News & Updates

We’ve passed the halfway point of the 2009 session.  The early part of next week will be filled with floor action in advance of the March 12 cutoff for bills to clear their house of origin.  As a result, the published hearing schedule is light, with only the House Higher Education committee scheduled to meet at 8am Thursday to consider bills that have come over from the Senate.  A few more hearings may be added, but the big push to consider bills from the opposite house will come the following week.

The next piece of the budget puzzle will come into focus today when the caseload forecast council meets to revise estimates of the demand for state services (school enrollments, corrections, health care).  Joe Turner at The News Tribune has a good blog entry that tries to put together all of the moving pieces into a bottom line number.

The Seattle PI has a strong editorial today on the value of higher education and how more opportunities for students is clearly linked to the future economic health of the state.  Here’s an excerpt:

The state’s persistent underfunding of higher education is a bum deal for Washington residents, especially those in the early decades of their working lives or with younger family members. In good times and bad, it’s a setup for making sure that an extraordinary number of the best opportunities go to people educated elsewhere.

Here’s the basic incongruity that persisted through the late 20th century and threatens to mark — and mar — the 21st: Our companies recruit so many bright people from out of state that Seattle regularly ranks high in educational attainment levels, but our colleges actually produce relatively few people with degrees.

You can read the entire editorial here.

During the session we follow dozens of bills besides our own request legislation.  After cutoff there are a number of key bills that remain alive which are worth noting.

HB 2254 would allow the use of “certificates of participation” to fund some capital projects.  The result would be that some projects could move forward which might not be funded in a tight capital budget environment.  The bill is awaiting floor action in the House.

HB 1119 has already passed the House and is in Senate Judiciary.  It would make important changes to uniform laws governing non-profit funds, such as our endowment.

SB 5925 would allow universities to require health insurance for students in study abroad programs.  It would protect students (and families) from potentially catastrophic expenses when a student is injured or becomes ill abroad.  It is in Senate Rules, awaiting floor action.

And floor action is something there will be no shortage of as lawmakers work toward the next cutoff, which is March 12.

The Washington State Supreme Court has just ruled in a major case, dismissing Sen. Lisa Brown’s challenge to Initiative 960 which (among other things) requires a two-thirds vote of lawmakers to raise taxes.  Last session, Lt. Gov. Brad Owen (who presides over the Senate) had enforced the two-thirds vote requirement, drawing the legal challenge.  Justices heard the case last summer.  Rich Roesler of the Spokesman Review has a synopsis of the case on his blog.

To date most public discussion of possible tax measures have involved a referendum to the people, which would not be subject to the two-thirds vote requirement.  Still, this is an important ruling to have in place before lawmakers begin to roll out their budget proposals in the coming weeks.

After Monday’s cutoff for action in the fiscal committees, our request legislation is still alive in both houses.  This includes bills to allow the University continued tuition setting authority for graduate and out-of-state students (HB 1235/SB 5734), to protect private investment information given to our endowment (HB 1640/SB 5526), and to streamline public works contracting processes (HB 1916/SB 5760).  Also of importance, and through committee, is HB 2254 which would allow universities to finance some building projects with “certificates of participation.”  This would allow more construction projects to be built than would be possible under capital budget resources.  The next step for all of these bills is floor consideration.

Also in the last couple of days, a number of news articles have appeared speculating on the level of budget cuts that might be in store for higher education. A note of caution is in order.  The budget situation has never been so fluid.  There are a number of moving parts, including budget cuts, tuition levels and the federal stimulus package.  While we can expect plenty of speculation to emerge about different plans and proposals, negotiations over the final shape of the budget still have a long way to go. We will continue to post significant developments here as soon as they are available.

Week 8 of the 2009 session is on tap.  After Monday’s cutoff for fiscal committees, the focus will turn to the floor where lawmakers will have until March 12 to move bills from their house of origin.  All of the University’s request legislation is moving forward at this point.  Next week we will have a clearer sense of which other bills of interest remain alive.

With the emphasis on floor action, next week will be a light one in the committee rooms.  The House Higher Education Committee has one meeting scheduled for Friday morning; the Senate has none scheduled at this time.

And for those who are tracking such things, mark your calendars for
Thursday — it’s the halfway point of the session!

Today is the first policy committee cutoff in Olympia (fiscal committees have until Monday to act on the bills they receive — expect long hearings in those committees the next few days).  All of the UW request bills (simplifying public works, protecting private investment information given to the endowment, making permanent tuition policy for graduate school) remain alive.

Earlier this session we reported on efforts to establish a four-year college in Snohomish County (either a standalone school or a UW branch campus).  As of the cutoff, a proposal to create a new four-year school remains alive, but the version approved does not specify governance or when the school would be built.  Expect more discussion on this as the session continues.

UW student regent Jean-Paul Willynck, a senior Urban Studies student at UW Tacoma, wrote an excellent op-ed piece for the Seattle PI on the value of funding higher education during an economic downturn.  Among other points, Willynck notes:

Like the building of roads, schools and telecommunication networks, investing in higher education not only looks to the future, but also provides much-needed jobs right now. As universities work toward their research and teaching goals, they employ thousands of faculty, support staff and teaching assistants. Further, the 100,000-plus students who attend four-year public universities in Washington support businesses from Bellingham to Pullman to Tacoma.

Specifically, at the University of Washington, more than 240 companies have been started by professors, students or with UW-developed technology. When institutions are asked to make budget cuts of 13 percent, this means fewer people to teach our future work force and entrepreneurs, less undergraduate engagement in research and decreased ability to attract the best and brightest to Washington. A reduction in funding cuts jobs and undermines the quality of education in the classroom.

Willynck is the first student from UWT to serve as student regent.  You can read the entire op-ed piece here.

There’s a new blog in town — Publicola — and it features an interview with President Emmert conducted by editor Josh Feit (who formerly covered politics for The Stranger).  You can check out the interview here.

Periodically we’ve been checking in with other western states on how their respective budget shortfalls are affecting public universities.  In California, the recently approved budget agreement includes major cuts for the University of California and the California State University systems.  A story in the University of California San Diego student paper summarizes the cuts:

The $130 billion budget plan slashes UC funding by an additional $115 million, stretching the university’s total projected budget deficit to $450 million. The cuts are designed to save the state a sum of $264.4 million in the 2009-10 fiscal year.

UC President Mark G. Yudof said the new round of cuts will have both immediate and long-term implications for the university and the state economy as a whole.

“It is important to state clearly that the reductions contained in this budget will be felt by students, by faculty, by staff and ultimately by people across California who benefit in their daily lives from the university’s work,” Yudof said in a statement. “Lower spending for higher education ultimately erodes student opportunity, innovation, health care and medical research and economic growth for California.”

Because the California budget accord relies on voters approving a series of ballot measures in May (and early polling suggests they may not), this story is far from over.