the reinvested investment return on the endowment was in excess of $1.287 billion. Therefore, Mr. McCrudden is saying that if Princeton did not have its tuition income it would elect to reduce programs, athletics, and books, have less than the best faculty, not maintain buildings, and not provide adequate living expenses for students rather than reduce from $1.287 billion to $1.253 billion the amount of endowment earnings that it reinvests. If this sounds plausible to you, you probably swung at the pitch as it bounced in the dirt in front of home plate.

Retaliation

University throws at students in the bottom half of the inning

Princeton's fiscal year does not end for a few more days, but the Trustees appear to know already that the increase in the size of the endowment is going to be obscene, again. On June 8 they announced that this year they will spend $24.8 million more from the investment return on the endowment than they did last year, because the returns were "strong". (See "Web Stories" at "princeton.edu"). This is good news for the faculty. $3,000,000 is allocated to "recruiting and retaining faculty members". This also is good news for administrative employees and staff. $5,300,000 is allocated to the IT office and "other term positions". And, under the heading of "I could have guessed", it's the best news of all for the people who solicit donations to build up the endowment. $6,200,000 is allocated for "expansion of the development office". But it's not good news for the students, or for their families, or for anyone else who may be helping a student pay the ever-increasing, staggering costs of being an undergraduate at Princeton. Not one dollar of the $24.8 million is going to be spent to reduce tuition or other charges to students.

So much for brushing back the Trustees of Princeton University, or, as we used to say on Brokaw Field: "Stay loose, meat."