Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the University Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate panel questions UC cuts, compact deferrals and one‑time program proposals
Summary
Committee members pushed University of California representatives to explain effects of a reduced base funding cut in the May Revision and raised concerns about a proposed one‑time First Star academies grant, housing debt‑service reversion, and bond earnings for the UCLA Powell Library seismic project.
The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education spent much of a morning hearing scrutinizing the University of California’s funding in the governor’s May Revision, the system’s cost pressures and several related program requests.
The Department of Finance described the main May Revision change as a reduction of the UC base reduction from $396.6 million in the January proposal to $129.7 million ongoing. “The adjustment maintains the multiyear compact with the University of California in exchange for clear commitments to expand student access, equity, and affordability,” Gabriela Chavez of the Department of Finance said.
University witnesses urged restoring the remaining cut. “I have to ask that you continue to prioritize higher education by eliminating the cut to UC,” Kathleen Fullerton, Associate Vice President for State Government Relations at the University of California, told the committee. She said the system faces mandatory cost increases, contract salary growth and federal research funding reductions that together leave campuses “squeezed.” UC testimony estimated more than $322 million in new costs for the system next year from enrollment growth, financial aid set‑asides, labor contracts, retirement contributions and health benefits.
The hearing also debated several May Revision technical and one‑time proposals. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting a $1.8 million, one‑time proposal to expand First Star Academies, a foster‑youth college‑prep cohort program, arguing the program overlaps existing supports and gives a nonprofit “significant program control.” Finance and First Star advocates said the program leverages nonprofit, philanthropic and local education partners and that the proposal is one‑time funding.
On student housing grants, the administration proposed reverting $3.6 million of potential debt‑service savings while allowing UC to retain $2.6 million for a UC Davis project and asked the Legislature to approve an additional $2.6 million for UC Santa Barbara. The LAO supported reverting the $3.6 million but noted a further $2.6 million remained available. UC asked that additional amounts be allowed to support specific local housing projects.
The May Revision also requests use of interest earnings from previous bond issuances to partially fund a seismic renovation and deferred maintenance at UCLA’s Powell Library. UC staff said the funds are bond interest earnings that cannot be used by other state agencies and that the project had originally been planned to use those funds.
Finally, the May Revision included budget‑bill language to standardize nonresident student replacement accounting at Berkeley, San Diego and UCLA; UC supported the language.
Ending: Senators said they were not satisfied with a remaining 3% cut and asked UC and the administration to continue negotiating; no formal budget actions were taken during the hearing.
