Proposed Category IIIa and Additional Category I and II Budget Reductions

[posted June 24, 2003]

Dear Colleagues,

As we continue to work on the very difficult issues created by the dramatic budget reductions required by the legislature, every part of our campus has found it necessary to reduce an important program, stop a high quality activity, or limit the effectiveness of a campus, community, or statewide service. Each of us who has worked through the details of the reductions I have required has felt the same sense of disbelief and disappointment that our representatives in the legislature could not find a way to blunt the impact of the state’s fiscal crisis on our university. Nonetheless, we live in a Commonwealth whose budget for higher education is the responsibility of our elected representatives and we must conform to their requirements even as we mobilize to persuade them to do better next year.

The table below contains the results of our review of reductions in Categories I and II and the particularly complex reductions required within Category IIIa. In the case of Categories I and II, we pushed the limits even farther here to recover an additional $3.1 million in savings. In Category IIIa we believe can find $2.5 million, although these discussions are still ongoing. Our review also indicated that we have reached a critical point in these conversations in which reductions beyond those outlined here and in my previous messages, a total of $21.5 million, would likely render the campus unable to function, support its students and faculty, or sustain its research and service missions.

While I have identified these reductions, we do not yet have full budget plans that would allow me to present the details of these changes to the campus, although we expect to have that full accounting by July 1. Many of these adjustments, because they involve academic issues in colleges and departments, require extensive consultation and review by the deans, chairs, and faculty involved to ensure that what we do has the minimum negative impact possible.

Over the next few days I look forward to your comments on these recommendations and on any other aspects of our process. It may be hard to make useful comments on the critical adjustments I have required of the deans and academic affairs since the resolution of these very difficult adjustments properly falls within the colleges rather than at this level of discussion. Nonetheless, I include this information here primarily to make clear how significantly these legislatively required budget reductions have affected every part of our campus. Our comment period will close at 6 pm on Thursday, June 26, and I will post the final numbers on Friday, June 27, at 6 pm.

A comment on the always controversial issue of intercollegiate sports is in order here. As those following this discussion know, I required the athletic program to identify $2.5 million in reductions. The Trustee Ad-Hoc Committee met to discuss the many issues raised not only by our budget reduction requirement but also by the turmoil in the major athletic conferences from the proposed expansion of the Atlantic Coast Conference at the expense of the Big East Conference. This meeting led to a recommendation that the university explore the ramifications for UMass Amherst in these circumstances.

At the same time, the meeting also authorized the exploration of a reconfiguration of the UMass Amherst athletic program along the following lines. The program would become an independent, not-for-profit corporation controlled by the University of Massachusetts Amherst. The income and expense of the entire athletic program would become the responsibility of the new entity. The university’s contribution from its general funds would no longer be required, although the current student athletic fee would remain as income to the athletic association. All other revenue required by intercollegiate athletics would come from endowments, annual giving, commercial endorsements, ticket sales, and conference revenue sharing. The purpose of this reconfiguration is to contain the financial risk of the intercollegiate athletic program within the new 501c3 entity and ensure that the program remains self-supporting. This reconfiguration would be essential should the university eventually become part of a major conference that requires Division 1A football because the costs of such a significant expansion could not possibly be sustained by the campus or the university.

The Trustee Ad Hoc Committee expressed support for this process, and a strong fundraising committee under the leadership of Mr. Robert Meers (a UMass Amherst alum) is working on the financial plan that will be required to move forward on any of these alternatives for the Amherst athletic program.

However, all of these activities do not directly affect the university’s budget circumstances. We must reduce the general funds support of intercollegiate athletics by $2.5 million as I originally proposed, and we have begun the complex planning that will implement this reduction. As is true for all of our programs, private fundraising and additional revenue from other sources can replace the general funds we must remove to balance our budget. In the event the major fundraising effort of Mr. Meers in collaboration with our development office proves successful, the additional funds would release the approximately $4 million of the campus’ budget that is now required to sustain a minimal intercollegiate athletic program.

Finally, by July 1, I will also post the administrative reorganizations I am considering for our campus central administrative offices.

As mentioned in my last communication, the president’s office has scheduled a meeting of the Management Council and the President’s Council on June 30th where I expect we will consider the issue of a student fee increase. By the first week in July, then, I should be able to present to the campus the complete plan for our response to the legislative budget reduction. If we have not succeeded in meeting the legislature’s requirements either through budget reductions or increased revenue by that time, I will then turn to the extremely destructive consideration of IIIb issues.

As we move closer to concluding this extraordinarily painful readjustment, I want to emphasis my gratitude to all who have provided the advice, comment, criticism, and insight throughout these critical conversations.

We may be close to finishing this process, but our campaign to improve this university’s support from its legislative colleagues and from its alumni and friends is just beginning.

With thanks,

John V. Lombardi
Chancellor

FY04 Budget Proposed Category IIIa and Additional Category I and II Reductions (PDF)




FY07 Budget Update Amherst 250 Plan: Step One, An Interim Report Amherst 250 Plan Financial Master Plan Budget Document Archive Home	Proposed Category IIIa and Additional Category I and II Budget Reductions [posted June 24, 2003] Dear Colleagues, As we continue to work on the very difficult issues created by the dramatic budget reductions required by the legislature, every part of our campus has found it necessary to reduce an important program, stop a high quality activity, or limit the effectiveness of a campus, community, or statewide service. Each of us who has worked through the details of the reductions I have required has felt the same sense of disbelief and disappointment that our representatives in the legislature could not find a way to blunt the impact of the state’s fiscal crisis on our university. Nonetheless, we live in a Commonwealth whose budget for higher education is the responsibility of our elected representatives and we must conform to their requirements even as we mobilize to persuade them to do better next year. The table below contains the results of our review of reductions in Categories I and II and the particularly complex reductions required within Category IIIa. In the case of Categories I and II, we pushed the limits even farther here to recover an additional $3.1 million in savings. In Category IIIa we believe can find $2.5 million, although these discussions are still ongoing. Our review also indicated that we have reached a critical point in these conversations in which reductions beyond those outlined here and in my previous messages, a total of $21.5 million, would likely render the campus unable to function, support its students and faculty, or sustain its research and service missions. While I have identified these reductions, we do not yet have full budget plans that would allow me to present the details of these changes to the campus, although we expect to have that full accounting by July 1. Many of these adjustments, because they involve academic issues in colleges and departments, require extensive consultation and review by the deans, chairs, and faculty involved to ensure that what we do has the minimum negative impact possible. Over the next few days I look forward to your comments on these recommendations and on any other aspects of our process. It may be hard to make useful comments on the critical adjustments I have required of the deans and academic affairs since the resolution of these very difficult adjustments properly falls within the colleges rather than at this level of discussion. Nonetheless, I include this information here primarily to make clear how significantly these legislatively required budget reductions have affected every part of our campus. Our comment period will close at 6 pm on Thursday, June 26, and I will post the final numbers on Friday, June 27, at 6 pm. A comment on the always controversial issue of intercollegiate sports is in order here. As those following this discussion know, I required the athletic program to identify $2.5 million in reductions. The Trustee Ad-Hoc Committee met to discuss the many issues raised not only by our budget reduction requirement but also by the turmoil in the major athletic conferences from the proposed expansion of the Atlantic Coast Conference at the expense of the Big East Conference. This meeting led to a recommendation that the university explore the ramifications for UMass Amherst in these circumstances. At the same time, the meeting also authorized the exploration of a reconfiguration of the UMass Amherst athletic program along the following lines. The program would become an independent, not-for-profit corporation controlled by the University of Massachusetts Amherst. The income and expense of the entire athletic program would become the responsibility of the new entity. The university’s contribution from its general funds would no longer be required, although the current student athletic fee would remain as income to the athletic association. All other revenue required by intercollegiate athletics would come from endowments, annual giving, commercial endorsements, ticket sales, and conference revenue sharing. The purpose of this reconfiguration is to contain the financial risk of the intercollegiate athletic program within the new 501c3 entity and ensure that the program remains self-supporting. This reconfiguration would be essential should the university eventually become part of a major conference that requires Division 1A football because the costs of such a significant expansion could not possibly be sustained by the campus or the university. The Trustee Ad Hoc Committee expressed support for this process, and a strong fundraising committee under the leadership of Mr. Robert Meers (a UMass Amherst alum) is working on the financial plan that will be required to move forward on any of these alternatives for the Amherst athletic program. However, all of these activities do not directly affect the university’s budget circumstances. We must reduce the general funds support of intercollegiate athletics by $2.5 million as I originally proposed, and we have begun the complex planning that will implement this reduction. As is true for all of our programs, private fundraising and additional revenue from other sources can replace the general funds we must remove to balance our budget. In the event the major fundraising effort of Mr. Meers in collaboration with our development office proves successful, the additional funds would release the approximately $4 million of the campus’ budget that is now required to sustain a minimal intercollegiate athletic program. Finally, by July 1, I will also post the administrative reorganizations I am considering for our campus central administrative offices. As mentioned in my last communication, the president’s office has scheduled a meeting of the Management Council and the President’s Council on June 30th where I expect we will consider the issue of a student fee increase. By the first week in July, then, I should be able to present to the campus the complete plan for our response to the legislative budget reduction. If we have not succeeded in meeting the legislature’s requirements either through budget reductions or increased revenue by that time, I will then turn to the extremely destructive consideration of IIIb issues. As we move closer to concluding this extraordinarily painful readjustment, I want to emphasis my gratitude to all who have provided the advice, comment, criticism, and insight throughout these critical conversations. We may be close to finishing this process, but our campaign to improve this university’s support from its legislative colleagues and from its alumni and friends is just beginning. With thanks, John V. Lombardi Chancellor	FY04 Budget Proposed Category IIIa and Additional Category I and II Reductions (PDF)


© 2006 University of Massachusetts Amherst. Site Policies. This page is maintained by University Advancement Communications.