$30 Million Back-fill into Higher Education

The 2009 budget is now balanced. I have to thank all of the legislators who worked hard to make this happen. It was not without pain I am sure. It is interesting to note a number of state agencies received a back-fill to help ease the pain of the cuts. Higher Education and our own Weber State were among the many that received the blessing of a back-fill.

Here is the breakdown for Higher Ed:

School	Cut	Back-fill	Total
University of Utah	$18,340,100	$9,170,100	$9,170,100
Utah State University	$11,299,900	$5,650,000	$5,649,900
Weber State University	$5,024,200	$2,512,100	$2,512,100
Southern Utah University	$2,387,400	$1,193,700	$1,193,700
Utah Valley University	$4,763,400	$2,381,700	$2,381,700
Snow College	$1,547,700	$773,900	$773,800
Dixie State College	$1,652,200	$826,100	$826,100
College of Eastern Utah	$1,328,100	$664,100	$664,100
Salt Lake Community College	$4,903,000	$2,451,500	$2,451,500

As you can see, half of all the cuts were back-filled. Meaning instead of a 7 percent cut now, we received a 3.5 percent. That is not the end, this back-fill is a onetime only situation. 2010 we will see these same 3.5 percent cuts. However, I am please with the legislatures work and I am glad to see Weber State will be getting at least $2.5 million back. Over all Higher Education will be getting $30,488,300 in back-fill.

You can see a full accounting of the budget here - http://www.le.utah.gov/ASP/Interim/Commit.asp?Year=2009&Com=APPEXE

The Senate Site - Higher Education Rally Video

The Senate Site (See Here) has a nice little video from the student rally at the capitol. I have been very impressed with the Senate Site and all they are doing to keep us informed.

Check out the video and site here: http://senatesite.com/blog/2009/01/higher-ed-rally.html

From the looks of the video and the eerily similar Obama sounding speech, the legislature is ready to put back half of the cuts proposed last week.

We will keep you posted.

Higher Education – Which Institution is more important?

Yesterday's Higher Education Appropriations Sub-Committee was filled with additional testimonials of why education should be protected. As the meeting went on, it was obvious battle lines were beginning to be drawn to protect one's own constituent institution of higher education. The two ideas drawn out of the committee now head into today's Executive Appropriation meeting. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Rep. Brent Wallis, from our own District 10, was very vocal about returning money back to higher education in a fair and equitable manner. There is a potential of a nearly 3.5 percent (or less) "put back" of funds to higher education before we are done with this legislative session. Rep. Wallis has been encouraging his colleagues to put the money back where it came from pro-rata. If we took 3.5 percent from Weber, give them 3.5 percent back. Everyone's portion would be the same. It appeared he has rallied a lot of support from a number of other legislators on the methodology of giving institutions back what they put in (or gave up). Since the money has been removed pro-rata it should be returned so.

The challenge comes from institutions with smaller budgets or higher enrollment. The 7 percent cut is devastating to small schools like College of Eastern Utah. It is also tough on schools like Dixie and UVU whom have seen huge growth and would need more than 3.5 percent back to fund that growth. A number of legislatures want funds for their institutions based on this rational. Rep. Daw (Orem, R) has argued the institution he represents [UVU] has the most enrollment in the state and deserves extra funds. Essentially he would be against a pro-rata system of putting the money back.

It is easy to see why a pro-rata system would be beneficial and fair to the every institution. Giving money based on certain parameters or priorities would be unfair. Weber State (like other schools) is facing huge layoffs. With a pro-rata system they are cut the same and will get the same back, hence savings jobs and programs. If we went away with the pro-rata system and Weber State is not high on the priority list because enrollment is lower than Dixie, UVU, U of U and Utah State, Weber could get only 1 percent back. That is a loss we cannot afford. Push for the pro-rata "put back: of funds.

I welcome a health discussion and comments on the topic.

If you wear “Hip-Hop Clothing” – Watch out for Greiner!

Senator Greiner is hoping for a victory as his Senate Bill 16 (See Bill here), Prohibited Gang Activity, pushes through the Senate with little opposition. Though not out of the Senate quite yet, it is one step closer. The Standard Examiner snagged a Daily Herald article on Sen. Greiner's bill this morning. Chief Greiner was more than willing to explain how they would know if people were in a gang, what is the key indicator—Hip Hop Clothing. (See Article Here)

Under SB 16, some officers would receive extra training in identifying gang members. In addition to using a gang registry, Greiner says officers would also use things like tattoos and "hip-hop clothing" to identify gang members."

This represents half the kids in my neighborhood! Seriously, can we not see the civil liberties that are being violated by such a bill? On top of that, we need special training to identify gang related hip-hip clothing. Half the students that will be rallying at the capitol this week will be wearing "Hip-Hip Clothing." What will they do with them? Is Greiner gone make the capitol a gang free zone? As soon as someone protests at the capitol, police can just checking the shirt label for a hip-hop design and force him out. This legislation can easily be abused and is unconstitutional.

Since my Senator is Jon Greiner, I will urge my Rep. to vote against the bill.

Sherriff Slater and the Tale of the Two SWAT Teams

I had wonderful chat in the office of Sherriff Brad Slater (just Brad, as he likes to be called). We discuss at length the concerns of the two SWAT teams in the Weber County/Ogden area. He passed on some enlightening information about a situation that appears to go way back. I have to thank Mr. Slater for taking the time to talk and help us understand why there are two SWAT Teams and what that means to each of us.

To begin, let's give a little back ground. Sometime ago, the Weber County Sherriff's office was in need of SWAT team to help with internal issues, like the Jail, County Court House, etc. Mr. Slater explained they formed the SWAT team to accomplish those internal duties and avoid charging cities for county related issues; in addition Ogden City Metro SWAT didn't want to contract to do them. As time has gone on and two SWAT teams have worked near each other. Ideas began to circulate they could possible share resources, supplies, equipment, etc. What a great cost cutting measure! However not everyone has seen it that way. Instead certain people are beginning to feel territorial about their SWAT. A feeling of one SWAT is trying take over the other has begun to circulate. These feelings have filtered down into individual police departments and local government. AS a result, we have two City Councils in the Weber County area that have passed resolutions to not contract with Weber County SWAT. (See South Ogden here and Riverdale here) The interesting thing to point is Weber County SWAT never wanted to contract with them in the first place. At most they had hoped to be a back up to Ogden SWAT when they needed them. But Ogden SWAT's back up is Layton; so this arrangement has never materialized. Why did these cities preemptively strike against Weber County SWAT? PRIDE!

South Ogden City appears to be caught up in an internal political war over who has the better team. This also appears to have stirred up some old feelings about previous issues, including talk of South Ogden City Police merging with Weber County Sherriff's Office. When Washington Terrace Police merged, rumors of a merger floated around South Ogden. The Mayor and Chief Shupe have been against this and the issue died. But the feeling of another agency overstepping its bounds was felt, even though nothing ever took place, and these feelings appear to have been resurrected in the SWAT issue.

Conclusion: I fully understand the reasoning behind two SWAT teams and why Riverdale City and South Ogden City are making statements they will not contract with Weber County SWAT.

Concern: How much is the internal turf war costing tax payers? If both SWATs exist in our area and are using similar or the same equipment; why can't they share and work together? Why are we contracting with Layton and sending money to another city or county? Can't we all just get along?

Thanks again to Brad Slater for taking the time to talk.

Comments welcome on this crazy topic.

Update on Higher Education - Thanks Rep. Wallis.

I had a great conversation with Rep. Brent Wallis today with regards to my last post on education cuts. He informed me the meeting ended with the approval of the proposed 7.5 percent cuts. Good to know since the recording was cut off.

As we discussed the options to help higher education, the esteemed Representative explained now is not the time to deplete our rainy day funds until we know where the bottom is. One suggestion I mentioned was my experience at Dixie State. President Huddleston, former Dixie President, asked all the staff to teach freshman orientation and capstone classes for free. Then he asked all faculty to teach a class for free. He even started teaching accounting courses for free. It was a huge budget reduction in 2002.

Overall it was a productive and informative conversation, thanks Rep. Wallis.

Where do we go from here? Well the proposal now heads to the executive appropriation committee and then on to the legislature. I will keep the readers posted as to the progress of this issue.

How much? Higher Education looks at a 7.5% budget cut.

In a particularly interesting Higher Education appropriation sub-committee meeting, held last week, a budget cut was proposed for 7.5 percent. The original motion was made by our own Rep. Brent Wallis. Though I feel Co-chairman Valentine pushed him into the motion and that was not his original comment, the motion was made. The motion was later substituted and disappeared into thin air. (Gotta love Robert's Rules of Order) Before a new motion was made a 10 minute recess was called. Unfortunately since I listened to the meeting via podcast, we were not blessed to hear what happened. However there were three great things I would like to point out.

1. Besides his motion to cut education, Mr. Wallis had a great comment about our economic times and the future of Higher Education.
   

He said, "We must go forward as a committee and put forward a very very strong case of how important higher education is going to be. These elements that we are trying to save within these cuts will in fact help us stimulate or start the economic revival we are looking forward to. That is the message we need to really get across. We are losing a lot of talent here; this talent can help us turn around the economy"

I couldn't agree with Rep. Wallis more. But can a 7.5 percent cut accomplish this. Wallis was pushed into that motion and should have backed out and let someone else make it. Because that kind of motion doesn't represent what he said in the meeting about fighting for education.

1. Rep. Senator Urquhart had a great idea of prioritizing schools based on enrollment growth. The schools with the most growth would receive less of a cut versus the schools with the least growth would receive the most cuts. Great idea that should be looked at even closer. Some potential problems would be schools like CEU in Price. That could be the nail in the coffin for them. (I don't see why they are still open anyways). As a matter of full disclosure, the good senator was quick to point out the school in his district, my Alma Mater—Dixie State College, has had the highest growth. The fact still remains that his idea has merit.

2. The Governor's budget, though already out of balance to the tune of nearly $100 million, suggests that moneys be pulled from road projects and other state programs to reduce the cut to 3.5 percent. Many people loved this idea, but since the Governor's budget is already out of sync, it would need further debate as the proposals moved on.
   

You have to give credit to the Utah Student Association for coming out to speak their case and to the Commissioner of Higher Education for his "sales pitch" to reduce the cuts. But in the end it wasn't enough. How did the committee vote? Well they never turned the microphones back on after the recess so we are all deprived of the results. I have been checking newspaper feeds and have an email into Rep. Wallis, but I haven't heard.

The Tribune had a "doom and gloom" article on the topic with regards to Weber State, you can see it here, (Weber State's President Battles Deep Cuts)

As always, comments are welcome.