UC Regents Raise Fees 32% Amid Bleak Economic News


Posted on 19 November 2009

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend by emailSend by email



By David M. Greenwald

As expected, a committee of the UC Regents voted on Wednesday to raise student fees by a total of 32 percent over the next year. These hikes will bring the annual cost of a UC education above $10,000 for the first time ever. The full board is expected to ratify these changes today.

There were massive student strikes at UCLA where the UC regents held their meeting and at UC Berkeley where many Northern California students coalesced.

Meanwhile, the economic news was even worse Wednesday, as the Legislative Analyst’s Office reported that the state will face a $20 billion budget deficit at least through June of 2011.  The result will be additional job cuts for state workers on top of the 7000 positions already eliminated from the general fund.  A spokesperson for the governor said it was likely that there would be additional cuts to employee compensation in the next round of budget cuts.

According to Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor, "Addressing this large shortfall will require painful choices—on top of the difficult choices the Legislature made earlier this year.  The vast majority of the new budget problem we have identified for 2009–10 can be attributed to the state’s inability to implement several major solutions in the July 2009 budget plan."

Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg responded to the LAO report: “The numbers cry loudly for California to focus on rebuilding our tax base.  The only tried and true way to do so is to use our fiscal levers to increase the number of high wage jobs. Putting more people to work earning decent wages will help overcome our deficit.  We need to protect our schools and universities, so as we create high wage jobs we produce a workforce able to fill them.”

SEIU California State Council President Bill A. Lloyd stated, “We agree with the LAO that it’s time for California to make clear its priorities.   The state’s working people have never wavered from our commitment to stronger communities, opportunities for our children, and retirement security for all.”

“In recent years, the devastating cuts to healthcare, home care, and human services endured by our children, seniors and people with disabilities represent a sharp departure from California’s commitment to providing opportunity for our younger generations and respect for seniors and people with disabilities.   As the Legislative Analyst correctly points out, California’s population is aging and the need for services is increasing, not decreasing.”  

“Budget solutions must include new revenue to restore California’s fiscal solvency, protect kids and seniors, and lay a solid foundation for economic growth and prosperity.”  

According to published reports, students rushed to the UCLA building where the regents met and began throwing food, sticks, and vinegar-soaked red bandannas (meant to look like blood).  The result was a modest 14 arrests for disrupting the meeting and resisting arrest.

Russell Gould, chairmen of the UC Board of Regents, seized on the LAO report as a defense, telling the students there was no way to avoid the fee hikes.  Mr. Gould told the Sacramento Bee yesterday that student objections do not influence his decision-making and that student fees must be increased.

However, not everyone agrees.  Senator Leland Yee issued a statement Wednesday accusing the Governor and Board of Regents of allowing the top executives to live high on the hog while the students suffer.

Yee stated, “It is unconscionable for the Governor to cut funds to higher education while allowing the UC administration to act like AIG. Certainly the state needs to prioritize funding for education and that is why I voted against all such budget cuts and will continue to do so.  However, it is intellectually dishonest for the Regents to simply blame the state budget for student fee hikes while they are lining the pockets of executives.  Executive pay should be the first thing on the chopping block, not students.”

Senator Yee cited a September interview with the New York Times, where UC President Mark Yudof, who receives nearly $1 million in salary and perks was asked, “What do you think of the idea that no administrator at a state university needs to earn more than the President of the United States, $400,000?” Yudof responded, “Will you throw in Air Force One and the White House?”
 
Senator Yee remarked, “Unfortunately, this is the type of arrogance and cavalier attitude that plagues the university.  California deserves better from their public university leadership.”

Jelger Kalmijn, President of the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE-CWA 9119) said, “UC has reserves in the billions of dollars that could be tapped, or UC could redirect its fundraising abilities, or use other sources of income such as the highly profitable medical centers, or call for a mild pay cut for the thousands of six-figure administrators.”

Lakesha Harrison, President of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME 3299), which represents patient care and services workers commented,

“UC is sounding the alarm bells of financial ruin and rushing to push the economic crisis on the backs of UC students, patients and workers.  But to many of us, this is another example of UC administrators’ misplaced priorities and lack of accountability to the public.”

Kathi Young, a Library Assistant and executive board member of the Coalition of University Employees said, “The only crisis UC faces is a crisis of leadership."

AFSCME Local 3299 has put together an alternative emergency budget measure to protect essential student and patient care services, while redirecting funds from areas that can most withstand temporary reductions.

The measure includes cutting the top two percent of earners, saving $220 million, short-term borrowing to serve as a stop gap for $200 million, utilizing Medical Center profits for $100 million, restructuring a portion of its bond debt service which they believe could save $75 million, adding another $50 million by borrowing less than 1% of UC's unrestricted investments, and cutting wasteful spending to free another $40 million.

Proponents of the alternative plan argue:

"The proposals above represent a prioritization of UC’s core mission over profit-hoarding, executive pay and perks. UC must look to the areas most capable of absorbing a temporary redirection to balance the budget, and fulfill its mission as a university system serving the public. UC must continue to cut non-essential spending—including, but not limited to, renovations of UC mansions, executive rentals of non-UC property, non-essential travel, and consultants’ contracts—before any consideration of cutting vital services. UC’s receipt of American Reinvestment and Recovery Act funds necessitates an especially judicious approach to reigning in excessive non-core spending."

Regents have pursued continued fee hikes for UC Students that have received multiple years of double-digit fee hikes before the latest proposal for a 32% fee hike over two phases.  

These fees led LA Times editorial writer and former UC Berkeley student Paul Thornton to wonder, “With fees having doubled in less than a decade, is a UC education still a deal? Is there a student-fee ceiling at which it isn't?"

______________________________________________________________________

David Greenwald is a contributing writer for the California Progress Report. His online journal The People’s Vanguard of Davis uncovers the news in and around the city of Davis.

Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg responded to the LAO report: “The numbers cry loudly for California to focus on rebuilding our tax base. The only tried and true way to do so is to use our fiscal levers to increase the number of high wage jobs. Putting more people to work earning decent wages will help overcome our deficit. We need to protect our schools and universities, so as we create high wage jobs we produce a workforce able to fill them.”

Does this man truly believe we are THAT stupid? California's unemployment rate is 12.2% and rising. The UNDERemployment rate is considerably higher than that. We don't have jobs for the qualified people we already have. We have well-qualified people fleeing California to other states right now for that very reason.

http://www.nationalbubble.com/people-are-leaving-california-by-the-thous...

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/business/Cost-of-Living-Sucks-Everyone-Le...

Now what WOULD be helpful is for the University of California to drop departments that are as costly as any other departments but contribute little if anything to the employability of the graduates of those areas. Ethnic and gender studies come prominently to mind.

But right now we need to SAVE money, decrease taxes, lure businesses back to California so the college graduates we have ALREADY paid for stop leaving. Of course, to get them to stay we have to give them opportunity here. That will require a massive change from our current anti-business environment.

Not many people even concerned California will spend $7.7 billion dollars expanding its prison system next year, yet can’t afford to educate its future! This state is the only state in the nation where a drug user or shoplifter can receive a 25 year to life sentence under its Three Strikes Law. Fixing the law to what the voters originally intended would save $1 billion dollars. When will the legislature ever have the guts to do the right thing?

Fixing the law to what the voters originally intended would save $1 billion dollars. When will the legislature ever have the guts to do the right thing?

Ever heard of the initiative?

When I took California civics they taught us about the Initiative, Referendum, and Recall.

If you really think the voters didn't get what they 'originally intended,' why don't you start an initiative? You don't need the legislature - a direct initiative will bypass it.

Problem is, that's really pretty much what the voters intended. They got pi$$ed off about legions of bleeding-heart judges not doing what they should have done and took all their discretion away.

With better judges, this might not have happened, but I see little prospect of reversing it now.

If we could get the feds to start keeping illegal aliens out of the country we could save a lot of money here though. We wouldn't be paying good money to keep people in jail who shouldn't be here to begin with....

I agree we can always find cash for prisons and overseas conflict but not for education?????

From a statewide correctional system viewpoint, there is a 65,000 county jail bed shortage and a 9,000 prison bed surplus. The remainder of $6.5 billion in AB 900 bonds should be applied to the deficit. If there is actual need for more prison beds, the State should increase the number of contract beds. Adding 3,700 contract beds, for example, would save over $110 million annually.

Contracting with counties for parole supervision with local courts dealing with parole violations would save $250 to $350 million annually. Implementing Little Hoover Commission recommendations to realign responsibility for serious juvenile offenders from the State prison system to the counties would probably save about $250 million annually. Just speeding up the technical violation process would save millions.

I agree with that whole heartedly

Great! Thanks for the update; it’s good to know about key updates in any new releases. Hope, you keep updating it very frequently!

im always late on this kind of news.. :/

According to Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor, "Addressing this large shortfall will require painful choices—on top of the difficult choices the Legislature made earlier this year. The vast majority of the new budget problem we have identified for 2009–10 can be attributed to the state’s inability to implement several major solutions in the July 2009 budget plan."
olways the same thing spending more money than coming in
http://directory.bodybuildingxt.com
Bodybuilding directory