Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

March 30, 1995

O'Connor asks senators for 4.5% hike in Pitt's state appropriation

HARRISBURG– Noting that Pennsylvania's funding for higher education has risen only 11.8 percent since 1990, one-tenth the rate of increase for prisons, Chancellor J. Dennis O'Connor on March 28 asked the Senate appropriations committee for an additional 4.5 percent hike in the University's base appropriation.

The state budget proposed by Gov. Tom Ridge on March 7 calls for a "student-based" 3 percent funding increase for higher education.

For Pitt, though, the increase in base appropriations would be only about 1.5 percent. And all of it would come through the Tuition Challenge Grant Program, which rewards institutions for holding tuition increases for full-time students from Pennsylvania to 4.5 percent.

O'Connor told the appropriations committee that the administration and Board of Trustees are looking at a tuition increase for full-time, in-state students of about 3.5 percent.

If the General Assembly approves Pitt's request for an additional 4.5 percent in state funds, or a total base appropriation increase of 6 percent, the University still will face a budget shortfall of about $3.5 million next year, O'Connor told the senators.

Without the additional 4.5 percent increase, O'Connor said, Pitt will be left with a budget deficit in fiscal 1995-96 of more than $8 million.

When Sen. James Rhoades, R-Schuylkill County, asked what the University will do if it does not receive the additional 4.5 percent increase, O'Connor said: "We will have to continue to get costs out of the system. Unfortunately, that could lead to reductions in some very important activities, such as our attempt to integrate the regional campuses. We also might have to reduce some of our student services." O'Connor never mentioned a hiring freezing as a possible cost cutting measure for next year's budget during the appropriations committee hearing on March 28. (The hiring freeze that went into effect March 29 is to help counter an expected $5.7 million deficit in the current budget and is scheduled to end with the fiscal year on June 30. When asked after the March 28 University Senate meeting if the hiring freeze might continue should the General Assembly fail to approval Pitt's request for an additional 4.5 percent in base appropriations, O'Connor said: "We're going to have to make some tough decisions in other ways. Right now, though, we're only looking at June 30. It's only for this year's balance.") Although Gov. Ridge's proposed budget would increase Pitt's base appropriations by only about 1.5 percent, the University also would benefit indirectly if the General Assembly approves Ridge's recommendation for a 17.3 percent increase in grants to students through the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA).

The 17.3 percent PHEAA increase, the second component in Ridge's student-based 3 percent funding increase for higher education, is significantly higher than the 10 percent PHEAA increases that were awarded under Gov. Robert Casey.

In proposing his budget, Gov. Ridge said the PHEAA increase will allow the maximum student grant amount to grow by $100 to $2,700 annually. He said the increase will enable 162,000 Pennsylvania students to obtain scholarships, or about 10,000 more than last year.

Also in the budget proposal, Gov. Ridge recommended eliminating all institutional line items and awarding block grant appropriations to state and state-related schools. In the past, Pitt's base appropriation was specifically earmarked for educational and general expenses, disadvantaged students, the medical school, the dental clinic, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Services for Teens at Risk, the Center for Public Health Practices, and Rural Education Outreach.

Asked by Sen. Mike Fisher, R-Allegheny County, how he viewed the governor's proposed block grant program and its effect on Pitt, O'Connor said it theoretically gives the University more flexibility than being locked into line item spending. However, the chancellor added, since the total money will not increase beyond 1.5 percent, the University still will have to use the money to fund those items that it has historically funded with its appropriation.

"We can increase our flexibility only with an increase in dollar amounts," O'Connor said.

In questioning Pitt administrators, the senators seemed to be suggesting ways in which the University might be able to control its budget without an additional increase in its base appropriation.

After comparing undergraduate tuition costs in the College of Arts and Sciences for Pennsylvania students, $4,962, and out-of-state students, $10,786, Fisher asked if the University was attempting to recruit more out-of-state students.

O'Connor told him that 12-13 percent of the entering freshman class this year was from out of state and that the University will continue to try to attract out-of-state students.

Pointing out that O'Connor had come to Pitt from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Fisher asked the chancellor how Pennsylvania's funding of higher education compares to that of North Carolina. O'Connor replied that North Carolina funded the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a school comparable in size and demographics to Pitt, at a level that was approximately twice what Pennsylvania was giving Pitt.

Fisher also asked if the University had approached the Casey and Ridge administrations about making the Tuition Challenge Grant Program apply to part-time students. O'Connor said the University had approached both administrations, but was unsuccessful in its efforts to get part-time students in the program.

Pitt has long complained that it is treated unfairly because it has more part-time students than other state-related schools such as Penn State.

Appropriations committee chair Richard Tilghman, R-Montgomery County, made it plain that the situation probably will not be changing any time soon, when he noted that if the state began including part-time students in the Tuition Challenge Grant Program it could be helping to finance people who are taking courses in basket weaving for a hobby.

Sen. Roy Andrezeski, D-Erie, asked about the faculty to student ratio at Pitt. After learning that it is about 15 students to one faculty member, other senators suggested that costs might be cut by increasing the ratio of students to professors.

Sen. Rhoades added that it might be time for the various state, state-related and private institutions of higher learning in Pennsylvania to begin looking at ways to work together and avoid the duplication of services.

In touting Pitt's importance to the state, O'Connor said that the University enhances Pennsylvania's competitive international position by teaching students critical thinking and problem-solving skills; training professionals, forging partnerships with industry to facilitate technology transfer and research discoveries; addressing prevailing social problems and public health issues.

O'Connor also pointed out that over the past two years the University has trimmed $17 million from its budget. Despite this and the fact that the state's economy has improved and revenues have been running ahead of projections, the chancellor noted, the only increases in its base appropriation that the University have seen over the past five years has come through the Tuition Challenge Grant Program.

"This program does not treat all universities equitably, nor does it recognize differences in institutional mission, programmatic cost or changing student demographics," he said. "As such, the Tuition Challenge Grant Program is not an acceptable substitute for an adequate investment in the base appropriations of Pennsylvania's public universities." Chancellor O'Connor and Pitt's other senior administrators will return to Harrisburg on April 3 to testify before the state House of Representatives appropriations committee.

–Mike Sajna


Leave a Reply