Officials warn of inadequate funds for state schools

Michigan's state legislators and public university officials agreed this past Friday that Gov. John Engler's budget proposal to increase higher education funding by 1.5 percent is inadequate.

At a state Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for Higher Education hearing in the Michigan League, University President Lee Bollinger warned the subcommittee that a 1.5-percent increase in funding would lead to a 5.6-percent increase in tuition cost next year.

"The allocations as seen at this point seem to be squeezing on the University," Bollinger said.

Sen. John Schwarz (R-Battle Creek), who chairs the subcommittee, and Sen. Jon Cisky (D-Saginaw) heard testimony from Bollinger, the University's Flint campus Chancellor Charlie Nelms and James Renick, chancellor of the University's Dearborn campus, asking for continued support from the subcommittee.

Following the hearing, Schwarz said he will propose a 3.5-percent increase in higher education funding, which would top Engler's proposed increases by $30 million for the year.

A 3.5-percent increase would be similar to last year's appropriations process when the state Legislature added an additional 2 percent to Engler's proposal, making it a 4.4-percent increase in funding.

In an attempt to persuade the committee to raise the University's funding, Bollinger informed the legislators of the growing costs that come with being a highly competitive institution. He also questioned Engler's budget, which boosts funding for corrections by 5 percent.

"It's a curious time. It's curious and odd because, on the one hand, the economy seems to be booming," Bollinger said. "But it is also difficult time for higher education and the University of Michigan particular because the costs of funding a great institution like this is increasing rapidly."

Schwarz, who agreed with most of Bollinger's remarks, told Bollinger and other higher education representatives that he also has concerns with the executive budget proposal.

"As we start this budget today, I'm as surprised as yourself at some of the numbers in the executive budget," said Schwarz, who asked Bollinger to suggest a funding increase for the University.

Bollinger responded by proposing a 3.7-percent boost, which he said would help the University continue to thrive as one of the top institutions in the nation.

Rep. Liz Brater (D-Ann Arbor), who attended the hearing, applauded Bollinger's dedication to the University and expressed her objections to Engler's proposal.

"I really appreciate your effort," Brater told Bollinger. "You try to weave together those aspects and serve the state. It will be difficult to work with the governor's proposed budget."

The panel of legislators and University representatives also addressed a $16-million increase in the tuition tax credit, which was passed recently.

While the tax credit should return about $35 million back to college students across the state, its funds come from the state's $8.8 billion general fund budget, which accounts for $1.5 billion in higher education funding.

Both Bollinger and Schwarz said they hoped the tax tuition credit increase will not affect higher education appropriations.

Nelms, who has accepted a position at Indiana University, received great praise from Schwarz and Cisky for his four years of service to the Flint community. Nelms said that even with high appropriations, smaller colleges and universities do not receive substantial increases.

"Senator Schwarz, if I give you a dollar and give you a 1.5-percent increase on your dollar, and I give Senator Cisky $10 and give him a 1.5-percent increase, you have the same increase but he receives more," Nelms said.

Schwarz responded to Nelms by saying that allocating larger percentages of funds to smaller schools "is something I am committed to trying,"

One factor that many legislators use to decide the level of funding is the Consumer Price Index, which measures the inflation rate in the U.S. economy.

Bollinger denounced the common use of the Consumer Price Index in public policy because it reflects how much consumers spend, not how much money they actually earn.

"The reference point is not the CPI," Bollinger said. "The CPI is what an urban consumer would spend this year to have the same resources he had last year ... We have tried to keep pace with increases in personal disposable income."

02-23-98