The University's Misleading Budget

Photo:
Gretchen Faust/Illustration



Related Articles »





  • Printer Friendly Printer Friendly
  • Comments Comments (0)

Ten days ago, a new document, titled "The UC Budget: Myths & Facts", was posted at the top of the news column on the web site of the University of California Office of the President (UCOP). It has since been widely distributed on the campuses.

This is a disgraceful PR job, loaded with lies and half-truths, for which UC President Mark Yudof should be held responsible.

Many misstatements in that document have certainly been pointed out before. Those earlier critiques have not been answered but rather ignored as the UCOP continues with their program of misinformation. Here are the worst examples. (Quotation marks designate portions of that UCOP document.)

"Myth: UC doesn't really have a budget problem because it has so many different fund sources it can dip into. Fact: UC's budget is made up of many different fund sources, but most of them are restricted to specific uses and cannot be used for other purposes. A federal grant for laser beam research can't be used to fund a deficit in the English Department. A payment for a surgery in a UC hospital can't be redirected to fund graduate students."

An examination of the university's accounting reports reveals that most UC expenditures come from unrestricted funds, more than three times those coming from restricted funding. Unrestricted funds are those monies over which the Board of Regents has full authority to designate use.

The latest UC Budget shows $5.4 billion in core funds, defined as general funds (State money) plus student fees. But we see that this accounts for only 39 percent of all Unrestricted Funds spent by the university last year! So the official claim about those other funds-"most of them are restricted"-is a lie.

The document says, "A payment for a surgery in a UC hospital can't be redirected to fund graduate students." That is a half-truth. In fact, there is surplus income of about $1 billion annually from UC medical enterprises, which is distributed to medical school faculty as bonus pay, on top of their regular salaries. A portion of that money could be redirected to other pressing academic needs in times of budget stringency: that would be called shared sacrifice. President Yudof and the regents have the authority to implement such a strategy.

"Myth: The real problem is the salaries being given to UC senior managers.Fact: Senior management salaries represent less than 1 percent of the total payroll at UC. Salaries have been frozen for the 340 members of the Senior Management Group, and bonuses or incentive payments have been canceled or deferred as well."

Previous research has revealed a much larger constellation of management bureaucracy throughout the university, which has grown enormously over the past decade and is estimated to waste some $600 million per year. The Senior Management Group, referenced above, is just the tip of that iceberg.

"The primary reason student fees rise is related to the level of state funding UC receives-or doesn't receive-from the state. The decline in the state's funding for per-student education at UC-from 78 percent of the total cost of education in 1990 to 58 percent today-has been partially addressed by student fee increases. No one likes it, but it has been necessary to maintain the quality of the academic program and student services."

What UCOP calls the "funding for per-student education" is accounting fraud. The numbers used to calculate that actually cover all costs for faculty research throughout the academic year as well as undergraduate and graduate educational programs. When that bundle of expenses is disaggregated, it turns out that student fees now cover the full per-student cost for the university to provide undergraduate education.

So the reduction in state funding is really a cutback in the faculty's research program. That is a lamentable loss, but it is totally unjustified to dump that cost onto undergraduate students (and their families). These same facts also eradicate the justification for UCOP's claim that the state has failed to provide funds for enrollment growth, since the student fees cover all of that cost.

Tags: MARK YUDOF, UC BUDGET


Charles Schwartz is a UC Berkeley professor emeritus. Reply at opinion@dailycal.org.



Comments (0) »

Comment Policy
The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regards to both the readers and writers of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this 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. Click here to read the full comment policy.
White space
Left Arrow
Op-Eds
Image A Path to Appropriate Regulation and Taxation
The current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," Berkeley approach to cannabis has...Read More»
Op-Eds
Image Many Environmental Regulations Unfair, Harmful
There are a lot of ways to approach environmental regulations. Which...Read More»
Op-Eds
Image Men's Gymnastics Threatened by Cuts
With recurring budget cuts occurring throughout California, the athletic de...Read More»
Op-Eds
Image An Online UC Degree: A Panacea or a Mirage?
On Jun. 14, the UC Commission on the Future met to discuss a proposal c...Read More»
Op-Eds
Image ASUC President on Democracy at Cal
As the ASUC president for the 2010-11 academic year, I am using this summer...Read More»
Op-Eds
Image Salaries Responsible for Budget Gap
While corruption can be found in all three of California's public higher e...Read More»
Right Arrow






Albany Bowl
Monday and Tuesday $1.50 per game.




Job Postings

White Space