Colleges, lawmakers seek ‘balance' in dealing with cuts

By Aaron Gould Sheinin

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

State lawmakers and the head of the University System of Georgia promised Wednesday to find a balance between massive cuts and onerous tuition hikes as they together seek to squeeze nearly $600 million from higher education.

In an early morning budget hearing at the Capitol, Chancellor Erroll Davis and legislators sparred, agreed and cajoled one another to avoid cuts to the popular programs and to not balance the state budget on the backs of students and parents.

"It will be a balance of cuts and tuition increases and again, we are hopeful that the [overall] cuts will be as small as possible because then we can keep tuition increases as small as possible," Davis said after the two-hour hearing.

Davis presented a potential compromise plan that he said came from lawmakers' suggestions. It's far from a certainty, but includes:

• A 35 percent tuition increase.
• An end to the guaranteed fixed-rate tuition plan nearly half of all students participate in.
• A $1,000-per-student fee.
• At least $500,000 in savings through consolidated services among the 35 institutions.
• A salary cut for all employees.
• And a shorter semester schedule.

Legislators are in search of an estimated $1.1 billion in new revenue or spending cuts for the fiscal year that begins July 1. The University System had previously been told by Gov. Sonny Perdue to expect $265 million in cuts for that budget year, but last week were told by lawmakers to find another $300 million.

The past seven days, then, have featured a series of nightmarish scenarios for filling the budget hole. Last week, at a similar budget hearing, Davis said it would take a 77 percent tuition increase to fill only a portion of their fiscal hole. On Monday, the 35 colleges and universities released a series of road maps to how they would fill the deficit without raising tuition. Those Draconian suggestions included laying off 4,000 employees, slashing thousands of course sections, closing satellite campuses, ending the 4-H program and closing half of the University of Georgia's county extension offices.

The resulting uproar was loud and swift. Students organized protests on campuses and on the Internet. Lawmakers' e-mail and phones lit up.

"If you have a BlackBerry, the battery should be worn out by now. Your e-mail is smoking," said Sen. Seth Harp (R-Midland), the chairman of the Senate subcommittee charged with writing the higher education budget.

After Davis presented the potential compromise, no one rushed to embrace it. And, in truth, the ultimate outcome won't be known for weeks or months as lawmakers wait to see if state revenues begin to recover before settling on the exact size of the cuts for the 2011 budget.

The severity of the cuts to higher education is, like cuts to the rest of state government, dependent on whether state tax collections improve. But the size of the cuts also depends on whether lawmakers agree to find new sources of revenue, whether through Perdue's proposed fee (some say tax) on some hospitals and managed care programs, through Perdue's plan to siphon nearly $300 million from a state fund used for water and sewer bonds by local governments, or through a tobacco tax increase and increased fees.

If the cuts end up reaching the heights discussed in the past week, the impact will be devastating and unavoidable, UGA President Michael Adams said after the hearing.

"There are no cuts left that we want to make, including 4-H," Adams said. "When you've cut $110 million already, like we have, you're down to very difficult decisions. One of the issues is do you protect the core functions, like teaching history and English and math, or do you protect things that are not as central to the core, but that we think are very, very important?"

Georgia State University President Mark Becker said lawmakers and the colleges are in search of "a baseline."

"The Legislature will do its work, and they expect the system to do its," Becker said.

At times, however, the budget hearing took on a tone of lawmakers vs. the colleges. Several lawmakers sought assurances from Davis that 4-H would be protected.

"We made certain proposals to the chancellor and the Regents," Harp said. "It did not include elimination of 4-H."

Later, in response to a question from Rep. Austin Scott (R-Tifton), Davis said, "I have not made any recommendation to eliminate 4-H."

That reply, and some confusion surrounding the entire process, has come down to semantics. When Davis spoke to lawmakers in last week's hearing, they were disappointed he did not have specific areas to cut. Davis said they were not told how much they needed to cut. Harp said $300 million and to provide a plan within days. On Monday, the universities released their reports doing so. But Davis said Wednesday those weren't plans or recommendations but simply an answer to the question: How would you cut that much money without raising tuition should you have to?

Plans, recommendation or road map, the documents released Monday caused a stir.

"Are we going to strip one of the greatest functions that's part of the University System as a land grant university, 4-H and extension service?" Rep. Bob Smith (R-Watkinsville) asked Davis.

"No one is proposing we eliminate 4-H," Davis said. "No one is proposing or saying we eliminate or limit extension."

Yet, that's exactly what UGA included in its report released Monday.

Some lawmakers continue to focus on high salaries paid to highest-level professors and university presidents, which can exceed $500,000. Rep. Bill Hembree (R-Villa Rica) suggested that with an unemployment rate in Georgia passing 10 percent, salary cuts shouldn't force professors to seek work elsewhere. But Davis said that's not the case.

"They're not happy just to have a job," he said, adding that he, however, is happy to have one. But, "high-paid researchers are not among that group."

Besides, Davis said his presidents and top professors are not overpaid.

"No one ever wants to discuss this point, particularly in these difficult times, is whether you're cutting salaries that are at the market, or you're cutting salaries that are below the market," he said.

"Our presidents and senior people, and I can give you all the comparisons you want until the cows come home," Davis said. "Do they make handsome salaries compared to what the average person does? Of course, they do.

"They are not overpaid in comparison to their peers. This is an intellectual capital game, and you have to pay for intellectual capital. "