Here's the email I got that appears to be considering this "separate entity" idea. See if you can figure it out. Ulgh, political speak.
Dear Members of the Campus Community,
The past week has been marked by passionate reactions to the release of the
state budget repair bill last Friday. You have seen the various communications
on that bill and its potential impact on our campus.
During the past couple of days, media attention has also begun to focus on next
Tuesday's release of the governor's 2011-13 biennial budget. I write to correct
some of the misinformation in the media and on the rumor mill about the New
Badger Partnership and the process through which it has been advanced.
1. I have been promoting an integrated case for greater flexibility for more
than a year.
2. UW System has been advocating for flexibility for a very long time with a
number of governors of different parties, without significant success.
3. I have said repeatedly that all three gubernatorial candidates expressed
interest in and support for the basic premises set forth in the argument for
flexibility. In 2011, lack of interest in moving forward with flexibility is a
recipe for even greater economic pain.
4. In late December, members of the governor-elect's team asked for a meeting at
which they expressed ongoing interest in flexibility for UW-Madison. They also
announced interest in exploring a public authority model.
5. In response to hypothetical questions posed by the governor's team, we
provided responses in a memo dated Jan. 7, 2011. That memo contains no
decisions. It provides answers to questions we were asked about what it would
take to offset 75 percent of a $50 million cut with tuition; it states
unequivocally that the tuition increases required to offset 75 percent of a $50
million cut would be unacceptable to us. We made very tentative suggestions
about other ways to deal with such a cut. We made no decisions or commitments
about tuition rates or about anything else.
6. Neither the governor's team nor the UW-Madison administration made any
commitments to public authority status or to any other change of that sort at
the meetings cited in the memo, nor did they or we agree to any particular cut
or tuition numbers. Meetings in January were exploratory.
7. In the meantime, as you know, we have worked with representatives of
on-campus constituents on the principles that would guide discussions with the
governor's office.
8. In the absence of a strong, timely system-wide proposal on behalf of all the
institutions, my staff and I continued working with the governor's staff on
their suggested approach to UW-Madison.
9. I made President Reilly aware of the fact that we had met with the governor's
staff and had been asked for information. I did not share the content of the
exchanges that ensued. I believed and still believe that it was the governor's
prerogative to speak with system leadership about what he was willing to
consider for the system and for UW-Madison. I was told that the governor's staff
had input from system back in January and had let President Reilly know they
were open to ideas, and were considering a different approach for UW-Madison.
10. Our advocacy for greater flexibility and fewer layers of bureaucracy has
always had as its goal the preservation of UW-Madison's world-class quality at a
time of enormous fiscal challenge. In our discussions, we have consistently
emphasized the importance of flexibility for the other universities in the
system. I do not agree with those who say that changes in the administration of
the campuses will damage the state. The state will be irreparably damaged if the
universities in the system deteriorate because of significant budget cuts and
the absence of new tools. Innovations in structure are essential to avoiding
that damage. The merits of the campuses' argument for appropriate levels of
flexibility and more decision-making ability on the local level outweigh
defenses of the existing administrative set-up, in my view.
11. Regardless of the administrative structure with which we end up, UW-Madison
will not only honor all its joint programs and partnerships with other system
institutions, it will enhance them, including transfer programs, educational and
research collaborations, and shared outreach commitments.
Our interest in the public authority status is based on its potential to help us
realize the principles that we established in the New Badger Partnership:
1. The state needs a world-class research university that offers education to
its citizens, attracts talent from around the world, promotes the ability to
think analytically and synthetically, conducts first-rate research, and applies
its discoveries to solving society's most urgent problems. It needs a research
university that supports existing industries and turns discovery into innovation
and job creation.
2. UW-Madison needs new tools if it is to retain and enhance its quality and its
capacity for innovation in service of the public.
3. Removing excess bureaucratic layers is critical to the university's ability
to fulfill its mission.
4. Every region in the world is rushing to establish a major research university
because of the value of those universities in a knowledge-based economy.
Wisconsin needs to preserve the one it has.
Going forward:
1. I believe that Governor Walker will propose public authority status for
UW-Madison in his budget bill, when it is released on Tuesday, Feb. 22. I also
believe he supports greater flexibility for other universities in the system.
2. We will provide whatever information and clarity about the bill and its
implications as soon as we can. Please watch for updates at <budget.wisc.edu>
and <newbadgerpartnership.wisc.edu>.
3. During the next several months, the campus community will have the
opportunity to work with the administration on features of a potentially new
model.
Chancellor Biddy Martin
