Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the University Of California Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UC officials urge lawmakers to restore May Revision base cut and discuss student aid, housing and program proposals
Summary
University of California representatives told a Senate budget subcommittee that the governor’s May Revision trims a proposed UC base funding reduction to about $129.7 million (roughly 3%) but urged lawmakers to eliminate the cut and warned of impacts to student services, faculty and enrollment if base funding shrinks further.
University of California officials told the Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education that the governor’s May Revision reduced the UC system’s proposed base funding cut from roughly 7.95% to about 3%, but speakers warned that even a 3% reduction would have real operational impacts for campuses and urged the Legislature to eliminate the remaining cut.
Kathleen Fullerton, Associate Vice President for State Government Relations for the University of California, said the $129 million ongoing reduction in the May Revision is “difficult to absorb” and could have long‑term consequences for students, employees and campus programs. “Costs continue to rise by nearly $343,000,000 in ’25–’26 alone due to salary agreements, benefits and inflation,” Fullerton said, warning that research federal award cancellations and deferred compact funding add to the pressure.
System officials laid out programmatic items in the May Revision. Department of Finance staff said the May Revision reduces the UC base cut from $396.6 million to $129.7 million and includes $1.8 million one‑time for a First Star/First Start Academies expansion (a program for high‑school students in foster care), and recommends reverting $3.6 million of $50.7 million in ongoing support for UC student‑housing debt service savings — leaving roughly $47.1 million ongoing. The revision also proposes using interest earnings from prior bond issuances to support seismic work at UCLA’s Powell Library and includes budget‑bill language to standardize nonresident replacement accounting at Berkeley, San Diego and UCLA.
Ian Klein and LAO staff said UC’s core funding would increase by an estimated 2.2% (about $233 million) in 2025–26 after projected tuition and fee growth, but the LAO recommended rejecting the new one‑time First Star/First Start proposal because it funds a new initiative while the state is reducing base funding, and it raises questions about program overlap and oversight. The LAO supported the House’s recommendation to revert part of the debt‑service savings and recommended approval of the Powell Library seismic proposal and the nonresident replacement language.
UC officials said campuses are taking cost‑cutting measures — hiring freezes, delaying capital projects and administrative reductions — and highlighted that a percent reduction in base state funding has magnified effects because of labor contracts and inflation. UC representatives also emphasized the role of programs such as the Middle Class Scholarship in lowering student debt and warned that cuts to such programs or deferrals of compact funding could force campuses to slow enrollment growth or reduce student services.
UC San Francisco’s College of the Law CFO David Seward said the May Revision allows the law college to “stabilize our core budget, fund mandatory cost increases and allow us to continue our cost‑restructuring efforts while protecting key academic functionality,” and he expressed support for the May Revision package as it pertains to that campus.
Committee members said they will continue negotiations and seek to minimize or eliminate the remaining base reductions during upcoming budget negotiations.
