University of California Educating All Income Levels

If costs have been cut, while has tuition risen? Here at UCSB, wouldn't money be better spent directly on academic needs than endless construction of parking garages ect?

Almost 70% of students at UCSB are on some kind of assistance. The artificially high tuition is bolstered by State issues and obfuscated by the fact that most students don't pay that much. That's the reasons it's so difficult to "cut tuition" or "cut cost", there's no transparency like with most government bureaucracies which makes it nearly impossible to get control of the mess. Like with all government agencies this is done and executed intentionally to screw the rest of us...

@italiansurg: "Almost 70% of students at UCSB are on some kind of assistance."

This is a meaningless statistic. So do student loans qualify as assistance? If so, then plenty of students are paying more than the standard tuition when factoring in the interest rates on their loan payments.

@italiansurg: "Like with all government agencies this is done and executed intentionally to screw the rest of us..."

Nonsense. Nearly all state and local agencies are required - BY LAW - to divulge their budget expenditures, and are subject to the Brown Act when making budgetary (and other) decisions. Whether the the general public pays attention is another matter entirely...

The UC Regents are not elected officials (save for the Governor), are not subject to the Brown Act, and can generally make decisions without any consequence (they routinely cut off public comment and make decisions in closed session), not to mention that the Regents are appointed to obscenely long terms. So they are free to sink the entire system without being held responsible.

When doctors can enter into their practices without spending many years paying off student loans then we will be able to say that we made true progress.

Cut the courses that don't aid in our infrastructure (ethnic/femisnist studies) from getting government loans, subsidize the ones (such as those relating to the medical field) and we will get somewhere.

(I realize now that I've offended liberals and conservatives alike--but so what?)

Message for Mr. Yudof: Stop shaking your finger at me.

@Ken_Volok: If costs have been cut, while has tuition risen?

Tuition has risen because the funding from the state per student has been going down dramatically since about 2000:
http://ucpay.globl.org/funding_vs_fee...
http://budget.universityofcalifornia....

This has happened in part because of the recent economic crisis. But also because the taxpayers of California, through their representatives in the assembly, have decided that they have other priorities for their dollars (lower taxes, more prisons, etc)

@Ken_Volok: wouldn't money be better spent directly on academic needs than endless construction of parking garages ect?

Parking at UC is a "self sustaining enterprise". All parking costs, including garage construction, are born by those
who park there.
Employees at UCSB pay $432/year for the privilege of parking on campus.
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu...
http://www.tps.ucsb.edu/permStaffCurr...

I am going to have to go with Ken Volok on this one. Not just the garages for parking though. Try taking a shower in the gym or rec center after you go by the rock climbing wall. That school is like the Biltmore. It is a learning institution not a luxury resort. All of those building and state of the art remodels and construction add to the cost of running that institution that just keeps on building. Faculty housing..etc....I remember when my tuition was less than 432 a semester. And no I am not 1000 years old. There is a reason this occupy movement is taking place. It is because a lot of these kids leave the party at the UC Resort system and enter the real world with 50 to 100K debt over their heads with crappy job prospects. Obama was right.

@bimboteskie: your tuition was low because the taxpayers were picking up the tab for most of it. Now they pay for about half of it. Please look at the chart that I linked.
I am not here to argue that funding should be restored. But any honest discussion cannot ignore what has been going on. This is the crucial point: Californians have to decide whether they want a low tuition first rate public research university or not. If so, they will have to spend tax dollars on it. Taxes will have to be raised or spending priorities will have to be readjusted. If not, tuition will go up to the level of private universities. Or UC will become second rate. Or both. It is really that simple.
Can you find examples of waste at UC? Sure, as you can in any big enterprise. However, as somebody who works there, let me tell you that a lot of fat has been cut and now we are cutting into the bones. Today's students pay more tuition than you used to pay, and they are not getting as good an education. Arguing about the showers at the rec-center or the parking garages is missing the forest for the trees.

Hello boop, where is the the chart you speak of? It is not just rec-center showers parking garages, UCSB in particular has been on a construction rampage for the last 10 years. I am not sure if the education has gotten better or worse since I was at a state college, hopefully better. But I am certain the faculty housing sure has! (gotten better)

Hi bimboteskie,

Here is the chart I was talking about:
http://budget.universityofcalifornia....

It shows how much is spent at UC on education
per student. How much of that comes from the state,
how much from UC general funds (not much), and how much from student fees. In 1990-91 the state was giving $16,430 per student, in 2009-10 it was $7,570. I think this number has gone further down since then. I also think that these numbers are adjusted for inflation, I am not sure, but I think you get the picture?

I have been teaching at UC for 20 years, and I have seen it get worse: larger classes, fewer TAs, etc.

As for faculty housing, none has been built at UCSB since the late eighties (but there is some under construction now).
As you know UC recruits its faculty nationally and sometimes internationally. The cost of living in California puts UC at a competitive disadvantage against universities in the Midwest, for example. The faculty housing program is one of the tools to keep UC competitive. Many other first class universities located in expensive locales have similar programs, eg:
http://web.mit.edu/provost/faculty_ho...
http://www.nyu.edu/life/living-at-nyu...
Also, other big employers in SB:
http://www.bellarivieranewhomes.com/t...

The way the faculty housing system at UCSB works is that faculty can buy these houses at below market price. However, they can only sell them back at a pre-agreed price. The program is important because it makes it possible for young professors to be able to come to SB. (The starting salary for an Assistant Professor at UCSB in the College of Letters and Sciences is $58,100. Although to be fair many get paid somewhat more, especially in the sciences where they can also get additional salary from NSF/NIH etc, if they are able to get these agencies to fund their research).

Sorry for the long post. These are complex issues and it is important to take the time to learn some of the facts. I love UC, I am extraordinarily lucky to work here, and I am grateful to the taxpayers of California for their support. But as I said in my previous post, Californians have to decide whether they want to continue supporting a great university. This should be a rational decision and should not be based on sound bites about fancy showers, parking garages, or even faculty housing. There is also a faction out there in the legislature and maybe also in the regents that deep down does not believe in public universities. This faction is quite happy to gut UC in the name of small government, private enterprise, lower taxes, etc. They are using the current economic crisis to further this goal. You may agree or disagree with them, but you should be aware that this is also going on.

(In case you are wondering, I do not live in faculty housing)