PSU Magazine Spring 1992

he buzz word fo r O regon state government these days is "glide path." It is the metaphor used to describe how government services will be eliminated in phases or diminished over time. The term derives from the aeronautic technique of aligning an aircraft losing power in such a manner as to extend its glide, buying time to look for a landing site and avoid a crash. Governor Roberts's unenviable task is to pilot state government on a glide path toward a soft landing that will injure as few people as possible. The Governor is skilled and resourceful, but she is no magician. Oregon 's landing is go ing to be bumpy and a lot of people are going to be jettisoned on the way down. They won 't all be state employees. Anyone who uses state health, human resources and education services knows firsthand about the effect of the first round of cuts. Four thousand more state jobs will be lost before we get to the next biennium. By then we may have to cut our budgets by another 20 percent. It is very sad that public confidence in government is so low that the dangers of crippling state government are widely disbelieved, or worse, wel– comed. Maybe there is a grain of truth in the criticisms. Some of us have been complacent. Some of us have cried "wolf' before we fully understood the consequences of a proposed cut. We have not always been as efficient as we could be. But, these are fa ilings that are as common in the world of business as in the world of government. Managers in government and in business should strive to operate as close to maximum efficiency as they can, but no one should expect efficiency to offset every cut or to eliminate the need for investment. We can get by on less. Efficiency can reduce, but not eliminate, the effects of budget and personnel cuts. By concentrating and refocussing our resources and energy, we will be able to perform better in certain ways. T eams of people at PSU have spent the last year examining what we do and how to do it better. Their recommendations are being implemented, and I am proud of what we have accomplished. Never– theless, there will be programs we can no longer offer, and services we can no longer provide. The choices we have to make are seldom easy. Should PSU concentrate on upper division and graduate studies at the expense of lower division ? Should we insist on improving the quality of education even if fewer students can be admitted?Should we remove resources from one school to enhance an other ? During the first round of budget cuts we closed one school and eliminated or suspended more than a dozen degree programs. PSU is being asked to reduce its administrative staff by 73 more posi– tions as its share of the 4,000 positions to be cut from state government during this biennium. Our budget planning for the 1993-95 biennium assumes another 20 percent reduction. Those who know PSU , know that there isn 't much "fa t" here. There never has been. The number of our sup– port pos itions per 100 students is well below the national average and the lowest of any public university in O regon. A 20 percent reduction in state support for PSU is twice as great as the reduction we absorbed during this biennium. A cut of that magnitude would mean $8 million fewer state dol– lars in 1993-94. That figure is more than the total budgets for the Schools of Business Administration and En– gineering and Applied Science. It is equivalent to the salaries of half the full-time instructional faculty. There is no way we can make up this loss through efficiency or reorganization. PSU is one of Portland's least recog– nized assets. If a company with a $50 million payroll that purchased $20 mil– lion worth of goods and services each year were to move to Portland, it would be considered a major coup for the city. But, PSU is a much better investment than that. It is non -polluting, makes a significant contribution to the arts and culture of the region, and its principal purpose is to educate students, most of whom will continue to live in the area and will contribute millions of dollars to the state economy over their careers. In addition, the University serves the community and improves the quality of life in the region. Oregonians need to take stock of their public assets. Like other assets, higher education needs investment in order to perform at its best and to pay the highest dividends. A small invest– ment made now will be repaid many times. Unfortunately, the cost of con– tinued neglect is more than just missed opportunities. How do we calculate the loss of young O regonians who leave the state to pursue their educations because there is no room fo r them here? Con– versely, what price tag can we attach to having a nationally recognized univer– sity in Portland ? Difficult as these questions are, Oregonians are going to have to choose. They will have to decide whether they are willing to make a long-term investment in quality higher education, or whether getting by is good enough. Judith A. Ramaley President