Budget Problem and Its Direct Impact on Publicly Supported University Programs

You Decide

Intergovernmental Management

September 23, 2012

You Decide 1

This current budget problem and its direct impact on publicly supported university programs is in

dire need of a resolution. I understand your concern to establish a swift and effective decision regarding

this issue. Before I offer my advice, I want to share my synopsis of this matter based of the information I

received.

The budget cuts that were approved by the state have led to the elimination of important

programs at the publicly supported universities in your state, and as a direct consequence, certain specific

majors are no longer offered at any of those universities. However, these specific majors are, in fact

offered at a state university in a neighboring state and your state's institutions offer programs not

available in the other state. An analyst proposed that an agreement be entered with the neighboring state

to allow reciprocity on in-state tuition for those programs. Some are in support of the interstate compact,

and others are opposed to the idea.

This proposed solution will fall under the Interstate Compact provision, which is a voluntary

arrangement between two or more states that is designed to solve their common problems and that

becomes part of the laws of each state. The most common interstate compacts concern agreements to

share natural resources, such as water; build regional electric power sources; share parks and parkways;

conserve fish and wildlife; protect air quality; manage radioactive and other hazardous wastes; control

natural disasters, such as floods; share educational resources.

The proposal of James Raika definitely falls under this provision. The aforementioned shows that

the interstate Compact Provision includes agreements that allow states to share educational resources.

This specific agreement, proposed by Raika will allow students from both states to enroll in out of state

schools and pay in state rates. This will be greatly beneficial to these students who will experience a

huge burden of paying higher rates because of a budget issue. This is an effective way of alleviating this

problem and offering a viable solution for both states. The only problem with this limited approach is

that it does not provide any solutions specifically for the budget or long-term planning to restore these

You Decide 2

programs. It may pose a serious concern in the future.

After reviewing Morgan James' position, I concluded that she is partially on board with the

provision. Ms. James is wary to rush into an agreement without exploring all possible options that could

bring added value and prove to be even more beneficial to the state. For example, she mentioned the

possibility of entering an agreement with the state that covers any and all cross -border higher

educational issues. The benefits of this approach are collaboration with multiple states, resource

sharing,