Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />passage of Ballot Measure 5, the University of Oregon has been directed to <br />reduce its budgetary needs by $10 million. In order to satisfy this require- <br />ment, the University chose to reduce its budget by $5 million and to identify <br />an additional $5 million in new revenue sources. Dr. Moseley described the <br />budget reductions as follows: $850,000 in central administration, $650,000 <br />in enrollment-related reductions, $2.58 million in program cuts, and $650,000 <br />in academic administration cuts. As a source of new revenue, the University <br />will be implementing a system-wide tuition surcharge of $3.5 million and $1.5 <br />million in additional revenue from non-resident students. Dr. Moseley warned <br />that if the assumptions about increased enrollment do not hold, the Universi- <br />ty could be forced to make up the rest of the $5 million through additional <br />program cuts. <br /> <br />Dr. Moseley commented on the method the University used to decide on program <br />cuts. The main criteria which governed the decision-making process were the <br />quality of the program, the level of duplication of that program around the <br />State system, and the centrality of the program to the University's mission. <br />He noted that because the University did not have programs of low quality, <br />the decision focused mainly on the last two criteria. . <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Bascom, Dr. Moseley said that teacher edu- <br />cation was cut because of its duplication statewide. <br /> <br />Mr. Green noted that the loss of the teacher education program will have a <br />profound impact on our community. <br /> <br />Responding to requests for clarification, Dr. Moseley said that each institu- <br />tion in the state was required to make a certain level of budgetary cuts. He <br />acknowledged that the system of higher education might have benefited from a <br />more rational decision-making process in which cooperative decisions could <br />have been made regarding what types of programs should be retained at what <br />institutions. <br /> <br />The University is working with members of the Lane County legislative delega- <br />tion, and Dr. Moseley reported that the legislators are interested in cooper- <br />ating to help preserve the level of higher education now available in Oregon. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Nicholson, Dr. Moseley said that even if <br />the University is not required to make the full $10 million in budgetary cuts <br />this year, the cuts in the future will be dramatic. He warned that if some <br />source of replacement revenue is not identified by 1992, higher education <br />will not be able to survive in the state. <br /> <br />Mr. Boles commented that the decision to cut the education program at the <br />University is incompatible with the identified Oregon benchmark goal of <br />having the best educated work force in the U.S. by the year 2000. He sug- <br />gested that this conflict needs to be resolved at the State Legislature. <br /> <br />Mr. Boles said that he believes the State Legislature misinterpreted the <br />voters' mandate with respect to Measure 5. In passing Measure 5, voters do <br />not desire less service, rather service from a different funding source. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />April 10, 1991 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br />