January 6, 2005
Governor or no, UW and higher ed budgets will loom large in 2005 legislature
The Washington State Legislature will open its session Jan. 10, regardless of whether all litigation regarding the governor’s race is settled. Beyond the usual discussions of higher education funding for the coming biennium, this session is likely to focus on longer-range goals for the UW and the other public institutions.
The budget proposal submitted by Gov. Locke will provide the reference point against which the new governor’s and legislative proposals will be calibrated, according to Randy Hodgins, UW director of state relations. “The uncertainty over the governor’s race shouldn’t have a major impact on the timing of the new governor’s budget, which will likely be submitted in mid to late March, after the state updates its revenue forecast and caseload predictions,” he says.
Gov. Locke’s proposed budget contained both good news and bad news for the UW. It called for about $60 million in enhanced state appropriations — funds to implement collective bargaining agreements for represented employees, as well as cost-of-living increases for faculty and professional staff. The proposal also would allow the UW some flexibility in tuition increases for resident undergraduates, allowing tuition to grow by 5 to 9 percent each year.
But the governor’s budget allowed for no additional enrollments in Seattle, Tacoma or Bothell. Hodgins attributes the absence of new enrollments to a misunderstanding with the governor’s office: “Our budget request said that we would accept about 1,000 new enrollments chiefly in Bothell and Tacoma if and only if significant progress was made on state funding per student. We think the governor’s office may have interpreted that statement to mean that new enrollments would be acceptable only if we achieved full funding of all enrollments.
“We’ll be discussing this issue with the new governor and the legislature as they work on the budget. We believe Gov. Locke’s general fund budget does relatively well for the University of Washington, and as a result, we’d very much like to have additional enrollments, especially in Bothell and Tacoma.” The UW also will work with other public institutions to continue having State Need Grants fully funded by the state. Gov. Locke’s budget calls for the grants to be partially funded by the institutions themselves.
Hodgins calls Gov. Locke’s capital budget “a disappointment.” The UW would receive $72 million as part of an overall capital allocation to the six public four-year universities of $280 million. The UW had requested $157 million as part of a collective request of $504 million for all four-year schools. Among the most urgent needs are funds for future expansion in Bothell and Tacoma, and design money for Savery and Clark halls. “If the design money isn’t allocated, it pushes back construction of those buildings beyond the 2007-09 biennium, and we fall two years farther behind in our restoration and remodel program,” Hodgins says. ”We will redouble our efforts to make sure that the new governor and the legislature understand how critical these capital projects are.”
The issue of access to higher education is likely to loom large in the next session. “There have been a lot of media stories over the last 12 months about how each of the four-year schools is having to close off its admission processes sooner than they have ever before. In addition to the UW, WSU and some other schools have had to close off community college transfers sooner than in the past. Our long-standing agreement with the state remains in place — to take at least 30 percent of our entering class as transfer students. But the size of that entering class is getting smaller because our state funding isn’t going up enough.”
The plans prepared by UW Bothell and UW Tacoma, proposing their goals over the coming decade, have been forwarded to the Higher Education Coordinating Board, which in turn will make its own recommendations when it submits the reports to the legislature. The studies have two major components: One is that both institutions should grow dramatically, roughly tripling their size, with most of that growth coming in upper division enrollments. Second, the studies call for the creation of a modest number of lower-division enrollments — to meet upper-division students’ needs, and also to provide for the acceptance of some place-bound students who would prefer a four-year college experience.
The UW and WSU will push for statutory authority to offer lower-division classes, as well as for operating and capital money to begin implementation of the plans. It is unclear whether there will be opposition from the community colleges on the lower-division authority. Some community college officials are worried about this change in the higher education landscape and the potential that funding for enrollments which otherwise would have gone to community colleges will go to the branch campus institutions.
Although legislative action to endorse these plans does not guarantee funding beyond the current biennium, Hodgins believes the state is still much better off if it establishes a plan for where it wants to go. “The needs and the problems are there. It’s good to take stock of where we are and where we would like to be in the next decade or so. As Yogi Berra once said, ‘You got to be careful if you don’t know where you’re going, because you might not get there.’ That’s very true, even in the public sector.”
The importance of having a plan is also the reason for the UW effort to forge a performance agreement (also called a performance contract) with the state. The UW and WSU are piloting this idea, which attempts to bring a long-term vision to short-term operating budget decisions, according to Hodgins.
“We are trying to get the legislature to engage in a discussion about all the components of higher education financing with the goal of maintaining a top-tier research university in the state of Washington. If the state decides to maintain this position, we believe we need to have a level of funding that’s more comparable to other research universities around the country,” he says. “The budget we’re requesting would be the first step in a multi-year plan to get back on a track where we’re closer to that level of competitive funding. In return, we want to be able to demonstrate a significantly increased level of performance that taxpayers and citizens of the state will get for this increased level of investment. We certainly don’t expect the state to invest more money and not expect the UW to continue to outperform the competition.”
In exchange for achieving a level of funding comparable to peer institutions over the next six years, the UW would promise in its performance agreement to maintain its position as the number one public university in federal research money. The agreement also would call for a significant increase in graduates with degrees in high-demand fields and a significant increase in the number of new technologies created and marketed each year. The UW would at least maintain, if not increase, the proportion of its students who are Pell Grant awardees, a grant given to the neediest of students. It would also promise improvements in overall graduation rates, especially of students from underrepresented groups.
“We think these are things that state policy-makers are looking for. They want us to maintain the excellence that we have now, and to improve in areas where the higher education system faces some important challenges,” Hodgins says.
The concept of a performance agreement is relatively new and getting the message across to elected officials has posed a challenge, Hodgins acknowledges. The response has run the gamut from those who are extremely supportive to those who are uninterested in the concept.
“Some elected officials who are leery of it are leery for the wrong reasons,” Hodgins says. “We are trying to explain to them that a performance agreement isn’t about gaining more tuition-setting authority or to break away from the state, nor is it about gaining back-door control of labor agreements to outsource jobs, or to downsize the institution. It’s about the future of the University of Washington and what kind of school they want to have here, and what it will take to maintain and enhance the excellence of this institution for the next generation of Washingtonians.”
More information about the performance agreement is at http://www.washington.edu/admin/pb/home/perf-contract.htm.
