A
LJJL-J L1V-J
VOL. 94. NO. 56
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1971
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA
xob slsislheg buidgelt Feomeslt
by JIM PEDERSEN
Staff Writer
The University of Nebraska
ordered a full meal, but it
received only skim milk
Thursday when Gov. J. J. Exon
presented his budget message to
the Nebraska Legislature.
Exon's proposal for the University
for 1971-72 calls for a $1.5 million
reduction in state aid from what the
University is receiving during the
current fiscal year. For the 1971-73
biennium, Exon proposed a $400,000
increase over the current biennium
The Regents had requested an
allocation of $123.8 million in state
funds for 1971-73.
Exon's recommended state fund
appropriations for all NU operations
for 1971-73 is $80.9 million, as against
$80.5 appropriated two years ago. For
the Lincoln campus and outstate
activities, the total appropriation
including general cash, federal and
revolving fundswould be cut from
$97.2 to $96.6 million.
In a speech before the legislature,
Exon said it is time "for higher
education to streamline, to break
through worn precepts. Students are
becoming bored with humdrum
approaches in education.
"I'm challenging the Board of
Regents, the Administration, the
faculty and students to review their
goals; to look at educational output
not just input; to realize that
educational costs will become
prohibitive unless educators and
officials look for educational reform
to get more out existing dollars; to
Create a top-flight university by
channeling thought to concentrate on
present appropriations rather than to
seek unreasonable spending goals.
Exon added, "The University is a
great university by any reasonable
standard and we have programmed a
budget that we are convinced will keep
it in the forefront."
The reaction from Chancellor D. B.
Varner and Regents' President Robert
RAun was an emphatic
"dissa pointed."
"The budget proposals are
definitely not capable of keeping the
University of Nebraska in the
forefront of higher education," Raun
said at his home in Minden.
Hardest hit were the two Lincoln
campuses, where figures show there
will be only $100,000 more for
expenses next year over this year.
Administrative Services director Gus
Lieske told newsmen earlier in the
morning no allottment had been made
for increased enrollment.
"The budget was prepared on the
assumption the Lincoln enrollment
The money situation
...at a glance
CAMPUS Z 1969-71 Biennium NU Request Exon Proposal
5 Appropriations for 1971-73 for 1971-73
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiuii iiiilkiiiiMiininin
Lincoln S 97.3 million 122.7 million 96.6 million
(and outstate 5
activities) ;
a
Omaha 20.2 million 29.1 million 24.7 million
2
Medical g 32.7 million 42.8 million 34.7 million
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigiiiiiiiiiiifiiiiiui iiiiiiiiiiiniii taimnmn
TOTAL FOR Z 150.2 million 199.7 mUlion 156.1 million
University Z
system Z
(figures
will hold at 20,000 students," Lieske
said. "If more students are admitted,
the increase will have to be absorbed
in teaching loads not appropriations."
Lieske added that the budget was
planned on a teaching load of 15 hours
and class size of 27 for professors
teaching freshmen and sophomores, 12
hours and class size of 25 for juniors
and seniors, nine hours and 15
students at the masters of arts level
and six hours and 1 2 students at the
doctoral level.
In short, the budget proposal
assumes more teaching, less research
and no increase in enrollment in the
next two years.
This means the University may
limit enrollment, a move Varner had
hinted at several limes, not to increase
educational quality but out of
economic necessity.
"We may have no alternative but to
limit the enrollment at the Lincoln
campus to 20,000 and impose general
enrollment restrictions at the other
institutions," Raun said. "I don't
know how we would do that."
Ironically, the Regents had
included in their budget request an
across-the-board tuition hike for all
students. The rationale, at the time,
was that students should pay a fair
proportion of the vastly increased
budget proposal then submitted.
In preparing his budget proposal for
the legislature, however, Exon retained
the tutiton hike while cutting tax
funding.
"The Regents may now want to
review th,e tutition hike," Varner said.
The question now however, is
whether the sparse budget may force
the Regents to retain the hike.
"I would not have been in favor of
a tution like for this level of
spending," Raun said. "It is not fair to
the students to raise their percentage
of payment, but I can't say if the
increase will be retained. The
Governor's budget certainly makes it
undesirable."
Only three of the Regents' top ten
priority capital construction projects
were funded-land acqusition at UN-O,
the home economics building at East
Campus and part of the requested
library funds for the Lincoln City
campus. The total fund proposal for
capital construction was about
one-fourth of the requested funds.
The proposed allocations for the
addition to Love Library was $1.5
million to be added to the $2 million
appropriated by the last session of the
legislature. The original request was
for $6 million over two years ago.
"We can't build a $6 million library
with $3.5 million," Varner said. "We
Turn to Page 2
rounded to nearest hundred thousand)
Regents to examine
modified PA CE plan
by DAVE BRINK
Staff Writer
The PACE controversy may finally
be laid to rest at Saturday's meeting of
the Board of Regents.
The PACE committee, led by
ASUN Senator Steve Fowler, will be
there with a modified idea. It calls for
a mandatory collection of $3.50 per
each semester ($1.75 per summer
session) but would allow students to
collect a refund after the fee is paid.
Sophomore Doulgas Voegler will
also appear before the Board. He will
encourage adoption of his own plan
which, like PACE, is a low-income
scholarship program. Voegler's plan has
one important difference, however.
Instead of PACE'S refund
procedure, Voegler calls for each
student to indicate whether or not he
will contribute at the time of
registration.
Fowler predicted the Regents might
table action on both proposals because
of the heavy work load they must face
at Saturday's meeting.
Fowler's committee did extensive
research in designing their proposal.
They also made a promotional effort
including a petition drive which
collected 4,892 signatures. Fowler said
time did not allow checking the
petitions for duplicate signatures but
he still feels they are significant.
The petition proposal called for a
mandatory fee without possibility of
refund. "Several thousand", according
to Fowler, didn't sign because of the
mandatory fee so the new refund
proposal represents the opinion of a "a
substantial majority of the students."
In Voegler's opinion, the petitions
show support for the "concept" of
low-income scholarships but not
necessarily for the specific PACE
program. He said his plan would be
more economical to implement and
would raise money without "any legal
T?
questions and without raising any
charges of coercion or intimidation."
"It worries me. that some people's
idea of what's voluntary affect
everyone and makes some return for a
refund."
Director of Business and Finance
Miles Tommeraasen said there is little
question that the refund system would
cost more than the Voegler plan. He
added that legal questions might also
appear but the cost could be lowered
if the refunds were in cash.
Tommeraasen emphasized that his
office was ready and willing to develop
a refund system if the Regents choose
the PACE proposal.
Tom Cardwell, who led the
short-lived STOPACE movement
petition drive, said Voegler's proposal
was "a simple way to implement this
thing". STOPACE collected about 200
signatures but, as Cardwell points out,
they only had about four workers.
According to Cardwell, the purpose
of STOPACE was not to oppose
low-income scholarships but to protest
the involuntary nature of PACE. He
called the refund system " highly
inefficient" and a great inconvience.
ASUN President Steve Tiwald,
taking the opposite view, called PACE
a "test case for the system".
PACE workers, according to
Tiwald, "did their homework",
carefully researched the plan, talked to
administrators, local citizens, faculty,
and students, and went through the
channels to come up with a program.
He noted that many students
opposed the mandatory fee so the
PACE committee changed to the
refund which "retains the individual's
freedom."
If PACE fails Tiwald said it would
be a "very serious setback to any
student-initiated reform efforts at the
University of Nebraska."