Editorial: Regents fail to act on behalf of UC constituents

Last this editorial board checked, the University of California
is a public university system. That means affordable education for
all Californians. But apparently, the UC Board of Regents have a
different definition of “public.”

This week, cloistered in the secluded meeting rooms of UC San
Francisco, the regents will decide whether to raise student fees
for the third consecutive year. The proposal on the table would
raise undergraduate fees by 8 percent to $6,141, and graduate fees
by 10 percent to $8,556 for the 2005-2006 academic year.

We’ll save you some suspense: After a lot of lip service
paid to how much they don’t want to raise fees, the regents
will raise fees, even though the state is increasing funds to the
UC by $134 million.

What’s troubling about this isn’t just the decision
to raise fees ““ this vote became a foregone conclusion when
UC President Robert Dynes made a back-room deal with the governor
to try to minimize state budget cuts to the university.

What is troubling is that no one ““ least of all the
regents ““ are standing up for the students. Instead, the
regents are making this university an institution run by the state,
not by the public.

Budget times have been tough, and only now do they seem to be on
the upswing. But the regents have to do a better job of
representing the university to the state, rather than simply
rolling over to every demand forced upon them.

It’s not too late to act. The regents can still show some
initiative to keep the UC system public, even when the state puts
education funding on the chopping block. A more proactive fee
system is one way to ensure that when budget times are bad, the
university does not have to ask students to bridge the gap with
their checkbooks.

For example, Regent Tom Sayles has suggested raising fees when
the state economy is good to allow the UC to maintain ““ or
even lower ““ the cost of education when the economy is bad.
The proposal has drawbacks, but at least it shows the sort of
forward thinking other regents could demonstrate from time to
time.

Of course, ideally the regents would also stand up to the state.
The regents need to remember that no matter how many times
Schwarzenegger wields the red pen, they, not he, ultimately set
student fees.

The regents need to remember they represent the interests of the
university ““ the students, the faculty, the staff ““ and
not necessarily what’s in the best interest of the state at
large.

The regents need to remember that safeguarding the mission of
the UC as a public education system is a goal worth fighting for.
They need to remember that complacency is not an option.

But given the attitude of the regents in the past, the second
course of action probably won’t happen. And so the idea of
the public university ““ an institution run for the public, by
the public, with the public good in mind ““ will slowly drift
away.

When the regents meet in San Francisco this week, the closest
body of UC undergraduates will be across the Bay Area, in Berkeley.
And that’s an apt measure of the difference between how this
university system should be run, and how the regents are actually
doing it ““ miles apart.