
A Message to the
Campus Community
Dear Colleagues,
Today, Governor Scott McCallum, in
an address to a joint session of the State Legislature,
introduced the Budget Reform Act of 2002, a package of budget
measures and reforms. The State faces serious short-term budget
problems, and the UW System will, in the Governor's proposal,
share the consequences. Specifically, the Governor has proposed
to reduce the UW-System budget by 4.5%.
I know this is an issue of great
concern on campus. While we are still awaiting more detail, I
want to share with you what we know at this early stage.
I'll start by expressing my
confidence in our ability, together, to manage this situation. In
fact, there is favorable news to be found in the Governor's
proposal:
The UW System would fare
better than might be expected given the seriousness of the
state's fiscal situation. The governor obviously recognizes that
we are part of the solution. Other state agencies would
experience double-digit budget cuts.
Tuition for our students
will be kept well below that of tuition levels at our peer
institutions. (During the run-up to the Governor's speech, the
idea of huge tuition increases had been floated.) We will, as a
proudly public institution, be able to keep our commitment to
access.
There had been speculation
that capital construction would be frozen. That is not a part of
the Governor's proposal. Such a step would have delayed the Lab
Sciences project and cost us, and Wisconsin, much more as
construction costs rose and historically low interest rates
increased.
The pay plan for the second
year of the biennium remains in place.
I must caution, however, that Gov.
McCallum's proposal is just that, only a proposal. There is much
more water that must go over the dam before we have a final
budget. You will be hearing all sorts of proposals and trial
balloons. This will require some patience on all our parts
Still, it is a proposal that would
leave our core programs strong. It is a better "starting
point" than many had predicted.
In addition, the Governor's plan
points to the need for - regardless of the budget situation - an
inclusive process that lets all of us help link our budgetary
allocations to our collective priorities. To date, UW-Green Bay's
approach has been to assume status quo budgets with initiatives
being undertaken only if "new" funding is in place.
That had to change and, prior to the seriousness of the current
budget situation, we put steps in place to begin that change.
This will be helpful as we prepare the budget for the second year
of the biennium and, longer term, as we seek to support the best
ideas of a highly creative faculty and academic staff.
That, then, is a snapshot of
today's news from Madison. For those of you more familiar with UW
System budget specifics, we currently believe that the numbers
will work out as follows:
UW System, in the Governor's
proposal, will have its GPR allocation cut by $50 million for the
biennium. That is in addition to a $6.3 million ongoing cut to
the 00-01 base with which we are currently living. The $50M
figure includes a $4.2 million "lapse" for 01-02 that
we implemented this year. That "lapse" now becomes a
permanent budget reduction. In addition, UW System will need to
make another $5.8 million budget reduction for this iscal year.
This totals $10 million for 01-02 (or $20 million for this
biennium).
We have addressed the cuts in the
current year of the biennium by reducing reserves. That has
affected programs and investments for which we have historically
used the reserves. This includes replacement of equipment and
scheduling of extra sections to meet immediate, unanticipated
student demand for courses. We have the capacity, this year, to
meet the expected additional reductions in 00-01 from such
sources. However, what made sense when reductions were expected
to be short-term "lapses" may not be as wise when
permanent reductions are necessary, and so we will want to
revisit these decisions as we plan future budgets.
For the UW System to reach the $50
million biennial figure, budgets will, in the second year of the
current biennium, need to be reduced by an additional $30
million. We also receive, as a system, $36 million in additional
revenue in the second year of the current biennium, and those
funds, targeted at new initiatives and economic stimulus, remain
in the budget.
Just how those two considerations
- a budget reduction and an "economic stimulus" budget
addition - play out is a matter of obvious importance. The
willingness of the State to invest in higher education as a key
to future economic health is one reason why we have not suffered,
in troubled economic times, as much as is being proposed for
other governmental entities. However, it is certainly my view
that, when it comes to considering major budget reductions, all
factors - including the economic stimulus package - must be on
the table as we weigh the reductions that will have the fewest
serious consequences for our ongoing commitments to serve our
students, our region, and our state.
I will share additional
information as it becomes available.
Bruce
01/22/02