ADVERTISEMENT

"Are More New Jersey Colleges Doomed to Collapse?"

Yes, the long term demographic decline of traditional college aged people is the underlying macro problem.

The extra Jersey centric wrinkle is for decades, from the late 80's to the Christie college bonds, the State invested zero dollars in capital spending for public colleges. All the building done over that period was borrowed money on the College's, not the State's, balance sheet. While almost all States divested from spending on public higher ed over that period, NJ is close to the front of the pack. Most NJ publics have a lot of borrowed money hanging over them making debt servicing a significant portion of the annual operating budgets.

NJCU is the worst example.

Not addressing the small privates. I won't say I don't care, but a certain Darwinian culling might be in order. We are seeing some of that already.

All that being said, Rutgers won't be unaffected, but we can weather the storm better than most.
 
For some reason it's saying subscriber exclusive for me. I do see the first 3 schools mentioned though.

I do get why a school like Rider is suffering...the pricetag isn't justifiable. Hell, outside of Princeton, and perhaps Stevens with a scholarship, which NJ private schools are?

I don't get why Willy P and NJCU are having the issues they are- are there just less people going to college?

I guess there is some argument for some merger of the "lesser" NJ schools. NJCU has an important role but could it be part of the administration of Montclair or somewhere else? I know a lot schools would love that piece of real estate alone...
 
Yes, the long term demographic decline of traditional college aged people is the underlying macro problem.

The extra Jersey centric wrinkle is for decades, from the late 80's to the Christie college bonds, the State invested zero dollars in capital spending for public colleges. All the building done over that period was borrowed money on the College's, not the State's, balance sheet. While almost all States divested from spending on public higher ed over that period, NJ is close to the front of the pack. Most NJ publics have a lot of borrowed money hanging over them making debt servicing a significant portion of the annual operating budgets.

NJCU is the worst example.

Not addressing the small privates. I won't say I don't care, but a certain Darwinian culling might be in order. We are seeing some of that already.

All that being said, Rutgers won't be unaffected, but we can weather the storm better than most.
I don't think you're right. Rutgers issues bonds to construct dorms. But these are revenue bonds that are paid off through room and board charges. I wouldn't worry about them unless there's a massive (and I mean massive) collapse in the number of kids living in the dorms. Rutgers does not issue bonds to construct classroom buildings. That's why it was so important a few years ago that New Jersey's voters approved a bond issue for construction. Those are state bonds, not Rutgers bonds -- servicing them is the state's problem, not Rutgers'. Rutgers does have a revenue problem, but it's an operating budget problem; the state legislature does not appropriate enough money each year to support Rutgers adequately. So the institution has to either cut back or raise tuition -- an unattractive choice.
 
Rider might be in big trouble in a decade or even less. Would Rutgers absorb them as a satellite campus or maybe TCNJ would?
 
I don't think you're right. Rutgers issues bonds to construct dorms. But these are revenue bonds that are paid off through room and board charges. I wouldn't worry about them unless there's a massive (and I mean massive) collapse in the number of kids living in the dorms. Rutgers does not issue bonds to construct classroom buildings. That's why it was so important a few years ago that New Jersey's voters approved a bond issue for construction. Those are state bonds, not Rutgers bonds -- servicing them is the state's problem, not Rutgers'. Rutgers does have a revenue problem, but it's an operating budget problem; the state legislature does not appropriate enough money each year to support Rutgers adequately. So the institution has to either cut back or raise tuition -- an unattractive choice.
Yes, dorm bonds are generally paid off from the revenue stream of the room rentals.

Don't know the RU specifics but other NJ publics built non-dorm facilities during the NJ no capital investment in higher ed period. As I understand it those bonds need to be serviced from general revenue on the College's balance sheet.

This is in contrast to for example NY and SUNY where seems nearly everything built on their campuses is financed by the Dormitory Authority of New York State. That includes building a stadium for U. of Buffalo.

Here in NJ the bonds for the new improved RU stadium had to be floated by RU. A big chunk of the "Athletics Subsidy" certain people get agita about is because RU Athletics is servicing those each year.
 
Nathan Grawe has written some nice books on this college demographics. I read them because I was researching some investments in student housing.

Two problems:

1) Demographics - the financial crisis of 2008-2009 caused a baby bust that persists, meaning the number of Americans hitting college age is set to fall off a cliff.

2) Leadership - college administrators have closed their eyes to an obvious demographic cliff and have not adjusted to improve admissions and retention tactics.

Good news:

Rutgers in better shape than peer flagship state universities across New England and the Midwest where populations are growing slower and immigrants coming in are less likely to be college bound.

The situation is most acute at private colleges broadly (Bloomfield) and poorly run non-flagship public schools (New Jersey City University). In New Jersey, only Rutgers, Princeton, and Stevens will be unscathed by the college enrollment's declining trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotInRHouse
ADVERTISEMENT