0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Image 8 of Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2011-05-03

Part of Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees

-g- Discussion followed. Mr. Smith stated that he felt students and Kentuckians were substantially burdened by having borne a l30 percent increase in tuition over the previous l0 years and that a line must be drawn at some point in order to maintain the mission of the states flagship institution and to serve the entire state. He said that he would vote not to approve FCR 4. Ms. May agreed that this is a difficult vote, and although she understands why the changes have been proposed, she is troubled by tuition increases from $3,700 to almost $8,700 over a l0-year time frame. Having larger increases in the professional schools than in the undergraduate schools sets a dangerous precedent. Students entering professional schools with four to five years of undergraduate debt should not be faced with tuitions that can rise rapidly. She said she would vote No. Mr. Roberts stated that he would not be able to support the tuition increase this year. Although he understands the need, there are also the needs of the students and their families to be considered. He and all of the board struggle every year with this issue, and he feels it is important to find a way to find a solution to the problem. Dr. McCorvey stated that the challenge for the board and the university is that we have to find ways to enhance what we are able to do here. The faculty has not had raises in three years, and thats a major concem. The students are being taxed because something is not happening at the legislative level. He suggested that we have to ask our legislators to look at our system. Does the state need to be taxed more so that the Legislature can do their job and help the university receive extra funds so that the students wont be taxed? It may be time to ask legislators to do their job in helping to move this state forward by granting to the university the appropriate funds that can help the university educate the citizens of Kentucky. Ms. Brown spoke next and said that she, too, would not support FCR 4 due to her deep concem about the students, who may be at a tipping point at which they are not going to be able to afford a college education. Mr. Gatton stated his sympathy for the students and wished tuition increases were not necessary. Even so, in l0 or 20 years, most likely the currently proposed tuitions will be viewed as modest. To keep the best faculty, deans must be able to give salary increases in order to fight competitive offers from other schools. Ms. Brothers said that she would vote in favor of FCR 4. She also expressed that she shares concerns for the students and agrees with Dr. McCorvey that there are issues with raises for faculty and staff She fears that we are pricing ourselves out of the ability to educate the native Kentuckians that we are here to serve. Mr. Stuckert suggested that it is unfortunate that Ms. Martin could not present her full program to all board members. Her program puts in perspective Kentuckys standing among its benchmarks and other Kentucky schools and shows that in tenns of undergraduate tuition and fees for 20ll, of 2l schools mentioned in an included chart, Kentuckys proposed tuition is fifth