Dear Faculty Colleagues:

Let me introduce you to some of our budgetary numbers to think about.  No pretense is made that these are accurate numbers—they are approximate and rounded off, but sufficiently close to draw reasonable conclusions.  I am attaching a table for you to look at the numbers college wise.

Our total budgeted amount for DAA is about $137.5 millions, of which $119 millions, or approximately 86% is spent on personnel costs.  However, if you look college wise, the personnel costs are the largest components of our college budgets starting at 96% for COB and CHHS, 93% for CAS and COE, 91% for COT—only exception is the library where personnel cost is 60%.  With a fantastic 6% increases in credit hours generated by DAA, any thoughts on reduction in personnel cost is sabotaging the stated mission of “education first” and risking our accreditations.  

Now DBF proposed a cut of 3% or $4.2 million for DAA, of which 2% or $2.3 million from colleges and libraries, and 1% or $1.9 million from CE, Provost Office, etc.  If we choose to keep personnel costs untouched, and make the entire 2% cut from controllables, then the following painful task emerges.  The controllables are cut by 51% (CHHS), 45% (COB), 27% (CAS, COE), 21% (COT) and 4% (Library). 

To understand the impact of this reduction from controllables for colleges, appreciate the fact that our colleges have been operating with an already reduced amount from previous years of successive cuts.  In addition, controllables do include graduates assistants, student help, doctoral fellowship, travel, etc that are very vital and is already on a shoe string.  So, getting the proposed 2% cut entirely from controllable is not feasible or prudent either.

So, what do we gain by this sudden 3% budget cutting exercise, which is both imprudent and hasty?  UBC has four sub-committees to deliberate on budgetary challenges--they are: contingency planning, revenue enhancement, priorities and macros, and resource allocations.  Patience is a good virtue to have.

Let me now bring clarity to some points raised in my earlier (February 11^th ) e-mail to you. 

First, we do not disagree that contingency planning is a necessity; and, increasingly so true in today’s turbulent climate.  Division of Budget and Finance (DBF) should be applauded for initiating one.  Our reservation is NOT on the merit of having a contingency plan, but on HOW EMU has decided and executed such planning.

Second, Michigan is having some of its most challenging years with possibly a permanent restructuring in our state economy.  State appropriations for education may not increase in the near future, in fact, may even decline.  The Governor’s budget proposal is—you guessed it correctly, a proposal.  The legislators are yet to approve it.  We as a faculty fully understand it.

What we disagree with the DBF is that, the total cash in flow available to EMU may not decline for the 2011 planning period, even if state appropriation declines.   Tuition and fees already generates the largest segment of our revenue, and is also on the rise, not on the decline.

Third, DBF is primarily responsible for implementing a sound budget to meet our mission.  Neither the faculty senate, nor the UBC is contesting the authority of DBF in executing their assigned tasks.  What we are disagreeing with is that DBF should not be setting priorities and goals (by making appropriation decisions).  Our academic leaders should be the one in making such important decisions.

Educating our citizenry is not an option, but an obligation.  In today’s increasingly competitive world, where knowledge and informational technology grows exponentially, education is the key to the future of our next generation.  Our actions today will impact the way our children will deal with their threats and opportunities tomorrow.  

There is no debating on education being the best investment one can make.  Neither is there a second guessing of what is the best inheritance that our children can benefit from. We must not forget that not making responsible investment in EDUCATION is a false economy.  Not planting the seed today means no harvest tomorrow of a citizenry empowered to take on the challenges of a dynamically changing globalized world.  Let us not engage in budget cutting, but in budget building, to make it possible for such wonderful thoughts to play out in reality.

A considerable body of knowledge and experience supports that the decisions are at its best when made in collaboration with those who are impacted by it.  So, please keep your senators well informed of your views so that an informed discussion takes place in the senate floor.  I am attaching a list of senators.

Thank you.

Best regards.

Mahmud Rahman

Professor of Finance

Vice President of University Faculty Senate

Faculty Representative to the University Budget Council

Proposed Cuts to Academic Affairs