More higher education cuts?

[Nidaros]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I take offense to your use of a sexual act to reference a different point of view. Its junior high humor, and it isn't clever.

Sorry no offense to your virgin ears.

[propar80]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I take offense to your use of a sexual act to reference a different point of view. Its junior high humor, and it isn't clever.

Competely agree...this isn't the AL "snide comment section" of a political article...I say keep it classy, even though we're delving into politics here and I can already see this thread bringing out some folks's deep-seeded right/left-repub/dem-blue/red long held beliefs and it seems discussion like these always ends up in flames(one more good reason for dissolving political parties all together IMO.)

On the other hand, I just remembered I'm not a mod. so tear it up!!

Go Jacks!!

[goon]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I don't think you understand the situation. If we had raised taxes a little bit a few years ago, we wouldn't be in this situation. The state has been spending one-time money (federal stimulus, trust funds, etc.) for most of the last decade to cover ongoing expenses. There hasn't been enough tax revenue to pay the bills for years. The one-time money goes away, but the expenses remain.

The governor is right, we can't keep doing that.

But the other part of this situation is that while we've been spending those one-time dollars, we have also been cutting budgets AND our needs have been growing. Costs for things like health care increase (a bad thing, but an increase nonetheless). More students seek college educations at our state universities (a good thing, and a cost increase). You could list about 1,000 cost increases, from the cost of paper clips to long-term care for the elderly. The point is that our needs for services, things we HAVE to do and things we WANT to do continue to grow every year. They just do.

So what do you do? Do you make a huge cut (up to 64 layoffs at SDSU under these proposed cuts) or do you say "This is important" and find cuts AND new revenues to pay for it?

Simplistic statements like: "If we tax more, they'll just spend it and we'll be in deficit again" don't really reflect the complexity of the situation.

This is about choices. If you're OK with 64 faculty and staff layoffs at SDSU, combined with much higher tuition that will slow growth and make it harder for many people to go to college, setting back essentially all the progress that the institution has made in the last six years or so, then by all means, take taxes off the table.

Since this is an athletics board, I'll add this: About 25 percent of the athletic budget comes from the general fund at SDSU. That will be subject to these same cuts. In our athletic department, $300,000 or so is pretty serious money.

So we raise taxes to fulfill the spending we have right now. What happens 15 years from now when it happens again with a giant shortfall in the budget? Raise taxes? I know we don't have as much paid in taxes as other states, but revenue is down across the board, do we raise taxes to increase revenue or cut spending to match the revenue? If you know the answer please share. I have an income that was reduced from the effects of the economy, so I had to make sure the needs and wants of mine still fit in with my revenue (income) after getting a pay cut.

The state has certain responsibilities it must pay for; others are wants, which it pays for. Where do you draw the line, is it truly the state responsibility for all the areas it reaches or have they taken the reach of where cities and personal and social responsibility should have more say.

I would find it a little reckless to keep spending levels the same or increase, while many in the state have taken cuts to continue to get by with. Taxing those that are taking cuts at the individual level only takes more income away from the citizens of the state who by having more money can spend more witch generates taxes and helps economy by me spending it at local shops and companies, giving it straight to the government to spend cuts out the goods and services that are keeping the economy moving. But I guess, what do I know. It’s not a popular choice when it hurts people, but is in a necessary choice that might need to be made?

[joeboo22]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I here a lot of people say private sector and real world. In terms of cuts. Well private businesses are for profit, the sole purpose. In the public world they do it for well being, but also have higher standards in many cases. Are there black holes in the Universities? hell yeah, but its not that big of savings and when you cut each program it does 2 things, it makes you less competitive and more likely never to bring that program back when the money comes back.

And before I here the well maybe state governments should be ran more like a private company argument all what I'll say is you better be prepared for higher taxes for less services because to a private sector its all about the bottom line.

As far as K-12. In the fall of 09 the high school I attended opted out for 400K, a good friend of mine ran for a school board position and won because he was upset that they opted out, said there was a lot of other places to cut and they just don't know what they were doing. I talked to him last week and he said the 10% cut takes between $340-$350K of that out, and they might have to opt out again. Said that once you get to see the funding mechanisms you understand that a lot of positions can't be cut.

A lot of the positions are tied to federal money that if you cut you risk higher amounts of federal aid.

Said in the end you are going to get teachers teaching more classes a day, with no teachers assistant to help them, with more kids in the classroom, for less money.

And again I don't support any cuts to education, its like attaching a finger once you cut it off, it might regain 100% but chances are if you are able to regain it it won't go back to 100%.

[filbert]

Re: More higher education cuts?

Sorry no offense to your virgin ears.

You are flirting with a ban.

Be civil.

[joeboo22]

Re: More higher education cuts?

If we are going to talk about real change in higher ed then somebody needs to explain to me why a state this size has 6 campuses and adding a 7th (Sioux Falls, don't kid yourself, we know where the Univesity Center is going). For serious cuts they should consider closing a campus or two and moving those resources to Brookings or Vermillion. I understand 100 years ago we needed more campuses to cover the state in order to provide access, but people are more mobile today and the need for so many campuses has outlived its time. Are DSU, BHSU, or NSU really necessary at this point. Could those students on those campuses be served just as readily by USD, SDSU, & SD Tech?

Not a popular suggestion but one that needs mentioning.

closing a college doesn't end up great. Someone who is from Bon Homme County where USD-Springfield was still sees the effects of closing something. Now I'll agree that USD-Springfield needed to be closed. But closing Universities doesn't save as much as you may think.

Since I know Black Hills State quite well I'll give some examples.
1st- 3rd largest University in the state
2nd- large non-trad study body- people who aren't going to go to USD/SDSU
3rd- large teacher college with high placement numbers
4th- the only full range university west of the river. (School of Mines is an engineering college)
5th- a lot of people come over from Wyoming because its cheap.

Now if I would do anything to higher Ed, I'd make DSU a junior college, tie most of the administration with SDSU and teach just the Eng comp 100/200, History 151/152, Speech, Math 100/101/102, remedial classes and so on. (The freshman/sophomore gen eds)

athletically I think they are going D-III so the move wouldn't be hard.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: More higher education cuts?

Higher education is not a business. Higher education is a public service that INVESTS dollars in our human capital, preparing young people so they'll have better lives and more opportunities than we had. That's pretty much every parent's hope for their children. I see it as an obligation to invest in the future. We're not making iPhones here.

Skinny up? You realize that with these cuts, the state contribution to higher education will have been cut from nearly $180 million in FY2009 to $150 million in FY2012. Meanwhile, enrollment has continued to increase dramatically. We're pretty lean already.

I don't really question that higher education is an investment. No matter how good the investment, if you can't pay for it, it is a moot point.

It stinks that the budget has been cut like that. Unfortunately the reality is that less revenue is coming in and the two options are cut expenses or increase revenue. I would prefer to cut expenses.

[propar80]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I don't really question that higher education is an investment. No matter how good the investment, if you can't pay for it, it is a moot point.

It stinks that the budget has been cut like that. Unfortunately the reality is that less revenue is coming in and the two options are cut expenses or increase revenue. I would prefer to cut expenses.

Why can't BOTH be done? How about 5% cuts across the board and the rest is taken care of in a higher sales tax, minus food and clothing purchases?

Go Jacks!!

[Nidaros]

Re: More higher education cuts?

You are flirting with a ban.

Be civil.

Okay

[joeboo22]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I don't really question that higher education is an investment. No matter how good the investment, if you can't pay for it, it is a moot point.

It stinks that the budget has been cut like that. Unfortunately the reality is that less revenue is coming in and the two options are cut expenses or increase revenue. I would prefer to cut expenses.

I don't think anyone is arguing that cuts aren't needed I think they are arguing are they fair and are they smart.

Higher Ed has a big gripe, because last year it was my understanding that they took a larger cut with the understanding that they wouldn't get a cut this year and possibly an increase.

K-12 has a gripe because it gets to a point where you start causing change that can't be reversed. Its a lot easier to close a high school then it is to open one up. Or you have to go ask your patrons to raise taxes because the state is too chicken to do so.

The part is the money you and I spend will go up it just will be in different areas.

In the next year my guess is my tuition will go up (I really need to graduate)
and My property taxes will go up because the school had to opt out (hopefully the school district where the family farms the majority of the land doesn't have to opt out either)

And if you don't vote for an opt out you risk losing the school and if you have a house in a town that has no school and has tried to sell it, its not easy.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: More higher education cuts?

Why can't BOTH be done? How about 5% cuts across the board and the rest is taken care of in a higher sales tax, minus food and clothing purchases?

Go Jacks!!

Are you suggesting some sort of compromise? In a legislative body of elected officials? That would truly be an amazing outcome.

[propar80]

Re: More higher education cuts?

Are you suggesting some sort of compromise? In a legislative body of elected officials? That would truly be an amazing outcome.

It was kind of a tounge-n-cheek comment. Only in the world of American politics is a tounge-n-cheek comment probably the best solution. A solution that everyone would probably agree on if for one second people would leave their political party belief out of it and think with their own brain.

"Political parties will tear this country apart" - George Washington.

Go Jacks!!

[JimmyJack]

Re: More higher education cuts?

Unfortunately the reality is that less revenue is coming in and the two options are cut expenses or increase revenue. I would prefer to cut expenses.

Fair enough. That's the discussion we need to have in this state.

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: More higher education cuts?

If we are going to talk about real change in higher ed then somebody needs to explain to me why a state this size has 6 campuses and adding a 7th (Sioux Falls, don't kid yourself, we know where the Univesity Center is going). For serious cuts they should consider closing a campus or two and moving those resources to Brookings or Vermillion. I understand 100 years ago we needed more campuses to cover the state in order to provide access, but people are more mobile today and the need for so many campuses has outlived its time. Are DSU, BHSU, or NSU really necessary at this point. Could those students on those campuses be served just as readily by USD, SDSU, & SD Tech?

Not a popular suggestion but one that needs mentioning.

I completely agree. I would leave BHS though just because it's the only west river school there. Your choices would be Northern State & DSU most likely? Also, what about the prospect of closing either USD or SDSU and having SD with only one Div. 1 school. I know...it won't happen. But it would be interesting to see how much it would help the budget.

Closing DSU would make a lot of sense.

[Nidaros]

Re: More higher education cuts?

I completely agree. I would leave BHS though just because it's the only west river school there. Your choices would be Northern State & DSU most likely? Also, what about the prospect of closing either USD or SDSU and having SD with only one Div. 1 school. I know...it won't happen. But it would be interesting to see how much it would help the budget.

Closing DSU would make a lot of sense.

Lets see how this goes over at the Madison Chamber meeting. The reality of closing any of the six will not happen without a fight of some sort. There are jobs and business in Madison that depend on DSU with open doors, and not closed and collecting dust. Closing NSU would really produces screams and yelling beyond comprehension. It looks very easy on paper but even Governor Duggy will not take the bait on that move.