State Universities and the governors proposed budget cuts...

[trueblujr]

So the new Governor has proposed budget cuts. 4.5% this year and 9% next year. All of the university presidents are now out there on there annual campaign of complaining and painting a bleak picture of how "draconian" (Capilutos word) the cuts are. Kentucky States President says it might cause them to shut the place down. Obviously that's their job to protect all of the money they are allotted and to paint those bleak pictures, but for the flagships at least, is it really that bleak?

I was just on the UK campus this weekend. There is several hundred million, if not more than a billion dollars worth of construction happening on that campus. The 4.5% cut this year amounts to about $16 million at UK. While that is a lot of money, is it really a crippling amount? They get more than a billion dollars in endowments, grants and donations. If the University can't manage or find a way to slash the $16 million when it really represents a drop in the bucket of everything going on at the university currently, then they need a new accounting department. That amounts to trimming a little fat which probably needs to be done anyway.

Can anyone with more insight than my casual observation shed some light on just how "draconian" these cuts are?

I can understand how it will hurt the smaller universities much more than the big ones. But for UK and ESPECIALLY THE CROOKS AT UofL. Quityerbitchin.

 

[mashburned]

Their reactions have been pretty good.

"DRACONIAN!!!!"

"I'll HAVE TO RAISE TUITION 25%!!!!"

"CUTS?????"

"WHAT ABOUT MY TACO CLASS!!!!!"

It makes for good news.

 

[UK_ Alum_02]

They should have plenty in the bank judging by the tuition hikes just since 2002.

 

[allabouttheUK]

Why don't they just gut the ******** courses and programs? Of the 200+ majors offered for undergrad, how many of them create productive members of society? Keep the math department, keep the science department, hell keep the AG department, but do you really need Dance, Philosophy, Gender and Women studies, AA studies, Indian culture, Interior Design, Latin American studies...ship these degress to liberal arts colleges and the University could save a load of money! Those degrees do nothing but pump out people who can't get decent paying jobs anyway.

 

[12 Oz. Epilogue]

Why don't they just gut the ******** courses and programs? Of the 200+ majors offered for undergrad, how many of them create productive members of society? Keep the match department, keep the science department, hell keep the AG department, but do you really need Dance, Philosophy, Gender and Women studies, AA studies, Indian culture, Interior Design, Latin American studies...ship these degress to liberal arts colleges and the University could save a load of money! Those degrees do nothing but pump out people who can't get decent paying jobs anyway.

This is counter-intuitive from a financial perspective. Most universities need those garbage degrees and the people that get them to grease the financial wheels enough to handle the other things that are actually productive. You think the cost of having a philosophy department is high? No. Better margin for what it brings in to cover other items.

 

[allabouttheUK]

I wasn't being serious about the school getting rid of them as I know it's not an option. I do think they are all garbage degrees though.

 

[mashburned]

Pay attention to EKU's new president. He could step right in at UL and feel right at home, imo.

 

[UKGrad93]

A big part of the problem is that money gets appropriated for buildings and construction. This money comes from the state and donations. That money cannot be used to pay people. The money to pay people usually has to come from a recurring source, because people are hired and expect to work until they quit, retire, get fired, etc... Buildings only get built once.

You will also notice that as budgets get tight, money for building upkeep and improvements usually gets cut.

Kentucky has a lot of state funded universities for it's size. I don't live in KY anymore, but it sounds like they should seriously consider shutting down a few of them.

edit: Government money does not work like your personal banking account. With your personal account, you decide where the money goes and who gets paid. Government money comes with several strings attached. UK isn't given a pot of money and then given the discretion of paying people or putting up new buildings.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Their reactions have been pretty good.

"DRACONIAN!!!!"

"I'll HAVE TO RAISE TUITION 25%!!!!"

"CUTS?????"

"WHAT ABOUT MY TACO CLASS!!!!!"

It makes for good news.

Id like to see the numbers on administrative salaries. Id say at least 50% of those could be cut without missing a beat. Reminds of the scene in office space: "What exactly would you say you DO here?"

 

[fuzz77]

They should have plenty in the bank judging by the tuition hikes just since 2002.

The problem is that tuition hikes have been made necessary because of continuous budget cuts that have been occurring since 1980...I'm really surprised that it has taken this long for the schools to stand up and publically criticize the cuts. Perhaps because this larger than the no increase/1% here and there cuts they have had in the past and the fact that the public is starting push back on the continuous increases.

I posted a chart the other day in another thread that showed that in 1977-78 a student working 40/hrs week for 12 weeks at minimum wage ($2.30/hr) could earn about 150% of the cost of tuition and fees to a 4 yr college. Today that will pay 25% of that same costs.

A race to the bottom.

• Colorado has reduced its support for higher education by nearly 69.4 percent, from $10.52 in fiscal 1980 (and a peak of $13.85 in fiscal 1971) to $3.22 by fiscal 2011. At this rate of decline Colorado appropriations will reach zero in 2022, 11 years from now. Projections using more recent data find that Colorado could hit zero as soon as 2019.

• South Carolina reduced its state investment effort in higher education by 66.8 percent, from $16.72 in fiscal 1980 (and a peak of $18.19 in fiscal 1975) to $5.54 by fiscal 2011. Extrapolating this trend, state funding for higher education will reach zero in 2031.

• Rhode Island reduced state higher education funding by 62.1 percent between 1980 and 2011, from $9.81 to $3.72. The state effort peaked at $10.35 in fiscal 1981. Extrapolating this trend, state funding for higher education will reach zero in 2031.

• Arizona has reduced its annual state investment effort by 61.9 percent from $12.27 in fiscal 1980 to $4.68 by fiscal 2011. This effort had peaked earlier at $15.13 in fiscal 1974. The trend between 1980 and 2011 will reach zero in 2032, although more recent data indicates it could be even sooner.

• Oregon reduced its state higher education investment by 61.5 percent, from $10.85 in fiscal 1980 (and $12.77 in fiscal 1970) to $4.18 in 2011. Extrapolating this trend since fiscal 1980, state investment will reach zero in 2036.

• Minnesota has reduced its higher education investment by 55.8 percent, from $14.17 in fiscal 1980 (and a peak of $15.08 in fiscal 1978) to $6.27 by fiscal 2011. Extending the trend since 1980 into the future, state funding for higher education will reach zero in 2037. But another extrapolation hits zero in 2032.

• Montana is scheduled to reach zero, based on extrapolated trends since 1980, in 2034. Montana has reduced its support from $10.88 per $1000 of state personal income in 1980 (and a peak of $12.13 in fiscal 1983), to $5.08 by fiscal 2011.

• Virginia reduced higher education funding by 53.6 percent from 10.47 in 1980 (and $11.37 in FY1979) to $4.86 in 2011. At this rate, state funding will reach zero in 2038. Another more recent projection reaches zero in 2032.

• Vermont reduced its investment by 51.3 percent from $7.78 in 1980 (and $10.88 in fiscal 1970) to $3.79 by fiscal 2011. Extending this trend, Vermont will reach zero in fiscal 2032.

 

[UKGrad93]

Id like to see the numbers on administrative salaries. Id say at least 50% of those could be cut without missing a beat. Reminds of the scene in office space: "What exactly would you say you DO here?"

Sure. Any large employer has its fat that could get cut. That is not exclusive to government or universities.

 

[TransyCat09]

Universities have created a vicious cycle for themselves.

They lowered admissions standards (or rather it generally became easier to meet the standards, across the board) and added courses of study to accommodate the influx of new students incapable of finishing a traditional course of study. This new group of students had to be attracted by things other than academics, so schools started building amenity facilities and other "student life" projects. This also "requires" an entire army of administrators with state benefits and high 5 figure to 6 figure paying jobs.

Now they have to continue to upgrade their student life facilities to attract kids who want a 4 (5,6...) year vacation via accepting more honeypots/students with virtually unlimited access to student loans.

How many facilities on UK's campus are entirely superfluous to the task of educating students?

 

[JHB4UK]

facilities hell. How many useless teach-nobody 6 figure Vice Presidents at UK now as compared to 30 years ago, 40 years ago? Same for every college all across the country.

states have been reducing funding to colleges, and rather than reduce costs colleges have recouped the lost revenue from students. and now students more than ever graduate with watered down degrees and lesser opportunities to make a good living - while having a huge student loan to pay off.

what good does that do a states economy to crank out people who can't make ends meet, who have to live in their parents basement and what little money they make just goes to paying student loans? Kentucky as well as every other state in the country ought to be requiring their universities to lower their payrolls & lower their tuitions.

 

[TransyCat09]

Sure. Any large employer has its fat that could get cut. That is not exclusive to government or universities.

Except most businesses don't add fat while their revenue decreases

 

[allabouttheUK]

Except most businesses don't add fat while their revenue decreases

Are we not counting large bonuses to CEO's and other board members as fat? I think it should be counted. How many of these types of people do you see get large raises and bonuses when their companies are treading water? Of course the employees get to suffer by way of work force reduction or cutting you out months before your retirement.

 

[TransyCat09]

Yes, and those companies usually don't last much longer.

It's also true that a lot of that money doesn't come from said company's revenue stream. Those situations aren't really analogous.

A better comparison would be a company who just lost 25% of its revenue and hired 40 new HR specialists and an architectural firm to redesign its HQ, while simultaneously raising the price of its product 15% with an appreciable downgrade in quality

 

[mashburned]

Who was on that task force Capiluto assigned to deal with the slavery mural? Fire them, imo.

That story is hilarious, and it's not really here nor there, but it's funny to me that we pay these people to accomplish things like..

- forming a "task force" to address a historic painting that depicts slavery. (The task force threw a blanket over it and delayed "dealing" with it. Year passes, and now they are "dealing" with it agin because they didn't "deal" with it the first time).

- paying 80k to outsiders to design a new "K" that doesn't exactly look like a K

- no telling what else

 

[UKGrad93]

Yes, and those companies usually don't last much longer.

It's also true that a lot of that money doesn't come from said company's revenue stream. Those situations aren't really analogous.

A better comparison would be a company who just lost 25% of its revenue and hired 40 new HR specialists and an architectural firm to redesign its HQ, while simultaneously raising the price of its product 15% with an appreciable downgrade in quality

The goals of a university are not the same as a for profit company. Many profitable companies could be even more profitable if they would cut the fat.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Sure. Any large employer has its fat that could get cut. That is not exclusive to government or universities.

Are we not counting large bonuses to CEO's and other board members as fat? I think it should be counted. How many of these types of people do you see get large raises and bonuses when their companies are treading water? Of course the employees get to suffer by way of work force reduction or cutting you out months before your retirement.

The goals of a university are not the same as a for profit company. Many profitable companies could be even more profitable if they would cut the fat.

Apparently, theres some confusion about how private companies work. Otherwise, there would be no attempt at trying to compare a state subsidized school with a private company.

A private answers to its stockholders. If its costs outpace its revenue, it has to make cuts or go under. At a public school, Id estimate about half the administrators could be fired today and noone would notice a bit of difference. That doesnt go for just universities. It goes for county boards of education too.

For too long, students and their student loans have been viewed as a neverending stream of revenue to cushion the large, unnecessary administrative salaries. Hopefully that comes to an end.

 

[allabouttheUK]

The fat in large corporations and universities is not found around the outside like cuts of meat, no, it's around the top. It amazes me that the people that bring in these ridiculous salaries do so little. It's the people that do all the work for them and get paid a fraction of what the CEO's and presidents make that keep the places running.

 

[TransyCat09]

The goals of a university are not the same as a for profit company.

Their goals seem very much to be about maximizing revenue. They just seem to not want to be bothered with the budgetary process

 

[allabouttheUK]

I' gonna blame it all on technology. Over the past 20 years it seems like everyone and every company wants immediate results. What happened to slow and steady growth while watching your bottom line? Technology has created a new and damaging way of thinking for society. It's all about instant gratification, and instant success. Bigger is not always better!

 

[mashburned]

UK announces launch of new website that tells you how much they contribute to the commonwealth...

 

[IamnotRalph]

At least its not this bad:

"Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards has a deal for lawmakers: pass my tax increase plan or I’ll cut LSU football".

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/c...lsu-football-balance-budget-article-1.2529695

 

[Perrin75]

Public Universities are required to make their salaries public. You can search all of UK's employees at this database. Looking around you will most likely see that most of these accusations of multiple, high level VPs making exorbitant salaries is false. Most of the full-time employees will probably fall in the 40-70K range, which is actually on the low side considering the majority of them have advanced degrees. Their equivalent in the Private sector are probably making a lot more.

I don't really follow Kentucky politics that much anymore, but I am shocked that the public is so willing to accept the cuts that the new governor is placing on all levels of education. Kentucky is already in a hole when it comes to the level of quality, and this is only going to make it worse. Which, is also going to make it much harder to attract and/or keep industry and talent down the road.

 

[TransyCat09]

It isn't that they are being paid wildly more than their job title should dictate (i.e., they are in line with the private sector), but rather that their jobs are mostly unnecessary to the essential roles of a university in the first place.

If I pay someone $5/hr to landscape my property, they would be making less than the industry average. But if I have nothing to landscape, I am still wasting $5/hr

 

[UKGrad93]

It isn't that they are being paid wildly more than their job title should dictate (i.e., they are in line with the private sector), but rather that their jobs are mostly unnecessary to the essential roles of a university in the first place.

If I pay someone $5/hr to landscape my property, they would be making less than the industry average. But if I have nothing to landscape, I am still wasting $5/hr

Which jobs are unnecessary at the university. Seems like you have special expertise in this. Perhaps you should lend your hand as a consultant.

 

[allabouttheUK]

Public Universities are required to make their salaries public. You can search all of UK's employees at this database. Looking around you will most likely see that most of these accusations of multiple, high level VPs making exorbitant salaries is false. Most of the full-time employees will probably fall in the 40-70K range, which is actually on the low side considering the majority of them have advanced degrees. Their equivalent in the Private sector are probably making a lot more.

I don't really follow Kentucky politics that much anymore, but I am shocked that the public is so willing to accept the cuts that the new governor is placing on all levels of education. Kentucky is already in a hole when it comes to the level of quality, and this is only going to make it worse. Which, is also going to make it much harder to attract and/or keep industry and talent down the road.

Well I stand corrected, thank you kind Sir.

 

[TransyCat09]

Just at UK:

- Violence Prevention Center, which lists among its 6 employees with roughly $200k of compensation: a VIP Center Director, Social Justice Educator, 2 program coordinators, a graphic artist, and a leadership specialist. Very important, sounds like

- 4-H and extension offices. If not cut entirely, trimmed significantly. Too many job titles and employees for me to go through

- Campus recreation has a staff cost of $550,000 for about 22 people (most are part time)

- Various "community X" departments who are glorified PR workers

In just 5 of the dozens (hundreds?) of departments that's almost 1,000,000 dollars. There is plenty more in there and that doesn't include the facility and physical plant costs which are probably just as much as the salaries. Again, I found $1,000,000 in roughly 5 departments not taking into account any secondary costs.

I'm sure debt service on expensive buildings is a drop in the bucket, too. And yes, I realize UK's budget is roughly $1 billion for the university (excluding the hospital), so that $1,000,000 is nothing, but that's also just the tiniest scratch of the surface

 

[mashburned]

Berea.College.

 

[mashburned]

Scrolling through that list of departments says a lot.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

Just at UK:

- Violence Prevention Center, which lists among its 6 employees with roughly $200k of compensation: a VIP Center Director, Social Justice Educator, 2 program coordinators, a graphic artist, and a leadership specialist. Very important, sounds like

- 4-H and extension offices. If not cut entirely, trimmed significantly. Too many job titles and employees for me to go through

- Campus recreation has a staff cost of $550,000 for about 22 people (most are part time)

- Various "community X" departments who are glorified PR workers

In just 5 of the dozens (hundreds?) of departments that's almost 1,000,000 dollars. There is plenty more in there and that doesn't include the facility and physical plant costs which are probably just as much as the salaries. Again, I found $1,000,000 in roughly 5 departments not taking into account any secondary costs.

I'm sure debt service on expensive buildings is a drop in the bucket, too. And yes, I realize UK's budget is roughly $1 billion for the university (excluding the hospital), so that $1,000,000 is nothing, but that's also just the tiniest scratch of the surface

So your criteria for if something is beneficial or not is your personal opinion...got it! You really should apply to UK, you could save them BILLIONS. I mean who needs campus security, multiple classes, buildings with doors, stuff like that. You could replace all the buildings with tents and porta potties, just think of that extra cash flow!

This is the problem with conservatives in general. They are all too willing to make cuts to research, science, any type of investment in things like this that other countries are investing in. Yet they can't stand cuts to a trillion dollar defense budget, cuts to billion dollar company's welfare, and other entitlements for private companies. And don't forget the waste that is infrastructure. Because you know these bridges and stuff last forever!

 

[-LEK-]

I am all for ending the Violence Prevention. IMO, we need more violence on campus.

 

[TransyCat09]

Notice I didn't list a single research department or campus security? Well, obviously you didn't, which leads me to believe you are illiterate.

Tuition and state funding as it currently stands accounts for roughly 80% of the budget. I think $800 million is more than enough to maintain a university whose main goal is to educate and research, but obviously you think we absolutely need a $120 million student center.

 

[TransyCat09]

I am all for ending the Violence Prevention. IMO, we need more violence on campus.

Considering it has 6 employees, none of whom are actual police officers or even security guards I am left to assume they don't actually prevent any violence anyway.

Definitely need to keep that graphic artist and "Social Justice Educator" on staff, tho. No telling what kind of violence would spring up without those integral pieces

 

[west-ky-wildcat]

If you increase the standards for admission you won't need a violence prevention center with a multi-million dollar budget. College isn't for everybody. The problem started when we tried to take an elite education and make it accessible to all. If you only accept students that are qualified and dedicated to an education, most of these problems solve themselves.


The only drawback is that universities make their money off of the ones that shouldn't have been accepted in the first place. Thus the reason that standards were lowered and tuition raised.

 

[Deeeefense]

Why don't they just gut the ******** courses and programs? Of the 200+ majors offered for undergrad, how many of them create productive members of society? Keep the math department, keep the science department, hell keep the AG department, but do you really need Dance, Philosophy, Gender and Women studies, AA studies, Indian culture, Interior Design, Latin American studies...ship these degress to liberal arts colleges and the University could save a load of money! Those degrees do nothing but pump out people who can't get decent paying jobs anyway.

while your post makes good economic sense, colleges are all about making money off of tuition and other fees, not "producing productive members of society", therefore eliminating programs that they make money on would be counter productive to their goals.

 

[-LEK-]

Considering it has 6 employees, none of whom are actual police officers or even security guards I am left to assume they don't actually prevent any violence anyway.

Definitely need to keep that graphic artist and "Social Justice Educator" on staff, tho. No telling what kind of violence would spring up without those integral pieces

I said I was for eliminating violence prevention.

 

[Kooky Kats]

Some classes I took that could be nuked to save cash:

Interpretations of Leisure
World of Peasants
Human Sexuality
Sociology 101




Tacos

 

[UKserialkiller]

Just put legalized gambling on campus.

Slot machines, card tables, roulette etc.

Students can try to win free tuition money and the house can use it's funds to compensate the difference in budgets.