April 28-29, 2015
Apr 28 05:50 Factchecking President Potter Apr 28 10:32 The DFL transportation mantra Apr 28 13:47 The Clinton Foundation Money Machine Apr 29 14:41 Good news for SCSU?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Factchecking President Potter
President Potter: Necessary Fact Checks!
by Silence Dogood
On April 20, 2015, President Earl Potter sat for an interview with Jim Maurice on AM 1240 WJON.
According to the article President Potter makes a number of statements that need to be fact checked.
"St. Cloud State University is also hoping a three-year plan to add new programs, and close others, can help aid reverse a three-year trend of declining enrollment." Earl Potter III WJON interview April 20, 2015
According to the website of the Office of Strategy, Planning and Effectiveness the following enrollment plot is shown.
The plot clearly shows a decline in FY11, FY12, FY13 and FY14. On February 16, 2015, Associate Vice President and Associate Provost Lisa H. Foss sent an email entitled: "FYE enrollment projections information." A table from the email is reproduced below.
FY 15 is not yet through but the table shows that enrollment will be down 5.0%. So if enrollment was down in FY11, FY12, FY13, FY14 and FY15, isn't this a five-year enrollment decline? So what "three-year decline" is President Potter referring to when he hopes for a reversal in SCSU's prospects? In the five-year period since FY10, FYE enrollment at SCSU has declined by 21.8% and according to his data analytics group, enrollment is predicted to decline for another 6 years. If his group is right SCSU is at least 6 years away from possibly turning the corner on enrollment decline.
Declining enrollment not responded to has resulted in deficit spending at SCSU and here is what Potter told WJON:
"Potter says they've trimmed the budget by $4 million this year, and they'll need to make another $10 million in cuts next year." Earl Potter III WJON interview April 20, 2015
Let's check the second part of the statement first (that "they'll need to make another $10 million in cuts next year.") A portion of the Meeting Notes of the Portfolio Management & Resource Allocation Steering Group meeting of April 8, 2015 is reproduced below.
This document clearly states that the FY16 cuts are going to be $12 million. I guess while President Potter was on his three-week international excursion he wasn't keeping up with the activities on campus as well as he thought he would. Or perhaps he has new information that the cuts will only be $10 million. If this is indeed the case, he probably would have stated that he originally thought he needed to cut $12 million but found out that he only needed to cut $10 million. Unfortunately, it is more likely that the cut really needs to be $12 million and he either misspoke or is 'out of the loop'. Let's hope it's the former and not the latter.
On Thursday, April 23, 2015, Vice President for Finance and Administration Tammy McGee provided documents at the Budget Advisory Group meeting that list the projected deficit for FY16 as $12,268,000.
Now the first part of the statement also needs to be checked ("Potter says they've trimmed the budget by $4 million this year)." According to budget documents released on Thursday, April 23, 2015, by Vice President for Finance and Administration Tammy McGee at the Budget Advisory Group meeting, SCSU has not actually cut $4 million but rather only $2,827,000. As a result, $1,173,000 still needs to be cut to get to the $4 million target and that will still mean SCSU will have spend $5.5 million more than it takes in revenue this year.
Given that there are less than three months left in the fiscal year and that it is not possible to cut personnel contracts, it is going to be very tough to come up with another $1.2 million without causing significant harm. It is also important to understand that if the cuts are one-time cuts, it will simply kick the can down the road and increase the amount that needs to be cut from the FY16 budget. Further VP McGee reported that reserves which should be, by MnSCU policy, $10.5 million will have been drawn to $1.5 million - even if the additional cuts are achieved. As a result, in order to replenish the reserves to 10.5 million the cuts would need to be greater than 21 million
"Declining enrollment has been common at public universities across the state and country since the end of the great recession." Earl Potter III WJON interview April 20, 2015
I'm not going to challenge the enrollment across the country part of this statement but the following Figure shows MnSCU data for FYE enrollments from FY2003 through FY2014 (the actual final numbers), plus as of last fall each university's own predictions for enrollment for FY2015, FY2016 and FY2017.
Only two universities in the MnSCU system could be labeled as being "in decline" and they are Minnesota State University - Moorhead and SCSU. From FY10 to the prediction for FY17, Moorhead's decline of 1,072 FYE represents a decline of 15.9%. For the same time period, SCSU's decline of 3,871 FYE represents a decline of 25.3%! It is also interesting to note that Moorhead actually predicts an enrollment 'bottom' for FY16 followed in FY17 by an increase of 96 FYE. On the other hand, SCSU's prediction for FY17 continues the enrollment slide from FY16 losing an additional 195 FYE.
"The President of St. Cloud State University says they've turned a corner after years of declining enrollment."
President Potter cites that new student admissions and new entering transfers are up for next fall. Additionally, he cites that "our returning students are up as well." Unfortunately, his highly praised Data Analytics Workgroup on February 15, 2015 predicted FY16 enrollment would be down 3.3%. As a result, even if the new student admissions and transfer admissions are up, the prediction is that the enrollment will still be down. Decreasing the enrollment decline from 5.0% to 3.3% is a good thing. However, it is important to recognize that the enrollment is still declining. A 3.3% decline is going to lead to a loss in tuition revenue and ultimately the enrollment loss will lead to a lower state appropriation.
So the question is exactly what 'corner' has been turned? The Data Analytics Workgroup projections for FY17 was a decline of 1.7%, FY18 was a decline of 0.9% FY 19 was a decline of 0.5%, FY20 was a decline of 0.3% and FY21 of 0.2%. While the rate of decline is projected to decrease, has a corner really been 'turned' if the enrollment is projected to decline for the next six years?
"If SCSU can start growing enrollment again, Potter is hoping to be back to a positive budget by 2017." Earl Potter III WJON interview April 20, 2015
Unfortunately, even if all of the cuts are made and enrollment declines follow the projections, for FY16 SCSU will still have spent all but 1.5 million of its reserve. If SCSU has to rebuild the reserve to 10.5 million (as required by MnSCU), the budget for FY17 will have to be cut by 10.5 million, enrollment will have to grow significantly without increasing expenses in order to generate excess revenue to expenses, or a combination of the two for SCSU to be restored to fiscal health.
If President Potter's excuses: "part-time students," "demographics," "that shock of coming out of the recession," and the "decline in the number of high-school graduates" have any basis in fact, it is hard to believe that SCSU will be able to "turn the corner." More likely, we'll just hear another excuse and more misstatement of fact.
Posted Tuesday, April 28, 2015 5:50 AM
Comment 1 by Mystique at 28-Apr-15 08:18 PM
Only off by 2 years and $2 million. It's pretty obvious that math is not one of Potter's strong suits.
The DFL transportation mantra
The DFL's rationalization for their proposed gas tax increase is consistent if nothing else:
State Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, said the increased transportation funding is needed to pay for ongoing maintenance and new projects. "More than half of Minnesota's roads are more than 50 years old," Dibble said. "Forty percent of the state's bridges are more than 40 years old. And in just the next three years alone, one in five Minnesota roads will pass their useful life."
For the sake of this discussion, let's stipulate that these statements are accurate. The first question, then, is exceptionally straightforward. With that many roads and bridges falling apart, why didn't the DFL fix that situation in 2013-14 when they had a DFL governor and DFL majorities in the House and Senate?
The DFL passed a transportation bill that Gov. Dayton signed. It wouldn't have been difficult to throw some tax increase language into the Transportation Bill. The bill would've sailed through the legislature. Gov. Dayton wouldn't have vetoed the bill. The transportation problem would've been solved for the next 20 years.
The DFL hasn't admitted that their last gas tax increase failed miserably so I'll admit it for them. The latest DFL gas tax increase passed in 2008. It's failed miserably. It hasn't come close to meeting the DFL's predictions.
Something's happened since 2008, though. Since then, the DFL admitted that motorists are driving more fuel efficient cars. Further, I'll highlight the fact that more people are working more hours from home. Those dynamics mean that gas tax increases won't come close to fixing Minnesota's roads and bridges.
That's why the Republican solution doesn't rely on raising the gas tax. Unlike the DFL, they learned their lesson. That's why the Republicans' plan relies on a stable funding mechanism.
Minnesotans need their potholes filled and their bridges fixed. They don't need major new investments in transit. That's why Minnesotans need to reject the DFL's tax increase and push for the Republicans' transportation plan.
Posted Tuesday, April 28, 2015 10:32 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 28-Apr-15 01:06 PM
Hey, what happened to that Constitutional amendment that "solved the problem" permanently?
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 28-Apr-15 01:15 PM
Gary:
Lets not forget that a whole bunch of counties were given the option to have a $10 wheelage tax added to the car tab bills of their residents to maintain their county roads. Why should Hennepin and Ramsey county which added the tax now need a new sales tax bill to improve their county roads.
And lets not forget if the roads are such a problem why don't you stop mass transit projects for a couple of years to catch up on the roads.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
The Clinton Foundation Money Machine
This article in the Federalist is proof that the Clinton Foundation isn't a charity but a money-making machine for the Clintons. This pie chart is especially troubling for the Clintons"
This tweet stinks:
More than 88% of our expenditures go directly to our life-changing work: http://wjcf.co/1b1BjMR
Sean Davis' impertinence will hurt the Clintons' credibility:
In order for the 88 percent claim to be even remotely close to the truth, the words 'directly' and 'life-changing' have to mean something other than 'directly' and 'life-changing.' For example, the Clinton Foundation spent nearly $8.5 million-10 percent of all 2013 expenditures-on travel. Do plane tickets and hotel accommodations directly change lives? Nearly $4.8 million-5.6 percent of all expenditures-was spent on office supplies. Are ink cartridges and staplers 'life-changing' commodities?
That's just part of the Clinton Foundation iceberg. This article won't help the Clintons, either:
Ten of the 13 firms that both lobbied the State Department and paid Bill Clinton speaking fees did so within the very same three-month reporting period. This group includes five technology firms - Oracle, Dell, Microsoft, SalesForce and VeriSign - that collectively paid Bill Clinton a total of $1.05 million.
Federal records show that Microsoft and Oracle were lobbying Clinton's State Department on, among other issues, immigrant work visas. Oracle was also lobbying in pursuit of legislation dealing with penalties for aiding espionage. Dell was concerned with tariffs imposed by European countries on its computer products. VeriSign was lobbying on cybersecurity and Internet taxation. SalesForce was lobbying on cloud computing, security controls and electronic privacy issues.
Three of the technology firms that paid Bill Clinton while lobbying Hillary Clinton's agency also received lucrative State Department contracts. Microsoft received almost $4 million in such contracts after receiving none the year before Clinton joined President Barack Obama's Cabinet. Oracle received $6.5 million in State Department contracts, a large increase from prior years. Dell secured contracts worth more than $28 million, up from just $2.5 million in the year before Clinton became secretary of state.
There's a better chance that I'll win the lottery twice this week than there is a chance that these tidbits of information are purely coincidental. Why should I think that it's coincidental that Bill Clinton gave speeches to companies that were seeking favors from Hillary's State Department at the time these major multi-national corporations were intensifying their lobbying efforts?
I don't believe that the Clintons' string of lucrative coincidences is coincidental. At some point, it's reasonable to think that it's a pattern, not a coincidence.
Posted Tuesday, April 28, 2015 1:47 PM
No comments.
Good news for SCSU?
Enrollment Good News (Except For The Data Analytics Workgroup)!
by Silence Dogood
On February 16, 2015, Associate Vice President and Associate Provost Lisa H. Foss sent an email entitled: "FYE enrollment projections information." A table from the email is reproduced below.
Clearly, the data shows a projected decline for FY16 of 3.3%. As part of the 3.3% decline, the summer enrollment was projected to be down 59 FYE corresponding to a decline of 6.4%.
As of today, the Day-to-Day FYE Enrollment Comparison shows the following:
From this data, the first table shows that summer enrollment is currently ahead of last year's enrollment by 33 FYE. The second table shows that the projection for summer enrollment is 957 FYE. From the summary table of the enrollment projections, the summer enrollment projection was 859 FYE. Now, at 957 FYE, the projection is 98 FYE or 11.4% higher. The third table also shows that the current projection of 957 is 39 FYE or 4.3% ahead of the final number for summer 2015. This is all good news!
February 15, 2015 the projection for summer was for being down 6.4%. Now, on April 15, 2015, after summer enrollment has occurred, the projection for summer shows an increase of 4.3%. From being down 6.4% to being up 4.3% corresponds to a differential of 10.7%. Anyone now want to talk about the accuracy of the enrollment projections of the Data Analytics Workgroup? Of course, IT IS a lot easier to make projections after registration has occurred.
If you look at the third table, the overall projection for FY16 now calls for only a drop of 1.0%. If the projections for fall and spring are off by as much as the projections were off for the summer, does SCSU really still have a budget problem?
Posted Wednesday, April 29, 2015 2:41 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 29-Apr-15 03:37 PM
Gary:
I might have looked at this slightly differently. If the enrollment is going to drop each year according to the first table isn't that BAD!!!! news not good news?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Yeager at 29-Apr-15 04:21 PM
"Does SCSU really still have a budget problem?"
An excellent question for the CFO.
