reclaimucsd

Posts Tagged ‘Prop 13’

Publication: Privatization Pamphlet

In California, Privatization, Reclaim Chancellor's Complex on March 4, 2012 at 6:51 pm

The problems facing the California government and the UC are neither permanent nor inevitable. Learn more about the problems, and see the potential solutions. Read the Pamphlet:

Budget Cuts, Fee Hikes, Privatization

More information and commentary is available in the full Report on Privatization, which is the source for most of the research contained in this pamphlet.

Advertisements

CALL TO ACTION: March 1st

In California, Privatization on February 21, 2012 at 2:45 am

[Please share this call to action with your friends, professors, colleagues, TAs, PIs, roommates, and who ever else you think should read it]

Students, instructors and staff you have a stake in the future of the UC. The public nature of the UC is under threat, but on March 1st we are coming together to defend it.

Students, mandatory fees set by the regents have more than doubled since 2001 adjusted for inflation.[1] At the same time, UCSD’s average debt at graduation increased 20%.[2] In 2009, 48% of UCSD students graduated with debt at an average of $18,757.[3] Since 1990 expenditure per student has fallen over 19%.[4] At the same time state support per student fell 60% while tuition support more than tripled.[5] The UC shifted from public funding toward personal, private funding. This shift was not and is not inevitable. Students: the ability of many of your qualified colleagues to attend a UC is threatened by this shift,[6] but you can help.

Instructors, between 1995 and 2010, while positions for teaching in the UC system increased 48%, positions in senior management increased 182%.[7] In 2007, a retired UC Berkeley professor estimated the excess growth in senior management to cost the UC $603 million annually.[8] As instructors retire they are not replaced,[9] and some of your colleagues at UCSD were recently recruited to a private institution.[10] The UC is moving from academic to entrepreneur. This movement is not inevitable. Instructors: the priority for the UC to attract, retain and support your colleagues has been misplaced, but you can help.

Staff, starting in 1999 the UC regents began to funnel pension fund money into riskier investments. Since 2004 billions of dollars have been invested through private investment firms which are non-transparent, lightly regulated, highly risky, and which have charged the UC tens of millions of dollars so far.[11] The UC’s pension and investment portfolios lost $23 billion in the 2008 financial crisis, some of which were made against the advice of a former treasurer[12] and in full awareness of the risk.[13] The UC is now asking for workers to pay into the pension system as they cut benefits to absorb its losses.[14] The UC privatized and jeopardized its investments. This was not and is not inevitable Staff: The risks taken by the regents promise to harm you, your families, and your colleagues, but you can help. Read the rest of this entry »

Publication: Report on the Profitability of Education

In California, Privatization on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 pm

The “Report on the Profitability of Education and the Exploitability of Students” was compiled by two UCSD students, based on the ‘Teach the Budget’ curriculum developed by graduate students at UCSC. It contains detailed sections on the cost of UC tuition, the regents, the state of California, student activism, and much more. It is fully footnoted with emphasis on primary sources.

It is available in a digital format, as well as a printable format, which folds into a booklet. References and Appendix are published online as well.

DIGITAL

PRINTABLE

REFERENCES AND APPENDIX

UC to Borrow Money FOR California

In California on February 14, 2012 at 11:21 pm

The UC is going to borrow $200 million for the state after the state took away $100 million dollars from the UC over winter break. [1] The state still owes the UC $1.7 billion dollars from previous loans. [2]

The California government is fiscally self-destructive: it is designed to be unable to fund itself. Proposition 13 requires a two-thirds vote to raise taxes, but allows a simple 50 percent majority to lower taxes and introduce loopholes. [3] Proposition 13 caps the tax-rate on corporate property at 1%, the revenues from which are allocated by the state government rather than local municipal governing bodies. [4]

UC spokesperson Dianne Klein: “The university is in a better position (than the state) to do that [borrow money], frankly because we have a better credit rating. The university is able to secure a better interest rate for that money” [5] In 2011, Fitch rating agency cited “Continued tuition and fee setting flexibility” as a key factor for the UC’s strong AA+ credit rating. [6]

THE UC IS NOW BORROWING MONEY, IN PART BECAUSE IT IS BETTER ABLE TO TAX STUDENTS THAN THE STATE CAN TAX CITIZENS AND CORPORATIONS.

WE SHOULD NOT PAY FOR A DISFUNCTIONAL STATE. WE SHOULD DEMAND AN END TO PROP 13s VOTING REQUIREMENTS.

———————————————————-

[1] http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/13/MNFV1MBVNN.DTL#ixzz1gX6X2RwB

[2] http://www.dailycal.org/2012/02/06/state-looks-to-borrow-from-uc-due-to-predicted-cash-flow-shortfall/

[3] Shrag, Peter. Paradise Lost: California’s Experience, America’s Future. London: University of California Press, 1999. p. 156

[4] http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/calfacts/calfacts_010511.aspx#zzee_link_2_1294170707

[5] http://www.dailycal.org/2012/02/06/state-looks-to-borrow-from-uc-due-to-predicted-cash-flow-shortfall/

[6] http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110708005988/en/Fitch-Rates-University-California-General-Rev-Bonds