It’s a book about backroom deals, money mismanagement and a supposed battle between athletics and academics. It’s also a critical look at controversies that have surrounded the University and its president for more than 10 years.

“Behind the Hedges: Big Money and Power Politics at the University of Georgia,” a book by Rich Whitt that paints an unfavorable picture of University President Michael Adams, hits stores Monday.

Whitt, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter who covered state and local government at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution before retiring in 2007, worked as a journalist for more than 30 years and was honored for his investigative reporting.

Though Whitt died of a heart attack in January, his words are highlighting controversies some students may have never heard about.

Tom Jackson, vice president for public affairs, said the University has moved on from the issues discussed in the book.

“It’s a retelling of one side of an old story – long since resolved,” Jackson told The Red & Black in a phone interview Thursday. “The University has made great progress in the past decade under the leadership of President Adams.”

In a March 26 e-mail obtained by The Red & Black from UGA Foundation Chairman Bill Young to Foundation trustees, Young said he was not informed the book was being written and was not contacted for comment.

“We continue to enjoy a very good relationship with the administration and will continue to focus on the foundation’s primary mission, which is supporting and enhancing academics at the University of Georgia,” Young wrote. “We will not let this book detract from that mission.”

Young could not be reached for further comment Thursday.

Norman Fletcher, chairman of the Arch Foundation, wrote to trustees on March 27, explaining the University would not make “extensive comments” about the book.

“When UGA administrators originally were approached by the author, they declined to participate in interviews for the book after reaching the conclusion that the effort would not be objective,” he wrote.

He expressed disappointment in someone “rehashing the issues.”

“Both the Arch and UGA Foundations have the same goal – to look forward and do all we can to help the University advance academically and ultimately become the best state university it can be,” he said. “I’ve talked with Young, we’re looking ahead, and I regret that someone is bringing up stale news.”

Although some have implied advance payments for the book came from biased sources, the publisher said it was funded by NewSouth Books.

“There were no funds by an outside source,” said publisher Suzanne La Rosa in a telephone interview Thursday. “We’re an independent publishing house and have a good track record for publishing good books that speak the truth.”

“We didn’t publish this to get into a mudslinging contest with Mike Adams,” she said. “The issues are really polarized, and the point of the book is that groups are so splintered they can’t achieve what they’re there to do.”

Adams, now in his 11th year, has served longer than many of the University’s 21 presidents. But Whitt presents that Adams has been surrounded by doubt and controversy since he was appointed in 1997.

In early 1997, University President Charles B. Knapp announced he would leave to head the Aspen Institute, an organization for environmental and economic concerns.

“On paper, Adams may have been the unlikeliest of candidates,” Whitt wrote. “As president of a small private college in Kentucky, he had no experience at a research university, let alone a flagship school like UGA.”

But Adams was chosen – a decision many of the book’s sources believed to be through influence by Board of Regents member Donald Leebern, Whitt wrote.

The book delves into the retirement of Vince Dooley, the University’s separation from the UGA Foundation and a controversial Deloitte & Touche audit that reflected poorly on Adams’s money management.

Dooley, a revered figure in Georgia athletics, is just one part to the puzzle making up a very public squabble involving Adams, athletics and the UGA Foundation. On the surface, the Dooley problem seemed to be a struggle for power between athletics and academics, Whitt wrote. But he makes the argument the seeds of doubt and distrust were sewn long before Dooley’s contract as athletic director was not renewed in June 2003.

Another piece was the University’s disassociation with UGA Foundation, the private entity responsible for University fundraising.

“When Adams arrived, the foundation had few rules about the president’s spending of privately raised money in accounts over which he had direct control,” Whitt wrote. “These ‘president’s discretionary funds’ were used to pay for such things as country club memberships, entertainment and transportation. If a UGA president asked for money it was assumed to be in the best interest of the University and was generally not questioned by the foundation.”

A considerable portion of the book analyzes a forensic audit commissioned by the UGA Foundation to investigate Adams’ salary, expenses and other issues. Whitt wrote, “More an investigation than an audit, they’re usually ordered up when there is suspicion of misconduct or abuse of office.”

The release of the report escalated tensions, according to Whitt, and in April 2005 the Regents directed Adams to send the Foundation a letter stating it would not be recognized as a cooperative organization. The Regents established a new private fundraiser, the Arch Foundation, Whitt wrote.

Whitt wrote that the audit report accused Adams of using UGA Foundation assets to benefit himself, his friends and his family.

The audit reported that Adams’ wife, Mary, had been receiving a $48,000 stipend since 2001 for duties including enhancing “UGA’s relationship with the community in the city of Athens, Georgia.”

“The D&T report also cited Adams for spending $10,000 in Foundation money for food and beverages to host a commencement luncheon for the 2002 law school class that included his son, David,” Whitt wrote. “The luncheon, at the president’s house, was ‘by invitation only’ and not all the faculty and students were invited.”

“The Foundation could find no other instance where Adams hosted a luncheon for a particular UGA college or school,” Whitt wrote, noting the luncheon being “invitation only” raised questions of whether the event was a personal expenditure.

Reactions to the audit were heated, Whitt noted.

“Some Foundation trustees accused the Regents of not bothering to read the document before issuing a statement endorsing Adams,” Whitt wrote. “The truth is that the Regents already knew much about what was coming. In addition, most were convinced that the Foundation had no business meddling in their affairs.”

Whitt wrote Adams admitted mistakes in financial handlings and reimbursed the foundation for the luncheon, but “pointed out that auditors found ‘the majority of expenses have complied with all policies and procedures.’”

The University has been reluctant to comment on any specifics, but note progress has been made since the time of the book’s controversies.

“We feel like the University’s trajectory is good,” Tom Landrum, senior vice president for external affairs, told The Red & Black Thursday. “We’ve made a lot of progress. We don’t want old issues that have been thoroughly vetted to detract from the progress of the University and the students.”