To help balance the books for the state’s current fiscal year, which ends in June, Ohio’s governor plans to push that month’s scheduled $127.5-million payment for higher education into July, the start of the next fiscal year, The Columbus Dispatch reported. But some lawmakers and college officials say they doubt the money will ever materialize. In its next budget period, the state will have to deal with the loss of $8-billion in one-time state and federal funds. “The schools are treating this like a budget cut,” Ronald Abrams, executive director of the Ohio Association of Community Colleges, told the newspaper.
RSS
Follow The Ticker through your favorite RSS reader.
5 Responses to Ohio Will Delay a Month’s Pay to Colleges
jcas3309 - September 30, 2010 at 8:20 am
Not Making Decisions Drives these ResultsIn times when budgets are cut and revenue funds are scarce/declining, it is an insitution’s responsibility (yes, Boards, Presidents, and Senior Management) to review expenses and make decisions to cut costs. This wasn’t expected? I think every inistution in that system (and other state systems) can review expenses, polices, and services and make hard decisions to refocus an area, eliminate a function, or eliminate non-value added processes. Everyone in this system should look at this as a sign, we can’t afford to be everything to everyone. Look at academic programs, administrative services, and workload of all individuals and you will be able to find savings to meet this shortfall and more. It is difficult to make tough decisions, but I believe that’s what CEOs and senior managment get paid for – the good institutions do it well and there are examples in the higher education environment.F. John CasePresidentFJ Case ConsultingChapel Hill, NC
rburns - September 30, 2010 at 9:14 am
A tough decision, no doubt, but one that should follow only after several other tough decisions. Across the board cuts should be a last result, not an initial move. They are easier than more precise, more targeted reductions that would leave institutions better able to serve their publics. But the management and planning responsibilties of both faculty and administration are not to find only the easy steps. It goes without saying that we cannot be all things to all people, but there are some basics that are necessary and that nonetheless will be damaged by across the board reductions. Have these institutions looked at their existing “specialist” programs, for example? A liberal arts program needs Theatre but women’s theatre, Black theatre, gay theatre (just one example discipline)and their departmental structures, staffs, and budgets can be reduced, folding their values into the primary program, especially in difficult times. The institution makes sound, targeted budget decisions thereby and perhaps even strengthens the primary academic program by melding the riches of its elements and providing a more multi-faceted experience to all of its students. Too often we have used once available dollars to fragment missions and to segment programs and services in ways that now are not productive. This more focused approach certainly can be most productive in a system if we understand that not every campus of that system needs to (should) offer every special program. With that understanding, reductions can be targeted even better with a view that within the system, if not on every one of its campuses, students have access to the wider variety of fields of study.The rich mix of talents among faculty and administration are available to make these hard decisions and should be brought into play, especially if one goal is to design the choices internally rather than somewhere in the statehouse. But the decisions will be made in any case.R.L. BurnsHeritage ServicesLa Crosse, WI 54601
davi2665 - September 30, 2010 at 9:38 am
The issue of scrutinizing the academic budgets for areas of possible savings is a peripheral topic, and does not address the disingenuous manuever of the Ohio governor. This is a smoke and mirrors attempt to make a $127 million obligation appear as if it does not exist, and then pass it off to the next fiscal year, where the budget is in even worse trouble than this year. Besides the issue of unethical and dishonest behavior, it is grossly unfair to the affected universities and colleges to spring this on them at the last minute. If you want to cut budgets, then cut budgets and be transparent about it. It is the manipulative, covert, and dishonest political chicanery that leads to the voters becoming bitterly cynical about the self-serving politicians. It is fuel for movements such as the Tea Party movement, and crosses all political ideological lines. A lack of transparency and lack of integrity know no ideological restrictions.
chemist_dave - September 30, 2010 at 12:01 pm
One month? $127.5M? While I’m surely not insensitive to the unfortunate crisis in Ohio and mean no disrespect herein, take a look at what’s happening to the California community colleges. The state is now THREE months and $840M behind in payments to the 112 colleges in the system!http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15913960?nclick_check=1
deliajones - October 5, 2010 at 5:13 pm
I’m inclined to agree with davi2665 that the move is smoke and mirrors. My objection is that it continues to fuel the impression that we can starve the state (and country) of tax revenues and expect them to provide essential services. Some honest politician needs to speak openly. “You’re quide adamant about not paying increased taxes, while all expenses continue to rise (health care, fuel costs, etc.). This is what will have to be cut. The price of a college education will continue to skyrocket.”I don’t usually react like an alarmist, but I am beginning to see a sytematic dismantling of the higher education opportunities that have developed since WWII, creating one of the world’s largest middle classes. I won’t go so far as some of my conspiracy -minded friends and say that this is deliberate. Nonetheless, monies being cut will certainly decrease aid and hence access.