Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, February 15, 1994 TAG: 9402160010
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Some decentralization of budget matters at some state-supported universities over the years has proved useful. This year a couple of budget amendments in the works would nudge this gate open further. The Allen administration is friendly to this kind of operational streamlining, and General Assembly watchers sense an open attitude this year among legislators, too. Perhaps this is the year for change.
Of course, state checks and balances are necessary when dealing with public money. Yet there need be no loss of accountability if proper audit procedures are put in place. And there is public money to be saved.
Consider the waste involved simply in duplicating every invoice received, kept on file at the originating university and sent to Richmond, where all checks must be cut. And not just billing but purchases themselves can be more expensive because of centralized controls.
Purchases of certain items such as computers must be made from prescribed lists at prices negotiated by the state. But in the volatile computer industry, where product upgrades and price downgrades occur regularly, the larger universities likely could cut better deals for themselves if given enough slack.
And as plans for every building project involving more than 5,000 square feet are sent along to Richmond for review, the resulting delays surely translate into higher construction costs.
One budget amendment would give the University of Virginia broad freedom from state control. Another amendment being drafted would allow pilot projects at select universities that would loosen central control over purchasing, information technology, and personnel, accounting and financial transactions. The state's larger institutions of higher learning have the administrative horsepower to make this work.
They should be given the chance to try, anyway. There could be unintended consequences. (Would removing large purchasers such as Virginia Tech from the state pool drive up prices for computers too much for smaller colleges?) Such unknowns make it wise to set up pilot projects, which should also appeal to skittish legislators who shied away from a broad decentralization plan a couple of years ago.
In matters of state control over colleges and universities, Virginia's legislators and bureaucrats seem to have everything backward. In day-to-day operations, larger institutions with sufficient staff and resources can handle their purchasing, contracting and bill-paying more efficiently on-site. Insistence on centralized control adds duplication, a layer of waste.
It is in the broad mission of the state's system of higher education - how many and which universities should have an engineering school, a law school, a research emphasis, graduate programs in physics or social work - where there should be a more comprehensive and better-articulated vision, and the state money to realize and support it. Here state oversight could helpfully focus effort and reduce redundancy.
by CNB