Free tuition for in state students with less than $65k family income

It is on the news today.

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2017/06/what_university_of_michigans_r.html#incart_river_home

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2017/06/university_of_michigan_to_offe_4.html#incart_2box_news_ann-arbor

I’m glad it is limited to in-state students.

They also meet the need of OOS students with less than $90k family income.

I’m wondering how it will effect the grants for those of us making more than $65,000. Will UMich reduce those grants (in the future) to compensate for the larger grants given to lower incomes? I’m guessing it is all coming out of the same pot, which is finite; there aren’t unlimited funds.

Fund is not unlimited, however, the endowment is really big. Those with $65k or less family income are mostly covered by grant anyway due to the need met policy. From the sample financial aid package for a family with below $70k income, the grant amount is already enough to cover the tuition. So the difference may be just a few thousand dollars for those just below the $65k. The total number of students with below $65k family income is only ~3000 and a significant portion of that are already currently covered by similar level of financial aids. There is also a $50k asset limit besides the $65k income limit.

More insane income redistribution policies from a out of control radical left wing administration. It’s ok for Harvard or other private institutions to do things like this, but not right for a public institution to do it without full state legislative approval and a governor sign off (who will be footing the bill along with hard-working successful families). Affordable higher education is not a right.

You’re honestly complaining about the fact that the school you love is removing barriers to opportunity instead of creating them?

there is nothing created. It’s just a transfer of wealth, from the more productive to the less.

So screw everyone who doesn’t make as much money as you do, and screw their children too, because they don’t deserve education if they’re poorer than some rando on the internet. Got it.

They don’t deserve free education on other hardworking people’s dime. That is correct. They can take loans and be responsible for their own finances. And if society as a whole thinks they want to do the wealth transfer, run it through the state legislature and governor elected by the people, not some out of touch admins and regents elected with a limited mandate.

Hahahahah.

I can’t wait till I’m making an engineer’s salary. I want nothing more than to help other hardworking students who haven’t had as easy of a life as I have. If they have to take more taxes from me to do that, that’s fine. The big public(ish) universities in my state have among the highest in-state cost of attendance. If that can be fixed with some of my “hard-earned” money, GOOD.

that is not the point. The point is the state legislature that represent the people of the entire state that partially fund the university should have a say, along with the great governor elected by the people of the entire state should have the chance to veto. Out of control university admins and complicit regents do not have the mandate to make public policies that affect things beyond the university besides running the university.

That has nothing to do with state fund. Why would it involve legislature. You may say that for other states, but not for Michigan as it is 90%+ not state funded

it doesn’t matter the % of state fund. As long as it involves state fund, the state legislature should need to approve. (and your 90%+ number is flawed. One should be looking at the % of instruction operating cost funded by the state, as opposed to including the hospital budget, housing operations etc as part of the denominator. Using FY2013-2014 numbers, the state paid 4796 per student and tuitions and fees paid for 15891 per student.)

Your number also does not include the soft state fundings that the university implicitly get, as a state university.

Most importantly, the university did not pay market value for the land it currently use. Should the university be required to pay back the value in billions+ 100 years of interest?
Also, the tax exempt status for all university patent proceeds from state business tax is estimated to be in the 10s of millions annually. I can go on and on.

The university ultimately answers to the state, not the agenda of some left wing admins.

Side note - i am as much a hawk as there is about the state keeps lowering it’s share of cost burden, but to say the state legislature doesnt have an ultimate say in an instruction that it seeded and continues to fund is ridiculous.

This announcement is really just formalizing what is already done…most if not all in state students with a family income under $65K already get “free tuition” through financial aid awards. Remember, tuition is only about 1/2 the overall cost if you include room/board, etc.

Fortunately, students can commute or live off campus for a much cheaper cost

@bearcats This is funded solely by the endowment. It is not state fund at all. The State of Michigan does not even have the merit scholarships for many years. The merit and need based aids have been relying on the endowment and private donations. If the Michigan state gov is willing to pay for more financial aids, let the legislature involve. Otherwise, they have no say on this. The key thing is there is no additional money coming from the state for this regardless how little they have contributed to the operating cost.

funded by endowment is just an accounting measure. Ultimate the whole pot of money fund the entire university. If your dad pays your rent so you gamble all your money at the casino, does it logical to say well, i didnt spend a dime of my dad’s money at the casino?

And again - not accounting for the soft funding that allows the university to even exist is ridiculous - “how little they have contributed”- lol.

fact is the university occupies 3200 acres of the most prime real estate in Ann Arbor. A developer recently paid 2mm for a 0.9 acre lot near central campus to build luxury units. That would give it 3200 acres $6mmm valuation easy. With a contiguous lot premium for land of that size one could argue the land is worth $9+mmm, factor in 100 years of interest this number is $15mmm+.

$15mmm at 6% interest is $900mm implied value transfer from the state to the university per year. That’s only accounting for this as a perpetual IO, without paying down the principal.

Have I gone into the tax breaks yet?

So cut the state a 15+ billion dollar check and give up every tax break and they can have no say.

At the end of the day, Michigan voters have spoken and it values fiscal responsibility and economic liberty. State senate is red. State house is red. State governor is red. State voted for President Donald Trump. The career admins pushing a fringe agenda is a slap to the face of hardworking taxpayers in the state that has given (and continue to give) so much to the university.

@bearcats, not sure where you’re headed with this. Are you saying public flagships should not offer need based financial aid?