Someone accidentally let the cat out of the bag. Maybe the architecture firm SHW Group got a nasty phone call from CMU after SHW accidentally gave the wrong presentation.

Well, not entirely wrong. They just talked about the future plans for the Bovee University Center, which were never approved by the Board of Trustees or previously disclosed to the university community.

All of the sudden a project that was a $5 million plan sprouted a second phase, one that was never mentioned at board meetings or in literature or in press releases or public comments about the UC renovations.

It's not like we can't or don't understand the need to prepare for the future. Trustees routinely talk about 'X' amount of dollars for construction with 'Y' amount of work to be done in the future. But no one said anything about phases of construction until the April 7 presentation.

So it's odd that vice president David Burdette used this line in an otherwise well-reasoned piece in Monday's CM Life.

"Unfortunately, the potential cost of all the changes in the proposed UC master plan also was shared."

Huh?

It's unfortunate that the community knows potential costs ahead of time?

That's not unfortunate. In fact it was a precipitous appearance for anyone who is or will be paying for the changes. We would actually say it's fortunate that someone didn't get the wink when the SHW Group gave the presentation. Pity on presenter Patrick Calhoun, if only someone had CC'd him the e-mail saying; "The first $5 million is public, the next $6 million is hush-hush."

Sharing information should be what all construction and architecture firms do with the CMU community, because apparently administration officials won't let you know where your money is being sent - unless someone lets the cat out.

The only two bones about the presentation Burdette picked were that the $10.9 million figure included $5.9 million in future work and that SHW had spilt the beans.

But no one ever knew there were "phases" planned; because no one ever gave the green light for additional phases or even planning for them, in fact all the evidence showed that the ceiling for the project was $5 million. Not $5 million now with the possibility of more later.

It is disappointing for a top administrator to call the release of significant and relevant information unfortunate.

It only furthers our suspicions that trustees and/or administrators are trying to get more costly improvements to the UC than they are publicly admitting. If you're comfortable with paying the costs in the future, why get upset when someone mentions those potential costs? It should have been enough to admit that phases had been added to the project in private. But to say releasing the information was the problem, not the information itself?

We look forward to a better response.

How about full disclosure on the project including timetables, estimates, the scope of the project, when and who authorized SHW to go beyond the $5 million mark and any approvals needed here on out and from whom?

Would that be unfortunate as well?