Board considers funding

By Jill Aho

Genuine concern overtook the faces of Mt. Hood Community College district board members Saturday as finance discussions ran the gamut and talk of the desperate state of MHCC’s financial future dominated much of the retreat held at Persimmon Country Club in Gresham.

Projections laid out by Gary Murph, MHCC’s chief financial officer, showed that MHCCs 2006-2007 budget is in danger of falling below the board’s preferred 5 percent reserve, with a shortfall estimated at $946,000. One of the ideas Murph and Silverman presented to the board was a $1 increase in tuition, which would gain the school an estimated $200,000. This suggestion sparked debate among board members, who thus far have been resolutely against any tuition increase.

Board chairperson Ralph Yates, said it was “pretty commendable” the school has not increased tuition in two years. He added on Thursday that the real issue for the board is whether to increase now or hold off until next year, considering the college has “held the line on increases” for the last two years, and still managed to prevent massive layoffs or significant program cuts.

The last tuition hike was approved April 14, 2006. The $2 increase was the last in a series of hikes set up by Silverman and the board at the time, according to Advocate archives. The most substantial increases have occurred since winter 2002, with tuition increasing from $39 to $61 by fall 2003.

Board member Rod Monroe, who, when elected last year was strongly against any such increase, said, “I’d rather not raise tuition, but we need options. If we do raise it, raise it as little as possible.”

MHCC President Robert Silverman maintained the board needed to discuss an increase in tuition because the decision must be made by April. He also reminded the board that tuition would need to increase eventually, offering them the choice of “small increments or a significant amount.”

The board’s hesitation to increase the cost of attending MHCC comes before an expected ASG presentation of a $1 increase in the student activity fee. Last week, Murph spoke with the ASG Executive Cabinet about the board’s attitude toward increases.

“Gary tried his best to talk some sense into them,” Silverman said Saturday.
The board expressed they would listen to the presentation, but as Monroe put it, “They’re going to have to do a good selling job to convince me that’s necessary.” The board may also approve a smaller increase.

An increase to the student activity fee was suggested by the finance council after finalizing a budget for next year. Due to expected decreases in funds generated by enrollment, the funding for student activities is expected to take a hit. Silverman presented the numbers for MHCC’s enrollment and tuition figures to the board.
Silverman began by assuring the board that the numbers weren’t final, and that there would be an increase in the figures because of late starting classes and batch programs. He explained that programs like high school and apprenticeship are counted as a group for state and federal student full-time enrollment.

The numbers would seem to indicate that MHCC’s SFTE and individual headcounts have gone up, but tuition revenue for the school has gone down. Silverman explained that some programs, like the G.E.D. program, count toward enrollment figures, but are not considered tuition-generating classes. He stated that all tuition-generating classes are down about 5 percent, which directly correlates with tuition revenue shortfalls.

Recognizing the need to increase SFTE in tuition-generating programs, Silverman presented the board with a few of the administration’s plans. One idea is to put more emphasis on MHCC’s summer offerings. The school plans to move registration up to correspond with dates from other community colleges and begin an advertising campaign aimed at returning university students. In addition, they plan to put more emphasis on evening and weekend offerings.