The UH Vice President for Academic Planning and Policy and the Interim Associate Vice President for Student Affairs are presenting a revised student financial assistance program to the Board of Regents (BOR) at the June 15-16, 2006 BOR meeting. The proposal recommends that:

1. the tuition rate for students from certain Pacific Islands jurisdictions be increased to 150% of the resident rate,
2. non-residents would be eligible for up to 30% of financial need-based grants.

Background:

For decades, the University of Hawaii system has included Pacific Island students from jurisdictions that do not have public higher educational institutions granting baccalaureate degrees as eligible for a "statutory exemption," meaning that they are charged the resident tuition rate (rather than the non-resident rate). This policy has demonstrated the University.s commitment to provide higher educational opportunities for these students. The BOR has the authority to establish--or abolish--statutory exemptions.

The University of Hawaii is governed both by Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) and by BOR policies. Apparently, there is a slight difference in language in the HAR and the BOR policy regarding Pacific Islanders. The HAR says that persons who are legal residents of any Pacific island or Asian district, commonwealth, territory, or insular jurisdiction, state, or nation which provides no public institution of higher learning are eligible for the statutory exemption. The BOR policy essentially says the same thing, except that the phrase "granting baccalaureate degrees" is included (i.e., residents of those places which provide no public institution of higher learning that grants baccalaureate degrees).

The UH administration brought this difference in wording to the Council of Chancellors and discussed maintaining or abolishing the statutory exemption. The administration has ended up recommending that these students be charged 150% of the resident tuition rate (a 50% increase). The rationale provided is that these students are not truly residents of the state and therefore should not be eligible to pay the same tuition rate as a Hawaii resident. There is, of course, an interest in increasing tuition revenue as well.

The administration is also recommending that up to 30% of each campus. need-based grants can be awarded to non-residents, and that some merit-based scholarships be available for Pacific Islanders.

Below are some of the reasons that the proposed changes are problematic:

1. Decreases access to higher education: With higher tuition costs, access to post-secondary education for Pacific Island students will become severely curtailed. Many will simply not be able to afford to further their education outside of their home nations. Baccalaureate granting institutions still do not exist in the jurisdictions from which these students come. Instead of providing opportunities for these students, UH is closing the door on them.
2. Compounds already existing financial challenges: Most Pacific Islands students do not have their full financial need met even after they receive US federal financial aid and other scholarships. At UH Hilo, for example, they have an average unmet financial need of $6,734 per student. If transportation is also factored in, the unmet need is actually $8,234. The financial challenges have become greater in recent years, as the U.S. has cut off eligibility for many of these students from some federal financial aid programs (e.g., Work-Study and SEOG grants). An increase in the tuition rate for these students (in addition to already-approved increases in tuition and housing for all students) would in all likelihood eliminate this population from being to able to attend. Even if a student is awarded a maximum Pell Grant, it would not even cover the cost of tuition, let alone books, housing, food, and other educational expenses.
3. Decreases the amount of aid available for financially need Hawaii residents and meritorious non-residents: By proposing that up to 30% of a campus. need-based grants could be awarded to non-residents (such as Pacific Islanders), the total amount of need-based grants available for Hawaii residents is reduced. Similarly, by proposing the establishment of merit-based scholarships for Pacific Islanders, the amount of merit-based aid for non-residents is reduced. Thus, both financially needy Hawaii residents and meritorious non-residents are negatively impacted by this proposal. If the tuition rate would be kept the same for Pacific Islanders, then there would not be an interest or need to allow campus. to use grants scholarships for non-residents.
4. Contradicts public statements about the purposes of revising the financial assistance program: At public presentations of the proposed financial assistance program over the past several months, the stated purposes of the revised program were to "maximize the financial assistance available for Hawaii residents enrolled as students in the UH system" and to "ensure that the revenues made available for financial assistance serve the interests of the University and the taxpayers of the state of Hawaii." Originally, the policy proposed that 100% of the need-based grants would be awarded to Hawaii residents. In the past few weeks, however, the plan has been modified so that a campus could choose to use up to 30% of the grants for non-residents. This is a significant change that is being proposed after the plan was discussed throughout the system. Since it was proposed so late, very few individuals and groups throughout the system have been provided with an opportunity to discuss and comment on the new plan.
5. Excludes stakeholders: The program is being presented to the BOR in June, when few students are on campus. Student groups such as the Student Caucus have not been consulted with regard the recent modifications to the proposal. Since the proposal recommends that the policy become effective in Fall 2007, there is ample time for further consultation, not only with student groups but also with broader constituents and stakeholders within and outside of the UH system. Furthermore, public hearings are often held on matters such as small increases in student fees, yet no public hearing are being held on this proposal, which impacts not only Pacific Islanders, but also resident and non-resident students.
6. Conflicts with the UH system-wide strategic plan: The current UH system strategic plan specifically includes a goal of being a "model local, regional, and global university," and an objective of establishing UH and the state of Hawaii "as the research, service, and training hub of Oceania, with bridges to the Asia-Pacific region, the Americas, and the rest of the world."  Charging a tuition rate that most students from the Pacific cannot afford (even with meager forms of financial aid and scholarships) is hardly doing a service to the region; it is more like closing down a bridge that has existed for many years.  Furthermore, it does not seem reflective of many of the commitments and core values articulated in the Strategic Plan, including "Hawaiian and Asian-Pacific advantage (the University is committed to achieving a global advantage by leveraging Hawaii.s unique position in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and its unique cultural and geographic attributes), "diversity, fairness, and equity," and "institutional integrity and service."
   
   If indeed a goal of UH is to become the research, service, and training "hub of Oceania," the proposed change in practice would not lead us there as an institution.  We need to be intentionally inclusive of all parts of the Pacific, not just the more powerful, wealthier nations on the rim. This is an opportunity to continue to demonstrate a real commitment to the Pacific Islands part of the larger Pacific-Asia region.
7. Reflects a lack of regard for the historical ties to the region: The policy making Pacific Islanders as eligible for a statutory exemption has its roots in the state legislature and the leaders of the University of Hawaii recognizing and valuing the historical ties and relationships that the US and Hawaii have with the larger Pacific region, particularly in the former Trust Territories. The relationships are unique and special, and should be taken into consideration when considering whether to change policies that will have detrimental impacts on these nations and its peoples in the future.
8. Disrupts a long history of developing leaders in the Pacific region: For decades Pacific Islanders have graduated from the University of Hawaii and have gone on to be distinguished leaders in the region, their nations, and communities. By providing affordable educational opportunities unavailable elsewhere, the University has played a significant role in facilitating the development of these leaders and of human resources development in the islands more generally. The proposed policy will have the effect of disrupting and discontinuing the development of regional leaders. It sends a message that the University of Hawaii is no longer a welcoming place for Pacific Islanders. It is particularly critical now with increasing globalization and attention to national security that we in the US and in Hawaii remain allies and friends with the rest of the Pacific. In addition, the State of Hawaii benefits by providing educational opportunities for Pacific Islanders since better educated individuals tend to contribute more economically and socially to the community; this is particularly important given that these individuals are legally permitted to live and work in the US without visas.
9. Demonstrates a lack of commitment to the region: The plan proposes to leave it up to the discretion of each campus about whether to award some of the need-based grants and merit-based scholarships to these students. There is likely to be a great deal of variation throughout the UH system as to how each campus chooses to award the funds. Given that this population is powerless, voiceless, and unrepresented, there is certainly no guarantee that campuses will give serious consideration to meeting the needs of these students. Therefore, it is critical that the University make a commitment as a system to ensure that they continue to have access to higher education. This is best done by maintaining the statutory exemption of paying the resident tuition rate.
10. Puts students in a "catch-22" situation: The UH administration argues that Pacific Islanders will be able to work for a year in Hawaii and then apply to have their residency status changed within the UH system so that they would be eligible for resident tuition. The problem with this argument is that working full-time for a year often puts a student in a position in which they earn too much to be eligible for Pell grants. Thus, they are caught in a "catch-22" situation in which they work, but then are ineligible for financial assistance.
11. Discriminates against Pacific Islanders: The UH administration argues that because Pacific Islanders from jurisdictions that do not have public higher educational institutions that grant baccalaureate degrees are not residents of Hawaii, they should pay a tuition rate higher than residents. However, there are other groups who are not residents of the state who are currently granted statutory exemptions. The administration is not recommending that any of these groups be charged a higher tuition rate. These groups include East-West Center grantees, US military personnel on active duty and their authorized dependents during the period such personnel are stationed in Hawaii, members of the Hawaii National Guard and the Hawaii-based Reserves, Native Hawaiians whose domicile is outside of Hawaii, and employees of the university, their spouses, and their dependents. Just as there may be good reasons to allow these individuals to pay the resident tuition, so, too, are they good reasons (outlined in this document) for certain Pacific Islanders to pay resident tuition rate. The argument to not allow them to pay resident tuition simply on the basis of not being a resident therefore discriminates against Pacific Islanders.

Jim Mellon

Director of Student Development
University of Hawaii at Hilo
200 W. Kawili St.
Hilo, HI 96720-4091
(tel) 808 933-0859
(fax) 808 974-7691
mellon@hawaii.edu