Update: On November 13, the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees reversed course and voted to approve the university’s plan to raise tuition by 3 percent for in-state undergraduate students. Read more here.
A committee of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees on Wednesday effectively killed a plan to raise in-state tuition for undergraduate students—the result of a lengthy, convoluted discussion that saw board members rewrite university leaders’ proposals in real time.
Chief Financial Officer Nate Knuffman presented the trustees’ budget committee with a proposal to raise in-state tuition by the maximum 3 percent—$211 a year at UNC-CH—that the UNC System Board of Governors is permitting campuses to consider for the next academic year. That board in September voted to allow all 16 of the state’s public universities to raise tuition for North Carolina undergraduates for the first time in nearly a decade, though the schools are not required to do so.
Even with the increase, Knuffman said in his presentation, UNC-CH would have remained third in its peer group of 12 universities for the lowest undergraduate in-state tuition and fee rates, only charging more than N.C. State University and the University of Florida.
Knuffman’s proposal, which was informed by a task force that included student leaders and staff, also included plans to raise out-of-state undergraduate tuition by 10 percent and to increase school-specific tuition only for graduate students in the School of Government, the pharmacy school, and the law school. The plan also included hikes to student fees, including one to fund a new campus recreation center.
By the end of the meeting, the committee had voted to send Knuffman back to the drawing board and directed him to come back with a new proposal that would not increase in-state tuition for undergraduates. To make up the difference in revenue, the committee asked Knuffman to instead create a plan that would raise tuition for all out-of-state graduate students. The details of that plan are expected to be shared with and voted upon by the committee on Thursday.
The budget committee’s decision came after more than 90 minutes of debate, during which trustee Patrick Ballantine at one point said Robert’s Rules of Order had been “totally thrown out the window.”
Trustee Ritch Allison first raised concerns about raising tuition in the context of the UNC System’s new model for performance funding. Under that model, campuses contribute an amount proportional to their share of the system’s total revenue, and the money is reallocated to reward schools for improving their four-year graduation rates and student debt levels, among other metrics. UNC-Chapel Hill is projected to lose nearly $7 million each year—something trustees, including Allison, have previously called an unfair “tax” on the university.
Allison said he worried that the funds generated from raising tuition would “end up going off of our campus” through the performance-funding model.
Trustee Jim Blaine also expressed concerns about the model, saying it was “really hard” for him to ask UNC-CH students and their families to pay more in tuition when the university is losing money to fund other campuses.
Blaine, the former chief of staff for Republican state Senate leader Phil Berger, also said the university’s “hands have proven to be very dirty,” saying he believes there are examples of “wasteful” spending that need to be addressed before a tuition increase for in-state students is considered. One such example, Blaine argued, is the university’s ongoing contract with a public-relations firm—for which the university has paid roughly $1 million over more than a year. Blaine questioned the need for such services when the university employs full-time communications staff.
“I just say, don’t hire the PR firm next year, and don’t raise tuition on our in-state students,” Blaine said.
The funds being used to pay the PR firm are from philanthropic donations made to the UNC-Chapel Hill Foundation, The News & Observer reported.
Trustee Marty Kotis, chair of the budget committee, said he objected to the increase because of the state constitution’s directive that higher education “as far as practicable, be extended to the people of the State free of expense.”
“I think there are plenty of other levers we can pull,” Kotis said. “I think there’s a strong signal to be sent by keeping resident undergraduate tuition flat, and I believe we have both constitutional requirements, state law, and policy that require us to do that.”
Not all trustees spoke against Knuffman’s proposal. Trustee Ralph Meekins at one point made a motion to adopt the plan as presented, but it died without a second from any other board member.
UNC-CH Chancellor Lee Roberts chimed into the discussion for the first time only after Meekins asked to hear his thoughts on the proposed 3 percent increase for in-state undergraduates.
“I mean, it’s our proposal. We stand behind it,” Roberts said. “We think it’s reasonable given the overall, total cost of attendance compared to the peer group and the fact that current students are protected.”
Roberts added that he and other university leaders believed the proposal was a “very measured and a reasonable increase, entirely consistent with our obligations to the North Carolina constitution.”
The Board of Governors has the final say over tuition and fee rates across the system. Under state law, any increases only apply to students who enter the university next year.
N.C. State’s Board of Trustees is expected at its meetings Thursday and Friday to consider its own 3 percent raise to in-state undergraduate tuition. The Board of Governors is expected to review campuses’ proposed tuition rates in January before voting on the changes in February.
