The Bottom Line has a story that attributes comments somewhat differently at the UC Regents Meeting-- part of the problem of only providing audio.
DailyCal on budget and pension dispute at Regent meeting
UCOP press release on multi year funding plan
On the Gilded and more
Daily Cal Coverage
On the Spring Break Beach Party
Below are notes-not quotes-scribbles of what could be deciphered on audio of UC Regents meeting today- will link above to pertinent coverage of the meeting today- there was much to take in/cover.
(btw, Regent Makarachian (we call him Regent M) raised really good questions in yesterday's buildings projects meeting- he is an expert on the subject but also raises concerns for us sometimes for the same reason, see his tab above for more background-- anyway, the UCLA hotel thing was not discussed any further today after all and will be taken up again in May- guess the committee, upon further reflection, decided to shelve it til May)
agenda and background docs for section below can be found here.
"They Haven't Been Asked"-- Ed Pol Funding Outreach meeting
Regent M makes good point on saying set a percentage from donations for student tuition
Admin tries really hard to strike the idea down- 'we can't tell donors what to do' -- esp if our chancellors are whispering in our ears that they want a new building too.
Hewlett Chairs raised as example of setting aside a % of donation $ for student tuition
the dev officers keep striking the idea down- can't tell the donors, can't suggest it to the donors -- (btw that is bs)
these are the same admin approaches that have not pursued the $$ all this time- the regents are telling us that the corps have never been hit up for scholarships "they haven't been asked" so the same people who have not asked on that are also saying they can't ask or suggest to donors for a percentage of donations to go to student services or tuition etc
this is coming across like the admins have not been working for the students - they have been working to fund the UC hospital machine (mostly hospital admin-- not care)
that is what is coming through
(the other part-- in addition to student tuition, there needs to be a discussion about the amount of funding and effort - or lack thereof - for career services for students and alumni-- but we never hear or see presentations on that)
btw, remaking linked to a story that supports what regent blum later mentioned in his discussion of seeking silicon valley donations as funding for tuition.
Blum also made the important comment and break down of the fundraising numbers and clarified how it is mostly for the hospitals/med and how the demonstrators/protestors concerns in this are not being addressed- the funding is not going to relief on tuition. Listen to this exchange when the audio is available - it is important. The administrators are not heeding the advice the regents have given on this for a long while now. UCOP and Yudof need to make clear to the UC admins dev officers that they need to go after money that is not just for the UC hospital machine- or they need to increase efforts on the other side- they need to say this to their staff publicly.
UC Berkeley and UCLA are the top feeders to Silicon Valley and -at the same time- the Chancellors want to control the outreach to the valley-fifedoms in full effect-that is another factor in this- the approach may be to the detriment of the system as a whole. And then there is the competition between K-12 and higher ed in getting $$$-- a billionaire daughter is pushing a huge effort on behalf of K-12 here is more info.
viral video campaigns-- let's play like we are on the set of Mad Men ---let's be like Kony 2012 but without the running in the streets in underwear or sans underwear...
someone mentions Speaker Perez middle class scholarship effort --but that may not have much life
Yudof sounded patronizing of the UCSA representative on the above -- kinda like -- oh gee $600 million that'd be great we'd gladly take it that - pie in the sky pat on the head subtext...
UCSA presents on their March efforts/rally at Capitol. Esp Cal Grants.
They thank Keifer, Varner, Lansing, Newsom for meeting with students-say they would appreciate it if other regents made outreach to also interact with students. But express concern that students have not been included in the loop on UCOP negotiations with the Governor etc. Yudof says millionaires tax is gone- not going anywhere. Lozano wants a mechanism for regents to be able to individually option into advocacy efforts of student groups.
The students and others need to fight to make sure a healthy % goes not to shiny new buildings etc and goes to tangible on campus work and student support
Finance: Agenda background docs can be found here
Peter Taylor Nathan Brostrom Dan Dooley present.
You simply must listen to the audio of the finance meeting and take your time through it-- many many many many points in it that give a huge number of leads on economic trends and CA future and politics, will link to any cliff notes the fellowship of the ring create if any are created.
Brostrom starts talking about the status of budgets and staffing and enrollment at the campuses-- dismal/daunting numbers
2 billion in new expenses by 2016-17
Gatorade and FL higher ed- tech transfer prime example- for real?
Pattiz says that public comment was a bunch of people wanting rice in every bowl but no one wanting to pay for it...
Newsom says some strong- very strong -comment against the Governor's approach/politics/props- during Patrick Taylor's presentation
Time to degree metrics, transfer student acceptance rates that the state wants UC to follow through on are part of the multi year deal negotiations.
Bonnie Reiss brings up compacts she and former Gov. Arnie made with former UC Pres Dynes in the Gov office and all of the fallout of it- wants to warn publicly that the legislature must be included in order for any agreement or compact to have any meaning.
Blum makes some 99% comments - listen to them. says his dad died at 49 when he was ten years old- his mom could not have afforded to send him to UC - even though tuition was $75 (?) fee then -- he goes on about many aspects of finance and talks about his support of Brown's proposition and that he wants to see the state have one final opportunity to become a reliable partner-- he has said for the past decade that the state is an unreliable partner. He would like to see the board support Brown's prop and make sure any negotiation must include real support of UC- something consequential, real and lasting for UC.
Pattiz asks if we (uc) are being asked now to participate in the political process -- (he did not realize that UC and his seat are part of the political process?) he says that he "thought the students in public comment were complete idiots" but that the students are right on some points. "We need to make sure that we get ours"-- he says that several times. (He should have just let Blum's comments stand alone- they were more impactful --less unnecessarily incendiary.)
Regent Island says something like we believed in the tooth fairy and he can't believe we put tuition increases in the negotiations- that this is a misstep. reserve the question of tuition increases for when they are necessary. we will lift tuition by $4000 a year if we include it as part of the regimen. do tuition increases reluctantly not as part of annual regimen. It makes no difference if it is the gov or the speaker or the legislature who UC 'agrees' with if the money is not there in the end.
Newsom negotiating is good - Bonnie is right just don't do it in the same way as Schwarzenegger-- but still the agreement is not worth much - does not have faith that it will transcend a single fiscal year, b/c it can't. Tyranny of low expectations- political window dressing. Raise bar dramatically on negotiations and take tuition hikes off the table. He agrees with Island that this is a misstep- one can hear Lansing or another female regent agreeing with these comments strongly.
Taylor or Dooley is raising his voice in anger/frustration and tries to explain their tactics/stance in the negotiations.
This is a real conversation now. You must listen to this exchange.
Wachter covers temp tax revenue, k-12, where is the general fund rev going to- Prop 98 guarantee discussed. Agrees with Newsom - UC expectations are way too low in these negotiations. We don't have tremendous leverage but if we (regents) are going to sign on to this we have to be clear we are not misleading so we should really go for it on what we expect.
Blum on competing demands -he raises prison guards negotiation example from news articles a few months ago. "What the hell was that all about? was that a payoff?" we have to be real about what goes on in Sacto. Was there a legal obligation of the state to reimburse us?
Pension plan is a haunting nightmare (raises Berkeley- $200 million deficit at end of six years that Brostrom talked about in his presentation)
Dooley says no abrogation of state's obligation on UC pension in our negotiations.
Blum says why the hell we don't take the state to court- if a legal obligation to UC on pension then I say we should sue the state.
Everybody gets riled.
Kiefer concerned about putting things into a state budget item- how that affects UC constitutional autonomy.
Varner each of these concerns are in mind of those on the negotiating team and the UC Pres.
(Is Yudof still in the room?)
Newsom comments revolve around CA higher ed fleeced by over $2 bil precisely because higher ed does not sue the state. That is the game one needs to play- culture of picking pockets in Sacto - pursue looking at sue the state. Governor needs UC Regents to support his prop b/c public overwhelmingly supports public higher ed. Governor does not appear to be sincere in doing something about higher ed but maybe relieving the pressure on the general fund for short term.
Lansing tries to tie bows...then
her final words on audio are " I think the police chief would like to speak to the regents, no" --
the meeting lead up with headlines about how Yudof will ask Regents to endorse Brown's props this november--but the meeting ends with the alpha regent saying UC should pursue suing the state...wow
other UC Regent Meeting docs can be found: here
Leland Yee and others in hoodies
and many angry at what is happening in education on every level.
Leadership means commentary that sheds light rather than stokes from the regent table- in these times esp.
- Richard Blum (AGAIN!)
- Wm. De La Pena
- Gareth Elliott
- George Kieffer
- Sherry Lansing (AGAIN!)
- Monica Lozano (AGAIN!)
- Hadi Makarechian
- Eloy Ortiz Oakley
- Norman Pattiz (AGAIN!)
- John A. Pérez
- Bonnie Reiss
- Richard Sherman
- Bruce Varner
- Charlene Zettel
- VACANT (M Anguiano?)
- VACANT (L Park?)
- UC Regents Committees
- Staff Advisors, Faculty Reps, Designates
- Ex Officio UC Regents
- UC Alumni Regents
- VACANT (E Tauscher?)
- VACANT (H Guber?)
- Paul Monge
"If the University were a business, it would likely be the largest corporation in California."
"If The University Were A Business, It Would Likely Be The Largest Corporation In California"-Regents Minutes (2010)