Straws in the Wind - Part 489

From the NY Times: The National Science Foundation, one of the biggest sources of federal research funding, withheld $1.4 billion that Congress had intended for research over the course of the past year... The extraordinary move — holding back about one-fifth of the N.S.F.’s primary research budget — is the latest sign of how the Trump administration is finding creative ways to work around Congress. Lawmakers from both parties have consistently opposed White House-led proposals to cut funding to major science agencies, including the N.S.F. and the National Institutes of Health.

...The White House wants to redirect the money to a limited set of administration priorities, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing, according to two people with knowledge of the administration’s plans. Congress appropriates money to the N.S.F. on two-year cycles, so the agency could still spend the held-over money in the new fiscal year... The White House and the N.S.F. said that diverting the money was allowed under Congress’s two-year appropriation...

Full story at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/02/us/politics/national-science-foundation-research-funds.html.

For the record

As we posted on Tuesday, the Regents had a two-day retreat at Lake Arrowhead. Technically, you could have attended the open sessions, but only in person. Technically, you could have made a public comment by phone if you didn't attend in person. But there was no live streaming, so whether anyone other than the Regents and their staff participated is unknown.

Below is the agenda for the retreat:

Regents Retreat Agenda: October 6-7, 2026, Lake Arrowhead  (not live streamed)

==

Tuesday, October 6, 2026 

8:30 am Board - (open session - includes public comment session) 

Public Comment Period (30 minutes)

Remarks of the Chair of the Board

Remarks of the President of the University

Reimagine Where and How UC Happens

Break

Artificial Intelligence and the Future of UC

Lunch

2026 Federal and State Matters

Long-Term Sustainability

Chancellor’s Panel

--

Upon end of open session:

Board - (closed session) 

Artificial Intelligence and the Future of UC

Long-Term Sustainability

Closed Session Statute Citation: Collective bargaining matters [Government Code §3596(d)]

==

Wednesday, October 7, 2026

8:30 am Board - (open session - includes public comment session) 

Public Comment Period (30 minutes)

Risks in the Health Enterprise

Health Governance 

Upon end of open session:

Board - (closed session) 

Public Comment Period (30 minutes) [This additional public comment period is likely a mistake on the published agenda since a meeting can't be both closed and public.]

Risks in the Health Enterprise

Closed Session Statute Citation: Collective bargaining matters [Government Code §3596(d)]

Leadership Priorities

Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]

==

Source: https://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/oct2026.html.

==

What can we learn from the agenda?

1) AI is a Big Deal. 

2) A major risk in the eyes of the Regents (or at least in the eyes of whoever created the agenda) to UC and UC Health is collective bargaining - since it is listed as the reason for closing the sessions on both days.

3) Litigation is a Big Deal. One surmises that the reference is to the current litigation with the feds.

Cooler

From an email this afternoon:

BruinADVISORY: UPDATE – Normal Operations to Resume Tomorrow at 6 a.m.; Building Cooling Restrictions Lifted

Temperatures in impacted buildings will begin returning to normal tomorrow at 6 a.m.

This BruinADVISORY is being issued on behalf of UCLA Facilities Management.

--

Dear Bruin Community:

With a return to lower temperatures and humidity levels in the L.A. region, the stage one cooling curtailment period in non-critical areas of our building facilities — as well as classrooms and recreational facilities — will end tomorrow, October 9, at 6:00 a.m., when normal operations will resume. Temperatures within affected buildings will return to their usual levels.

Cooling curtailment during high heat and humidity is crucial for allowing the campus to maintain adequate cooling in its most critical facility areas, including hospital and patient care settings, research space, vivariums, general assignment classrooms and data centers.

We apologize for any inconvenience this caused and appreciate your patience and cooperation. If you have any questions about the cooling demand response plan, please contact Sean Wilder at swilder@fm.ucla.edu.

Sincerely,

Kelly Schmader

Assistant Vice Chancellor

Facilities Management

==

Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abB9wLz0VOM.

Watch the Regents Meeting of Sept. 16, 2026 - Part 1

Blog readers may have noted we are slow in summarizing the final day (Sept. 16) of last month's Regents meetings. Indeed we are, although we have covered the first two days. But it takes time to go through the recordings (which we always preserve). So we are going to break Sept. 16's meeting into two parts and deal with part 1 here. We will get to part 2 when we can.

The meeting began with public comments. Many comments opposed the closing of a childcare program at UCLA. There were also several anti-SAT comments. There was also a pro-SAT comment. Other comments included opposition to Prop 38, housing for student-parents, renewable electricity, financial rewards at UCLA Health, support for the Berkeley litigation settlement on antisemitism, anti-Israel, and limits on the entity that will occupy part of the former Westside Pavilion.

After public comments, there was a grad student presentation expressing concerns about federal funding, basic needs, and childcare among other issues. An undergrad presentation expressed concerns about a privatized model of UC, ICE, disabled students, childcare, diversity, TPM, AI, and the SAT. A brief demonstration occurred but not enough to lead to a clearing of the room or a significant interruption. 

There followed a presentation on AI and UC. Topics included cybersecurity, cost, data centers, access, a faculty and student usage. There was a theme about a need for a systemwide approach, partnerships with outside firms and DOE, the need for a legal framework including liability, the impact on student assessment and teaching and the inconsistent policies currently in effect. Centralization seemed to be favored, in part due to the costs of infrastructure. It was noted that unlike the various early dot-coms, AI is being monetized upfront. It was suggested this difference could lead to inequity. The idea of a "kill switch" was discussed and it was said there isn't such a thing now. 

There was discussion of the history of testing at UC. It was stressed that this was a discussion item only; no decisions would be taken. Testing, it was said, arose out of the Master Plan of 1960 and concern that UC was admitting more than the top one eighth of California students. However, when the SAT was required in 1968, there was never an official cutoff score. Reviews of the SAT were undertaken in 2002 and 2009. A 2019 task force recommended continued use. But a combination of the pandemic and litigation led to the current test-free policy.

Two admissions officers - one from UC-Riverside, one from UCLA - made presentations. And a member of the committee that proposed continuing the SAT also testified, although he seemed to be a dissenter. Editorial comment: Would you really expect admissions officers to say that they are doing a deficient job now due to the absence of testing? They didn't, of course. All is well, they said. And if you wanted to hear a diversity of views, they clearly could have been on offer, given the campaign by many faculty for resuming use of the SAT. Regent Sures wanted to know what other universities are doing. Regent Park wanted to hear about the impact on STEM (as opposed to general data on graduation rates). Regent Arias was concerned about high schools that don't offer advanced courses and other problems in K-12.

We will get to the rest of the meeting (Part 2 of Sept. 16) when we can. 

Meanwhile, the full meeting of Sept. 16 is at https://archive.org/details/regents-9-16-2026. The specific recording of what is summarized above is at:

https://ia801003.us.archive.org/31/items/regents-9-16-2026/Board%2C%20Academic%20and%20Student%20Affairs%209-16-2026.mp4. (Beginning through 2:55:15)

Straws in the Wind - Part 488

From Inside Higher Ed: The Department of Justice... filed its 26th lawsuit targeting policies that allow undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates. The lawsuit, against the University of Delaware, is the first of these DOJ cases to target an individual institution rather than a state or municipal government.  The lawsuits have already ended in-state tuition for undocumented students in Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas, impacting an estimated 180,000 undocumented students. Florida pre-emptively eliminated its policy in February 2025 and recently barred undocumented students from enrolling in any selective public university. At least 220,000 other undocumented students live in states where litigation is ongoing, according to data from the Higher Education Immigration Portal.

The complaint against the University of Delaware specifically seeks to prevent the institution from offering in-state tuition to undocumented students, even if they are lawfully present in the United States, and stop them from enacting any new policy that would “favor illegal aliens over U.S. citizens,” according to a news release...

Full story at https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/10/02/u-delaware-sued-offering-noncitizens-state-tuition.

Will Harvard Continue to Lead the Charge? - Part 202

From the Harvard Crimson: Harvard President Alan M. Garber ’76 quietly convened a University-wide committee of faculty members to develop a new vision for scientific research over the next several years, according to six people familiar with the matter. The group, known as the Science Advisory Committee, formed over the summer, one person said, and includes roughly 15 to 20 faculty members. It is chaired by former Provost Steven E. Hyman and Immunology Department Chair Arlene H. Sharpe ’75, that person and one other said...

The push to develop a coherent, University-wide strategy for the next era of scientific research — and one explicitly tied to fundraising — is the most concrete step the University has taken to rethink its approach to research since the government froze nearly $2.7 billion in Harvard’s funding in spring 2025. University officials have said for the past year that Harvard will need to diversify its funding sources in response to unreliable government support for scientific research... There are now early signs of that work around the University. The Alumni Affairs and Development office launched a new team focused on “transformational giving” after a spring reorganization...

Earlier this week, one of the University’s biggest donors, Kenneth C. Griffin ’89, who paused his giving to Harvard to 2024, announced a $3 billion gift to Carnegie Mellon University, the largest single gift in the history of U.S. higher education...

Full story at https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2026/10/2/garber-science-advisory-committee/.

Who is in? Who is out?

The systemwide Academic Senate is circulating a letter from UC President Milliken to the chancellors regarding shared governance for clinical faculty who are not members of the Senate. Only ladder faculty, in residence faculty, and clinical X faculty are members. There is concern about lack of shared governance for clinical faculty who aren't. Apparently, a proposal to add them to the Senate was earlier rejected.

...As the University of California’s health enterprise has grown, the growth in some faculty series, notably the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series has raised questions about how to best integrate clinical faculty into University governance. Faculty in the Clinical X, In-Residence, and Ladder-rank series are members of the Academic Senate. However, the majority of clinical faculty are in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series, which is not a faculty series in the Academic Senate.

Non-Academic Senate clinical faculty requests for a role in shared governance were noted in a 2020 task force report. To begin to address these concerns, a Special Committee on Health Sciences and Clinical Affairs was then formed. From 2024 through 2025, under then-President Michael Drake’s tenure, non-Academic Senate clinical faculty, Academic Senate leadership, and UC’s health science schools proposed various approaches to expand access to University governance for clinical faculty. However, the issue remains largely unresolved to this day...

Full letter and other documents at:

https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/systemwide-senate-review-tf-on-clinical-faculty-representation-9-30-26.pdf.

Comments concerning establishing some alternative method of representation are due in mid-November. There has also been a suggestion of raising the limit on the number of clinical X faculty, presumably to allow some conversion of clinical faculty to the clinical X series - which would put them in the Senate.