Thursday, June 17, 2010

Do We Have Spare Cash?

You might be interested to read the piece from The N&O today where state teachers accuse our system of having money to spare.

It is an interesting question to ponder......and one each of us should be prepared to go to our Chancellors and ask. The budgets are public -- technically. But we all know how money gets shoveled around between categories and becomes harder to trace out. We also all know how the cuts have had an effect in our classrooms.

Politics and the need for money plays a large part in these charges. But we also should be held accountable for our use of public money (K-12 and University).

Masthead



Published Thu, Jun 17, 2010 05:45 AM
Modified Thu, Jun 17, 2010 12:02 AM
Vying for funds, educators defend their claims
Behind-the-scenes criticism of UNC-system spending burst into the open this week, with the president of the state teachers organization telling UNC President Erskine Bowles that universities had money to spare before they started cutting faculty.

The university is protecting its "questionable spending," said Sheri Strickland, president of the N.C. Association of Educators, while teachers in local public schools are losing their jobs.

The public criticism of spending for the state universities comes as legislative budget writers work out how to allocate an additional $75 million between the universities and public schools - money pulled from the proposed budgets of other state agencies to beef up education spending.

In the past year, tight budgets have heightened the competition between the teachers group and the state university system, with the NCAE claiming that Senate leaders protect the universities. NCAE stepped up its criticism of university spending this year, referring repeatedly to the $9 million in tuition breaks that legislators give UNC athletes and to a consultant's report that UNC-Chapel Hill has too many administrators.

Bowles defends system

In an e-mail message, Bowles said the system has already cut 930 jobs, including 900 administrative positions. A strong case has been made that the system went too far with administrative cuts, Bowles wrote, "but that's what we felt we must do to protect our academic core."

But the NCAE sent its members another news article about UNC salaries this week. Bowles is not firing back.

Through spokeswoman Joni Worthington, Bowles said, "I have no qualms whatsoever with K-12 fighting as hard as they can for every dollar they need to educate their students. In fact, I'm glad they are. It's important that the K-12 system be properly funded."

Advocates for local schools have been more visible overall this year, with the NCAE joining forces with the state Department of Public Instruction and school board and school administrators to highlight the consequences of budget cuts on K-12 public schools. The latest was this week, when superintendents from across the state talked of budget cuts leading to more children in classrooms and fewer foreign language and advanced courses.

Strickland said she sent Bowles a letter to respond to his comments last week that the House version of the budget would force faculty out of jobs and deny financial aid to poor students. The university system has money it can redirect, she said, including salaries from administrative jobs.

Budget writers said the additional $75 million they have to spend on education will help them get close to meeting the requirements of K-12 public schools and the university system.

lynn.bonner@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4821

Friday, June 11, 2010

BOG Meeting and Latest News

The BOG met this week in Chapel Hill. It is quite a challenging time for the University.

Naturally, talk of the budget dominated. The House budget would be particularly devastating to all of the campuses and much of the public presentation Thursday morning detailed exactly why and how. While Friday morning included better news (the House has "found" some money that can be applied to education and the Governor is backing our priorities), we cannot forget that even the Senate version of the budget means significant cuts will be taken. And furlough authority is also in that version of the budget.

But the Senate budget is looking to be the best of all possible worlds and the staff at GA is working around the clock to keep up with things and achieve the best results. If you are in communication with anyone there, you should thank them for their hard work on our behalf. It has been a uniquely challenging year and things are moving more rapidly than ever before.

Here are the conferees on the budget and you should continue to be in contact with them about your concerns for our future and the real impact the cuts are having on our campuses. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/confcomm/confcommittee.pl?BillChamber=S&BillID=897&session=2009

But we also need to be looking to how to be in communication with President Bowles about furloughs, and offering him new kinds of budget management tools as the planning will start ASAP for the next two year cycle. As faculty, we specialize in thinking creatively and over the long haul. We need to use those talents now.

I also spent time talking with GA folks about a whole range of issues that will be on the Executive Committee Planning Retreat agenda at the end of the month.

In other news, Hannah Gage was reelected as chair of the BOG, Peter Hans will continue as the Vice Chair and Estelle "Bunny" Sanders as the Secretary. All terms are for two more years. They are an effective leadership team and should help us make the transition between Presidents far more smoothly. The Faculty Assembly has a good relationship with the BOG now and we want to continue to build on that strong foundation.

The Screening Committee is at work in the Presidential Search. We need to monitor this process as closely as possible in such a closed process. But I encourage everyone who knows people on the Screening or Interview committees to be in touch and encourage them to consider the importance of academic experience, creative thinking about the future, and a diverse pool of candidates.

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

UNC Budget Priorities

Here are the new UNC Budget Priorities. The conference between House and Senate begins tonight. The work should be done by 30 June.

Let me hear your discussion and questions.

The University of North Carolina
2010 Budget Conference Committee Priorities


Minimize Cuts: On TOP of the $50.6 million of University cuts already in the 2010-11 budget, the Senate assigns another $50 million of management flexibility cuts, while the House includes another $147 million. The House proposal would mean the loss of 1,700 additional jobs across the University; the Senate proposal would mean the loss of 800. We urge conferees to reduce overall University cuts to a minimum and to grant full flexibility.

Operating Reserves for New Buildings: In the current biennium, 55 buildings on 15 campuses are scheduled to come on line [UNCC bioinformatics, NCSU engineering complex III, UNC-CH science complex, UNCW school of nursing, ECU family medicine, ECSU pharmacy, etc.]. The Senate provides NO funds to operate these new buildings (maintenance, utilities, security), and the House provides only $12M (60% of the dollars required). We urge conferees to adopt the House approach and to increase the level of operating funding further if at all possible.

Need-Based Financial Aid: The Senate fully funds our request for need-based financial aid ($34.9M) with one-time dollars. The House provides only $12 million of aid. Under the House plan, some 6,000 to 8,000 North Carolina undergraduates would not receive need-based grant aid for which they are qualified. We urge conferees to fully fund the UNC Need-Based Aid Program and to use recurring dollars to the extent possible.

Salaries: The Senate maintains FY 09-10 salary restrictions through FY 10-11. The House prohibits all salary increases from any funding source, except for promotions. This provision effectively precludes the use of distinguished professorship matching funds (including those needed to sustain the Spangler initiative) and the Faculty Recruitment & Retention Fund. At a minimum, in this time of scarce state resources we should use federal and private funds to keep our best professors in our public University classrooms and doing research that benefits North Carolina. We urge conferees to adopt the Senate language and allow our campuses to use federal and private funds to attract, retain, and reward our faculty.

Furloughs: The Senate provides furlough authority to the UNC President for FY 10-11 to offset management flexibility reductions. Furloughs can be an important tool for managing budget reductions in a tough year like this. We urge conferees to adopt the Senate position.

Repairs and Renovations: Both the Senate ($70.2 million) and House ($35 million) provide R&R funding for the University. The percentage of the state pool directed to the University by the Senate more closely reflects the University’s actual share of state-supported facilities. Adequate R&R funding is critical; otherwise campuses are forced to draw on academic budgets to pay for essential repairs. We urge conferees to adopt the Senate approach.

Tuition: Both the House and Senate adopt the alternative tuition proposal put forward by the Board of Governors. While the Senate authorizes additional tuition increases of up to $750 to help offset the impact of budget cuts, the provision as written does not allow campuses to set aside some portion of this supplemental tuition increase for need-based financial aid. Conversely, a provision in the House budget requires that 50% of all campus-initiated tuition increases be set aside for need-based aid. This mandated percentage set-aside fails to acknowledge differing campus need profiles. We urge conferees to provide discretion for UNC campuses to set aside a defensible portion of all tuition increases for need-based financial aid. Current Board of Governors tuition policy requires campuses to use at least 25% of new tuition revenues for need-based aid.

Eliminate Enrollment Cap: While both the House and Senate fully fund University enrollment growth for 2010-2011, the House caps enrollment growth for 2011-12 at 1%. North Carolina has never denied access to qualified North Carolinians. We urge conferees to eliminate this provision.



Other UNC Special Provisions:
• Limit Transition Packages (Section 29.5A) – As requested by the General Assembly, the Board of Governors has dramatically reduced the pay and leave available to chancellors and other senior administrators returning to faculty positions. We urge conferees to delete this unnecessary provision.

• Amend COPS/UNCG Land (Section 30.6) – UNCG asks that $6.5 million of funds designated for its
Classroom Building be reallocated to construct a tunnel under busy Lee Street and the railroad to connect the main campus to the only area where UNCG can grow. This would provide a safer passageway for our students and other pedestrians. We urge conferees to grant this request.

• Academic Scholarship Provision (Section 9.25) – We urge conferees to preserve the tuition differential for nonresident students on full academic scholarship.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

State Workers Rally

State Workers will rally in Raleigh behind the Legislative Building today. There is a brief story in the N&O this morning:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/06/08/520748/nc-state-workers-to-rally-at-legislative.html

You can also follow the info at SEANC:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/06/08/520748/nc-state-workers-to-rally-at-legislative.html

The concerns are wide-ranging, but also include the State Employees Health Plan in addition to the budget.

Friday, June 4, 2010

Bowles Response to House Budget

June 4, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UNC President Erskine Bowles today issued the following statement on the House budget recommended for FY 2010-11:

The North Carolina House has passed a budget that would place public higher education in North Carolina on a path toward mediocrity. The University understands the tough economic environment we are in. That's why this year we agreed to take 29% of the Governor's budget reversions, even though we account for only 13% of General Fund appropriations. We know in times like this that everyone has to share the pain. But having already cut our state-supported administrative costs by 23% last year, the massive new cuts proposed by the House this week would do devastating damage to our academic budgets and the quality of education we can offer our students. If these proposed cuts remain in the state budget, another 1,700 positions will have to be eliminated across the University. Quality faculty will lose their jobs or be pirated away. Classes will be significantly larger or unavailable. As a result, retention and graduation rates will fall dramatically. And worst of all, many qualified North Carolina students won’t be able to obtain the financial aid they need—and many more will be denied admission altogether—since the House budget caps UNC enrollment growth and fails to fully fund need-based financial aid.
It takes generations to build a great university. Unfortunately, a great university can also be destroyed virtually overnight if not properly sustained. Just ask any business looking at bringing new jobs to North Carolina how important our University system is to their decision to locate in this state. If the budget conference committee is not able to undo the damage done by the House, economic opportunity for all North Carolinians will be diminished for years to come.

###

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Do Universities Understand Shared Governance?

The following story from today's Chronicle got me thinking about new business models and how they avoid what traditional understandings of shared governance at universities really mean. No reflections here. Just sharing the story and hoping others will think on it, too.

U. of Chicago's Plans for Milton Friedman Institute Stir Outrage on the Faculty
By Peter Schmidt

The University of Chicago's plan to move ahead with developing a controversial institute named for Milton Friedman has prompted more than 170 of the university's faculty members to sign a petition complaining that it is becoming increasingly "corporatized" and that its president, Robert J. Zimmer, is trampling upon their shared-governance rights.

The petition, in the form of a letter that leaders of the protest say they will present to Mr. Zimmer on Tuesday, calls upon the institution's president "to reverse course" and "extricate the university from a misguided and destructive corporate model" that, it says, has led administrators there to forge ahead with various expansion plans without a faculty vote.

"You can begin by halting the development of the Friedman Institute and changing its name," the letter says.

A spokeman for the university, Jeremy Manier, said in an e-mail that the university's administration had not yet received the petition and was not ready to comment on it at any length. In a terse official statement contained in the e-mail, the administration said: "If a letter or petition is submitted, university leaders would want to consider it fully and respond thoughtfully to the whole document, through the appropriate channels."

The establishment of a Milton Friedman Institute for Research in Economics without a faculty vote is hardly the only action by the administration that the letter cites as objectionable. It also objects to the university's decision to allow the creation of a Confucius Institute—a language institute sponsored by the People's Republic of China—on the campus without the Faculty Senate's approval.

The letter argues that the university has risked having its reputation used to "legitimate the spread" of such institutions, which have been cropping up at colleges in the United States and other nations around the world.

Among other complaints, the letter alleges that the administrative staff has experienced "metastatic growth," that the administration has been interfering with academic matters at study-abroad programs, and that the administration has been withholding information on the budget and other matters from faculty governing bodies. It argues that the university has assumed "a business mentality, in which academic units are understood—even designed—to function as product lines and profit centers," and that power over academic matters is being shifted "to the donors whose favor the administrators court."

The letter's focus, however, is on the Friedman Institute, which the university announced last month it would be locating in a soon-to-be-renovated building that had been housing the Chicago Theological Seminary, which will move. The institute has sparked controversy ever since the university's 2008 announcement of plans to establish it in honor of Mr. Friedman, a Nobel laureate in economics who spent 30 years at the university and advised the Reagan administration and foreign governments on economic policy.

The institute began sponsoring interdisciplinary academic conferences, hosting visiting scholars, and supporting research more than a year ago.

A faculty group formed to oppose the institute, the Committee for Open Research on Economy and Society, played a central role in the latest petition drive. The letter its leaders are submitting to President Zimmer characterizes Mr. Friedman as "among the most partisan, most polarizing figures in the history of this university," and says his name is associated with "his relentless championing of a free-market fundamentalism now largely discredited" and with "the services he rendered to brutally repressive regimes in Chile, China, and elsewhere."

Among the faculty members who signed the petition, the most heavily represented academic divisions are the humanities, the social sciences other than economics, and the biological sciences. Few, if any, of the signatories are from the three academic divisions that proposed the institute: the economics department, the business school, and the law school.