An advisory group at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln has formally recommended against several academic program eliminations proposed by the administration to address a $27.5 million budget deficit. The 21-member panel of faculty, staff, and students urged Chancellor Rodney Bennett to delay the cuts, calling them an "absolute last resort."
In a letter dated October 24, the Academic Planning Committee argued that given more time, the university community could find creative solutions to the financial shortfall without dismantling degree programs. The recommendation sets the stage for a critical decision by the chancellor, who can either accept or reject the group's advice before presenting a final plan to the Board of Regents in December.
Key Takeaways
- UNL's Academic Planning Committee opposes cutting four of the six academic programs targeted by the chancellor.
- The committee is calling for a delay in program eliminations to explore alternative cost-saving measures and revenue streams.
- Chancellor Rodney Bennett is seeking $27.5 million in total budget reductions to close a structural deficit.
- The advisory group raised concerns about the data and metrics used to identify programs for elimination.
A Push for Alternatives Over Elimination
The core message from the Academic Planning Committee was a plea for more time. The group expressed confidence that the campus could rally to find other ways to solve the budget crisis if given a genuine opportunity.
"We are confident that, had they been given time, the campus would have come together to find creative, positive ways to eliminate the structural deficit without proposed program eliminations," the committee stated in its letter to Chancellor Bennett. They argued that the energy shown by faculty, staff, and students during recent hearings could be channeled into productive solutions.
The committee suggested that most program cuts would take over a year to implement, making a delay feasible. This pause, they believe, would allow individual departments a chance to find their own cost savings or develop new sources of revenue.
Background: The Budget Shortfall
The university administration is aiming to cut $27.5 million from its budget. This figure includes $21 million to cover an existing structural deficit and an additional $6.5 million intended to create a financial cushion against future budget cycles. The committee's letter echoed sentiments from university leadership that the issue stems from reduced state investment rather than excessive spending.
Breaking Down the Recommendations
The committee did not reject all of the administration's proposals. Through a series of anonymous online votes, the group provided a detailed breakdown of what it could and could not support.
Programmatic Changes
A majority of the committee members voted against eliminating four of the six academic programs on the chopping block. These four programs represent a combined $7.7 million in proposed cuts. However, the committee did support cuts to other programs totaling $4.3 million.
The group also gave near-unanimous approval for merging four departments into two distinct units, a move expected to save $2 million:
- Departments of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication
- Departments of Plant Pathology and Entomology
One of the most significant alternative proposals came from the College of Architecture, where two programs were slated for elimination. The committee, with the backing of the college's dean, voted 19-2 to instead merge all four of the college's programs—architecture, interior design, community and regional planning, and landscape architecture—into a single unit.
Controversy Over Data and Transparency
A major point of contention for the advisory group was the metrics-based approach the administration used to identify which programs to cut. Committee members noted that the data was shared confidentially but that no one was able to fully validate its accuracy or statistical validity.
"The analysis didn’t accurately reflect all units’ missions," the committee wrote, explaining that it was biased toward larger units and failed to capture important contributions like community extension work.
"We do not have a spending problem on this campus: We have an investment problem."
– UNL Academic Planning Committee Letter
The committee's final recommendations were also briefly at the center of a transparency issue. University officials initially stated they would not release the advisory letter until after the chancellor had reviewed it. However, following a public records request from the Nebraska Examiner, the university reversed its position and released the letter to faculty and staff on October 31.
What Happens Next
Chancellor Bennett now faces the task of reviewing the committee's detailed feedback before finalizing his budget reduction plan. In a statement, he thanked the committee for its "thoughtful work" and said he was carefully considering their input.
The final proposal will be presented to the University of Nebraska Board of Regents for approval at their meeting on December 5. While the committee's recommendations are not binding, they represent the collective voice of a significant cross-section of the campus community.
Should the administration proceed only with the items that received majority support from the advisory group, along with previously announced administrative efficiencies, the total budget reduction would be approximately $23.2 million. This would still leave a gap in reaching the $27.5 million target, putting further pressure on the administration to find savings that do not involve the contested program eliminations.
