The recent discussions over a $1 billion surplus in the University of Wisconsin System balance boiled over Tuesday as a planned discussion on the system’s Human Resources program before the state’s Joint Committee on Employment Relations turned into a heated question and answer session with UW System President Kevin Reilly.
The state’s Legislative Fiscal Bureau released an audit report April 19 detailing the specifics of the systems’ large surplus. State legislators quickly responded with harsh criticisms of Reilly and the Board of Regents for their lack of transparency over the reserve fund, which draws a significant amount of funding from tuition dollars, according to the LFB audit.
Much of the anger over the large reserve was made worse by the fact universities had been increasing tuition rates by 5.5 percent for the past six years.
From the start of the hearing, Senate President and committee co-chair Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, structured the session to question Reilly on the surplus. Each member of the eight-person committee was allowed an opening statement to give their thoughts on the UW System’s fiscal record and ask questions of Reilly.
Assembly Speaker and committee co-chair Robin Vos, R-Burlington, who said he had previously supported giving the system more fiscal autonomy, led off with a harsh critique of Reilly and the Board of Regent’s record.
“It is not easy for me to admit I was wrong, but this is one example where I was totally mistaken in believing that the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the UW System could control their own fiscal affairs,” Vos said.
Reilly defended the system’s decision to keep the reserve fund, saying it would help with uncertainty in the system’s future funding.
He specifically highlighted the projected decline in university enrollment over the next decade, which would cut into tuition revenue, as well as the need both to keep and attract high-quality professors at UW schools as justifications for the surplus.
Ellis, who was visibly angry every time he addressed Reilly, criticized Reilly for using the system’s Board of Regents as “figureheads” after Reilly said the board never explicitly voted on how to allocate the surplus.
“We’re not angry,” Ellis said. “We’re disgusted.”
Other committee members, including state Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, used their opening statements to highlight their frustration over the lack of transparency in the system’s funding structure.
Darling said the way the system handled the surplus information was “unjustifiable” and “appalling.”
Disappointment, distrust and leveled statements of embarrassment permeated the meeting, which turned to questions of what the system can do to better serve students and citizens in the state.
Reilly said he and the UW System Board of Regents would work to keep state legislators and citizens well informed on the system’s fiscal situation in the future through detailed reports and records.
“I hear the angst. I hear the anger. In many ways I think it is justified,” Reilly said. “What my promise to you is, and to the people of Wisconsin, is we will come forward and consult with you before we go to the Board of Regents.”
Committee tables HR Redesign discussion
The Joint Committee on Employment Relations postponed its consideration of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Human Resources Redesign at a meeting Tuesday.
The HR plan, which the Board of Regents approved in December 2012, would reclassify certain university staff to improve employee recruitment and retainment.
Academic staff would be defined as salaried positions unique to specialized higher education, such as lecturers. The plan would also rename classified staff as “university staff,” which would include all positions at an hourly wage.
Office of Human Resources Director Bob LaVigna said the JCOER will consider the plan in the future, and he is hopeful the plan will pass.
“We’re still hopeful and optimistic that the committee will approve the plan,” LaVigna said.
