TaxProf Blog

Editor: Paul L. Caron
Pepperdine University School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Minnesota Law Battles 50% State Subsidy Cut With 13% Tuition Increase, 1% Faculty Pay Cut

Minnesota MNDaily, After Cuts, Law School Eyes Future:  A 50% Cut in Two Years Translates to Increased Tuition:

Like every other college at the University of Minnesota, the Law School is facing a litany of budget woes, including a daunting cut in state funding from 22% to 11% in two years.

The results of this cut include a 13.5% increase in tuition this academic year and a 1.15% percent pay cut for faculty in the 2011 fiscal year.

Dean David Wippman revealed all this in the State of the Law School address to about 60 students Monday at Mondale Hall. Wippman explained how the Law School plans to maintain quality through difficult times by focusing on alumni outreach, namely for fundraising purposes and mentoring current students.

Dan Filler (Drexel), University Of Minnesota Law Prepares For State Budget Cuts:

We're obviously moving toward a segmented market in public legal education.  There will be top-tier schools that want to compete with their private brethren.  This means staying nose to nose with private schools on both faculty compensation and course load.  It also means investing in institutes, centers, and programs that facilitate research.  As a practical political matter, it's going to be near impossible for any state school to achieve this without amping tuition beyond $30K.  We've already seen the Berkeley/Virginia/Michigan move and the real question is which other schools intend to follow that model.  (I would have guessed Minnesota, among others.)  Then there will be the remainder of state schools that temper their commitment to super high-end hiring and retention with the practical reality that state governments neither desire, nor can afford, a Lexus law school. 

The interesting question is where these decisions will be made.  Will faculties decide they want to support and grow elite programs, moving strategically to reduce or eliminate state subsidies? Or will university administrations, or state governments, insist that tuitions remain low - insuring that their state law schools are affordable and signaling that access is an extremely important value.  (The UC system may be pursuing a third model -- one a tad more redistributive -- featuring high sticker prices and unusually expansive need-based financial aid.)

In a world of unlimited resources, one law school can be everything to everyone.  As things now stand, however, law schools are forced to make critical choices.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/10/minnesota-law-school.html

Legal Education | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef0133f5627517970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Minnesota Law Battles 50% State Subsidy Cut With 13% Tuition Increase, 1% Faculty Pay Cut:

Comments

I can't blame them, but I think large tuition increases in the current market are probably a mistake. As much as I complain about cutbacks in research funds, etc. at Rutgers, there's no question we get better students than we deserve because we kept costs down. But Minnesota is playing in a different league--my guess is that they cannot easily give up the status of a "top 20" or "top 25" law school--so the students pay the price.

Posted by: Michael A. Livingston | Oct 27, 2010 1:49:14 PM

Law schools need to abandon the magnificent glass-and-steel buildings, the latte kiosks, and other materialistic trappings, and get back to the basic mission of turning out graduates who can contribute something to the law. Most of this nattering about faculty research ought to go by the wayside as well. If one in ten articles published by lawprofs find any use in the hands of practicing lawyers, that would be amazing.

Posted by: Jake | Oct 27, 2010 7:01:23 PM

Notice how none of what Minnesota is looking at doing will benefit its students in any real way. It will benefit the faculty at the school, but not the students. That's of course what drives most decisions at American law schools.

Posted by: Hansel | Oct 28, 2010 8:53:52 AM

Magnificent buildings and latte kiosks? Have you ever been to the U of M Law School? Trust me, we're not exactly in the lap of luxury. U of M law has a long history of doing a lot with a little money, but cutting funding in half in two years is just unreasonable. Thanks a heap, Pawlenty!

Posted by: Becca | Oct 29, 2010 10:49:01 AM