As blog readers will know from our periodic analyses of the state budget, the word "deficit" in public budget-speak often does not mean what you might think. Most people - using common English - think of a deficit as meaning revenue < expenditure over a defined time period (typically a fiscal year). But in public budget-speak, there is often a deviation from this common sense approach. So when anyone says "deficit," always ask for a definition.
Basically, there are three starting numbers needed: Revenues, Expenditures, and Reserves. If yours truly were a department chair, or an Academic Senate committee chair, or a member of the Legislative Assembly, he would start by asking for estimates of those essential numbers for the current fiscal year and projections thereafter. He would ask specifically how "deficit" is being defined.
It is true that some revenues are contractually earmarked for certain purposes, e.g., research grants, patient fees, etc. But starting with the basics, you can back out the discretionary portions of the budget that can be adjusted. There simply is no way that the folks in Murphy Hall who handle university finances do not have such estimates, even if they have not been officially published.
Think of it as household finance. You couldn't do your personal budgeting without knowing your income, your spending, and whatever savings you might have tucked away for emergencies. The university is no different.
====
And rumor further has it that a resolution has been submitted by various faculty members to the chair of the Academic Senate along the lines above:
Resolution on Restoring Shared Governance in Campus Budget Planning
Executive Summary
This resolution reaffirms the Academic Senate’s statutory role in campus budget oversight under Regental Bylaw 40 and UCLA Divisional Bylaw 65.3. It calls for full disclosure of UCLA’s 2024–25 and 2025–26 budgets, transparency regarding the reported $300 million deficit, and documentation of reallocations affecting campus units. Drawing on the 2009 Budget Planning Principles, the 2024 Best Practices for Divisional CPBs, and the 2025 CPB Budgetary Environment memorandum, it seeks to restore meaningful shared governance through the release of budget data, the implementation of CPB’s recommended consultative structures, and a renewed Senate-led articulation of principles for financial decision-making during periods of fiscal disruption.
Resolution on Financial Transparency and the Restoration of Shared Governance in Budget Planning
Whereas Regental Bylaw 40 and UCLA Divisional Bylaw 65.3 assign the Academic Senate a central advisory role in campus planning and budgetary matters, indicating that the administration provide timely and complete financial information to enable informed consultation and that the Council on Planning and Budget (CPB) and the Executive Board (EB) are the primary advisory bodies to the Academic Senate on matters of planning, budget and administration;
Whereas the University Committee on Planning and Budget’s Best Practices for Divisional CPBs (November 2023) and the Principles to Guide Fiscal Decision-Making in the Current Budget Environment (May 2009) affirm that transparency, early consultation, and shared information are essential to the integrity of shared governance;
Whereas the UCPB Report on Divisional-CPB Best Practices identifies six goals that define the UC systemwide standard for effective shared governance in planning and budget:
(1) information sharing and transparency in all budget matters;
(2) oversight of operating budgets and resource allocation for individual units;
(3) timely participation in long-term strategic planning;
(4) regular consultation between CPB and campus leadership;
(5) training and maintenance of institutional knowledge; and
(6) dissemination of financial information to the broader campus community;
These goals collectively entail that CPB receive predictable and advance access to relevant budget information before reviews are undertaken, to ensure meaningful and timely consultation;
Whereas the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) has not provided the Academic Senate or its Council on Planning and Budget with full written or digital budget statements for fiscal years 2024–25 and 2025–26, nor with the data necessary to understand the reported $300 million campus deficit, including statements of revenues, expenditures, reserves, and the definition and composition of said deficit;
Whereas academic units across the campus have reported disruptions to their budget processes without adequate explanation regarding their appropriations, thereby impeding the Senate’s capacity to exercise its statutory advisory role and to ensure that budget allocations align with academic priorities;
Whereas the Council on Planning and Budget’s CPB Recommendations to Executive Board on Budget Priorities (April 2024) memorandum documents that these disruptions, coupled with the lack of data sharing and analyses, have impeded CPB’s ability to provide informed advice as indicated by Senate bylaws—issues that become especially critical during a budget crisis—thereby weakening shared governance and diminishing faculty participation in decisions affecting UCLA’s academic priorities;
Whereas this absence of transparency and consultation undermines financial accountability, shifts burdens to Senate faculty to seek extramural funds to address deficits, and weakens the University’s ability to uphold its core academic missions of teaching, research, and service;
Be it therefore resolved that the Legislative Assembly requests that the Chief Financial Officer and other relevant administrative officers immediately release to the Council on Planning and Budget and to the Executive Board comprehensive financial statements for fiscal years 2024–25 and 2025–26, including statements of revenues, expenditures, reserves, and a clear definition and accounting of the reported deficit;
Be it further resolved that the Chief Financial Officer and other relevant administrative officers provide detailed documentation of all reallocations or transfers of funds from campus units, specifying the sources, amounts, and uses of those funds;
Be it further resolved that the Chief Financial Officer and other relevant administrative officers work collaboratively with the Council on Planning and Budget to strengthen communication and consultation with the Senate by implementing the Systemwide Academic Senate Best Practices for Divisional Committees on Planning and Budget, as requested in the CPB Budgetary Environment 2024–2025 memorandum but not yet undertaken, including the specific steps outlined on page 2 of the May 29, 2025 memo—training for CPB members, quarterly meetings with the Chancellor and EVCP, an annual campuswide budget town hall, regular CPB–CFO consultations, and end-of-year CPB reporting—and that this collaboration produce by December 13, 2025 a public report establishing a recurring, transparent process of consultation consistent with Senate policy;
Be it further resolved that the Council on Planning and Budget and the Executive Board, drawing on the precedent of the Academic Senate’s 2009 Principles to Guide Fiscal Decision-Making in the Current Budget Environment, prepare a joint report articulating principles to guide fiscal decision-making during the current period of financial uncertainty, to be circulated to the Senate and campus leadership by February 2026, thereby renewing the Senate’s role in defining the values and standards that should govern future budgetary planning and administrative consultation;
Be it finally resolved that the Legislative Assembly requests that the Chief Financial Officer and other relevant administrative officers provide, in consultation with the Council on Planning and Budget and the Executive Board, detailed analyses and forward projections addressing:
(a) the impact of reductions in state funding, identified at the recent town hall by the CFO as the primary factor underlying the structural deficit;
(b) anticipated changes in federal funding across campus programs and research portfolios, recognizing that such developments are determined at the Regents level;
(c) potential reductions in federal grants and their downstream effects on campus operations;
(d) projected impacts of graduate student researcher (GSR) wage increases;
(e) past and anticipated changes in campus debt service obligations;
(f) costs and status of recent real estate acquisitions, including expenditures needed to bring new properties into active use;
(g) expenditures and commitments associated with campus-wide technology initiatives such as One IT and the integration of artificial intelligence tools;
(h) recent and current agreements with external consulting firms; and
(i) trends in the growth of administrative budgets relative to academic expenditures—
and that these analyses be transmitted to the Council on Planning and Budget and the Executive Board in time to inform deliberations for the 2026–27 budget cycle.
No comments:
Post a Comment