UCIbudget

Thanking you for your interest

2010-06-18T11:42:00.001-07:00

The fall 2009 reporting classes at UCI (Lj21) thank our readers and interview subjects for their involvement in our blog examining the effects of budget cutbacks at UCI. Though the classes in which we produced the blog have ended, the problems we documented remain mostly unsolved, with questions about the future of public higher education looming larger than ever.

As journalism students, we hoped to fuel discussion on the subject of higher education funding; to this end, we are proud to have had our work cited in the Orange County Register, Sacramento Bee, OC Weekly and many other publications. Thank you, again, for reading.

UC Irvine Winter Rally

2010-01-04T19:50:00.000-08:00

by Jason Davis

January 4, 2010

All Photos by Jason Davis; Nikon D700

UCI Medical Center: Where Does the Money Go?

2009-12-07T11:22:00.000-08:00

By Jessie Lee

Earlier in 2009, the UC Irvine Medical Center (UCIMC) received a $21-million gift aid to finish the final construction phase of its new UC Irvine Douglas Hospital. Initiated in 2005, the 7-story unit is expected to be completed by the end of 2011 with 424 beds, 15 high-tech and spacious operating rooms, 45 neonatal ICU’s and more. The total project totaled $555.9 million, the largest project in Orange County. While the UCIMC continues to expand and build up its state-of-the-art unit, UCI students are struggling for survival at the bottom of the UC system due to the ongoing budget crisis.

With the financial shortfall resulting in budget cuts, fewer services for students, programs eliminated, furloughs, and layoffs, there have been complaints from unions and critics that physicians are still paid enormously high compensations. They have expressed opinions in seeking assistance from UC medical centers. Among the protesting voices against UC's budgeting transparency is Charles Schwartz, Professor Emeritus of Physics at UC Berkeley. He is a vocal critic who provides organized information and concepts on the finance, secrecy, and governance on his blog University Probe. Schwartz has written about redirecting medical revenues and faculty bonus pay generated from UC medical schools to cover the financial shortage. Through e-mail, Schwartz was also able to answer a few questions and offer some more pointers on the issue of alternatives to financing the UC.

To understand the medical center’s perspective, I met John Murray, spokesperson for the UCI Medical Center (UCIMC), who generated a great deal of knowledge on how funds work in the institution, and about physician compensation amidst the financial crisis.

The following are issues relating to the UCIMC amidst the financial crisis:

• Medical revenues cover expenses, reimbursement shortages, physician compensation, and bonus pay for the SOM
• Management reorganization in the UCIMC eliminates vacant positions and reduces costs
• UC medical centers are exempt from the system-wide furlough program
• Critical disparity in remuneration for senior management group and staff physicians

Source of Money

The UCI Medical Center (UCIMC) is an enterprise operation, meaning that it is self-sustaining. The institution is funded mainly through service fees and patient care, according to John Murray. There are a few grants, but they constitute only a minor portion. In the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2008, the UC Irvine Medical Center Audit Report records total operating revenues at $526.4 million in which net patient service revenue contributed to $502.8 million. The remaining “Other operating revenue”, amounting to $23.6 million, comes from chiefly State Clinical Teaching Support (CTS) funds, referral lab, cafeteria and parking operations. Government-supported health insurance programs Medicare and Medi-Cal provide for almost half the net patient service revenue.

(Click to enlarge, or download full document from link below)

UCIMC Statements of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Assets for the Years Ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, page 16.

While UCIMC earned $584.3 million in total operating revenue, its total operating expenses amounted to $530 million. Much of the profit earned goes out to pay for expenses, to purchase new equipment or medical technology, to construct the new hospital, and to license their technicians, Murray said. He added that the medical center expands moderately with small business, generating more revenue for continued development with the help of government-issued hospital revenue bonds.

READ THE FULL UC IRVINE MEDICAL CENTER AUDITED 2008-2009 FINANCIAL REPORT HERE.

SEE MORE UC and UC MEDICAL CENTER AUDITED ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/finreports/

Medical Revenues Cover Reimbursement Shortages and SOM Bonus

In response to the budget cuts, critics have expressed the possibility of using medical center revenues to patch up the financial deficit. Charles Schwartz wrote that “some of that extra money at the Medical Centers should be on the table,” in referring to the $512 million UC-wide “Unrestricted Net Assets” for the end of the fiscal year 2008 (UniversityProbe.org).

The UCIMC counters that these revenues are often used to cover other “committed” fees. For one, insurance companies may debate paying for clinical service fees at the going rate. This problem exists even with government payors such as Medicare and Medi-Cal, as official documents have evaluated. Government auditors, contractors, and intermediaries may dispute on many issues, including the diagnosis, and clinical procedure. Thus, the medical center allocates a portion of its revenue to charity care, which is omitted from net patient service revenue. Charity care helps provide clinical services to uninsured patients at lower or no charge. They also cover differences from insurance reimbursements less than the actual cost of hospital fees. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2009, UCIMC spent $81 million on charity care.

Each year, the medical center transfers a portion of its revenue to the university to “further education”, as hospital officials said. Another portion of these revenues were given to the UCI SOM, named Transactions with the University and University Affiliates. Part of it goes to pay physicians for their services, and after the expenses are deducted from that amount, the rest is called “health system support”. The excess is a bonus. The center transferred a little less than $75.3 million to the UCI School of Medicine (SOM) in the fiscal year 2009 for “academic and clinical support”, and the final health system support was reported as $53.4 million.

The UCIMC does not seem to have any additional money to contribute to the UC system. Sources show that the sum of charity care and SOM transfers is around $134.4 million. This number is surpasses their income from operations alone, stated in official 2009 fiscal year audit reports. Despite that, there is an imbalance in what this financial gift for the SOM is used for. This issue will be discussed further later in the article.

Effects of the Budget Cuts on the UCIMC

Despite the economical downturn, healthcare remains a necessity to the public. As the hospital seeks methods to “absorb the cuts internally,” no programs at the UCIMC have been cut, the PR said. By getting more juice out of every penny, the hospital has felt minimal impacts. There have been halts on salary raises, and job duties are redistributed due to hiring freezes, which is the key method of compensating for these cuts. The MC has also “winded down contracts” with consultants, a position that generally requires higher compensation than other employees. A majority of these consultants are in the information technology department. Although union members have claimed four layoffs from the medical center (read more about it in Sebastian Ontiveros and Emily Ma's report), the hospital stated that there have been no furloughs and layoffs among UCIMC employees.

UC Medical Centers Free From Furloughs

The UC Regents exempted medical centers from the regular furlough program. The rationalization behind this decision, as Murray explained, is because hospitals need to stay open for service to the community. Even if employees were furloughed, the institution would still need to hire other people to come in and do the job. If a furlough program were instigated to save $20 million, these positions would still need to be filled up. In essence, additional help would be needed, amounting to more expenditure. The PR said,

"On Thanksgiving holiday, it takes roughly $1 million to operate the medical center."

If you place these employees on furlough for 18 days, that would cost the institution $18 million. Furloughs would not be an efficient strategy to implement at medical centers.

While there have not been any furloughs, there has been restructuring in the management division. But whether or not the restructuring is driven by the financial cutbacks is undetermined. In March 2008, the Regents combined two positions into one: Chief Financial Officer – Medical Center and Associate Dean for Fiscal Affairs – School of Medicine. The gross pay for these positions in the year 2007 was $368,750.04 (Ronald L. King) and $201,056.67 (Mona M. C. Wapner), respectively. This reorganization resulted in one new position: Chief Financial Officer – Health Affairs, Irvine campus. Ronald L. King was given a 13% raise for this new position, earning $431,500 in base salary. (Numbers obtained from The Sacramento Bee and ucpay.globl.org). Slap on an additional $60,518 bonus pay, cited from official sources, and $492,018 is King’s total compensation in calendar year 2008 (Annual Report on Executive Compensation for Calendar Year 2008). As CFO – Health Affairs, King is responsible for overseeing the finance of UCIMC, the University Physicians & Surgeons, SOM, and also School of Nursing and Programs in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Public Health. UC Davis, UC Los Angeles, and UC San Francisco have all adapted a similar position, too.

Currently, the UCIMC has no Chief Financial Officer of its own or Chief Nursing Director. The responsibilities of these jobs are distributed among existing officials. In the case of the nursing division, nurse managers assume the extra duties of Chief Nursing Director.

Another reformation occurred in July 1, 2009, when Dr. David N. Bailey, former UCI Vice-Chancellor for Health Affairs, resigned. This position was then separated into two positions: Vice Chancellor of Health Sciences and Dean of the School of Medicine. Ralph V. Clayman is currently an Interim Dean of the SOM. Similarly, over at the UCIMC, Terry A. Belmont is an Interim CEO at the UCI Medical Center. Both are still awaiting announcement for the search of a permanent Dean/CEO.

Who is Responsible for Hospital Faculty Compensation?

As one institution, UCIMC has two employers. The UCI School of Medicine is accountable for compensating the hospital faculty, including physicians, RN’s, and Ph.D’s. On the other hand, the medical center itself compensates around 60% of the base pay of its 600 residents and fellows.

The compensation of physicians at the UCIMC is determined and distributed through the Health Sciences Compensation Plan (HSCP). As described in documents from the UCI School of Medicine (SOM)’s website, this plan is an organization of the SOM faculty that “hold a University appointment at 51% or greater, funded by the SOM”. Murray stated that HSCP compensates the base pay for these physicians working at the UCIMC. There are three factors affecting the amount:

1. Stipends from duties including teaching, assuming administrative/management offices such as Vice Chair, Division Chief, or departmental committees
2. Research grants, funded mostly by the government
3. On-call rates, and clinical practice, which are paid for separately through billing and insurance companies and managed by the University Physicians & Surgeons.

In addition to that, surgeries are mostly cash procedures, which increase cash compensation. The University Physician & Surgeons is another UCI faculty practice organization, formed in 2005. They manage “capitated contracts” and “oversee the entire clinical practice for UC Irvine’s faculty” (School of Medicine Timeline). Therefore, in correct terms, UC Irvine Healthcare, the clinical entity of UC Irvine Health Affairs, is made up of two parts, the UCIMC and the University Physicans & Surgeons.

Bonus Pay and High Compensations

Unions and critics say that money from medical centers could smooth out budgetary differences. Unexpectedly high compensations are one of the major aspects that has been criticized and attacked consequently after the budget setback. Charles Schwartz writes that, “[Yudof] chose not to mention that all the bonus income from the physician practice enterprise would be exempt from the paycuts” in University Probe. Through an e-mail Q&A with Schwartz, the professor concisely suggests that instead of compensating faculty bonus pay, the money should be used to cover budget holes. He refers to his previous essay "Financing the University - Part 7," which writes,

"If we were to take (or borrow) 15% of that bonus pay, to help preserve the core missions of UC, that would bring something like $100 million to the table."

("Budget Alternatives for the UC").

UC doctors and coaches are substantially the highest paid UC employees. The large compensations mostly result from a hefty “bonus pay” as several California newspapers show in a 2008 salary database they have compiled. These may be stipends for temporary office, merits, one-time relocation allowances, bonuses, and more. In the case of the medical center, official UCIMC salary guidelines regulate these bonuses to be paid for by the funds that remain from patient care professional fees after expenses have been met (Faculty Salary Guidelines).

Hospital officials commented that UC medical centers are under more scrutiny, because they are part of the UC system. As a public institution, many documents are required by law to be disclosed, whereas private clinics are not. In actuality, physicians’ salaries at UC Medical Centers are already lower than free market compensation levels. Many can easily ask for salaries 30% to 40% higher in private practice. To be willing to work at the UC medical center would require a more serious devotion to academia than the monetary compensation. The PR stressed that many administrators at the UCIMC are far from the top in the list of high salaries UC employees. The Dean of the School of Medicine, Ralph V. Clayman, is paid around 33% lower than the market average, Murray enumerated.

In 2008, Clayman’s compensation as “Professor-MedComp” in 2008 was $439,507.73. This number doesn’t make it to the top 50 in the UC system. UCI takes its first ranking at #49, with John Stuart Nelson raking in a meager $663,257.12, compared to #1 from UCLA, Ronald W. Busuttil with $1,776,403.71. In a separate category of “Executive Dean of School/College” on ucpay.globl.org, the highest paid UC faculty in 2008 was Gerald S. Levey of UCLA ($630,190.98). UCI enters the billboard at #23, with Thomas C. Cesario earning $397,274.97.

The total compensation for Gregory R. D. Evans, a clinical professor and plastic surgeon at UCIMC, in 2008 was $564,325 (ucpay.globl.org). Amidst the recessive economy, budget cuts, and financial deficits, how do physicians similar to Evans continue to receive these seemingly large compensations? According to the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), the annual earnings for plastic surgeons ranges anywhere from $300,000 to $791,510. Aside from being a clinical professor, Evans is also the Chief of Aesthetic and Plastic Surgery Institute at the UCI Department of Surgery. Without considering demographics, geographic location, and the income effect, at $564,325 from the University of California, he is only roughly in the middle of that range.

Furthermore, Murray also emphasized that salary level does not determine a job’s value in society. He said the high bonus pay of plastic surgeons could simply reflect a trend in Orange County that people like to do plastic surgery.

An important fact is that while some management officials have been given raises ranging from 10%-25%, they may at the same time assume two titles at once. By eliminating one office, the Regents save tens of thousands of dollars. Nevertheless, this still brings to question the need for such raises and high compensations, especially among senior management administrators, during this time of budget deficit.

The UCOP’s website provides the 2009 Update of Total Remuneration Study for Campus and UCOP and Medical Centers, evaluated by Mercer and Hewitt. The companies compared UC medical centers to 12 national and 10 California academic medical centers including Johns Hopkins Hospital, Stanford Hospital, University of Michigan Medical Center, University of Virginia Medical Center, Kaiser North and South, Long Beach Memorial, and more.

The following graphs show the results of the study, highlighting a significant imbalance for staff physicians and senior management groups.

(Click on any of the images to enlarge picture; download link provided below)

(p. 61) Official study shows that all UC medical center employees are within 5% above or below market average for cash compensation, except for staff physicians, which are 18% below average.

Any comparative search on various faculty members with ucpay.globl.org will reveal a significant disproportioned income among physicians of different departments, and also with management officials.

(p. 62) Graph compares that health and welfare benefits for all medical center employees are all below the mean by 2-7%, except for senior management groups and professionals and support staff (PSS) that are 2% and 3% higher, respectively.

(p. 63) Documents show that retirement benefits for UC medical center employees are all significantly above market average but at the same time widely disparaging amongst groups (the lowest being 22% for nurses, and highest being 100% for senior management groups)

(p. 66) In general, besides staff physicians whom are down by 9%, all UC medical center employees are remunerated uniformly above market average by 4-6%.

READ THE COMPLETE DOCUMENT, titled “New Retirement Plan Ideas for New Hires and Related Collective Bargaining Issues”

Overall, medical benefits for UC medical center employees are “close to market median,” while retirement benefits are 66% higher than average. To conclude on compensation, official documents analyze that “cash compensation for many [UC] employee groups is below market, significantly so in many cases, but that UC’s benefits are currently ahead of market.” Total cash compensation for employees of UC medical centers is 2% below market average. There exists a large disparity between categories: Management and Senior Professionals (MSP) are 1% above average while Staff Physicians are lower than their average by 31%. Yet cash compensations are defined as base salary, which exclude one-time relocation allowances, stipends for additional temporary responsibilities, one-time bonuses, and etc. Remuneration reports do not take into account bonus pays, which are often over the top. This places bonus stipends in an overlooked territory.

Information observed from official online resources show that the medical center spends what it earns, and that they contribute their share in the UC system. But even after extensive research, it is still hard to fully understand the budget. There are broad categories in financial reports, such as “Other.” As one of the administrators in the SOM Dean’s Office said, “Even we don’t know the numbers.” Yet ultimately it is the unwillingness of the UCI School of Medicine to speak that provides the public more reason to look at the medical center with more skepticism.

The School of Medicine receives millions each year from its teaching hospital in support of education, but when that money is simply regurgitated as bonus compensation for executive administrators and chief physicians, to what extent does that really further education?

As the Regents continuously approve of raises: 32% tuition fees for students, and salary increases for UC executives and physicians, there is only one obvious fact. Students are a segregated sector from all other categories. Students and the system are put to the test when students can’t keep up with the large fee hikes. Financial capability will become another stratification in public higher education. How much should the rules of economics weigh in on public education?

California Community Colleges also in Hot Water

2009-12-04T11:54:00.000-08:00

Dear Readers,

Education activist Helen Lecar wrote us in response to an article on the role of blogs in covering the crisis in higher education. Ms. Lecar writes that the budget disaster goes beyond the University of California and includes the state's community colleges -- long the entry point for many to postsecondary education and middle-class earnings -- and now also imperiled.

From Ms. Lecar:

Hi,

I just found your blog this AM, via the California Report and am delighted that you're working past at all the photo-op public media about student protests. The issue is, as you indicate, the long-term causes for the budget cuts and the wreckage they leave behind.

As a League of Women Voters activist on behalf of the California Community College System, however, I was disheartened to note the absence of any mention in the article of the even bigger calamity the 2-year colleges are facing. The same budget cuts, which are denying university admissions to thousands of qualified students, and re-directing them to the already overburdened, underfunded CC districts, are also excluding students altogether from the Master Plan's promise of universal access to higher ed.

There is now a strict, reduced cap on the number of full-time equivalent CC students the state will pay for, with devastating cuts to student services of all kinds. The end result is that the system-savvy, rejected university-eligible students, who know how to navigate the application process and fill out the forms early, are excluding by their sheer numbers the very students the CCs were set up to serve -- people who come late to higher ed, who need to retool their job skills, who were underserved in their K-12 years, who are newcomers to the US and the English language, who are trying to better their lives and learn their way into the middle class.

As Benjamin Franklin noted, "We must all hang together or we will all hang separately." Please keep your readers, and your students, aware that the cuts to education affect everyone, K-20, and indeed will destroy the future of the economy of the state if the current legislative pigheadedness is not reversed.

Helene Lecar

What About the Workers?

2009-12-03T09:14:00.000-08:00

by Jason Chung

When we hear about budget cuts, the first thing that comes to our minds is the students and how many of them will soon be unable to afford their UC education thanks to the recent 32 percent hike in tuition. But what about the workers? The campus custodians? The food and service staff? The gardeners? These contract workers are not true employees of the UC system staff. Their status as outsourced workers offer them no job security. Therefore, they were amongst the first to end up on the chopping board when our school system failed to obtain a workable budget from the California state funds.

As students, we have a mass of organizations dedicated to fighting for our causes, even if we are not activists ourselves. But for the hundreds of workers who are already working long hours for minimum wages, they do not have the luxury of going on strike or holding rallies to garner attention for their situations. They have families to feed. Their children's next meal to consider. Taking time off from work to plead their cases is simply not an option.

Here is where the UC Irvine Worker-Student Alliance (WSA) come into play.

“The WSA was formed in 2007,” says Abraham Medina, a senior Sociology undergraduate member, “when we felt that the mainstream student organizations here on campus are not giving adequate attention to worker issues.” Its members range from graduate and undergraduate students, UCI alumni and the workers themselves. Though relatively small in number, most of its roughly 50 student members belong to more than two other organizations, and are extremely active in reaching out to the community. Medina, for example, is also part of the Orange County DREAM Team that assist undocumented youths gain access to higher education. The group prides itself for its practicalness and lack of a hierarchy structure, believing that to fight for equality, they must first treat each other as equals.

The group immediately went to work in May of that same year, when outsourced workers from UC Berkeley, Irvine, Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz joined together demanding an improvement to their substandard wages. After numerous petitions, rallies and letters to the Chancellors of each campus, along with the backing of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299 union, the workers finally won a crucial battle for their rights when they reached a settlement with the UC system to increase wages for UC Berkeley, Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz workers by $1.75, while UC Irvine is to immediately stop further outsourcing from one of the companies, Commercial Landscaping Service, who provides the campus with groundskeepers, and in-house those who were already working here.

However, UCI received the short-end of the bargain when the Office of the President denied that the funds to in-house the UCI workers existed. As such, as of today, these workers remain outside laborers with no health insurance, no sick-days, and no pension plans for retirement. Since then, the WSA has continued to fight feverishly for workers' rights.

More recently, when it was announced that major cuts must be implemented in UCI in order to keep the university running, the WSA reemerged in the spotlight. On April 29, 2009, the group held a panel titled “A Worker Struggle is a Student Struggle”, in which these subcontracted workers were given the opportunity to describe their personal experiences working for UCI in hopes of drawing the backing of students. “However,” says Sandra Flores, a sophomore History undergraduate member, “UC administrators have only answered with divisive practices and tactics of intimidation in order to prevent any worker movement on the campus...UCI [was] threatening to fire and replace all present workers [at the time] to avoid in-sourcing the current workers.”

On May 14, 2009, they hosted a rally titled “Protest UCI Racism” in which they again called for the in-housing of the 150 subcontracted workers hired through ABM Industries, one of the largest facilities services contractors in the U.S., who were still denied employment after over two decades of service. As outsource workers, not only are they paid minimum wage ($8.25), as opposed to the $12 that UCI-employed workers earn, they are not entitled to vision and dental insurance, retirement benefits or vacation time. Although hundreds of students showed up at the rally in front of the administration building that day, “negotiations have deteriorated,” says Fernando Chirino, a fourth year Sociology graduate student member, “three workers who have already been laid off have just received letters saying they will never be [rehired].” In August, 35 more custodial positions were cut in the university's attempt to close the $77 million gap left behind by state budget cuts.

Currently, the WSA is partnering with several other activist groups in the Defend-UCI coalition. They have temporarily switched their focus from fighting for workers' rights to helping laid-off workers get through this difficult period. Aside from the usual protests and rallies to garner attention to their cause, the group is also holding can drives to lighten the unfortunate workers' loads.

What's Happening to Outreach?

2009-12-01T16:44:00.000-08:00

by Jason Davis and Lauren Demello

December 1, 2009

Severe economic hardship has required faculty and employee furloughs and layoffs throughout the University of California education system. Many of the difficult decisions forced upon the UC have meant heavy, repeated blows to sports teams, Humanities, and various outreach programs, among others. UC Irvine has already seen the closure of one such outreach program, and the future of at least another remains uncertain. While many programs at UCI are making do with less funding for the 2009-2010 school year, still others are nervous about further cuts and potential closures for 2010-2011. Unfortunately, cuts from some of these programs directly affect services to the surrounding community. Although some of the services have been preserved in different entities, a climate of uncertainty persists.

In the spring of 2008, an outside review team at UCI recommended the closure of SAAS—the Student Academic Advancement Service, and a restructuring of its services to be adopted by other programs within the Division of Undergraduate Education. SAAS was federally funded, in part, by the US Department of Education to assist first-generation, low-income students, and offered study skills workshops, academic counseling, career planning, and tutoring to eligible students. SAAS was also responsible for the popular Summer Bridge and Transfer Bridge programs, which have thankfully been transferred to Student Support Services. According to Shelly Brown-Gunn, Associate Director of SSS, there were several recommendations in the report outlining how services could be improved or restructured. “The decision to close SAAS was a reaction to sudden and drastic budget cuts to DUE last summer. The Deans determined that a lot of what SAAS did for students had some duplication in other departments, so they had to make the ‘lesser of all evils’ decision of shutting down that department to be more efficient with the services provided in utilizing other departments already performing those services.” Some of the federally funded money that previously went to DUE for SAAS now goes to SSS, but Shelly said that it aspires to benefit the same students—roughly 450—for the same services—just under a different name.

Shelly reiterated that restructuring is still taking place and that DUE might not be done with layoffs to balance their budget. And that’s a lot of work to take on for a new organization that is essentially under-staffed. “DUE had to have multiple layoffs to achieve the budget savings after the cuts. Closing SAAS didn't solve the entire problem with the budget. Whenever a division has to do massive layoffs, there will be the issue of the remaining staff having to take on more responsibility to make up for the productivity losses. That is what happened with the restructuring of my department to take over part of what SAAS did. Choosing who to lay off is a heart-wrenching process and I don't envy the people that had to make such difficult decisions… I was shocked to hear they [SAAS] were being closed, and I didn't see that coming at all. But the DUE was shocked to get a nearly 20% cut—it was a million dollars that needed to be shaved from the current year's budget—a cut of that magnitude with that timing was unprecedented. It is just a dismal time for the UC and for California right now.”

Amidst the certainty of additional midyear cuts, the future of other student and community outreach programs is uncertain. Humanities Out There is a program designed to boost students’ reading, writing and critical thinking skills in secondary schools. This year, the partnership is with the Orange Unified School District and H.O.T. has focused its efforts on literature and history through a variety of historical, artistic, and scholarly publications. As Program Manager, Peggie Winters coordinates the recruitment of graduate instructors and UCI undergraduate students who tutor in the OUSD. Contrary to general perception, H.O.T. is not a recruiting tool for Humanities, nor is it open only to Humanities students. “Our tutors come from all over,” Peggie said. “We have pre-med students, information computer science students, and engineering students. We’re trying to introduce college level teaching at the high school. In the high schools that we go to, most of the students are going to be first generation college students. We’re trying to reach out to the groups of high school students that have never thought about going to college because no one in their families ever went to college.”

Jeff Lake, an eleventh grade English teacher at Orange High School, says that the Humanities Out There program is very well received by his students, and that the lesson plans are relevant to their studies. Although many of the students are unsure what they want to study after high school, Jeff says “H.O.T. is effective for any student, regardless of their future collegiate interests,” and that many of his students are considering college as a result of H.O.T. “I feel that my students have obtained some of the skills required to succeed in college. Most of the H.O.T. lessons have dealt with analytical writing, which is a skill students need to be well prepared for. Not only for success in their remaining years in high school, but for post-secondary writing courses they will need to complete [as well].”

There are currently one hundred UCI undergraduate students working under the instruction of six graduate students. Each undergrad then becomes a tutor to roughly four or five High School students; in total, H.O.T. provides college-level instruction to five hundred and forty High School students every quarter. Obviously, funding is an issue with such a large student staff, and until this year, H.O.T. was funded, in part, by a grant called Gear Up under the UCI Center for Educational Partnerships. With the latest installment of cuts to CFEP’s budget, H.O.T. was dropped from the grant. To stay afloat, H.O.T. has been receiving money from the School of Humanities. Next year, though, H.O.T. will only be receiving $20,000—a rate, Peggie says, is not enough. Dr. Stephanie Reyes-Tuccio, Director of CFEP, confirmed the cut. “HOT was heavily funded by CFEP in the early days. Those were the days that the CFEP received double the funding that it gets now. But [in] 2001, CFEP’s funding was cut [by] 50%. The next year, it was cut even more.

“My supervisor told me that we don’t have money to fund HOT,” she continued. “Gear up was designed to make school wide change in terms of scores in mathematics and language arts.” But since H.O.T. was only offered in two classrooms for each school, it just didn’t affect the number of students needed to justify its support. “That’s the capacity that HOT has based on their funding. So, there’s no way that we could or did affect school wide increases in scores when HOT can only service two courses.” Since CFEP has been unable to increase funding to 2001 levels, H.O.T. lost its inclusion in the grant. “There’s no funding to support H.O.T.,” said Dr. Tuccio, “and there hasn’t been for a while.”

Responding to the question of SAAS, Dr. Tuccio said she was devastated and questioned whether the reduced staff of SSS could appropriately handle the increased load. “We’re still new in the academic year. At this point it’s hard to tell what will happen. I [recently] met with the Associate Dean and was briefed on SSS and the takeover of SAAS. But she was optimistic about how they would take all the different components of SAAS programming and distribute it to different organizations across campus. And her feeling was that things would be done more efficiently in time… I’m going to be watching very closely to see how this transition goes and to make sure the needs of the students are being met because I’m accountable. I was recently told that SAAS would have been serving many more students this year.” But a restructuring of Humanities Out There, similar to what happened with SAAS, would not be a welcomed alternative for H.O.T., says Julia Lupton, H.O.T.’s founder. “I feel that something that makes HOT special is the [graduate] research and the interest of [local] schools. I think if it were taken over by another group on campus it would just turn into a homework help thing. It would be very different from what HOT currently delivers.”

Unfortunately, when programs are unable to support themselves financially, they are the first to see cuts. Initially, there was “a host of different outreach programs across campus. CFEP was [created] to get everyone in one place and have synergy, to leverage everyone’s efforts and to have a more strategic outreach toward the schools instead of everyone doing their own thing.” Dr. Tuccio noted the difficulty in keeping these programs running, and although CFEP has written three proposals for the Gear Up grant, she said it isn’t enough to sustain programs at their current level of funding. “Schools don’t have money to fund the programs so they come to me for additional support. Unfortunately it is at a time when the campus is cutting me, so I have less support to offer them.”

CFEP, too, is going through changes. It also is downsizing and they are moving to a new location—a smaller and less accessible location. In the “old days,” before there were budget constrictions, CFEP used to publish lesson plans collaborated for H.O.T. by UCI graduate students and local High School teachers. The lesson plans haven’t been printed in three years, but electronic documents are routinely requested from all over the world. According to Julia, these publications aren’t remedial pamphlets, and teachers and students in any school can use them, even if they were never affiliated with H.O.T.

If Humanities Out There were to close for school year 2010-2011, it would mainly affect those in the community that wouldn’t be exposed to college level thinking and writing. With H.O.T., underserved and diverse groups of students are learning firsthand that college is a realistic, worthwhile, and rewarding endeavor. At UCI, losing H.O.T. will primarily affect graduate students whose departments do not fund TA-ships, and the undergrads who tutor within the surrounding communities. Jeff Lake feels the H.O.T. tutors are very effective, and that his students look up to them as “experts in the field.“

“If H.O.T. is not able to return next year,” remarked Jeff, “I feel my students will miss out on a valuable opportunity for small group instruction and a ‘window’ into the college life that the tutors provide.”

Although Julia Lupton is not no longer involved with H.O.T., she understands the current situation. “The fact that we have survived this year amazes me, and the fact that we weren’t cut last year. It’s sort of an end to an era,” she remarked. “If the money comes back, [maybe] we can start up the program again. We do have a really nice structure with graduate students developing content and undergraduate students getting to teach the content. So my hope is that it will be brought back and that this is just hibernation. I want this to build back up within the school of humanities.” As for Peggie Winters—who had become teary eyed at the mention of closure—she suspects the school will make an effort to relocate her into another administrative role. “It’s extremely frustrating to be struggling like we are,” she said. “We are borderline depressed about it. We feel helpless because there’s nothing we can do. We feel bad, but we understand the economy. The sad thing is, I feel the way we are being treated is that this program is a luxury.

“This program is not a luxury.”

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

The Center for Educational Partnerships is a division of Student Affairs and works to create “collaborations that support preparation for and success in higher education… in order to achieve the University of California's goal of academic excellence.”

Student Academic Advancement Services closed on August 31, 2009. None of the previous counselors could be reached for comment.

Student Support Services is continuing many of the functions previously offered by SAAS, albeit with a reduced staff. The Division of Undergraduate Education is monitoring its transition.

Humanities Out There is continuing its mission in the Orange Unified School District for the remainder of the 2009-2010 school year.

The Cost of Quality

2009-12-01T09:34:00.000-08:00

By Morgan Slade

In the Cross Cultural Center, the distant hum of the overhead projector echoes throughout the room. Thirteen students shuffle in and quietly prepare for the tuition hike ‘teach-in’ to begin, one of many held on the UCI campus two days before the UC Regents passed the 32 percent educational fee increase.

Teach-in organizer Tia Peterson, Graduate student of Psychology and Social Behavior, addresses the gathering, warning that further fee increases will result in an education that leaves students financially and emotionally bankrupt. Peterson states,

"I came to UCI because I was highly recruited. The deal was that I attend UCI with full financial support because they were invested in the contributions I could offer as a member of their research team. I have lived up to my end of the deal. I have published articles, done numerous studies, graded papers and mentored many undergraduates. I have trained undergrads to become R.A.’s and have written their letters of recommendation. I have passed my comprehensive exams, finished my second year project and earned my masters degree. I have done all of these things and done them well. In the end it does not matter how hard I have worked because due to a lack of funding in my department I get dropped anyway. I have fulfilled my duty to the university. They have broken their promise to me."

Student activist and organizer Emmeline Domingo also speaks at the teach-in, stating, “We don’t elect our regents. They are appointed to us. So the question that immediately arises is whether they are invested in the students or are their interests purely political?”

The common assumption at this meeting and in discussions among students and faculty across campus is that the tuition hike, brought on by California’s fiscal constraints, is a calamitous breach of trust. Many students argue that the 32 percent fee hike is forcing them to bail out the UC system. In exchange, the student body will be devoid of diversity as middle and lower income students are unable to absorb the fee increase; resulting in many qualified yet discouraged applicants from contributing to the nexus of ideas that comprised our formerly accessible UC system. But is this really the case?

While the UCLA protest displayed the impassioned resistance of students, in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that the hikes are providing opportunity that was previously unavailable.

According to an action item addressed to the Office of the President’s Committee on Finance, “Of the $505.1 million that mid-year 2009-10 and 2010-11 fee increases would generate, approximately $175.1 million would be set aside for financial aid; the rest would be used to address State budget reductions, mandatory cost increases, and other pressing needs” (http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/nov09/f1.pdf).

Throughout 2009-10 the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan has accommodated fee increases for undergraduate students whose family income is less than $60k. In 2010-11 the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan will expand its funding to meet the needs of undergraduate students whose family income is capped at $70k.

Ricardo Vazquez, contributor to the UC Newsroom shares, “With the income cut-off set at the median income for California households, the plan will potentially extend to half of all California households […] The Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan will initially provide a minimum level of gift assistance for 48,100 eligible California-resident students” (UC Regents approve policy providing minimum aid for lower-income students).

According to the Committee on Finance, the expansion of The Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan will:

"Provide system wide fee coverage to an additional 800 students who were not previously eligible for participation in the Plan. The overall benefit to increasing the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan is not only to raise the financial aid income threshold for current UC students, but also to encourage a greater number of low income students to apply and hopefully be enrolled at the University of California."

In addition to the expansion of the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan the University is working to mitigate some of the strain presented to middle class students. The University will cover one-half of the fee increase for middle income students who have become financially impacted by higher fees and would have otherwise been excluded from grant assistance as eligibility was designated for families whose income was capped at $100k but now includes families with incomes as high as $120k. In fact, students with incomes below $180k will experience greater accessibility to resources previously untapped.

The Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan coupled with increased Pell Grant/ Cal Grant resources and lax UC Grant eligibility requirements all serve to maintain the UC’s commitment of assisting low and middle income students.

Yes, California is in the red. Due to the onset of tuition hikes students have been enlisted to combat President Yudof's threat of mediocrity. However the student fee increase isn’t the only casualty produced by the budget crisis. Over 2000 employees are expected to face layoffs between this year and next. The UC system is experiencing the loss of respected faculty to various institutions with no projection as to when they will be replaced. Hours have diminished, programs have been deserted and positions have been confiscated. Perhaps the fee increase is an unjustifiable means to an end. However when considering the benefits reaped from salvaging the integrity of the UC system one must ask themselves if they are willing to contribute to the quality of their own education.

Is Proposition 13 the reason behind this mess? Part 2

2009-12-01T03:36:00.000-08:00

This is the second part of the two part investigative piece on Proposition 13 that explores whether Proposition 13 is to blame for the mess going on in the California Budget Crisis. This part explores whether Proposition 13 is truly the case as to why California is in it's budget woes.

If you want to read the first part, click on the following link-

http://ucibudget.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-proposition-13-reason-behind-this_24.html

Is the two-thirds majority vote requirement in Prop 13 to blame for being a hindrance to this economy?

A claim like this is an overstatement. First off, according to Joel D Fox, former president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Proposition 13 is not responsible for the two-thirds vote requirement to pass the state budget or the two-thirds vote of the people to raise local taxes for special purposes. The two-thirds vote on the budget was established more than seventy years back in 1933 for budgets that exceeded 5% growth over the previous year’s budget. In 1962, that two-thirds standard was applied to all state budgets after the constitutional revision. The supermajority vote requirements is not limited to just California, but the United States in general. In fact the two-thirds vote can be found numerous times in the United States Constitution. Because the two-thirds supermajority has been long instilled in our constitution, it makes a good point that the two-thirds vote brings a sense of overall agreement to important decisions. If there were no two-thirds supermajority voting requirement, it would be obviously unfair if a tax can be passed by people who don't have to pay that tax.

In contrast, Joel Stein of Times magazine states that for the sake of California's economy, it's best for the people to not vote because their vote has taken not helped California progress. To read the article, click here

Is there a need to reform Prop 13’s property tax cap in order to make up for the tax revenue that was lost?

Although the California property tax revenue was cut by 57% in 1978 due to Proposition 13, that only put California down from being one of the most taxed states to an above average taxed state. According to the CCSCE (Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy), due to the passing of Proposition 13, California ranked 45^th in effective property tax rates at .477%; however, we still generate enough capita from property tax at $1,151 per capita to be ranked 27^th in the nation. That is fairly high compared to bottom ranked Alabama, which makes $455 per capita from property taxes. Even though property tax revenue was lowered the year Prop 13 was implemented, that did not hurt California from raising enough tax revenues above inflation.

According to George Rebane of the Bastiat Triangle Association-

“The important and revealing metric to assess the impact of Prop 13 is the inflation adjusted per capita revenues that the state has enjoyed over this period. Everyone knows that since Prop 13 the state has found many other areas and activities from which to squeeze tribute out of us during the last 27 years. So let’s see if the passage of Prop 13 has somehow caused collected property taxes to fall behind in contributing their share to the state’s coffers.

1980 per capita property tax was $6,360,000,000/24,000,000 = $265.00.

2007 per capita property tax was $43,160,000,000/38,000,000 = $1,135.80.

The CPI increase gave us a total inflation of 202.4/88 – 1 = 2.3 – 1 = 1.3 = 130%.

The inflation adjusted 2007 per capita property tax then becomes $1,135.80/2.3 = $493.82.

The inflation adjusted percent increase is then $493.82/$265.00 - 1 = 1.864 – 1 = 86.4% more than inflation increased during the 27 year interval.

Putting it another way, the state’s annual property tax revenues increased at a rate
(1.864)^(1/27) – 1 = 1.023 – 1 = 2.3% over that of inflation. And since the average annual inflation rate over that period was (2.3)^(1/27) – 1 = 1.031 – 1 = 3.1%, the state pulled in property tax revenues that grew at a 2.3%/3.1% = 74.2% higher rate than needed to keep pace with the 1980 per capita property tax receipts.” (2009)

Proposition 13 shifted cities’ revenue focus away from property taxes and move towards other revenue sources. According to Associate Economics Professor Gary Richardson of University of California, Irvine, “So for local governments that likes to tax property and find it convenient to tax property, this Prop 13 puts a crimp as to what they can do. That (Property tax) was a very convenient method for them to raise revenue for their citizens. So that’s going to shift the types of governments or the taxation to other areas and it might have an effect on the composition of government. If local government can’t pull some strings (because) they can’t raise money through property taxes, they’ll try to raise money through other means or other government units will have to pick up the slack.” Since then majority of our general funds have been coming from, ranking from highest to lowest, Personal Income taxes, Sales tax, Property tax, Corporate Income tax, and other miscellaneous taxes. According to the CCSCE, California’s personal income tax collection per person is $1,418, ranking the 6^th highest in the nation. Our 9.55% income tax rate is the 4^th highest in the nation and for incomes more than $1 million per year, there is a 10.3% tax rate, the highest tax rate for incomes more than $1 million in the nation. California also boasts the highest sales tax rate in the nation with an 8.5% sales tax rate for customers, 2.25% higher than the national mean, 6%. Not only does California boast the highest sales tax rate, it also has the highest Corporate income tax rate at an 8.84% flat rate. Overall, California ranks 6^th in tax burden percentage in the United States with an estimated 10.5% of income going to taxes compared to the 9.7% national average. Clearly not much has changed compared to 1978 before Prop 13 was implemented into our state’s system when CaliforniaAmerica. had a tax burden percentage of 11.7% compared to the national average of 10.3%. In conclusion, it is clearly an overstatement to mention that Proposition 13’s property tax cap has diminished our tax revenue when we still remain one of the highest taxed states in the United States.

So if California is the highest taxed state in the United States, why isn't our revenue increasing as it should? Why did California's expenditure drop from $91,547.0 to $84,582.9 (in millions)?
Thomas Del Beccaro, Vice Chairman of the California Republican party, states three reasons why. "(1) the national economy, (2) that so many Californians have left over the last 5 years and (3) millions of Californians are now unemployed. All together that means a shrinking taxpayer base." With taxpayers fleeing from California, we lose taxes along with them too.

What about the Commercial Property owners? Couldn’t the State of California have made much more revenue if they weren’t given the grand benefits of Prop 13’s property tax cap?

As mentioned before in Part 1, “a corporation owning commercial property is bought out or merged, but the property remains in the ownership (deeded) of the corporation, then the property can effectively change ownership and avoid Prop 13’s provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property’s resale value.” Although this has greatly reduced the property tax businesses have to pay to maintain property, this does not mean that businesses have the benefit of paying less taxes. Prof. Richardson stated, “We have plenty of mechanisms to tax businesses. If a business is not paying enough in one type of tax, consider another tax. If Disneyland (referring to the example in part 1) is not paying enough property tax, then just add a one dollar surcharge on ticket prices (Corporate income tax).”

Although taxing corporations through other means can help raise revenue lost from the property tax cap, we ultimately forget that it's people who pay taxes. If the government Imposes a new tax (corporate income or sales) on Disneyland, Disney may lower dividends to stockholders or lower the wages of the workers. If possible, they can do both along with raising ticket prices. In other words, it's possible that stockholders, workers, and visitors at Disneyland are altogether paying for the tax on Disney. (Cited from economics FAQ from Pitzer.edu)

To see how the California’s Government changed since the enactment of Prop 13, check out this link: http://www.hjta.org/propositions/proposition-13/analysis-government-revenues-california-enactment-proposition-13

Is it Prop 13’s fault for the declining quality and spending in our K-12 education?

Prop 13 has some effect on the spending of K-12, but it’s certainly not the only thing going on. First off, there is certainly more money in the school system now than before Prop 13. Even though there has also been more students in school than in there were back in 1978 when Prop 13 passed, more money is spent on the students, in real per capita dollars. A study by the Center for Government Analysis shows that there is a 30% more spending per pupil than there was back in 1978. So why the problem in K-12 education does persists? According to Joel D. Fox, “…education is not just about money. Too much administration, union rigidity, parental involvement or lack thereof are all issues. And the problem is not just in California…There are many problems with public education in this country that do not revolve around money.”

Secondly, Proposition 98 ensures a minimum funding guarantee for k-14 education (elementary to community colleges). This ballot initiative, passed in 1988, binds the state funding to ensure that K-14 will receive consistent funding. The California Department of Finances states that, “The state's share of the guarantee is derived by subtracting local property tax revenues (the local share of the guarantee) from the total guarantee amount. Proposition 98's share of overall General Fund tax proceeds averages about 43 percent. As a percentage of new (additional) General Fund tax revenues, Proposition 98 gets approximately 54 percent, depending upon the factors and tests. For example, for an increase in General Fund tax proceeds of $100 million, Proposition 98 would get about $54 million on the average.” However, there are consequences from ballot initiatives like Prop 98 (earmarking initiatives) that is damaging California’s economy which will be explained later.

Now what about the funding for UCs and other California public universities? Is Prop 13 to blame for the cut spending of our public universities?

Before we go point fingers at Proposition 13 for the spending cuts on public universities in California, we must realize we’re in a nationwide recession where other states are cutting spending on services and that proposition 13 is just one of many ballot initiatives that are limited to our state. During an economic recession, taxes fall and spending cuts must be made, but earmarked taxes limit the government’s choices as to what spending should be cut. Political Economy Professor Linda Cohen remarks “I think it’s important to know we’re in a very serious economic recession. All states are under a crisis so whether or not we have Prop 13, we would’ve been in recession. By repealing or reforming Proposition 13, we’re not going to get a quick fix. The reason why things got exacerbated is because of (California’s) bad fiscal structure.” So what makes California’s fiscal structure different from other states? “California does a lot more earmarking through propositions and California’s revenues are more volatile than other states,” answers Prof. Richardson. Throughout California’s fiscal history, there have been many ballot initiatives to give guaranteed spending to certain services from California’s tax revenue, designating a certain minimum percentage of the tax revenues to that service without allowing the legislature to cut spending on those services. “When we do earmarking, we’re tying the hands of the government and we’re letting special interest dictate spending outside of the legislative process, and that often does not generally lead to good outcome,” comments Prof. Richardson. Facts from the CCSCE show that in the 2006-2007 fiscal year, out of the $170 billion in state and local tax revenue, the personal and corporate income tax making up $63 billion, went to general funding while property tax revenue ($42 billion) went to schools, cities, counties and special districts, sales tax ($45 billion) went to state government, local government, and transportation agencies, and the miscellaneous tax ($20 billion) went to local government. All the tax revenues that did not go to general funds went to services that were able to pass ballot initiatives such as highway maintenance, transportation, K-12 education, water bonds, Parks and recreation, and etc. Meanwhile, the government had to figure out how to split the $63 billion amongst the general funding services such as prisons, youth rehab, healthcare, tax relief, higher education, resources, labor and workforce, and etc. Because of the low tax caused by the recession, the government is left to cut spending to help the state survive in this deficit. The problem is the government is not allowed to cut spending on any of the services that receive funding from earmarked taxes leaving them to only cut spending on whatever is covered by the general funding such as prisons, rehabilitation centers, healthcare, tax reliefs and higher education. Because the government is only allowed to cut spending on whatever programs and services are covered by general funding, this has led to the cut spending on higher education such as UCs.

Although it would have been beneficiary for public universities if they weren't as many earmarked taxes as there are today, to believe that there will be a significant increase is just a mere speculation. Prof. Richardson states, "When there's a downturn (earmark) you think 'Well maybe the decisions (Budget cuts and spending) would have been different.' Well that is kind of a speculation. It's not clear if the decision was different. I suspect we would have gotten less of a cut, but I'm not a 100% of that." Even if there were no earmarked taxes, giving Government more options as to what services should get cut spending, it is possible that the government still would have chosen higher education to take the damage.

So if not Prop 13 what is to blame for the California Budget Crisis?

According to Prof. Dan Mitchell of UCLA, “At the peak of the business cycle, the state was already taking in less in revenue than it was expending. The faltering economy and the loss of taxable gains from the stock market worsened the deficit and brought about the current fiasco.” In time of a nationwide recession, every state is hit hard economically due to lack of consumer confidence in spending, stock market crashes, the weakening value of the dollar, and layoffs which has led to lower tax. The unfortunate problem is California is hit the hardest. “The budget downturn is worse in California and that has nothing to do with our fiscal structure of our government, that has to do with the economy and that our economy was hit harder by these shocks. The government problems are what transmit the shock to through government to government services. But the shocks of the economy are not caused by Government budget structure. The government budget structure is not the reason why couple of years ago people were building these houses out in the desert that people did not want to pay for or the rate they had to pay for to sustain them. And that seems to be the big part of the California budget crisis,” explains Prof. Richardson. So if neither the California fiscal structure nor the Prop 13 is the cause of the California Budget Crisis, what is the main cause? Simply put by Prof. Richardson, it’s the main cause of the recession itself, the United States Housing bubble.

To understand what caused the United States Housing Bubble, please check on this link to learn more- http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/united+states-housing-bubble/1145

UC Irvine libraries try to protect students' access from being limited further despite a 14 percent budget cut.

2009-11-30T22:26:00.000-08:00

by Line Eichner Knudsen Elliott

It is early afternoon, and the Gateway Study Center across from the Langson Library is packed with students. A hum of computers, clicking keys, and crackling paper creates a din of concentrated studying, a bubble of quiet intensity that is shielded from the noisy campus life, which continues on the other side of the center’s tinted glass doors. Students lower their voices to a near-whisper if conversation is absolutely necessary, but most have their heads bent over the tasks before them. There are assignments to complete, papers to turn in, finals to prepare for, and yet, just a few weeks ago, the study area was closed until 6 p.m., and students were forced to take their homework elsewhere.

As budget cuts are implemented across the UC system, libraries are among the facilities cutting costs in order to continue services to students.

The UCI libraries, consisting of Jack Langson Library, the Science Library, and Grunigen Medical Library off campus, share one budget and decision making in this sphere affect all three, while the newly opened Law Library and the Media Art Center, specialized in their fields and open only to students in select programs, are run separately and on much smaller amounts of money. What all of them have in common is a decline in the services that are available to students.

According to Mitchell C. Brown, Research Librarian and Unit Head for the Reference Department at the Science Library, the library budget is allotted by the UCOP. In the past, the UCI libraries were given extra funds because the campus was considered a growth campus, a campus that continues to add students, but this year those extra funds were no longer available.
It is the first year the UCI libraries have experienced a permanent cut, which means limitations in terms of the amount of money they have received, but they also cannot expect that the money will be forthcoming next year.

According to Brown, cuts were about $4 million out of a budget of roughly $28 millions for the school year 2009-2010. The largest part of this money goes to salaries, about 35 percent, another 32 percent is allocated the materials budget and 12 percent go to operating costs.

“Personnel cost is always the most expensive part of any organization,” Brown said. “And it is really where your intellectual capital is. So with a $4 million cut we don’t want to get rid of people.”

So far the libraries have avoided actually firing any employees, but they have experienced a serious reduction in the number of student workers. The libraries used to be the largest employer of students on campus, but that is no longer the case.

The most obvious changes so far concern opening hours. Grunigen Medical Library has cut hours from 88 hours a week in March to 73 hours in November. Langson and the Science Library have cut hours from 99.5 hours a week in March to 65 in the beginning of this quarter, but they have recently raised that number to 77 hours a week through the week of finals.

“The hours were cut earlier on because we just didn’t have enough money,” Brown said. “The hours were extended for the Gateway, and that money came from the fact that we had one or two people who left the university entirely. Now we had money from salary savings, and the Gateway got extended. Going into the spring I think some of the hours are still going to be reduced. We are looking for money to be able to cover that, and I don’t think it’s going to change, but it could.”

Still, the cuts in hours are no doubt making it harder for those students who prefer the calm environment of a library to get their research and studying done. One library supervisor, who prefers not to give his name, observed that Langson recently saw a rise in students during the day when the Gateway Study Center was closed, but as these hours have been extended, things are back to normal.

Kelsey Wong, 20, Nursing Science, said: “The cutback of hours is the only thing I’ve noticed. I come here a lot. It is pretty much my main place to study. I heard they are not having the libraries open 24 hours for finals week this year, and that is going to suck… A lot! If I study at my apartment, my roommate will come in every ten minutes and interrupt so I don’t know how that’s going to work out.”

Though there does not seem to be many complaints among students about loss of other services in the library system, reductions in funds have necessitated additional cuts as well. For example, they have switched from being available in both electronic and print journals, to just electronic journals, but luckily the electronic sources seem to work for people. This way information may be accessed even if the building is not open. They have also had to place a hold on purchasing books.

Brown said: “We haven’t been buying as many books in the first part of this fiscal year, so that’s July through this month. We’ve been receiving books automatically, but we haven’t been purchasing as much as we have in previous years so we saved about 30% potential cost on that. We’re just waiting until the budget is balanced on our end before we do a bunch of purchasing.”

Another cost saving area has been cuts to certain databases after it was discovered that some of the information was available in several places. Some subscriptions, for example, are shared with all 10 UC campuses, but were also available as exclusively UCI resources. The libraries were thus, in this instance, able to reduce costs without actually losing services.

In this regard, the libraries are furthermore trying to understand how they can potentially share more things between all campuses within the UC system. However, it does not solve the overreaching problem.

“We’re hoping sharing will work for some materials,” Brown said, “but ultimately it comes to a point where you can’t necessarily share. Some things everybody needs.”
So far, the libraries have tried to avoid serious cuts by looking ahead and planning for cuts that seemed inevitable. According to Brown, the savings implemented this year are probably only about of what is needed, and a ten percent cut in the materials budget will most likely be needed.

“We are also looking at next years financial outlook,” Brown said. “It does not look that good either so we might actually have to do some cuts. We’re actually going to feel bad next year. But we are in the process right now of planning for that.”

He believes that the libraries will soon enter the much trickier process of eliminating areas that people really want to keep. Until now, the libraries have made cuts only to areas which could be covered up to some extent, but the focus has shifted to try to cover only what is needed right now.

“People,” he said, “must realize that they might not have everything that they would like in the future. We will have to deal with that when we get to it. Right now we have to try to build a system that will work regardless of what comes down the road.”

Another issue that the UCI libraries will soon have to deal with is how to make up for the hiring freeze. This year several library employees have left the staff permanently, and there are no one to replace them.

“We actually projected this out,” Brown said. “There is a point where we simply do not have enough people to do certain things and that’s going to be a problem. If we continue to lose people we may not be able to function.”

One such example is the print journal section on the second floor of the Langson Library. Keeping the journals in order takes about three hours a day, work that used to be done by student workers. Now it is up to regular staff to sort the journals, but several days in November, the job went undone because some of the staff was out sick and there simply were not resources to cover for it.

“If it’s something we cannot do on a regular basis, people are going to start to notice,” Brown said. “You might say, ‘Well it’s just a journal, how important could that be?’ But when you are looking for it and it’s something to do with your homework, that’s one of those areas – if you can’t find it - where you start running into problems.”

But while Langson, Science, and Grunigen are by far the biggest collections in the UCI system, there are much smaller programs trying to keep up with the budget cuts as well. At the Arts Media Center (AMC), Ross Whitney, Director of AMC, is getting by on a modest budget of just $17,000.

“We get our budget from the School of the Arts,” Whitney said. And it is not much at all. Santa Monica City College spends that much on acquisitions alone. So that is our entire budget for staff and acquisitions, and other little things like phones and utilities.”

Because of such limited funds, the AMC resources, which include CDs, DVDs, videos, instruments, computer and recording equipment, and expensive software, are only available to students in the Claire Trevor School of the Arts.

According to Whitney, the biggest effect of the budget cuts is on equipment right now. This year the classes required new computers because the lab was filling up and some of the older ones did not support the most recent music software, and that money came out of the operating budget. This has never before been the case. And while a photocopier is really much higher on Whitney’s wish list, students come first.

“We’ve never had to buy computers before,” Whitney said. “Because we just don’t get an operating budget that can afford to purchase new computers every three years. But classes come first so we had to buy those computers. It is ridiculous that we had to buy them. It’s supposed to come out of the technology fund, always has, but obviously the budget cuts are real, there are less money, people are competing for it.”

The AMC has not escaped cuts in hours either, and just like the UC libraries, it is evening and weekend hours that are hit the hardest. Some weekends the AMC are not open at all.

An AMC student who wants to be known as GhostDogZ, 23, Studio Art, said: “The primary concern is scheduling conflicts. Considering we have classes to go to throughout the day, free time would be evening and nighttime. The fact that you cut an hour at night gives us less of a chance to work. So you have all this free time on your hands, but no access to the facilities you need.”

Student access is particularly important because it gives them access to more features and software than they would normally be able to afford, like Pro Tools, editing programs, and MuLab.

Part of AMC’s problem is that most of the things it needs are very expensive. When a voice lesson DVD went missing, Whitney did not have the $600 to replace it. The subscription for the $300-400 encyclopedias of world music has been discontinued. And Whitney decided to personally donate copies of Final Cut Pro and Shake.

Still, the most important thing for Whitney is being open for student access to computers and to materials. Because of the size of AMC’s collection materials, it only checks out to graduate students and faculty, but not to undergraduate students or the public. It is more of a research library, and as such, its services are pretty limited.

“That is not crucial for us as long as we are open for students access,” Whitney said. “I am still able to acquire things. Our dean was very sympathetic; he supports this facility because he uses it for his classes. So we’re hurting, but we’re surviving fine. We’ll be ok. It’s like living off of two meals a day instead of three.”

The Law Library, also located on the UCI campus, in is a similar situation to the AMC. Separate from the other libraries, the Law Library operate on a much smaller budget, and is open only to faculty and students in the law program. But unlike the AMC, which has been around since 1992, the Law Library opened on August 24th this year.

According to Sheila Fortman, Administrative Coordinator of the Law Library, the timing of the budget crisis does not favor the new library. Despite being one of the smallest law libraries in the nation, they are only able to expand their core collection at this time, and then only what is needed for the law school.

Staffing has also become an instant issue. The library cannot afford as many people as they would like to stay open, so hours have been cut before they were ever put in effect. Three students help out a total of 20 hours a week, during evenings and weekends, but even then, the Law Library is only just able to keep its doors open.

“It is hard because we are so new, we don’t really know yet what will happen,” Fortman said. “We would like to be open more hours and help more students and have more research librarians, but we just don’t have the staff for that.”

Next year the UCI libraries are expecting further cuts. It may get worse for them, but Brown is hopeful that that will not be the case. A lot of this year’s budget cuts were absorbed by areas that could get cut without greatly affecting any one program or group, but next year the libraries will not have not these areas to cut. They are depleted and cut down to their core.

So where will the money come from? Tough decisions will have to be made, decisions that, in Brown’s opinion, no one is likely to be particularly happy with. The hope is that it might be just a flat spot in funding levels that will get better at some point, but the reality is it could be bad for a while.

“You make a choice between two bad options,” he said, “and you try to do it without doing something that is devastating. So what we are trying to do is get to a point where things does not get any worse, at least it’s stable, and we’re able to protect the areas that people are using.”

For library hours go to: http://www.lib.uci.edu/about/hours/index.html
For AMC hours go to: http://www.arts.uci.edu/amc/

People power – a key driving force in the future of the UC

2009-11-29T13:18:00.000-08:00

by Apphia Freeman

Student activism at UCI hit a new peak on November 24 when some 300 plus students gathered in front of the administration building on campus, protesting the budget cuts which have affected almost every facet of the university. The most recent blow came during the November 17-19 Regents meeting at UCLA, in which the vote on the 32% UC tuition hike passed. This was a major catalyst for the November 24 protest, which was probably one of the most energetic rallies the relatively quiet campus of UC Irvine has seen so far. This climax in student protesting was preceded by a number of stop and start efforts to prod students into action, beginning with the UC-wide walkout of September 24.

The walkout, on the first day of official instruction of the Fall 2009 quarter, had support from faculty, some of whom cancelled classes so students could participate. The scene at about 10am was still a pretty quiet one, with some union members out by the tables set up at the flagpoles, but with no major protesting yet. According to the New University, activity soon picked up, with people beginning to “congregate and march in a circle on Ring Road” near the flagpoles prior to the noon rally. Faculty, students, groundskeepers and union members joined in the picketing, and they gathered on the flagpole steps at noon to listen to numerous speakers – including graduate students, union representatives, and faculty – speak out against the cuts. The number of participants that day was a point of contention – the New University article reported about 500 people – which its writer termed a “guesstimate” of the total number of people throughout the length of the event. The OC Register reported that “comparatively few students” joined about “150 union workers and supporters” at the rally, which it generally portrayed as more “low-key,” with few protest signs and few participating professors. Whatever the number, the walkout was to kick-off a quarter of much increased activism on campus.

The teach-in on the budget cuts, held at UC Irvine on October 14, was one of the first motions to try to educate and mobilize the faculty and students of the campus. Organized by Defend UCI – a group made up of students, faculty, staff, and workers who are actively involved in protesting the fee hikes – the teach-in helped to educate the audience on major issues surrounding the budget crisis. The panel was made up of members of faculty – most of which were associate professors – and union representatives. Each of them contributed valuable perspectives on the crisis, based on their field of expertise, and gave pointers on how students, faculty and union members could fight to preserve the standards of the university. There was a lot of audience participation during the Q&A session, in which audience members brought up points for further explanation, or contributed their own viewpoints. Some representatives of political clubs on campus also used this opportunity to make their presence on campus known, and offered their services as organizations that could recruit and rally students to gain support for the cause. This was very much the stance of the Young Democrats Club, whose president was among the audience, and whose attitude was essentially “we’re willing, tell us what to do.”

Ultimately, the teach-in was a much-needed assessment of the situation and of what issues needed to be recognized before the real political strategizing can take place. Horacio Legras – an Associate Professor of Spanish and Portuguese, Chair of the Spanish & Culture Department, member of Defend UCI, and one of the panel members at the teach-in – emphasized that “action needs to start from a collection of reliable information,” but that in the meantime, “inaction should not be justified.” He stated that “waging a strategic battle will require a comprehensive plan with demands that are backed by a vision.”

It has been well over a month since that first teach-in on October 14, and much has already transpired in terms of actions to educate and rally support for the fight against the budget cuts. Besides the various protests on campus – including the zombie-themed Halloween protest of October 29 organized by Defend UCI – there was also an action-packed 7th and 8th week, with three teach-ins in Week 7 and two more in Week 8. These teach-ins were organized by ASUCI’s Office of the Executive Vice President and the Office of the Student Regent, with the goal of educating the students, writing letters to the Regents, fostering activism, and preparing for the public comment time during Week 8’s Regents Meeting at UCLA.

A rally was also originally organized for Week 8 – on November 17 at 11:30am – at the UCI flagpoles. However, anyone arriving on site at the slated time would have been greeted by an empty turnaround at the flagpoles, save for two or three dispersed pedestrians – no picketers, and no angry yelling mob.

Emmeline Domingo – the Logistics and Press Secretary in the Office of the Student Regent, member of ASUCI, and a student activist involved in organizing the budget-related events of Week 7 and 8 – responded in an email regarding the lack of activity. She apologized for the lack of communication with regards to the rally, and stated that they had started calling it off the week before due to a change in strategy. In lieu of the rally, 12-15 members of Defend UCI – as well as a reporter from CBS – met at 11:45am and walked quietly over to the Administration building to deliver a signed petition to Chancellor Drake. The petition was drafted by Defend UCI, and they had gotten 1,200 signatures for it. Domingo recounts how they actually got up to his office, and the secretary’s response was, “I’ll tell my boss.” They even requested a meeting with the Chancellor, but were not promised anything. Domingo explained that advertising the action would have prevented them from even getting that far, because the police quickly block off the administration building once they catch wind of ensuing confrontation.

Such an action shows that there are many different ways in which faculty and students can make their opinions heard, and goes back to what Professor Legras had said at the teach-in – that “what we do is not inconsequential,” and that “we need to force an opening in order to influence some decisions.” Low-key actions may be just as effective as large, high-profile protests like the UC-wide walkout of 9/24.

Still, it is hard to deny the visual impact of the protests at the UC Regents Meeting, held at UCLA from November 17 – 19 to vote on the 32% tuition hike. These protests marked a climax in terms of the intensity of student activism. I sat down with Emmeline Domingo, who had participated in the protests, to get an insider’s perspective of what went down in response to this unprecedented fee increase.

She described a very promising first day of protests, where everyone was in total solidarity, with the goal to make as much noise as possible so the Regents meeting could not proceed. They went everywhere together so they could make maximum impact with the noise they generated. While the traditional chanting, picketing and protesting was going on, there were also 65 students who were allowed to go in the Regents meeting for public comment, where they had the opportunity, for a minute each, to tell the Regents how they felt, and how the fee increases were going to affect them.

Trouble started when some students’ times for public comment got cut off – 4 students never got the chance to speak – hence inciting the public in the meeting to start chanting and disrupting the meeting. Accused of being an unlawful assembly, 14 were arrested, and ultimately everyone in the room was sent out. When they came back down and told the protesting crowd what had happened, they got angry, and Domingo said that was when things “started getting ugly – people stepped closer to the barricades, and the police freaked out,” responding by pushing the barricades further out, and students got caught in between them. Domingo stated that “people got pushed and shoved by the police and tased.” Despite a number of other disruptions during the meeting, the Regents still ended up passing the fee increase with very little discussion. The vote was unanimous, with the exception of Student Regent Jesse Bernal’s.

John Bruning, a Sociology graduate student and one of those spearheading Defend UCI, participated in an event held that night on the 17th called Crisis Fest, which was basically a tent city, with people camping out in one of the quad areas on UCLA. He states that a lot of students came down from Berkeley & Davis also, camping out so they could be there early the next morning for the protests. There were some workshops and talks, and towards the end of it, around midnight, a group of about 30–50 students took over UCLA’s Campbell Hall at about 12:30am, as reported by the online UCLA Newsroom on November 19. They stayed until 7pm the next evening, according to Bruning. The group that was involved, he notes, was “pretty representative” of all the colleges, with 3 UCs, 2 Cal States, and 1 community college. Although it was a major action, they actually saw very little police intervention.

The second day of protests, Domingo recounts, began much the same way the first day began. Because they had seen the way the police handled the situation the day before, one of the chants was “Put the guns away.” Domingo observed that there was “more police, more backup... (and) a lot more students” as well. Because they were not able to stall the vote on the first day, people were angry. Domingo states that they “were ready for drastic measures – and this created factions.” In contrast to the unification of the first day, now “there were people who wanted to rush the building, people who wanted to march through the school to gather more support, and people who wanted to march into the city.”

Domingo expressed her frustration at the fact that although there were more people the second day, it was “harder for (them) to be a single movement.” She emphasizes that “there is only strength in numbers,” which with regards to the local resistance at UCI, implies the need to involve all levels in the university and the community. Domingo expressed the importance of getting faculty support – and not just from the ones who already advocate for the activist organizations – but from all faculty, by means as simple as offering extra credit to students who participate in the various actions and rallies.

It seems that a lot more could be done in terms of faculty solidarity and support. Professor Legras believes that unity among the departments is essential in making a case for the schools that are feeling the brunt of the budget cuts – needless to say, the Humanities. He stated that the history of the Humanities, not just at UCI but everywhere, has always been one of “big fragmentation.” He emphasized that the hiring of faculty for one department does not mean that another will suffer due to the lack of resources – and that it is “completely suicidal to think that the strength of my department depends on the weakness of yours.” On the contrary, he believes that the existence of any strong department in the Humanities actually improves the prospects of hiring strong faculty or graduate students for his own department, because “the most interesting graduate students and faculty always promote questions that go beyond the limits of their discipline, and you have to provide them with somebody to talk to outside yours.” He gives the example that with regards to attracting graduate students specializing in Latin America, they offer not only the 8-10 professors in that department, but 4 professors from the History department, 1 from Film & Media Studies, 3 from Chicano/Latino studies, and 12 from the Social Sciences – all of whom also specialize in Latin America. So in terms of making a case for the Humanities – to prevent the administration from further cutting back on the Humanities budget – faculty need to recognize that unity is essential in invigorating the department and in attracting the brightest minds. It should be in such solidarity that they can then collaborate to facilitate research and share resources.

On the other hand, solidarity in activism has really taken off on the students’ side. Domingo says that this may be the biggest student movement since the Berkeley 60s – which is significant in light of the fact that apathy is the biggest thing this generation has been known for. While protests were going on at UCLA, other campuses were also taking action – there was a rally at UCI, Berkeley had a 3-day strike, Santa Cruz occupied buildings like Kerr Hall, and Davis tried to but was prevented from doing so by police.

Bruning affirms the belief that we are at the forefront of a significant undergraduate and graduate student movement right now, both at UCI and statewide. He mentions two of the organizations that are most active within Defend UCI – the Radical Student Union, of which he is a member, and the Worker-Student Alliance, which has been very involved with AFSCME and campus workers. Both groups are a mix of undergraduate and graduate students. There are also a number of other groups, like the Black Student Union, which has been playing an increased role in the protests on campus, and who also sent people to UCLA to participate in the protests there.

This surge in student activism seems to be an indicator of a larger, nationwide trend of increased political participation among the younger generation. Bruning describes the solidarity actions that occurred at a number of campuses nationwide around the same time the UCLA protests were going on. One was the banner drops at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign to show solidarity with the UC – big banners that said “Chop from the top,” as reported in the online Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center. He describes another action at NYU, in which – as affirmed by an article in the Washington Square News – 2 students got arrested. Bruning adds that the students there are pretty radical, and that activists at UCI have had “a fair amount of contact with them.” There have been 16 occupations in the past two months around the state, one of which was an action with about 60 students occupying the lobby of the UC Office of the President headquarters in Oakland, as reported in the UC Newsroom on the University of California website. There was also a library occupation at Fresno State, as reported in the San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center online. Bruning describes it as “one thing after another; if one school’s not doing it another school is” – and that a lot of schools around the country “are seeing (the UCs) as kind of like the forefront of a new student movement in the country, so they’ve been trying to rally around us a little bit.” He attributes this wave of activism to the extent of what has happened with the UC in terms of state defunding.

When asked about which UC is the most radical, Bruning stated that “Berkeley has a turnout for protests, but in terms of raw action, it’s Santa Cruz.” Santa Cruz has had five occupations so far. As reported in the online Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area, they held Kresge Town Hall on November 18, and took over Kerr Hall – the main administration building – the next day, which the cops put an end to three days later on November 22. They were also the first UC to occupy buildings – the first day of instruction, during the walkout, they took over the Graduate Student Commons and held it for a week, as reported in UCSC’s student-run City on a Hill Press. Santa Cruz has also been very proactive in exporting their brand of activism. As revealed in the online Los Angeles Independent Media Center, they conducted a southern tour, visiting UCLA, CSU Fullerton, and UCI to talk to people about how to organize and rally. Bruning believes that the Campbell Hall occupation at UCLA was partially a result of that. They have also been very active at Davis, Berkeley and San Francisco State. There were even some from Santa Cruz in the Berkeley and Davis occupations that happened the week of the Regents meeting.

As for UCI, Bruning states that they have been trying “to step it up a little, because we have the reputation around the state of being an apathetic school.” And we have got off to a good start. Groups like Defend UCI, besides being organizers of the 9/24 walkout and the various other protests and teach-ins this quarter, are right now trying to regroup in light of the recent fee increase. They are trying to figure out where to go from this point, and what are other ways to support students and enhance their education.

Domingo, who works with ASUCI and the Office of the Student Regent, states that they have interns within their offices who deal specifically with media. These interns look for information that the media has put out that is contradictory to what is actually happening – because, as she explains, “journalists often don’t do enough reporting to get to the heart of the issue.” If they see an article with falsehoods, they email the newspaper companies pointing them out. There have not been any responses – but Domingo feels that they “still need to try.” The Student Regent interns also look up policy to try to find loopholes to get more funding or simply to analyze them to get a better idea of what they are up against.

Most importantly, though, they strategize ways to continue informing people to gather support. Some ways they use include posting information about the budget crisis on the Student Regent website. They even enlisted the help of students to write letters to the Regents, which they presented to them during the public comment time in UCLA. There was a total of 150 handwritten letters from UCI students that were presented to the Regents, and Domingo believes that UCI “probably had the most representatives out of all the schools at the public comment – at least 6.”

These efforts to rally support from students have definitely paid off. The protest of November 24 was arguably one of the biggest and most energetic to hit the UCI campus, and the most impressive thing is that it was initiated by students themselves. Bruning states that the idea for the protest came from a single undergraduate student, and that the word just started spreading. It was posted as an event on Facebook on Friday night or early Saturday, and it grew in two days from 500 people who RSVPed their attendance to over 2000 people.

The crowd started protesting in front of the administration building, which was already closed off to the public and had about 14 police officers standing guard, and they eventually started down Ring Road to gather more support, inciting students to “Walkout!” as they passed by instructional buildings. By the time they started heading back to the Administration building, the crowd had swelled to hundreds of students, high off each other’s energy, yelling in unison slogans like “They say cut back, we say fight back”, “No justice, no peace”, or the question-response rallying calls like “Whose university – Our university!” When they reached the administration building, they went right up to the barricades – behind which the police officers held their ground – chanting “We want Drake!” It was quite a spectacle, probably unlike anything UCI has ever seen. The protest led to the arrest of John Bruning himself – details can be found in his statement online at http://occupyuci.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/john/.

Such protests may have more of an impact than what meets the eye. While Professor Legras did not expect the walkout of 9/24 to have the impact that it did, he now firmly believes in the efficacy of such protests. Most of the people at the walkout were from the Humanities department, who were protesting the impending staff layoffs. Legras states that there was going to be “originally 29 layoffs, but I think we’re looking at 8 or 9 layoffs now?” He believes this to be “a direct result of the walkout, and the walkout being reflected in the press and media.”

Even if the impacts of such protests are not immediately explicit, they will still likely affect future decision-making. All the media publicity these protests have been receiving has an impact on public opinion as well as on UC administration. Legras believes that the Regents are now “much more reluctant to approve another increase in student fees” after the one that already passed during the meeting at UCLA. He also stated his belief that the furlough program is “already dead,” and that he “(doesn’t) think they will continue the furloughs next year.” The impact of the protests may even reach as far as the legislature, “because faced with all this bad publicity, the legislature has not been as tough as they would be with the UC,” and that they may be “willing to compromise a little bit” in terms of how much of the UC budget they will cut. Legras believes the lesson here is that there is “some kind of informality in the whole process” of budgetary decision-making – and that the walkout of 9/24 “communicated to ABC much more effectively than anything else we have done or said.”

While no one expected that the protests at UCLA would prevent the Regents from passing the 32% fee increase, Domingo explains that they are still essential for stirring people out of apathy. One of the more immediate impacts she has seen as a result of these protests is that people are now “actively trying to find out” about these issues – and she emphasizes that “we have this momentum and we need to keep riding on it.”

As for whether or not student-led protests have ever influenced administrative decisions, Bruning brings up the example of the protests revolving around labor issues with campus unions and sweatshops – stating that students have had a number of significant successes around sweatshop organizing. They had the opportunity to meet with the UC President (Bob Dynes at the time) and were actually able to implement policy changes, as affirmed by a 14 May 2006 article in the Oakland Tribune.

It seems safe to say that the future of student activism on UCI looks like a bright one. As announced on the Defend UCI website on November 23, there is an occupation of Langson library planned for December 4 to 11. Students are planning to use studying as “a form of resistance” in protest of the reduced library operation hours, by forcing the library to stay open from the end of week 10 and all through finals week.

Domingo tells us that what we will be seeing in the months leading up to March are more teach-ins and more actions, in which she aims to invite representatives from different activist organizations to come together to strategize and figure out the best ways to continue this movement. She also revealed that there will be a march on Sacramento in March 2010, in which students will take their case directly to the state’s headquarters, to force them to “reconsider their priorities” and “reinvest in higher education.” She emphasizes the need within these next three months “to mobilize students and the communities to get support,” without which nothing they do will be effective.

Tuition Increase and Regents Protest at UC Irvine: November 24, 2009

2009-11-24T23:41:00.000-08:00

by Jason Davis

Silver Gelatin Photos by Jason Davis

Nikon, Kodak TMAX

Unions in Action

2009-11-24T22:10:00.000-08:00

By Saeideh Golji

Hundreds marched down the streets of LA on Nov. 19, 2009 holding banners and chanting slogans. The Regents had just made the decision for a 32% fee increase and outside protesters were speaking out, their faces filled with rage and their voices strong with numbers. Scattered throughout were posters and signs sending messages like 'No Fee Hikes' and 'A Democracy Needs Education for the Masses not the Elite'. One young woman had stripped down to her undergarments with a sign covering her front and back reading 'I Sold My Cloths To Pay Tuition'. Reporters and journalists followed along the protesters documenting the day as it happened and interviewing students. At the front, leading the direction of the rally, were four people holding up a green banner reading "CUT THE PERKS! NOT WHAT WORKS" followed by smaller font reading "AFSCME 3299". Students and workers had united in speaking up against the University's measures to cut coasts and save money.

The University is looking to save around $800 million dollars across all campuses to even out the budget. Measures have taken place resulting in the libraries having a total $4 million cut to work around, the library staff having to accept a furlough plan, and lecturers and campus workers seeing layoffs. A number of unions at UCI have been working together helping one another in their efforts to counter these cuts. These unions include UPTE, University Professional and Technical Employees; UC-AFT, the American Federation of Teachers, on the UCI campus they represent the librarians and lecturers; UAW 2865 representing readers, tutors, and TAs; and AFSCME 3299, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, on UCI campus they represent the service unit.

The most visible form of fighting back the unions have taken on has been protests and rallies. The first sight of protests on the UCI campus was in front of Aldrich Administration Building on Wednesday, July 15th 2009, when members of the unions UC-AFT, AFSCME, and UPTE demonstrated what was at that point just a threat of major cut backs. Once furloughs had been imposed members of UPTE held UC campus wide walkout on September 24, 2009, the first day of fall quarter, protesting what they claimed to be unfair negotiations.

Soon after in an interview with New York Times the UC President, Mark Yudof made a comment saying “being president of the University of California is like being manager of a cemetery: there are many people under you, but no one is listening”. This sparked a zombie-protest organized by DefendUCI, a collision of students and the unions UPTE, AFSCME, and AFT. The union’s ultimate protests were at the regents meetings on November 18th and 19th. Members from all unions and students showed up in support for each other as a united front.

Aside from helping mobilize people and students with rallies and protests, the unions have been active behind the curtains, trying to ease the effects of the UC budget cuts. Two of these unions include: UC-AFT, AFSCME 3299.

Just last year, after years of fighting, negotiators for AFSCME 3299 managed to secure a contract for better living wages for their employees. The victory was short lived as budget cuts and layoffs instantly took back all the ground the negotiators gained. The first 12 individuals to be layoff on the UCI campus due to the budget cuts were groundskeepers, members of their union. Aside from fighting off 9 of those 12 layoff notices this union has been fighting for the 35 groundskeepers working side by side their employees for years but not yet considered university employees. As of Jan 1st all the members are seeing a decrease of work hours and a pay cut. Juan Vazquez, a union organizer for AFSCME 3299, claims that the University is "using the economic crisis as an excuse, we [AFSCME 3299] found that they're financially stable to weather the storm without having to make these cuts and yet they're still doing it". He mentioned UC Riverside has been the only campus to open their financial records, revealing millions of dollars spent on executive travel. AFSCME 3299 has offered an alternative budget plan that protects students and employees and redirects fund reductions to places that can afford them. This plan includes the following recommendations:

Reduce the top 2% of earners saving $220,000,000
Use short-term borrowing as a stop-gap saving $200,000,000
Utilize medical center profits saving $100,000,000
Restructure debt saving $75,000,000
Utilize unrestricted investments saving $50,000,000
Cut wasteful spending saving $40,000,000

The entire report can be downloaded here. This alternative budget plan has also been endorsed by UC-AFT. UC-AFT has also compiled a list of five demands of their own that ask for the UC administration to:
1) Stop the fee hikes. The report claims that “undergraduates are now subsidizing everyone else, and yet the administration continues to cut undergrad courses and programs”.
2) Overturn the cuts that have been made in regards to layoffs and pay cuts.
3) Look at more progressive solutions to fix the budget like “borrowing money from the medical centers and sharing profits between units and reducing administrative units”.
4) Keep a ‘transparent budget’.
5) And finally, treat all the unions with justice.
(Full report can be seen here)
Unfair “union busting and bargain in good faith” can be seen within the UC-AFT union. According to UC AFT Vice President Mitchell Brown, their union has taken a negotiation strategy, a strategy also mentioned by Juan Vazquez. Brown claimed that there have been "small victories, never a big success. We managed to come to agreements in the negotiation process with the Office of the President not to cut librarian positions, protecting staffing, but we had to accept the furlough plan". The furlough plan mandates that librarians take unpaid leave, adding up to 7-12% of their annual salary or about a month’s salary. AFT was not able to negotiate a similar solution for the lectures resulting in a total loss of 43 lecturers on the UCI campus. It seems to come down to accepting furloughs or resisting them, and my resisting furloughs members become subjected to temporary layoffs.

Although the Regents have made their decision, the unions have not lost hope. According to Audrey Brunier, a union organizer for UAW 2865, though sometimes with different tactics unions will continue their negotiations “to expand funding to higher education and to raise revenue from those who can afford it not students and workers”, and their common ground in protests and rallies to “stand together and stand firm, making some kind of impact that way”.

Defending UC's Clerical Workers: The Coalition of University Employees

2009-11-24T15:40:00.000-08:00

By Soraya I. Sadeghpour

The Coalition of University Employees (CUE) is a member-run union which, elected in November, 1997 by clerical employees throughout the UC system to represent them, is made up entirely of UC clerical employees. Their headquarters are in Berkeley, California, though there is a group or "local" at each UC campus. CUE's contract with UC gives them the same protection as most large unions; it requires UC to negotiate with unions regarding the fate of their represented employees during times of considerable change to the employees' work proposed by the University. This includes the recent Furlough/Salary Reduction Program, implemented for most UC employees beginning Sept. 1, which CUE did not agree to. The furlough issue is one of many friction points between the clerical workers and the UC administration during this time of strapped finances.

--Below is a summary of CUE's views regarding the recent furloughs across UC, the temporary layoffs that CUE members are now faced with, and the voluntary START Program (with which CUE feels many are being intimidated into signing up because of UC's alleged "direct dealing"). In addition, a section on CUE's bargaining efforts with the UC Office of the President illustrates its views that UC bargains unfairly with the union, while UC clerical workers face the possibility of their salaries, already far below the comparable market, sinking further downward.--

A SHARED SACRIFICE
"Beginning Sept. 1, most UC employees will begin taking part in a one-year furlough program aimed at helping UC close an $813 million budget deficit...This approach of shared sacrifice means that every member of the University takes part in solving UC's budget problem."
- University of California, 8/28/09 on the Furlough Plan (UC Berkeley Human Resources website).

Linda Weinberger, a 30-year Langston Library employee at University of California, Irvine, is at work when her supervisor hands her a letter of 6 sentences signed by her employers that reads as follows: "I regret to inform you that your 100% position as [insert Position and Department here] is subject to temporary layoff effective [insert beginning and end date here]. This action is being taken in accordance with Article 13 of the Agreement between the University of California and CUE."

This last bit tends to confuse those who are not well-versed in this Agreement, as it refers to the action of physically notifying the employee, not the action of temporarily laying employees off. Specifically, Article 13, Section D, Subsection 1 states: "When the University selects particular members of the unit for layoff, it shall give individual notice to each employee of the effective date of the layoff and whether the layoff is temporary or indefinite."

As for the layoffs, CUE certainly does not agree they are even legal, since the union is still in a "status quo" bargaining period with UC on this issue; but the unclear wording of the letter certainly seems to imply CUE concedes to the layoffs. And Weinberger was one of Irvine's 1,300 CUE members to receive this news at the beginning of this month. She's been expecting it.

CUE held its monthly meeting, which always convenes on the first Thursday of every month, on Nov. 5 on the Fifth Floor of University Tower, in the central plaza across the street from UCI. "This is the first time we've had this many people in here!" Cynthia Norman, Vice President of the Irvine Local of CUE exclaimed upon seeing the variety of clerical workers sitting around the conference table, or standing and crowding up the doorway and the corners of the room.

These clerical workers, representing the libraries, the bookstore, the financial department of UCI and more, have to hear what the leaders of their union have to say about these temporary layoffs. It is an anxious time for many who will have to learn how to deal with a 4% cut, or more, to their paycheck for this fiscal year.

The meeting opens with myriad questions, all directed to Dianna Sahhar, the president of the Irvine Local. "Why does the notice say that the layoffs are in accordance with and agreement between UC and CUE?" asks one employee.

"Let me just say that we feel that it's direct dealings for Human Resources, your department or your supervisor to hand you this, and tell you that 'these are the days we're going to lay you off,'" explains Sahhar at the CUE meeting, "or even if you pick your dates, that's called direct dealing. They have to deal with the bargaining team, and we are at the table negotiating, so this is kind of like a side deal that they're doing. And it is illegal."

In fact, in an email she sent to all of the Irvine CUE members a couple of days earlier, she explained that CUE has already filed an Unfair Labor Practice document with the Public Employment Relations Board for review regarding this alleged "direct dealing" by UC, and that CUE members should send their layoff notices to the CUE office, so that the union can more effectively document this illegal action and subsequently "call department supervisors and ask them to stop this implementation."

This is the reason that one young bookstore employee hands a bulky envelope, full of copies of the 16 layoff notices from the bookstore, 16 proofs of service and a copy of Article 13 to Sahhar during the meeting. Completely halting the temporary layoffs, according to Sahhar, is "another battle," but at this point, CUE's bargaining representatives from each campus have been negotiating the effects of those layoffs since UC has not budged on its right to impose them, and CUE lawyers contend that if UC temporarily lays anyone off before CUE has finished bargaining the effects, the members will "most likely get [their] money back and have [their] accruals restored."

CUE has already succeeded in having many of the notices rescinded (UC takes them back) by accusations to supervisors of direct dealing, as CUE's contract with UC states that the union and the member should be noticed simultaneously, and the union claims it has not yet become informed in any direct manner besides from the members who have received them individually. "And they seemed to be premature, really, jumping the gun by doing this while we're still at the table," Sahhar says.

One employee's exasperation is heard from the back of the conference room: "Does anyone feel like this is just a lot of intimidation?" The entire room instantaneously confirms this feeling with a rush of head-noddings and indignant personal stories.

One bookstore employee explains that her department recommended taking her required eleven layoff days in two increments, one of 5 days, the other of 6. Another CUE member scoffs: "And, as it turns out, you wouldn't be eligible for unemployment!" Sahhar agrees: "They're saying they're doing it so it won't be such a burden on your paycheck, but in reality, it's so they don't have to pay unemployment." In fact, her email recommended that, if an employee decides to take all of their layoff days in one month, they contact the Employment Development Department on the first day of layoff to apply for unemployment benefits, which would be effective the following week.

More confusion ensues: One worker explains that her department is telling the employees that if they are laid off over a school holiday, they would not receive holiday pay. However, UC's Holiday Article No. 9, Section B4 states that "An eligible employee who is on approved leave without pay or temporary layoff, for a period of not more than 20 calendar days, including holidays, shall be eligible to receive pay for any holiday occurring during that time." All of the clerical workers' layoffs are "not more than 20 calendar days." Therefore, paid holidays are not part of the layoff days. CUE member Deborah Perkins received a layoff notice with dates beginning over this Thanksgiving break. A copy of the Holiday Article was not included with the layoff notices.

More indignation ensues: Norman cites a letter that she recently sent to California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, mentioning that "most of the CUE employees, when they get their cut, are going to get a $2 thousand cut after all the taxes. How are you going to pay your mortgage or your rent? And your gas and your phone and your food and your water? I put all of this in the email. I said, we're predominantly struggling women, and they're [UC is] losing $22 billion and still giving increases in salary off the backs of the lower-paid female employees?"

Indeed, all but one of the CUE employees participating in the meeting are women. "And predominantly," Dianna concurs, "women are lower-paid anyway. We're 25% below market already, and now, we're going to be 30% after these temporary layoffs." There is another wave of indignation in the room, as CUE members shake their heads and mutter; not one in this room feels the cheering prospect of a shared sacrifice.

START (Now!)
"As in the past, START is one way to help UC cope with budget cuts in an attempt to minimize the need for layoffs."
-Staff and Academic Reduction in Time Program description, UC Human Resources and Benefits site.

CUE bargainers have thus far succeeded in keeping their represented employees' full paycheck, yet many clerical employees have already voluntarily reduced their time and corresponding pay in exchange for a number of advantages through the Staff and Academic Reduction in Time Program (START). Those who join START are exempt from Furlough Plan participation "if their voluntary reduction is already equal to or exceeds the percent reduction for their respective pay band," states UC's Furlough Plan Guidlines.

"If you voluntarily reduce your salary with START it's almost like taking personal layoff," says one bookstore employee at the CUE meeting, who has recently received her temporary layoff notice. "But the issue for us was, our percentage with layoff was less than our minimum percentage with START. So you would have lost money if you did START, but you would have been keeping your retirement and vacation and sick [pay]. So you can decide which is worth it to you. Is that value in cash worth it, or is the retirement worth it?"

In fact, according to the most recent revisions of the START Program Guidelines from the UC Office of the President, an employee signs a contract with START in order to reduce their time "from a minimum reduction of 5 percent to a maximum reduction of 50 percent of full-time," which are made in increments of each pay period (monthly or bi-weekly). This warrants a certain advantage, though the minimum reduction is more than that of the temporary layoffs. An employee on START will accrue, month-by-month, vacation and sick leave credits (which become reduced by leave without pay, such as a temporary layoff), UC Retirement Plan service credit as well as UCRP retirement benefits

Sahhar is one of many CUE members who believe that "UC is trying to bully [CUE members], and a lot of people, into going on START, because of those accruals...Many people have gone on START because they're scared of their temporary layoffs, and that's another issue with us, because START is supposed to be voluntary. We're not supposed to sign it under duress of being laid off."

The fact that the employees have received their layoff notices so long before the actual dates that they take place (most don't begin until, at earliest, May 2010), also supports this theory; there remains much time for employees to decide to use START. Through this, not only would UC be collecting a high minimum of each employee's salary, but it would also mean that the employees are giving up their pay voluntarily, and UC would not need to bargain with the union on this issue.

However, Sahhar and CUE's lawyers hope to prove that many of these workers felt threatened by the layoffs and were encouraged by their departments to join START rather than signing it completely voluntarily, and thereby have UC reimburse those workers.

One such candidate is an employee who wishes to remain anonymous, and was the only employee in the CUE conference who had not received her temporary layoff notice. Though she seemed nervous throughout the meeting, and was a regular voice in the room when the topic rested on the START program, the reason that she had not received a notice remained a mystery to the rest of the group, until she mentioned her signing of the START contract as a off-hand remark. "One person has recently been placed in this personnel position [in my department]," she explained, in response to sympathetic disappointment from many for her decision, "and she was after me all week to get it done. So I feel it was under duress, because she knows that I have medical conditions and I need to get that taken care of. She was literally hounding me, she said 'don't forget, we don't know what's going to happen to your medical benefits or retirement,' and she knows that I'm looking forward to retirement."

This meets outrage from the rest of the group. Sahhar: "That's a lie! There's no break in your medical in layoff, see they did it to scare you!" Norman: "See they're pissed off because we're fighting what we know is illegal, and we have the attorneys all on it. They want the employees to go fight CUE, not them. So they got us all scared and nervous and frightened, so they'll [the employees will] try to attack CUE." In an email, Sahhar explained that CUE has received declarations from members regarding the layoffs and START, to be added to CUE's ULP charge filed with PERB in Oct., but that she does not know if they came from Irvine or another campus.

HAVE FAITH
"In collective bargaining, generally speaking, one of the things you try to avoid are gratuitous comments of actions which offend people. Because ultimately your intentions are trying to work to an agreement that you can live with."
-CUE's economist Peter Donohue, KUCI Podcast, Sept. 28, 2009

In UC's description of the Furlough/Salary Reduction Plan, which was implemented on Sept. 1 2009 and will last through August 31, 2010, explains that it will reduce an employee's total yearly salary from 4%-10%, depending on the amount of that salary, and lay him or her off for a corresponding amount of days.

The savings from this, the document explains, is expected to cover one quarter of UC's budget gap, as student fee increases (a 32% raise approved by the UC Board of Regents on Nov. 19) will cover another quarter of the deficit and cuts in spending "on campus and in the Office of the President" will take care of the rest. "For union-represented employees," the public document explains, "implementation of the plan will be subject to collective bargaining agreements and all applicable laws."

CUE did not accept this plan. At the meeting, Sahhar shows disappointment in UC's way of dealing with this disagreement from the union: "now [UC negotiators are] saying 'oh the furlough is off the table,' you guys didn't pick it so you don't get to pick that plan anymore. So instead we're going to do temporary layoffs.' and their temporary layoffs look very similar to the furlough plan, but minus the accruals that would have remained at 100%."

Indeed, in a July 16, 2009 letter to all faculty and staff at UC Riverside, Chancellor Timothy P. White tells employees directly that if "a given union chooses not to [concur with the furlough plan], then we will be forced to institute additional layoffs within such bargaining units. In this regard, I strongly encourage union members to contact their union leadership immediately and voice their preference between layoffs vs. furloughs."

Also, an article published July 17, 2009, Associated Press quotes UC President Mark Yudof stating, "If we didn't have furloughs then I think it's very likely that we would have to consider laying off people." Even the guidelines of the Furlough Plan from UC state that "the University is prepared to discuss alternative proposals from the unions, so long as they yield the same or similar cash savings as the furlough plan adopted by the Regents."

This, CUE refers to as "bad faith bargaining," which the Legal Definitions section of US Legal, Inc.'s website defines as a failure by employers and/or unions involved to "use their best endeavours to agree to an effective bargaining process, meet and consider and respond to proposals made by each other, respect the role of the other's representative by not seeking to bargain directly with those for whom the representative acts" and an undermining of "the bargaining process or the authority of the other's representative."

This is the reason that the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE), a union seemingly holding a very similar view to CUE of UC's bargaining style, filed an Unfair Labor Practice Charge with PERB in Sept. 2009, against the UC Regents. This charge reads:

"The University has announced an across-the-board 'salary reduction program' consisting of either furloughs or reductions in time or, for UPTE bargaining unit members, 'temporary layoffs' achieving the same result (the same salary savings and the same number of days off) as an equivalent furlough or reduction in time. UC informally sought to get UPTE to agree to such a paycut-in-exchange-for-days-off program [the Salary Reduction/Furlough Plan], but, when UPTE didn't agree, UC went ahead and unilaterally implemented its program anyway, without reaching impasse, much less exhausting post-impasse procedures."

It would seem that UC has simply changed the terminology of the Furlough/Salary Reduction plan, calling it "temporary layoffs" instead, so that the University then has the right to impose the same exact amount of pay cuts on unions which did not agree with the original plan.

As Sahhar explains at the CUE meeting:

"It's considered 'bad faith bargaining' because when you're bargaining, you're supposed to be bargaining for something better. But instead UC's saying 'you have this plan or this plan. Pick one. Take it or leave it.' That's not bargaining. That is UC dictating to us. So, that's where we are right now; UC wants to push us into what's called 'impasse.' They're trying to say that 'we cant negotiate any further, we've gone as far as we can, and we want to go into 'impasse' which means, when we negotiate again, we have to go into 'mediation.' And what mediation is, is UC sits in a room and we sit in a room, and we no longer sit at the table together, but the mediator goes back and forth from one room to the other, bringing proposals back and forth, to the two sides. During this time there's something called 'fact finding' and during that time UC has to give us all the information that we ask for. We have a whole bunch of requests for information out there right now that UC has not yet answered."

The Union UPTE is in a similar situation, as illustrated in their recent ULP charge against the Regents of UC. What follows is how UC seems to be treated all negotiating unions, including CUE:

"...the University urged UPTE to agree to place its members under the furlough plan. When UPTE did not promptly agree, the University began announcing, location by location that it would be unilaterally implementing a pre-impasse change, exacting precisely equivalent savings from UPTE members' paychecks (according to the graduated set of pay cuts by pay band described above), and providing precisely equivalent days off m exchange (again, according to the above salary bands), but that the pay cuts and time off would be imposed as 'temporary layoffs,' instead of 'furloughs.' The University explained this change in language as being necessary because the University believed that it had authority to impose unilaterally the former but not the latter."

"Furthermore, employees are being asked to negotiate the dates of their layoffs directly with management. As just one example among many, on September 18, 2009, UC Davis manager Robert Pattison told a group of assembled employees that they should talk with their managers directly about which days the layoffs should occur on. In the same meeting with employees, UC again reiterated that its conduct was legal because the parties' layoff article (now expired) permits temporary layoffs without bargaining."

"UC did not come even close to bargaining these decisions to impasse or agreement. Rather the Union's first notice of each decision was a notice presenting the decision as a "fait accomplit."

UPTE's demands to bargain were repeatedly rebuffed. Indeed, the University completely failed and refused to bargain regarding curtailment. With respect to temporary layoffs, the University did informally present the union with a furlough plan, but, when the union did not immediately agree to it, the University simply went ahead and imposed the near-identical temporary layoff plan, without bargaining and well before impasse."

As the right of the temporary layoffs to even take place is not an issue which UC will bargain over with unions, CUE has been hard at work negotiating the effects of such layoffs. On Nov. 13, in fact, Linda Weinberger, a 30-year Langston Library employee at UCI and relatively recent CUE member, traveled to Oakland to bargain with UC's Chief Negotiator Peter Chester and other UC representatives, along with one other CUE bargainer from each other campus.

"We were trying to make it as easy for UC as possible," she says, "and as a bargaining team, we decided to hold it up in the north, at the Office of the President, because then UC doesn't have to travel anywhere, they just have to walk down a flight of stairs to the bargaining room."

Of the actual issues at hand, at this bargaining session, Weinberger lists the following:

1) Stop at $13 million. "We are trying to make sure that UC does not take more than $13 million from CUE employees, which they told us is the amount they need. We have been trying for months to make sure that UC doesn't extend over that amount. So we are trying to adjust the figures of the temporary layoff days (and originally the furlough plan). That is in our proposal."

"What UC is proposing is that if you make $40,000 and below, you have 11 layoff days with a 4% salary reduction. If you make $40,001-50,000 you will get 13 layoff days at 5% salary reduction. Or, if you make $50,001 and above, you'll get 16 layoff days at a 6% salary reduction. They want this done over the course of a year, but instead of using figures to trigger the temporary layoffs, we're telling them that as soon as they hit their $13 million threshold, they must stop giving layoffs. So, while CUE's trying only let it go TO the $13 million, UC is always trying to sneak in higher percentages, and get more money from us. We don't know at this time how it's going to play out at this point."

2) Figure in START. "We also know that CUE members are on START, and we want them to figure in their START savings as part of the $13 million. [And therefore UC is only allowed to layoff as many more as get them to that amount]."

3) Freedom from START. "In the proposal, we also have a request to allow employees to go on and off START as they choose. If they are on START and they want to go into the layoff program, that has also been negotiated between CUE and UC."

4) Employees decide how to take the cut. "We're trying to give the employee the option, if they are laid off, whether they want to spread out the salary reduction over a 12 month period. So even though they are going to be laid off 11 days in a row, they would be able to take a portion of that amount out of each pay period over 12 months."

5) Unemployment benefits. "We're also saying that we want to give the employees the option of taking the temporary layoffs in one block of time, (regardless of how many days), and if that happens, you can file for unemployment starting from the first day you are laid off. They don't pay you the first week, that's the waiting period. Then, if you don't have another job elsewhere, you receive unemployment benefits, up to $450, depending on how much salary you make."

6) Curtailment-period layoff time. "If the employees choose so, they may take their layoff time over the curtailment period. That means, for example, the campus is closed between Dec. 18-21. Some of those days, UC says, they're already are going to be non-paying days. SO we want employees to have the option of choosing to take as many layoff days over campus closures. Or, if they don't want to do that, because they don't want their salaries to be reduced over December,...they can take temporary layoff days later on in the year."

7) No taking jobs. "We don't want the UC assigning the work of laid off workers to other workers. Because that would be unfair."

However, of the general negotiations, Weinberger says that "UC has been trying to circle back around to the Furlough-Reduction Plan, and to get the amount that they want. Whenever UC comes up with a new proposal, it's clear that they are trying to give us as little as they can, and get from us as much as they can."

A Bargaining Report from that meeting will be issued within a few days.

LOST IN TRANSLATION
"[UC] They always 'don't know' and explain 'oh, I have to get back to you on that,' and we have to give them written requests for information whenever we want to know anything, and then we have to wait to get it back. And we've been waiting months. I mean we've been waiting three years from some information discrepancies from our last contract, and we still haven't received some of that information regarding the finances."
-Dianna Sahhar, President of Local 9/Irvine Campus Local of CUE.

Bargaining most effectively with UC, in fact, often requires some knowledge of facts, with facts to confirm those facts. But when CUE received notice from UC that $13 million was needed from the clerical unit, and CUE's economist, Peter Donohue, concluded that that was "way high," the University provided the union with no more than an excel spreadsheet to explain the amount, the first with incorrect or suspicious formulas, according to Sahhar, and the second with no formulas at all.

This was all a product of CUE's direct dealing with the UC Office of the President, Labor Relations, and with the Budget Office. "I don't quite understand why we have this half-billion-dollar talent up there, all over the place, when they tell us they can't provide us with HR [Human Resources] information, with budget information, all this stuff," Donohue says in an interview on KUCI podcast in Sept. of this year, "Which, when we talk to people who actually do the work, the people who manage, for example, the campus ledgers, they're telling us that that's available every day. They do a daily reconciliation of these things. Now, some place there's a disconnect."

Donohue, a Ph.D. economist from Portland, Oregon, also explains:

"...University administrators are the rudest and most disrespectful negotiators I've ever encountered. Now, not UC particularly, UCI I would say would be in the middle of the pack. And I've dealt with University systems from Washington to Oregon to here [UC] as well as at CSU, and, by comparison, University administrators seem to have the notion that they know, and you don't, and you should basically do what you're told. [Another more] practical problem of some import is that, in every single negotiation we [CUE] has had, University is disrespectful in a sense of the law, which requires that, under their legal duty to bargain, they also have a duty to provide information.

University is notorious for its unwillingness to provide information. Information that other employers, particularly employers right now who are in actual crises, have no difficulty and are completely willing to provide. I was doing County of San Francisco negotiations with one of the bigger unions in town, and we received everything we asked for.

By comparison, here, what we're told is, 'oh, our computer systems don't work really well, our data systems can't generate that info,' or we're given information which turns out to be just plain wrong! Over and over again. Now, that indifference to providing information, or accurate information, does not reflect well and it doesn't show respect towards employees. I think that's exactly the wrong path to take at a moment like this."

THE WIDENING GAP
"The University’s goal is to maintain market-based competitive salaries for its employees. This means providing sufficient funds, through a combination of merits and COLAs [Cost of Living Adjustments], to maintain UC faculty salaries at the average of the salaries provided at the eight comparison institutions, and to provide salary increases for other employees that, on average, at least keep pace with inflation and the marketplace."
-UC's public statement, UCOP Budget Request for 2004-05 [Program Maintenance: Fixed Costs and Economic Factors]

The Union's expert on market comparisons Kathleen J Hurley and her associates released a special report for CUE entitled "Compensation at UC," examining compensation reports and information provided by UC as well as other public documents and resources comparing UC compensation to that of other employers.

This research concluded that, when compared to those of the CSU systems, UC blank assistants earn approximately 22.7 percent less. For example, large lags exist for Library Assistants at UC, who earn roughly 33.4 percent less than those comparable at CSU (Library assistants at CSULA were shown, as of 2004, to be paid 33.37% more than those at UCLA), and Irvine Dispatcher positions earn roughly 24.67 percent less than CSU. Further, this overall salary includes the worth of benefits, which, in the UCs, rate very well in the market in comparison to 17 select private organizations.

Considering the previous example, then, this ultimately means that a Library Assistant at UC is paid, on average, $805 less per month in wages, and will receive $563 less per month in retirement benefits at age 55 after 20 years of service. UC pay for clerical workers even lags behind those of several California community colleges, also listed in the report. It is no surprise that the majority of UC clerical workers leave after less than 5 years of service, according to the report. And the added reduced salaries, weather through the furloughs or temporary layoffs, would add additional lag to employees who are already fundamentally under-paid.

At the same time, CUE's economist Peter Donohue recently took his presentation, called "UC's Hidden Wealth," on a "road show" to several UC campuses, to convince onlookers that not only does UC have the financial resources to avoid this pay cuts, but that it also treated several UC executives, supposedly on the same day that the Regents voted for the furlough schedule on July 16, 2009. CUE member Katherine Renfro is quotes on CUE's website as stating that "We know the University has the resources. The Regents gave bonuses and raises to senior managers and executives on the same day they voted in the plan for furloughs, salary cuts, and layoffs. That money could be used to save the jobs of our fellow workers, lower student fees, and to uphold the mission of the University of California."

Norman, in a recent email to Senators Boxer and Feinstein, states that,

"UC is taking from the lower paid and increasing the higher paid. The lower paid are predominately women making [about] 35 percent below market salaries, [and] most of them are CUE. We are being threatened to take pay cuts when we are living from paycheck to paycheck, and most of the higher paid are making $500,000 to 1 million per year and live in mansions they do not have to pay [for]. Including other perks...Please advise and please help us. Many of us have families of single parent households and are facing evictions or will become homeless because we cannot pay our bills due to the cuts while this will not affect those with higher pay salaries those above $200,00/year and there are many of them. I do not understand how Congress Legislatures can allow this to happen to hard working lower paid women who are the heart of the University system."

These "perks" that Norman mentions, helping the wealthy become wealthier than perhaps is healthy for any person or family during the state of the world today, was confirmed July 16, 2009's "Report of Interim Actions," from the Office of the Secretary and Chief of Staff. These pay raises, promotions and perks were summarized by the UPTE union in a press release from July 23, 2009:

"Several executives were appointed at salaries from 11% to 59% higher than their predecessors. The regents also voted to give 'administrative stipends' ranging from $24,000 to $58,625 to several employees, without any extra duties, and added several new highly paid executive positions."

This release goes on to list the specifics, the names mentioned, the increases in question for those executives, and several links to documents on the UC website for further investigation. These facts were printed in several California newspapers, mostly in early August, 2009.

So, did top executives really get raises? Technically, yes. What UC calls "a promotion" including higher pay with a "correspondingly" higher workload, CUE calls greed. Either way, one must ask oneself: Doesn't reduced staff and more students mean a higher workload, in terms of finances or time, for the remaining staff and students as well? There are no raises, perks or promotions among the lowest-paid groups (such as clericals), or among the very body that is the fundamental reason for the University existing in the first place. Is it fair?

Finding An Open Road to Higher Education

2009-11-24T07:17:00.000-08:00

By Odalis Suarez

It was lunchtime. I parked my car like I always did and walked towards the entrance of the school with my notebook. Students looked at me with uncertainty. Was she a student? I walked into the building, casually greeted everyone I knew and proceeded to walk to the counseling office. I had an appointment, but it wasn’t for academic assistance because unlike the students I passed by that day, I had already found my path to higher education while they were still searching for theirs. That day I entered as an alumni of Crescenta Valley High School and as a reporter attempting to discover the obstacles high school seniors are facing as they apply to UC schools that are dealing with the budget cuts and fee increases.

With the recent budget cuts and the 32% student tuition increases (effective winter quarter of 2010), both students and faculty in high schools all over California are working harder than ever with one goal in mind: getting admission into college.

“Each counselor got 200 or more extra students so that’s a 50% increase” explained a Crescenta Valley High School counselor, “so that in itself is a lot of additional work just in terms of that many more students needing help and coming in and having questions and many more parents e-mailing and calling.”

CV is one of the many high schools in California that have been impacted by the budget cuts. The La Crescenta based high school is coping with their counselor shortages and managing a great deal of seniors needing college assistance. “I have 160 seniors this year as opposed to 100 seniors last year,” added the counselor.

Prospective students applying to schools such as UC Irvine are faced with a financial challenge. According to a letter written by UC President Mark Yudof, it states that “For the 2010-2011 academic year, additional fee increases” will occur as it will cost “$1,344 per year for resident undergraduates” and “$1,458 for nonresident undergraduates”.

Students are already struggling financially in high school as they are faced with payments that are necessary to apply to college. "[There are] a lot more students coming in for fee waivers for SAT’s, ACT’s, and college applications [this year],” stated the counselor.

In addition to the financial struggle that lies ahead for high school seniors, UC Irvine has raised the bar in student academics. According to the Office of Institutional Research Planning and Budget http://www.oir.uci.edu/ who has worked extensively on statistical research in regards to UC Irvine admissions, in 2006 the mean high school GPA of admitted high school seniors was 3.70. Two years later in 2008 the mean GPA has increased to 3.82, and now recent reports have been made that for 2009, the mean GPA of high school students admitted has further increased to a solid 4.0.

When this statistical fact was mentioned to the CV counselor, she emphasized concern for the students and their academic decisions:

"Students are getting more worried about [GPA]. It’s creating an atmosphere where students are making decisions based on GPA rather than what’s best for them or what their interests are or what they want to do in their future. So I think its making people focus on the wrong thing because they are very stressed about the eligibility. They are trying to do maybe more than they are comfortable with."

Questions were sent to the UCI admissions department in regards to these findings and any concerns made by students. However, after numerous attempts the department failed to respond to the written questions.

UC Irvine’s selectivity is further emphasized in another data set showing the number of high school students admitted and the percentage of selectivity. From 2006 to 2008 the number of high school seniors that applied to UC Irvine has consistently increased from 38,435 to 42,414 and yet the rate of high school students admitted has decreased from 23,167 to 20,670. This means that the percentage of selectivity in UC Irvine has decreased as well with 2008 being the all time lowest with a percentage of 48.7%. The lower the percentage of selectivity is, the more selective UC Irvine is becoming. This trend is still ongoing as students who applied for fall 2009 further increased with a total of 44,116 students. Only 18,676 students were offered admission, which provided a percentage of 42.3% selectivity. In my previous interview with Brent Yunek, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Services and acting Director of Admissions and Relations with Schools, he acknowledged that:

“If the trends continue the way they have I would expect a smaller percentage of the applicant pool admitted, but we still have many factors yet to be realized to know for sure. For instance, our enrollment target has not firmly been set for next year if something changes in that target that it would by any slip chance be allowed to grow, that could possibly change things in a different direction, so it’s a little early."

What are the expectations for students wanting to apply for fall quarter of 2010? According to Glendale Unified School District board member Greg Krikorian, students seem to be more eager this year to attain a higher education. “More students in general are striving to get a higher education, we are seeing more students going to the private, public, community colleges,” stated Krikorian. “I am seeing that there is a larger amount of students that aren’t being accepted to the system because there are too many applying because of the budget crisis.”

Attempting to find community concerns and any proposed legislation in regards to the budget crisis, numerous calls and e-mails were made to 69^th Assemblyman Jose Solorio’s office. However, after providing their office questions, they failed to comment on any of them.

High school students may be interested in knowing that although seven out of the nine UC schools in fall 2009 had a selectivity or admittance rate under 70%, UC Merced and UC Riverside are the only two UC schools that had their rate above 70%. According to the University of California website http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/undergrad_adm/selecting/camp_profiles.html, UC Merced had a selectivity rate of 77.8% and UC Riverside had a 78.3% selectivity rate. According to an April 2009 Los Angeles Times article that quotes Susan Wilbur, systems director of undergraduate admissions, http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/08/local/me-ucadmit8 it states:

“…all students who were academically qualified for the university would find a UC spot, although not necessarily at campuses they preferred. About 10,000 eligible students who were rejected by all campuses to which they applied will be offered admission to Riverside and Merced this month…”

This does not necessarily mean that there is a greater chance of acceptance to these schools, but it does show that high school students still have available options if eager to apply within the UC system.

Thirsty for knowledge and determined to pursue their dreams, high school seniors are not the only group of students fighting for a spot within UC system. Tyler Parkinson, a second year student attending the University of Oregon is attempting to transfer out of state for the second time. “I applied to the University of San Diego, I got accepted and I ended up not going there because I wasn’t offered financial aid and my family didn’t want to take out a lot of loans especially since I don’t have to take any loans to go here (University of Oregon)” explained Parkinson.

Despite his previous setback, Parkinson is giving California another try. This time he’s asking UC Irvine for admission for fall quarter of 2010, knowing that getting accepted will be more of a challenge this year financially and academically.

“[My parent’s] concerns were the price because even though it’s more affordable than a private school, it’s still very expensive and actually just last week the price went up again which is like oh great! It’s even more of a long shot now than it was two weeks ago! Their other concern was the fact that because they have been hearing so much in the news about the budget cuts they weren’t sure if I would have trouble getting into my classes because there are less professors teaching” stated Parkinson.

A very motivated transfer student, Parkinson is persistent in applying despite the challenges that he might face if accepted to UC Irvine. He has emphasized that he will need to change his major from Business Administration to Economics, and in order to pay for his tuition will need to get an on campus job at the university. However, Parkinson has emphasized, “I’m not giving up regardless of the budget cuts and regardless in the spike of tuition because it’s something I want to do really badly and its been really important to me ever since college started.”

Even GUSD school board member Krikorian has been working rigorously with the school district to promote programs, seminars, and workshops that will fully educate students and parents in the application and financial aid process, especially during the budget crisis. “I can understand the anxiety among students and parents with the present crisis we’re in and we’re seeing more students getting more education [and] actually going into their masters programs. So they’re going out and getting more education, more degrees. I definitely do see the anxiety has risen,” stated Krikorian.

It’s a nail biting circumstance for students who are applying to UC Irvine for fall 2010. The determination to attain a higher education is inevitable, but this year is a critical year for students who are applying to schools facing budget cuts and fee increases such as UC Irvine. There is higher competitiveness, increased selectivity, and higher tuition costs. As everything goes up, the students admitted seems to be the only element that is going down. For high school students, the road to higher education this year is coarse and rough, but it’s a path that could eventually lead to a smoother journey.

ASUCI activists: “The UC Regents are making students bail them out.”

2009-11-24T04:11:00.000-08:00

by Amanda Hansen

It’s no secret that the students of the UC System are angry over California’s mounting fiscal crisis. It’s directly affecting their college careers, and ultimately their lives. Student protesters can be seen in front of their administration buildings chanting words of anger and disapproval, placing witty signs to draw peoples’ attention to the issue, administering rallies with people sharing their personal stories about how these cuts have affected their college experience. But do all these tactics really work? Can student protestors’ actions make a difference and influence policy? In lieu of the Regent’s approval of a 32% increase in tuition, many student activists are taking even more action in unprecedented numbers since the protests of the 1960s. Evidently, people are angry and frustrated, but how far are they willing to go for reform?

The University of California, Irvine, alone is cutting $77 million dollars ($800 million dollars across the UC’s total) to help the state balance its budget, which means we can expect to see layoffs, furloughs, bigger class sizes, shorter library hours, and the quality of education in general declines. Ultimately, it is the students who pay the biggest prices in their education, and not just monetarily. Students are experiencing cuts to athletic programs with the loss of five water sports so far, the UC’s are accepting fewer admissions for incoming students, forcing them to explore other alternatives. The once widely accessible and respected public institution in the United States, which, upon its foundation was dedicated to a near free education, is more and more beginning to resemble a private institution in terms of its fiscal demands.

Defend UCI is a collation of faculty and graduate students formed in June in response to the furloughs and organized a walkout on the first day of the fall quarter of 2009. According to the Los Angeles times, the turnout had been estimated at a 1,000 roughly, at UCI’s noon-walkout. Despite having such a positive turnout across all the UC’s in response to the budget crisis, the Regents still passed the 32% fee increase in tuition. When asked if the rallies, walkouts, and all these forms of protest mattered in the Regent’s decision-making, Defend UCI’s John Bruning said that “I don’t think that the turnout mattered… nothing short of putting a gun to their heads would have changed the vote. I think this is because the Regents really don't care what students think, and students really aren't their largest constituency.” ASUCI’s Sarah Bana, however, felt the protests on the day of the passage of the fee-increases held some significance, “…the turnout mattered in showing the Regents that this is clearly a student issue and needs to be addressed. It puts pressure on the Regents to work with the state legislature. I also think that the amount of media attention that was brought to the public because of the great amount of student protestors will make an impact on the state legislature and its decision making.”

I attended a teach-in that ASUCI held on November 19. It took place a packed classroom; all desks were filled with students with their own personal stories. One student contested “I work three jobs and I’m a double-major.” Sarah Bana told me she now has to share her apartment room with two other girls, in which there are only two desks in the room to study. At the end of the meeting, the class was instructed to join a letter-writing campaign in which grievances would be mailed to the Governor Shwartznegger. However, one must ask if merely picketing and letter writing to state legislators is enough to truly make a difference and incite change. From the results we have seen, it hasn’t. What has been working, however, is building occupation. As John Bruning pointed out, “The library occupations have been the only actions thus far to win concessions… they aren't so much about leveraging demands as they are about expropriating buildings for student use and management. I would like to see 32% of UC buildings occupied by students in response to the fee increase.”

John Bruning may just get his wish; starting December 4^th in the afternoon to the very next day, the students at UCI will be staging a “study-in” at Langson Library. Roughly 1,300 students will be attending and counting. They demand longer library hours and putting an end to the threat of lay-offs that looms over the library staff. The event is titled “Liberate Langson Library” and students are encouraged to bring blankets, food, and of course study materials.

But no one is giving up on rallies just yet; another rally outside the administration building will take place at noon, November 24, in which slightly over 2,000 students are expected to participate.

The level of participation in past events and the participation expected for future events demonstrates the frustration UC students feel over these imposed fee-increases and the extent to which they will do all they can to fight back and be heard. Forms of resistance vary greatly and come in different styles and techniques. Whether it’s letter-writing to a state legislator, or staging an all night teach-in at a library, the important thing is that an action took place, and that’s the first step in obtaining the desired policy. According to ASUCI participant Shacole Hamlett, ““we need to empower students; we need everyone to make a stand because things don’t change when people don’t take action.”

The FAQcts About the Larger Economic and Social Issues Connected to the UC Budget Crisis

2009-11-24T02:41:00.000-08:00

by David Hubbert

With all that is being said about the University of California's budget crisis these days, it's easy to develop a single-issue oriented view of the problem. For example: the issue for the students is not the furloughs, and the issue for the workers is not the tuition fee increase. The unions blame the UC Regents, the Regents blame the state, and the state legislature is a virtual crossfire of finger pointing. To gain some perspective of the contributing factors and prevailing attitudes surrounding this emotionally-charged financial fiasco, I have compiled a FAQ to help students better understand the larger picture. Many of the questions in this FAQ come from students here at UCI.

What are some of the core issues of the University of California's current budget crisis?

One of the fundamental problems with the overall California budget and that of the UC budget is that the state has a highly progressive income tax and has one of the highest marginal tax rates (tax increases by bracket) in the country. This means when the economy is booming, people experience an increase in income levels and the state revenues go up disproportionately to the growth in the economy. When this is reversed during a period of economic decline or recession, state revenues also decrease faster than the economy slows.

But, doesn't the progressive tax structure ensure adequate revenue redistribution to protect those who are hardest hit by the recession?

Many people think that our progressive income taxation is a wonderful thing because the wealthy supplement the poor and everyone gets by, even in a lean economy, but it makes for instability in state revenues. In a recession, not only does the state's income go down in terms of marginal tax rates, but in tough times people try to guard against high marginal tax rates by moving out of state. High tax rates paired with decreased personal income is a good incentive for California's millionaire tax cash-cows to head to more forgiving states, such as Nevada, which has no state income tax. This further exacerbates the problem of decreased state revenue during a recession.

What other factors, besides tax rates, have contributed to the state's current economic crisis?

In booming economic times, we tend to increase public services and programs as if the good times will never end. The problem with this pattern of behavior is two-fold. Firstly, market economies move in cycles, the two major cycles being boom and recession. Therefore, it is inevitable that the economy (and consequently state revenue) will decline. Secondly, an increase in public services and programs creates jobs and scaling back during a recession means layoffs and furloughs, which only hurt the economy more.

So then, why does it seem to take everyone by surprise when we enter a recession and revenues decrease?

Because we are one of four states that doesn't have a budget reserve. A budget reserve is important for the reason you think it is: it's something you can go to when in fact your revenues have decreased. This fact is even more disconcerting in light of the tax structure that provides so much potential for instability.

How does all of this correlate to the UC budget crisis?

The fact is that the state has turned its back on the UC system in an attempt to salvage itself and satisfy the tax payers of the state of California. They have been steadily decreasing funds for the UC system since 1990, at a rate that averages out to approximately one-percent per year. The thirty-percent fee increase is an attempt to compensate for this. Again, it goes back to the failure of the state at managing itself.

What about a special tax initiative to maintain the university system in California at an affordable price?

This solution amounts to more or less, an ethical dilemma. The average student that graduates from a UC is going to earn an above average income. Many people would like to believe that somehow the wealthy people in the state are going supplement the education of the poorer UC students through tax revenue. The truth is that the wealthy are going to be paying, but in fact there will also be maids and truck drivers who will be working to pay for the education of people who will end up making far more than they have the potential to earn for themselves. Noted economist and author Richard B. McKenzie, who is a professor at the Paul Merage School of Business here at UCI contends, “There is already a tremendous redistribution of income in the state going on through the UC system. That is we're taking tax money from people whose income is on average lower than a UC graduate and giving it to students whose eventual income will be above, and whose family's income is already above the average. The reason for that is we tend to be selective here, so it means that we tend to get better students. And it's just a fact of life that students who are from high income families tend to do better academically than those who don't.”

What about reducing the exorbitant salaries of UC executives to offset tuition costs?

While their salaries are indeed exorbitant, should all administrators making over $200k per year (397 of them) agree to work for free for one year, this would still only offset the UC's $450M budget deficit by $109M.

Perhaps we should eliminate the paid T.A. programs or furlough faculty, rather than increase tuition.

Perhaps, but that is a short-term solution which could hurt the education of future students. Even if we were to stave off the thirty-percent increase in tuition by these means, we would likely experience a decrease in the quality of our education. Class availability has has already gone down and class sizes have gone up. Without the fee increase (since our state is destitute), we will have have more of the same. It's a choice between an increase in tuition or a decrease in the quality of our education.

What about pulling research faculty to augment the teaching faculty, thus allowing us to maintain smaller class sizes and class availability?

While most students would rather see faculty divert themselves from research to teaching in a time of crisis to maintain class availability and reduce class sizes, the fact is that it is not in the best long-term interest of the university system. You can't maintain the long term quality of an academic institution if the university and the faculty aren't involved in research – especially if you pride yourself on being a research university, as many UCs do (including UCI). It is very tough for a public university to remain elite, simply because most of the people supporting them are not elite; they are tax-payers. This is why the lasting elite universities tend to be private. The other thing most students don't seem to consider is that if this budget crisis is prolonged, other states will recover from the national recession, likely at a faster rate than California. This will allow other university systems to siphon off our faculty. Students may gain a short term advantage in the lower tuition, but they can suffer a long term disadvantage in the lowering of the quality of education the university provides, concurrently lowering the reputation of the university itself.

Besides financial compensation, why might faculty be agreeable to leaving the UC system?

To be honest, some faculty see the protests as the students telling them that they feel they aren't getting value for their educational dollar as it is, making the tuition increase an even more bitter pill to swallow. Many of the faculty see themselves as being on par with their colleagues at private universities, such as Stanford, where undergraduates are paying nearly $40k per year.

So, what you're saying is that we just have to pay the increase?

In a nutshell: yes. There are no simple solutions to issues such as this, which are extremely complex. Unfortunately, at this time there are not any other solutions that the powers that be would likely agree to. It's not the best or most fair solution to the UC budget crisis, but it's the one we've been given. We can protest all we want, but it's the way of the world. I don't know of a single person that doesn't complain when our congress gives itself a raise and then levies taxes on its citizens all in the same session, only to vote for the same people the next term. Those in power make the rules, and those who vote them in, follow them. Consider it a civics lesson, courtesy of our own Mark Yudof.

Financial Aid In Transition: "I don't even know how I'm going to pay for classes next quarter."

2009-11-24T01:48:00.001-08:00

By Borna Hamedani

For this piece I have interviewed students from UCI, OCC, and UCLA all who have recived financial aid from their schools.

The UCI financial Aid office located in Aldrich Hall was somber on the morning of November 16th, 2009. Aid officials were kept busy with their work. Once in a while a student would come in and check on their financial aid situation, posing questions and receiving answers. Some would leave disappointed, while others would leave with a big grins on their faces. This being symbolic of the budget cut crisis are state is currently experiencing in regards to education. Budget cuts which have adversely affected financial aid for students.

On July 28th Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed approximately half of the California Student Aid Commission budget. Cutting it from $13 million to $6.7 million, this strongly hinders the appropriate and timely disbursement of financial aid for hundreds of thousands of student in California. Considering the amount of students receiving Cal Grants has risen 68 percent since the year 2000, the need for this commission to be properly funded is even greater. Due to this many students have failed to receive all or in some cases any of the financial aid they were originally awarded.

One of those students was in the financial aid office on the same day I was. When he was leaving I overheard him “This isn’t fair.” His name is Ali Afrasiabi and he is a 5th year Biology major who is having trouble paying his student fees and living expenses. I approached Ali for an interview and he was more then willing to give one.

Q: As you said in the office what is not fair?

A: I was awarded a $5000 grant to help me pay for school and so far I’ve only got $1700 of it and that’s not even enough to cover one quarter of classes. It barely covers more then half the cost of a quarter for me.

Q: Did they tell you why this has happened?

A: Yea I don’t know, they said it’s because of cutbacks that they had to make and grants have been reduced for some students. I guess I’m the lucky one of those students. I’m really pissed off right now, Sorry!

Q: Did they tell you if you will be receiving your entire financial aid?

A: They told me the rest of my grant has been put on hold or something and that the earliest it might be given to me is the start of next quarter. But they also said I might not even get the full amount.

Q: How will this affect you?

A: Well, first off it’s really messing with my head and I can’t really concentrate on school. Because I don’t even know how I’m going to pay for classes next quarter. I need that grant and I need it bad, you know? I’m just really frustrated with our school right now, how could they let this happen to the students.

With the UC Board of Regents recently approving a 32 percent increase in student fees, financial aid has never been so vital for so many students. This increase will generate $505 million and $175 million of it will be set aside for financial aid. According to the universityofcalifornia.edu, grants along with expanded federal tuition tax credits are expected to cover the rise in tuition for all students whose households have incomes below $180,000. This is crucial for many students who will not be able to afford the rise in tuition, and many of whom will be forced to drop out.

“I already work full time and attend school full time, and if there going to raise fees that much, I think I’m just going to drop out and work for a living.” Stated Eric Akbarpour a student I came across at the Orange Coast College financial aid office. “My parents don’t support me financially, I’m on my own and my financial aid isn’t covering all the costs of school.” Eric is not the only student who is being put in this situation; many others are considering dropping out of school all together, and this would be a great error on their part. Statistics indicate that in general the more education people complete the greater income they will earn in their careers. For those who can’t afford school and whose financial aid has been cut down, this will have a substantial impact on their futures.

“I want to get through school and start my career not in debt.” Alex Ashari a senior political science major at UCLA stated to me. Alex has also been stripped of a large portion of his financial aid and instead has been approved for student loans.
“I appreciate the loans, but I wanted to get through school on financial aid and not have to owe money once I graduated, but I guess I have no choice.”
Alex will graduate after this year and plans on attending graduate school. In order to do this he will have to take out many more student loans. His financial aid will no longer cover his expenses the same way it once did.

Budget cuts are still being made and according to the 2009 State Budget Act, University budgets are being cut by an additional $255 million. This just furthers the problems with financial aid because schools will suffer great losses from top to bottom.

Fortunately for students within the UC’s, programs like the Blue and Gold program have been put into action to assist students in paying for school. If there family earns less then $70,000 a year they become eligible for additional aid to help cover all there system wide fees. A helping hand for those in desperate need of further aid, so that they can receive a proper education.

Is Proposition 13 the reason behind this mess? Part 1

2009-11-24T01:31:00.000-08:00

This is a two part investigative piece on Proposition 13 that explores whether Proposition 13 is to blame for the mess going on in the California Budget Crisis. There have been several vocal groups demanding a reform or repeal of this ballot measure, stating that it will make great strides in moving forward in this dark fiscal period. The first part is fairly general and explains what Proposition 13 is and why it is opposed.

To read the second part click here

What is Proposition 13?

Proposition 13 is a ballot measure that was passed by 69% of voters in the California 1978 election. This ballot initiative set a cap on property taxes to no more than 1% of a home’s assessed value. It also restricts increases in assessment to 2% a year except upon the selling of the property and it established a measure that required a two-thirds vote approval to raise state or local taxes. Prop 13 drew its momentum from the Supreme Court decision of the Serrano v. Priest case where it was ruled that a property-tax based system for public schools was unconstitutional and that the amount of funds going to the school districts was disproportionately favoring the wealthy. Howard Jarvis, an American businessman, politician, lobbyist, and anti-tax activist, was the main supporter of prop 13. Before proposition 13 was passed, many homeowners, especially retired and elderly homeowners on fixed incomes, were hurt by the fluctuating property-taxes because of owners’ ill preparation against the sudden rise in tax rate. With the set tax cap, many homeowners can expect the amount they have to pay for property tax. Howard Jarvis would have smiled to see how drastically fewer homeowners are threatened by the unpredictable property taxes and are able to own private property at ease. Prop 13 remains as an iconic tax revolt symbol and looking back, its instantaneous effects was quite remarkable, if not revolutionary. However, with the passing of Prop 13, California cut property tax revenue by 57% in the fiscal year 1978-1979. The annual revenue of local governments was brought down by about $6 billion. The dramatic decrease of property tax revenue corresponded with the struggle in general funding to fund higher education, healthcare, law enforcement, and etc.

So why is Prop 13 under attack during this economic crisis?

The California Tax Reform Association argues that proposition 13 has been protecting business properties for the past 30 years. If a corporation owning commercial property is bought out or merged, but the property remains in the ownership (deeded) of the corporation, then the property can effectively change ownership and avoid Prop 13’s provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property’s resale value. Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times summarizes this better, “What businesses dodge, the homeowners pays.” According to Phil Ting, San Francisco Assessor-Recorder, “30 years ago in San Francisco, commercial property owners contributed the majority of property taxes, 59%, and residential property owners contributed 41%. Today, we see the reverse: commercial property owners contributed just 43% of property taxes in 2008 while residential property owners contributed 57%.” Another way to look at this issue is Disneyland. Lenny Goldberg, director of the California Tax Reform Association, calculated that Disneyland, which has not had a change in ownership, is currently taxed at an average of about a nickel per square foot. In contrast, a median California home bought last year measuring 1600 square feet and selling for $330,000 would be taxed $2.06 per square foot. Hypothetically, if Disney merged with another company but still had possession of Disneyland, Disneyland can practically be handed over to that company and it will still be taxed a nickel per square foot. If there was a reform on this loophole in Prop 13 where business property were taxed at market rate, that would result in $7.5 billion a year in additional revenue to help close the gap in the $24 billion deficit.

Critics of Proposition 13 stated that the limitations put on property tax has forced the government to depend on other taxes such as personal income tax and sales tax and to reallocate the state’s revenue to provide for services that faced funding gaps such as schools. The bank and corporation taxes have been steadily decreased and in today’s fiscal recession, the state unemployment reached 11%, leading to a reduction in Tax revenue. With less funding coming from property taxes, it has been difficult to balance the funding for services such as freeways, needy families, local governments, schools, law enforcement, and etc in this economic recession. Education has been taking a hit in funding as California’s public schools stand to lose $5.4 billion on top of the $7.4 billion lost last year. Before Prop 13 was passed, California’s education (per-pupil spending) was ranked 5^th in the nation back in the 50s and 60s, but now it is ranked in the mid 40s.

Not only did Prop. 13 lower the revenue; it made increasing the revenue more difficult as raising taxes requires a two-thirds vote of the legislature unlike 47 other states in this country where a simple majority is needed to pass. Because of the vote requirement to raise local taxes for special purposes, many local governments found it impossible to raise any taxes for the sake of funding the city. According to Andres Martinez of the New America Foundation, “Only a handful of states require a two-thirds majority to pass a budget, and in California it is pretty much guaranteed that you won't get two-thirds of people to agree on anything.” Why? It is hypothesized that in California, the people collectively share the “nothing for something” mentality where they want good services from their county and city but expect someone else to pay it for them.

Budgetary Reactions in the UCI Spanish Department

2009-11-23T19:47:00.000-08:00

By Anjelica Zalin

Spanish is one of the many departments suffering at UCI because of the budget crisis. As in many programs at UCI, professors’ workloads have increased considerably, graduate students have suffered, and there is an overall lack of funding for necessary components in the department.

Interviewed for this article was the Chair of the Spanish Department, Horacio Legras, who is an associate Professor for the Spanish and Portuguese Department in the School of Humanities. Also interviewed was Professor Glenn Levine, who is the Language Program Director and Associate Professor for German, as well as the Director for the Humanities Language Learning Program, and the Faculty Director for the Center for International Education. Legras and Levine were among several people I interviewed on UCI's language departments as whole.

Further, I observed a class that nearly exceeds the cap for students in language class, which was originally 15 people but is now 25 (class size is a casualty of budget cuts). This class was a Spanish 1A class, which had about 25 people in it. Students who arrived late had to sit in seats further from the table around which students gathered, because of the limited space, making it less convenient to write and set books down. I also found that there was less student-to-teacher interaction because of the large size of the class. In contrast, I also sat in on a Spanish 2AB section with just 11 people enrolled. The discussion was more fluid because the students were able to sit in a small circle, making it easy to converse with one another. The students also seemed like they knew each other extremely well, making conversation both in English and Spanish, natural. There was also good teacher-to-student interaction because of the manageable size.

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

The following FAQ explores some of the Spanish Department's responses to the budget cuts in detail.

Q. How large is the Spanish department in terms professors and majors?

A. As a department that used to have about 14 professors, the Spanish department now has only about 7, a number that has fluctuated this year due to changes within the department. It has approximately 120 majors and 28 graduate students with 98 language classes and 32 upper division undergraduate language classes. This coincides with the University of California Statistical Summary of Students and Staff, which states that there are 150 majors in the Foreign Languages and Literature discipline, at UC Irvine, out of 22,076 undergrads in the Fall of 2008, making up about 1% of the distribution. Provided that the numbers have not changed drastically over the past year, this would mean the Spanish majors make up a large portion of this number.

According to the Office of Institutional Research at UCI, there are 87 undergraduate students and 42 graduate students in the Spanish department for the 2009 Fall Quarter, bringing the total to 129. Also according the OIR, there are 2,287 undergraduate humanities majors for the 2009-2010 school year. According to the course catalogue for 2009-2010 year, one of the requirements for the School of Humanities is 2 years of language completion, other than English, unless otherwise satisfied by AP scores in high school or if a student tests out of a UCI language placement exam. This means that a large portion of humanities students are enrolled in language classes including Spanish, which means many students are exposed to the Spanish department. In fact, UCI has a general education requirement which requires a language other than English to be taken if certain requirements have not been met prior to college, such as AP scores, subject tests, or UCI testing. Professor Legras also said that there are approximately 380 students per quarter enrolled in a Spanish class. Including the summer session, there are about 1,200 students that take some kind of Spanish class at UCI each year. This is a large number of students who have some kind of contact within the Spanish department.

Q. How has the Spanish department had to adapt to the budget crisis?

A. Not only have the professors dwindled to only half of what they used to be in the last five years, but the “hiring freeze” as described by Professors Levine and Legras, has prevented the language departments from alleviating the work load from the already over worked staff members. In addition to this, there was a cap on the language classes for 18 people per class. In the last four months the cap has increased to 20, then to 22 and is now finally at 25, which is nearly a 50% increase. Professor Legras has stated that these numbers are too large for a language class and would be far more difficult for the TA’s to teach as effectively.

In budgetary terms, Professor Legras stated that the state of California has cut the budget by approximately 35%. The school of humanities is based on 98% funding, meaning that like some other schools, there are no private grants. The school of humanities is suffering potentially more than others at UCI because the budget is 35% cut of 98% funding, making the recent budget crisis a huge impact on the humanities. Professor Legras mentioned however, that without furloughs, the situation could be far worse.

Q. How has the workload increased for the professors and other members of the Spanish Department?

A. Having only 7 professors in the Spanish department currently, they are spread very thin and have all had to take on numerous other duties. One aspect in the Spanish department that has increased the workload immensely for professors is the time demanding system of promotions within the department. There are different levels of promotion which are assistant, associate, and full which all require committees to review them. This year there are five promotion cases with only four professors reviewing them as some are unable to participate in the committees, such as Professor Legras who is the Chair. The department now has to push back two of the promotion cases to the Winter and committees which originally always contained three people, have now been reduced to just two, making the work load increasingly difficult and time consuming for the remaining professors.

Another example of the financial burden and increasing workloads, Professor Legras informed me of, was the position of the Language Coordinator. This job entailed an exceedingly long amount of desk work each day, plus overseeing 98 classes, 32 TA’s, every syllabus for a class, the performance of each TA within the class, and the placement for each student in the Spanish department. Recently the language coordinator became very ill and needed to leave the position. When a replacement was requested, there was talk of adding it to the duties of other professors or just simply not having a language coordinator. Professor Legras said, “If we don’t have a language coordinator, there is no Spanish program.” They have since hired a lecturer earning only the pay of a TA to take on this job, for 12 months a year including the summer classes. Professor Legras has stated how happy the department is with her work and their goal now is to increase her salary.

In addition to this, many professors in the language departments in general have many duties besides their teaching. Professor Levine stated that Professors three main goals are teaching, researching, and writing. With extra duties implemented by the budget crisis, there is less time to do research. Professor Levine holds many positions in addition to teaching at UCI, which seems to be a theme in the language departments. He not only teaches German, but he is the faculty director for UCI Center of International Education and founded the Humanities Language Learning Program at UCI. With all of these different ventures, there is little time left after teaching. As Professor Levine explained to me, there is something called a “course release” given to a professor after a certain amount of time, where a teacher is hired part time to teach one course in his stead. However, due to lack of funding and the “hiring freeze”, all requests for course release have been denied, increasing the work load greatly for professors that are already extremely busy. While, Professor Levine could choose to take the course release if he wished, this would leave even more work for his remaining colleagues in the department.

Q. How has the budget crisis affected the language departments’ ability to bring in guest professors?

A. Up until last year, Professor Legras informed me that each year a distinguished professor was invited to UCI to teach for 10 weeks, with a budget of $48,000. However, this is no longer happening. Professor Legras spoke of what a positive thing this used to be as it benefitted the Spanish department and UCI as a whole to have, usually, an international professor spend time at the campus. Professor Legras spoke of how wonderful it was for the undergraduate and graduate students to interact with such a renowned professor.

Professor Levine has found the German department in a similar situation regarding the lack of funding needed to bring in a distinguished professor as a guest for a quarter. A German scholar typically from out of the country was brought in to teach for a quarter. Professor Levine spoke of how it augmented the German department and regretted that this was one of the first things to be cut after the budget crisis occurred. He also explained that any guest lecturers that were brought in were generally from fairly close by, which he explained the German department is appreciative to have, but can no longer afford to bring in international guests.

Q. How have Graduate students been affected by the budget crisis within the language departments?

A. The situation with graduate students is a very serious problem at this point, mainly because there are less people applying because there is not enough money to offer to the grad students. There used to be a six year guarantee for financial support for a grad student which has recently been cut down to about three and half years. Not only is the financial situation an issue, but with the decrease in students attending the University, there is a risk that there will not be enough classes available for the grad students to teach. Professor Legras said ideally, a grad student should be able to teach one course at UCI, but due to budgetary constraints, many are required to take a leave of absence and must teach several classes at a junior college. However, grad students are an extremely important part of each department at UCI and Professor Legras explained that there is a possibility of UCI getting penalized with a $10,000 fine, coming from the central administration, for each grad student that is not recruited for the quota needed. While this has yet to happen, it is possibility because of the pressure imposed upon the Spanish department to admit more grad students. As Professor Levine who is experiencing similar problems in the German department put it, “A department does not function without grad students.”

Q. Has the budget crisis affected the time it will take an undergraduate student to graduate?

A. In the past few years, Professor Legras informed me that the Spanish major was made more flexible so as to allow students to be able to graduate in a timely manner. There are fewer mandatory classes and the ones that are mandatory are typically seen at the beginning of the major. However, with some less course offerings, there is a possibility of doing independent study if it is crucial for a student to graduate in four years.

Q. How is the morale in the department?

A. Professor Legras explained that there was an annual Latin American film festival that used to have a budget of about $4,000-$7,000. Prominent directors were brought in, quality film was ordered, and it was always an interesting cultural component of the Spanish department. However, the budget is now only $400, which is only about one tenth of what it used to be. Instead of canceling the festival, they had decided to make do with what they have and have made proper adjustments. Instead of nice film, they are using DVD’s and they have asked directors to view their movies, many who have agreed to do so free of charge. As Professor Legras stated to me, “If we just stay inside and let ourselves be consumed by frustration, it would be much worse.”

Spreading Political Consciousness

2009-11-19T05:24:00.000-08:00

By Kimberly M. Ford

The following article includes interviews with current UC Irvine student Leandra Ordorica, UC Berkeley student Billy Buster, and graduate students at UC Irvine, Fernando Chirino and Annessa Stagner. Each of these students has been active in the cause to prevent the University of California budget cuts.

After the 15 % tuition increase, which will occur next year, many students and families will no longer be able to afford paying for a University education in California, let alone a private institution there. As a result many students, like Billy Buster and Leandra Oririca result to financial aid. Other students take an alternative route, and don’t enroll in school because they can’t afford it. Fernando Chirino, who is a fourth year graduate student at UC Irvine states that “The more students have to pay for a public education, the more private that school becomes as it will both be based on tuition and need to cater toward securing contracts that bring in the most money.”

Annessa Stager, who is also a graduate student at Irvine thinks, “Students could be doing more to prevent the budget cuts from taking place.” Stagner is a leader of AGS Council at Irvine.

Regarding the budget cuts, Oririca says, “At first, I tried to fight it.” She passed out fliers to get students involved, joined facebook groups, such as “Defend UCI” and “Save SAAS,” and she spoke with Dean Sallinger, Vice Chancellor Gomez, and Chancellor Drake. Ordorica believes that students are beginning to “calm down” about the budget crisis. When Ordorica was asked if she attended the walkout on September 24^th, she replied: “No. Why would I walk out if I am paying for school?”

Statfinder.com reveals that The University of California system admitted 19,373 transfer applicants to attend school during 2008-2009; however, only 14,059 actually enrolled within the UC system. This means that 5, 214 applicants, who were admitted into the system, chose to enroll elsewhere, didn’t attend school, or chose to attend community college. In conclusion, the population at UC schools is decreasing.

Chirino continues to promote the movement against the budget cuts. He has spent the past three years protesting as a member of the Worker Student Alliance. Initially, their efforts focused on preventing cuts directed at service workers. Currently, Chirino is one of the chief organizers working in the Defend UCI coalition: “Besides being one of the 2 MC’s during the September 24^th walkout rally at the flagpole, I also helped draft flyers, make and post posters, contracted and confirmed speakers, and helped to organize the mini-rally and the evening panel at the Humanities.” For the Zombie Protest, Chirino lead the picket, as well as assisted with protestors’ ghost-like make-up. Lastly, he drafted and helped plan the November 17^th delivery of the Defend UCI petition, denouncing the budget cuts. The petition accumulated over 1,200 signatures.

There is reason behind Chirino’s acts. He insists, “We, through our actions, are showing to our families and friends back home that they don’t have to take it. Our struggle is greater than the UC system, greater than public education. It is the struggle of the working class majority taking back from the opportunistic, capitalist minority what is rightfully ours-- power.” Chirino describes the student movement against budget cuts as “static.” He says, “It is unreasonable to think students would act before they fully understand the nature of the problem and feel its impacts. “ Chirino says that “Many of the families and friends of the UC workers and students live in these cities, meaning that the news of these budget cuts are being disseminated through these networks. As the political consciousness spreads so will the movement.”

There is a large sum of people who cannot attend UC schools due to the cost. The budget cuts are not only disabling many students from getting a good education, but they are also affecting the United States education as a whole. Billy Buster, a Community College transfer student now at UC Berkeley explains that students should do research on the matter rather than just accept the fees. He says, “Students should know how the UC budget cuts will affect them and the future. The ability for your children, your sisters, your brothers, and your friends to receive financially obtainable education is on the line.”

According to Chirino, over 1,000 people were physically present at the UCLA on November 17th, political consciousness is beginning to spread. However, will it spread fast enough to preserve the adequate and accessible education in which every individual is entitled to?

Food Service Workers Struggle To Make Ends Meet As Work Hours and Days Are Cut

2009-11-19T04:33:00.000-08:00

by Alejandra Olmedo

Noon. Rush hour. Students walk in and out of the crowded food court, at the Student Center, in search of food to satisfy their hunger in-between classes. Those that can find an unoccupied seat stay to calmly enjoy their meal. Once they devour greasy cheeseburgers and their 32 oz. soda, they leave. Some carelessly leave wrappers, and soiled napkins among other bits of trash not thinking of the person who has the job of picking it up. Many may not even notice them, but they walk around wiping down tables and emptying out trash bins on a daily basis. Unfortunately, this is the job that Maria and Sol (each chose not to disclose their real names)take on for near-poverty wages. These two women were kind and brave enough to sit down with me and share their stories, each providing for many on such a limited budget that continues to shrink as the weeks go by...

The first high-profile casualties of the major budget cuts within the UC systems were those at the very bottom of the barrel, custodial workers. Recently, 35 custodial workers were laid off, with more set to come. Now, it seems as though a new group of workers on the chopping block will be food service workers. These are the stories of two women trying to make due with what is within their grasp. Unfortunately, what they are afforded is limited. This is not only due to financial issues within the UC systems, but country wide the declining economy that is causing people to lose their jobs.

Maria, a middle aged Hispanic woman, has worked at the University of California, Irvine campus for two years and faces losing her job. With two daughters here in U.S., three in Mexico, parents and brothers all depending on her, she does not know how to resolve her mounting problems. Recently, Maria was demoted from a full-time worker to a part-time worker and now a temporary worker. This situation is nothing new since she is now joining one of many who are facing similar situations. Several handfuls of food service workers have already been laid off. However, the excuse given to her was that she worked significantly more hours that her co-workers. She spoke angrily about the topic, believing that this was not the truth. To make matters even worse, she was told by her boss that by December she would be laid off.** What a wonderful Christmas present. She then proceeded to describe in detail how she felt that day and how exactly the events unfolded.

"But they told me that they furloughed me because of the cut backs. As far as I'm concerned it isn't true. The reason why they furloughed me was because I supposedly had [worked] more hours... When I found out, I was devastated, I thought to myself, 'What am I going to do now?' My family depends on me "

Although, Maria does plan to confront union leaders, as she and many of her other co-workers are facing many injustices, which include being laid off and losing work hours and days. However, Maria has been singled out once before as being "problematic" by her superiors since stands up for her rights and those of others. She once was a prominent member among the worker's union, however has her problems have grown her involvment in the union has decreased.

Now knowing that she will be laid off in December, Maria has huge concerns about her job and over the effects loosing it will have on her family. Maria has to feed, clothe numerous dependents on wages that could barely sustain a small family. Maria, a single mother, is the sole provider of a family of over 7, making $12/hour makes it nearly impossible to pay all living expenses. Maria faces even more personal adversities and her family ends up footing the bill. Then, Maria began by tearfully speaking about missing her daughters. Now with an even more limited budget, she has to

"wake up her daughters at 4am so I can drive them over to their fathers' house since I don't have the money to pay babysitting."

However, she does not have any problems with leaving her daugthers at her ex-husband's home, neither does she have any personal problems with him, rather she simply wants to spend as much time as she can with her daughters, which is understandable. She often comes home to an empty house all due to her financial issues, she cannot afford to see her daughters weekdays: five days are too many days to go without seeing your daughters, stated Maria. Her truck was also impounded for a whole month, with her mounting debits who knows what awaits her in the near future…

I returned to the food court once more to meet with another food service worker. Waiting I observed Sol, an older looking Hispanic woman, making sure every table is clean and suitable for sitting and eating. She agreed to meet with me quickly as she did not have much time to speak. Sol, a polite, quiet and reserved smiled and answered every question, however she did not leave the interview as happy as she began….

When asked about the budget cuts and its effects on her workload, she stated that she now has to "do the work that five people did months ago." She bears the grunt of a heavier workload but the same miserable wages. "It is very tiring doing all of the work by myself" she now has to empty out all of the trash bins, clean tables in a large food court. Many of these jobs are back-breaking especially for a woman of her age, she now has to carry and lift trash cans that two used to do. On top of all these issues, she faces losing her job, “no one is safe, no one is guaranteed they will have a job tomorrow.”

She even spoke of the negative effects that her job has had on her health.

“I went to the doctor and he told me a I had diabetes. No one in my family has diabetes. The stress of the job caused this.”

According to Sol, she is only given one break, a 15 minute break, this wouldn’t be uncommon if she worked four hour shifts. However, she works full-time, meaning she works more than 4 hours a day, so she should be untitled to a 30 minute break as well. This is due to her heavy workload, work that she has to perform all by herself. She has so much work that she is not even afforded all of her breaks. Yet, Sol did complain about the union's lack of interest and involvement in the worker's plight. However, she does not firsthand engage in union activites, rather she sits back and waits for something to change.

Director Jack McManus, of the Hospitality and Dining Services, sat down briefly with me to discuss the UC budget and its effects. According to McManus, approximately 162 cooks, food service workers, etc are employed under Hospitality and Dining Services. When questioned about the upcoming lay-off of Maria and possibly many more workers, he looked puzzled, as though he was hearing this for the first time. He attempted to clarify that NO workers have been laid off, and that they do not plan on doing so anytime in the near future. Needless to say, there is a disconnecr between what the workers are being told and what the heads of the department known.

According to the Employment Opportunities Bulletin, food service workers have a starting wage between $8.32 and $10.60/hour. This amount is miserable relative to the amount of duties they have to perform. However, another offical UC Irvine database tells a different story. DataWareHouse states that Food Service workers should have a starting wage of $12.50. Yet, DataWareHouse does provice some chilling statistic, with a beginning wage of $12.50, a worker stands to make $2,175.00 monthly and $26,100.00 annually, and this is before takes. One has to ask; how do these workers make do with such limited economic means?

*Interviews were conducted in Spanish, then closely translated into the English equivalent. All translations are approximate.

**Maria's lay-off situation is unknown, she could not be reached for a follow-up interview.

International Students: "I decided to take the opportunity to study abroad because I wanted to try something different."

2009-11-19T01:37:00.000-08:00

by Saeko Oishi

The clock reads 11:00 A.M. but the room is empty; empty except for an anxious and excited woman wearing a business casual suit and heels to match. As she is setting the tables for the International Coffee Hour, she checks the clock and looks out at the hall for any international students to join her. As I walk into the room, the aroma of fresh roasted coffee fills the air. Charisma Bartlett, APA Pre-doctoral Psychology Intern at UC Irvine, continues to prepare the refreshments and greet the students as they walk into the room. “Oh no, we’re out of napkins. Would you like to come with me to get some from Starbucks?” I followed her outside the counseling center as she explained to me the effects the budget cuts have directly had on the programs offered to the international students at UCI. Charisma’s enthusiasm for the program despite the minor obstacles caused by the budget cut was evident through her genuine smile. “The budget we get to work with weekly got decreased to half of what we used to get… We’re working with what we have though.” For example, to compensate for the budget cuts from the programs and events offered for international students, the students themselves have had to prepare food for each other rather than having it provided to the students.

The UCI budget cut has affected almost all aspects of student life at UCI including the classes offered, programs and organizations. It has affected everyone and anyone whether they are a student, a T.A., or a professor in one way or another. The International Club, which is supported by the International Center, is no exception; The International Club is an organization that has generally been overlooked by the typical UCI student. However, the budget cut greatly affects these international and exchange students, as their tuition is raised unexpectedly on top of their traveling and housing expenses which are an investment in itself. The overall number of international students has not changed much, with a total of 1,891 international students for the fall quarter and China as the top represented country with 452 students. After China, there are 325 students from Korea, 226 students from India and 179 students from Taiwan. As we returned back to the Counseling office, the room was filled with international students from all over the world, but each student with one thing in common, a look of excitement and enthusiasm. Each student seemed to be struggling with one common issue, public transportation. As an international student, there isn’t much reason to obtain a California driver’s license since their stay is intended for only a year or two. However, with the budget cuts, the accessibility of public transportation has decreased drastically within the past year.

“In Irvine, it’s almost impossible to get around anywhere without a car. I’ve taken the bus to nearby locations but I didn’t realize how far of a walk it is to get from point to point after you get off the bus. The budget cuts have decreased the number of buses running on a regular basis as well so the time you have to wait if you miss a certain time is ridiculous. You basically need a car or need to bum a ride from a friend on a regular basis to do anything, it’s very inconvenient,” Anna*, an international student from Australia said. Anna* has already been here a year and plans to stay another year to study here at UCI as a Business Econ major. As Anna* shared her struggles with her transportation issue, others in the room all nodded their heads in agreement. The tuition this year for international students has gone from $7,800 per quarter in 2004 to $10,800 this year. In addition to the fee increase, international students have additional concerns such as public transportation, how the currency exchange of their home country is affected by the economy, and the changes that international students have had to make for their stay abroad.
The main source for public transportation in Orange County, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), has had a $9 million cut for 2008-2009 transit operations. They are also expecting likely cuts or delays to an additional $12.5 million of transit operating revenue. In general, Orange County is experiencing significantly lower sales tax revenues that support transit operations and due to the downfall of the economy, the overall outlook for the OCTA budget is not looking too promising in the future. Housing is not so much an issue compared to transportation since International Students enrolling at UC Irvine to complete a degree program can apply for housing through the same channels as students from the U.S. and have guaranteed on-campus housing as long as they intend to study at UCI for at least one full academic year.
The conversation switches to a lighter topic as one of the members brings up the Thanksgiving dinner organized by the International Center which will take place next week, specifically for international students. “I want to try pumpkin pie and turkey! I have never tried pumpkin pie or turkey before!” Minami, a Japanese exchange student exclaims as her eyes light up and gets excited at the thought of being part of a Thanksgiving dinner. The room is now filled with a few local UCI students and ten to 15 international students from all over the world including a few students from Australia, Iran, and Korea as well as a couple from France. Although the number of students who come to study from abroad has stayed somewhat consistent in the past dew years, the struggles that these students have had to face are evident.

Another student striving to enjoy his time here at UCI despite the obstacles the budget cuts have presented is Jin Cho, a second year international student from Korea who is studying International Studies and hopes to graduate next year. In 2004, Cho transferred to UC Irvine from a community college in Santa Barbara but later had to return to Korea to serve in the Korean military for two years. “It is a requirement in Korea to join the military when you are 18 or 19 unless you are injured. I decided to take the opportunity to study abroad because I wanted to try something different. I don’t plan on going back to Korea, I want to stay here in the U.S. after I graduate”. He returned to the U.S. this year after serving in the military and was astonished at the changes he has had to make to compensate for the effects of the budget cut. “In addition to the tuition increase, the currency exchange between the Korean and U.S. currency is also affected by the economy and public transportation is less accessible as well. Compared to when I was here at UCI in 2004, everyday life has gotten a lot harder for me.” Although Jin had a car in 2004, the economy and budget cut would not allow for him to do the same this time around and therefore resorts to public transportation. “I used to study at Gateway or the science library during the week when I first came here in 2004, but now with the budget cuts, the libraries close earlier and it’s a lot harder for me to just find a place to study with friends. Plus the fact that I don’t drive now really limits me”. When I asked him about whether he has ever participated in a protest on campus, he replied, “I’ve wanted to, but I’m scared they will take down my name and kick me out or something.” Jin is even considering a minor rather than getting a major for International Studies to graduate earlier. It is not an easy process but he plans to get his visa sometime soon in order to find a job and work in the U.S. after he graduates; although the way things are looking, this may have to wait a while.

Charisma emphasizes the fact that many international students have been here for more than a year and have had to learn to adapt to a completely different lifestyle. On top of the fact that these students have had to restart a new life as a student in a different country, the adjustment and changes that they have had to make in accordance with the budget cut and tuition hikes have led several international students to reconsider their time studying abroad. Others have found that despite these obstacles, their experience studying abroad is an opportunity worth sacrificing for as these students continue to live out their UCI experience while making necessary changes in response to the budget cuts.

UCI Medical Center: The Glass Ceiling

2009-11-18T23:16:00.000-08:00

By: Sebastian A.R. Ontiveros and Emily Ma

Simultaneous clapping to the popular phrase “Si se puede” concludes the November monthly meeting for the team leaders of the UCI section of the ‘Local 3299’ faction of AFSCME. ‘Local 3299’ represents the UC wide system service employees, and stands for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. At this sectional meeting for UCI, happy faces are abundant in the room of twenty people. Salutations and smiles are exchanged between fellow members, but after a few laughs the mood transforms into a business atmosphere, and the seriousness of a person’s well being is consciously considered in the following discussions. “We’re dealing with a bully and if we don’t fight back they’re gonna get us hard,” says one team leader. “We cannot tolerate intimidation or other tactics to divert us from our goals,” says another. A real sense of David battling Goliath exudes through the second level conference room of the UCI Medical Center Library. The team leaders of each individual section are gathered to discuss current events circulating in their departments and ensure the fair treatment of their service employees; a union in every sense of the word.

AFSCME, was established in 1932, and represents diverse groups of workers, such as “nurses, corrections officers, child care providers, EMT’s, and sanitation workers” (AFSCME). Nationally, the union boasts 1.6 million members. Within AFSCME there are various “Local” branches. Local 3299 represent 20,000 workers at the ten UC campuses, and five medical centers. At UCI, Local 3299 speaks for 2,400 at both the campus and the medical center. All employees are unionized members, as a condition of employment, however it is up to the member to be active or non-active. Juan Castillo is the local lead organizer, and is assisted by two other organizers. There are about 30 departments represented, such as the Radiology Department, Operating Room Department and even a Food Service Department. Members meet with each department leader according to which department they are working in. Each department has a leader, which collectively makes up the “Member Action Team,” which meets every month to recap current events to relay back to their department. Raylene Machado holds not only the position of Radiology Department Leader, but also the title M.A.T. Captain. Although she works full time as a Radiology Technician, she also devotes time throughout the day sending E-mails to union members, talking to management, and spreading awareness at union information tables on campus. Yet, as Machado explains, not every member is as passionate and proactive as she is, “It’s really common that if employees speak up, management finds some way to retaliate.” Many times, such retaliation is being done under the radar— being the last dismissed during lunchtime or given overtime, but to union members, it seems as if their action is making a difference. “It shows they feel threatened.” Although Machado admits she has not been directly affected like the service workers have been affected, she says that many of the members do need to receive federal aid through food stamps. Yet, with the economic crisis, many forms of aid such as food stamps are being cut. “Where are these people gonna go?” Machado asks.

Initially, as news broke of the planned budget cuts for the UC system, service workers were notified by UCI School officials of their intentions to impose layoffs at their level. According to Juan Castillo, the lead organizer for the UCI division of Local 3299, the workers were notified in early August by mail. Immediately, Castillo and his counterparts started to organize against the act, bombarding officials with letters, E-mails, and phone calls to reconsider their decision, but were told that they would not negotiate. However, these actions extended the effective date of the layoffs to October, giving time to develop a plan. Subsequent to this small victory, Castillo and others went to the heart of the problem and organized a rally outside the home of Vice Chancellor Wendell Brase to put pressure on him. “There were about 200 people outside his house,” said Castillo. “The ironic thing here was although the office of the vice chancellor said that behavior like this would not get us anywhere, after we did that they wanted to meet with us.” The meeting consisted of Castillo, other organizers and workers, but was missing the Vice Chancellor himself. The Vice Chancellor's absence upset many including Castillo because according to Castillo, the union was initially informed that the Vice Chancellor would be present. Castillo made his discontent known and the authorities involved in the meeting said “We were getting too personal.” Castillo’s response was, “When you layoff 46 people and these people can’t pay their rent, can’t feed their kids, it is personal.” The result of that meeting: the original forty-six-worker layoff was reduced to only three. Castillo described this as a bittersweet victory. “Even though they minimize the number that doesn’t mean we are going to stop because there are still three workers that got laid off,” Castillo said. “Laying off three workers will not change the economical status of the budget crisis."

One of the unlucky workers to be laid off was Diego Rivera. At 23-years-old, he has been employed by the UCI Medical Center as a groundskeeper for eight years. Diego works 40-hours per week and sends money back home to support his parents and family in Mexico. “Lay-offs were chosen based on seniority.” Juan Castillo explains, “However since all workers were directly hired by UCI at the same time this was difficult to determine.” Four years ago, service workers were not employed directly by the UCI Medical Center, but through a contracting company, Commercial Landscaping Services. Under this contract, workers earned just $7.50 an hour. Actions taken on behalf of the union eventually allowed service workers to break their contract from CLS, demanding that they be hired directly by UCI, and thus were able to make $14.50 an hour, as well as receive health care benefits and retirement plans. As a result, many of the workers were technically hired at the same time. As diligent of a worker Rivera is, he lost his job due to unfortunate circumstances. After suffering a lateral ligament rupture while playing soccer, Rivera badly needed surgery, which meant that he needed time off from work to recover. This accident and injury were beyond his control, yet were what ultimately cost him his job. “I can’t make car payments. I can’t send money to my family,” Diego says solemnly through a translator. Even though the number of lay-offs has decreased from forty-six to three, the medical center still imposed a temporary layoff of 300 workers in order to compensate for their loss. “It’s a furlough by another other name” one union leader said.

The budget cuts that ultimately forced the three-person layoff still have had adverse affects on the remaining workers. Maria Aragon is a four year veteran at UCI Medical Center and according to her she already has to take on copious amounts of overtime just to pay her bills. And, with the reduction in staff she says that she already notices the increased amount of work due to the lack of staff. “We don’t have money to spend out, we don’t go to the movie theaters or Disneyland” Aragon said humbly. "We are just trying to make a living and get keep our house." Her biggest fear she divulges is that she does not want to have to borrow money from her kids to support herself. However, as she ages it will be harder and harder for her to keep working the forty plus hours of manual labor. Yet, even with Aragon’s personal hardships, she is considered one of the ‘lucky ones,’ there are others that would kill for her position, like Diego Rivera. In fact, in a curious change of events the remaining workers received a two-dollar raise in salary. However, the news was nearly simultaneous with an increase of the workers’ premiums for health care, canceling each other out. It seems like with each victory comes a setback, following that bittersweet theme. Wages have gone up, workers have been laid off, and just when things seemed to start to look up and workers’ jobs were re-instated, management found a way to circumvent furloughs and layoffs by imposing a temporary cut back in hours for 300 workers and even still a new issue is added to their plate with there health care. Despite all these setbacks, Aragon said this is the best job she has ever had. “I really like the atmosphere, and it has benefits,” she says. But is it right that anyone take advantage of that?

For more information, please visit http://www.facingpovertyatuc.org/UCI.html

UCI's A.R.C. Remains "State-of-the Art"

2009-11-17T23:01:00.000-08:00

By Melissa K. Mead

“We’re funded by the UCI students... and live by the amount provided by the bond”

- Greg Rothberg, ARC Associate Facilities Director

One place on the University of California, Irvine’s campus that manages to maintain a refreshing, state-of-the-art feel is the Anteater Recreation Center (ARC, for short). The grand opening of the luxurious 50-acre site in 2000 was successful in sparking “the enhancement of the campus community” by dedicating its vicinity to “fitness and wellness, intramural sports, and physical education programs.” Now, the ARC even offers cooking, dancing, self defense classes, as well as sixty-minute massages.

Perhaps most surprisingly, the ARC seems to be immune from the UCI budget cuts that are playing out across campus. In early September, ARC expenditures were the subject of an article in the New University after the purchase of brand new fitness equipment “totaling approximately $100,000,” according to Janet Konami (Associate Business Director of Campus Recreation).

The article questioned the ARC's budget and how the facility could possibly afford to shell out the money for new equipment when supposedly the current fitness machines were already sufficient.

Both Konami, as well as the ARC’s Associate Facilities Director, Greg Rothberg, discussed how the ARC is fairing during the UC budget crisis.

- - - - -

Rothberg explained that in the spring quarter of 1996, students of University of California, Irvine voted on and passed a referendum called the “Student Recreational Center Funding Project,” which funded the construction of the ARC. Within this referendum, students agreed to incorporate a “fee,” much like a gym membership fee, into their tuition payment. Rothberg also mentioned that this referendum paid for, and continues to pay for the supervision of the building, as well as the maintenance, upkeep, and replacement of the ARC’s fitness equipment.

Both Rothberg and Konami said that the ARC’s funding continues to come directly from students’ fees which are automatically included in their tuition. And despite the tuition hike, and any future tuition hikes (for that matter), Rothberg also brought up the important point that “the bond (within the 1996 referendum) that pays for the building, is totally separate from what’s happening with the state budget and the UC budget.”

He said that the only connection between the ARC’s budget and the state and UC budgets, is the tuition increase. He also said that the fees included in students’ tuition will remain the same--even if the tuition should continue to increase.

As far as outside donations are concerned, UCI’s ARC doesn’t receive any. The only outside donations that the Recreational center makes are going toward a small handful of club sports, in order to help them operate. Konami further explained that both club sports teams, as well as ARC classes and programs (such as dance, cooking, massages, etc.) generate revenue as well. This means that these classes that the ARC offers are entirely self-supporting programs that operate solely off of their own generated revenue.

Budget decisions for the ARC are made within the Campus Recreation department, which not only manages the ARC, but also is responsible for managing and keeping track of intramural sports teams as well as clubs and classes offered by the ARC. Replacing the ARC’s equipment is practically built into their budget, based on the “useful life” of the machines," accoreing to Konami.

What about ARC employees taking any kind of pay-cuts due to the recent budget cuts? Konami’s response declared that “all full-time employees and contract employees, including those in executive positions, had taken pay-cuts anywhere between 4 and 12% (based on a graduated scale depending on salary).” And interestingly enough, since student employees aren’t allowed to work full-time at the ARC’s facility, they have remained exempt from the pay-cuts. Rothberg’s response was almost identical to Konami’s, claiming that “everyone was going to get furloughs, and that student employee pay will remain the same.” However, the ARC is only closed eight days out of the whole year, which (as Konami stated) “makes it hard to accommodate furloughs, when we don’t have many days for people to take.”

Below are the ARC's hours:

Monday-Thursday: 6 a.m. - 1 a.m.

Friday: 6 a.m. - 12 a.m.

Saturday: 8 a.m. - 9 p.m.

Sunday: 8 a.m. -12 a.m.

While UCI’s main libraries continue to cut their hours, the ARC remains able to keep their doors open--and much later than the libraries’ hours at that. Greg explained that while “there’s been some pressure to try and reduce the ARC’s hours and offerings, we’ve tried not to do so, in order for the students to retain the opportunity to come here as much as possible.” Konami added that “Cutting hours will always be an option if we run into really hard times, but that as long as the students’ fees are included in their tuition, and tuition is being paid, we feel as though we have a responsibility to keep the hours that have been set. I don’t think that [students and faculty] pay a separate fee for library use," Konami said: "We keep hearing that this [budget crisis] is going to go on for another year or two, and if at some point it gets really bad, we’ve talked about cutting the hours back to midnight.”

For Konami, who has been on campus for over 26 years, the current budget cuts do “feel more dire” than the budget cuts she saw back in the ’90’s. And despite not being able to “see any light quite yet,” Konami suggested that “being in Recreation is actually a relatively good thing, because people still need to come [to the ARC].” She also said that unlike a handful of other activities, coming to the ARC remains (practically) a “free” thing to do, and that spending time here to blow off steam and workout doesn’t involve spending a lot of extra money--something most students don’t have lying around.

In addition, Rothberg said that “we see the ARC as a place where people are able to get rid of their stress. We’ve really tried to be conscientious of cutting things in order to save money because we feel that it’s an important place for students to come to and forget about outside stress that is involved with their finances or school.”

While what many refer to as “fairness” remains an issue within the cuts that UCI has seen so far, it is only fair to say that it looks as though we will continue to see further effects of the UC budget cuts that will affect different programs and facilities in varying ways, and that there isn’t yet a light at the end of the tunnel. Until then, head over to the ARC and sweat it out!

Here's the link to the New U's ARC story: http://www.newuniversity.org/2009/10/news/100000-spent-on-new-machines/

Budget cuts mean less hours, less services, and less student workers at the UCI campus libraries.

2009-11-17T14:22:00.000-08:00

Ned Raggett, 38, is a library assistant at the Jack Langson Library on the UC Irvine campus. There he is in charge of the library reserves, ordering them for professors, and making them available for students. He has been working in this capacity since 1997.

Q: When did you first learn of the budget cuts? A: To be honest, when things started looking dicey with regards to the State budget, I figured that cuts would be made to the school system. I believe it was in June or July last year that the State of California started having financial difficulties, and after that it was only a matter of time.

Q: What was your initial reaction to hearing about the budget cuts? A: I was not surprised. As I said before, I was sort of expecting that cuts would be coming. The whole process with regards to fitting a budget within its financial limits is rather convoluted, but there have been pay cuts as a part of budget cuts in the past, and there will be again. I thought, “It’s just one of those times.” I am less surprised that it happened than the intensity with which it has hit.

Q: How will the crisis affect you personally? A: Obviously I will have to revise my personal spending, and give up what I can no longer afford.

Q: Has it had any impact so far? A: In terms of my employment, I – and my colleges – are subject to furloughs, which no one are happy about. But more than that, I oversee the student employees working here at the library, and because of the cuts in the budget and to our hours, I cannot assign then as many hours as I would like. Already the services at the library are cut so we are not open as late in the evening as we used to, and the study area, which I also oversee at times, is only open in the evening now. It is just too bad.

Q: Are you actively involved in the protests against the budget cuts? Why not? A: No, I am a member of CUE (Coalition of University Employees), but I am not really active in the protests. I support the unions in general, which is why I am a member, but I do not like they way they are handling the current situation. Rather than fighting tooth and nail to keep things unchanged for now, the unions could try to negotiate for retroactive pay for the employees. Like an IOU. We would have a little less money right now, but be compensated down the line. This way they are just expending all of their energy on a battle they cannot win. The cuts are coming, but the unions could use it to their advantage instead of going kicking and screaming.

Q: Who do you think the cuts will hit the hardest? A: If the all budget cuts are implemented, it is inevitable that a part of the burden will fall on all of us, but I think it is important for everyone to realize that those who are getting paid less now are the ones who are going to have the hardest time affording the pay cuts. The higher paid employees will have an easier time dealing with less money.

Q: Where, in your opinion, could or should the cut be made?
A: There is no easy solution to this problem. I definitely prefer that everybody take a cut to their paycheck rather than seeing people laid off and losing everything altogether. But I think it is important for the “higher-ups” to look at the possible pr of this issue. They must be careful not to simply protect themselves when others are having problems. The cuts should be spread out in a reasonable fashion; CUE says that the University of California have money put aside for tough times, and I understand the rationale of having money for such a purpose, but I think that one could argue for the use of part of the emergency fund to lessen the impact of the proposed cuts. Everyone is looking for a simple solution, but in a case such as this, the solution is bound to be complex.

The hours at Jack Langson Library:
Monday to Thursday: 8am to 8pm
Friday: 8am to 5 pm
Saturday and Sunday: 1pm to 5pm

The hours at Gateway Study Center
Monday to Thursday: 6pm to 3am
Friday and Saturday: 5pm to 9pm
Sunday: 5pm to 3am

Financial Aid in a Crisis?

2009-11-17T11:45:00.000-08:00

By Kaela Berry and Angelo Florendo

The time is 2:10 in the afternoon at the Office of Financial Aid and Scholarship. From previous interviews with the staff, it is around time when traffic is at its peak. However, there is hardly anyone present in the office. Approximately two people are present. One of the two people is a man wanting to change his financial aid account. Four minutes later, two people wait in line. Traffic is slowly building up. One student is inquiring about scholarship money. Among all of this, there is soft rock music is subtly playing in the background. The staff, though slow, is still semi-enthusiastically pacing around, helping students, checking files, or researching certain things. Most students ask about loans. Students show variations of emotion: anxiety and indifference, but boredom mostly.
The flow of traffic in financial aid may have been like this at the current moment. Four months ago, it wasn’t at all like this. Due to the budget cuts, the financial aid office is starting to feel the heat of the cutbacks. This affected the staff as much as the students especially during the beginning of the fall quarter. The budget cuts have gotten to the point where the members of the staff; this in turn affected the students causing confusion and frustration due to the many students and short-staffed office. So far, it appears to take around two minutes for a student to be helped. This is a vast change from only three months ago, during the summer, when the line of students were zipping out the doorway and both Financial Aid counselors and advisors were working on Saturday nights, unpaid, just to get ahead of work. “It was pretty busy…crazy,” Financial Aid counselor Sokhea Nou said. “We were short-staffed, up in the front and the counseling area, so we had to deal with a large workload.” The busy summer and lack of staff member were results of the budget cuts. The Office of Financial Aid and Scholarship had to make some changes on normal work responsibilities in order to compensate for the lack of advisors working. Nou explained: This summer we were down by one counselor and then four advisors. So we only had two advisors. One advisor was on maternity leave and the other one left…[The counselors’] main responsibility, on a normal day, if we’re fully-staffed, is to work on the phones and, of course, work the front desks…they had to input all the verification documents that came in, all the taxes that were submitted. Because we were so behind, we had them just input for most of the summer and the counselors covered the phones and the front and everything else.”
The purpose of financial aid, basically, is to help students pay for school; leaning more towards the students who cannot afford to go. And through financial aid, there are many different ways to receive financial aid, like grants, loans, scholarships, etc. Financial aid determines who is eligible for aid via FAFSA form. What a FAFSA (Free Application for
Federal Student Aid) form does is ask a family their background both financially as well as personally (i.e. family size, how many children attend college).

We managed to get Daniela Harris as well as several members of the financial aid staff to take time out of our schedule to speak with us about the workings of financial aid, as well as how the budget cuts are affecting the office as well as the personal lives of the staff as well as the students. Daniela Harris is a financial aid advisor; the frontline. The advisors have the most direct contact with the families of students. According to Harris a lot of the initial, starting points for anything: applying and paperwork is all done through the advisors.

Q. How do you determine the people who get grants, loans, etc?

A. All families who want to get, at the very least, loans or any type of financial aid through the school have to complete a FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) form. They all go into the website and they put in their income, their household size, what their assets are, how many of their children are attending college, etc. The Federal Government: Department of Education calculate based on all those factors, what that family should be able to afford for their child to go to school, for the year. That’s called the Estimated Family Contribution. When financial aid gets that number to our office, we tell the family, (were the student a full time California resident, living on campus), the student might pay $25,000 for the year, but based on FAFSA information, the family might be able to pay a smaller amount, out of pocket. The trouble with that though is that they might have a high car payment, they might be living in an expensive place, etc. So they might not have the money out of pocket, so we do cover that portion with non-need based loans, but we take that number and get the difference between what you can afford and what it costs to attend, that’s where put in the grants and the need-based loans.

Q. What exactly is non-need based loans?

A. Non-need based loans are higher interest rate loans. The difference between Stafford loans: you have a subsidized loan and an unsubsidized loan; a subsidized loan is a lower interest rate and has no interest while the student is in school. A student with financial need will get a subsidized loan and some unsubsidized loans. A student with no financial need will get all unsubsidized loans.

Harris is only one of the two Financial Aid advisors still working at UCI’s Office of Financial Aid and Scholarship. Over the summer, the Office of Financial Aid and Scholarship had to make some changes on normal work responsibilities in order to compensate for the lack of advisors working.
Sohkea Nou, a Financial Aid counselor, explained:

“This summer we were down by one counselor and then four advisors. So we only had two advisors. One advisor was on maternity leave and the other one left… [The counselors’] main responsibility, on a normal day, if we’re fully-staffed, is to work on the phones and, of course, work the front desks…they had to input all the verification documents that came in, all the taxes that were submitted. Because we were so behind, we had them just input for most of the summer and the counselors covered the phones and the front and everything else.”

Q. How much does the average student receive in financial aid?

A. That’s a hard question to answer because financial aid [could be in the form of] loans, grants, scholarships. It’s anything of use to pay for school. A student will get up to the cost of attendance in financial aid.
It depends on their status; if they are full-time, part-time, if they are California resident, non-California resident. It’s just different factors, if they are living on campus, or off campus, or if they are living with their parents, they’re going to have a different budget than other students. A dependent student who’s living off campus, who is a California resident, going full-time, will be getting around $25,000 a year. We will give that student $25,000 in financial aid. It could be loans, it could be grants, and it could be scholarships. We will give them, up till the cost of attendance. There are few students whom we cannot give up to the cost of attendance, but most students get up to what we estimate the average student, in their situation would have to pay to attend UCI, including housing, books, parking, fees, everything.

A program has been put into effect last year to help those in financial need, known as the Blue and Gold Program. It is a fairly new program where students from families with incomes of $60,000 or lower and qualify for financial aid can attend a UC and not pay for the fees. Those who are applicable for the Blue and Gold program will receive minimum grant aid to cover their fees and those who are at higher need for aid will receive more grants to pay for room and board, books, etc. The program cost 3.1 million dollars and is paid by federal stimulus dollars.

Q. How has the office of financial aid adapted to the budget cuts that have been happening at UCI?

A. In the amount of aid that has been given out, we have always been strict on our institutional funding. When completing the FAFSA, it is a federal application; you are applying for federal loans and grants. They get that information; they send it to the state that the student plans to attend school within. For California, that would be the California Student Aid Commission for Cal Grant. They would also send the information to UCI, and we determine what type of institutional aid we can give: what type of loans UCI can offer and what type of grants UCI can offer. The amount of grant money we can offer depends on how much money we are getting, which depends on how much UCI gets from the state to spend and help students. It also affects [financial aid] because of the Cal Grant situation. Cal grants have been in jeopardy for a while and we were thinking if we were going to give that or not for next quarter. Cal Grants are trying to keep up with the amount of fees that are charged by the UC system. Now we are trying to find out what the fee increase is going to do. And if we will, we might have to help cover it with UCI funds versus state funds. It has really made a lot of students weary of what their situation is, but it also leaves us where we cannot help students out right now because we don’t know what to tell them, because at this point we know as much as the student does at this point.

According to UCI’s Office of Financial Aid and Scholarship website, there are three types of grants: The Cal Grant, Pell Grant, and UCI Grant. All three are awarded to students who demonstrate great financial need. On May
26, 2009, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed to eliminate the Cal Grant, but the proposal was turned down by the legislative committee on June 5, 2009. The Cal Grant normally awards students $7,788 for the year, but with the budget cuts, this is could easily change.

Q. Have the budget cuts affect aid to the students?

A. Not at this point. The Cal grants are still there, and those students are still getting that, which is fortunate. If those students were not getting those Cal grants, UCI wouldn’t be able to help those students make it with our funds. That would be too much money to help those students out. If that programs were to be cut or anything that would really affect the students. We have to always watch our budget and how much grant money we have before we can do certain things. One thing we do in this office is: a student will report on their FAFSA for this school year, 2008 income tax information. If they lose their job, which is happening a lot more with the economy, they can come into our office and let us know, “hey our parent is no longer working, and our income is not what we reported on our FAFSA, can you re-evaluate things for us”? And that is what we will do. We have actually had a lot more students sending these requests into our office lately. We have a certain amount of money set aside to help those students who have situation changes, and there are so many students turning these in, we are not sure if we can accommodate all those families. So now we have to be stricter with our deadlines for turning that in. Last year for summer, we had to shorten the deadline of students turning in certain documents because students who turn in documents by a due date, they get an institutional funding also known as priority funding. Anybody could get federal money whether they are late or not because it is federal money. But UCI restricts our money to what we have to give and we restrict by people who are turning things in by the deadline. So for the summer, we shortened the deadline. It was a limited time period where the students could apply for summer, 2008. So this year, we have to be case by case on students turning things in by a certain time to see if we get students turning things in. One certain form, the Sibling Verification Form. That was the latest document due, and it had a deadline. For students to turn in the form after the deadline, we have to go case by case to see if we have funding left to help this student. If not, we have to tell the students who are late to turn in the form, “Sorry, but this is the situation. We can’t fund you anymore…”

Q. What was the name of that document again?

A. The Sibling Verification Form. It was to verify that they do have a sibling attending college, because that affects what their family is expected to contribute over the year.

UCI’s Associate Director of Financial Aid, Penny Harrel, went into detail on how the budget cuts worked and who they affect when it comes to Financial Aid. She said:

“On our campus, what happens is the cuts go up to the chancellor’s office and then to the budget office and then everybody looks at them and they look at our whole campus… they are the ones that deal with huge cuts on the campus and then each unit takes its cut and then you have to manage it and see how you are going to do…There’s two sides to this: one is federal
money and the federal money is increasing. Obama is increasing Pell Grants, he’s increasing loans…The Pell Grant goes to families that have no contribution, they can’t help put their child through school at all and that’s going up and up and that goes to our neediest students. So they’re getting an increase, they’re not getting a cut. The state grant is in question mark, the Cal Grant. That one is in trouble with the state and they keep cutting back, cutting back. So far they are tracking along and even when we’re going to get mid-year fee increase here for winter, they are going to cover that. So people that have Cal Grants will not feel that
pinch, but the other students will.”

Q. If there were any more budget cuts made in the future, what do you think will happen in the future? What do you see the future of financial aid going into?

A. There will always be federal funding, if not always, there would be that to fall back on for students. If we, the institution couldn’t give out money, and also if anything ever happened to state funding, but it pretty much if we run out of funding, that’s just less money we can give. That’s really hard to say overall what would happen because then that would be a decision that we would have to, with the numbers that the management would have to take into account whether, “how much money are we getting, and how much money can we give out to students.” With the unemployment rates being so high, there are more families who are needy, and so there’s a certain amount of money that needs to be spread over more families. If the budget cuts decrease the amount of money we get, that would mean more money a parent would have to take out to help cover those costs for their students, but unfortunately
if families are not doing so well, it puts them into a situation where [they may not even be eligible to get a loan]. It affects a lot of different things.

The UC’s have developed a fundraiser in order to help remedy the situation known as Project You Can. It is a system-wide fundraiser where all ten campuses are attempting to raise one billion dollars in four years. The billion dollars will help keep the UC schools affordable and available.

Q. You mention the Cal Grants are in jeopardy, are the Cal grants still in jeopardy right now?

A. Earlier in the quarter, we were not sure if students were going to be able to get that money for winter quarter, but right now, they will be able to get it. But before we could not even tell students, and it was in the news that Schwarzenegger was still deciding on those things.

Q. What demographic of students are suffering from the budget cuts?

A. With students though, there are students really all over the place. They say that the middle income people are the ones, who get affected the most because they make too much for things, but they are not able to cover some their child’s education. It is hard to tell those students that FAFSA is expecting them to contribute all this money to their cost of attendance, and then for those students to explain that their family is experiencing hard times, and they can’t fulfill FAFSA’s requirements. But I haven’t really noticed a trend in what students are affected. If the students are in financial need, they get the money. If they do not have the need, they get all loans. I personally think FAFSA is pretty fair, and sometimes it’s not for the students whose parents refuse to help them out. But we are required to take the parent information in anyway. To evaluate a family’s ability to afford school, I think it is pretty fair most of the time.

Q. Has the financial crisis with the budget cuts personally affected you in any way?

A. With the UC System budget cuts, yes, because now staff is furloughed, and a salary pay cut. I think it affects everyone working. And for students they are expected to contribute so much to school based on their income and assets etc. But if you have a certain lifestyle that you are maintaining, like budgeting a car payment on this amount of income, or a house payment, etc. Then all of a sudden there is a new bill coming in because you have a son or daughter who is going to school, and that is something you might have been expecting, but really cannot account for, and you can’t just change things so suddenly to meet a lower income. Not that the individual has a lower income, but to spread out your income over another bill. For students, it is hard for them to look at FAFSA and say that they have to pay $10,000 out of their pocket a year for school, but their family is using all their income and their resources for certain expenses so far, and to change things around to be able to fit $3,000 per quarter for just fees to attend. That’s really difficult, that’s $1,000 more a month. So for someone who is working, like me, and you work and live within your mean a certain income, and then because of the budget, they are going to have to reduce everyone’s pay. That is when the staff is going to have to switch things around so we can still live within means, like having to move, get a different car, just like anyone who has to deal with a pay decrease or anything like that.

In his letter, on October 16, 2009, Mark Yudof proposed fee increases starting January 2010. Undergraduate resident fees will be raised $585, nonresident fees will be raised $633. Graduate resident fees will be raised somewhere between $579 and $654, nonresident fees will be raised somewhere between $579 and $681. For the 2010-2011 year, undergraduate
resident fees will increase $1,344 per year, nonresident fees will increase $1,458. Graduate resident fees will increase somewhere between $1,332 and $1,506 per year, nonresident fees will increase somewhere between $1,332 and $1,566.
_http://www.reg.uci.edu/fees/yudof-fee-letter.pdf_
(http://www.reg.uci.edu/fees/yudof-fee-letter.pdf)
_http://youcan.universityofcalifornia.edu/scholarships.html_
(http://youcan.universityofcalifornia.edu/scholarships.html)
_http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/blueandgold/documents/blueandgold_fac
tsheet.pdf_
(http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/blueandgold/documents/blueandgold_factsheet.pdf)

_http://www.ofas.uci.edu/content/TypesOfAid.aspx?nav=2&id=calgrant_
(http://www.ofas.uci.edu/content/TypesOfAid.aspx?nav=2&id=calgrant)
_http://www.editor.uci.edu/09-10/intro/intro.8.htm_
(http://www.editor.uci.edu/09-10/intro/intro.8.htm)

November 19th,
the committee has agreed to raise the UC fees by 32%. Now resident undergraduates must pay $6,851 for the next winter and spring semesters, nonresident undergraduates must pay $22,011. Residents graduates will have to $8,009 for the next two semesters and nonresident graduates will pay $18,039. However, those who applied for financial aid and have received the Pell Grant or the Cal Grant will receive more money for their aid in order to pay their fees. UCI’s Associate Director of Financial Aid, Penny Harrel, explains: “There’s two sides to this: one is federal money and the federal money is increasing. Obama is increasing Pell Grants, he’s
increasing loans…The Pell Grant goes to families that have no contribution, they can’ t help put their child through school at all and that’s going up and up and that goes to our neediest students. So they’re getting an increase, they’re not getting a cut. The state grant is in question mark, the Cal Grant. That one is in trouble with the state and they keep cutting back, cutting back. So far they are tracking along and even when we’re going to get mid-year fee increase here for winter, they are going to cover that. So people that have Cal Grants will not feel that pinch, but the other students will.”

This is because of the program Yudof put into effect last year to help those in financial need, known as the Blue and Gold Program. It is a fairly new program where students from families with incomes of $60,000 or lower and qualify for financial aid can attend a UC and not pay for the fees. Those who are applicable for the Blue and Gold program will receive minimum grant aid to cover their fees and those who are at higher need for aid will receive more grants to pay for room and board, books, etc. The program cost 3.1 million dollars and is paid by federal stimulus dollars.

Tuition, Taxes, and Tribulation: Where That Money Goes

2009-11-17T11:33:00.000-08:00

By Ravind Kumar

The financial situation in California is not pretty: there simply isn't enough money coming into the state to cover the tremendous amount of spending that goes out. California's financial system is a behemoth creature that is struggling to hold up its own bulk, and the legislature has been forced to shore up the supports by cutting funding for state programs left and right in order to keep the entire monster from crashing down around us. Among those cuts were those for public education—not a large surprise to the larger community of educators in California. The budget for public education has been falling steadily since 1966 when President Ronald Reagan imposed cuts on the UC Berkeley campus in order to “clean up the mess at Berkeley,” referring to the rise in student and faculty protests of the Vietnam war. Since then, the total amount of State funding in the budget has fallen to a mere 14.3% according to the 2007-08 Facts and Figures report.
With State funding steadily dropping, and student fees steadily rising, its not a far stretch for most students and faculty to assume that the student fees are being increased to cover the loss of State funding. And while that is certainly one piece of the larger UC budget pie, student fees are not the centerpiece to the UC budget as some students may think. That line of thinking is heavily flawed. It fails to see the greater picture behind the UCI budget, and indeed most UC's as a whole. It ignores the vast amount of other funding that the UC receives for its research, the private and foundation grants and loans given to the various schools around campus, and those philanthropists who donate small fortunes forward to help keep the UC system running.

State expenditures amount to only about 14.3% of the school income. Tuition counts for 12.8%. The Federal government helps cover an additional 13%, and the rest comes from income generated from campus facilities, like a whopping 31% from Teaching hospitals. Altogether, the UC income from receipts (payments) is approximately $1.6 Billion—not a small number by any accounts. But even put together, over 50% of those receipts are generated by campus resources, whether it be the Teaching hospitals, private grants or contracts, auxiliary enterprises, or educational activities in general. So, while both taxpayers and students might like to think that they are Atlas holding the world up, it would really be more accurate to say that they are like one of his arms.

So then, where does that $1.6 Billion go?

Most of the money from the school income goes towards three major categories. The first is faculty, or salaries, in the number of about 27.6% or 435 million dollars. The second is teaching hospitals – 29.3% or 461 million dollars. The third is a combination of Student Aid, Academic support, institutional support, student services, and research, which altogether take up 35.8% or 572 million dollars. So when UCI found that, thanks to the lack of state funding, that there was at least 70 million dollars in cuts to go around, there were only so many places that the university could turn to in order to cut slack. And while that 70 million might not seem like a lot from the total pie, that entire amount comes from the 14.3% of school funding that is state funding. The teaching hospitals eat up almost all of the income they generate, from 31% output to 29.3% back in. Federal assistance is often heavily restricted, making the funds difficult or impossible to move out of their intended area of expenditure. Which leaves only one other possible source of income, and an unfortunately wide area of academia to slash at. Staff furloughs along with cuts in research and on campus maintenance have accompanied the student fee increases to help deal with the 70 million dollar shortfall—not any one of these alone, but a great deal of sacrifices along the entirety of the UC structure had to be enacted to cope with the sudden and large loss of state support.

No one enjoys paying more or getting paid less during a financial crisis. Both students and faculty have risen up against the cuts, protesting them as unnecessary or too great in nature. Their calls are varied and energetic, but most of them echo a line of thought that is also reflected in the taxpayers who think they, too, hold up the UC system single-handedly. With all the construction on campus, the massive movement of new housing and buildings across campus, those calls have become louder and more unified.

Does the UC system really not have any extra money to use?

The answer is—no. While there certainly is a lot of money in the UC system, those fund are not, as many students, faculty, and other opinionated residents have called them, ‘Unrestricted’ funds. The University of California Office of the President has released multiple reports rebuking those who believe that the UC has a magical reserve of billions of dollars simply sitting around waiting to be used. Peter Taylor, CFO for the University of California, wrote on the University of California website that “all but a fraction of the university's net assets at the end of each fiscal year are committed, and they reside in tens of thousands of funds and accounts, most of which are controlled by UC's campuses. They are akin to money deposited in a personal checking account on the 15th of the month, but committed to paying the next month's mortgage or rent.” Looking at the percentages of expenditure on campus, Taylor’s statement is easily confirmed. The vast majority of the money that comes into the university is used almost wholly on the university itself, in everything from salaries to student aid.

So, as some critics point out, how does UCI afford to have all these new buildings? How is it that research instititutes on campus still have such good facilities? How are they getting their money?

The answer is simple. Grants. The Office of Research here at UCI is on a constant quest for grants, state, federal, and private, in order to help keep down the costs of research and projects around campus. Assistant Vice Chancellor of Research Development Dr. Jacob Levin gave a detailed description of how grants function to help support the research and facilities on campus.
He writes, “My Office has worked on something like 140 grant submissions since I began. [The] smallest awarded was $1,000. [The] largest was $27,156,000. Most grants probably range between $100,000 - $300,000 per year in the sciences, less in the Humanities (student grants of $5,000 are common there), but they can vary tremendously.” Based on documentation provided by Dr. Levin, the biggest contributor for grant funding is at the federal level, with the Health and Human Services Agency, which contributed $132 million in grant funding during the 2006-07 fiscal year. Those grants get split up and allocated throughout the campuses many and varied research projects, whose discoveries contribute to the Intellectual Property coffers of UCI, which in turn also help to bring additional income into the University. And there is far more than just funding for research within grants.

According to Dr. Levin, the University (and indeed any organization that receives grant money) negotiates what is called Facility and Administrative costs, an indirect-rate that helps to cover the administrative costs of doing research at the various facilities around campus. For on campus operations, this can be as high as 53%, which is funding in addition to that already given. That means that, for on campus resources, every 100$ nets the university an additional 53$ to cover administrative costs. Put simply, every grant the campus receives helps to alleviate the stress of administrative operations around campus. Unfortunately, private and foundation gifts often have very low or no indirect-rate costs, meaning that the campus has to foot the bill for those administrative costs. Grants are generally hard to get, with only about 10-20% of grants requests submitted receiving funding. Despite this, Dr. Levin’s office boasts a 45% success rate with securing grants—well above the average, according to him, which not only makes his department worth sustaining, but drives researchers to apply for the more complex grants that provide some of the largest funding opportunities. And each grant, in turn, helps to support the administrative costs of the University, at both the facility level and at the administrative level, with small portions of the F&D cost going to the UCOP offices and EVC offices.

Of course, the same critics who argue that funds are liquid within the UC budget system have also attacked the usage of grants at UCI and at UC’s at a whole. Can’t those funds be moved around?

Once again, the answer is no—and the answer is somewhat responsible for the complexity of the budget crisis. Grant money, or money loaned by a corporation or foundation, is always tasked towards a single purpose. Jeanette Storey, CAO at the Sue and Bill Gross Stem Cell Institute at UCI, knows the limitations of grant money first hand. “We received $52 million in research grants, of which 27 million was for the facility. But because that money is for research OR the building, we have a very small operating budget.” Grants, she say, have very strict guidelines attached to them. Moving them can be nearly impossible, and what’s more, if a project is completed for less than the total amount of the grant, more often than not the excess money has to be returned to the grant organization. Dr. Levin expanded on this with more detail, writing that “All funding must be reported on to the funding agency on how it was spent, and they have strict rules on that. We can certainly try to negotiate a better rate, but as I mentioned, that is quite an undertaking even with the Federal government, and Private Foundations are likely just to walk away and deal with someone who won't make trouble.”

While grants may not be the life-ring for the UC financial crisis, they are still important to the UC campus as a whole. “If a researcher requests funding for researching spinal cord injuries, they need equipment, facilities, graduate students or post docs.” The university, she says, only provides enough funding for 3-5 years of research—and at that, often not enough to afford all the costs associated with that research. Grants are the lifeblood for researchers, providing them with the funding they need to continue their research after the university funding has ended. “If a researcher doesn’t get their project done in the time allocated for them, their career might be finished. Those years are extremely important, and those grants are what give them the ability to do that.” Grants, she says, are also extremely important for new researchers, those who often bring new and exciting ideas forward. Their acheivements within the university help give the university a stronger name within their field--and conversely, if their research is underfunded or under-valued, they might leave for a better institution. "If they're not happy, its bad news...literally." Whether it be through new discoveries through new researchers, or gaining prestigious new faculty and the work they bring with them, the research aspect of UCI and its continued success is an integral part of keeping the campus strong as a whole, both now and in the future.

While students, faculty, and taxpayers will continue to raise questions about the existence of additional funds within the UC Budget, the fact of the matter is that, while the money certainly is there, it is not as available and easily accessible as some would like to believe. And while such critics will continue to delude themselves into believing that they are single-handedly holding up the UC financial system, it would be wise to acknowledge the importance and presence of other very significant forms of funding within the UC system as a whole.

The Asian-American Studies Department: "I feel like, at the end of the day, change is in our own hands."

2009-11-17T08:14:00.000-08:00

by Charlyn Arellano
On the third floor of the Langson Library, the Southeast Asia Archive exists, unbeknownst to much of UCI's student population. Kept in the back corner of the floor, the archive is a treasure trove of books and other texts that, in large part, document the struggles and experiences of Southeast Asian immigrants who had made their way over to Southern California. With a brief scan of the shelves, titles like, "I Begin My Life All Over" and "Boat People" are displayed in various fonts and colors. Cabinets against the back wall, framed by different cultural pictures, contain different documents, pamphlets, posters, and fliers, collected from different Southeast Asian communities in Southern California through the efforts of retired UCI librarian Anne Frank.
The quality of this wealth of information is being challenged, as with many other organizations and programs around campus, by the UC budget cuts. Linda Vo, the associate professor of the Asian-American Studies Department, is also a member of the archive advisory board. With the formidable force of the budget cuts looming over UCI, Professor Vo vocalizes concern for the quality and growth of both the Southeast Asian archive and its academic department counterpart. This is all the more disconcerting when the percentage of Asian-American students attending UCI is considered.
According to the University of California Statistical Summary of Students and Staff,11,576 undergraduate students of Asian-American descent were admitted into UCI in the fall quarter of 2008. Fall 2008 had seen a total student population of 26,984 students. With consideration of these figures, Asian-American students compose a strong 52% of UCI's total student population. Assuming that these numbers had not seen a drastic changes over the course of a year, UCI boasts, with confirmation from US News and World Report, the highest percentage of Asian-American students in attendance among all existing UC campuses.
With such numbers, the existence of UCI's Asian-American studies program seems natural in nature. However, the Asian-American studies department, like many other on-campus organizations, has recently been subjected to a stripping-away of resources and funding. The damage done by the current loss of staff and funds is increased further by consideration of the relative youth of the department, which is still endeavoring to plant deeper roots in the UCI academic community.
The following information has been both provided and clarified from the collaboration of Professor Linda Vo, Associate Professor of Asian-American Studies, Professor Christine Balance, Assistant Professor of Asian American Studies, and Professor John Liu, Senior Lecturer of Social Science and of Asian American Studies. These three individuals are 3/5 of the Asian-American studies department's core faculty. They offer their thoughts regarding the impact of the UC budget crisis on the Asian-American department from their positions as educators and as Asian-Americans themselves.

Q: How large is the Asian-American studies department in terms of professors and majors?
A: The Asian-American studies department at UCI has continuously seen changes in its numbers as the program itself struggled to gain recognition amongst other areas of UCI's academia. In terms of core faculty, there are 5.5 professors teaching Asian-American studies on campus. "We have Professor John Liu. There is Christine Balance who's new. Professor Dorothy Fujita-Rony, myself, and also Professor James Lee who is another new faculty member we just hired. And we have Professor Claire Kim who is the .5. She is 50% political science and 50% Asian-American studies," Professor Linda Vo explains.

Q: How has the composition of the Asian-American studies department staff changed in consequence of the UC budget crisis?
A: Professor Vo emphasizes that the greatest budget crisis-related damage done to the Asian-American studies department has been felt most immediately on an administrative level. The MSO of the Asian-American studies department serves as the office manager of the entire department, overseeing inter-department activities. "June Kurata, who has been our MSO and office manager has been our office manager since 1993. The difference is that this year the budget crisis affected us so we were told to cut our staff. The staff that left were not replaced and then we were asked to combine staff with the African-American studies department. This was a school of humanities decision. We're not the only unit that is doing that-- there are other units that have been consolidated so that different departments are sharing one MSO," Professor Vo says.
The amount of lecturers for each individual Asian-American studies course has also been affected by the budget crisis. Professor Vo notes that due to the hiring freeze, the Asian-American studies department was unable to hire new lecturers that are used to reconcile the small number of steady professors present on the department's payroll. "We hire three to four lecturers every quarter to help us teach classes that have faculty that are on sabbaticals, that are on leave, or that are on fellowship. And this year our budget got cut, so we have one continuing lecturer who lectures for us year after year. That budget got cut for the lecturers, so I wasn't able to hire [new] lecturers."

Q: How have the responsibilities of the Asian-American department faculty changed in consequence of the budget cuts?
A: The stress of the budgets cuts has not only been felt by UCI students. With a lack of lecturers to conduct different courses, faculty members have been forced to take up extra class loads that would otherwise be left to the supervision of lecturers. "People in the professorial ranks have to do research. And so their ability to do research is going to be hindered by the fact that they have to pick up more administrative responsibilities. You have to teach classes that are listed in the [UCI] catalogue at least once every two to three years. Faculty have to take care of those classes, or those classes lose their listing. That means more prep time because [professors] have to prepare [to teach]," remarks Professor Liu.
The mission statement of the University of California is, arguably, affected by the budget cuts, with the Asian-American department faculty serving as an example. The University of California's mission statement, as found on the University of California website, reads, "We do research - by some of the world's best researchers and brightest students in hundreds of disciplines at its campuses, national laboratories, medical centers and other research facilities around the state. UC provides a unique environment in which leading scholars and promising students strive together to expand fundamental knowledge of human nature, society, and the natural world. Its basic research programs yield a multitude of benefits for California: billions of tax dollars, economic growth through the creation of new products, technologies, jobs, companies and even new industries, agricultural productivity, advances in health care, improvements in the quality of life. UC's research has been vital in the establishment of the Internet and the semiconductor, software and biotechnology industries in California, making substantial economic and social contributions."
Because of the hiring freeze, professors invest less time fulfilling a large portion of their job description, and allocate more time to the running of extra classes.

Q: How has the general Asian-American Studies department had to adapt to the budget crisis?
A: As mentioned previously, with the hiring of additional lecturers proving unattainable due to the hiring freeze, professors have witnessed a gradual increase to their respective workloads. Increased class sizes brings faculty further away from giving any personal assistance to students. Professor Vo reflects on the class-reconfigurations she's has to oversee to adapt to the budget cuts. "[O]ur intro class is quite large this quarter. It has about 280 students. So it's one of our larger classes. It's 60A: Introduction to Asian-American Studies, so we increased the class enrollment because Professor Liu was open to doing so. Last year, our limit on class capacity was around 260. We increased it to 300 this year, with more than 300 students originally requesting the class."
The same hiring freeze that has enlarged class sizes has simultaneously made several Asian American courses unavailable during the academic year. "Some of the courses [that we lack new lecturers in]," Professor Vo explains, "are courses that we [as core faculty] are not experts in-- like Asian-American Public Health, Asian-Americans in law-- these are courses we generally teach on a lecturer-to-lecturer basis. Asian-Americans in Education, Asian -Americans in Public Policy, Asian-American Art History; these are some of the courses I am trying to get offered during summer session." Since these classes are not currently being offered during the fall, winter, or spring quarters, students wanting and/or needing to take these courses will need to invest more time and money into one or both summer sessions.

Q: What are some reactions and attitudes amongst the Asian-American Studies Department concerning the UC budget crisis?
A: The entire core faculty of the Asian-American Studies Department find their ethnic origins rooted in different Asian nations. As Asian-Americans themselves, faculty members feel a personal hit from the threat the budget crisis imposes upon the continued growth of the Asian-American Studies program. Any student-activism seen on campus in response to budget cuts and tuition hikes is reminiscent of the activism seen throughout the same Asian-American movement taught by Asian-American Studies professors.
Professor Balance recalls her time as an undergraduate student, drawing parallels between the current financial crisis currently plaguing the UC system and the social rights she helped to fight for years ago. "I did my undergrad work at UC Berkeley in the late nineties around the time of Proposition 187 and Proposition 209. As well as being a Filipino-American student who was fighting for Filipinos to become part of affirmative action, as well as for the tenure of two Filipino-American professors, Oscar Compananes and Rick Baldoz, who were both denied tenure at UC Berkeley. So for me, being on an undergrad campus, was always about some sort of political activism. Coming to UCI as a faculty member and still having to be in a picket line on the first day of school made me think, 'Oh my gosh. I thought I grew out of this.'"
Professor Vo shares a sense of disappointment concerning the UC budget cuts, as they affect not only classes under the jurisdiction of the Asian-American studies department, but materials considered valuable for the continued understanding of [specific members of] the Asian-American community. The Los Angeles Times wrote an article in July of 2009 that discusses the hinderances posed by the budget cuts to further documentation of the Southeast Asian immigrant community. A room in a room of Langson Library, there lies "rare items from decades ago -- audio recordings of those recounting their journeys fleeing Vietnam by boat, letters written from refugee camps to families left behind and refugee orientation brochures they picked up upon arriving in Orange County." UCI's Southeast Asian Archive is visited by scholars across the country, as it is the only collection in the world that keeps record of the travels and transitions of Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian immigrants from their native lands to the United States.
The budget cuts had not allowed the library to replace Anne Frank, the retired caretaker of the archive who had been committed to collect more documents from amongst the present-day southern California Vietnamese community. Professor Vo worries that the maintenance and general quality of the collection, a source useful for conducting Asian-American Studies courses as well as research, will suffer. "My major concern is that they still haven't re-hired the staff member that we hired for that position. Anne Frank [was the original staff member in that position]. She did a lot of outreach in the community, at conferences. And the archive was open a lot longer then. Cut backs are affecting the whole library so they haven't replaced staff that have left," says Professor Vo.

Q: How does the departmental problems caused by the UC budget cuts compare to departmental problems of previous years?
A: In its early developmental stages, the Asian-American studies department had experienced difficulty in gaining a steady and prominent position in UCI's academic curriculum. The Southeast Asian Archive Newsletter of Spring 1993, Volume 2, Number 3, documents some of the details of a protest and hunger strike that had taken place on UCI's campus. The student-involved protests called for UCI administration to start an Asian-American studies program. According to the report, over 300 students had occupied the chancellor's office on April 22nd of that academic quarter, vocalizing their demands. Professor Liu had been present during these demonstrations, serving as both witness and participator to the events that gradually led to the development of the Asian-American studies department.
Professor Liu recalls that, after the student and faculty demonstrations, "We were fortunate enough to get a very dynamic Executive Vice Chancellor by the name of Chang-Lin Tien, who opened up the lines for us to hire the faculty [for Asian-American studies]. We did it through a program called Targets for Opportunity, which is meant for minority and women professors. While he was Executive Vice Chancellor, he opened up 12 to 14 positions for minority [studies] faculty."
The Asian-American studies program began with three constant faculty figures, Professor Liu among them. He was joined by Dr. Karen Leonard, a specialist in anthropology, as well as Professor Hwang, the then-acting chairperson for the department. It eventually grew, hiring professors like Dorothy Fujita-Rony and Claire Kim. With an examination of the Asian-American studies department's beginnings, the UC budget crisis clearly becomes another trial for the fairly young department. The UC budget cuts has called for a decrease in staff and resources for a program that had, initially, comparatively few staff and support when considering the much larger numbers of other academic departments. This description remains true of the department at present, as the hiring freeze renders the department incapable of replacing faculty members lost due to what Professor Liu has referred to as "internal disputes" that had preceded the more recent and salient features of the UC budget cuts that have been felt and protested against by UCI's student and faculty population during the present Fall 2009 quarter.

Q: What purpose, ultimately, does the Asian-American Studies Department serve here at UCI that calls for its preservation and maintenance, despite the UC budget cuts?
A: Professors Vo, Balance, and Liu are well-aware that a common argument of more established areas of academia make is that more funding should be given to the Natural Sciences, Engineering, and other departments of the like. However, they implore students, especially those at UCI, to see the very practical importance of Asian-American Studies. This study chronicles a people's struggles; these struggles have the capacity to compel today's generation to persevere despite the current budget/fiscal crisis.
Professor Balance contextualizes and compares the UC budget crisis in terms of the Asian-American movement. "At the end of the day, I think in times like these, when so many things are changing, and many students and faculty are uncertain about how things are going to be. I think it's important to have classes like Asian-American studies to help students think about power and where power lies in or society and learn to think about things critically, and not just take things for face value. Otherwise, if you're just going to sit back and not have any reactions towards these changes, life's just going to run you over. [...] As much as we [as a society] are made to feel that it is necessary to have lots of money to have access to things, things aren't necessarily that way. I feel like, at the end of the day, change is in our own hands, whether that means you go out and vote against the people who are working in the interest of the rich or if it's a matter of reading the newspaper every day to keep informed [about the UC budget cuts]."

Money Matters: Is the cost of attending a UC now unattainable?

2009-11-16T23:39:00.000-08:00

By: Jenna Benty

Class. Work. Study. Work. Class. Repeat. Jean (who asked that her last name not be disclosed) a business student at University of California Irvine, may seem like the typical student. However, most do not know that all this work is needed just to be able to attend a UC school. In the midst of her typical chaotic day, she was able to spare a couple moments to talk about the recent budget cuts and their affect on her as a low-income student. At the University of California, Irvine budget cuts seem to be the main concern circulating around campus. According to Cathy Lawhon, the Director of Media Relations at UCI, as of early August 2009, the “cuts imposed in the state budget...[pushed the UCI] budget cut up to $77 million now.” With budget cuts soaring through the roof, the University of California administration is looking to a possible tuition increase to help overcome the large cuts. In this new proposal by University of California President Mark Yudof, there will be a tuition increase for undergraduate students of $585 starting in January 2010 and an increase of $1,344 starting in fall 2010. However, these fee increases do not alarm students such as Jean, because the new proposition does not look to cut financial aid. In fact, the proposition states that “one-third of the revenue generated from any undergraduate fee increase would be set aside to mitigate the impact of higher fees on undergraduate students with financial need.” Jean claims that she is “one of the lucky ones,” and that because she falls under the $60,000 dollar a year cap for financial aid, she still qualifies for Cal grants, work-study, and other financial aid programs. Jean’s main goal at UC Irvine is to keep her GPA up so she can continue to receive the financial aid she needs to attend. She states that “if [her] GPA drops, [she] will lose a lot of financial aid, and [she] would have to drop out.”

Jean believes it is those borderline students; the students who barely miss the “Blue and Gold Opportunity” program who will be affected the most. The “Blue and Gold Opportunity” program assists students who fall under the $60,000 dollars a year in income by covering their fees through grants, scholarships and other financial programs. Jean has already seen the effect of the tuition spikes affect her friends. She witnessed one of her friends “find a second job because the first job did not pay enough to fund his tuition, he is a full time student with two jobs.” In another case, two of Jean’s friends had to “drop out of UC Irvine all together to go to a community college because they couldn’t pay the tuition.” The students are struggling with funding their education even before these new tuition spikes are implemented. Jean was a member of the recently cut program known as SAAS, or the Student Academic Advancement Services, which helped support low-income, first generation or disabled students. Past SAAS Peer Advisor Deborah Lee, who graduated Magna Cum Laude in June 2009, now witnesses the effect of the budget cuts on her past low-income students from afar. Deborah was also a low-income student until she graduated as a Criminology, Law and Society major, so she has worked first hand with the stress that comes with financial aid and paying for college. As a peer advisor to the SAAS program she worked to recruit individuals to the program, which was a challenge for the first time in 2009. She claims “the lack of response was due mostly to the economic situation. These prospective students who are first generation, low-income students had decided not to attend the university anymore…the tuition increase would be devastating especially towards first generation college students and low income students.” Tuition increases have already affected low-income students and their ability to attend a University of California. The average parent income for full year applicants has drastically increased from the year 2000. According to the Regents of the University of California, in 2000 the average parent income of a student at UC Irvine averaged at $77,662 and for the year 2009 has sky-rocked to an average parent income of $98,439.

Ironically, the program SAAS was recently eliminated due to budget cuts, considering these are the students that are largely affected by the budget cuts and tuition increases. When talking to past SAAS students and now ex-coworkers, Deborah was shocked to find “the students were rationing their food in order to fight the termination and tuition increase just so they could have the opportunity to study abroad.”

Low-income students have now taken the budget problems from both ends, not only will they have to pay a higher tuition; important programs that assisted them in financial aid are being cut. Former SAAS student Leandra Ordorica states “SAAS has helped me find resources to be able to pay for UCI. Every time I applied for a scholarship, there was always someone there to write me a letter of recommendation.” These small amenities make the largest impact on the low-income students where finances are constantly a concern. Not only did the SAAS program assist in finding low-income students scholarships, “each counselor sat down personally with a student to see what their specific needs and goals were. After assessing each individuals students ambitions, they would personally find a type of aid that fit their specific needs,” according to Deborah Lee.

For the weeks leading up to the much anticipated UC regents vote on whether there should be a 32% increase in tuition, students on the UC Irvine campus have been holding “Teach-ins” to keep students aware of the issues at hand. One of the questions being brought up: how are students going to handle the tuition increase and budget cuts financially? On November 16, a “Teach-in” directed by students Patrick Lee and Emmeline Domingo brought the financial question to the forefront. The possible tuition increase was questioned at many levels, including the low-income “Blue and Gold Program.” Through this new tuition increase, President Yudof claims that he will raise the income cap from $60,000 a year to $70,000 a year requirement and that their financial aid will be protected through fundraising.

Emmeline Domingo questioned his proposition, “Yudof states he will fundraise, but from where? He did not specify and it is implied that it will come from our own pockets. And if we had the resources to fundraise for us in the beginning, why aren’t we taping them now? Or why haven’t we tapped them before?” With the threat to tuition increases fast approaching, students are already feeling the hit on their wallets, and their grades. Many are unaware that the tuition increased for the 2009-2010 school year by 9.5%, and according to Emmeline “the quality of our education is [still] decreasing… the quality of our education is not dependent on how much we pay, because really isn’t the quality dependent on us students? If we have to pay more…we will have to take out loans on top of loans…that means we have to work more, we can’t focus on school as much and others will have to withdraw all together.” The fee increase now poses a threat to our quality of education, which is already evident as we have dropped in ranking from 44^th to 46^th reported by US news.

As the teach-in progressed, students began revealing their personal struggles with paying for their higher education. Tia Peterson, a grad student of the School of Psychology and Social Behavior explained how the fee increase and the budget cuts have affected her quality of education. She explains that her quest to graduate education has been “incredibly disappointing, the cost of trying to take [her] education in steps has become overwhelming.” The graduate program at UC Irvine operates much differently then the undergraduate program. The typical graduate student will sign a contract for a period of time in which they will be employed by the school while receiving their graduate education. However, due to the budget cuts, the funding used to employ these students has been cut, and even students such as Tia who are in good standing in their department have to take out large loans to pay for school. The “Blue and Gold Program,” is not accessible to graduate students, so students with very low incomes are not receiving any assistance from the school. The lack of funds forced Tia to take out loans “a total of four grand, to cover tuition even though [she] is not taking any classes or doing anything except training [resident advisors] and collecting research data.” The excessive amount of loans the graduate students are filling out are going directly to the school, and in essence they paying the school to be allowed to work and not receiving any compensation in return.

As Tia reflects on her pursuit for higher education, her disappointment is undeniable, she states “I have put more then a decade of my life into my education and into trying to educate people, and in the end will have paid very very dearly for it.” One by one students stood up to share their struggles with the financial aspect of higher education. Another student participating in the "teach-in" describes her struggle as a middle class student. Despite the fact that she is out of the range for any type of financial aid, she still “hold[s] three jobs and works about 20 hours per week,” to support her education. The fee increase will no longer affect the lower income families but branch out to the middle class families as well, which make up the majority of the UCs. Those students who are not covered by financial aid packages and those who cannot afford to pay more will end up being squeezed out of the UCs and will have their pockets drained. Though each story was different, they all left a negative impact on their studies, their extracurriculars and their college life.

Not only are low-income students fighting to keep the administration from cutting programs detrimental to their financial research, they are now fighting against an even large threat, a large tuition increase. The UC Regents board will be meeting at UCLA Tuesday November 17^th and Wednesday November 18^th to discuss the possible tuition increase and will come to a vote Wednesday November 18^th. This may be the determining factor for many current and prospective students whether a UC education is in their grasp financially.

Is there a future for outreach? (pt.1)

2009-11-16T23:04:00.000-08:00

By Jason Davis and Lauren Demello

November 16, 2009

In trying times, difficult decisions must be made. Severe economic hardship has required faculty and employee furloughs and layoffs throughout the University of California education system. Many of the difficult decisions forced upon the UC have meant heavy, repeated blows to sports teams, Humanities, and various outreach programs, among others. UC Irvine has already seen the closure of one such outreach program, and the future of at least another remains uncertain. While many programs at UCI are making do with less funding for the 2009-2010 school year, still others are nervous about further cuts and potential closures for 2010-2011. Unfortunately, cuts from some of these programs directly affect services to the surrounding community. Although some of the services have been preserved in different entities, a climate of uncertainty persists.

In the spring of 2008, an outside review team at UCI recommended the closure of SAAS—the Student Academic Advancement Service, and a restructuring of its services to be adopted by other programs within the Division of Undergraduate Education. SAAS was federally funded, in part, by the US Department of Education to assist first-generation, low-income students, and offered study skills workshops, academic counseling, career planning, and tutoring to eligible students. SAAS was also responsible for the popular Summer Bridge and Transfer Bridge programs, which have thankfully been transferred to Student Support Services. According to Shelly Brown-Gunn, Associate Director of SSS, there were several recommendations in the report outlining how services could be improved or restructured. “The decision to close SAAS was a reaction to sudden and drastic budget cuts to DUE last summer. The Deans determined that a lot of what SAAS did for students had some duplication in other departments, so they had to make the ‘lesser of all evils’ decision of shutting down that department to be more efficient with the services provided in utilizing other departments already performing those services.” Some of the federally funded money that previously went to DUE for SAAS now goes to SSS, but Shelly said that it benefits the same students for the same services—just under a different name—and aims to serve roughly 450 students a year.

Part 2 and 3 of the series will continue later in the week.

FAQ: Trying To Generate Funds and Distribute Financial Aid In A Time of Crisis

2009-11-16T17:39:00.000-08:00

By Ashley Lee

Located on the ground level floor of Aldrich Hall, the Financial Aid and Scholarship office is dimly lit and surprisingly very quiet. It is about 2:00 in the afternoon on a Tuesday and the Financial Aid office is pretty much empty with the exception of two students who are talking to the financial aid staff in a cubicle. Overhearing both students, one is trying to appeal for financial aid as her father had lost his job and now needs assistance with her schooling, while and the other student is trying to take out a student loan for this year.

The Financial Aid and Scholarships office is the core resource where students have the opportunity to find scholarships at the resource center, and receive guidance for their financial needs throughout the school year. With the recent budget cuts, and fee hikes, funds for financial aid is a concern among students as grants and loans are not as substantial as they use to be. (For more information about the general requirements for financial aid in the 2009-2010 academic year go to http://www.editor.uci.edu/09-10/intro/intro.8.htm)

Chris Schultz, the Acting Director of Financial Aid and Scholarship, and Chau Luu, the Assistant Director of Scholarships, answer questions of how they are dealing with distributing financial aid and scholarships to students this year due to the cuts, clarifying points of confusion that happened to financial aid this year and explaining what they anticipate for the future of increasing financial aid.

Daryl Serrano, the Coordinator for the Higher Education Campaign at California Student Public Interest Research Group (Calpirg) on campus, answers how students are getting involved in terms of expanding financial aid especially Pell Grants and making it become more accessible to all students.

1.What is changing in the qualifications process as a result of the budget?

Shultz : When any student fills out the FAFSA form or the financial aid application, the federal government performs a calculation on all the income that is presented. They tell us based on this student’s profile that their family should be able to contribute x amount of dollars toward the student’s education for the following year. So then what we do is a pretty straightforward subtraction where you take the cost of where the student is going to be living (on campus or off campus) and we set budgets on an annual basis. So you take the budget minus the parent’s contribution and if there is a positive number then they need financial need. We also look at certain funds like our work-study program and some of our loans that we advantage or stir toward the neediest students. The reason why we do that is we really try not to offer parent loans to needy students because they typically come from very low economic strata and their parents will never be able to take out the loans. Therefore, we try not to offer parent loans to those students so we will prioritize our funds towards them.

Luu: In terms of scholarships, as we reach into the 2010-2011 year, they will become more selective as funds will not be available as they have been in the past. The fact that one applies for a scholarship a year in advance, it is a competitive process and it depends on the funds we have at the end of the year to determine what we can offer.

For freshmen and transfer students they can apply to the Regents Scholarship, which is our most prestigious as it is a four-year aid award scholarship for freshmen and a two year aid award scholarship for transfers. This year only 16 freshmen and 50 transfers accepted this scholarship. Last year, 111 freshmen and 29 transfers accepted this award. By looking at these statistics, there is a huge decrease in the acceptance rate for freshmen in the 2009-2010 year due to budget cuts, as UCI scholarships had a limited number of offers. The budget plays a role into determining how many regent scholarships financial aid can offer, as we have to sustain the funds for current students who have received this award in the past. We cannot offer more regent scholarships as this could cause a high yield for us as the budget climate varies and we would therefore be unable to cover all the students with this award. One of these reasons why there was an increase in acceptance of scholarships for transfer students is that financial aid increased the number of offers.

Chau Luu could not state how many scholarships they offered, as this information is not released to the public.

2. How does a student who is borderline get evaluated differently since budget cuts?

Shultz : Everybody qualifies for aid except foreign international students. For domestic students it depends on whether you qualify for grants or loans. That is kind if a misunderstanding as they think they do not qualify for aid but typically these loans are subsidized by the federal government meaning that they will buy down the interest rates and are much cheaper and have more benefits than if you went through private loan.. These subsidized loans are not activated until after graduation. So these students actually qualifying for a benefit when applying for some of these loan programs. That said when we do the calculations we really do not have a lot of leeway for federal regulations for somebody who is borderline/needy. Say you need of 200 dollars there is really much we can offer. The minimal loan amount for the need base loan is 300 and again we can offer the student other loans that are subsided and have great benefits but one will not will qualify for grant support along those lines.

3. With the budget cuts this year, how did it affect notifying students of their aid award?

Shultz: In general, we go through a modeling process for entering students or new applicants and try and come up with a financial aid package that is going to spend our grants funds and the available money we have, but not overspend it. Now this year was an exception. First, we were not sure about the fees for this year so we were waiting on what the final fees would be as the fees impact student aid awards. We were also waiting on whether the Cal grants were going to be funded. Without the Cal grants it would have had a huge impact on students even though it was only going to remove Cal grants for new students. What this would of done is that we would have to review all the grant funds and the funding that would of gone to continuing students and everyone would get an overall lesser grant amount. So we really did not have enough information to get awards out sooner that we wanted to.

4. With the budget cuts, I am sure that you do get a lot of appeals for financial aid. How have you addressed these issues?

Shultz: These would be considered special circumstance cases where the student has to fill out a form and document what has happened to them. We have been getting more requests to review these cases. It could be anywhere from the death of a parent, parent losing their job, or a spouse returning to school. We would ask for example if there was a change in income for example, we ask them to give us their best estimate of what their income is going to look like for the rest of the year and we send the information to the federal government and ask them to do another calculation to see how their eligibility changes. Hopefully they will qualify for more grant support.

In fact we have spent over double the amount on grants for these types of cases that we already spent last year. There is quite a few who qualified for grant support. In dollars it is close to $490,000 and 104 students who received grant support. The grant money goes toward the full year and some may not qualify for additional grant support but maybe a subsided loan when they were only getting unsubsidized loans.

5. Is there a shrinking pool of financial aid due to budget cuts?

Shultz: At the university level we have something that is quite unique in the nation is this return to aid policy or a set aside where about a 1/3 of all the fees paid comes back to the campus for university grant support. So for this coming year it is over 42 million in grant support just at the University level. What the UC system has is a policy on how to administer funds and it is called the educational financing model or it is abbreviated as EFM. What this policy says is that you look at individual students that apply to your campus and then you figure an amount of loan or work that students should have to incur on average and after you subtract that out and their parent’s contribution then the remainder is grant support.

For Pell Grants and Cal Grants because of the nature of the program, it is not really something that everyone can get. You qualify or you don’t. What we have seen at UCI is that the over the past 10 years or so is that we have seen like a decline in the number of our students that are qualifying for Pell grant. This is attributed to the fact that as UCI becomes more selective we are starting to pull more students from the middle and higher income brackets, which would mean a smaller percentage of our students, are Pell Grant recipients.

Last year there was a lot of controversy about the Cal Grant Program as one of the Governor’s proposals was to bridge the gap in the budget was to eliminate the Cal grants for the new students. So continuing students would keep their grant, but new students would not be offered the Cal Grant. In the end the governor and the legislator agreed to fund the program this year so there were no Cal grants cut.

* In determining what the increase in aid was and by how much cannot be determined, as financial aid does not do analysis until the year is over as aid is continually being awarded.

6. How will Yudof’s Project You Can (raising 1 billion dollars in student support across all 10 campuses) affect financial aid? Do you think this project is effective?

In asking about the Future of Financial Aid, Mark Yudof on October 16, 2009 released a statement regarding an update on student fees for the 2009-2010 year informing the students that Financial Aid will not be cut and increases in “UC grants, Cal grants, federal Pell grants and federal tax credits for this year are expected to cover for three quarters of all undergraduate with households under $180,000.” He even stated “middle class students aid who are not eligible for UC or Cal Grants will receive a grant that covers half of any fee amount if their parents income is below $100,000. “ On October 23, 2009 Mark Yudof proposed Project You Can, which will raise 1 billion dollars in student support across all 10 campuses. Yudof also plans to raise the Blue and Gold opportunity program so that families earning $70,000 or below will receive gift all that covers all system wide fees for about 45 percent of UC undergraduates. (For more information on Yudof’s futute for financial aid go to : http://www.reg.uci.edu/fees/yudof-fee-letter.pdf .)

Shultz sees Yudof’s Project You Can to be a long-term project because when there is any sort of fundraising effort it would take awhile for the money to materialize. “Until we have a clearer picture as to how the sources of the funds it is hard to tell what the intermediate impact will be. To build our endowment is key because it will give us a more stable funding source for grants and scholarships especially. Because right now we have such a low endowment and relatively speaking we are not able to robustly fund programs. It is great that there is this effort to finally build these funds because if you do not start you will never get there. However, people need to understand that it is not going to be instant gratification where that money will be here and all of sudden we will have 5 million dollars initially to spend for students for it is going to materialize over many years. In short term, it will not be as effective as it will not generate any funds and long term it is a great opportunity to generate funds for the campus that we have been wanting and needing for our students.”

Luu said that “long-term purposes of this project “as a great vision in terms creating of goals for the UC’s. However, in for the short-term purposes, it is hard to say that Project You Can is feasible. I feel that this project needs to gain more support and am a little skeptical if the UC can meet their targets. I am curious to see where the funds go and I hope that scholarships can get something out of it, as it would be great to know that we can give something back to the students.”

Calpirg does not have an opinion on this project. However Daryl himself thought that it would be helpful if financial aid increases just as long as there is a limit on who receives financial aid. He said that financial aid should only be given to those who really need it. If passed he finds this project effective, but given the economy and debt that California has, he does not see the project as being feasible.

In terms of student support for creating awareness of making higher education more affordable for students one of Calpirg’s campaign is to collect stories from students at UCI and at Irvine Community College about their ordeals with the lack of funding. Through these stories, they want to raise that students need more grant money and their goal is to raise 40 billion in Pell Grants. Last year, Calprig was successful in temporarily doubling Pell Grants for students until 2012. (http://www.studentpirgs.org/higher-ed )

To read stories how other students are dealing with paying for their education go to http://www.studentdebtalert.org/stories/select_school

http://www.calpirgstudents.org/graduation-app/stories/select_school

To help support the cause of funding education visit: http://www.calpirgstudents.org/uci