Saturday, February 27, 2016

Trump-ing $10 billion and Dirks on $150 million...

At a certain point folks wanna know the basis for those numbers .

But Berkeley, well , see this post from UCLA Fac Blog :

Saying Nothing at Berkeley


There was an interview on the Marketplace radio program with Chancellor Dirks of Berkeley about the sources of his "structural deficit." He managed to say virtually nothing about it other than he wouldn't cut the anthropology department to deal with it.

Why does Berkeley have a structural deficit but the other campuses don't? (Not asked.) What is he going to do about deficits in athletics? (Vague answer about marketing deals to be announced soon.).

____
Also there's Remaking the U.
The New Normal Isn't Normal, It Erodes Democracy on SF State, Stanford and UC Berkeley funding, more.
Includes:
"Campus Shared Services has failed completely. Its annual savings are now expected to be zero--actually negative, since the campus has lost millions on this program so far.  Even if everything had gone according to plan, OE is a classic example of a "nickel solution"-- $75 million a year is 3.33% of the campus's $2.25 billion annual budget, and this benefit would never have fixed larger budgetary problems. "



And:
Over the last decade there have been a number of costly ventures – from the renovation of the stadium to the Lower Sproul Plaza development; from Operation Excellence and Campus Shared Services to the experiment in On-Line Education; from the Energy Biosciences Institute to CITRIS. Each project is rolled out with great fanfare as a lucrative investment to be recovered sometime in the future, whereas each one has proven to be a financial albatross. There seems to be systemic pattern of fiscal irrationality. But from where does it come? 
If I may answer my own question - a major part of the responsibility lies with the administration itself. The university appears to have been hijacked by what we might call spiralists – those who advance their careers by spiraling from one organization to the next. They stay for a few years, advancing their portfolio with a signature project that then launches them into a higher orbit and plunges the university into a downward spiral of accumulating debt. The latest case in point is the outgoing VC for Finance and Administration, John Wilton, who arrived five years ago to replace another spiralist, Nathan Brostrom. Like Brostrom, Wilton is now moving on, leaving behind a train wreck. 
Will Wilton’s replacement be yet another spiralist from the financial world?  Why don’t we replace him with one of our own great economists? If we are a recruiting ground for the chair of the Federal Reserve Board and for the Director of the National Economic Council, why not for the VC for Finance and Administration?  
I’ve really only got one question: is the administration prepared to acknowledge its own contribution to our annual deficit and, if so, what does it propose to do about it?
____

See Daily Cal:
Campus considers dissolving the College of Chemistry to cut costs
____

And there's this other reassuring story,at DailyCal for UC Systemwide folk who might recall also  that UC PATH processes will flow through UC Berkeley B/c they said UCB was the most advanced Campus to do that , at least that's what they said at the Jan. UC Regents Meeting....

____

At the recent US Prez  R. debate folks wondered about the $10 billion  net worth, and savings from cutting waste, etc It isn't so different at UC...

No comments:

Post a Comment