A decision that may benefit state universities in the short-term could have a devastating effect on state funding in the long run.

The Kansas Board of Regents’ decision to allow state universities to plug budget holes with student tuition money may have some short-term advantages, but the message it sends to state legislators may set a precedent that will damage university funding for many years to come.

Regents had promised that tuition increases they approved last year would be used to provide “enhancements” at state universities. The intention was not to use the money to cover budget shortfalls that resulted from state funding cuts, but to provide students better facilities and programs — give them more value for their education dollar.

And those dollars were not insignificant. Students at Kansas University paid tuition that was 25 percent higher this year. Tuition is scheduled to double by the 2006-2007 school year. Students actually supported the tuition increases because they agreed that KU tuition was low, compared with peer institutions, and they were willing to invest more in obtaining a better university education.

To their credit, KU officials pledged last week to stand by their promise to use increased tuition funds to build programs rather than cover shortfalls. Tuition money was used this year to raise graduate teaching assistant salaries, improve technology and contribute to operating costs for schools and departments. Plans for next year’s funds include more salary increases for GTAs and other faculty as well as new faculty positions.

But, according to the regents’ decision, other universities are free to make other choices, including using tuition money to fill budget gaps left by state funding cuts. On one hand, the regents are right to give university leaders the freedom to direct tuition money where it is most needed. Unfortunately, allowing that money to be used to make up for state funding cuts may make it too easy for Kansas legislators to continue to reduce the state’s commitment to higher education and put more of that burden on students and their families.

The state’s share of funding to operate the six state universities in Kansas has been steadily dwindling over the years. Rather than seeing the state university system as a vital piece of the state’s social and economic engine, legislators increasingly have seen the schools as an individual benefit that affects only the students who attend.

Students already are paying a substantial “user fee” to attend a state university. Providing all academically-qualified Kansas students an opportunity to attend a state university always has been a high priority for the state, but continued tuition increases may put a university education out of reach for many Kansas families. The large tuition increases approved last year can’t be justified as a way simply to maintain the current level of academics and service on state university campuses. If students are to pay that much more, they should expect to reap some additional benefits.

The state’s current fiscal crisis may justify some short-term juggling of funding responsibilities, but the regents have opened the door to a long-term opportunity for state legislators to shirk the responsibility of adequately funding higher education in the state. If legislators take advantage of the opening, it will hurt not only state university students but the state as a whole.