DRAFT

Provost Advisory Council Notes

January 22, 2002

 

Attending:  John Simpson, Cathy Sandeen, Leslie Sunell, George Brown, Lan Dyson, Lynda Goff, Tom Vani, Larry Merkley, Marty Chemers, Ed Houghton, Ron Suduiko, Meredith Michaels, Steve Kang, George Blumenthal, Bob Meister, Susan Gillman, Barbara Brogan, Francisco Hernandez, Robert Miller, David Kliger

 

Absent:   Wlad Godzich, Frank Talamantes

 

Guests: Donna Hunter

 

Staff:  Linda Kittle, Beau Willis, Galen Jarvinen

 

Budget

 

CP/EVC noted that there are two major variables in charting the campus’ future:  (i) our internal planning process and (ii) the external financial/environmental constraints, particularly those associated with the State budget.  We have control over the first (and our long-range planning process is designed to address that).  He has asked Vice Chancellor Michaels to provide an update on the status of the State budget.

 

During her presentation, Vice Chancellor Michaels made the following observations:

  • The Governor’s 2002-03 budget is available on the Internet; a summary specific to UC, prepared for the UC Regents, was provided to PAC members.
  • From UC’s perspective that budget proposal is good starting point and signals the governor’s support for education as a State priority.  However, given the State’s fiscal situation (an estimated $12.5 billion deficit according to the Governor’s budget proposal), the Governor basically commits future budgets in order to solve the current fiscal deficit.  The package, for example, includes $5.2 billion in expenditure reductions, $586 million in funding shifts, and $5.6 billion in loans, accelerations, and transfers to bridge the funding gap.  The Legislative Analyst has released her initial assessment of the Governor’s budget; and a more detailed analysis will be released in February.
  • For UC, the 2002-03 budget proposal has the following implications:
    • The “compact” is not fully funded; neither are the traditional one-time UC requests (e.g., deferred maintenance).
    • Student fee increases are neither proposed nor “bought out.”
    • New summer quarter funding is proposed for UC Davis, but not at UC Santa Cruz nor at the remaining unfunded campuses.
    • Permanent cuts to UC are “targeted” rather than “undesignated” and include reductions that will affect UC Santa Cruz programs (e.g., funding for the subject matter projects, outreach, energy savings, and financial aid).
    • The Governor has also proposed an economic stimulus package that accelerates funding for selected UC construction projects, including UC Santa Cruz’ Engineering Building.
  • To be eligible for the economic stimulus package funding, the campus will need to start construction (“break ground”) on the Engineering Building project by June 30, 2002.  Accordingly, the campus processes for that project have been accelerated, the trailers behind Baskin Engineering will be removed, and geotechnical soil borings will be done in preparation for the building.
  • At this point, the campus is projecting that UC can expect, at best, flat budgets (except for new enrollments funding) and, more likely, additional cuts from the budget proposed by the Governor.

 

In the discussion that followed, the following points were raised:

  • The campus (and UC) hiring freeze is still in effect; exceptions are granted by principal officers, who will be cautious about granting exceptions given the uncertain financial situation.
  • It was noted that since the State’s economy tends to be cyclical, it is important that the campus continue its long-term planning so that it is posed to take advantage of near-term opportunities, as well as the State’s fiscal recovery when that occurs.  This economic downturn will affect the timing, but not the eventual implementation, of campus plans.

 

Next steps.

 

  • Follow-up:  Despite the economic uncertainty, CP/EVC will authorize some 2002-03 faculty recruitments.

 

 

 

Information Updates

 

  • PAC committee chairs provided mid-year briefings on the activities of their subcommittees:
    • ITC Update.  In addition to reviewing his written report, Chair Merkley asked members to comment on the charge to two new ITC task forces on web services and information management requirements.
    • CWC Update.  Chair Sunell noted that two issues of critical importance to her committee were campus childcare services and a number of work-life issues. 
    • ASPC Update.  Chair Hernandez noted that his committee would analyze the options for enrollment management as well as address related topics (e.g., colleges including the graduate college, academic support services).
    • APC Update.  Chair Brown reported that his committee has undertaken a review of college and program governance structures, developed guidelines for program review and for the establishment/disestablishment of academic programs, and is planning for growth in non-FWS quarters (e.g., State-support summer instruction, off-campus programs such as EAP and the Silicon Valley Center) which represent nearly half of the new growth the campus will experience through 2010-11.
    • ACF Update.  Chair Vani noted that his committee’s focus has been on the campus capital program, as well as the development of space allocation principles.
  • Interim Director Tanner provided and discussed his written update on planning for the Silicon Valley Center.