The Budget Shaft

[Dane96]

If English is your 3rd language...you should be proud. Well thought out statement!

 

Heck, I can write in English and Brooklynese.

[GODANESGO]

Without trying to imply that our University's leadership has done enough, as of yet, on this issue, do you all really think Pres. DeFluer answering a question in the students' campus newspaper represents true public action? At least Interim President Philip testified before the Assembly's Higher Ed Committee last week. Pres. DeFluer's a member of the CHE, and the report still came out sans Bing and Alb as a flagship.

[Dane96]

True GDG, but Bing also came out of it with a pledge (behind closed doors) to fund a 150m building of a new State law school. That is what I have been told.

 

With their Engineering and Law program...and a President...they are poised to be in better position than Albany.

 

NOT ONCE HAS PHILIP COME OUT AND SPOKEN TO THIS OTHER THAN-- "We believe the governor supports us and will not leave us out." That is a paraphrase.

 

Bing has said- "WE WANT YOU TO CLARIFY."

 

It is hard-hitting and requires response from the Governor when a University President calls out a plan. It cannot be ignored.

[Clickclack]

GDG,

 

I was careful to use qualifying words like "appears"...."while this might not be the case" etc. while also calling for more vocal leadership from the presidents office. I didn't want to make it personal as undoubtedly he does not operate in a vacuum but I am concerned about the silence. I submit that there are other ways to lead, one does not have to get on a soapbox and scream... 'till they are blue in the face. A good measure response is appropriate though, not only to the 10 people who wrote him an e-mail. A public statement on the front page would have been appropriate, preferably one that DID NOT take 19 days to craft.

 

I would like to see someone take the bull by the horns.....I'll be honest, I'm not seeing it.

[ATL_DANE]

True GDG, but Bing also came out of it with a pledge (behind closed doors) to fund a 150m building of a new State law school.

 

Let me get this straight...

 

UB will be a "flagship" and receive $1.6 Billion in state investment (NY Times number, not mine)

SBU will be a "flagship" and receive matching funding to UB... another $1.6B?

Bingo is getting a $150M new law school and already is attracting the best undergraduate class.

 

What is UA getting here?

 

Every SUNY campus is fighting and competing for the best and the brightest students. Those three sound like they have some huge advantages coming there way over UA! Who did we piss off?

[GODANESGO]

I think it's disadvantageous to get too far off track here. D96 posted something he has heard behind closed doors to start up a law school. A desired law school at Bing has been talked about for a number of years, with nothing coming to fruition at all so far. Decade long talk of a possible law school is different than what's actually been included in the Governor's budget proposal. Let's keep them separate.

 

Regardless of the different strategies that Bing and Albany have employed so far, I think the most important thing would be for both schools to work together. I find it highly unlikely that the Governor's Office/Leg. will say 'ok Bing, you can have a 'flagship' designation but Albany won't...we'll name 3 of 4 UC's, but not all.' I think the goal of the 2 schools should be to lobby for all 4 to be designated as flagships..or to kill the idea all-together.

 

While I know it's a bit hypocritical since I haven't been the one drafting these letters, I think the goal of a letter writing campaign should be to focus on exactly the reasons why UAlbany should have the title of flagship or why there shouldn't be such a designation. I'm not sure the stance of "it's not fair" or simply pointing out the differences in funding between UB/SBU and UA/Bing carries much weight in this debate.

 

Just my two cents??..

[Dane96]

I want to second what GDG said. The law school thing is a separate issue, but the fact is they have the highest academic repute of all the UC's. They are the William and Mary compared to, let's say, UVM.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that we need to work with Binghamton on this issue. There Law School would be comparable to our Nanotech. The fact is, they still will be in the backseat with us compared to what is publicly being said about SBU and UB.

 

I do not agree, however, with GDG's stance that funding is not mutually exclusive to flagship-- In fact, it is a direct representation of it. Point in case, UCONN gets something like 8000 bucks per student, while CCSU gets a ton less comparably.

 

Same can be said of UF and USF...FSU and FAU...etc.

 

Saying it is not fair that Stony Brook gets nearly 1billion dollars IS PARAMOUNT-- It is this money that allows SBU to: Buy teachers; buy facilities; support student programs, etc.

 

It is this exact funding...that makes a school a flagship.

[uofalbany]

Without trying to imply that our University's leadership has done enough, as of yet, on this issue, do you all really think Pres. DeFluer answering a question in the students' campus newspaper represents true public action? At least Interim President Philip testified before the Assembly's Higher Ed Committee last week. Pres. DeFluer's a member of the CHE, and the report still came out sans Bing and Alb as a flagship.

 

 

I had really wanted to know more about that Higher Ed committee hearing last week that you attended, but you never commented back to my inquiry.

 

Exactly what was the gist of the hearing?

Was the 'flagship' issue part of the discussion, or was the focus on promoting SB and Buffalo?

 

What I really want to hear is what President Philip had to say when speaking?

How long did he speak and did he express concern regarding the 'flagship' talk?

[uofalbany]

And I never mentioned, I sent emails to Philips, and got the same reply as all of you.

[GODANESGO]

I do not agree, however, with GDG's stance that funding is not mutually exclusive to flagship-- In fact, it is a direct representation of it. Point in case, UCONN gets something like 8000 bucks per student, while CCSU gets a ton less comparably.

 

Same can be said of UF and USF...FSU and FAU...etc.

 

Saying it is not fair that Stony Brook gets nearly 1billion dollars IS PARAMOUNT-- It is this money that allows SBU to: Buy teachers; buy facilities; support student programs, etc.

 

It is this exact funding...that makes a school a flagship.

 

I agree with you here, so I think I might have just done a poor job with explaining what I meant. In terms of our side of the argument, I think the stance should be exactly why UAlbany should be getting the same funding levels as UB/SBU..whether up at 'their' level or them being at 'our' level. If there's a conversation with a Legislator, we show them that UAlbany's funding in this budget proposal is quite lower than UB's. The Legislator then says 'ok, why should you be funded at the same level?' I think that's the potential question we should be answering in our letters.

 

I explained what the hearing was about in my original post about it, but would be happy to do so again. It was a Public Hearing in front of the Committee to review the prelim report of the CHE. So anyone (realistically) could testify. The next hearing will be in a couple weeks in NYC. There was a SUNY President's group including the Pres of Fredonia, Upstate Medical, Morrisville, Nassau, and UAlbany. The focuses of their testimony were on some of the main issues within the report (and while we all care very deeply about the flagship designation, that wasn't a key part of the report) including research investment, system control of academic program approval, trasferability, etc.

 

Philip's comment was not a main part of his testimony. Each Pres was representing their respective sector..University College, Doctoral/Professional, Ag/Tech/Specialized, Community Colleges, and University Center. As Philip was there representing the UC's, he concluded by saying "On behalf of the University at Albany and the rest of the 3 SUNY flagship University Centers.." So he wasn't testifying about the budget funding/flagship designation, as that hearing (at least in front of the Higher Ed Committee) will be the first week of Feb, last I read. I just find it to be a (small) positive that it was Philip to speak on behalf of the University Centers instead of Simpson, Kenny, or DeFluer and that he briefly mentioned that he's aware of what is developing with the flagship designation in a public/government setting.

[ATL_DANE]

D96 is right on. Money... that's the main reason you want to be the flagship.

 

$1.6 billion can buy a nice campus. After all, we're all in competion for the same students. If SBU and UB are receiving a disproportionate amount of funding, isn't that a pretty big hurdle to over come? Add to that the inherent loss of prestige. Who doesn't want to claim they are the best or attended the best. Best means "flagship", right? That's what the average Joe is thinking.

 

I also agree with GDG. Bingo is our friend here. We help to convince Spitzer it's 4 or nothing.

 

Lastly, I undestand Bingo's law school is a tangent but it will help them greatly in the fight for future students. I think it's much more valuable than nano. Kids attend universities for undergraduate because they think it will help in the entrance process into law school (true or not). Nano would help us, if we could get an undergraduate engineering school. We have a long way to go if we're going to be Georgia Tech. Many politicans are also lawyers, just one more reason why it helps to have a law school.

[uofalbany]

I explained what the hearing was about in my original post about it, but would be happy to do so again. It was a Public Hearing in front of the Committee to review the prelim report of the CHE. So anyone (realistically) could testify. The next hearing will be in a couple weeks in NYC. There was a SUNY President's group including the Pres of Fredonia, Upstate Medical, Morrisville, Nassau, and UAlbany. The focuses of their testimony were on some of the main issues within the report (and while we all care very deeply about the flagship designation, that wasn't a key part of the report) including research investment, system control of academic program approval, trasferability, etc.

 

Philip's comment was not a main part of his testimony. Each Pres was representing their respective sector..University College, Doctoral/Professional, Ag/Tech/Specialized, Community Colleges, and University Center. As Philip was there representing the UC's, he concluded by saying "On behalf of the University at Albany and the rest of the 3 SUNY flagship University Centers.." So he wasn't testifying about the budget funding/flagship designation, as that hearing (at least in front of the Higher Ed Committee) will be the first week of Feb, last I read. I just find it to be a (small) positive that it was Philip to speak on behalf of the University Centers instead of Simpson, Kenny, or DeFluer and that he briefly mentioned that he's aware of what is developing with the flagship designation in a public/government setting.

 

Thanks for the significant clarification. It was much more thorough than your original post about it:

 

"I was at the Assembly Higher Ed Committee's Public Hearing on the Commission on Higher Education's preliminary report today, where Philip was one who testified. Though the hearing was about the CHE report, Philip closed his remarks by saying "Oh behalf of the University at Albany and the 3 three other flagship university centers..", which got a chuckle from Chairwoman Glick. The President of Upstate Medical was next to testify and light-heartedly started off with something to the extent of "I won't be asking for a stadium"..which got an even bigger chuckle." quote by godanesgo.

 

I also find it interesting that he was representing the University Centers.

 

If the 'comment' was not a main part of his testimony, what was the gist of 'his' testimony?

[GODANESGO]

The Presidents were a 'panel,' so they were all up testifying at the same time. I believe Philip's section was on the Commission's focus on the need for technology research dollars and its connection to economic development, etc. I don't have the script in front of me, so I can't give any quotations, but I believe that was his focus.

[alum73]

I don't expect equal funding, but something near the relationship of the campuses. Albany has 17000 students, UB and SBU have 28000 and 23000. We still don't have the detail for the 1.6 billion for capital projects, so maybe that detail, when released will be more satisfying to UA. I hope we keep the 4 University Centers and don't designate "flagship" campuses. The governor hasn't done very well, so far, in his first term with public relations. This flagship talk is another error on his part. We continue to operate with an interim president and SUNY continues to operate with an interim chancellor. It will be hard to get a president when they don't have a chancellor. I'm hoping the presidential search gets into high gear as soon as the new chancellor is appointed.

[Dane96]

I don't expect equal funding, but something near the relationship of the campuses. Albany has 17000 students, UB and SBU have 28000 and 23000. We still don't have the detail for the 1.6 billion for capital projects, so maybe that detail, when released will be more satisfying to UA. I hope we keep the 4 University Centers and don't designate "flagship" campuses. The governor hasn't done very well, so far, in his first term with public relations. This flagship talk is another error on his part. We continue to operate with an interim president and SUNY continues to operate with an interim chancellor. It will be hard to get a president when they don't have a chancellor. I'm hoping the presidential search gets into high gear as soon as the new chancellor is appointed.

 

If I had to put money on it-- Spitzer is one and done!

 

He is not liked across the board. Even Pataki had enough tact to pull competing groups together.