Letters to the Governor

May 19, 2017

Dear Governor Brown,

CC: Speaker Anthony Rendon, Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin De Leon, President Janet Napolitano, Chancellor Timothy White, Chancellor Eloy Oakley

We are the Reclaim CA Higher Education coalition, stakeholders committed to the reaffirmation of California’s Master Plan for Higher Education. We are the students, staff, faculty, and public interest groups of California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California – representing more than three million constituents.

Our mission is to fully restore the Master Plan for Higher Education as it was enacted in 1960 – affordable as defined as tuition and fee free, accessible, and quality. However, as we are not currently in a budget year where the Master Plan has been restored, we are engaging in budget advocacy that at least moves in the direction of fully funding higher education.

We have reviewed the audits that were conducted by the state auditor’s office examining the California State University and the University of California and support their recommendations regarding transparency and accountability for both systems. We do not, however, support the penalization of public higher education systems in the budget through diverting Cal Grant monies to private institutions. Penalizing public higher education students for a problem they did not create is wrong and is fueling the privatization of public services rather than creating opportunities in public higher education. 

 

The University of California
 

The Regents at the University of California voted to restart tuition increases despite the fact that public polling by PPIC indicates that voters are staunchly opposed to this. UC also plans another 5% student fee increase, which will require Californians to pay again for something they paid for already through their taxes. In the current climate post-audit, the Regents’ apparent unwillingness to reconsider this vote will be even less popular in light of headlines such as the Sacramento Bee article from April 25, 2017: “UC Kept Secret $175 Million Reserve as it Raised Tuition, State Audit Finds.” 

The May Revise pledges to hold $50 million in abeyance unless the University of California complies with certain directives to address deficiencies identified with the state audit. From years of experience in working with the UC Office of the President we strongly concur with the conclusions of rampant unaccountability, lack of transparency and executive administrative growth disproportionate to the student, faculty and support staff. UC has failed to keep adequate focus on accessibility and affordability; however, and perhaps more importantly, the State of California must also take considerable responsibility for the undermining of the public mission. We agree with your directives, but do not agree with holding the funding for students, staff, and faculty in abeyance for misbehavior they did not commit. We ask you to release the $50 million this year. Please use your position as a Regent to hold the UC accountable in collaboration with the Lt. Governor, Speaker, and Superintendent of Public Instruction, all of whom are also Regents.

The May Revise continues to under-fund our UC system, because it only allocates $7,400 per student (less than the per student amount allocated in the K-12 system) for the 2,500 additional students required by the “committee of two” agreement. We request that the state not stop at $18.5 million for this funding, but instead fully fund the additional 2,500 students at the appropriate $26,074 per student for a total of $65.2 million. We support creating accountability measures to ensure that this additional money does not fuel executive bloat. We urge you to take this incremental step to return to the Master Plan that promised a tuition free UC.

We ask that you endorse two additional efforts to hold UC accountable to all Californians. First, oppose the first steps to dismantling the UC pension plan by offering an opt-out for new employees. The plan partially implemented in 2016 will cost an additional $500 million over the next year, a figure not contested by UC. Second, put a halt to the abuse of off-shoring and out- sourcing of middle-class jobs that erode not only UC as the world’s premiere academic institution but undermine the economic vitality of all our communities.

The California State University System

We would like to take a moment to fully appreciate you for moving the $6 billion from the Treasurer’s investment fund into Cal PERS, thereby ensuring a secure and dignified retirement for CSU and Community College staff and faculty for years to come.

We ask that you fully fund the CSU at $172 million. The Board of Trustees have gone on record as committed to taking tuition increases off the table in 2017-18 if the CSU receives full funding. Furthermore, there are growing needs affecting student graduation and completion rates, health and safety and the needed hiring of faculty and staff.

              While we support the additional funding, we also encourage you to improve the oversight and transparency of the CSU budget. Such accountability would ensure that state monies are spent in a responsible and prudent fashion. We ask that the state exercise broad and focused oversight of CSU expenditures and reduce the budget flexibility currently afforded to the CSU. Under the existing climate, the misuse of monies by the CSU are only found in press accounts and state audits. 

 

The California Community Colleges

 

We thank you for the CCC augmentations to the base budget included in your May Budget Revise. This increase from $23.6 million to $183.6 million will help our colleges afford ongoing increases to expenses, especially related to pensions and employee benefits.

As you work through the final budget with the Legislature, we hope you will keep in mind the greatest weakness in our system, which is our overuse and exploitation of part-time faculty. Because we know that individual relationships with faculty, mentoring relationships, play a key role in determining student success, investing in office hours for part-timers and in more full-time positions can make a huge difference to students.

We strongly encourage you to increase funding for part-time faculty through augmentation of the Office Hours program, and restoration of the Health Benefits and Equity line-items. Part-time faculty teach 44% of the credit course sections, which is substantially higher than the 25% goal established in the Education Code. The academic research is clear that more of our students succeed when they have access to full-time faculty and fully supported part-time faculty.   

 

Finally, we stand with you, Governor, Speaker Rendon and Senate President Pro Tempore De Leon as well as each of our system heads in supporting our higher education institutions as safe spaces for our students, with an emphasis on protecting DACA recipients. Thank you all deeply for your leadership in this important matter.

 

Sincerely,

 

  • UAPD – AFSCME (Union of American Physicians and Dentists)
  • CCCI (California Community College Independents)
  • CPFA (California Part Time Faculty Association)
  • CSUEU (California State University Employees Union)
  • CUCFA (Council of University of California Faculty Associations)
  • FACCC (Faculty Association of California Community Colleges)
  • SSCCC (Student Senate for California Community Colleges)
  • Teamsters Local 2010
  • UAW Local 2865 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at UC)
  • UAW Local 4123 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at CSU)
  • UCSA (University of California Student Association)
  • UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (University Professional and Technical Employees – Communication Workers of America)

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

March 19, 2017

Dear Governor Brown,

CC: Speaker Anthony Rendon, Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin De Leon, President Janet Napolitano, Chancellor Timothy White, Chancellor Eloy Oakley

We are the Reclaim CA Higher Education coalition, stakeholders committed to the reaffirmation of California’s Master Plan for Higher Education. We are the students, staff, faculty, and public interest groups of California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California – representing more than three million constituents.

Our mission is to fully restore the Master Plan for Higher Education as it was enacted in 1960 – affordable as defined as tuition and fee free, accessible, and quality. However, as we are not currently in a budget year where the Master Plan has been restored, we are engaging in budget advocacy that at least moves in the direction of fully funding higher education.

First, we want to acknowledge the audits that were conducted by the state auditor’s office examining the California State University and the University of California. We support the recommendations in the audits regarding transparency and accountability for both systems. We do not support the penalization of public higher education systems in the budget through diverting Cal Grant monies to private institutions. Penalizing public higher education students for a problem they did not create is wrong, as is fueling the privatization of public services, which is what this movement of money fosters.  

 

The University of California
 

The Regents at the University of California voted to restart tuition increases -- despite the fact that public polling by PPIC indicates that voters are staunchly opposed to this. UC also plans another 5% student fee increase, which will likely be interpreted by voters negatively as a tuition increase –requiring Californians to pay again for something they paid for already through their taxes. In the current climate post-audit, the Regent’s apparent unwillingness to reconsider this vote will be even less popular in light of headlines such as the Sacramento Bee article from April 25th, 2017: “UC Kept Secret $175 Million Reserve as it Raised Tuition, State Audit Finds.”  

But whom will the voters blame? The UC office of the President is at the end of the current cudgel. But whom is in charge of the UC office of the President? Or the entire University system for that matter? The answer is the UC Board of Regents. Our strong concern is that Regents of conscience have been unable to hold the UC office of the President to account and actively demand accountability and transparency since the Regental rules were amended last year to only allow an item on the Regent’s agenda if it is agreed upon by the UC President and the Chair of the Board of Regents. We do not know if any Regents of conscience were requesting to speak about budgetary items they felt may not have been spent wisely. If they did, one might speculate that the item would not have been agreed upon for the Regental agenda.

Additionally, how can we ensure more Regents of conscience are appointed to these lengthy 12 year terms? Article 9 Section 9 E of the California Constitution demands a senate committee to be convened for any Regental appointment. This section of the constitution has not been followed for over a decade, and to all of our detriment.     

We note that the current May Revise of the state budget increases the UC’s budget allocation for the 2017-2018 budget year by $4.2 million, which is the money enabled by the transportation bill for transportation research only. We also note that $50 million is being held in abeyance by your office unless the University complies with certain directives. We agree with your directives, they are imminently reasonable. However, we do not agree with holding the funding for students, staff, and faculty in abeyance for misbehavior they did not commit. We ask you to release the $50 million this year, and demand that the Regents hold the UC accountable through using your Regent seat, the Lt. Governor’s Regent seat, the Speaker’s Regent seat, the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s Regent seat, among others.

The May Revise continues to under-fund our UC system, as it amounts to only $7,400 per student (less than the per student amount allocated in the K-12 system) for the 2,500 additional students required by the “committee of two” agreement. We request that the state not stop at $18.5 million for this funding, but instead fully fund the additional 2,500 students at the appropriate $26,074.00 per student for a total of $65.2 million.

The California State University System

On January 10, you proposed $157 million in CSU funding over the base budget, fully $167 million less than the $324 million in state funds that the CSU trustees have said they need in order for the system to operate at full capacity. We ask that you fully fund the CSU Board of Trustees’ request.

It's important to note that the board has gone on record as committed to taking tuition increases off the table in 2017-18 if the CSU receives full funding. Furthermore, there are growing needs affecting student graduation and completion rates, health and safety and the needed hiring of faculty and staff.

While we support the additional funding, we also encourage you to improve the oversight and transparency of the CSU budget. Such accountability would ensure that state monies are spent in a responsible and prudent fashion. We ask that the state exercise broad and focused oversight of CSU expenditures and reduce the budget flexibility currently afforded to the CSU. Under the existing climate, the misuse of monies by the CSU are only found in press accounts and state audits. 

 

The California Community Colleges

 

We thank you for the CCC augmentations included in your January Budget Proposal, but we are disappointed that the college allocation falls short of the system’s fair share of the Proposition 98 guarantee. We hope that this can be addressed in the May Budget revision, and we hope you will prioritize base funding that will help our colleges afford ongoing increases to expenses, especially related to pensions and employee benefits.

Equally important are the system's requests for $24.5 million to restore past cuts to part-time faculty compensation and $100 million for new full-time faculty positions. The quality of education throughout the Community College system continues to be undermined by the overuse and exploitation of part-time faculty. The success of recent initiatives, from "strong workforce" to "equity" to the newest one, "guided pathways," depend on having faculty fully engaged and working together, and these efforts are hampered by too few full-timers and too many part-timers piecing together work at multiple colleges due to low pay and poor benefits. We must reinvest not just in programs but in people, and restoring past cuts to funding for part-time faculty pay and benefits is an essential step this year.

 

Finally, we stand with you, Governor, Speaker Rendon and Senate President Pro Tempore De Leon as well as each of our system heads in supporting our higher education institutions as safe spaces for our students, with an emphasis on protecting Dreamers/DACA. Thank you all deeply for your leadership in this important matter.

 

Sincerely,

 

  • UAPD – AFSCME (Union of American Physicians and Dentists)
  • CCCI (California Community College Independents)
  • CNA (California Nurses Association)
  • Courage Campaign
  • CPFA (California Part Time Faculty Association)
  • CSUEU (California State University Employees Union)
  • CUCFA (Council of University of California Faculty Associations)
  • CURB (Californians United for a Responsible Budget)
  • FACCC (Faculty Association of California Community Colleges)
  • SSCCC (Student Senate for California Community Colleges)
  • Teamsters Local 2010
  • UAW Local 2865 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at UC)
  • UAW Local 4123 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at CSU)
  • UAW Local 5810 (United Auto Workers – post-doctoral researchers at UC)
  • UCSA (University of California Student Association)
  • UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (University Professional and Technical Employees – Communication Workers of America)

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

March 8, 2017

Dear Governor Brown,

CC: Speaker Anthony Rendon, Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin De Leon, President Janet Napolitano, Chancellor Timothy White, Chancellor Eloy Oakley

Let’s reclaim the model that serves all Californians. Voters feel California’s public higher education systems are central to the state’s quality of life and its economic vitality, as evidenced by the results of numerous surveys from the Public Policy Institute of California and others. PPIC’s survey also shows Californians set restoring top-quality, affordable higher education ahead of other state priorities, including high-speed rail, water projects, and rebuilding roads and bridges.

We are the Reclaim CA Higher Education coalition, stakeholders committed to the reaffirmation of California’s Master Plan for Higher Education. We are the students, staff, faculty, and public interest groups of California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California – representing more than two million constituents.

Obviously, to fully restore the Master Plan entails time to engage the public at large and legislators. For the present, we would welcome policies that at least move in the direction of fully funding higher education.

 

The University of California

The UC Board of Regents are assuming a 4% base budget adjustment to state funding and an additional $18.5 million from the state to fund 2,500 additional resident undergraduate students in 2017-18 (relative to 2015-16 enrollment levels). We note that this $18.5 million for 2,500 additional students continues to under-fund our UC system, as it amounts to only $7,400 per student (less than the per student amount allocated in the K-12 system). We request that the state not stop at $18.5 million, but instead fully fund the additional 2,500 students at the appropriate $26,074.00 per student for a total of $65.2 million.   

As you know, the Regents voted to restart tuition increases -- despite the fact that public polling by PPIC indicates that voters are staunchly opposed to this. UC also plans another 5% student fee increase, which will likely be interpreted by voters negatively as a tuition increase –requiring Californians to pay again for something they paid for already through their taxes. Thus, we ask that the state fully fund student enrollment, including necessary increases in enrollment.

This type of under-funding has led UC to self-destructive behaviors in the past outsourcing jobs even as evidence shows the outsourcing causes low-level employees to be compensated at below living wages (which means welfare costs to California) or jobs exported from California, while total costs of the work increase due to the new management layer created by the outsourcing. UC has even resorted to paying its own employees poverty wages and forcing them onto public benefits, as is evidenced by the Teamster/Occidental College research report released this past fall.  

 

We call for an end to outsourcing and for the UC to settle a fair contract with Teamsters Local 2010 – including the maintenance of a secure and dignified defined benefit pension. 

We request that the state pay the employer share of retirement costs for state funded positions at UC, just as it does for state funded positions elsewhere in government. That figure would be $354 million this year. The agreement by UC 50 years ago to split UCRP out of CalPERS was a promise that UCRP's cost to the state would never go higher than CalPERS's cost to the state, not that there would be no cost to the state. The current UC plan to allow employees to “opt out” of the Defined Benefit Pension Plan in favor of a 401 K gamble will cost $500 million over the next 15 years – approximately $34 million a year – which is a waste of public funds. This 401 K opt out should not be allowed, as it is a step to making the Defined Benefit Pension actuarially unsound.

Furthermore we call upon the UC to end lobbying and funding to oppose the rights of student researchers to collectively bargain.

The California State University System

On January 10, you proposed $157 million in CSU funding over the base budget, fully $167 million less than the $324 million in state funds that the CSU trustees have said they need in order for the system to operate at full capacity. We ask that you fully fund the CSU Board of Trustees’ request.

It's important to note that the board has gone on record as committed to taking tuition increases off the table in 2017-18 if the CSU receives full funding. Furthermore, there are growing needs affecting student graduation and completion rates, health and safety and the needed hiring of faculty and staff.

While we support the additional funding, we also encourage you to improve the oversight and transparency of the CSU budget. Such accountability would ensure that state monies are spent in a responsible and prudent fashion. We ask that the state exercise broad and focused oversight of CSU expenditures and reduce the budget flexibility currently afforded to the CSU. Under the existing climate, the misuse of monies by the CSU are only found in press accounts and state audits. 

 

The California Community Colleges

 

We thank you for the CCC augmentations included in your January Budget Proposal, but we are disappointed that the college allocation falls short of the system’s fair share of the Proposition 98 guarantee. We hope that this can be addressed in the May Budget revision, and we hope you will prioritize base funding that will help our colleges afford ongoing increases to expenses, especially related to pensions and employee benefits.

Equally important are the system's requests for $24.5 million to restore past cuts to part-time faculty compensation and $100 million for new full-time faculty positions. The quality of education throughout the Community College system continues to be undermined by the overuse and exploitation of part-time faculty. The success of recent initiatives, from "strong workforce" to "equity" to the newest one, "guided pathways," depend on having faculty fully engaged and working together, and these efforts are hampered by too few full-timers and too many part-timers piecing together work at multiple colleges due to low pay and poor benefits. We must reinvest not just in programs but in people, and restoring past cuts to funding for part-time faculty pay and benefits is an essential step this year.

 

Finally, we stand with you, Governor, Speaker Rendon and Senate President Pro Tempore De Leon as well as each of our system heads in supporting our higher education institutions as safe spaces for our students, with an emphasis on protecting Dreamers/DACA. Thank you all deeply for your leadership in this important matter.

 

Sincerely,

 

  • UAPD – AFSCME (Union of American Physicians and Dentists)
  • CCCI (California Community College Independents)
  • CNA (California Nurses Association)
  • Courage Campaign
  • CPFA (California Part Time Faculty Association)
  • CSUEU (California State University Employees Union)
  • CUCFA (Council of University of California Faculty Associations)
  • CURB (Californians United for a Responsible Budget)
  • FACCC (Faculty Association of California Community Colleges)
  • SSCCC (Student Senate for California Community Colleges)
  • Teamsters Local 2010
  • UAW Local 2865 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at UC)
  • UAW Local 4123 (United Auto Workers – graduate students at CSU)
  • UAW Local 5810 (United Auto Workers – post-doctoral researchers at UC)
  • UCSA (University of California Student Association)
  • UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (University Professional and Technical Employees – Communication Workers of America)

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

December 18, 2015

Dear Governor Brown,

CC: Gavin Newsom, Lt. Governor, State of California; Toni Atkins, Speaker, California State Assembly; Anthony Rendon, Speaker-designate, California State Assembly; Shirley Weber, Chair, California State Assembly Committee on Budget; Kevin de León, President Pro Tempore, California State Senate; Mark Leno, Chair, California State Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review; Brice Harris, Chancellor, CCC; Janet Napolitano, President, UC; Timothy White, Chancellor, CSU

Reclaim Higher Education of California, a coalition of stakeholders committed to the reaffirmation of California’s Master Plan for Higher Education, writes you to advocate for the prioritization of enrollment growth for California’s three public systems of higher education. We are the students, staff, faculty, and public interest groups – of California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California – representing more than two million constituents.

We call upon you to draft a Budget for 2016-17 that provides adequate funding to enable all three public institutions of higher education to expand their enrollment, without increasing the financial burden on individual students and their families. The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) predicts a shortage of 1.1 million bachelor or higher degree graduates in California by 2030. (Johnson, Hans; Marisol Cuellar Mejia; and Bohn, Sarah. October 2015. “Will California Run Out of College Graduates?” San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. Page 8.) The future of California’s position as an economic powerhouse is dependent on fulfilling this critical need. The ability to enroll more students at California’s three public systems of higher education is inadequate to meet demand due to funding shortfalls. Building requisite enrollment to support California’s prosperity will require a long-term financial commitment to the expansion of public higher education.

While the loss to the State of California is significant, think also of the thousands of individuals who have missed out on pursuing their dreams and educational opportunities. To that end, we must acknowledge that depressed communities are more immediately affected by tuition and other cost increases, due to fewer individual and family resources that allow for time away from work to pursue an advanced degree.

Undoubtedly, the recession has posed great fiscal challenges to the state, but higher education remains one of our state’s best tools for economic recovery and sustainability, and it should remain a top budgetary priority. The state’s funding of higher education remains below pre-recession levels. As a result, enrollment in all three systems is well below what it ought to be. In order to keep pace with the increasing population of qualified high school graduates, the UC should have enrolled a total of 55,000 more students over the past six years than it has; the CSU should have enrolled an additional 141,000 students; and the CCC should have enrolled over 2 million additional students. (Wilson, Stacy; Newell, Mallory; and Fuller. Ryan. June 2010. “Ready or Not, Here They Come.” Sacramento: California Postsecondary Education Commission. Report 10-08.) Cumulatively, the state has granted 650,000 fewer bachelors or higher degrees since 2010 than it ought to have. Investment in increased enrollment growth would put California back on track to produce the number of degree holders California’s economy demands.

In what follows, we offer specific proposals to support enrollment growth and the restoration of accessible and quality education at each of the three systems of higher education.

A UC Growth Proposal

UC has recently proposed a budget that would increase enrollment by 5,000 students next year, with an additional 2,500 students enrolled over each of the following two years, bringing the total increase to 10,000 students. The state should fully fund this proposal at the average expenditure of $18,900 per student (University of California. November 2015. “Summary of the Budget Request: Budget for Current Operations 2016-17.” Oakland: University of California. Page 18.), building to an ongoing annual contribution of $189 million at the end of the multi-year enrollment program - on top of the four percent annual increase already committed to. Note that the funding the state offered for the first year’s enrollment growth was only half of what is needed to fund these seats. The UC has had to find money elsewhere in its budget to cover the gap – money that could have been used to restore the targeted student-faculty ratio, close the 10% compensation gap between UC and its peers, attack some of the backlog of deferred maintenance, build dormitories, and the list of needs goes on.

While we strongly support increased enrollment to the UCs, the California legislature should additionally address the housing crisis that students are already facing. Housing prices have a significant impact on the ability of a student to afford and complete a UC education. Housing prices have increased at staggering rates in areas surrounding UC campuses because the increasing demand for housing has far outpaced the growth in supply. For example, this has led housing costs in Santa Cruz to increase by 24% over the last four years (Castillo, Brandon. May 26, 2015. “New Santa Cruz rules aim to ease housing crisis.” Salinas: KION News Channel 5. http://www.kionrightnow.com/news/local-news/new-santa-cruz-rules-aimto- ease-housing-crisis/33232946). Students are priced out of campus housing and the lack of local availability leaves them stranded. Many students are unable to afford housing or would rather forgo the security of a home than graduate with exorbitant debt. In the long-term, campus housing opportunities need to be expanded, and immediate relief must be offered to those who need it most.

In conjunction with enrollment growth, the quality of a UC education must be maintained with adequate funding to hire additional faculty and graduate students as well as to meet other increased operational costs. Over the last decade, the student to faculty ratio has steadily increased, which reduces the individual attention each student receives.

Sufficient funding and financial aid must be provided to offset the impact enrollment growth has on quality and affordability to ensure sustainable growth of the UC.

A CSU Growth Proposal

CSU has recently proposed a budget that would increase enrollment by three percent. The state of California is better served when this institution is able to grow to support its enrollment demand. As we’re well into the state’s economic recovery, it’s important that we make vital investments in the CSU system – the largest and most diverse university system in the country.

While we agree with the CSU system’s request for additional funding, above the multi-year compact plan, we would like to add funding to enroll 8,000 more students. This would put the CSU in alignment with previous growth projections. We propose – at $10,285 per student – to increase the CSU’s additional budget request by $82.3 million, bringing their additional request up to $184.6 million. The additional funds would go toward supporting the required infrastructure and hiring of staff and faculty required to handle the increase enrollment goal, across the entire CSU system. This proposed operating budget would bring annual revenue of the CSU to $5.46 billion, which includes student tuition revenues (net of financial aid).

It is clear that CSU plays a critical role in preparing the workforce of California, as it grants more than one-half of the state’s bachelor’s degrees and one-third of the state’s master’s degrees. Our state’s future is directly linked to the ability of the CSU to educate California residents, because more than 50 percent of California’s teachers are CSU graduates.

A CCC Growth Proposal

For 2014-15, the CCCs were funded for 2.75 percent growth ($140.4 million), and for 3 percent growth ($156.5 million) in 2015-16, but despite the 130,000 additional students this funding supports, system enrollment has still not caught up to pre-recession projections. The CCC system budget request for 2016-17 includes $175 million for an additional 70,000 students, another growth augmentation of about 3 percent. Due to the frustration students experienced with severe course reductions and fee increases during the recession years and now the lure of employment options in areas where the economy is reviving, not all community college districts are growing.

However, the growth allocation model guarantees that funding goes to the districts that can benefit the most. Further, the system recently revised this model to target growth dollars to areas with the neediest student populations.

In addition to growth, the state must also ensure instructional quality with funding for additional full-time faculty, including counselors and librarians, together with funding to enhance the professionalization of part-time faculty in support of the system's Student Success Initiative. To this end, the 2016-17 CCC budget request includes $80 million for full-time faculty positions and restoration of the part-time faculty categorical programs: office hours, benefits, and compensation equity. CCC students are an extremely diverse group, ranging from recent high school graduates to middle age returning or first-time enrollees. They also need financial assistance to meet the high cost of textbooks, housing, and in many cases, support of their families while they attend classes.

Summary

The increased costs and lack of available slots at institutions in all three systems of higher education has dampened California high school graduates and other potential students interest in seeking the education and training that will provide them with opportunities to more fully develop their economic and social potential. This decrease in enrollees is reflective of ethnic and racial, social, and economic inequality. Depressed communities are more immediately affected by tuition and other cost increases, because they have fewer individual and family resources to support time away from work to pursue higher education opportunities.

To encourage interest and create opportunity, we additionally request that the state be more directive in how this enrollment growth and other funding is invested:

  1. A $30 million multi-year grant for augmented enrollment outreach efforts on the part of each of California’s three higher education systems, for a total of $90 million.
  2. Immediate addition of class offerings and support staff to accommodate the additional students. Admission to the institution is not a guarantee of an education. These students cannot linger on wait lists for years, hoping to get the classes they need to graduate.
  3. Immediate hiring of faculty and ending the exploitation of contingent instructors of all kinds. Hiring of new faculty should emphasize the conversion of adjunct faculty to tenure track faculty. More students cannot be admitted without instructors for the additional classes. At the same time, the state must provide additional support to adjunct faculty and graduate student instructors, including pay and benefits parity and office hours funding, so they can be truly supportive of student success.
  4. Immediate housing relief for students who are attempting to find living situations near their educational institutions where rates are exorbitant. A market-rate housing stipend should be provided to each student living outside their familial home.

As the 2016-17 budget cycle begins, we acknowledge the recent attention given to the issue and look forward to working closely with you to re-prioritize higher education in the State of California.

Sincerely,

  • AFSCME UAPD – Stuart Bussey, President
  • CCCI – Richard Hansen, President
  • Courage Campaign - Eddie Kurtz, Executive Director
  • CPFA – John Martin, Chair
  • CSUEU – Pat Gantt, President
  • CUCFA – Joe Kiskis, VP for External Relations
  • Teamsters 2010 – Jason Rabinowitz, Secretary-Treasurer/Principal Officer
  • Student Senate for California Community Colleges – Dahlia Salem, President
  • UAW 2865 – Robert Cavooris, President
  • UAW 5810 – Anke Schennink, President
  • UC-AFT – Robert Samuels, President
  • University of California Student Association – Kevin Sabos, President
  • UPTE-CWA 9119 – Jelger Kalmijn, President

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 2, 2015

Dear Governor Brown:                                                                                                                     

CC: Toni Atkins, Speaker, California State Assembly • Kevin de Léon, Pro Tem, California State Senate • Mark Leno, Chair, Senate Budget Committee • Shirley Weber, Chair, Assembly Budget Committee • Brice Harris, Chancellor, CCC • Janet Napolitano, President, UC • Timothy White, Chancellor, CSU

The California Master Plan for Higher Education created an international model for public higher education, as is stated in your May Revise. We agree, but we believe that your May Revise could exacerbate the escalating crisis in higher education, a “Master Plan train wreck” in which the trains carrying students through the California Community Colleges derail at the California State University and University of California systems. This disaster could be averted by following your substantial increase in community college resources with complementary investment in the four year institutions. In this 2015-2016 budget cycle, which features far more revenues than were originally projected, we call upon you to reaffirm the State of California’s commitment to the Master Plan in its entirety: accessible, affordable, quality, public Higher Education. As key stakeholders representing over three million students, staff and faculty throughout the State’s three higher education systems (the California Community Colleges, the California State University and the University of California) we urge you to prevent the “Master Plan train wreck” and fully restore resources to all three systems.

ACCESSIBLE: California will need at least one million more graduates by 2025 to remain economically competitive, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. This requires implementation of a vision addressing systemic problems plaguing California’s ailing public colleges and universities, starting with increased state investment. For example, as you have heard multiple times since January 2015, the CSU needs $100 million in increased funding beyond what you allocated in January to meet its access requirements under the Master Plan. The additional $38 million given in your May Revise only allows for some 4,000 students to be enrolled, a projected 6,000 students who have the right to be there under the Master Plan will be turned away from CSU’s doors if the final budget does not include the necessary $62 million more.

AFFORDABLE: Since President Napolitano announced her plans to raise UC undergraduate tuition by 28 percent within the next five years, we have been united in opposition. The solution to UC funding is restoring state support, not tuition increases or cuts in workers’ pensions. UC Unionized workers’ contracts already took major concessions in their pensions last year in exchange for maintaining a single tier pension. The average worker is paying two percent more into their pension to keep the benefits the same for future generations. By taking the wage-cut-for-intact-pension deals, UC workers did meet the required budgetary goal that UC had set for us. Demanding that the pension be split into two tiers now, or even worse, converted to a defined contribution plan, is in bad faith and we reject it. UC students’ tuition should be frozen, but the balance should not be placed on the backs of workers; our faculty and staff will remain united in this. 

QUALITY: In the May Revise we were pleased to see funding placed in the Community College budgets for converting part-time faculty to full-time. Smaller class sizes and greater instructional support are key components to quality public education, and full time faculty play an important role in this regard for all three education systems. In addition, we urge you to abandon the idea that online education is the panacea to state disinvestment. We feel that we are encountering a “Master Plan train wreck,” when funding was not provided to CSU and the UC systems for the same goal. Faculty teaching conditions are students’ learning conditions, and this is true across all three systems.  

We support the following guidelines for the 2015-16 budget:

For the California Community Colleges, we thank you, Governor, for the support you have shown thus far for student services, full time faculty, and the much needed additional base funding. We still advocate that funding should be directed to specific components of student success. These include office hours, health benefits, and equal pay for equal work for part-time faculty, otherwise known as “parity,” together with professional development of faculty, staff, and administrators.

For the California State University, we thank you, Governor, for the $25 million in one-time funds for deferred maintenance, and the $38 million you have proposed in your May Revise above the $125 million included in your January budget. The CSU still needs $62 million in additional funding to support the enrollment of 6,000 more in-state residents that will provide greater access to the CSU system, to hire more faculty for added classes, and to hire more instructional support staff to serve those students.

For the University of California, no tuition increases under any circumstances. We believe that the $119 million you supplied in your May Revise should be increased by at least $50 million. This additional funding should be tied to support undergraduate enrollment targets of an additional 5,000 in-state residents, more student aid to defray the real cost of attending a UC, smaller class sizes, and resources to recruit and retain quality faculty and staff.

            We welcome your recognition of the state obligation to fund UC pensions and the funds you have provided for that. However, we do not agree that UC should make additional changes to the structure of the retirement system, such as the creation of an additional tier in exchange for the state’s contribution. We especially oppose language in the revised budget that requires the creation of a defined contribution only option. 

Instead of attacking employees’ pensions there should be limits placed on executive compensation, an end to lobbying and funding that opposes Research Assistant collective bargaining rights, no outsourcing of vital services that can be done at a lower cost in-house, and curbing poverty rates in California for sub-contracted workers, mostly immigrants and people of color.           

We look forward to working closely with you in once again prioritizing higher education within the State of California.

Sincerely,

  • AFSCME UAPD – Stuart Bussey, President
  • CCCI – Richard Hansen, President
  • Courage Campaign - Eddie Kurtz, Executive Director
  • CPFA – John Martin, Chair
  • CSUEU – Pat Gantt, President
  • CUCFA – Joe Kiskis, VP for External Relations
  • Members of Luther Burbank High School – Law and Social Justice Academy
  • Teamsters 2010 – Jason Rabinowitz, Secretary-Treasurer/Principal Officer
  • SSCCC – Omar Paz, President
  • UAW 2865 – Mar Velez, President
  • UAW 4123 – Emily Beals, President
  • UAW 5810 – Anke Schennink, President
  • UC-AFT – Robert Samuels, President
  • UPTE-CWA 9119 – Jelger Kalmijn, President

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 5, 2015

Dear Governor Brown:                                                                                                                    

CC: Toni Atkins, Speaker, California State Assembly • Kevin de Léon, Pro Tem, California State Senate • Brice Harris,

Chancellor, CCC • Janet Napolitano, President, UC • Timothy White, Chancellor, CSU

The escalating crisis in higher education requires a reaffirmation of the State of California’s commitment to The Master Plan for Higher Education. As key stakeholders representing well over 4 million students, staff and faculty throughout the State’s three higher education systems – the California Community Colleges, California State University and the University of California – we urge you to restore adequate state funding to higher education.

As a result of deep budget cuts in recent years, the Master Plan for Higher Education is in jeopardy. Tuition and administrative costs are skyrocketing while enrollment of in-state students is not keeping pace with the needs of our economy. Our institutions of higher learning should, once again, be an engine of economic growth and good jobs in our communities. We will need at least 1 million more graduates by 2025 to remain economically competitive, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

Now is the time to implement a vision that can address the systemic problems plaguing California’s ailing public colleges and universities. This includes increased state investment, as well as making institutional reforms that promote greater access, affordability, instructional quality, and internal accountability. Broadly, this consists of:

  1. Increasing enrollment to meet the needs of Californians
  2. No tuition increases that exacerbate the student debt crisis, which includes reining in executive compensation
  3. Fair pay and benefits for the hundreds of thousands of workers who make the institutions work
  4. Smaller class sizes and greater instructional support, which includes abandoning the idea that online education is the panacea to state disinvestment
  5. Ceasing the outsourcing of vital services

We support the following guidelines for the 2015-16 budget cycle above the augmentations to our institutions’ base budgets:

For the California Community Colleges, we thank you, Governor, for the support you have shown thus far for student services, and the much needed additional $125 million in base funding. We still advocate that funding should be directed to specific components of student success. These include the conversion of part-time faculty positions to full-time, compensation for part-time faculty office hours, the provision of health benefits for part-time faculty, and equal pay for equal work for part-time faculty, otherwise known as “parity.” We also support the system request for $25 million for professional development of faculty, staff, and administrators.

For California State University, we thank you, Governor, for the $25 million in one-time funds for deferred maintenance. We still need $100 million in additional funding to support the enrollment of 10,000 more in-state residents that will provide greater access to the CSU system, to hire more faculty for added classes, and more instructional support staff to serve those students.

For University of California, no tuition increases. In addition we need, $150 million to support undergraduate enrollment targets of 5,000 in-state residents; more student aid to defray the real cost of attending a UC; smaller class sizes; and resources to recruit and retain quality faculty and staff.

This increased $150 million in funding should be tied to reasonable accountability measures consistent with UC’s mission and values, such as limits on executive compensation; an end to lobbying and funding that opposes Research Assistant collective bargaining rights; no outsourcing of vital services that can be done at a lower cost in-house; and curbing poverty rates in California for sub-contracted workers, mostly immigrants and people of color.

Finally, we request that the discussions between the “Committee of Two” around pre-funding of retiree health benefits reflect the commitment that the State, the University, and UC employees will bear that responsibility, not employees alone.           

As the 2015-16 budget cycle continues, we look forward to working closely with you so that we can once again prioritize higher education within the State of California.

Sincerely,

  • AFSCME 3299 - Kathryn Lybarger, President
  • AFSCME UAPD – Stuart Bussey, President
  • CCCI – Richard Hansen, President
  • Courage Campaign - Eddie Kurtz, Executive Director
  • CFA – Lillian Taiz, President
  • CPFA – John Martin, Chair
  • CSUEU – Pat Gantt, President
  • CUCFA – Joe Kiskis, VP for External Relations
  • Teamsters 2010 – Jason Rabinowitz, Secretary-Treasurer/Principal Officer
  • SSCCC – Omar Paz, President
  • UAW 2865 – Mar Velez, President
  • UAW 4123 – Richard Anderson, President
  • UAW 5810 – Neal Sweeney, President
  • UC-AFT – Robert Samuels, President
  • UCSA – Jefferson Kuoch-Seng, President
  • UPTE-CWA 9119 – Jelger Kalmijn, President

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Governor Brown:                                                                                                                    12/15/2014

CC: Toni Atkins, Speaker, California State Assembly • Kevin de Léon, Pro Tem, California State Senate • Brice Harris,

Chancellor, CCC • Janet Napolitano, President, UC •Timothy White, Chancellor, CSU

 

The escalating crisis in higher education requires a reaffirmation of the State of California’s commitment to the Master Plan for Higher Education. As key stakeholders representing well over 2 million students, staff and faculty throughout the State’s three higher education systems — California Community Colleges, California State University and the University of California — we are ready to work with your office, the State Legislature and university administrators to address this crisis.

 

The Master Plan is in jeopardy. Tuition and administrative costs are skyrocketing while enrollment of in-state students is not keeping pace with the needs of our economy. The Public Policy Institute of California maintains the state will need at least 1 million more graduates by 2025 to remain economically competitive. Unfortunately, our institutions sorely lack both state support and accountability measures to meet these needs.

 

Now is the time to implement a vision that can address the systemic problems plaguing California’s ailing public colleges and universities, as well as ensure that these institutions will continue to generate middle-class jobs throughout the State of California. This includes increased state investment, as well as making institutional reforms that promote greater access, affordability, instructional quality, and internal accountability. Broadly, this consists of increasing enrollment to meet the needs of Californians; no tuition increases that exacerbate the student debt crisis; smaller class sizes and greater instructional support; reining in executive compensation; ceasing outsourcing of vital services; and abandoning the idea that online education is the panacea to state disinvestment.

 

We support the following guidelines for the 2015-16 budget cycle above the anticipated augmentations to our institutions’ base budgets:

For California Community Colleges, the consensus proposal among constituency groups for additional funding to ensure students receive proper institutional support: $100 million for converting faculty to full-time and extending part-time faculty office hours together with $25 million for professional development of faculty, staff and administrators.

 

For California State University, $127 million in additional funding to support the enrollment of 10,000 more in-state residents that will provide greater access to the CSU system, the hiring of much needed faculty to increase quality by decreasing class sizes, and more instructional support staff to serve those students.

 

For University of California, funding to stop tuition increases and support undergraduate enrollment targets of 5,000 additional in-state residents, more student aid to defray the real cost of attending a UC, smaller class sizes, resources to recruit and retain quality faculty and staff, an end to lobbying and funding to oppose Research Assistant collective bargaining rights, and no outsourcing of vital services since bringing services in-house will decrease UC’s existing administrative costs and increase quality overall.

 

As the 2015-16 budget cycle begins, we look forward to working closely with you so that we can re-prioritize once again higher education within the State of California.

 

• AFSCME 3299 — Kathryn Lybarger, President

• AFSCME UAPD — Stuart Bussey, President

• CCCI — Richard Hansen, President

• CFA — Lillian Taiz, President

• CSU-EU — Pat Gantt, President

• CUCFA — Joe Kiskis, VP for External Relations

• Teamsters 2010 — Jason Rabinowitz, Exec Director

• UAW 2865 — Michelle Glowa, President

• UAW 4123 — Richard Anderson, President

• UAW 5810 — Neal Sweeney, President

• UC-AFT — Robert Samuels, President

• UCSA — Jefferson Kuoch-Seng, President

• UPTE-CWA 9119 — Jelger Kalmijn, President


Showing 2 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • commented 2017-09-07 01:54:21 -0700
    Articles that have meaningful and insightful comments are more enjoyable, at least to me. It’s interesting to read what other http://www.essayprime.co.uk people thought and how it relates to them as their perspective could possibly help you in the future.
  • commented 2017-09-07 01:50:10 -0700
    Thanks for sharing with us. I just loved your way of presentation. enjoyed reading this .Thanks for sharing and keep writing. http://www.assignmentuk.co.uk/buy-assignment-online It is good to read blogs like this. As constantly, we appreciate yourself assurance and accept as true within us.