You may have noticed in yesterday’s LA Times or other papers that CSU Chancellor Reed said he will NOT ask for a multi-year plan involving scheduled tuition increases:
California State University will not seek a second tuition increase this academic year even if it suffers a further $100-million cut in state funding, the system's chief executive said Wednesday. Chancellor Charles B. Reed, addressing trustees who were meeting in Long Beach, also rejected adopting a multi-year budget that would incorporate annual tuition increases. Some higher education leaders argue that such a move, though controversial, would provide stability and help campus leaders, students and parents better manage education costs…
Reed downplayed the prudence of the multi-year approach, arguing that the current budget volatility made it "too difficult to plan in this environment."
Full story at http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-calstate-trustees-20110922,0,4287564.story
The article also contrasted the Reed approach with the Yudof approach. As readers of this blog will know, UC President Yudof presented a multi-year tuition increase plan at the September Regents meetings – apparently assuming that the Regents would adopt it. They didn’t. (Preliminary audio of some of the September Regents meeting is on this blog; we will post the entire meeting when we get the recordings from the Regents.)
There is an old political adage about not calling the question unless you have counted the votes. Up to now, President Yudof’s recommendations on budgets, tuition, etc., have been pretty much rubber stamped by the Regents, although some dissents have been heard from a minority. CSU’s Reed seems to have learned something from the UC-Yudof-Regents episode. There may be consequences down the road if there is now a gap between the UC President and the Regents.
Sometimes, going out too far and too fast leads to unforeseen results:
No comments:
Post a Comment