(Not a formal meeting with the usual agenda items.)
President Brand called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m., in 180 P. L. C., on May 1, 1992.
The President stated that the meeting was called to present information on the cuts that had to be made in the budget for the 1993 95 biennium. The present budget is the base for the mandated cut of 20 %, so that the next budget will that much smaller. The State of Oregon's portion of the UO budget is about one third of the total budget for the institution. The other two thirds includes research and grants and contracts, tuition, auxiliary funds, e. g., dormitories, but the state one third is very necessary to the well being of the University.
The UO is not alone in this budget reduction undertaking. The Governor has asked OSSHE to cut 20 % and in turn OSSHE has asked each institution to do likewise. In another request the Governor has requested recommendations for build backs that will become "decision packages" in how the UO would like to add back some of those dollars that are being cut. All of the state agencies have the same request...we are altogether in cuts and add backs. And the UO add backs will be in competition with all of the other add backs. The add backs for OSSHE and the institutions are guided by the request that the add backs be directed toward bettering the working relationships within OSSHE and potentially with other agencies. This is the first add back. Another 10 % add back is designated as "benchmarks," initially created by the Goldschmidt administration and being pushed by the present administration. The focus here is on certain key areas with measurable operation elements of how we are doing in each area or benchmark. ª The deadline for the UO to respond to the Chancellor is mid June. The OSSHE Board will meet later in June to commence looking at the proposed cuts and the two, but separate, add backs. If nothing happens to change the budget process of cutting the result will be a dramatic change in the state system of higher education a smaller system, but not necessarily a better system or one of the same quality.
The University Senate is putting together a ad hoc budget committee made up of faculty, and not just Senators, that the President will consult with and of course he will continue to consult with the Faculty Advisory Council. All of this plus many other meetings and consultations will take place prior to the UO's response to the Chancellor in mid June.
Measure 5 has, since its enactment, taken a cut of 10 % from the UO budget for this biennium, a proposed 20 % for the next, and even more in the third biennium. The political climate is one that recognizes the horrendous problem that 5 presents, but does not want to discuss the problem. Legislative action is the only thing that can present any alternative to Measure 5 and that alternative will have to go to the voter for approval.
It is possible that a special session will be held this summer and if the legislature and the governor can agree on a plan to restructure the tax system the voter will be given an opportunity to cast a mail ballot in mid September. However, it is not all that simple.
Thus far labor and business, both big and small, have not come together to discuss the problems presented by Measure 5; the education community, especially the OEA the lobbying group for K 12 has not spoken up for any remedy; the Republicans and Democrats have yet to come together on a plan. All of these groups and people must come together before a special session can be successful.
But that is in the future. The state benchmarks include social issues, economy, environment, quality of life, etc., but NO lead benchmark on higher education and people in the system are working to get such a benchmark.
A concern of the system is the Board Administrative Review Committee (BARC). BARC has asked each campus to look at 10 , 20 , and 30 percent reductions in administrative support in non academic areas. The UO has two weeks to provide a plan to accomplish such a reduction in each of those increments in non academic areas.
BARC will also determine the rate at which the UO will reduce its work force by 156 people, as ordered earlier by the governor. It is hoped that this can be done without massive lay offs, but BARC will give the UO information on that desire.
The Board has a task force on tuition policy that will decide on future levels of enrollment. A series of statewide meetings will be held to gather information by this task force. The Governor has requested, and the system will provide, a policy statement on what we will do in terms of tuition, a very important factor both in terms of access for students and how we will finance higher education in this state. HB 3565, "The Education Reform Act," will significantly change how higher education interfaces with K through 12 and community colleges. HB 3565 has potential significant changes for our mission policy. This act will establish six tracks for pursing higher education after high school. Portfolios will have to be evaluated, more people will drop in and drop out more often, but the last line in the bill states that none of the things required by HB 3565 will need to be done if funding is not available.
The cuts this time, at the UO, will not be the vertical cuts that were done last time. Major programs, departments, will not be cut, we will handle the cuts differently. After much discussion with the FAC, ad hoc faculty groups, administrators, and Deans, the President stated that the strategy had to meet the demands of Measure 5, and yet leave the UO in a position to meet the education needs of Oregon's future. The number of 18 year olds in this state will increase by 35 % by the end of this decade. Currently about 25 % of the 18 year olds in Oregon go on to higher education, the national average is about 40 %, and the migration of students to community colleges has increased. All of this will come to bear on the higher education in Oregon just as we pass the last part of Measure 5. We must prepare for this future in spite of Measure 5.
The worst case is the full 20 % cut, this is about $65 million per year being cut from the budget. The 20 % is probably overstated, but we must cut it to meet the order of the governor. This summer "we, as private citizens, will be able to knock on doors to help overturn Measure 5," the President stated.
Serious cuts in non instructional parts of the University will be the avenue to make the 20 % cut. Revenue must be enhanced (1) through tuition, (2) requiring auxiliary services to pay their own way with fees collected for their services (those services currently get financial assistance from other university fund sources), (3) more fund raising, and (4) more grants and contracts.
Specific assumptions that the UO will work under for the 1993 95 budget:
There is no agreement that if there is a budget restoration, it will be devoted to downsized or cut areas. BUT there is a presumption that restored faculty positions would revert to the unit of origin.
If the budget is not stabilized by 1996 97 the President stated that a different approach to budgeting will be the result.
The efforts to improve quality and position ourselves for the long term will continue. The University has to find ways to move forward despite the difficulties. Measure 5 cannot, the President asserted, be essentially Chapter 11 for the state.
The President, in responding to questions, stated that since the UO will not be closing departments Affirmative Action efforts should see no changes, however students of color, as well as other students will see accessibility decline because of the increase in tuition. As for faculty in general all current commitments will be honored, the President went on, but that a freeze is a sure thing in the future without relief from Measure 5. Faculty furloughs and increased teaching loads are not being considered.
A question concerning what administrative cuts would include the President responded by stating that administrative costs at the UO are less than 5 % of the budget. This includes support activities, the business office, student services, physical plant maintenance, anything you can think of that does not directly involve instruction or research. It is far more than just a few offices in Johnson Hall.
The budget time table for 1993 95 will be as follows: 1. Campus preparation of budget outline May 1 early Fall Quarter, October 15, 1992.
This will be the schedule if nothing happens between now and late September 1992.
he business of the meeting having concluded the meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
(These minutes are based on notes taken by Mr. Robert Bray, News Bureau.)