As usual, we are playing catch-up with the Regents. The afternoon Regents meetings of July 16th began with the Finance and Capital Strategies Committee. After approval of various capital projects and planning proposals, the state budget for UC was reviewed. It was noted that the initial proposed 8% cut was reduced to 3% and then ultimately a flat budget with some deferrals. As blog readers will know, we often point to the idea of deferrals as an inherent problem since today's legislature cannot obligate future legislatures. Deferrals are basically loose promises. Some discussion occurred regarding deferrals and the difficulty they pose for planning since loose promises may not be kept.
National Labs approved a budgetary division of the management fee paid to UC for its role in what amounts to the remains of the Manhattan Project. A total of $30 million was allocated. Compliance and Audit conducted a brief routine meeting regarding planning for 2025-26, combined with some discussion of cyber risks to UC.
At Academic and Student Affairs, there was a proposal for more freedom of the UC president to approve professional degree tuition increases of up to 3% for state residents and 5% for out-of-state students. Regent Park asked for clarification concerning how often such increases could be proposed. She said she would be concerned about any nominal increases given concerns about student debt. Regents Hernandez and Brooks (the incoming student Regent) also raised opposition. In the end, the proposal was approved with 3 negative votes.
There followed a discussion of the job market for UC graduates and major California employers to which they went. UC was in fact the employer taking the most graduates but the discussion didn't go into that finding. There was a focus on Apple and the placements there. A website was demonstrated which could summarize such data. UCLA chancellor Frenk spoke in favor of engagement with alumni concerning career advancement. Regent Brooks called for more sharing of such data with students and even students in K-12.
Regent Lieb then introduced the issue of "incident" reporting - essentially student complaints about alleged malpractice by instructors. He expressed concerns about the long durations involved in processing such complaints. Provost Newman spoke about increased information on procedures for complaints in student orientations. But Lieb said students were able to find the procedures; the problem was excessive delay. It was said that a new 30-day limit had been put on the initial stage. Regent Sures asked how long it takes on average from filing a complaint to resolution. There did not appear to be data but it was said that most cases are done within 6 months. There was a promise to provide the data. Sures also asked how many cases of actual discipline of faculty were there recently. There was a promise to provide that information as well at the next meeting.
Provost Newman asserted that when the student disturbances of 2023-24 occurred and President Drake had provided $7 million to the campuses for education on the situation in the Middle East, the money had been appropriately spent, although there were no specifics. Chancellor Frenk referred to the "Dialogue Among Differences" program at UCLA, although, as blog readers will know, it is not clear that this program has produced much. Apparently, however, its name has been changed to "Campus Community Engagement." Frenk suggested that sources of friction were shifting from the Middle East to the impact of changes in federal policy on higher education. In any case, Provost Newman indicated that the codified time-place-manner policies would be part of student orientations in the fall.
Public Engagement and Development had a discussion of UCOP's centralized efforts in providing information on changing federal policies, a website on UC policy on antisemitism, and a PR campaign touting UC research and its impact. The past student Regent, the present one, and the student regent-elect spoke about their role on the board. A presentation was made about the UC Student and Policy Center in Sacramento by its director. She described interaction with the legislature, policymakers, and journalists. Finally, there was an update on Sacramento activity including history of the new UC budget allocation.
The Governance Committee approved some executive appointments and pay, a change in a lecturer title, and increased dollar limits on presidential approval of legal settlements.
===
As always, we preserve recordings of Regents meetings since the Regents have no policy on duration of retention. The links for the afternoon of July 16 are below:
Finance and Capital Strategies: https://ia600501.us.archive.org/6/items/regents-7-16-2025/2-Finance%20and%20Capital%20Strategies%20Committee.mp4.
National Labs & Compliance and Audit: https://ia800501.us.archive.org/6/items/regents-7-16-2025/4-National%20Laboratories%20Committee%2C%20Compliance%20and%20Audit%20Committee.mp4.
Academic and Student Affairs: https://ia800501.us.archive.org/6/items/regents-7-16-2025/3-Academic%20and%20Student%20Affairs%20Committee.mp4.
Public Engagement and Development: https://ia800501.us.archive.org/6/items/regents-7-16-2025/5-Public%20Engagement%20and%20Development%20Committee.mp4.
Governance: https://ia600501.us.archive.org/6/items/regents-7-16-2025/6-Governance%20Committee.mp4.
The full website for July 16, which also includes the morning meeting, is at https://archive.org/details/regents-7-16-2025.
No comments:
Post a Comment