News & Updates

Lawmakers are busy on the floor this week, but even busier in negotiations over the state budget.  All of the UW’s request bills remain alive at this point.  Our bills on tuition-setting authority for graduate and out-of-state students and to streamline public works contracting both await House floor votes; we are continuing to work on final language.  Our bill to protect private investment information provided to our endowment has cleared both chambers, but is awaiting final resolution of some small differences.

Of course the backdrop for all of the action on the floor is the state budget.  Rep. Kathy Haigh has introduced a bill in the House that would allow lawmakers to set tuition levels, and Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles is planning to offer an amendment in Senate Ways and Means to allow tuition to increase by 14%.  Both are indications that lawmakers are seriously considering allowing higher tuition levels as a way to mitigate the impact of proposed budget cuts.  It is very important to note that even with higher tuition, the cuts being contemplated for higher education would still be substantial and require significant cost-cutting measures.  

On the revenue front, discussion appears to be narrowing to a proposal to put to voters a three-tenths of one percent increase in the sales tax which would be used to offset a portion of health care cuts.  At the same time, today saw the largest Capitol Campus rally of the session — an anti-tax rally that the State Patrol estimates drew over 5,000 people. 

Lawmakers are also facing a ticking clock — the regular session is scheduled to end April 26.  They will need to reach budget agreements several days before that to finish on time.  To date, neither chamber has passed a complete budget which is highly unusual and a sign of the difficulties lawmakers are having reaching a final accord.

On the Capital Budget front, negotiations are also continuing. One major difference is how the House and Senate dealt with the UW building account.  The House transferred the money to the general fund; the Senate did not.  How that issue (among others) is resolved will determine how many capital projects will be funded this cycle.

So even more than usual, this year the mantra for the final ten days of session is “watch and wait.”  No word yet on coffee (and aspirin) sales at the legislative cafeteria — but it’s probably safe to put your money on a record performance.

This morning Crosscut is featuring an article by Pete Jackson titled “U.W. is getting a big demotion”.   In the article Jackson notes:

These unprecedented cuts will permanently kick the University of Washington to second-tier status and throttle programs at Washington State University and Western (note to friends of Western’s Huxley School: It’s rally time). Washington will import more of its talent, just as it exports its top high school grads. No more supercilious guffaws at Oregon and OSU, schools that felt the slow earthquake of 1990’s Measure 5 that starved basic education and ultimately squeezed higher-ed as well.

That’s right, prideful Huskies, Cougars, and Vikings, you’re about to get Duck-ed!

The real and anticipated squeeze is already under way. At the UW’s College of Arts and Sciences, four faculty members have announced plans to bolt over the past three weeks. It’s the prelude to a brain drain: Better jump ship before the pirates heave another grappling hook.

You can find the complete article here.

Over the weekend the Tri-City Herald and the Bellingham Herald both editorialized in favor of higher tuition to reduce the effect of proposed budget cuts.  Links to both editorials are below.

Tri-City Herald, April 12
Our reluctant endorsement for college tuition increase
The Herald endorses Gov. Gregoire’s proposal for tuition increases, noting that higher college costs will be offset by greater federal financial aid to many students and families. Even with the increase, tuition will be a “relative bargain,” the paper says.

The Bellingham Herald, April 11
Higher tuition at WWU; bitter but necessary
The Herald editorial board writes that a 14 percent tuition increase in each year of the coming biennium is necessary, even if it will increase the financial burden on some parents.

In a letter to Governor Gregoire, the Seattle Chamber of Commerce has endorsed raising tuition to mitigate proposed budget cuts, noting that increases in financial aid and tax credits will offset the impact for most students.  In part, the letter notes:

Higher education is fundamental to our state’s ability to foster economic recovery and job growth now while driving the innovation and research that will enable our trade‐dependent state to remain competitive in the global economy. It is particularly troubling that the proposed cuts to higher education in our state are deeper than cuts being considered by any other state except Nevada. These reductions would potentially deny 10,000 Washington students access to higher education or severely dilute the quality of the four‐year institutions that state leaders have  worked so hard to advance in recent years.  
 
This is not an acceptable outcome for a state that competes with the most aggressive nations and markets in the world — from China to Japan to India to the United Arab Emirates to the European Union.  
 
To reduce the impact of state cuts, we urge lawmakers to grant the four‐year institutions increased flexibility and allow them to exceed the current cap on tuition. Our state has some of  the lowest tuition levels in the nation and even with a 14 percent increase, tuition at the University of Washington would be the most affordable compared to peer institutions in the Global Challenge States. At the same time, planned federal assistance, tax credits and Washington state need grants will help offset the impact on students and families. 

As of next Monday there will be less than two weeks left in the 2009 session (adjournment is scheduled for April 26).  All bills other than budget related bills have to clear the floor by April 17; the time after that is reserved for budget matters and resolving differences between the House and Senate.

Few hearings are scheduled; the House Capital Budget Committee does have a session scheduled April 14 on Rep. Hans Dunshee’s proposal to put a $3 billion bond issue before voters to pay for school construction.  The UW is included in that proposal for $79 million in projects.

Proposals on revenue packages are beginning to float out, the latest being a bump in the sales tax to offset cuts in health and human services.

The proposal to increase tuition by 14% to reduce the effect of cuts will clearly be part of the final discussions, having received strong support from the Governor and many editorial boards (here and here) among others.

How this will all play out is more of a mystery than usual given the challenge lawmakers are facing.  Budget negotiations usually have to fall apart several times before they finally come together near the end.  One can expect plenty of rumors and trial balloons before the shape of the final budget become clear.

We will do our best to keep posting “actual factual” developments here as soon as they are available.

More editorials appeared today on the need to increase tuition in order to stave off the worst effects of proposed budget cuts.  Here are links to today’s stories:

The Columbian, April 9
In our view April 9: 2 Painful Solutions
The Columbian says large tuition increases are painful but necessary.

The Wenatchee World, April 9
Nothing left but raising tuition
The Wenatchee World editorial board says substantial tuition increases are necessary, because cuts on the order of 20 percent would “unmake” the state’s public institutions of higher education.

The News Tribune, April 9
Higher tuition doesn’t equate with less access
Columnist Peter Callaghan points out that there is no statistical correlation between low tuition and greater access to higher education.

The Seattle Times, April 9
Washington Legislature should let universities increase tuition
The Seattle Times editorial board says that tuition at Washington’s four year public colleges and universities should rise significantly, “to preserve student access, quality and years of progress toward preparing a sophisticated work force.”

Over 40 members of the Boards of Regents of the state’s four-year schools (plus the Higher Education Coordinating Board) have written a joint letter to lawmakers asking them to raise tuition in order to mitigate the effect of proposed cuts.  In part the letter reads:

. . . as appointed stewards of Washington State’s public four-year higher educational institutions, we are deeply concerned that the magnitude of the reductions to higher education in the Senate and House operating budget proposals would result in significantly reduced access and quality at our state’s public colleges and universities.  We ask that you give the institutions the tools and the opportunity to manage through this period of economic
adversity so as to keep the door to higher education open to students from all backgrounds. The key to this is tuition. (emphasis in original)

We firmly believe that if you will grant the institutions the option to increase resident undergraduate tuition up to the amount that has been suggested by the Governor and some legislators, not only would access to higher education be maintained to a significant degree, but it would be achieved without impacting the economic diversity of our students.  Our institutions remain steadfast in their commitment to expand educational opportunity for low- and middle-income students.  Unequivocally, an increase in tuition would be accompanied by an increase in financial aid.  This authority would also help ensure that students already enrolled in the institutions do not suffer a significant decline in the quality of their educational experience. 

You can read the entire letter here.

Last Thursday during my live chat on the budget there were a number of questions related to layoffs.  I passed those questions along to our Vice President of Human Resources Mindy Kornberg, who prepared the answers below —

__________________________________________________

Randy, thank you for passing on the HR-related questions from your web chat last week. UWHR is taking the lead on investigating workforce reduction options and alternatives and advising President Emmert on the likely effects and constraints of reduction options related to staff positions. Every option that produces salary savings for the University has been on the table–salary reductions, reduced schedules, furloughs, shortened work weeks or work year, job sharing, and layoffs. As the budget situation grows more dire, the advantages and disadvantages of each option become more pronounced.

Web chat participants raised several good questions about different budget reduction options that people have been hearing about in the news as well as concern about leveraging reductions fairly across the University. I have answered the HR-related questions from the web chat below.  Please continue to share HR-related concerns and suggestions with my office via email — uwhr@u.washington.edu.

[Comment From UW Employee]
I am wondering about the layoffs that will occur and the thought process of many who think that state employees make large salaries. We are in fact paid less than County and City workers. Has there been any thought to 4 day work weeks or other factors that the County has utilized?

Yes, we have conducted a preliminary exploration of reducing pay by shortening the work week. This concept may work for individual departments or units along with other cost reduction measures, but is insufficient at a University level to meet the challenges of the state budget cut.

[Comment From Vanessa]
I’ve heard that options for staff reductions that include temporarily losing one day from their schedules or taking furloughs is off the table vs. just laying off people completely or reducing them to half-time. Is this true? And if so, why?

Human Resources is working closely with organization leaders on reviewing all reduction options – both temporary and permanent. We expect that most organizations will use a variety of reduction options to meet their financial objectives.

[Comment From juan]
Is there a way to share concerns about furloughs where those of us that oppose being asked to do the same amount of work in less time for less money can make our case AGAINST furloughs (and salary reductions)?

I understand and share your concern. In planning reductions, organizations must carefully examine the work and services that are essential, ensuring that reductions include revising job responsibilities to align with revisions to service levels or service offerings. Salaries need to remain competitive with the local market and with our peer institutions or, as an institution, we will have a tremendous retention and recruitment problem.

Thanks to Mindy Kornberg and her staff for providing these answers.  We will continue to provide as much information we can in a very fluid and challenging environment.

Over the last few days we have been posting stories and editorials about proposed higher education budget cuts.  Here is summary of the key articles to date —

The Seattle Times, April 8
Keep the “higher” in higher education

In a guest editorial, UW President Mark Emmert advocates that the state’s public universities be given more flexibility on handling tuition increases to help address budget cuts.

Seattle pi.com, April 8
Reality-challenged legislators threaten our universities

Columnist David Horsey compares the state’s public universities to the geese that laid golden eggs. He calls the proposed cuts to higher education,” Dumb, dumb, dumb.”

Yakima Herald-Republic, April 8
State higher ed cuts run counter to need

The Herald-Republic editorial board decries the budget proposals for higher education cuts in both the house and senate, saying the tradition of providing access is under assault, and that the future prosperity of the state is threatened.

Everett Herald, April 5
Tuition rates must go higher

The Herald editorial board writes: “If Washington is to emerge from the recession and the current budget crisis with a stable, competitive economy, state budget negotiators must minimize the damage to higher education.”

The News Tribune, April 5
House, Senate threaten too much ruin to higher ed

The News Tribune editorial board writes: “If lawmakers must swing a wrecking ball into Washington’s higher education system, they should at least pad it with more tuition money.”

KING-TV, April 1
Emmert: UW could lose 1/3 of state funding

Both the Washington state House and Senate budget plans call for major cuts in funding for higher education this year. University of Washington President Mark Emmert said Wednesday that the cuts are roughly one-third of the money the UW gets from the state.

TVW, April 1                                                                                                               The Impact: An in-depth look at higher ed budget cuts

A special edition of The Impact focuses on the house and senate budget proposals. UW President Mark Emmert is interviewed about the proposals’ potential impact on the UW and higher education.

The Seattle Times, March 31
Tuition wars coming

The Seattle Times editorial board writes that tuition for higher education “will have to rise even more than the state Senate proposed to protect quality and access for Washington resident undergraduates.”

Most of the budget news we have reported here has been directly related to the UW, but it’s important to note that some of our key partners also are facing drastic budget cuts.  The Life Sciences Discovery Fund, which was established in 2005 to strengthen the state’s competitive standing in biotech and medical device research, is facing over a 40 percent cut and reports that it would have to dramatically curtail or suspend operations.

You can find the complete story here.