Editorial

"Get rid of the surplus:" Michael Martin's Plan for UWRF

By Student Voice

October 1, 2024

As UW-River River Falls celebrates its 150th anniversary, the university is in the midst of what may be its most uncertain time in recent history. That uncertainty can be summarized in one sentence: UWRF is experiencing a $7.1 million deficit that will, according to 2024 financial review, “worsen over the coming years.”

Former Chancellor Maria Gallo expressed confidence that the university will thrive for another 150 years, but Interim Chancellor Michael V. Martin does not share the same certainty. In our interview with him, Martin said UW-River Falls is at an “inflection point,” and “needs to adapt to the current challenges in higher education.”

Martin’s plan to “adapt” is evident— Cuts. Cuts to what Martin calls ‘surplus’ or ‘excess’ capacity. “You have two choices,” he said. “Get rid of the surplus capacity or sell it in new ways.” What Martin calls “surplus capacity,” is UWRF programs and employees that are on the chopping block.

Martin has stressed that these changes are inevitable. “People understand, even if they don’t like to understand, that there’s going to be change in the wind. You can be party to it, and you can help invent it, or you can resist it, when it’s coming either way.”

The question is: Are further budget cuts the change that we need? Martin said that “the faculty is as big as it was before the pandemic, but there’s many fewer students.”

However, this claim is inaccurate. According to UWRF’s financial review, UWRF had 5,290 full-time enrolled students (FTEs) in 2020, compared to 5,401 FTEs in 2019. As reported by the UWRF Newsroom, there were 5,222 FTEs in September 2024. This reflects a decrease of only 68 students since 2020, before the pandemic-related decrease in enrollment that Martin mentioned. Clearly, the student population has not dropped significantly. Is it really worth cutting programs and employees when the enrollment numbers are so close to what they were in 2020?

Whether this increase is an indirect result of natural shifts in the environment, or the direct outcome of UWRF’s various strategic and strategic enrollment plans, it seems to be working. On April 22, 2024, the Student Voice noted, “UWRF intends to increase enrollment over the next few years, so it would be unwise to remove faculty or staff who will be needed to meet the needs of an increased student body in the near future.”

This is one reason why cutting employees doesn’t seem to make much sense.

In addition, Martin’s statement that “the faculty is as big as it was before the pandemic” is inaccurate. UWRF’s financial review indicates that “total [full-time employees] have fallen in nearly every administrative unit and every college, placing added strain on existing employees.”

Can employees who are under this “added strain” effectively meet the needs of hundreds of additional students, while continuing to provide a quality educational experience?

The UWRF Newsroom also reported that “new first-year students total 1,132,” which is the primary reason for the increase in UWRF’s total FTE numbers. Martin highlighted the first-year to second-year retention rate, noting that “28% of the freshmen don’t come back in the fall.”

If this 28% retention rate remains consistent, the university can expect to lose around 317 freshmen by fall 2025. This underscores the importance of retention; UWRF cannot afford to lose this many freshman students. Both Martin and Gallo stressed the importance of retention in their interviews. “[Retention] is the fastest way and the best way to be more stable,” Gallo said, while Martin called it “the biggest challenge in enrollment.”

We at the Student Voice agree with both Martin and Gallo. However, we argue that the budget cuts that have already been implemented, along with the future cuts that Martin supports, have been, and will continue to be detrimental to retention efforts. If retention is one of, if not the most important, factors in the university’s success, then these budget cuts could be detrimental to that success as well.

Most students enroll at a university because it offers programs they are interested in pursuing. Eliminating even a few of these programs decreases the incentive for prospective students to enroll.

While some might argue that smaller programs, such as liberal arts, offer less incentives for new students, eliminating these programs would limit options for those who are interested in attending UWRF or switch their majors. If a student wants to switch to a liberal arts program that no longer exists, they may be forced to transfer to another university, contributing to the annual loss of around 300 freshmen students.

Moreover, programs that are currently small or have traditionally been so may not always remain that way. With an increase in incoming freshman students, these programs could see growth in enrollment. While it’s unlikely that Journalism will overtake Agricultural Studies in popularity, it’s difficult to predict which programs might grow and by how much. If the program is eliminated, it also eliminates the possibility of that growth.

The impact of cutting a program may only be felt after the cut has been made. In 2023, UW-Green Bay considered eliminating six majors and minors, which included Environmental Policy, and Theater and Dance, causing an outrage, not just at UW-Green Bay but across the UW System. And it’s difficult to restore a program once it has been done away with.

Another important aspect, of course, is the emotional impact on students and employees, which is rarely reflected in  financial reviews.

We couldn’t find any reason why cutting programs would benefit enrollment, and it seems that the UWRF administration hasn’t found identified one either. Martin admitted that the strategic enrollment plan, which includes the budget cuts implemented thus far, has not had much of an effect on retention: “We haven’t closed the gap much,” he said.

Additionally, cutting programs would harm the campus culture, a vital component of a “thriving institution,” which Maria Gallo advocated for in our interview with her.

While Martin said the increase in enrollment is “a positive sign,” he also acknowledged that “there’s a long way to go.” We agree. One good year of enrollment cannot rectify UWRF’s budget deficit, which has been building for years, if not decades. Is that worth the risk? Maybe to Martin, it is.

“I’m willing to be the person who, if we take some risks and they don’t work, can be blamed for,” he said. “I don’t mind that at all.” This is a disconcerting statement, to say the least.

Martin mentioned a few measures that could be taken. One is the merging of certain administrative and maintenance offices across different UW universities. “Do we need to have a standalone payroll office‚ a standalone purchasing office [or] standalone vehicle maintenance? The question is, with three institutions 60 miles apart, are there some backroom things we can do that would reduce costs at [all three] places?” he said.

Collaborating with local businesses and institutions represents another promising option. Maria Gallo said, “We had a record breaking fundraising year this past year at 4.1 million. So we have good momentum there. And I think [Martin] will help keep that momentum going because we need those kinds of infusions of one-time money as well as continuous money,” adding “[We need] one-time money to get projects off the ground.”

One of these projects is what Martin called a “summer boot camp” aiming to provide incoming students with a head start in essential areas like math, English and science. “I’m going to see if I can extract a little money from a foundation over in Minnesota that I worked with in another life to beta test a summer boot camp,” Martin said. The boot camp seeks to increase retention by preparing students for their freshman year and preventing them from falling behind.

These are just a few of the ways that the university can address its financial concerns and adapt. If UWRF needs to reinvent itself, it should do so without jeopardizing its foundation. UWRF’s programs and the faculty members are the main reason why all of UWRF’s students, all 5,222 of us, are at this university. Cutting these programs risks not only the institution’s identity but its future.

We urge Michael Martin to not let that happen.