2
FRIDAY, APRIL 28, 2006
uV oatlg ®ar Meri
www.dailytarheel.com
Established 1893
113 years of
editorialfreedom
RYAN CTUCK
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
962-4086
RCTUCKO EMAIL
UNC.EDU
OFFICE HOURS:
MON., WEDS.. FRI.
2-3 P.M.
JOSEPH R.
SCHWARTZ
MANAGING EDITOR,
962-0750
JOSEPH_SCHWART2
OUNC.EDU
BRIAN
HUDSON
NEWS EDITOR,
962-0372
UDESKOUNC.EDU
REBECCA
WILHELM
PROJECTS EDITOR,
962-0750
BECCAO7OEMAIL
UNC.EDU
BRIANNA
BISHOP
CITY EDITOR,
962-4209
CITYDESKOUNC.EDU
KAVITA PILLAI
STATE & NATIONAL
EDITOR, 962-4103
STNTDESKOUNC.EDU
BRIANA
GORMAN
SPORTS EDITOR,
962-4710
SPORTSOUNC.EDU
MEGHAN DAVIS
FEATURES EDITOR,
962-4214
FEATURESOUNC.EDU
JIM WALSH
ARTS &
ENTERTAINMENT
EDITOR. 843-4529
ARTSDESKOUNC.EDU
GALEN CLARKE
PHOTO EDITOR,
962-0750
DTHPHOTO©UNC.EDU
UNDSAY NAYLOR
KATIE SCHWING
COPY CO-EDITORS,
962-4103
JEN ALLIET
DANIEL BEDEN
DESIGN CO-EDITORS,
962-0750
FEILDING CAGE
GRAPHICS AND
MULTIMEDIA EDITOR,
962-0246
CHRIS JOHNSON
ONUNE EDITOR,
962-0750
ONLINE@UNC.EDU
EMILY STEEL
WRITERS' COACH,
962-0372
ELIZABETH
GREGORY
PUBLIC EDITOR,
(919)612-6020
ELIZAGRE@EMAIL.
UNC.EDU
► It is the policy of The Daily
Tar Heel to report any inaccu
rate information published in our
newspaper as soon as the error is
discovered.
► Corrections for front page errors
will be printed on the front page.
Any incorrect information printed
on any other page will be corrected
at the top left of page 3. Errors com
mitted on the Editorial Page have
corrections printed on that page.
Corrections also are noted in the
online versions of our stories.
>• Please contact Managing Editor
Joseph Schwartz, at joseph_
schwartz@unc.edu, with issues
about this policy or to report cor
rections.
P.O. Box 3257, Chapel Hill, NC 27515
Ryan C. Tuck, Editor, 962-4086
Advertising & Business, 962-1163
News, Features, Sports, 962-0245
One copy per person; additional copies may be
purchased at The Daily Tar Heel for $.25 each.
© 2006 DTH Publishing Corn.
1
••UK unooqii 1 *. ■ • i- ■•■■■ vttWM—- V . . . -wialiflii
STUDENT STORES
Book Buyback
Cash 4 Books
.UNDER THE BIG TOPI
MAY i- MAY in
A? ITJLA JL X lflAl IU
WBs&
%M May l-5 7:30 am to 8:00 pm
|M Hay 8 Ml am to 8:00 pm
JM May? 1:00 pm to 8:00 pm
Hay 8-10 7:30 am to 8:00 pm
J S BONUS COUPON -15% OFF • JUfYSINSUITIM IN TM CLOTHING AND GIFTS BEPIUIIIINT
UNC system considers hike stability
Campus-based increases change game
BY ERIC JOHNSON
SENIOR WRITER
Campus-based tuition has a
short but contentious history in
the UNC system, having emerged
since 1998 as an important source
of campus revenue and an object of
frustration among students.
As the system Board of Governors
prepares this summer for an over
haul of its campus-based tuition
policy, the need for a predictable
stream of revenue will weigh against
concerns about the ballooning cost
of higher education.
Of all the policies and priorities
on the university agenda, few will
have such a far-reaching impact on
students and campuses.
“We all know the real impact
on tuition has come from campus
initiated tuition increases,” said
Jeff Davies, chief of staff to system
President Erskine Bowles, speak
ing to university faculty members
earlier this month.
Before the 1998 policy, which
allows campus officials to propose
tuition hikes and keep control of the
revenue, almost all increases were
initiated by the state legislature.
Few lawmakers or university
officials viewed tuition as a signifi
cant source of campus revenue, but
that began to shift with the advent
of campus-based hikes.
Initially envisioned as a mech
anism for raising funds under
“extraordinary circumstances,” the
policy quickly evolved into a more
regular source of revenue.
“The extraordinary circum
stances over the next few years
generally were the state’s weak
economy and the inability of the
General Assembly to meet all of the
university’s needs,” Davies said.
Eventually, the reference to
extraordinary circumstances was
dropped from the policy altogether.
“The focus really ought to be on
the need rather than whether the
circumstances were extraordinary,”
Davies said.
That change in emphasis
allowed in-state tuition costs at
UNC-Chapel Hill to more than
double between 1998 and 2006,
with out-of-state costs rising by
more than $7,000.
Campus officials and students
alike have complained that the
process is unpredictable, with the
board approving sizable hikes one
year and denying them the next
In revisiting the policy, board
members have said it is their chief
aim to provide a greater measure
of predictability for administrators
and students in other words, an
expectation of annual increases.
Hannah Gage, chairwoman of
the BOG’s tuition policy task force,
explained in February the direc
tion of the board’s thinking.
“What we’ve said to the chancel
lors is that if they can work within
a given framework, they can expect
to have their requests approved.”
The board experimented with
exactly such a policy this year,
guaranteeing approval for requests
that fell within set limits.
The streamlined process led to
quick approval for tuition and fee
University seeks tuition predictability
BY BRIAN HUDSON
NEWS EDITOR
“Predictability,” it seemed, was
the buzzword of this year’s tuition
talks.
During the UNC-Chapel Hill
Board of Trustees’ January meet
ing when members unanimously
approved undergraduate hikes
of $250 for residents and $l,lOO
for nonresidents trustees also
adopted a resolution calling for
long-term planning.
But the notion of predictability
was not anew one.
During the fall’s half-dozen
meetings of the tuition advi
sory task force, which reports
to Chancellor James Moeser on
tuition policy, members discussed
looking beyond the coming year in
considering tuition revenue.
Much of the revenue of this year’s
hikes will go toward faculty salaries.
Of the $8.5 million, $4 mil
lion will go to increasing salaries
—a useful tool in enhancing the
University’s ability to recruit and
retain professors.
That amount will bring UNC
CH’s average salary closer to its
peers, but there is still much
ground to cover.
News
hikes at all 16 system campuses,
and met with strong approval from
chancellors and system officials.
Still, Gage said the board will
move cautiously before imple
menting any permanent changes.
Further debate was put off until
the summer to give Bowles time to
review the proposals and weigh in,
she said.
“I think that he wants to get a
lot of input,” Gage said. “He really
wanted to research the history.”
His most important concern,
Bowles told the board in February,
is to avoid any policy changes that
might lead to lower state appro
priations. Campus-based tuition
must not become a replacement
for public funding, he said.
“He is examining the history
of tuition increases very care
fully, examining the relationship
between tuition and state appro
priations,” Davies said.
System administrators are
UNC-CH’s peer institutions are
a group of similar schools with
which ffie University competes for
faculty, among other facets.
During preliminary talks, task
force members considered how
future tuition hikes could go toward
bringing the average faculty salary
in line with peers’ averages.
It is likely that a portion of rev
enue from any hikes approved next
year will go to salaries.
“There are two things that will
always be there —one is finan
cial aid the other is faculty sala
ries,” Executive Associate Provost
Steve Allred said, speaking on the
University's current needs.
Such forward-thinking planning
was advocated by taskforce members
Seth Dearmin and Adrian Johnson,
then-student body president and
- president, respectively.
Eventually, Johnston and
Dearmin, the latter of whom was an
ex-officio trustee, drafted the resolu
tion that was passed by the trustees,
officially introducing predictability
as a major policy consideration. ■
“There is a very reasonable
desire on the part of students to
have abetter sense of predictability
and a more stable environment for
hopeful that Bowles can work
with the legislature to implement
any changes. Board members and
campus administrators are quick to
note that the assembly is generally
supportive of university needs.
“I think the legislature tends to
put a lot of faith in the president
of the university,” former system
President C.D. Spangler said.
Even if a policy allowing for reg
ular increases could be implement
ed without prompting a change in
state funding, Spangler said he
has concerns about the long-term
trend toward higher tuition.
“I’m not a fan of increased
tuition, no matter where it comes
from,” he said. “Students are not a
revenue stream.”
But campus-based revenues
have become an important com
ponent in paying for university
priorities, Davies stud. He pointed
specifically to faculty salaries and
other initiatives to increase corn
tuition knowing that tuition is
going to increase,” Moeser said.
With the introduction of the
trustees’ predictability resolution,
the board will hear tuition propos
als four years in advance.
Although the planning will be
nonbinding, administrators and
student leaders hope that the
campus will have at least an idea
of long-term tuition.
“We’ll review this every year;
we’re not going to lock ourselves
into a tuition plan,” Moeser said.
Administrators have been sure
to make clear that the resolution
is nonbinding, for fear of painting
themselves into a comer.
Tuition is one of the revenue
sources over which the University
has the greatest control, even
though the UNC system and N.C.
General Assembly have oversight
of the ultimate decision.
A dip in federal research dollars
or allocations from state legislators
could leave the campus short on
money —and looking to tuition rev
enue for help. Both of those sources
are more lucrative than tuition.
“T\iition only accounts for 11 or
12 percent of our total budget. It’s
a fairly small piece of it,” Moeser ' 1
iailg (Bar Uteri
petitiveness.
“We have had some large tuition
increases and we have had some
very important needs that have
been met by those increases,” he
said. “The goal is to have regular,
predictable increases rather than
no increases.”
Zack Wynne, president of
the UNC-system Association of
Student Governments, said that
stopping increases in tuition
would be extremely difficult under
the proposed new policy.
But given the reality of spiral
ing college costs nationwide, a set
framework for tuition hikes could
be a worthwhile goal, he said.
“I think it’s already become an
annual increase anyway. I think all
we can do now is to use this frame
work to allow for predictability
over the next few years.”
Contact the State & National
Editor at stntdesk@unc.edu.
Tuition increases
► During its January meeting,
the Board of Trustees approved
campus hikes.
► The hikes were later approved
by the UNC-system Board of
Governors.
► The measures will go into
effect after a rubber stamp from
the N.C. General Assembly this
summer.
The effects
Resident undergraduates:
$250 increase in tuition.
Nonresident undergraduates:
$l,lOO increase in tuition.
Graduate students:
SSOO increase in tuition.
said. “The state (allocation) is 21
to 24 percent. And research is big
ger than that.”
“We spend a lot of time talking
about one of the smallest revenue
streams that supports the overall
budget of the University.”
Contact the News Editor
Ik f jii’irj ; * Mixdesk@unc.edu.