The University is looking for ways to cut its already-tight budget after the state announced a two percent decrease in monthly funding, according to Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor Larry Nielsen.

The University Budget Advisory Committee met Wednesday to discuss the cuts and to brainstorm ideas for dealing with future cuts.

“We’ve trimmed the fat away a couple times,” Nielsen said. “We’re down to the muscle and into the bones and probably coming out the other side. We need to start talking about what we can stop doing.”

Every month, the state will spend slightly less than 98 percent of the money previously budgeted, according to Nielsen.

The budget cuts will likely not be distributed “across-the-board,” meaning the University will use an adjusted system that weighs essential and nonessential elements of its operation, Nielsen said. Teaching salaries and utilities are examples of essential elements, he said. Charles Leffler, vice chancellor for finance and business, said that it is possible that this one-time cut will become more permanent. “We need to look at what [programs] we just don’t have to have anymore so we can still function core activities,” he said. “It is valuable to know [of the cuts] now because we have time to put together this process.”

A concern among members of the committee was that it is difficult for the University to grow with less money.

“Eventually we have to tell [the legislature] ‘No, we can’t teach an additional section unless you give us a [budget] increase,'” Jim Martin, professor of chemistry and chair of the Faculty Senate, said. “What we are going to grow and what we are going to cut both need to be on the table.”

Katie Perry, senior vice provost and professor, suggested allowing community colleges to teach lower-level courses.

“It’s time for us to do things that we do well and not do things other people can do just as well for us, like teach English 101,” she said. “We could have people come here at some level other than high school.”

Perry said it is important to protect the academic quality the University has worked to achieve.

“We have to do something smarter, not more with less,” she said. “If we don’t change the way we operate, we’ll deteriorate into mediocrity. We’ve come a long way to be at the top of our class. We’re worn down to the nub, to the sub-nub.”

John Fountain, Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences department head, advised formulating “two different strategies,” one for short-term budget cuts and another for long-term.

“If you’re going to operate permanently on a smaller budget, you have to change your priorities,” he said. “I’m not sure that not growing is an option, but not doing what we’ve said we can do is an option.”

The University needs to convince the Legislature that budget cuts are not an option, Steve Keto, associate vice chancellor, said.

“We have to have a more concrete example of the impact of budget cuts other than the fact they affect the quality of our education,” he said.

Perry said the legislature needs to see some of the consequences of budget cuts.

“We always suck it up, and the legislature thinks, ‘if they can do it for less, they should,'” she said. “[The Legislature] needs to see some manifestations of the bleeding and the hurting.”

Paul Williams, an accounting professor with the College of Management, said the long-term consequences of increasing budget cuts may make it necessary to take drastic steps.

“We always figure out a way to accommodate the students,” he said. “But if it gets bad enough, we might have to look at some [previously] protected items.”

Leffler said the committee could look at printing and communications on campus as an area to make cuts.

“We could see if there is a more efficient way to perform those actions,” he said. “Can we get more for the same money or reduce the costs?”

Other options the committee discussed were consolidation of departments that produce relatively few graduates or are redundant, teaching in larger classrooms, tapping alumni for money or doing away with degree programs.

“If we consolidate some programs we’ll lose some pieces, but some that are left will be more effective,” Nielsen said. “You have to make decisions long before you need to get the money from that decision. It may be a 10-year process to get rid of a degree program.”