State of Minnesota Economic Outlook: Implications for the System

The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system is an Equal Opportunity employer and educator.

State of Minnesota

Economic Outlook:

Implications for the

System

Presented to Northeast Higher Education District

November 12, 2009

Fiscal year 2010 budget gaps

Spending cuts as percentage of actions

Use of ARRA funds as percentage of actions

State of Minnesota revenues below forecast: fiscal years 2010-2011

$ millions Estimate Actual Variance %

Individual $1,728 $1,635 $(93) (5.4)

Sales 874 854 (20) (2.3)

Corporate 129 182 52 41.1

Motor Vehicle 16 20 4 25.0

Other 372 376 4 1.1

Total $3,119 $3,067 $(52) (1.7)

Source: “But…What About Tomorrow?”, presentation to LCPFP Balanced Budget Subcommittee, October 2009.

State of Minnesota fiscal year 2010 Q1 revenues below fiscal year 2009 Q1

$ millions Estimate Variance % Yr Chg %

Withholding $1,398 $(27) (2.0) $(112) (7.6)

Indiv. Est. 290 (55) (18.9) (99) (29.6)

Gross Sales 924 (13) (1.4) (143) (13.6)

Corp. Est. 127 37 29.1 (15) (8.4)

Total $3,119 $(52) (1.7) $(359) (10.5)


Minnesota Is Facing Significant Long-Term Budget Problems

Problems Remain for 2012-13 Biennium

$ millions FY2012 FY2013 FY2012-13

Revenues $16,576 $17,729 $34,305

Expenditures 19,728 19,008 38,736

Difference ($3,152) $(1,279) $(4,431)

Assumes:GAMC Discontinued. Restoration adds $889 million.K-12 Aid shift restored. Delay saves $1.2 billion.No repayment of K-12 property tax recognition shift.No discretionary inflation. Inflation at CPI would increase spending by $1.3 billion.


Economic/Demographic Environment Has Changed

Short run economic cycle has merged with long run demographic cycle.

We have entered the Age of Entitlement—economic growth in the next 25 years will be about half what it was in the past 25.

State revenue growth will slow while spending pressures will accelerate.

This is a national/global issue.


Minnesota Faces a Fiscal Trap

The issue is a long run, structural one— short run solutions will not solve the problem.

Trend growth alone will not be sufficient. Fundamental changes are necessary.

Revenue growth will slow. Efforts to increase it will be met with resistance.

Spending pressures will increase driven largely by issues of aging and health.

State spending will shift its focus from education, infrastructure and higher education to care and support of the aging.


2007-09 Recession Permanently Reduced the Base for Future Revenues


Next 25 Years--State Revenue Growth Rate Projected To Slow

6.8%

3.9%

5.5%

3.4%2.8%

1.2%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

2001 2033

5 Y

ea

r C

om

pu

nd

Gro

wth

Ra

te

TotalPer CapitaReal Per Capita

Budget Trends Commission, 2009

From 2010 to 2020, Minnesota will see large increases age 50s and 60s

20,15036,190

47,3305,050

-30,680-9,980

47,95061,920

-2,680-63,650

-42,31054,240

102,960112,540

91,37041,400

8,44016,500

0-45-9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475-7980-84

85+

Source: Minnesota State Demographic Center, rev 2007Numbers are rounded

Budget pressures will change --more 65+ than school age by 2020

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

18-24

65+

5-17

Census counts & State Demographer projection, revised 2007

If state health care costs continue their current trend, state spending on other services can’t grow

3.9%

8.5%

0.2%0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

Revenue Health Care Education & AllOther

An

nu

al

Av

e G

row

th 2

00

8-2

03

3

General Fund Spending Outlook, presentation to the Budget Trends Commission, August 2008, Dybdal, Reitan and Broat

How do we get out of this fiscal trap?

Revenue growth will depend increasingly on per capita economic growth.

Future economic growth will depend increasingly on increasing productivity and less on labor force size.

This plays to Minnesota’s historic strength.


Impact to the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities

Higher education share of state’s budget

Fiscal year 2011 estimate includes unallotment. Higher education includes the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, the University of Minnesota, and the Minnesota Office of Higher Education.

State appropriation per FYE studentDuring past decade, appropriation per FYE student has decreased $765 (16 percent); adjusted for inflation decrease is $1,759 (36.5 percent)

Minnesota state colleges and universities share of state budget

The System’s share of the state budget is 3.9 percent.

State budget deficit for fiscal years 2012-2013: $4.431 billion to $7.248 billion (if other budget pressures such as GAMC, inflation, etc., are recognized).

The System’s share of the budget deficit:

Solved with spending cuts only: $172.8 million to $282.7 million.

Solved with combination of spending cuts and tax increases: $86 million to $141 million.

Northeast Higher Education District share of allocation framework

State appropriation flows through allocation framework

District’s percent share of framework

FY2005 – 4.42 percent

FY2010 – 3.49 percent

Key principles of allocation framework

Enrollment

Cost control – average instructional cost per FYE student

Minnesota state colleges and universities strategy

Revenue growth

Tuition increase greatest potential

Enrollment growth

Enrollment growth will pressure overall revenue outlook

Productivity

System’s strategic focus 2010 Action Plan

Reaching the Underrepresented

STEM and Healthcare

Minnesota Online & e-Learning

Workforce of the Future

Organizational Change

Energy Conservation

State of Minnesota Economic Outlook: Implications for the System

Education

Transcript of State of Minnesota Economic Outlook: Implications for the System