|

Non-Budget Bills on UC Introduced in the Legislature


The prior post on this blog noted the progress of the state budget in the legislature. Below are some bills introduced related to higher ed and UC. There was a February 18 deadline for members to introduce bills although there are ways around that restriction. As yours truly has noted in the past, the legislature has never taken to the notion of “no pay/no say.” That is, even though the proposed state budget would contribute roughly 1/8th of the UC budget (and less if the tax extensions do not pass), the legislature feels free to micro-manage.

Yours truly has noted from time to time that unless and until there is a real deal between UC, the legislature, the governor, and other interest groups, we will continue on the current non-constructive path. I won’t belabor the point again but you can find the most recent reference here:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BzVLYPK7QI_4Y2E4OTFjZmQtM2QzNy00NjA2LWI4MDAtZWNkYTRhODdiMWI2&hl=en&authkey=CLeVhc8J

The bill descriptions below are taken from http://californiascapitol.com/blog/?p=5458

AB 248 (Perea) University of California: research facilities.

Introduced: 02/03/2011

Status: 02/18/2011-Referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.

Location: 02/18/2011-A HIGHER ED. Summary: Would request the Regents of the University of California to manage high-tech research facilities for use by the University of California and private companies for research projects.

= = =

SB 181(Liu) Public postsecondary education: student fee policy.

Introduced: 02/07/2011

Status: 02/17/2011-Referred to Com. on ED.

Location: 02/17/2011-S ED. Summary: Would prohibit any increase in the mandatory systemwide fees charged to a resident undergraduate student enrolled in the University of California or the California State University adopted on or after July 1, 2012, from being effective before 3 months have elapsed after the date on which the fee increase is adopted. The bill would also require the regents and the Trustees of the California State University to develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees in accordance with a prescribed procedure. The bill, commencing with the 2012-13 academic year, would require the Legislative Analyst’s Office to annually review, and report to the Legislature, its findings, conclusions, or recommendations regarding the implementation of policies implemented pursuant to the bill. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

= = =

SB 185 (Hernandez) Public postsecondary education.

Introduced: 02/07/2011

Status: 02/17/2011-Referred to Com. on RLS.

Location: 02/17/2011-S RLS. Summary: Would authorize the University of California and the California State University to consider geographic origin and household income, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions. The bill would also authorize the University of California and the California State University to consider race, gender, ethnicity, and national origin, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions, to the maximum extent permitted by the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution and relevant case law. This bill contains other related provisions.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Spotlight on Speech Codes, 2022

    Fire (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) has just released its yearly summary of the state of free speech at 481 public and private colleges and universities in the United States. FIRE defines free speech as “the overwhelming majority of speech protected by the First Amendment.” Few exceptions exist. The survey addresses a wide variety of issues with relevance to free speech, including: Free Speech Zone PoliciesPrior RestraintsSecurity Fee PoliciesPolicies Governing Speakers, Demonstrations, and RalliesPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechInternet Usage PoliciesPolicies on Tolerance, Respect, and CivilityBullying PoliciesThreats and IntimidationHarassmentPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechObscenityIncitement The report is both disappointing…

  • | | | | | | |

    Listen to Part of the Regents Afternoon Session of 1-22-2014

    As we have noted in numerous prior posts, the Regents refuse to archive their meetings beyond one year.  So we dutifully record the sessions in real time.  Below is a link to part of the afternoon session of Jan. 22.  This segment is mainly the Committee on Educational Policy.  Gov. Brown was in attendance.  We will separately (later) provide links just to certain Brown segments.  But for now, we provide a continuous recording. There was discussion of designating certain areas of UC-Merced as nature reserves, followed by discussion of a new telescope.  The discussion then turned to online ed and…

  • |

    Oversize Load?

    From the Sacramento Bee: …(T)the University of California’s academic student workers union recently filed a complaint against the UC Office of the President demanding that discussions about class size be a part of their contract negotiations. The union has been bargaining with UC since last summer, and its contract expired at the end of the year… The UC Student-Workers Union, which represents more than 12,000 teaching assistants, tutors and readers across the UC system, is seeking a regular forum to talk about class size with faculty and UC management, said Josh Brahinsky, a Ph.D. candidate in the history of consciousness…

  • | | | |

    Napolitano Responds to UCLA’s Moreno Report

    Moreno UC President Napolitano issued a response to the (former California Supreme Court Justice Carlos) “Moreno Report” of Oct. 2013, formally titled “Independent Investigative Report on Acts of Bias and Discrimination Involving Faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles.”  It includes directives to all campus chancellors: 1) Every campus should designate an official to serve as its lead discrimination officer. This official is responsible for ensuring that an appropriate response is made to all reports of perceived acts of discrimination, bias, and harassment involving faculty, students, and staff from all parts of the campus. * The discrimination officer will…

  • | | | | | |

    The Resurrection?

    [More in our Regents coverage.  See earlier posts.]  The Regents spent some time on the old Master Plan for Higher Ed.  There was discussion, according to news reports, among representatives of UC, CSU, and the community colleges on better coordination. …“This report shines an important light on the need to have a central body whose sole focus is guiding the Legislature, governor and our three higher education segments as we plan and build for the future,” (Assembly speaker John Pérez) said. Full story at http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-college-reports-20140123,0,5215408.story Um, does no one remember  CPEC, which still exists in ghostly form as a website…

  • | | | | | |

    Issue Heating Up

    We noted in yesterday’s posting (in the update portion) on the Regents public comment session that there were spokespeople complaining about anti-Israel activities on UC campuses including course credit on one campus, pushes for divestment, etc.  Earlier postings noted statements by the UC prez and several chancellors (including Block) opposing an academic boycott of Israel by several academic societies.  Today, the LA Times reports: A group of lawmakers has formed the California Legislative Jewish Caucus to weigh in on issues of priority to members, including immigration, civil rights and Israel, according to its chairman, state Sen. Marty Block (D-San Diego)… …