Archive for 2009
UC’s proposed 2010-2011 budget now online
The proposed Regents’ budget for 2010-2011 is now online.
Long version:
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/nov09/f3attach3.pdf
Really long version:
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/nov09/f3attach1.pdf
“Key elements” include: maintaining only a 4% employer contributions and 2% employee contributions to the UC Retirement Plan for the duration of 2010-11; preserving the quality of employee and retiree health benefits programs; ending the furlough/salary reduction plan on August 31, 2010; continuing the academic merit salary increase program; increasing student fees 15% in January and then another 15% for next fall; and a proposal to reduce systemwide enrollment by a further 2,300 (current year is already reduced by 2,300), while continuing to expand infrastructure and facilities.
Oil Severance Tax Article
An article in the California Aggie about proposed legislation to begin taxing oil extraction to create funds for public higher education quotes DFA member Joe Kiskis. The full article is at http://theaggie.org/article/2009/11/16/oil-severance-tax-aims-to-support-higher-education and here is an excerpt:
AB 656 proposes a 9.9 percent oil severance tax for California oil drilling and natural gas companies. It is estimated that the tax would allocate $1 billion for UCs, CSUs and community colleges. The Council of UC Faculty Associations expressed its support for this bill in April… “The new funds would replace some of the lost state support and would therefore reduce the pressure for further fee increases and cuts to educational quality. However, this bill would fall short of generating enough additional money to restore a healthy level of university funding,” Kiskis said in an e-mail interview.
Hope for a financially stable higher education system in California may seem implausible, but AB 656 by Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico (D-Fremont) rekindles some faith that the University of California, California State Universities and community colleges will have some help.
AB 656 proposes a 9.9 percent oil severance tax for California oil drilling and natural gas companies. It is estimated that the tax would allocate $1 billion for UCs, CSUs and community colleges.
The Council of UC Faculty Associations expressed its support for this bill in April.
AB 656 can provide additional financial support for UC Davis and the higher education system of California, said Joseph Kiskis, UC Davis physics professor and CUCFA Vice President for external relations.
In April, Kiskis authored a letter that represented the views of the CUCFA and included suggestions for the bill.
CUCFA suggested that the 11 member board of the California Higher Education Endowment Corporation create a public website that shows annual reports on how UCs, CSUs and community colleges have utilized the funds.
Funding allotment is projected to allocate funds so that CSUs receive 60 percent, UCs receive 30 percent and community colleges receive 10 percent.
UC spokesperson Steve Montiel told the Daily Californian that the university was concerned about the distribution of the money.
“We believe any legislation that proposes to provide additional support for higher education needs to treat the UCs and CSUs the same,” Montiel said in the Daily Californian on Nov. 6.
Montiel also said the university needed to know whether the revenues from the tax would replace existing funding and whether it would be made available exclusively to colleges and universities.
A representative from Torrico’s office said these distributions were decided based on the amount of money UCs, CSUs and community colleges already receive. UCs and community colleges receive funding from outside sources in addition to student fees. CSUs also obtain funding through student fees but rely heavily on money from the California General Fund, which is severely affected by the economic crisis.
The distribution is subject to change, the representative said. Community colleges may require more funding than the current 10 percent because more students may attend community colleges in the future, due to the rise in tuition cost for UCs and CSUs.
The CUCFA also recommended a different distribution of the funds – 45 percent for UCs and CSUs and 10 percent for community colleges.
“The new funds would replace some of the lost state support and would therefore reduce the pressure for further fee increases and cuts to educational quality. However, this bill would fall short of generating enough additional money to restore a healthy level of university funding,” Kiskis said in an e-mail interview.
With this bill, institutions of higher education will not have to rely on funds from the California General Fund. The California higher education fund would be established and divide the severance tax money among the institutions.
“California’s higher education system, which for decades has served our state so well, will continue to decline without a renewed commitment to invest in our public universities,” Torrico said in a press release.
Opponents of the oil severance tax believe the bill will not contribute positively to the current economic situation.
Scott Macdonald, a spokesperson for Californians Against Higher Taxes, believes that the oil severance tax will not contribute toward rebuilding our economy.
Macdonald said although California is the only state that does not have an oil severance tax for oil producing companies, California oil companies already pay the highest taxes.
“It will make oil production decrease, thousands of jobs [will be lost] and oil production will be replaced with foreign imported oil,” Macdonald said.
He also believes the oil severance tax would increase the price of gas.
“Increasing taxes undercuts the ability for the economy to recover. It is the worst idea at the worst time.” Macdonald said. “Higher education is extremely valuable, but we must live with the means we have. It is the most effective way to get out of this economic situation.”
The Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee will review AB 656 on Jan. 11, 2010.
Nov. 16 teach-in well attended
About a hundred people showed up for the teach-in Monday night. Speakers included: Nathan Brown (faculty member), Tarone Bittner (of AFSME), Kaitlin Walker (graduate student), Catherine Fung (graduate student), Ian Kennedy (faculty member), Joshua Clover (faculty member), Jeffrey Bergamini (of UPTE), Jim Davis (lecturer), Kevin Roddy (lecturer), and Sarah Raridon.
Teach-in Monday, 7 to 9 pm, in Giedt 1001
Your students may have a lot of questions about the impending fee increases, and about the funding situation of UC in general. Faculty and students at UC Davis are sponsoring a teach-in from 7 to 9 pm on Monday in Giedt Hall Room 1001. The DFA recommends that you mention this teach-in to your students so they can plan to attend.
If you wish to present some information about the crisis, we have PowerPoint slides here, and there are a number of articles at the Keep California’s Promise website that would make good handouts (of particular interest for this use might be the 2 page overview discussion guide, the 1 page article on how tuition is being used to leverage Wall Street bonds, or the 2-page article about the disproportionate growth in administrative positions at UC).
LAO Report: Assessing California’s Vision for Higher Education
The Legislative Analyst’s Office has just issued the following report:
The Master Plan at 50: Assessing California’s Vision for Higher Education
Almost 50 years ago, the state of California adopted a visionary plan for higher education that sought to forge the state’s colleges and universities into a coordinated system, founded on core principles and directed toward specified goals. Adherence to that vision has been uneven over the past five decades, while changes in demographics and the economy have caused the state’s educational needs to evolve. The 50th anniversary of the Master Plan thus presents a timely opportunity for policymakers to take stock of California’s higher education system in light of current and projected needs and priorities. In order to assist the Legislature in such an effort, our office is launching a series of publications examining key aspects of higher education policy and funding. The series is designed to frame key issues for legislative consideration, and assist in the refinement of higher education goals and policies. This report provides an overview of the series. (8 pp.)
This report is available using the following link:
http://www.lao.ca.gov/laoapp/PubDetails.aspx?id=2141