SCA 14 would implement changes in 138-year-old governing system of UC Board of Regents

On May 23, California State Senator Ed Hernandez proposed Senate Constitutional Amendment 14 (SCA 14) with the primary objective of curbing the budgetary autonomy of the University of California Office of the President (UCOP) and implementing changes to the UC Board of Regents.

According to a press release from Hernandez’s office, the reports from the state audit following the UC tuition hikes created a need for more accountability in how the university system is governed.

Some of the proposed changes include more faculty, student and staff representation on the Board of Regents as well as the presence of the Chancellor of the Community Colleges. Furthermore, SCA 14 would reduce the appointed members’ terms from 12 years to four years and set a limit of three terms.

The press release added that constitutional authority of the UC system was last amended in 1976. At the time, the state’s population was around 20 million people and the annual tuition for in-state UC students was $630 (about $2,700 in today’s dollars). The state population has since doubled and tuition prices have risen to $13,500 for California residents.

“California has grown and changed since 1976,” Hernandez said in the press release. “It is only natural that we have a conversation about how the University of California’s governance can best reflect and adapt to those changes.”

In regards to budgetary practices, if SCA 14 passes, UCOP will have its budget allocated by the state legislature.

Duane Wright, a graduate student in the UC Davis Department of Sociology and a member of the UC Student Workers Union (UAW Local 2865), expressed his support for countering the unchecked power of the UC executives while still maintaining concerns regarding transparency within the UC administration.

“As a defender of public education, I support efforts to counter the unchecked power of UC executives,” Wright said. “However, I also know that Sacramento has been complicit in the privatization of the UC and has often looked away while the administration does what it wants.”

Wright said that he hopes to see some changes integrated into the university system as a whole.

“It has always been students and workers who have been the fiercest fighters for accessible quality public education, and I want to see reforms in the UC system that would increase student and worker power within decision-making structures of the university,” Wright said.

According to the LA Times, a number of regents have spoken out against legislative control of the UC, emphasizing that the 10 UC campuses developed into the nation’s top public research university under an autonomous regents system.

The article also included concerns from Regent John A. Pérez, a former Assembly speaker, who asserted that UC budget practices should be handled by regents rather than legislators.

“The level of depth that’s required to right-size this and to deal with the complexity is appropriately, both constitutionally and functionally, with this board,” Pérez said at a UC Regents meeting.

Ricardo Vazquez, the UCOP director of media relations, echoed the same sentiments with regard to maintaining financial autonomy, expressing that amending the state constitution based on the audit findings would be a mistake.

“We continue to believe that the UC Board of Regents is best placed to provide fiduciary oversight to the Office of the President, which includes appropriating the Office’s budget […] UC’s constitutional autonomy has ensured that the university’s mission, vision and values emanated from its students, faculty and staff, free from political or sectarian influence,” Vazquez said via email.

Vazquez also noted that UCOP is currently implementing all of the state auditor’s 33 recommended changes.

If SCA 14 passes with a two-thirds vote from the state legislature, it will be scheduled to appear on the November 2018 ballot.  

Written By: Kimia Akbari — campus@theaggie.org

Private endowment for university business costs reimburses expensive regent dinners

Documents retrieved through a state audit of the UC Office of the President (UCOP) show that UC Board of Regents members have footed the UC with an accumulated bill of $225,0000 since 2012. On January 25, the Regents threw a party costing $17,600 amidst voting to raise student tuition.

The UCOP reimburses the Regents for the banquets, dinners and parties with private endowment funds given for university business costs by donors. Some regents disagree with billing the parties as a university business expense, such as Governor Jerry Brown and Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, who reportedly did not attend the January or May parties.

The California state audit alleges that $175 million was found in hidden funds, excessive executive salaries and misleading budget practices. The dinner expenses were discovered through the state auditor’s probing of UCOP records.

Stephanie Beechem, the officer of media relations for the UCOP, responded to the Regent dinners and the ongoing state audit allegations. Beechem explained how the costly dinners and parties are footed by a private donor endowment, the Searles Fund. She said that from now on, board dinners will be paid for by the Regents themselves, absorbing the cost.

“The Office of the President already has begun reviewing its policies governing entertainment and travel expenses as it implements the state auditor’s 33 recommendations to improve the office’s budgetary practices,” Beechem said via email. “The Office of the Secretary of the Regents aligns reimbursement policies to that of the Office of the President and will make the appropriate modification once that review is complete. Up to now, board dinners have been paid for with monies from the Searles Fund, a private endowment that the donor designated for university business costs not covered by state or tuition funds. However, to avoid any question over use of university or university-associated funds, regents will absorb their costs for board dinners from this point forward.”

Itamar Waksman, a third-year international relations major and the Internal Affairs Commission vice chairperson, voiced his disdain for the expensive dinners which have not been paid out-of-pocket by the regents. He is also concerned about how the university system levies lowering student costs with maintaining quality, public reception and accountability.

“The truth is that dinners like these will continue to happen,” Waksman said via email. “A large university system like the UC feels it needs to have events like these in order to continue to attract the administrators and other staff that make this one of the best university systems in the world. Now, this isn’t to say that the optics for this aren’t bad because they are. However, spending $225,000 a since 2012 is really a drop in the bucket. The important question to answer is how does the UC system improve its accountability to the people of California and find a way to lower costs for students while maintaining its quality? If the UC’s find a way to freeze tuition or and give more educational opportunities to disadvantaged communities in our state, then they can continue to have $250 per person dinner parties in my mind.”

Written by: Aaron Liss — campus@theaggie.org

Student Affairs no longer able to cover costs to Conference and Event Services due to budget constraints

On May 16, registered student organizations (RSOs) were notified via an email newsletter that they will be charged to reserve on-campus meeting spaces starting on July 1. Previously, the Division of Student Affairs made a financial commitment to RSOs for the 2016-17 school year so that organizations could continue to receive the previous year’s free allotment of spaces. RSOs are currently allowed four hours of meeting reservations per week and three special events per quarter in general assignment and classroom spaces. UC Davis Conference and Event Services also charges fees of $45 for paid spaces and $10 for general assignment spaces exceeding the allotment.

Third-year geology and history double major Minda Moe is the president of Quiz Bowl at UC Davis. Moe is worried about the policy because their organization does not have enough money to pay for reserved spaces.

“They haven’t told us how expensive it will be,” Moe said. “I’m worried that we’ll either have to limit the number of meetings or wander around the building looking for open rooms.”

Moe is concerned that there will be not enough spaces or that organizations may have to share rooms. They explained that meeting off campus is not always feasible because it is difficult to get everyone to the meetings.

“I know a lot of organizations that book rooms every week,” Moe said. “All I see is a bunch of organizations wandering around and trying to get room space.”

Third-year genetics major Mahitha Murali is similarly concerned about being able to get together and afford spaces.

“It poses a great risk for student-led organizations, especially those that focus on philanthropic efforts to continue building their organizations,” Murali said via email. “Visions at UC Davis is solely run by a team of students who are focusing on raising funds for education in different parts of the world, and this policy may affect how often we meet and whether our team will be able to continue our fundraising initiatives to support the education of youth in Ethiopia, India, Nicaragua and Sri Lanka.”

IGNITE at UC Davis is hosting a Facebook event encouraging student organizations to send emails to petition for the removal of rental fees for the next year. Second-year sustainable agriculture and food systems major Abigail Edwards, the secretary of IGNITE at UC Davis, received the email notification, immediately updated the club officers and spoke to Center for Student Involvement Director Kristin Dees about possible actions. Edwards then began to formulate plans to involve the more than 800 clubs on campus that could be affected by the new rule.

“I discussed these ideas with our officer team and we decided we needed to mobilize the UCD community, specifically RSOs, not only for the survival of our own [organization], but for the survival of all the UCD club programming which support students’ well-rounded education,” Edwards said via email.

IGNITE also drafted an email template that organizations can send to Dees, who is acting as a liaison between the students and the administrators at Student Affairs responsible for the fees.

“The email template is intended as a way for student [organizations] to voice their concern without having to draft a whole new email — we are all students and it’s week nine so we’re trying to make this as accessible as possible,” Edwards said. “The more feedback they receive, the better.”

Edwards said the response from students has been very positive and that many students were unaware about the increase or concerned about how the fee would impact their clubs.

“This year, they are $10 to $45 per hour (depending on whether you are collecting money or not) which is a lot for student [organizations] working with a tight budget,” Edwards said.

Edwards believes that the fee increase has the potential to decrease the number of student organizations or deter new organizations from being created because of the lack of accessibility and ability to be involved.

“To be honest, I don’t think there would be so many clubs on campus without access to free spaces to organize,” Edwards said. “Student organizations utilize these spaces to connect with other students with similar interests, which is such an important part of the Aggie experience.”

Written by: Jayashri Padmanabhan — campus@theaggie.org

Regents limit international, out-of-state student enrollment

The Regents of the University of California (UC) approved an 18 percent enrollment cap on international and out-of-state students at five of the nine UC campuses, including UC Davis, on May 18.

After scrapping an original proposal for a 20 percent enrollment cap in March, the UC Regents lowered the proposed percentage and excluded UC Los Angeles, UC Santa Barbara, UC Irvine and UC Berkeley. The four excluded campuses bolster a large percentage of non-resident students that already surpasses the 18 percent cap. They will be allowed to maintain their percentage, but not increase the proportion, for the 2017-2018 school year.

State audits last year alleged that a growing number of underqualified non-resident students had been admitted into the UC system. The audits alleged that non-resident students were given priority over more qualified Californians, who pay under one-third of the tuition that non-resident students pay. Non-resident undergraduates contribute over $70 million in base tuition that will “directly subsidize need-based aid for California residents,” according to an “action item” from the May 18 Board of Regents meeting.

The UC Regents grappled with wanting to bolster California’s underrepresented and low-income students, whose need-based financial aid is supplemented by the tuition that non-resident students pay into the UC. According to reasoning in UC Regent documentation from the May 18 meeting, Californians should be prioritized because the public university system is meant to provide a prestigious academic safety net for low-income, local and underrepresented students. UC Regents who support the cap agree that the university system attracts students worldwide and benefits monetarily from the influx of non-resident tuition, yet do not want to see local students and taxpayers left out.

Due to implementing the enrollment cap, the UC system will be allotted $18.5 million from state lawmakers that was withheld pending the rollout of the non-resident cap.

ASUCD President Josh Dalavai voiced concern with the passed enrollment cap because he does not believe Californians should be prioritized over out-of-state and international students.

“I’m a born and bred Californian and proud of it,” Dalavai said via email. “That being said, I’m a strong opponent of any kind of non-resident enrollment cap. While I understand the argument for prioritizing Californian students, I disagree on the grounds of the value of different domestic AND international perspectives on educational enrichment through peer interaction.”

Non-residents pay $39,000 in tuition and fees compared to the $12,300 that California residents pay. The regents also recently passed a tuition hike that will go into effect next fall, raising these rates.

Stephanie Beechem, a media relation officer for the UC Office of the President, mentioned how non-resident tuition supplements the lower in-state student tuition.

“The University of California’s new nonresident enrollment policy balances UC’s commitment to putting California residents first, with the benefits that nonresident students bring,” Beechem wrote via email. “Financial aid funds derived from the tuition paid by nonresident undergraduates will continue to be used to reduce the cost of attending UC for California resident undergraduates with limited financial resources, many of whom are from underrepresented backgrounds.”

Julia Ann Easley, a senior public information representative for UC Davis News and Media Relations, relayed how UC Davis participates in advocating for both residents and non-residents by enrolling 14.6 percent non-resident students, or 4,100 students. The composite average of all UC campuses for the 2016-17 academic year was approximately 16.5 percent.

“UC Davis is committed to serving California resident students,” Easley said via email. “In fact, UC Davis has the highest number of undergraduate California residents among UC campus[es]. At the same time, UC Davis values how the intellectual, social and [cultural] diversity of students from other states and countries enriches the learning and social environment of the campus for all students. As well, the revenues that national and international students bring with them help provide a high-quality education to California students. UC Davis is below the cap that has been set.”

Written by: Aaron Liss — campus@theaggie.org