“GVSU considering tuition decrease of 5 percent for fall” (but not really)

I was initially stunned and surprised at this headline that showed up from “Central Michigan Life” in my Google feed this morning, “GVSU considering tuition decrease of 5 percent for fall.” Then I actually read the article. Here are the opening paragraphs:

Another state university may not increase tuition for the fall.

Grand Valley State University President Thomas Haas testified to the House Higher Education Appropriations Committee on Tuesday and said if the state sets the minimum funding for GVSU at $3,775 per student, he will recommend tuition at the university be reduced 5 percent for next year.

“When I was a graduate student at The University of Michigan, the state provided Grand Valley with 75 percent of its operating budget,” he said. “Today, that number is 20 percent.”

Which is to say if the state of Michigan increases its appropriation to GVSU, then GVSU will lower tuition.  That ain’t gonna happen.

There’s another passage here that sums up my concerns about the 0/0/0% strategy:

Lawrence Sych, associate professor of political science, said the decisions made by EMU and GVSU will not have much of an impact on the state budget for higher education.

“It makes no sense to restrain tuition unless the state increases its aid to higher education,” Sych said. “I can’t see them getting a balanced budget this year without them having to take some cuts on the higher education.”

Higher education is one of the few programs in the general budget that can be cut and still function, he said.

“The attitude is, ‘If we cut colleges and universities, they can increase tuition,’” he said.

Which is why EMU might have to go back on the 0/0/0% promise– though as one senior colleague/suited person told me, that could turn out in the EMU administration’s favor.  If the state cuts funding or if the unions win modest pay raises, then the administration can say “Hey, it’s not our fault– blame the state and/or the faculty.”