UW situation blamed on Olympia

With the stroke of a pen last year, Gov. Gary Locke dashed the slim hopes of those at the UW banking on the creation of a modest fund to be used to recruit all-star faculty and retain those thinking of leaving.

The governor's line-item veto of $6 million in recruitment and retention money -- made on the last day of the legislative session -- had to be made, according to Locke's office.

"He wanted very much to keep the $6 million, but couldn't because of a series of votes in the Legislature," said Debora Merle, Locke's policy adviser for higher education.

A new tax on beer was meant to provide both the money for the state's research universities and to provide the state's home health-care workers with a quarter raise. The Legislature did not pass the tax in the final hours of the session, and the governor reacted.

"He just couldn't justify giving faculty a raise and keeping the home health-care workers at $7 an hour," said Merle.

In the same budget that initially included retention and recruitment money, the UW faced a $24 million budget cut and was provided with only enough money to maintain 2001 salary levels.

Unlike many other state employees, faculty members at state universities are not automatically given cost-of-living adjustments, which are meant to increase pay based on localized inflation rates. For faculty, raises are left to the discretion of the Legislature.

Faculty members at the UW rely the most on merit-based raises, as decided by their peers.

Essentially, because the Legislature did not give the UW any money for merit, no faculty members were given raises save a few who took counter offers when being recruited by other schools.

The chances of money being in the budget for merit raises this year are uncertain. Locke's proposed budget cuts the UW's budget, and the state faces a $2.4 billion funding gap over the next two years.

"It's tough to determine when we have tight dollars," said Don Carlson, R-Vancouver, chairman of the Senate Higher Education Committee, regarding this year's higher-education budget.

David Hodge, dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, put it a little differently than Carlson.

"Damn, are they in a tough box," Hodge said.

However, the message that brain drain is a critical issue to the state has reached lawmakers. And while those lawmakers sitting on higher-education and budgetary committees say they understand the problem, in the same breath, they say the outlook is bleak.

"I don't think there's any question for us in our state that, long term, if we're going to stay in a competitive situation, we're going to have to put more money into higher-ed issues," said Dave Schmidt, R-Mill Creek. "I take a pragmatic approach, and I realize, as a legislator, that nobody here gets everything they want. Nobody does."

If the Legislature can find money in the budget for any type of salary increase, even if it isn't enough to start closing the gap between the UW and its peer institutions, some on campus will see it as an acknowledgment from Olympia that the University is important, and better state support may come in the future.

"It's going to take a plan. I think people understand that in a single year or in the midst of an economic crisis, things can't be solved overnight," said Sandra Silberstein, chair of the faculty senate and an English professor. "But at the same time, people need to feel that they're moving forward, that there is something they can count on."

The topic of brain drain at the UW naturally connects with the topic of Washington's tax structure.

"Part of the reason we're not funding higher education properly is because tax payers keep voting for initiatives that are taking away money and costing us," said Jeanne Kohl-Wells, D-Seattle, ranking minority member on Carlson's committee.

Some suggest a new tax structure that is a reliable way of generating funds.

"The state of Washington is going to have to take a good look at how we finance our government, including K-12 and higher ed," said Denice Denton, dean of the College of Engineering. "We need to get more stability in our business plan because people are starting to worry."

To some lawmakers, however, the outcry over low pay raises concerns over the state's management rather than its tax base.

"To me, there's a bigger question that needs to be answered. If our institutions are falling back and K-20 education says that their salaries are in the lower one-third, and yet from a revenue perspective in contrast to other states we're in the top third, where is the gap?" said Schmidt. "What it tells me is that we're spending a whole lot of money on government somewhere that other states are not."

One place the state did not spend money last year was the retention and recruitment fund -- known as R&R -- a tool administrators at the UW point to as the only way to slow brain drain without a general pay increase.

"It's crucial to us in the respect of both making counter offers and to recruit super stars," said Denton. "We've used both R's."

The R&R money is also used to avoid heated salary discussions in the middle of a recruiting battle.

"That particular pot of money that was given to us worked wonders in our ability to preemptively deal with some of our situations," Hodge said.

A small amount of R&R dollars can be carved out of a college's budget, as both Hodge and Denton have done. The amount is limited, however.

"There's not a lot an individual dean can do," said Denton. "We can put Band Aids on things and limp along, making specific people feel better."

University-wide R&R dollars, though supported by most lawmakers, are never a sure thing until the budget is signed, as the UW learned last year.

"The problem with R&R money in these budgetary times is that it seems to be the piece upon which they balance the budget," Silberstein said.

To address the brain drain on a grander scale, administrators, lobbyists for the faculty senate, the administration and individual faculty members have put pressure on lawmakers to change the way higher education is treated. Pointing out how research universities drive the state's economy, and how the bubble of new enrollments expected in upcoming years will cramp small campuses, one member of the Board of Regents has developed a plan.

Daniel Evans, a former governor, has partnered with another former governor, Booth Gardner, to draft a plan to stimulate the economy and serve the universities by erecting new buildings on campuses, to be paid for by state bonds.

A projected jump in the number of high-school graduates within this decade could be mitigated with investment into the state universities' infrastructures now, Evans suggests.

Although the construction projects will help give the state some short-term money through sales-tax revenues, Evans admits it will not have much of an impact on faculty pay levels.

But it is a gesture. It is a way for the lawmakers, in this tough economy, to show they recognize the importance of the state's premier universities, he said.

"We think we have a real chance," Evans said. "While it doesn't put money into any [faculty] pockets, it shows the Legislature cares."