On July 2, 2008, hundreds of concerned citizens, students, internet participants, and band kids gathered on the 4th floor of the Joe Crowley to attend the Town Hall Meeting with President Glick to discuss the effects that the state proposed budget ‘cuts’ would have on the UNR campus.
I have included the entire opening speech given by President Glick at the bottom of this post, but I shall only describe the parts that pertain to the topic I have been speaking about as of late.
When I decided to go to this meeting, I had absolutely no intentions of posting a question to Mr. Glick. However, these intentions flew out the window about as quickly as they decided to put this table up on the projector:
This “UNR General Fund Budget Reductions” table had pretty much contradicted everything I discovered and compiled from the Office of Planning, Budget, and Analysis Department. This table claims that the fiscal year between 2007-2008 suffered an $8.4M reduction in funding: about a 4.5% decrease in funds. According to tables and graphs that I put together and shared with everyone, they ironically state that the university had about a 4.5% increase in funds. Understandably confused, I quickly gathered my numbers and posed him this question:
-President Glick – July 2, 2008
His response makes sense: Although the University of Nevada, Reno has in fact received more revenue from the state then ever before, the money they appropriate can only be used for certain line items that the state mandates. Although understandable, it is extremely deceiving to call the situation a “budget cut”.
However, I was still quite confused as to how they reached the (4.5%) figure, especially considering Mr. Glick confirmed my numbers. I really wanted to speak with him afterwards, but when the band kids started posing 10 minute “questions”, I knew I had to cut out to retain my sanity.
As I was leaving the town hall meeting, a man by the name of Bruce Shively approached me. He is the Assistant Vice President for Planning, Budget & Analysis of the university, and he is the man who put together all the numbers I have been ranting as of late. I asked him the same question that I was left with, and in a nutshell he told me that the 4.5% cut is based upon the projected funds that the school expected to receive from the state. There are no true revenue cuts, just cuts based upon the speculation. WOW! I followed up by asking him if he thought the graph he designed for the town hall meeting was deceiving, considering how no such disclaimer or even a hint of such an explanation has ever been given. He quickly retorted that it was not confusing to him, and he abruptly ended the conversation.
The purpose of these posts is not “bash the school” or “discredit the man”; instead, I encourage everyone to do their own research, challenge the status quo, and keep your mind free from the tyranny of disinformation. To bash our State, State Legislature, and our Governor simply because one was too lazy to challenge the argument and instead jump on the presumptive and often times inventive and litigious numbers is wrong; because any person who accepts and acts upon only one side of information without properly and fairly considering both sides have only themselves to be frustrated at.
Note: The small gaps in video are no more than 5 seconds in length. Enjoy.