Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Higher Education Capital Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Higher education officials defend SB 102 dedicated funding model as committee weighs changes
Summary
Jeff Landry, commissioner of the Utah System of Higher Education, told the Transportation Infrastructure Appropriations Subcommittee on Jan. 30 that the SB 102 dedicated funding model has encouraged campus renovations and saved state appropriation needs for new construction.
Jeff Landry, commissioner of the Utah System of Higher Education, and Deputy Commissioner Nate Talley told the Transportation Infrastructure Appropriations Subcommittee on Jan. 30 that the dedicated/non'dedicated distinction created by SB 102 (2019) has shifted campus capital projects toward renovations and more efficient use of existing space.
"SB 102 changed all of that," Landry said, describing how institutions now have incremental annual allocations that can be saved and used for renovation projects instead of competing for single new buildings. He said the approach has reduced pressure to build large new facilities and has produced a higher share of renovation projects.
The presentation emphasized that the system'level allocation formula considers enrollment, facility condition and other factors. Officials said they will finalize allocation estimates for this session before the subcommittee adjourns. Landry said many projects recommended by institutions this year are supported by existing ongoing appropriations from the Higher Education Capital Project Fund and therefore do not require additional new general-fund or income-tax funding.
Nut graf: The system presented the formula and results to explain why a proposed reduction in dedicated building funds would be counterproductive, and to describe complementary changes under consideration for non'dedicated requests and technical college allocations.
In his remarks, Landry pointed to measurable changes he said the policy has produced: "We've had a 30% decrease in the appropriation needs for non dedicated technical projects over the past 2 years," and he said about 90% of this year's identified costs support renovations, remodels and upgrades rather than new construction.
Committee members raised technical-college capacity concerns and formula effects. Representative Phil Kristofferson told presenters that several technical colleges reported waiting lists and asked what the system was doing to increase capacity; Nate Talley said the system's budget request includes capacity funding for technical colleges and that the Board of Higher Education is proposing to give technical colleges an allocation model similar to degree'granting institutions so they can build up funds for space and renovation.
Senator Winterton and others pressed that current allocation formulas may undercount secondary (concurrent) enrollment, which can penalize institutions that serve many high-school students. Presenters said HB 265 (as filed) directs a rework of allocation models and specifically tasks staff to consider how secondary students are counted in future formulas.
Several lawmakers voiced support for the dedicated model as a way to depoliticize building funding. Senator Rebe said the approach "takes the politics out of the process" and praised institutions for working together on allocations.
The subcommittee did not take formal action on SB 102 or the allocation rules during the meeting; institutions were scheduled to present individual dedicated and non'dedicated requests later in the agenda.
Ending: System staff said they will finalize allocation estimates before adjournment and that they are forming a task force of presidents to address remaining space-utilization concerns. No policy change or funding reduction was voted on during the Jan. 30 meeting.
