Ouch! - UC Approves $2,500 student fee increase

LOS ANGELES – The governing board of the University of California approved a $2,500 student fee increase Thursday after two days of tense campus protests across the state.

The 32 percent increase will push the cost of an undergraduate education at California's premier public schools to over $10,000 a year by next fall, about triple the cost of a decade ago. The fees, the equivalent of tuition, do not include the cost of housing, board and books.

The vote by the Board of Regents in a windowless University of California, Los Angeles, meeting room took place as the drone of protesters could be heard from a plaza outside.

For a second day the room was closed to visitors, after the meeting was repeatedly disrupted by demonstrators' outbursts.

Hundreds of students and union members gathered at the arched doorways of the building, waving signs, pounding drums and chanting "We're fired up, can't take it no more" and "Shame on you."

Armed police in riot gear lined up behind steel barricades, watching over scores of protests. Some police carried beanbag-firing shotguns. Authorities said there was one arrest.

Board members pointed out that students from households with incomes below $70,000 would be shielded from the fee increase, and financial aid would help others defray the higher cost. But that did little to ease the mood on campus, where some students wondered if they could afford the jump or qualify for more borrowing.

Ayanna Moody, a second-year prelaw student, said she feared she might have to attend a community college next year.

"I worked so hard to be at one of the most prestigious universities. To have to go back, it's very depressing," she said. Administrators "already cut out a lot of our majors and programs. I'd rather they cut some of their salaries."

UCLA graduate student Matthew Luckett agreed: "They should cut from the top," he said, referring to administration salaries.

About 30 to 50 protesters staged a takeover of Campbell Hall, a building across campus that houses ethnic studies. They chained the doors shut and there were no immediate plans to remove them.

On Wednesday, 14 demonstrators were arrested at UCLA and demonstrations spread to other campuses.

UC President Mark Yudof told reporters Wednesday he couldn't rule out raising student fees again if the state is unable to meet his request for an additional $913 million next year for the 10-campus system.

"I can't make any ... promises," he said.

 

I agree it is too bad that fees have to increase. However the UC system is still a great bargain compared to other top tier schools across the nation. What students in California can do is take lots of courses in a community college then transfer to a UC school. That is what my stepson did along with several of his friends.

 

Well, you can't do this when you are an upper-division or graduate student, and bargain. And many of these kids don't care about other top-tier schools. The UCs are where you go when you want to be in Cali and attend a great state school. I can definitely understand the students' frustration. The problem seems to be that the UC is not willing to further cut its spending and lower its academic offerings. Commendable in a way, but it comes at a price.

 

Actually the UC's have made significant cuts. The real problem is that the State of California continues to slash hundreds of millions from the higher education budget. The State is broke.

 

Sure. That's why I said 'further cuts.'

 

In the U.S., we have a "flexible" human capital market whereas most professional development is left to the individual. There are examples of state intervention, of course--state universities systems are prime examples--but even there students are largely left to decide for themselves what they will study.

As such, the state (government at whatever level) must make a compelling case to the people in order to invest their tax dollars into students' professional development. (And, of course, to other university-based activities like research.) In California's case, because of severe budget cuts, the state is faced with either cutting educational funding, raising taxes, or cutting elsewhere. Obviously, there is usually a mix of these and other options.

Students may still turn to the taxpayers for support in the form of larger grants and subsidized loans, which alleviates some of the pressures of these changes.

One extreme possibility is for the state to get out of the business of paying for individuals' professional development all together. The other extreme would be to take on this field with almost full control (like the German dual apprenticeship system or Japan's internal system). A third would be to shift the amount governmental control of the education market--either towards more or even less control than we see today. Another would be to do nothing and leave it to political, financial, and social forces, as we do now.

Personally, I would like to see more policy control and thinking on the part of government, where it would plan and pay, then get the results it seeks. Perhaps then taxpayers would be more likely to support education programs because they would see the ROI. As it is now, these programs (like the UC System) sit on the margins--cut or built up as available funding will permit. They're expenses more than investments, subject to cuts whenever things get tight. But the flip side would be a greater role in telling students what they can and cannot study when attending government-funded/subsidized schooling. See the "Asian Miracle" countries for examples. (Not perfect there, either, as we've seen in South Korea. But Singapore did it.)

Does such control fly in the face of our concept of freedom and free choice? Perhaps. But its our money we're spending; perhaps we as a people might want to take a stronger stance on how it is invested.

 

Highlighting is by me --

If students maintain their own households and aren't being claimed as dependents by their parents, then how many of them are going to have $70K income? This is really only going to effect kids who are being supported by their families.

The University of California budget is kind of interesting.

The entire University of California system-wide budget in 2007-8 (the last year for which complete figures are available) was $19.2 billion.

This is divided into three portions.

Instructionally related funding is referred to as 'Core Funds'. It comprises 28% of the total budget and includes $3.257 billion from State General Funds and $1.593 bilion from Student Fees.

The other two major portions of UC funding are a whopping 42% of the budget from 'Sales, Services and Auxiliaries' and 27% from 'Public and Private Contracts and Grants'.

Sales, Services and Auxiliaries includes $4.554 billion in revenues from the five UC Medical Centers, $1.408 billion from various Extension activities, UC food service, housing, the bookstores, the university press, UC branded products and so on.

Contracts and Grants includes research funding, federal payments for managing Lawrence and Los Alamos National Laboratories, and such things. By source, this breaks down to $353 million from the State of California, $2.293 billion in Federal research funding, $1.008 billion for DOE Laboratory Operations, and $1.313 billion in private gifts, contracts and grants.

My source for these numbers is

http://budget.ucop.edu

Lets look at the instructionally-related "Core Funds". Where does that money actually go? How is it spent? Faculty and Staff Salaries get 59%. Faculty and Staff Benefits get another 12%. Equipment, Supplies and Utilities get 20%. Financial Aid accounts for 9%.

Are the UC Faculty and Staff willing to accept a pay-cut and a reduction of their gold-plated benefits, all for the good of the institution? Of course not. Imagine how that suggestion would be go over in the faculty clubs. The professors would probably vote to go on strike.

If UC is such a brain-trust, such an intellectual resource, then they should be able to think of something. 42% of the University of California's revenues come from Sales, Services and Auxiliaries, and it looks like little or none of that money is going to instruction at the present time.

The University of California is presented to the public as if it was a university, an educational institution. But only 28% of its budget directly goes to instructionally related activities. UC is really a huge commercial/research institution that's grown up to surround the university. An institution that's very powerful and can be dangerous if challenged.

At the moment, the UC solution seems to be to leave faculty and staff pay and benefits untouched, leave 72% of the UC budget untapped for instructional purposes, and to make up reductions in General Fund appropriations to the "Core Budget" by dramatic increases in student fees. UC has historically been significantly less expensive than most other states' public universities, but that's changing as we speak.

The students are getting the message loud and clear. They are being treated as if not only the UC administration, but their professors as well, think of them and their interests as the soft spot, the university's vestigial appendix.

Everyone from the UC Regents through the research laboratories to the custodial staff is looking out for their own interests, while students are being told that they will just have to man-up and take one for the team.

 

Unfortuntaely it does not matter if a student under 24 maintains a household or not - the parents income is used (I went through this myself).

 

I'm sure there are sensible cuts that can be made. However, UC's budget is not much different from any another major public university. I would wager that Stanford's budget is similarly apportioned, as well as other large private universities. UC's faculty are paid well below that of other major research universities. All the Ivy League schools have higher pay scales for faculty. If you're going to condemn UC's budget as misguided, then you will have to include just about every other ivy and public ivy in this country.

 

Those who don't like the modest UC fee increase are welcome to leave... There are many, many worthy students who are ready to take their seats.

 

Dump them and go with TROY (USC)!