October 2002

Mason Awaits Budget Decision

By Daniel Walsch

This month, George Mason University expects to receive word from Governor Mark Warner as to how much he is cutting from its operating budget. The governor is choosing from one of three options: cutting $7.3 million (7 percent), $11.5 million (11 percent), or $15.7 million (15 percent).

None of these options appeals to the university. George Mason officials argue that the university stands at a crossroad in its evolution. Whether it is to be a great state institution central to a vital region or just another regional state university depends in large measure on the level of support it receives from the state, they argue.

Backed by the unanimous agreement of the Board of Visitors, President Alan Merten continues to argue that George Mason's budget should not be reduced to the extent of its sister institutions because of its growing student body, its history of being Virginia's least-funded doctoral institution, and the key role it plays in supporting the Northern Virginia economy. "Each of the options before us will significantly compromise the momentum we have gained over the past few years in terms of generating greater community and regional support, attracting students, and contributing to our region's overall economy," says Merten.

Since the 2000-2001 academic year, George Mason has enrolled additional students and increased its overall student enrollment by nearly 3,500. Plus, incoming student credentials have never been higher. During this same period, however, the university has received no enrollment growth support from the state.

Before this latest round of budget cuts, George Mason was already underfunded by almost $25 million. When compared to its national peer institutions and Virginia's other doctoral schools, George Mason receives only 68 to 70 percent of the state funding that the average of those groups receives.

In terms of economic development, George Mason is the sixth largest state agency and the eighth largest employer in Fairfax County. It serves as a magnet to private industry by training and graduating men and women for a wide array of workforce sectors. Other areas in which the university has advanced in recent years are sponsored research, the quality of its faculty, and partnerships with private industry and governmental organizations.

"All of our vital signs are strong, yet as a young institution, we remain vulnerable," says Merten. "Depending upon what Gov. Warner decides, we run the risk of facing significant deterioration."

At the September meeting of the Board of Visitors, the administration identified 10 major issues or categories that will be affected by the anticipated cuts: admission of students; student access to the university; services to transfer and minority students; the biodefense and bioinformatics programs; research competitiveness; classroom instruction; technology and support services; the physical plant infrastructure; the university's economic development efforts; and the university's outreach efforts.

If the budget is reduced by only 7 percent, rather than 11 or 15 percent, the impact will be relatively mild. Proposed cuts in the 7 percent scenario range from a reduction of hours, services, and funding for the writing and math centers to a reduction of 30 to 40 teaching positions. For the 11 and 15 percent scenarios, however, the specific proposed cuts include a reduction of 100 to 140 teaching positions and a reduction of new admissions by 1,000 freshmen, transfer, and graduate students.

According to Merten, these three budget reduction plans make every effort to safeguard what is the core mission of the university: teaching and learning. This fundamental objective, however, will be compromised even with the 7 percent reduction plan because it will have a negative impact on instruction at George Mason, he says.