California fell more than $300 million short of its projected cash revenue for the month of September — and over $700 million short so far this year — according to a report released by the state Controller’s Office Monday.
If revenue targets are not met, the state may make up to $2.5 billion in trigger cuts included in the 2011 budget — $100 million of which could come directly from the university. The state has already reduced the university’s funding by $650 million.
In September, the state took in $301.6 million, or 4 percent, less than anticipated, which means that it is currently $705.5 million, or 3.6 percent, short of its general fund revenue collection goals for this year. In November, officials at the state Department of Finance and the state Legislative Analyst’s Office will make predictions, based on revenue collection to that point, that will determine whether or not the state will enact the trigger cuts.
At this point nothing is certain, according to Caroline Godkin, senior fiscal and policy analyst at the office.
“We’re still in the process of starting our forecast,” she said.
The amount of cuts will be decided by the department on Dec. 15 based on what happens in the coming months.
“It’s always possible that these revenues will be made up,” said Jacob Roper, spokesperson for state Controller John Chiang. “Most (of the revenue) is collected in the second half of the fiscal year.”
Roper said September’s earnings were brought down by low sales tax and corporate tax revenues, the cause of which is yet unknown.
Chiang said in a statement that “September’s revenues alone do not guarantee that triggers will be pulled. But as the largest revenue month before December, these numbers do not paint a hopeful picture.”
Depending on the department’s forecast, the university may lose as much as $100 million in state funding. But even if that happens, UC spokesperson Dianne Klein said that mid-year tuition increases will not be implemented.
“It’s not right,” she said. “Families and students need to budget.”
The university will absorb the funding deficit through asset management, she said — but she added that a tuition increase could still be in the cards for the fall.
“The longer-term solution requires stable, predictable funding from the state,” she said. “Without that … tuition will continue to be on a roller coaster.”
At its September meeting, the UC Board of Regents discussed a plan that could increase student tuition to over $22,000 for the 2015-16 academic year. While the plan is not definite and there is no guarantee it will be voted on at the board’s next meeting, decreased state funding makes tuition hikes more likely. The plan included a mechanism through which student tuition and state funding would rise together. If a state funding increase were not provided, the plan would see a tuition increase to make up for the lack of state funds.
The board is expected to discuss the plan further in November.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
“student tuition and state funding would rise together”
And who’s representing the legislature in these discussions?
It’s nice that student tuition helps pay UC staff to stay at home “telecommuting” so they can work side contracts, take care of their toddlers, and take care of all their home chores while they “multi-task.” The business school is so generous to even let them attend grad school on your dime. Thanks!
How many?
I know of at least 40. At least 15 abuse it egregiously. Since I only know about 5% of the staff, maybe multiply this by 20. If 20 people abuse it, and you multiply that times 100k each in salary, benefits, and resources, that’s an easy 2 million in absolute fraud. There are about 7000 staff total. At least double that number in waste because of the effect it has on morale and team productivity. Double it again when these same people protect their niche and stay decentralized instead of working towards a single common campus administrative unit or purpose. If you want the real number, ask HR to give you the TC agreements and numbers. It is public record as are the lax rules letting staff do anything they want while they are at home…childcare, consulting, grad school…and again at least 15 are completely defrauding the system and students.
And driving your SUV three times a week from your big house in the suburbs is not green. Numerous studies have proven this.
Have you submitted your complaint to the Chancellor’s Office or the Regents? (Or maybe Operation Excellence?)
Complaints and suggestions have been made at all three of these governing bodies by numerous people. It is no surprise to HR either; there is just no governence or will to correct the problem. They haven’t made any substantive change or review to the Telecommuting policy or rules in ten years. There are bascially no rules at all in restricting it. Technically, you have every right to work a side job or watch your kids under the current rules or receive this substantial perk even on salaries over 80k.