Some state officials are concerned the University of Minnesota’s Duluth campus hasn’t been getting the correct amount of state funding for years.
While some say the numbers show an unfair imbalance between the system’s campuses, others argue there are good explanations for the differences.
UMD received about $28 million in state funding for fiscal year 2013 — down almost 44 percent from five years ago. State funds allocated for the Twin Cities campus decreased by about 20 percent over that same period.
“It doesn’t sound right to me, and so obviously there’s a serious reason for people here to feel like they’re being shortchanged,” Gov. Mark Dayton said at a Jan. 24 student forum on the UMD campus.
Rep. Mary Murphy, DFL-Hermantown, who was also at the forum, said she’s heard from constituents that the UMD campus hasn’t gotten its “fair share” for
years.
Per enrollee, the Twin Cities campus receives about $8,200 in state appropriations and UMD receives about $2,500.
University Chief Financial Officer Richard Pfutzenreuter said comparing appropriations between campuses isn’t valid because they serve different missions and have separate cost structures.
“I don’t think it’s an apples-to-apples comparison,” he said.
Pfutzenreuter said because the Twin Cities campus receives funding for units like University Extension, statewide experiment stations and the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, it makes sense that the campus receives more state aid per capita.
The entire state benefits from these Twin Cities-based units, he said.
The University Board of Regents dictates how state funds are distributed, in accordance the state’s constitution.
About 51,500 students enrolled at the Twin Cities campus last semester, almost five times more than UMD.
Last fiscal year, the University’s budget included $515 million for operations and maintenance, representing 14 percent of the overall budget. Tuition represented 23 percent.
With the decrease in state funding, tuition now represents a growing portion of the institutions’ budgets, Pfutzenreuter said, and therefore, comparing state allocations isn’t a strong argument.
“If you’re going to do that kind of comparing, you have to look at shifts between state appropriation and tuition,” he said.
University of Minnesota Regent David McMillan, who represents UMD at the Board of Regents, couldn’t be reached for comment.
Defining a “fair share” varies depending on who one asks, UMD Chancellor Lendley Black wrote in an emailed statement.
Bonding
In the governor’s bonding recommendation released last month, Dayton didn’t include funding to build a Chemical Sciences and Advanced Material Building on UMD’s campus, which Murphy said was disappointing.
In the University’s 2014 Capital Request, UMD buildings represented about $9 million of the $100 million in Higher Education Asset Preservation and Renovation funding.
“At UMD, we certainly have buildings that are in great need of upkeep,” Hannah Keil, a UMD student representative for the Board of Regents, said in an email statement.
The HEAPR funds, outlined in the bonding recommendation, are separate from state funding appropriations. Dayton’s bonding bill recommended only $40 million of the University’s request.
Dayton’s recommendation also provides $56.7 million to renovate the Tate Laboratory of Physics, $12 million for the University’s research laboratory improvement fund and $10 million to renovate the wellness center on the Crookston campus.
Keil said students were happy to see Dayton mention UMD’s funding issue at the forum.
In his statement, Black wrote he believes UMD will get more financial support in the future.
“We have had very productive discussions on UMD’s overall budget challenges, and system funds are just one part of helping us achieve long-term financial stability,” he wrote.
