As the Senior Staff Budget Advisory Group filters through the list of budget cut suggestions, there are bound to be a few ideas they should push to the side.

One such suggestion is layered parking, where freshmen would pay more to park at Central Michigan University than upperclassmen.

Forcing freshmen to pay more for parking doesn’t make sense. A layered parking system will not help solve CMU’s budget woes and should be abandoned.

If the SSBAG were to adopt the layered parking system under the stipulations laid out in one budget cut suggestion, freshmen would pay $450 a year for a parking pass. Sophomores would pay $350, juniors, $250, and seniors $150.

That’s right — the initial suggestion targets freshmen for an increase of $300 in parking fees in order to keep a car at CMU.

Given that freshmen typically have to park in the worst spots on campus — near Kelly/Shorts Stadium — layered parking could turn some prospective students away from CMU.

Parking here is relatively cheap when compared to other universities around the state.

At Michigan State, parking passes range from $268 to $89 depending on the residence hall and lot students choose.

Freshmen are not allowed to park their cars on campus until they have completed at least 20 credit hours.

Western Michigan University students have to pay $300 an academic year to register their vehicles.

Commuters at Eastern Michigan University pay a flat rate of $150 per academic year.

Here, it is $150 -175, depending on the pass.

CMU Police Chief Bill Yeagley believes the university has one of the best parking systems in the state and doesn’t want to see it change.

CMU is one of the few universities in the state that allows freshmen to park on campus.

It remains a unique perk for perspective students.

The administration should do its best to make parking on campus for freshmen still attractive.

If university officials decide to increase the fee for parking passes, or even develop layered parking fees, the price should be kept as low as possible.

Parking passes should not exceed $250 a year for freshmen.

Another option the university could look into is charging more money for prime spots around campus.

In all honesty, layered parking will probably not earn CMU much of a profit.

Fewer students are going to pay more money to park on campus, keeping revenue relatively the same before the layered parking.

At a time when students are having their resources cut from under them, university officials must be careful if they chose to increase costs.

Layered parking is a suggestion that won’t throw much into the university’s budget in the long run.

Casualties are unavoidable in Central Michigan University’s battle to balance next year’s budget.

Some will inevitably be unhappy with the results.

The Leadership Institute is one program slated for the chopping block to keep the university above water. Given the current situation university officials find themselves in, closing the program for a time is a rightful consideration.

The Leadership Institute is no doubt a great program. As proven through the number of favorable comments on cm-life.com, a significant number of students are passionate about the educational opportunities it provides.

But in such tough economic times, cuts have to be made so the university can stay operable and attractive to most prospective students.

The program lost its main figurehead when Director Dykstra Heinze left in early January.

Closing it will save the university around $161,497 — an amount that may seem petty to some, but is one step closer to solving the current budget crisis.

Other campus programs have met the same fate. On the Fly Productions — the student RSO that specialized in planning events for CMU — also is planning to pack up at semester’s end. More could face budget trouble as the Senior Staff Budget Advisory Group mentioned in its responses to budget suggestions that the Campus Programming Fund will likely see a drop in funding.

This situation comes as an outrage to those focused solely on student life at CMU. But the alternative to closing down smaller programs is making significant cuts that affect the entire student body.

The university has to ensure that students are going to get a basic college education before being a part of specialty programs.

The administration has to avoid making cuts that would have an across-campus effect. Slicing programs such as the Leadership Institute affects a decent number of students, but not the entire student body.

That said, just because the Leadership Institute is cut does not mean students with a leadership minor will be abandoned.

Besides, it is unfair to tell hundreds of students who may have made a significant financial investment in leadership classes and tell them it’s time to find a new minor.

The entire situation at CMU is unfortunate, especially with big projects under way such as the $25-million medical school, and should not have to come down to cutting programs. No one wants to see an end to a program that builds leaders out of young
people.

Hopefully, if the Leadership Institute does close, it can be reinstated if Michigan’s economy bounces back.

Balancing a budget will require some give and take from the entire university community. Let’s keep an open mind and see where the next few months take CMU.

George Ross becomes the 14th president of Central Michigan University today.

And he has quite a lot on his hands.

CMU is facing a steep budget deficit for 2010-11, along with a likely cut in state appropriations. It also is building a $25-million College of Medicine and renovating Rose Arena. And students will likely face another tuition increase and cuts in their majors’ departments.

Overall, it is an uncertain time at Central. And Ross, who once served as vice president of Finance and Administrative Services at CMU, returns to Mount Pleasant amid that time.

Here are some near-future suggestions from Central Michigan Life’s Editorial Board for the new university president:

Hold public meetings

Being visible and accessible will do wonders to build a trusting relationship between Ross and the CMU community.

Former University President Michael Rao, especially during his last two or three years at CMU, rarely appeared in front of students and faculty through forums and meetings. Former interim University President Kathy Wilbur had a strength is speaking with the CMU community and it helped build a stronger relationship.

Whether they were meetings at residence halls, Academic Senate or budget forums, Wilbur knew she had to maintain communications with everyone.

Now is the perfect time for Ross to follow her lead and plan meetings with students and faculty. He needs to get his face out there to represent CMU effectively.

Not effectively communicating with students, faculty and the media on a consistent basis would not be a great first impression for Ross to make.

Look for funding outside of CMU

In a time of dwindling state funding and rocketing tuition increases, more alternative forms of funding should be sought.

Tuition can only be raised so much before it punctures enrollment and drives away perspective students. And lawmakers in Lansing have proved the guarantees for funds are few, while the demands are many.

Much of a university president’s duties exist off campus and in the company of alumni.

It is here where there are continuous opportunities to cultivate relationships with graduates.

An investment of the university’s and Ross’ time could result in a financial investments on the alumni end. Those inclined to give tend to give.

Searching for and utilizing these opportunities will play to CMU’s advantage, especially with so many ambitious campus renovations on the horizon.

Handle the budget with care

The 2010-11 budget is possibly the biggest obstacle Ross will have to address immediately.

Ross should take Kathy Wilbur and Phil Squattrito, co-chairs of his transition team, as well as the Senior Staff Budget Advisory Group’s recommendations seriously and implement their ideas into his decision-making.

Careful planning and timing is key to success. The worst thing Ross could do is act hastily and entirely on his own without the background information he needs to make the best decision possible.

The university is facing its share of problems it has to see through. Strong leadership and tactful decisions will help CMU get back on top of things again.

Hopefully, George Ross is capable of doing both.

Kathy Wilbur’s term as interim university president of Central Michigan University is coming to a close.

Wilbur has achieved and faltered in a few areas in her eight-month stint as president.

Hopefully, she will take her experiences from this position and apply it as she returns to her role as vice president of Governmental Relations and Public Affairs at CMU.

Wilbur’s biggest strength as president was her visibility. From visiting students in residence halls to participating in forums, Wilbur has been more accessible to the CMU community than previous president Michael Rao.

Her willingness to approach students was a fresh change, considering former University President Michael Rao hardly met with students prior to leaving for Virginia Commonwealth University last year.

Rao likely wouldn’t have held a budget forum that addressed students and faculty. University President-designate George Ross should make it a point to be just as accessible as Wilbur was, especially when there is so much uncertainty on campus.

Wilbur is not without her faults, however.

Failing to update the public about budget cuts during the last Board of Trustees meeting was a disappointment.

Weeks before the meeting, Wilbur said she would reveal budget cut suggestions at the meeting. On one hand, it is understandable that there are many people besides Wilbur involved with budget cuts and she is not entirely to blame.

But the lesson learned is not to speak of something if you can’t deliver it, especially with a subject that impacts so many people.

Another bump during Wilbur’s term was the denial of Freedom of Information Act requests. Central Michigan Life filed 14 FOIAs in February concerning the revealing of budget cut suggestions, and all of them were denied.

But voila! Today, some budget cut suggestions sent to the Senior Staff Budget Advisory Group were posted to the Web, which begs the question: Why was the FOIA asking for them rejected?

While this is not all on Wilbur, we would like to see more transparency with issues that impact thousands of people involved with the university, and we would like to see a president that advocates that.

In the end

Wilbur, despite lacking a Ph.D., became interim president because of her role as a lobbyist and her familiarity with pushing CMU’s interests forward.

Becoming president so quickly and running a university is no easy feat, especially with state appropriations dwindling and Michigan’s economy struggling.

The insider perspective and knowledge of what it takes to be a leader at CMU should help Wilbur be even more effective when working with government officials on the part of the university.

Hopefully, she will remember the pressure of tackling the university’s problems and fight in the interest of the students.

Central Michigan University administrators on Tuesday held the first of what they say will be several forums to discuss the university’s impending budget crisis.

Panelists detailed how the budget works for those in attendance before opening the floor for questions and commentary.

With so much speculation swirling around campus over CMU’s financial future, one may expect people to line up for a chance to offer a word.

But that wasn’t the case.

If the student body and faculty want to influence how administrators approach budget cuts, they must take advantage of every opportunity for active involvement.

That doesn’t happen when the community cowers in the corner.

Silence doesn’t tell administrators just how deeply cuts will impact faculty and students at CMU.

There was a multitude of things worth discussing after the presentation.

Administrators touched on topics such as faculty layoffs and how to avoid tuition increases during the forum.

The only questions asked afterwards pertained to student retention and if the university was pledging to hold the line on tuition.

The forum ended 20 minutes early due to lack of audience interaction.

Why weren’t more students present?

Although it’s understandable students are busy, the overall lack of effort was laughable.

Fewer than ten students showed up to such an important discussion.

Students could even watch the event online and e-mail their questions.

Not a single question was e-mailed to the panel.

Granted, there is a lot of information administrators don’t have yet that allows them to make more concrete decisions.

But at least they attempted to start a budget-related conversation.

Many of the goals panelists presented to the crowd are open-ended and up to interpretation.

This is the perfect opportunity for students and faculty to ask pressing questions.

How will CMU continue to be focused on education if faculty has to worry about staying employed? Why should students have to pay more in tuition if the resources they need to succeed are slashed?

Yet no one asked. Silence.

Future forums

Interim president Kathy Wilbur said more forums on the budget will be held in the future.

With the initial form explaining the budget situation, the administration should reveal all proposed solutions to patch the faltering budget.

Be transparent and let the CMU community know what you’re thinking.

As for the students and faculty – attend the forums. Don’t complain and stand on the sidelines while the administration restructures CMU.

Apathy will not solve this complex issue.

It will take thoughtful questions and pressure on the administration if students and faculty want to influence what goes and what stays.

Students, this is your tuition money in action.

For faculty, this is your job on the line.

Why aren’t you saying anything?

Central Michigan University administrators on Tuesday held the first of what they say will be several forums to discuss the university’s impending budget crisis.

Panelists detailed how the budget works for those in attendance before opening the floor for questions and commentary.

With so much speculation swirling around campus over CMU’s financial future, one may expect people to line up for a chance to offer a word. But that wasn’t the case.

Only three people asked questions, just one a student.

If the student body and faculty want to influence how administrators approach budget cuts, they must take advantage of every opportunity for active involvement. That doesn’t happen when the community cowers in the corner.

Silence doesn’t tell administrators just how deeply cuts will impact both faculty and students at CMU.

There was a multitude of things worth discussing after the presentation. Administrators touched on topics such as faculty layoffs and how to avoid tuition increases during the forum.

The only questions asked afterwards pertained to student retention and if the university was pledging to hold the line on tuition.

The forum ended 20 minutes early due to lack of audience interaction.

Why weren’t more students present? Although it’s understandable students are busy, the overall lack of effort was laughable.

Fewer than ten students showed up to such an important discussion.

Students could even watch the event online and e-mail their questions. Not a single question was e-mailed to the panel.

Granted, there is a lot of information administrators don’t have yet that will allow them to make more concrete decisions. But at least they attempted to start a budget-related conversation.

Many of the goals panelists presented to the crowd are open-ended and up to interpretation.

This is the perfect opportunity for students and faculty to ask pressing questions. How will CMU continue to be focused on education if faculty has to worry about staying employed? Why should students pay more in tuition if the resources they need to succeed are slashed?

Yet, no one asked. Silence.

Future forums

Interim president Kathy Wilbur said more forums on the budget will be held in the future.

With the initial forum explaining the budget situation, the administration should reveal some more proposed solutions to patch the faltering budget. Be transparent and let the CMU community know what you’re thinking.

As for students and faculty — attend the forums. Don’t complain and stand on the sidelines while the administration restructures CMU.

Apathy will not solve this complex issue. It will take thoughtful questions and pressure on the administration if students and faculty want to influence what goes and what stays.

Students, this is your tuition money in action. For faculty, this is your job on the line.

Why aren’t you saying anything about it?

Central Michigan University’s interim President Kathy Wilbur said last week that discussing potential budget cuts opens a door for unnecessary fear.

However, that is exactly what happens when the university stays silent, much like it is now. Students and faculty are more suspicious when officials are tight-lipped concerning issues of great impact, and rightly so.

A budget forum will take place from 3 to 5 p.m. Tuesday in the Bovee University Center Auditorium. Officials have said the forum will address the university’s budget structure and the economic climate CMU faces.

While background information is certainly helpful, the campus community wants and deserves to hear more.

Sure, disclosing the specifics of budget cuts sent to Wilbur last week may not be prudent. But speaking in generalities to address over-arching ideas for cuts is not something beyond administrators’ reach.

The budget cuts will impact students the most, yet officials refuse to make light of anything they’re contemplating. There are more than enough ideas floating around, considering that students e-mailed suggestions and every department had to propose suggestions for 3, 6 and 9 percent budget cuts.

Why is the university treading this water and not including the campus community in the thought process? Are officials going to decide on cuts behind closed doors? No answers have surfaced yet among such pressing questions.

The shroud of secrecy administrators use for every major decision around campus is getting old. From the presidential search last year to the football coaching search this year, students are constantly ignored and belittled by high-impact decisions that involve thousands in tuition and taxpayer dollars.

The Board of Trustees runs CMU like a business, not a place of higher education. In the end, we are all in this struggle together. Whatever cuts are decided upon by the university’s administration are decisions we all must learn to live with.

The administrators are not the ones who will be sitting in classrooms or learning to make less with more when it comes to lab experiments or projects. At the end of the day, when the trustees head home, we are the ones at this campus on a daily basis.

At this point, budget suggestions are merely speculation. But no matter how far they are from being set in stone, new ideas from the campus community could only offer broader perspective for the battle ahead.

CMU should generalize some of the suggestions and get students’ reaction. Take after Western Michigan University and send out an e-mail of what the budget situation is and some of the proposed solutions.

Error in Friday’s editorial

The Central Michigan Life staff made an editing error when writing Friday’s editorial, “Vacant trustee.”
It should have said Central Michigan University Trustee Gail Torreano missed her second of four Board meetings.

Although our stance in the editorial remains the same, we apologize for the error and will continue to strive for 100 percent accuracy when writing the newspaper’s opinion.

Thursday’s Board of Trustees meeting was the second of the last four that Trustee Gail Torreano has not attended.

Such a record is detrimental to improving Central Michigan University, especially in a time of vital transition and economic uncertainty.

As such, Torreano should respectfully consider resigning from her position on the Board.

There’s a lot going on at CMU right now that the Board has to consider, namely balancing a struggling budget and the beginning of a campaign for a $24-million College of Medicine.

Now is not the time to miss out on responsibilities, especially at a focal point in CMU’s history.

How can the public take Torreano seriously if she is incapable of showing up to meetings that are planned months in advance?

It’s understandable that travel to Michigan isn’t the most convenient for Torreano, who accepted a job in Texas last summer.

And Board members said Torreano did inform them ahead of time that she wouldn’t be in attendance at Thursday’s meeting.

But Torreano knew what was expected of her when she joined the Board of Trustees.

With the exception of 2009, members of the board only have to attend five meetings a year, all of which are scheduled far in advance.

If she cannot come to the majority of meetings, she should not be part of the important decision-making the Trustees are responsible for.

Resigning wouldn’t be a sign of disrespect.

Students would rather have a member who attends the meetings and is therefore able to make a significant mark on the university than someone not there half the time.

If she is busy with other projects, she should be considerate of what’s best for students and what’s best for her own career.

Aside from Torreano, the attendance at Thursday’s board meeting was fair, at best.

Trustee Marilyn French Hubbard was available via conference call.

She spoke only to give her consent when votes were taken and did not contribute at all to discussion.

Even Trustee John Hurd left a few minutes early, so only four members were physically there until the end.

And this, only days before a new president comes on board.

Why was attendance this weak for a Trustees meeting?

This is supposed to be CMU’s governing body, the people who have the last say on any major decision at the fourth largest institution of higher education in the state.

Family emergencies and other similarly important matters are excusable, but not much else.

CMU doesn’t need trustees who are absent when they are called upon. Students are expected to be responsible for themselves. The Board of Trustees should do the same.