UC Watch is a clearinghouse of information about the need to reform the University of California system. Thousands of UC workers represented by AFSCME 3299 have joined with students, professors, alumni, community members and elected officials to fight for a systemic overhaul of the University of California.

For too long UC has acted above the law. Its governing Board of Regents is comprised of mostly wealthy lawyers and businessmen, many of whom have donated big bucks to Governors’ election campaigns. The Regents are privileged to enjoy lifestyles that put them far out of touch with the majority of everyday Californians. Under the current system, UC executives are allowed to function with little public accountability and with misplaced spending priorities that hurt the University and the people of California in the long term.

We envision a more responsible, equitable, and accountable public University. We promote greater UC oversight while maintaining academic freedom of research, teaching, and expression. We believe that students and faculty should be free within the classroom to express a wide range of viewpoints in the pursuit of knowledge, and any reform of UC’s governance and oversight must work to maintain academic freedom within the University. Finally, we stand for affordable education and genuine access to higher education for all Californians and we strongly oppose the misuse of public money.

The time has come to reform UC, a system whose structure has not been updated since it was designated a public trust under California’s Constitution in 1879. At the time, the former agricultural college in Berkeley enrolled less than 2,000 students. Today the 10-campus system includes more than 220,000 students and more than 170,000 faculty and staff. Today’s UC is radically different than the system that functioned some 130 years ago. That’s why improving and modernizing UC’s structure will require nothing short of a change in the state Constitution.

Governance

Because the state’s Constitution currently gives the University unique status as a public trust, UC is free from many of the state and local regulations that other institutions must operate under. Only five other public universities in the country have a similar status but the University of California arguably has the greatest level of autonomy in terms of its governance.

UC Is Not Subject to State Law

After UC’s latest executive pay scandal revealed large scale irregularities in executive pay and perks, many legislators have proposed bills reining in UC’s executive pay or creating more oversight over pay practices. These bills have had to ask UC to voluntarily change its behavior. For example, AB 53, a bill that curbs pay for state employees earning over $150,000, only urges UC to comply. In another example, state legislators from both houses urged UC to give UC Retirement Plan participants representation on a pension board by passing a Senate Concurrent Resolution in 2007. To date, UC has not responded to this recommendation.

UC Is Not Subject to Local Ordinances

Several of the host cities where UC campuses are located have living wage, sanctuary city and other local ordinances that UC does not have to honor because it is immune to local legislative control as well as state laws.

UC is not even subject to local building and zoning regulations. As a result, the cities of Berkeley and Santa Cruz both had to sue UC for greater input on growth and to arrange for fair cost sharing for services. Local residents, including UC employees who live locally, are affected by UC’s refusal to take seriously local concerns about buildings, traffic, and growth.

In fact, a 2007 report by the California Legislative Analyst’s Office characterized the problem. The report reviews the process used by UC to prepare campus long-range development plans (LRDPs) and analyzes whether it adequately addresses the impacts that campus growth has on surrounding communities. The LAO found, “a lack of accountability, standardization, and clarity in the current process, and recommend steps to make the process more transparent and effective (such as ensuring greater legislative oversight and public involvement in the development of an LRDP).”

UC’s “Above The Law” Attitude

Regardless of its standing as a public trust, there are some state laws that definitely apply to UC. One such law is the state’s public records act. However, because of its arrogant above the law attitude, the University has a track record of failing to comply with provisions that require Regents to meet in public session and for the University to disclose information about its operations when requested by the public.

• In 2004, UC lost a public records lawsuit brought by retired UC Berkeley Professor Charles Schwartz, the San Jose Mercury News newspaper, and a union. UC disclosed minutes and tapes from secret meetings in 2000 and 2002 in which Regents decided to outsource UC Retirement Plan investment management contracts. Investigative articles by the San Francisco Examiner had earlier revealed that Regent Gerald Parsky had pushed to oust long-time UC Treasurer Patricia Small and enter into a no-bid contract with investment advisor Wilshire & Associates. It also broke the story that Wilshire had given $80,000 in soft money to Parsky’s fundraising campaign for presidential candidate George W. Bush one week before UC awarded Wilshire a contract.
  
  
• AFSCME 3299 is currently suing to get public records it requested and is entitled to under state law. Last year Local 3299 requested information on all of UC's expenditures including service contractors, consultants and others at all of its campuses and medical centers. This information is needed to provide input on UC’s spending. After nine months, and to date, the majority of campuses have not provided any of the public information requested.
  
  

UC’s Board of Regents

The UC system is controlled by a 26-person Board of Regents, with 18 Regents appointed by the Governor to 12-year terms. The Regents are unpaid volunteers who typically meet once every two months to make all the crucial decisions about the direction of the University. The Board is essentially a collection of wealthy businesspeople chosen to serve as Regents less for their expertise in higher education and more for their political connections.

Each year, California state government provides millions of dollars in funding for UC instruction in a lump sum payment. The UC Board of Regents and the President have the autonomy and authority to distribute these dollars as they see fit and with relatively few restrictions. In other states, legislators have more direct authority over how funds are distributed and spent at public universities. Why should UC be any different?

Transparency and Accountability Needed

With a lack of meaningful legislative oversight the UC Regents have assumed monarch-like authority over the system, imposing egregious fee hikes for students while overlooking large-scale irregularities in the salaries and compensation awarded to top administrators. The UC Regents have allowed Californians’ precious tax dollars to be wasted on Chancellors’ homes and sabbaticals while higher education has become less accessible for lower-income students.

UC workers represented by AFSCME 3299 along with their public representatives have long called for greater transparency at UC. Senator Leland Yee’s 2007 Higher Education Governance Accountability Act, which was sponsored by Local 3299, brought greater transparency to UC decision-making on compensation issues. Now it’s time to take the next step.