Spring Break
Financial figures in the Rose interim report are incorrect, Rush says
by Alana Abramson
Staff writer
News | 5/19/09
Posted online at 3:15 AM EST on 5/19/09
The interim report released by the Committee on the Future of the Rose April 30 was met with criticism by Michael Rush, the current director of the Rose Art Museum, who questioned the accuracy of the financial figures presented in the report.
The interim report is a compilation of the research the committee has gathered about the Rose, particularly regarding the museum's budget as well as the legal concerns of selling art and operating as a public museum.
Committee chair Prof. Jerry Samet (PHIL) wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that the report was released with the intention of informing the Brandeis community about the committee's process. "We wanted to let the Brandeis Community know what we were up to. More specifically, we were able to share some general information about the legal situation, make clear the the Rose itself was not in any sort of budget crisis, and outline the sorts of outreach and consultation," he wrote.
The committee, formed in March by the Faculty Senate Council and the provost, is composed of professors, students, alumnae and members of the Rose Board of Overseers. It is charged with devising options for the future of the Rose.
The monetary figures about the Rose's endowment and revenue from fiscal 2008 were included in the section of the report concerning budget information. One of the figures in the report states that the Rose's indirect expenses-money allocated from the University's budget for the museum-in fiscal 2008 were between $500,000 and $600,000. In a phone interview with the Justice, however, Rush said that those figures were inaccurate. Rush explained that when he assumed the position of director of the museum in 2005, the indirect costs were approximately $200,000.
"There is no way that indirect costs have risen $400,000 in three years. The money quoted in the report is not concordant with the records we have been operating with at the museum," Rush said.
Samet went on to explain, however, that the main idea behind releasing the figures was to show that the decisions regarding the Rose were a result of the University's fiscal challenges, not the museum's. When asked if the committee stands by the figures reported, he responded that the figures presented in the report did not misrepresent the information the committee had received about the Rose budget.
The interim report is a compilation of the research the committee has gathered about the Rose, particularly regarding the museum's budget as well as the legal concerns of selling art and operating as a public museum.
Committee chair Prof. Jerry Samet (PHIL) wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that the report was released with the intention of informing the Brandeis community about the committee's process. "We wanted to let the Brandeis Community know what we were up to. More specifically, we were able to share some general information about the legal situation, make clear the the Rose itself was not in any sort of budget crisis, and outline the sorts of outreach and consultation," he wrote.
The committee, formed in March by the Faculty Senate Council and the provost, is composed of professors, students, alumnae and members of the Rose Board of Overseers. It is charged with devising options for the future of the Rose.
The monetary figures about the Rose's endowment and revenue from fiscal 2008 were included in the section of the report concerning budget information. One of the figures in the report states that the Rose's indirect expenses-money allocated from the University's budget for the museum-in fiscal 2008 were between $500,000 and $600,000. In a phone interview with the Justice, however, Rush said that those figures were inaccurate. Rush explained that when he assumed the position of director of the museum in 2005, the indirect costs were approximately $200,000.
"There is no way that indirect costs have risen $400,000 in three years. The money quoted in the report is not concordant with the records we have been operating with at the museum," Rush said.
Samet went on to explain, however, that the main idea behind releasing the figures was to show that the decisions regarding the Rose were a result of the University's fiscal challenges, not the museum's. When asked if the committee stands by the figures reported, he responded that the figures presented in the report did not misrepresent the information the committee had received about the Rose budget.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
michael rush
posted 5/19/09 @ 12:11 PM EST
When I was contacted by the Justice about this piece and told it was for "the graduation issue" I was clear that what I wanted to address was graduation. (Continued…)
Post a Comment