Randy Dunn put out an update on the budgetary situation today. He gives a very full account of recent legislative moves--almost all of which have been abortive. Dunn suspects, in the end, that the state will come up with some sort of stopgap funding bill to see state government stays open through the election. Presumably, then, SIU is planning on that basis--the assumption we'll get some FY 17 funding from the state before too long, but no firm commitment for the whole year until after the election at the earliest.

There isn't much news in his update. For Carbondale, though, there is a little something . . .

While the School of Medicine and SIUE have identified and are operationalizing the level of reductions necessary to carry them well into FY17, the Carbondale campus is now finalizing recurring reductions - beyond that first round of about $13.5 million in cuts put in place a year ago to get through FY16 (or so we hoped at the time). Any additional reductions for SIUC heading into the new school year will be announced at the campus level once decisions are reached.

These are presumably the cuts planned for in the various college level plans to cut something like 12.5% from budgets. Then there's this:

As has become our mantra across the system at this point, the goal of "protecting the core" or "holding the center" of 1) viable academic degree and academic support programs, 2) critical student services, 3) essential clinical and outreach efforts, and 4) campus asset preservation will remain paramount as we go into these uncharted budgetary waters in the months ahead.

"Viable" is nice--of course a fairly large proportion of our programs won't be viable, by a number of definitions, given years of cuts. At any rate, look for news on SIUC cuts fairly soon, I would think. Those cuts will presumably be based largely on who can be cut in a hurry without declaring financial exigency--at this point, that would mean lots of NTT cuts. Those cuts will impact programs (and people) inequitably. Strong program, weak program, essential program, inessential program--no matter, all that would matter is how many NTT you have. Not the smartest way to run a university, even within the constraints imposed by the chaos in Springfield. Let me hasten to add that I have no inside information on this . . . 

Presumably the prioritization plan will come into play at some point here, but there are weeks (if not months) to go before it would take effect, as it should be reviewed by Faculty Senate and Grad Council, in addition to the open comment period by faculty announced in the email about it we received earlier this week. Then it will take a good deal of time to compile the data and reports called for in the plan--a massive undertaking requiring unprecedented levels of detailed data on research and creative work--quite substantial written reports from chairs, etc.

More on that plan fairly soon, if anyone's out there . . .