Legislators vs. Regents
State Legislature Poised to Neuter the
Regents of the University of California
Will it lead to greater public accountability for UC
or will it lead to chaos and disaster for UC?
by Charles Schwartz, UC Berkeley
Here are two dueling press releases, one proposed Constitutional amendment, and some preliminary discussion of the issues.
From Senator Yee’s press release of May 27, 2009:
(See the full document here.)
UC would no longer be ‘above the law’ under Constitutional change
SACRAMENTO – State legislators, along with University of California (UC) students and employees, today responded to a number of egregious actions by the UC Board of Regents, including recent exorbitant executive pay hikes, by introducing a Constitutional Amendment to allow greater public oversight and accountability of the institution.
SCA 21, authored by Senators Leland Yee (D-San Francisco), Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield) and Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) and ACA 24, authored by Assemblymembers Brian Nestande (R-Palm Desert) and Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge), would remove the Regents autonomy and allow the Legislature to enact statutes affecting UC policy, similar to authority granted over the California State University. If approved by two-thirds of the Legislature, the measure would be put before the voters for final approval.
…
From UC’s press release of May 27, 2009:
(See the full document here.)
Below is a statement from the University of California regarding
Assembly Constitutional Amendment 24, legislation sponsored by state Sen. Leland Yee and several of his colleagues that would repeal the university’s autonomy.
It is absurd that Senator Yee and his co-sponsors want to rewrite the California Constitution to strip the university of its historic
autonomy and place it under direct control of the state Legislature.
Given the current $25 billion hole in the state budget and the
political paralysis that chronically plagues Sacramento, tossing a
10-campus public research university that is the pride of California
and the envy of the world into the Sacramento mix should be a
non-starter.
Let’s be clear: UC is working. At a time when it has become popular to mock California, the university survives as one of the state’s great
success stories. It has thrived under the system of autonomous
governance, led by the Regents, that was so wisely written into the
Constitution by our pioneers.
…
From the text of the bills introduced into the Legislature:
(See the full document here.)
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST
SCA 21, as introduced, Yee. University of California.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution provide that the University of California constitutes a public trust and requires the university to be administered by the Regents of the University of California, a corporation in the form of a board, with full powers of organization and government, subject to legislative control only for specified purposes. These provisions require that corporation to have all powers necessary or convenient for the effective administration of its trust.
This measure would repeal on January 1, 2011, the constitutional provisions relating to the university and the regents and would require the university and the regents to be continued in existence subject to legislative control as may be provided by statute. The measure would require the Legislature to enact legislation to implement these provisions.
…
And here are some pointed quotes from the principals:
In the Los AngelesTimes on 5/28/09,
“For too long, the UC has operated as an independent fiefdom,” said [State Senator Gloria] Romero, chair of the Senate Education Committee. “Audits of the UC during the last few years read more like AIG or Enron than what we expect from the University of California. This is a system that clearly has lost its sense of public accountability.”
In the San Francisco Chronicle on 5/27/09,
“So are we led to believe that the state government being run in Sacramento is an example of how we’re going to make the university even better? I don’t think so,” [Regent Richard] Blum said. … He cited UC’s superior academic rankings, its national prominence as a research institution, and its accessibility to low-income students. “The problem is that California has consistently underfunded the UC system,” Blum said. “If you look at it on a constant dollar basis, the amount of contribution for each student by the state has dropped in half and has been made up by us having to raise tuitions.”
…
[Senator Roy] Ashburn said, “It’s obvious that leaders of the University of California are out of touch with the real world. … While California’s families and businesses are cutting back, UC paychecks are getting fatter,” he said in a written statement.
————————————————
So what does one make of all this? I expect that many people will have a first response that is an extreme YES or NO depending on their previous attitudes toward UC. I think that it is much too early to take sides.
This could be a great opportunity to save UC from the plan of privatization/corporatization – which I see as the Regents’ current path. Or it could lead to an absurd reduction of this great university into a cheap political football. What we need right away is more clarity from the state legislators on what their intentions are: and they must start by establishing some sound principles of academic values in their Constitutional amendment.
The two sides of this argument over “autonomy” are really talking on two different planes related to the University: there is the matter of academic quality and academic freedom; then there is the matter of fiscal management and public accountability.
The principle of university autonomy, where it is meant to preserve academic integrity and academic freedom, in teaching and in research, revolves around the conduct of the faculty and is not much dependent on the Regents. (There is a rich history of The Regents creating, or being the conduits for, the greatest threats to UC’s academic integrity.)
The questions of financial responsibility and public accountability really do fall squarely onto the laps of The Regents – and there is plenty to complain about: skyrocketing student fees, excessive executive pay, a suffering pension plan, long-term bureaucratic growth, etc.
It is in this second domain that the Legislature might manage to improve things; but first they must provide some strong guarantees for the preservation of the first domain. Here is one suggestion, which comes from my own involvement in an earlier (1994) attempt to democratize The Regents. Add language to the Constitutional amendment that says:
“In order to protect the independence of academic functions at the University, those authorities and responsibilities previously delegated by The Regents to the Academic Senate of the University of California, shall not be withdrawn or modified without the express consent of the Academic Senate.”
Such a commitment would clear the air on the academic side and let us focus on the relevant issues of financial management.