Denogean: UA students got schooled by Shelton, regents in tuition flap
Friday, December 12th, 2008
University of Arizona President Robert Shelton delivers his State of the University address.
Any discussion of last week’s university tuition-setting debacle should begin with two statements of fact.
One, the Arizona Constitution calls for university instruction to be as nearly free as possible. Two, the state constitution specifies that the Legislature must appropriate enough funding to maintain, develop and improve all state educational institutions.
Because the legislators we elect don’t honor the second mandate, it has become impossible to honor the first.
That’s the real reason why, once again, students at Arizona’s universities were walloped with whopping tuition increases for 2009-10.
However, it didn’t help that student leaders caved when they had a rare victory in hand.
The university presidents arrived at the Board of Regents meeting at Arizona State University with requests to increase tuition and fees for in-state undergraduates by 9.9 percent at the University of Arizona, 10.4 percent at ASU and 13.9 percent at Northern Arizona University.
On Dec. 4, Regent Dennis DeConcini proposed that all three universities make do with “an inflationary increase” of 3.7 percent. It would have demonstrated that the universities were willing to tighten their belts for one year during an economic crisis, DeConcini said this week.
The regents rejected DeConcini’s 3.7 percent motion for both ASU and NAU, instead approving the presidents’ requests. But when DeConcini made the motion pertaining to UA, Regent Anne Mariucci didn’t support the president’s proposal, as she had for ASU and NAU, instead voting for the 3.7 increase. She said UA needed an extra push toward change. The motion passed 5-4.
One difference between the ASU and NAU proposals and the UA proposal is that both ASU and NAU already have adopted “indexed tuition” models that (supposedly) help families plan their college expenses.
Under the model, tuition increases for incoming students can be large, but the increase for returning students is limited to 5 percent annually over the four or five years it should take them to graduate.
UA’s rejected request had included an agreement to adopt indexed tuition in 2010.
UA President Robert N. Shelton was shocked by the board’s action. He told the media he potentially would be forced to cut as many as 50 lecturers and cancel hundreds of class sections.
It struck DeConcini, a former U.S. senator who sat on the appropriations committee, as a classic tactic.
“Whenever you don’t give an agency what they think they deserve and need, they often indicate they are going to cut things that the appropriators might like or the constituents might like, in order to get those constituencies fired up.”
Even with the smaller increase, UA’s tuition revenues would increase next year, but by about $17 million or $18 million instead of the estimated $23 million the requested increase would have reaped.
DeConcini arrived at his motion after talking with student leaders, including student Regent David Martinez III, ASUA President Tommy Bruce and Arizona Student Association board chair Michael Slugocki.
Martinez voted with DeConcini but immediately had second thoughts, he said this week.
After the vote, he talked to Shelton, student leaders and other regents to better understand what the lower tuition increase would mean on top of the millions in university budget cuts already ordered to help balance the state’s budget.
Martinez was persuaded that UA wouldn’t be able to maintain the quality of its programs, might have to cut classes and wouldn’t be able to invest in critical infrastructure. The “harsh reality” swayed his opinion.
On Dec. 5, Martinez, moved to reopen discussion of UA’s tuition increase. Regents approved Shelton’s proposed increase of 9.9 percent, setting tuition and fees at $6,076, and approved an indexed tuition model to begin in 2010 at UA.
DeConcini was stunned.
“I called them up (the student leaders) to the podium, or the table there, and asked if this really was their position. I was quite taken aback. They gave me what I thought was a pretty weak answer, that they thought Shelton was a good administrator and they had gotten predictability (the indexed tuition plan) and this was OK.”
DeConcini thinks the student leaders were taken in by scare tactics. There are other ways to trim budgets than by firing instructors and cutting classes. DeConcini also thinks he put himself on the line for the students and they “left me hanging.”
If the double-digit tuition increases for new students approved for ASU and NAU are an indicator of what will happen under the “indexed tuition” model, tuition for new in-state students in Arizona will double every six years.
Also, the maximum 5 percent increases agreed to for returning students outpace both inflation and the Higher Education Price Index, an inflation index that tracks the main cost drivers in education.
The students wanted predictability. They got it. We can now predict that a college education will be increasingly unaffordable in Arizona.
“I think they made a horrible deal for themselves,” DeConcini said.
Perhaps the student leaders should take a class in Negotiations 101, ’cause they got schooled last week.
Anne T. Denogean can be reached at 573-4582 and adenogean@tucsoncitizen.com. Address letters to P.O. Box 26767, Tucson, AZ 85726-6767. Her columns run Tuesdays and Fridays.















Doris Atkinson Brady displays her Women's Land Army badge (right) and a certificate signed by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
ABOVE: Joan Fiske, in her 'Land Girl' uniform, served from April 1942 to June 1945. BELOW: Fiske with her late husband, Jim