To the Students, Families, Faculty,
Staff, and Associates of CLA:
I. Introduction
II. Fee
Comparisons
III. Enhancing
Programs: The Strategic Plan, Unmet Needs, and Priorities
IV. Preserving
Programs: Legislative Analyst's Forecast of the Budget
Introduction
In winter quarter the university community
considered whether the Cal Poly Plan fee should be supplemented
with college-based fees to support academic programs.
On March 13th and 14th, students went to the polls on
this matter and passed
the fee(s).
Fee Comparisons
Why is Cal Poly looking at an increase in fees now?
Some data, I think, explains why. Current fees at Cal
Poly are, on average, between two-thirds and one-half
the fee levels of its peers: the Best
in the West universities in US News and World Report,
the highest ranked public
MA universities across the entire US, the institutions
that California considers to be CSU
peers, and other "polytechnic"
universities that are compared regularly with Cal
Poly. This would not be a problem, of course, had state
resources compensated for the gap. But as reports from
the California Commission on Post-Secondary Education
show, state contributions per full-time equivalent student--in
constant dollars--have fallen significantly since the
late 1980s. (See Display
17.) To make up for some of this, the campus has launched
a large fund-raising
campaign. Since 1998, CLA has raised over $7,000,000--much
in bequests (deferred gifts), in-kind equipment (costly
technology), and scholarships. As extraordinarily helpful
as such generosity is, it does not fill the fee gap; it
also does not replace the 15% decrease in constant dollars
from the state.
Strategic Plan
and Unmet Needs
CLA follows a strategic plan in order to focus its
resources. Students, faculty, staff, friends, and alumni
tailored it. In sum, we definitely have improved our labs,
updated advising, and sharpened our edge in fields like
technical writing, digital printing, and quantitative
methods in the social sciences. This success is recognized
across the state. In fall, 2001, CLA accepted
36% of the students who applied, due to the demand for
our high quality programs; Cal Poly, as a whole, accepted
46% of its applicants.
We know what it takes to enhance and
preserve our edge. For instance, were we to reduce our
student to faculty
ratio to the level of our peers, we could run more
labs, assign more reports, oversee more internships, and
quicken the time to degree. (Right now, we exceed
the campus's pace by 14%.) Further, we have analyzed,
in detail, the extent to which current funding does not
allow us to replace aging equipment and to support student
activities like CPTV and our various music ensembles.
We are $188,000 short in the former category and $71,000
short in the latter, unadjusted for inflation. (See Unmet
Needs and Departments' Priorities.)
California's
Budget, 2001-04
Over the next several years, however, preserving our
edge might be as important as enhancing it. According
to the California Legislative
Analyst, the state could end this year with four to
eight billion of debt. (Estimates in the LA Times
on 1/6/02 ran considerably higher.) Without cuts, that
debt could rise to over twelve billion next year, with
problems persisting through '03-04. Consequently, although
the Governor's
proposed budget is promising at this stage, the College
has made contingencies for a cut of @$1,000,000 next year.
Non-academic units on campus and elsewhere in the CSU
are aware that they might see decreases in funds of at
least double that--in order to protect the university's
core mission of educating students. Our general budget
is posted in three scenarios, each based on a different
allocation of permanent and one-time funds, since we do
not have a final picture yet. Scenario
A shows a possible deficit next year of over $1,000,000,
were we to deliver the same services as this; B
shows a $400,000 problem in '02-03, followed by a $1,000,000
need in '03-04; and C
demonstrates a positive balance in '02-03 before debt
in '03-04. Typically, a $1,000,000 cut for CLA entails
a loss of about 200 sections--capacity to educate 400-500
full time equivalent students. That is 4% to 6% of our
average.
Therefore, we have been thinking about
new fees--to preserve and to enhance CLA's programs. We
have charted several
plans to show what resources they would generate and
to what programs and needs
they likely would go. The simple fact is that the Legislative
Analyst only sees two alternatives for agencies like
the CSU: decrease expenses per FTE students and/or increase
fees. As in the past, we will remain parsimonious with
our expenditures. We will be the best bargain in California
and one of the best in the US. But a bargain without quality
is, in the end, not much of a bargain. The latest version
of the fee proposal that we are considering can be found
here.
Sincerely,
Harry
Hellenbrand, Former Dean/CLA
Return
to Site index
