- Author: Wendy Powers
Congratulations to Rachel Long, recipient of the 2019 Bradford Rominger Agricultural Sustainability Leadership Award! Rachel will receive her award on May 28 at the Agricultural Sustainability Institute's Distinguished Speakers Series. Rachel earned this award as a result of her ability to conduct research and translate the results into information and recommendations her clientele can use to improve their businesses.
When you have educational content to share as a brief news story, consider submitting it to the story pipeline. This new outlet for your knowledge is a piece of telling our story and promoting all of the science developed and/or relevant across the state. Take a look at what knowledge Michael Cahn shared. We have so much information to share that is useful to people well beyond our county lines, why not put it somewhere with a broader reach.
I suspect fruit growers may be in need of recommendations about next steps following this rain. I'm assuming I will have the weekend off from yard work, though I need to prune roses. Instead, I should finish that last merit review I've put off since Sunday and then start reviewing comments and recommendations from the Peer Review and Ad Hoc Review Committees.
This week has flown by, though I am eager for Friday to end. Both the CD and the REC director meetings, originally planned as in-person meetings, were 2+ hour phone calls yet the rest of each day managed to fill with other meetings. The California Farm Demonstration Network met on Tuesday morning; I feel good about having left with action items as there is nothing worse than a meeting with no next steps. Mark, Mark and I met yesterday afternoon to do some planning and prioritizing. We have some ideas to pursue, intended to meet some mentoring needs and allow each of us to provide more support across the state.
Tomorrow is our annual meeting with the President and her team. I suspect much of the discussion will focus on the budget, building on the discussion at today's Regents meeting. It looks like Glenda may not have a chance to talk about UC ANR at this month's Regents meeting. I hope we have a chance to tell our story soon.
- Author: Wendy Powers
This week was the Regent's meeting where UC ANR had a chance to educate the Regents about who we are and the value we bring to California. I missed the first public day of the meeting because the Program Council was also this week. But I was to be there yesterday which was the scheduled day for Glenda's UC ANR presentation. The group was behind schedule by 9 AM. They ended up so far behind schedule that the UC ANR presentation was rescheduled to the May meeting.
The topic that put the agenda so far behind schedule? Student tuition. The proposal centered on a 2.6% increase to non-resident fees that would equate to just under $800 per year. Regents raised concerns that, while $800 may not seem like much, in some countries it is a month's wages. Additional concerns regarded DACA students who failed to meet the requirements for in-state tuition and the fact that they would be impacted by the $800. Those against the increase argued that the cost of running UC is not the financial responsibility of non-resident students. Those in favor countered that while they, too didn't like the idea of increasing costs to students, there is a $30M gap in the budget, state funding does not keep up with rising costs, and 2.6% is less than a cost-of-living adjustment. In the end, the decision was to undertake further analysis and make a decision at the next meeting (hopefully after the UC ANR presentation). I happened to be sitting near a large group of students who declared ‘victory.' By the way, did you know that snapping fingers have replaced clapping (less disruptive)?
I'm not sure who won what. Acceptance letters need to go out, and they will state that the non-resident fees may increase by 2.6%. That then turned into a discussion about the need for students to be able to know, in advance, what their education will cost without changing those costs mid-stream. If the increase goes forward, should it only then apply to incoming students? Then next year's acceptance letters would include the 4-year cost for the class entering in fall 2020, and so on. The commitment would only be made for four years, thus, promoting an increase in 4-yr graduation rates.
While tuition doesn't relate to UC ANR directly, I found the principles relevant. One could replace the word ‘tuition' with ‘REC research costs' and have the same conversations. In fact, I've had these same conversations. It all comes back to ‘who pays when the taxpayers don't?' Unfortunately, the Lt. Governor did not offer to help make a push for UC ANR like she did with state support for UC, in general, but perhaps that will come.
I'm still digesting the Program Council conversations, but in the meantime, I need to start working on my weekly quota for reviewing merit and promotion packages. So far, I am 0% complete for the week.
