News & Updates

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.

Today’s Seattle Times features an opinion piece by President Mark Emmert.  In calling for higher tuition to mitigate the worst of proposed budget cuts, President Emmert notes:

The task before the Legislature is daunting, to say the least. I know our legislators are struggling mightily to do the right thing, and I don’t doubt the sincerity of their efforts. But as well-intentioned as they are, enacting either of the two legislative budget proposals would send a clear message that Washington is waving the white flag not only in the global competition of the knowledge economy, but on the future of our children.

Virtually all economists recognize there is no greater engine for creating good-paying jobs and building a state’s economy than high-quality colleges and universities, especially research universities. The Legislature’s budget proposals would cripple the state’s capacity to build our economy at just the worst moment. Under either proposal, our state would be left to choose one of two options: deny 10,000 Washington students access to higher education, or dilute quality so badly that we have to remove the “higher” from higher education. Either one would mean that a great many Washingtonians would not be able to achieve their financial and professional dreams.

You can read the entire article here.

Writing on the SeattlePI.com site, David Horsey makes a strong case for preserving higher education funding, through increased tuition if needed.  Discussing the budget cuts proposed last week, Horsey notes:

The only way to make it work is to cheapen the education the students receive, to embrace mediocrity and let Washington’s higher education system settle to the level of Mississippi. What we have right now is a half dozen diverse universities spread around the state that, over the last decade, have become better and better, thanks, in part, to more adequate funding from the state. The University of Washington, in particular, has achieved a level of excellence that has earned it recognition as one of the top research universities, not just in the country, but on the planet. As smarter people than I have observed, the UW is one of the biggest engines we have to drive our economy. Do legislators really want to shut that engine down right when we need it the most?

The entire piece, which is well worth reading, is here.

Earlier today Governor Chris Gregoire announced her support for a 14% tuition increase as a way to offset some of the cuts contained in the legislative budgets proposed last week.  You can read more about the Governor’s announcement in the Seattle Times and the Tacoma News Tribune.  While a 14% increase would still require major budget cuts, it would be significant and the effect on students would be mitigated by increased financial aid.  More as it develops.