Nov 07, 2009 | 01:04
Share:
Apr 16, 2009
Difficult budget decisions lie ahead for campus leaders
Now that the deans at UCLA are planning for a 5% budget cut of general funds, the campuswide budget process will move into a strategic phase over the next month. Leaders in the administration will be making difficult decisions on where differential, targeted cuts can be made in order to preserve academic excellence.
Photo by Stephanie Diani.
Academic departments will feel the pain, Executive Vice Chancellor/Provost Scott Waugh told the Legislative Assembly meeting at the Faculty Center last week.
"We understand the difficulties of mounting an instructional program and maintaining research at an adequate level. If we could, we'd protect every unit. We just can't, not in this environment, given the cuts we have already sustained."
The final decision by Chancellor Gene Block will include a combination of targeted as well as across-the-board budget cuts, based on the state budget plan passed in February, with a contingency built into the plan in case more budget cuts are required next year.
The risk that UCLA’s economic predicament could get worse is real, Vice Chancellor Steve Olsen of finance, budget and capital programs told Academic Senate members. The state budget approved in February was based on estimated state revenues for next year that now look too high, according to the Legislative Analyst, which is forecasting that revenues will be $8 billion lower. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will update the revenue forecast on May 28 in his May Revision. A bleak forecast could lead him to propose additional cuts, Olsen warned.
“But it’s not clear the state will do that,” the vice chancellor explained. The state budget was approved only after a prolonged and very painful process. “The level of appetite for additional tax increases and spending cuts is not clear. We’ll have to see.”
Another uncertainty looms on the horizon. The budget was signed off on the assumption that voters will approve five ballot measures on May 19. Failure of one or more of these propositions could result in more spending cuts, Olsen said. One measure, Proposition 1C, which would authorize the state to borrow $5 billion in future lottery revenue (and pay it back later), could have a major impact on the 2009-10 state budget if it were defeated.
“If any of these [five ballot measures] fail, it may have an impact on the legislature’s thinking about the budget,” said Olsen, who urged everyone to go to the California Secretary of State’s website to become informed voters.
The real dilemma UCLA faces, Waugh said, is that the university no longer has the revenue to support the academic structure that has been built up over the years. “We’ve built academic programs, departments and courses on the basis of a level of funding that no longer exists. So the base has shrunk, and we still have this large superstructure. We’re going to have to figure out how to reduce this superstructure.”
That could mean reducing programs, majors, requirements for majors and the number of courses taught, but only after going through a long process of consultation within departments and with the Academic Senate. “That’s one reason we’re looking at a one- to two-year horizon,” Waugh said.
Restructuring will have a positive side, Waugh said. The campus would have new majors and new teaching programs “that are absolutely well-suited to developing the kind of students and citizens we want for the future.”
Meanwhile, the toolbox committees working on finding mid- and long-term solutions to UCLA’s budget problems are expected to hand in their recommendations for saving money, increasing revenue and restructuring academic programs by April 24.
One bright hope exists with flurry of grant-writing on campus as researchers apply for stimulus dollars through the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act not only increased funding for grant programs under these agencies, but also for Pell Grants and research infrastructure grants.
“All of these are important,” Olsen said. “But … these are new good things” that won’t mitigate the current budget cuts. The state, for example, will receive $8 billion for general budget relief, but none of it will reduce UC’s $115 million budget cut.
“We obviously don’t know how successful UCLA will be, although I am confident we will be very competitive. And it’s fair to say, based on past experience, we could expect over a period of several years a one-time infusion of some tens of millions of dollars in overhead recovery.
“That will be very helpful, but bear in mind — it’s only one-time money,” Olsen advised.
"We understand the difficulties of mounting an instructional program and maintaining research at an adequate level. If we could, we'd protect every unit. We just can't, not in this environment, given the cuts we have already sustained."
The final decision by Chancellor Gene Block will include a combination of targeted as well as across-the-board budget cuts, based on the state budget plan passed in February, with a contingency built into the plan in case more budget cuts are required next year.
The risk that UCLA’s economic predicament could get worse is real, Vice Chancellor Steve Olsen of finance, budget and capital programs told Academic Senate members. The state budget approved in February was based on estimated state revenues for next year that now look too high, according to the Legislative Analyst, which is forecasting that revenues will be $8 billion lower. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will update the revenue forecast on May 28 in his May Revision. A bleak forecast could lead him to propose additional cuts, Olsen warned.
“But it’s not clear the state will do that,” the vice chancellor explained. The state budget was approved only after a prolonged and very painful process. “The level of appetite for additional tax increases and spending cuts is not clear. We’ll have to see.”
Another uncertainty looms on the horizon. The budget was signed off on the assumption that voters will approve five ballot measures on May 19. Failure of one or more of these propositions could result in more spending cuts, Olsen said. One measure, Proposition 1C, which would authorize the state to borrow $5 billion in future lottery revenue (and pay it back later), could have a major impact on the 2009-10 state budget if it were defeated.
“If any of these [five ballot measures] fail, it may have an impact on the legislature’s thinking about the budget,” said Olsen, who urged everyone to go to the California Secretary of State’s website to become informed voters.
The real dilemma UCLA faces, Waugh said, is that the university no longer has the revenue to support the academic structure that has been built up over the years. “We’ve built academic programs, departments and courses on the basis of a level of funding that no longer exists. So the base has shrunk, and we still have this large superstructure. We’re going to have to figure out how to reduce this superstructure.”
That could mean reducing programs, majors, requirements for majors and the number of courses taught, but only after going through a long process of consultation within departments and with the Academic Senate. “That’s one reason we’re looking at a one- to two-year horizon,” Waugh said.
Restructuring will have a positive side, Waugh said. The campus would have new majors and new teaching programs “that are absolutely well-suited to developing the kind of students and citizens we want for the future.”
Meanwhile, the toolbox committees working on finding mid- and long-term solutions to UCLA’s budget problems are expected to hand in their recommendations for saving money, increasing revenue and restructuring academic programs by April 24.
One bright hope exists with flurry of grant-writing on campus as researchers apply for stimulus dollars through the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act not only increased funding for grant programs under these agencies, but also for Pell Grants and research infrastructure grants.
“All of these are important,” Olsen said. “But … these are new good things” that won’t mitigate the current budget cuts. The state, for example, will receive $8 billion for general budget relief, but none of it will reduce UC’s $115 million budget cut.
“We obviously don’t know how successful UCLA will be, although I am confident we will be very competitive. And it’s fair to say, based on past experience, we could expect over a period of several years a one-time infusion of some tens of millions of dollars in overhead recovery.
“That will be very helpful, but bear in mind — it’s only one-time money,” Olsen advised.
Stay updated on the budget situation. Please see UCLA’s budget website.
