FSEC denounces tuition hike proposal

By DONNA LONGENECKER
Reporter Assistant Editor

Members of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee agree with their colleagues at Fredonia State College that SUNY must establish a rational tuition policy, but denounced a resolution calling for a tuition increase recently approved by the Fredonia Faculty Senate as a politically motivated attempt by the state to "dupe" faculty into asking for an increase.

Judith Adams-Volpe, director of university and external relations for the Universities Libraries, told FSEC members at the body's Nov. 28 meeting that she vehemently opposes the idea that faculty should be the ones asking for a tuition hike. But, she acknowledged, the present economic environment may make a tuition increase necessary, given that New York State ranks "dead last" in its support of higher education.

Adams-Volpe, a member of the SUNY-wide senate, said she is helping to draft a resolution in support of a rational tuition policy to be presented at the SUNY Senate meeting Jan. 17.

Fredonia State President Dennis L. Hefner recently met with the editorial board of The Buffalo News and called for a SUNY undergraduate tuition increase of $200 to $300 in the coming academic year. He said that since SUNY is expected to maintain the current year's budget for next year, the increase is needed to pay state-negotiated employee raises.

Hefner said paying the collective bargaining costs would mean a shortfall of about $1 million for Fredonia; UB President William R. Greiner recently told the UB Council that the university estimates it will cost $9 million to fund those increases.

Adams-Volpe told her colleagues that she "was very much against" the Fredonia resolution calling for a tuition hike. She said she believes it is more appropriate for the governor—who, she said, is the one making resource allocations that force SUNY to rely on tuition for a major part of its funding—to call for a tuition increase. "For us (faculty members) to be putting it forward is a major, major political mistake," she argued.

"I believe strongly that this is a political matter and we have been duped by the state into being the ones who are calling for a tuition increase or even a rational tuition plan. This is a tragedy of the commons if we are the ones who support the idea of an increase," said Adams-Volpe. She noted there are other, more reasonable alternatives for the state to consider to financially support SUNY and that one such alternative would have to include the creation of a rational funding policy, in spite of the state's "horrendous record of support for higher education."

William Baumer, professor of philosophy, said the state Senate and Assembly both have failed to approve tuition increases in the past and have a significant say in allocating funds for higher education. Increases in tuition, he added, should occur in a rational manner, rather than in large, irregular increases.

John Boot, professor and chair of the Department of Management Science Systems, pointed to what he called "the Catch-22" of not raising tuition. "If you don't raise tuition, fees will be raised and students don't get support for fees," he said. "We may not have had a tuition increase for quite some time, but fees have been raised all along." This situation has come about because "we don't have a rational funding policy," he added.

Henry Durand, director of the Center For Academic Development Services, said that he didn't think anyone was opposed to rational funding support for SUNY, but cautioned senators against being the ones to ask for it.

"I just think we need to separate and clearly delineate the difference between the whole notion of funding support for SUNY and funding by a specific method, which is a tuition increase. I think it is a critical mistake for faculty, who already are perceived as the rich guys up on the hill, to come out and support a tuition increase. I mean, if you want to generate the ire of the public, that's the quickest way to do it," Durand noted.