= ‘Tue Srare Universrry of New York BUDGET ALERT jaintaining Access at the State University of New York It has been widely reported that the Public Higher Education Empowerment & Innovation Act will deny low income students access to SUNY and that the legislature must continue to play a significant role in setting tuition because SUNY cannot be solely responsible in protecting access to the University for low income students. This position is wrong for several reasons: First, one need only review the actual data over the last several years to conclude that the current, legislatively driven process for setting SUNY tuition is not in the best interests of our students, particularly low income students. In some years, the current process has resulted in tuition increases as high as 30% in one year, and never less than 7%. At the same time, the legislature has approved huge base budget cuts for SUNY, with the effective result being that tuition increases have gone to service cuts in state support for higher education. + Last year this cycle of increasing tuition and reducing state support reached its destructive zenith when the budget process went so far as to redirect actual tuition dollars to close gaps in other non-educational areas of the fate budget -- all this pursuant to a process wherein the legislature plays a significant role in setting tuition. © The fact is that if SUNY’s Board of Trustees had been principally responsible for setting tuition rates according to the framework called for by PHEEIA, tuition today would be no higher than its current rate, but our students would not have experienced the large, unfair and unpredictable spikes that occurred at the hands of the legislature. It is these spikes that have seriously disadvantaged low income students. Second, even before PHEEIA was proposed by the Governor, SUNY demonstrated its absolute commitment to maintaining an affordable tuition rate that would not overly burden low income students through its tuition proposal for the upcoming academic year + In particular, SUNY”s Board of Trustees endorsed a tuition inerease of only 2% (generating 21.2M of additional tuition revenue for the University), while the legislature has expressed support for cuts to SUNY’s state operating budget of approximately $140M. A 2% increase means that SUNY’s in ~ state undergraduate tuition would rise to $5,070 per year, well below national averages for other public institutions of higher education. Tuition of $5,070 would take SUNY’s tuition beyond the cap for the state cam + Purchase Cage TECHNOLC co ecg Lakesmm (TAP — a tax payer funded financial aid it Tuition Assistance Progi program) by $70 per stud * Accordingly, at the same time SUNY’s Board of Trustees proposed a 2% inerease in tuition, it pledge to use a portion of the new revenue generated by the increase to cover the $70 by which tuition would exceed the cap on TAP for Tap-eligible students nder bill introduced by the Executive, Governor ease in TAP, thus addressing the concerns | increases TAP to cover 50% UNY or CUNY school. Third, as part of the last ex Paterson proposed a significant i about protecting low income students. ‘This propo: of the highest undergraduate level tuition at either a th, PHEEIA would not eliminate the legislative role in setting tuition. It would require, however, that that role be rationale, fair and transparent. In particular, PHEEIA calls for a legislatively established cap, initially tied to an inflation index for higher education, but now, in an effort to compromise with the legislature, a hard cap of no more than a 5% increase for the comprehensive institutions and 8% for the doctoral granting institutions. Finally, not implementing PHEEIA places all the burden of addressing SUNY’s, financial challenges on the backs of its students, something SUNY has vowed not todo. * By ignoring PHEEIA’s provision related to public private partnerships and procurement efficiency, the legislature would deny SUNY new revenue streams and the savings that would come from modestly reducing procurement regulations that drive up the cost of SUNY buying goods and services, ‘Instead, the legislature would have SUNY resolve all of its economic issues through tuition policy, at the same time it endorses cuts to SUNY’s operating budget. These facts must be carefully considered as budget negotiations move forward. To move ahead with cuts to SUNY’s budget without implementing any of the administrative tools necessary to effectively deal with the reduction will result in devastating effects on the State University’s ability to provide a quality, affordable and accessible education FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT SUNY’s OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AT: (518)320-1148