IBJNews

  • Home

Indiana colleges want $700 million for new buildings

Associated Press
February 2, 2011
Keywords
Colleges and Universities, Education & Workforce Development, Government, Government & Economic Development, Legislature, State Budget, State Government
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Commission for Higher Education officials say Indiana's universities should get no money for capital projects during the next two-year state budget, despite a claim by college officials that they need about $700 million for new buildings and other projects.

University leaders fear a "spiral into mediocrity" if they don't get any funding for new projects and projects already approved by lawmakers that have not yet been funded, The Indianapolis Star reported.

Lawmakers who are creating the state's budget will have to determine how much money the colleges will get. The Legislature consistently approves more money than recommended by the commission, but this year could be different. Gov. Mitch Daniels has called for cuts in overall higher education spending, and some key legislators say everyone needs to do more with less these days.

Rep. Jeff Espich, a Republican from Uniondale who heads the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, said legislative willpower has never been strong when universities come calling asking for new projects.

"But I think there is a little more discipline than normal this year," he said.

The Commission for Higher Education's proposal would put $522 million in new projects on hold, as well as half $169 million in projects that have been approved but not funded. Indiana University has requested $217 million for projects including science labs at IUPUI and a Wells Library renovation. Purdue University wants $184 million for projects including the renovation of Helmke Library.

Only six previously approved projects would be allowed to continue, the most expensive being a $20 million project for Ivy Tech Community College's Anderson campus.

Fast-growing Ivy Tech has a construction wish list of $145 million in new projects around the state, including Muncie, Lafayette, South Bend, Fort Wayne and Columbus.

"About half of our campuses are below our space needs," said Ivy Tech President Thomas Snyder.

Though the commission called for a funding moratorium on projects, some lawmakers said that could lower the quality of education in the state.

"Right or wrong, to get the best students and to keep the outstanding professors, you have to have facilities to accommodate their expectations," said Rep. Peggy Welch, D-Bloomington. "And they also help create jobs."

Construction groups say $700 million in projects would go a long way.

J.R. Gaylor, president of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Indiana, which represents 50,000 workers, said his industry currently has a 20 percent unemployment rate.

"If you take away the volume of contractors that would be needed for new construction projects like these, you would definitely have an impact," he said. "And we need to spur construction and economic growth in this state."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Just Say No
    MidwestFebruary 3, 2011 2:19 PM
    1st, maintain what is already built. To cut costs use various construction &/or engineering classes from IUPUI, Purdue, Ivy Tech etc to do the work and pay with Federal Work-Study funds. Students do learn from experience. Do not just keep building. Current high school population is decreasing and middle schools are being merged with high schools across the state because of population shift leaving classrooms empty. Enrollment will decline as economy improves, jobs become available, and people become full-time employees rather than full-time students. Utilize what is already built in the form of off-campus classrooms in the community. Rent may be costly, but not as costly as construction loans and the capital can be saved to generate interest for the rent payments. On the other hand, it would put a few people to work who would ultimately pay taxes and buy productsâ?¦. Ah, a public project of work for unemployment and welfare payments. Many public buildings and libraries standing and being used today were built as public projects. It does require some cost management â?? for the unemployed project managers and MBAs. Just donâ??t throw the tax dollars around without a solid, reasonable, rational, cost-effective plan.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Really
    CertificateFebruary 3, 2011 1:04 PM
    Seriously - if the state wants to cut education budgets - they need to start with the institutions of higher learning. Come on, keep the money at the local schools, not everyone is going to go to college. I recall several buildings at my school that had the lights on but were not hardly used. So yes save your pennies, raise tuition, turn out the lights and pay for it on your own.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • correction
    JustinFebruary 3, 2011 10:23 AM
    approach* campaigns*

    Dang!
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Ball State
    JustinFebruary 3, 2011 10:21 AM
    Or the schools could use Ball State's approace; save money over time (tuition, fees, and capital compaigns), then pay cash for new buildings...don't worry about the state funding the projects.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Give it to them!
      TravisFebruary 3, 2011 12:23 AM
      Right now construction bids are low since contractors are desperate for work. If you wait two years everybody may be wanting new buildings which would take drive up prices dramatically.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    ADVANCED SEARCH
    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ

    1. liek the rest of America

    2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

    3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

    4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

    5. whoa!

    ADVERTISEMENT