The law will fix student loan interest rates to the 10-year U.S. Treasury note instead of using the current arbitrary formula. It will also establish interest rate ceilings and lock interest rates for the loan’s lifetime. In the process, interest rates will be slashed for the upcoming 2013-14 academic year, with undergraduate rates reduced from 6.8 percent to 3.86 percent.

The law will also retroactively apply to loans taken out after July 1, when interest rates on federal Stafford loans doubled after Congress failed to prevent the expiration of subsidies. Stafford loan interest rates subsequently doubled from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. The legislation is projected to provide $25 billion in debt relief for students in the next five years.

During the past month, legislators from both parties have tried to address both short-term problems stemming from the expiration of the subsidies and long-term problems such as the national trend of increasing student debt and its effects on the economy.

The final bill passed focuses mainly on the short-term problem of interest rates, and some leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives have questioned the long-term effectiveness of this solution.

“The bill helps reduce costs to students and families, but it does not solve the long-term student debt crisis,” said bill proponent Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., in a press release.

UC officials and students also worry that loan debt may become unsustainable when economic conditions improve and Treasury bill rates start to increase.

“In the long term, accounting for inflation, loans will become more expensive for prospective Berkeley students,” said Rachelle Feldman, director of the UC Berkeley Financial Aid and Scholarships Office.

She suggested variable interest-rate loans and income-sensitive repayment programs as changes to the student aid program, as they would better adapt to changing economic conditions.

Alex Lee, a senior at UC Berkeley, has relied heavily on federal Stafford loans since he started college and will continue to do so. He said that he has no way of paying for college other than loans.

“I’m essentially at the mercy of the student loan system,” Lee said. “Once I get out, I’m pretty much screwed.”

Undergraduate loans for the coming year will drop to 3.86 percent, and graduate student rates will be 5.41 percent. PLUS loans, which are offered to graduate students and the parents of undergraduates, will drop to 6.41 percent. All of these rates will be lower than the current fixed rates of 6.8 percent for Stafford loans and 7.9 percent for PLUS loans.

The bill will also establish rate caps to prevent student loans from becoming too expensive — 8.25 percent for undergraduates, 9.5 percent for graduate students and 10.5 percent for PLUS loans.

Contact Dennis Vidal at dvidal@dailycal.org.

The post Obama signs student loan reform, ties interest rates to Treasury note appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The decision to change the faculty code of conduct stemmed from a 2007 U.S. District Court case in which UC Irvine professor Juan Hong filed a lawsuit against the university alleging he had been denied a salary increase in 2004 due to his criticism of the hiring and promotion decisions within his department. The court ultimately ruled against Hong, finding that he was not entitled to protection under the First Amendment because he had made the comments as a public employee and not as a private citizen.

The university is bound to make decisions that its faculty members do not agree with. The UC Academic Senate and Academic Senate divisions at various UC campuses have been openly critical about administrative decisions in the past, including the amount of faculty input in UC governance. All faculty members should be able to express their opinions without fear of retribution.

The UC Board of Regents should think about reviewing the faculty code of conduct to include all types of free speech under the First Amendment that apply to a faculty member as a private citizen and public employee. UC Berkeley started the free speech movement, and it continues to be a basic tenant of the university’s culture for faculty members to participate freely in rallies and protests.

The UC system owes it to its professors to be able to express their opinions.

The post Facilitated free speech appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Jasna Hodzic/Courtesy

A state appellate court ruled Tuesday that the University of California must disclose the names of all police officers who were involved in the Nov. 18, 2011, UC Davis pepper-spray incident.

The 1st District Court of Appeal, ruling in favor of the Los Angeles Times and The Sacramento Bee, contended that the Federated University Police Officers Association, citing confidentiality concerns, had failed to demonstrate that police officer identities were excludable from disclosure under the California Public Records Act.

“This a great victory for students who want to protest and have assurance that they won’t be brutalized,” said Thomas Burke, the attorney representing the newspapers.

The November 2011 incident, in which several UC Davis students were publicly pepper-sprayed by campus police, sparked national outrage over the accountability police face when dealing with student protesters. Students sued the university and reached a $1 million settlement in January.

The controversy began in April 2012 when a task force led by former California Supreme Court justice Cruz Reynoso released a report detailing the police’s misconduct. In the report, the task force conceded that campus police could have taken better steps to prevent “the objectively unreasonable decision to use pepper spray.”

The commission, however, refused to disclose the names of numerous police officers and only included the names of those directly involved, Lt. John Pike and then-campus police chief Annette Spicuzza.

The censorship followed an agreement between the UC Board of Regents and the FUPOA that the names would be kept confidential due to concerns about the police officers’ safety.

In May 2012, the LA Times and The Sacramento Bee filed a petition with the Alameda County Superior Court against the UC Regents to disclose the names.
At the Superior Court hearing, Burke argued that the FUPOA failed to cite any examples that police were harassed or threatened after the incident.

“Some of the police officers’ names had already been unofficially identified by various media sources, so when the issue came up in court, we argued that police officers would already have experienced harassment,” Burke said.

The appeals court ordered that the names be withheld for 40 days to allow the FUPOA to decide whether or not to appeal the decision.

“I feel that the court construed the confidentiality statutes too narrowly, and we’ll likely seek review in the California Supreme Court,” said Michael Morguess, attorney for the FUPOA.

Contact Dennis Vidal at dvidal@dailycal.org. Follow Dennis Vidal on Twitter @vidaldennis

The post Court rules officers implicated in UC Davis pepper-spraying must be named appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Under Napolitano, the Department of Homeland Security instituted the federal program “Secure Communities,” which deports undocumented immigrant offenders from the United States with the support of local police agencies. The program is rife with controversy, as there have been many reports that immigrants have been deported due to minimal offenses. On the other hand, Napolitano has come out in support of the federal DREAM Act and has said she is in support of varied paths to citizenship. As head of a university with a fair number of Latino and minority students and an even larger Latino population statewide, Napolitano needs to be open to educating all types of students and recognize that some of them might be undocumented.

There is also apprehension about Napolitano’s handling of budget cuts to her department during the sequester and her role in overseeing more vigorous airport search practices. In light of the events of Occupy Cal and the pepper-spray incident at UC Davis, Napolitano needs to ensure UC police are not militarized.

Napolitano’s apparent lack of significant educational experience is also concerning, though as the former governor of Arizona, she has proven herself a proponent of that state’s higher education system. In that role, she expanded the state’s higher education budget in order to raise the capacity of students accepted to the state’s universities, bolster financial aid and provide raises to university faculty. Ideas she has presented as governor could make her an appealing choice — among those ideas are a four year fixed tuition rate and doubling the number of bachelor’s degrees earned by the end of the next decade. This type of innovative leadership is what the UC desperately needs right now.

Still, Napolitano is presented with the difficult task of learning the ins and outs of academia and how much of a role research plays in maintaining the university’s level of prestige. She should utilize the number of promising advisers at her disposal to help her along, including Aimee Dorr, the UC provost and executive vice president for academic affairs, who has committed herself to retaining the university’s academic excellence.

We believe choosing Napolitano is indicative of the UC Board of Regents preparing for a more privatized future with decreased reliance on the state. With her high profile political status, Napolitano brings connections that might prove useful when it comes to financial and political support on the federal level. Napolitano has also already recognized the priority of forming and maintaining university connections by immediately calling the president of the University of California Student Association after her selection was announced to discuss UC issues.

The selection of Napolitano has forever changed the trajectory of what types of candidates can be picked to run the UC system. Ultimately, Napolitano has to work to keep the priorities of UC students, faculty and staff, as well as those of the state of California, at the forefront of her agenda. We hope that her choice to resign as the leader of a powerful federal department and come to the UC system demonstrates her commitment to do that.

The post Napolitano’s test appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The 2013-14 budget will increase funds for the UC and CSU systems by 5 percent, about $125 million more than last year. It will also be the first part of a four-year funding plan, in which the UC and CSU systems will receive up to a 20 percent increase in general funds appropriations. The systems will also be granted an additional $125 million increase in funds for 2013-14 for freezing tuition costs in 2012-13.

“California’s finances are in very solid shape for the first time in a decade,” Governor Brown said in a press release. “We’re making significant investments in the things Californians care most about — the education of our children and adequate health care.”

In an effort to make higher education more affordable for students and their families, the budget also establishes an expected four-year tuition freeze for UC and CSU residents — from 2013-14 to 2016-17.

The budget also establishes a Middle Class Scholarship program, which will go into effect in the 2014-15 school year. The plan will slash tuition up to 40 percent for students with annual family incomes up to $150,000

According to a press statement by Patrick Lenz, the University of California’s vice president for budget, the university is hopeful that the new budget will allow it to hire more faculty and staff members and make education more affordable for students and their families.

The budget also shifts general obligation and lease revenue debt service for UC capital improvement projects to the university budget. The university will be able to factor these capital costs into the university’s overall financial projections. Also, the plan states that there are limits to the amount of the university’s budget that can be used for UC capital expenditures, which now need to be approved by the administration and the state Legislature.

“The university now has the authority to refinance existing debt that the state previously issued on UC’s behalf, creating savings that will go toward funding our retirement plan with potential additional savings to address other essential university programs,” Lenz said.

The budget also increases funding for K-12 education by adding $2 billion to California’s K-12 schools through the Local Control Funding Formula, which allocates funds to students with the greatest need based on English proficiency, foster care and income.

Additionally, the budget requires UC and CSU systems to provide reports for graduation rates, number of community college transfer students and number of degrees completed for first-time freshman students, low-income students and graduate students.

“Like other state-supported entities, UC did not receive everything it asked for in this budget, but the funding increase certainly puts the university on a sound financial trajectory,” Lenz said.

Contact Jane Nho at jnho@dailycal.org.

The post Gov. Brown signs 2013-14 state budget, increases funds for UC and CSU systems appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Andrew Kuo/Staff

We’ve all had some experience with grand theft in our lifetimes. Oh, you haven’t? What about that time you were a small schemer plotting to steal that last piece of cake from the fridge as soon as everyone else had gone to sleep? Or when you moved on to stealing cars and shoving random strangers (in “Grand Theft Auto”)?

Some budding criminals have apparently managed to go in both directions. The crime? Stealing the letters that spell out “University of California” on a sign on the west side of Boalt Hall. It’s an amateur prank — or so it seems. The crime report? Grand theft lettering. Shit just got real. Though ’twas a silly offense — an accurate assessment if indeed it was committed by a Stanford student — we at the Clog know it’s our duty to forewarn you of the even dumber criminals out there. And yes, there are some that are a lot dumber.

Public masturbation. Late last year, a man was riding BART (as any self-respecting Bay Area citizen does) and, for reasons unknown, attempted to hand a cellphone to a woman sitting near him. According to the woman’s testimony, upon rejecting the phone, she observed the man pulling out his sweaty genitalia and beginning activity that understandably caused him to giggle uncontrollably. Of course, the lack of security cameras on BART made it difficult to prove in court — we’ll skip the obligatory joke on how he eventually got off easy.

Extra casino chips. Las Vegas is a solid eight hours away from Berkeley. Yet many people make the trek to catch a show, spin some slots or take their chances at the tables. It’s likely that a good number of Berkeley-ites know the strategy behind counting cards, which is a less than surefire way of beating the house. Quinton Carter, a pro on the Denver Broncos who makes more than $500,000 per year, had a foolproof method. He snuck chips onto the table with utter disregard for the security cameras staring him down — a move that rivals getting hit by 300-pound men on a weekly basis. The big guy went small, opting to only sneak an extra $15 in chips, which we can only assume will pay for his upcoming lessons in common sense.

Dancing. Well, it’s only a crime when it’s done badly — or when you first take a sufficient amount of drugs and break into an unsuspecting Monrovia homeowner’s backyard … and start dancing there. This throws a little cold water on the new-age mantra of “Just Dance,” but it does certainly make for a good story to tell at parties — until, of course, you tell them that it resulted in a stain on your previously groovy record.

Crashing a news van. It might have only been a traffic ticket, and your insurance might have been jacked up a bit. But that was assuming you didn’t previously steal an iPad from a backpack at a nearby Peet’s Coffee, hop into a getaway car like in a well-written Ben Affleck movie and then crash into a news van stationed at a community safety meeting. Naturally, the reporters didn’t have to go far to have exclusive coverage on the stupidity of the story.

Cocaine. This is a bit self-explanatory, but this crook had a revolutionary way of transporting it. Matching the apparent hipster culture of the Bay Area, he avoided the traditional snorting or butt-chugging practices, instead opting to swallow more than two pounds of the snowy powder pellets. In his continuing infinite wisdom, he boarded a plane to Japan from the student-frequented SFO and was stopped. You may have realized that it is somewhat difficult to walk after stuffing 100 pills in your mouth. Even more difficult would be to poop out the pills on the airplane, as the man intended, and potentially reswallow them if he had to.

According to police, the crime of grand theft lettering was committed in the rather large interval between May 1 and June 14 — a testament to the lack of law students who actually attend class. Maybe. But at least the criminals are smarter than these ones!

Do you know of any crazy crimes? Let us know in the comments!

Contact Uday at umehta@dailycal.org and follow him on Twitter at @mehtakid.

The post 5 crimes dumber than grand theft lettering appeared first on The Daily Californian.

AB 955 will raise tuition during the community college system’s summer and winter intersessions from $46 per unit to the nonresident rate of $200 per unit for all students, regardless of residency status.

The author of the bill, Assemblymember Das Williams, has said he hopes the bill will shorten the amount of time students spend in school and help decrease the amount of debt they have upon graduating. Proponents of the bill have said it also aims to increase funds for community colleges to create more classes.

But the entire idea of the bill is counterproductive to its ultimate goal. If the objective is to reduce the amount of debt for students — a number of whom are low-income California residents who go to school during shorter sessions like the summer to take the remaining units they might need to graduate — why is the price of the units being raised?

Many California community college students are state residents who take classes at their local junior colleges to gain much-needed credits and eventually move up to the University of California or California State University systems. These same students might also be single parents who work full-time and attend community college because they cannot afford the cost of tuition at a major state university immediately after graduation from high school or any other secondary school.

Raising the unit price also affects current UC or CSU students who might be taking community college classes during the summer or winter break to get prerequisites out of the way before the normal school session starts again.

The problem at community colleges is still a difficult one, as the number of courses offered there has declined by 21 percent since 2008, according to a March 2013 report by the Public Policy Institute of California. Most of the courses offered during the summer or winter term are ones needed to transfer or obtain a degree. The state Assembly needs to come up with a better funding solution that helps reduce student debt without raising the unit price.

Community colleges serve as a stepping stone to attendance at a variety of different colleges, both in-state and out-of-state. By raising the price of units during shorter sessions, we could make the dream many low-income students and California residents have of one day attending a four-year institution impossible.

The state Assembly should have thought this one through.

The post Nonsensical tuition increase appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Mary Zheng/File

Thousands of health care workers employed by the University of California have begun a two-day strike at UC medical centers and student health centers across the state.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 3299, a union representing more than 12,500 UC patient care employees, began to strike Tuesday morning amid ongoing contract negotiations with the university that began in June 2012. University Professional and Technical Employees 9119, a union representing technical workers, is also striking in solidarity with AFSCME 3299.

Workers have expressed discontent with understaffing, the use of private contractors whom they say are inadequate and proposals by the university to reform pension benefits.

“I’m tired of being told by my manager, ‘Do the best you can, prioritize, triage,’” said Judy McKeever, a registered respiratory care practitioner at UCSF Medical Center. “Our patients deserve better. Our patients deserve to get all their therapies. They deserve to be seen by us as frequently as they should be.”

On Tuesday at noon, about 300 workers were striking outside UCSF Medical Center. However, strikers had organized shifts, and according to John Salsbury, a spokesperson for AFSCME, hundreds more workers were expected to picket outside the medical center between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m.

Earlier that morning, members of AFSCME and UPTE also held a demonstration outside UC Berkeley’s Tang Center. About 50 people attended to support the 30 patient care workers who work at Tang.

The University of California, however, opposed the strike, saying it will be costly and could negatively impact patient health. In a press conference Monday, John Stobo, the UC system’s senior vice president for health sciences and services, said that the strike will cost about $20 million and result in the cancellation of several medical procedures.

Although a Sacramento Superior Court judge issued an injunction Monday prohibiting some workers from striking, it only applied to about 450 workers who have critical responsibilities, according to UC spokesperson Dianne Klein.

“We believe it’s completely inappropriate to put patients in the middle of a labor dispute and jeopardize essential services to them as a negotiating tactic,” said Dwaine Duckett, vice president for systemwide human resources at UC Office of the President. “Leaders of both unions claim their chief concern is patient care, but it’s very simple: If they strike, services to patients suffer.”

Andrea Guzman is a news editor.Contact her at aguzman@dailycal.org and on Twitter @guzmanandrea5.

The post UC health care workers strike at medical centers across California appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Taryn Erhardt/File

The UC Board of Regents will meet in Sacramento next week to discuss Gov. Jerry Brown’s revised 2013-14 budget, among other matters.

The regents will also review a special report by UC President Mark Yudof on the current and future challenges facing the university, a report on the university’s academic performance and a proposed design for a new aquatics center at the UC Berkeley campus.

On Wednesday morning, the board will hear an update on Brown’s revised budget, which reflects new revenue estimates and the effects of new proposals by the state Legislature on the budget.

Later that day, the Committee on Educational Policy will hear a report on “academic performance indicators” at the University of California. The report summarizes two decades of statistics collected from the 10 UC campuses and finds that despite declining state support, the university has continued to excel by a number of performance indicators, including graduation rates and number of students enrolled.

Over the last two decades, four-year graduation rates have increased substantially. The entering class of 2007 had a graduation rate of 60 percent, up from 37 percent for the entering class of 1992, according to the report.

The report also recommends that state legislators give the university and individual campuses greater flexibility, authority and resources. The positive outcomes seen over the last two decades show that the university can function better independent of the state, the report says.

The committee will also discuss a proposal to increase investment in the university’s Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources for new research that includes work on invasive pests and diseases, childhood obesity and sustainable food projects.

The Committee on Grounds and Buildings will vote on a proposed design for a new aquatics center on the UC Berkeley campus. The $15 million project, which was announced last month, will be funded entirely by Cal Aquatic Legends, an independent nonprofit donor group founded to raise money for the project. The center would only be used for athletic training.

The project requires an amendment to the UC Berkeley 2020 Long Range Development Plan, which the Committee on Grounds and Buildings will be asked to certify and approve.

The Committee on Finance will vote on the 2013-14 financing of Cap-Equip, a universitywide program that aims to restructure capital financing and save money on research, telecommunications and software equipment. The committee will also vote on maintaining the expenditure rate for the university’s endowment pool.

The Committee on Oversight of the Department of Energy Laboratories will hear updates from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on climate research, a new X-ray laser that determines protein structures and a recent grant from the Department of Energy for the Joint BioEnergy Institute in Emeryville. In April, the department promised about $25 million annually through 2018 for the development of new biofuels.

On Thursday, after a public comment period, the regents will hold closed meetings with the Committee on Compensation and the Committee on Finance as well as other regents-only meetings.

Alex Berryhill covers higher education. Contact her at aberryhill@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @berryhill93.

The post UC Regents to discuss revised budget in Sacramento appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Introduced by Assemblymember Scott Wilk, R-Santa Clarita, the “New University of California” will not provide any instruction but only grant degrees to students who pass a certain number of examinations, according to a statement released by Wilk.

“It exists for a single purpose: to certify by examination that an individual has acquired the knowledge and skills necessary to compete and succeed in the work force,” read the statement. “It has no tuition, no faculty, and no bureaucracy.”

The creation of the university follows the proliferation of online education programs like Udacity and edX, which provide instruction but not academic credit.

“This bill would allow students to use whatever approach works best for them to obtain the knowledge needed to receive a college education, whether that is online courses, paid courses, or self-directed study,” read the statement.

Students would only be charged a small fee to finance the administration of exams.

“This smaller, more affordable fee makes college education more accessible for California’s students,” read the statement.

The university would have the authority to contract the development of the exams out to other organizations and would be structured similarly to the University of California. It would be managed by a board of 11 trustees and a chancellor.

The bill was introduced to the Legislature in late February and is currently waiting for review by the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.

Student leaders have expressed mixed reactions to the bill.

“Part of my feeling towards this bill is to be cautious about modifying our higher education system in ways that would substantially alter it,” said ASUC Senator and CalSERVE external affairs vice president candidate Nolan Pack. “I think the problem is that, while there may be arguments saying that it is cheaper, it circumvents the problem that we are not currently funding our higher education system to where it should be.”

UC Student Association Organizing and Communications Director Darius Kemp echoed Pack’s concerns.

“We always believe in a progressive conversation to improve higher education and are willing to sit down with any legislators looking to improve the accessibility and affordability of the UC system,” Kemp said. “While we encourage discussion towards any improvement to higher education, we also feel that it’s important that we fix the broken system we have now.”

The UC Office of the President has yet to review the bill and at this point has no comment, according to UC spokesperson Dianne Klein.

Analysis of the bill will occur in late April, with a hearing scheduled shortly thereafter, according to Josh Molina, legislative director for Assemblymember Das Williams, D-Santa Barbara, chair of the Committee on Higher Education.

“What we have to do now is invest in public education again,” Pack said. “It might be an unnecessary fix to our higher education problem.”

Contact Sophie Ho at sho@dailycal.org.

The post Bill proposes establishment of fourth state university system appeared first on The Daily Californian.