House budget bests others, still falls short
By Steve Hill
University Week
The 30-day special legislative session in Olympia has produced a budget that favors higher education over other discretionary agencies.
Director of Government Relations Dick Thompson called last Friday’s offering from the House an improvement over both the Governor’s and the Senate’s proposal. However, in a session that has offered limited good news for the state’s colleges and universities, the House budget still falls short on most UW requests.
“Given the fiscal constraints in Olympia, together with the extensive cuts in social and health programs - the $103 million cut in the basic health plan for working poor - the House budget could be the high-water mark for higher education,” Thompson said.
On the surface, the House proposal appears to offer lower salary increases than the Senate, including 3 percent in July 2001 and 2.6 percent in July 2002 as opposed to the 3.7 and 3.1 percent proposed earlier by senators. The University had requested salary increases of 6 percent in 2001 and 4 percent in 2002.
But the good news is the House proposes to fund all salary increases, not just those paid from the state’s general fund. Neither the Senate nor the Governor had allowed for salary increases for state employees supported by tuition dollars - a group that makes up 25 percent of UW salaries.
While the Senate budget proposed tapping into a pension surplus that serves an estimated 9,400 active and retired police and firefighters, the House avoided the controversial move. Like the governor, the House proposes a 2 percent cut on noninstructional costs. And like the previous budget proposals, the House version won’t fund the cost of inflation and increased energy charges. In effect, then, the House budget cuts more than $22 million from the UW in inflationary expenses that will need to be paid.
“As I said when the Senate presented its budget, we recognize the constraints the Legislature is facing in trying to write a biennial budget, and we appreciate the effort to try to preserve funding for higher education,” said President Richard L. McCormick. “However, the House budget makes it even more apparent that despite such efforts, higher education faces a serious predicament in finding adequate funding to remain competitive and continue to expand opportunities for students. I trust the Legislature will do the best it can do; the question is whether that will really be enough.”
The proposal gives the Board of Regents authority to raise tuition by as much as 6.9 percent in the 2001-02 academic year and by 5.9 percent in 2002-03. Tuition increases at the Law School and in MBA programs could go up by as much as 12 percent each year.
If lawmakers haven’t agreed on a budget by the end of the 30-day special session, another session would be called. In the meantime, UW officials are carefully watching the negotiations between the two chambers.
“We will need to continue to explain the needs of the University of Washington during the next few weeks as the negotiations take place between the House and the Senate,” Thompson said. “We will continue to point out the need for items such as more salary dollars and money for TA health benefits while trying to prevent even deeper cuts to the UW as a way of restoring cuts in other agencies.”