TFAB says increase in-state tuition and financial aid

The VP for Enrollment is forecasting a decline in in-state enrollment and an increase in new out-of-state students, which however will barely offset the decline from graduating students. It seems not every parent wants to send their child to Rob Mullens’s Duck branded big-time sports party school, especially one that is about to blow $12M on big-ass stereo speakers for the football stadium.

The Emerald’s Zach Demars has the story on last night’s tuition meeting here. The Trustees have already approved a small 2.9% increase for out-of-state students, apparently because they didn’t understand inelastic demand. The most likely scenario for in-state is an ~8% increase, depending on state funding. The university plans to go forward with its planned budget cuts. regardless of that funding. Which is odd.

ASUO President Maria Gallegos -Chacon and Vice President Imani Dorsey plan to issue a minority report, presumably arguing that the university should cut back on its bloated sports programs rather than soak the students again.

One bit of good news was that the TFAB endorsed a proposal put forward by some economist to use part of the tuition increase to increase financial aid for students with family incomes that are just above the cutoff for the full-tuition Pathways Oregon scholarships.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to TFAB says increase in-state tuition and financial aid

  1. honest Uncle Bernie says:

    Will be very interesting to see how UO tuition increase compares to OSU.

  2. Inquiring minds says:

    Interesting how our neighbor to the north is taking a very different approach to same problem.

  3. honest Uncle Bernie says:

    The proposed increase is “as high as 11.06%.” Portland State talking about the same thing. UOM perhaps right that Schill will settle on 8%. Meanwhile, OSU reportedly decided last month to go with 4.29%. Meanwhile, UO foresees another decline in in-state enrollment. Maybe they are choosing to save money and go to OSU.

    Meanwhile, UO is acquiring white elephants like the Knight Campus and Tykeson Center, without funding to really pay for them. I hear the cost for new advisors in Tykeson is in the range of $5 million/yr. I haven’t heard that the Knight Campus really has funding yet for the other $500 million. I do hear that it is still sucking money out of “regular” UO fundraising. I hope I’m wrong.

    And then there are the big-ass speakers. And undoubtedly new extortion from the athletic staff. And …..

    And — I know of big-name professors here with high salaries who reportedly still don’t teach any classes ….

    There is a lot for the legislature and the HECC to grill Schill over if he comes pleading — or will it be demanding? — more money from the State.

    Somehow, living in Johnson Hall seems to make people lose their judgment. I’ve seen it happen over and over.

    • Eyeroll says:

      I’ve heard from a credible source that two large [LARGE] SOMD donors have been inspired by University Advancement to redirect their next donations to the Knight Campus. So yes, it is still sucking money out of “regular” UO fundraising.

  4. Deplorable Duck says:

    I’ll bite. What’s the thought regarding elasticity of demand? That out-of-state students (esp international) would pay far higher prices (with little defection)? Or something else?

    Also, putting my jerk hat on, shouldn’t the U apply those elasticity ideas to faculty salaries as well?

  5. Gina Psaki says:

    How long, oh lord, must the wicked triumph?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.