UC Regents approve tuition increase despite Gov. Brown objecting

UC Regents approve tuition increase despite Gov. Brown objecting

A University of California Board of Regents committee voted to increase tuition at least 5 percent every year for five years despite widespread objection from students and Governor Jerry Brown.

The vote was 7-2, with Brown, who serves as a member of the board by virtue of his governorship, and Student Regent Sadia Saifuddin voting against the proposal.10968803136_a317f97d62_o As  more of a formality Thursday the entire Board of Regents will officially approve the proposal.

UC President and Obama Administration alumni Janet Napolitano championed the tuition hikes arguing that doing so was “integral not only to the stability, but also to the vitality, of the University of California.”

At the meeting, Brown made his case against the proposed hikes and called for a rethinking and reorganization of the UC system. He offered an alternative plan to convene a group of experts to transform the UC system to better educate students and serve the needs of California.

Students in attendance protested the vote because they felt they were left out of the discussion by the Regents and became vocal at various points of the meeting. Some students at the meeting called for the resignation of Napolitano and others chanted “Hey hey, ho ho, Napolitano’s got to go.”

Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom defended the students telling reporters students “weren’t part of this process, and they felt dismissed. And they were.” Newsom, like Brown, has opposed the tuition increase.
Governor Brown has said that the UC system would not get additional funds from the state if tuition was increased. He statements will now be put to the test.

What complicates matters further is that many students were under the impression that if the 2012 Prop 30 tax increases were passed, tuition would not be increased. In fact, I experienced this first hand on campus in 2012 when I taught classes at California State University, Fullerton. The vast majority of my students were under the impression that if they did not vote for Prop 30 they would have to pay higher tuition and not be able to afford college—thus they overwhelmingly supported the tax increases.

Prop 30 was passed and now students, at least at the UC, are seeing tuition rise as well. And many feel betrayed.

This story is just beginning to unfold. Brown has made the UC system a priority since taking office, attending Regent meetings unlike his predecessor. Napolitano did not back down to Brown pushing for tuition hikes in, what many believe, was a political move to force Brown to give more state money to the UC system. But what will Brown do next? Stay tuned.


Write a comment
  1. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 20 November, 2014, 00:35

    Before you let your demons dull your minds consider the inflation rate, high student demand, aging facilities, UC’s reputation……5% increase a year is fiscally sound….very conservative from liberal budget planners.

    Reply this comment
  2. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 20 November, 2014, 08:41

    I saw Napolitano interviewed by Conan Nolan on NBC News Conference this past, Sunday morning. She informed Mr. Nolan and everybody else watching, that students who come from families who earn $80,000 or less per year, do not pay tuition, if they are accepted to a CA University. Why is it so hard for columnists like yourself, to fail to mention that salient fact about tuition costs? That withholding of information just helps to make more citizen heads explode–right?

    Reply this comment
  3. Toldyaso
    Toldyaso 20 November, 2014, 09:54

    Students feel betrayed by governor brown? Ha ha welcome to the real world. Learn this now so you will not be fooled in the future. Politicians will lie to you to get what they want. This might be the best lesson they get in their higher educatiom pursuit.

    Reply this comment
  4. TruthandtheAmericanWay
    TruthandtheAmericanWay 20 November, 2014, 09:57

    If memory serves and it does; however, I will let this link speak to the issue. http://www.dailycal.org/2014/09/18/uc-regents-approve-executive-compensation-increases/. What we have here is another state system that is out of control that is massively bloated in the back office with an albatross of administration abuses. If an ethical consultant were to review they would eliminate thousands of make work jobs. Resultant, quality education with reasonable fees for all those enrolled. This link will help regarding the student’s concerns: http://www.dailycal.org/2014/11/18/students-rally-protest-proposed-tuition-hikes-ahead-regents-meeting/.

    Sight digression – seems universally, that the education system beyond the individual school beginning at the county, state, and federal levels is where we are losing the education war. Back room bureaucrats are not the solution, nor is tossing tons of money into the rate hole going to solve anything other than increasing the bloated doing nothing staff, while killing the individual schools from doing what they should be able to do – teach, rather than chasing bureaucratic job security work.

    Reply this comment
  5. vonborks
    vonborks 20 November, 2014, 11:26

    55% of undergrads at UC pay no tuition at all, and many of those need remedial course and some students are illegal, many more have Spanish surnames which gives them preference for admittance. UC was founded to provide advanced education for Californian’s, it was not founded to correct social problems, of which thee will always be too many. The 55% thing is nonsensical and unsustainable. As an alumni I received a letter from the Regents asking for my support, I refused…

    Reply this comment
    • SeeSaw
      SeeSaw 20 November, 2014, 20:14

      Have you documentation showing that applicants with Spanish surnames have preference for admittance to the UC system? I really doubt that.

      Reply this comment
  6. Queeg
    Queeg 20 November, 2014, 11:35

    Doomers it’s a village. Participate or move to the wastelands of primitive prepper gardens, honey and locusts!

    Reply this comment
  7. Desmond
    Desmond 20 November, 2014, 12:05

    Some comments are so ignorant they don t deserve a rebuttal.

    Reply this comment
  8. toldyaso
    toldyaso 20 November, 2014, 12:50

    Oh, I forgot! It’s Kalifornia. We can’t point to government waste, fraud, abuse, lies or corruption or we are racist and/or against the common good! I bet Napolitno and Brown played bad cop good cop: Ok Janet, you go in and say we need a rate increase, and I will act like I’m outraged since I just got these college students to vote for Prop 30. In a few months the public will forget all about it and the media will cover for us. Deal?

    Reply this comment
  9. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 20 November, 2014, 13:55


    You need to quip/relax once in awhile.

    Had lunch today at a junior college…budget burger combo for $3.50…loaded burger, fries, drink.

    Education and it’s accessories are super cheap in California. They gotta raise revenue or you pay for the losses on my budget burger combo.

    Reply this comment
  10. JPR11
    JPR11 20 November, 2014, 17:49

    So what is the annual retirement cost? Why the increase when CA passes a new $6B tax? Is this just another CA failure?

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

CalPERS reveals its true colors

Steven Greenhut: When the California Public Employees’ Retirement System — the nation’s largest retirement system, albeit one plagued by scandal

Latest taxpayer-subsidized green fiasco is based in Anaheim

April 25, 2013 By Chris Reed The latest Californa-based green energy fiasco took center stage in the House Committee on

State Property Sale Off, Again

Katy Grimes: The highly questionable sale of 11 state-owned properties hit another snag on Monday after being given the go-ahead