اینترنت

برچسب: CSU

  • CSU tuition hike creates more debt, longer time to graduate for neediest students

    CSU tuition hike creates more debt, longer time to graduate for neediest students


    Credit: Baona / iStock_

    The graduation stage at all California State University (CSU) campuses are vibrant tableaus of dreams achieved. Each cap and gown tell a unique tale of persistence, ambition, and hope. But beneath the prestige and pride lies a sobering reality. For many students, obtaining a diploma also means accumulating debt.

    The CSU’s recent decision to increase tuition by 34% over five years, at an annual rate of 6%, might intensify these disparities, potentially impacting the trajectory of many students’ dreams and futures.

    While the CSU cites fiscal imperatives for the increase, it’s crucial to consider its effects on students, particularly those from marginalized backgrounds. Higher education, once the beacon of hope and socio-economic mobility, is slowly being priced out of reach for many. Making this path more expensive threatens to sideline those who are meant to benefit from it the most.

    The data doesn’t lie, so let’s dive into it. Our recent collaborative report with The Institute for College Access and Success (TICAS) on the CSU system illuminates disturbing trends. While the CSU’s efforts to boost graduation rates are commendable, the cost of these achievements disproportionately impacts students from racially marginalized communities. We found that from the academic year 2021-22 a disconcerting 63% of Black bachelor’s degree recipients are grappling with student debt. In contrast, only about a third of their white and Asian peers face similar financial burdens. Moreover, only 48% of Black students secure their degree within six years. As these stats indicate, the increase in tuition could threaten the very essence of CSU, known for its diversity and inclusivity.

    The data tells a story that reaches far beyond mere statistics. Picture the path of a first-generation college student from a marginalized background. They step onto campus, buoyed by dreams and shouldering the weight of their family’s expectations. As they navigate the academic world, they confront both systemic obstacles and personal challenges.

    Yet, as graduation draws near, a looming debt casts a shadow over their achievements. Each loan statement they receive isn’t merely an invoice; it’s a stark reminder of the price of ambition, of wanting to change your life for the better.  These are dreams recalibrated or paused, not because of a lack of drive, capability, passion, or talent but for the sake of survival. Thus, the narrative shifts from higher education being a bridge to dreams to a poignant query: Is the investment truly worth its promise?

    Add to this the ramifications of the CSU’s recent decision. Annual tuition increases totaling 34% can lead to longer work hours, fewer academic credits, or even postponed semesters. Each subsequent loan statement, irrespective of graduation status, serves as a somber reminder of the tangible costs of dreams and the yearning for a brighter future. Such decisions don’t just delay dreams; they risk derailing them.

    At this defining moment, the CSU must introspectively reassess its foundational principles. The recent tuition hike decision has resonated like an unsettling alarm throughout the CSU community. While certain factions might view this as a necessary step to counteract fiscal deficits, for many students, it’s an added layer to an already challenging academic climb. To paint a clearer picture, on most campuses, our most economically disadvantaged students would need to clock in twenty or even upwards of thirty hours of paid work a week, in certain regions, just to afford the cost of attendance.

    Beyond individual concerns, society must recognize wider ramifications. Those students we’re most committed to elevating may increasingly feel academia’s gates slowly creaking shut. If financial burdens eclipse the dream of higher education, the entire society loses out. We risk sidelining tomorrow’s innovators, thinkers, leaders, and agents of societal change. The budding poet, poised to inspire an era, might remain silent; the aspiring scientist, on the brink of groundbreaking discoveries might opt for more immediate financial gains by taking a job instead. The community advocates, starting their journey in student leadership and deeply attuned to their community’s historical narratives, might never fully realize their potential to uplift and lead.

    This is a rallying cry for unity. As the CSU system charts its course, it is vital that policymakers, educators, students, and the wider community actively participate in this critical dialogue. We must also confront the sobering truth that members of our community will disproportionately bear the inequitable burden of a college degree. It’s crucial that we safeguard against making the pursuit of dreams financially untenable. After all, dreams cultivated within the halls of academia should ignite, illuminate, and elevate – not ensnare.

    •••

    Dominic Quan Treseler is president of the Cal State Student Association and a political science major at San Jose State University. 

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • CSU students sound off on impact of upcoming tuition increase

    CSU students sound off on impact of upcoming tuition increase


    “I was considering a master’s program through Cal Poly,” Monreal said. “But with the tuition increase, I might just consider getting a master’s degree anywhere else.”

    For students like Monreal, who already manage student loans to take on college tuition costs, the 6% yearly tuition increases will have a profound impact on their education choices.

    As an older sister to several high school-age siblings, Monreal said that she would encourage them to take into consideration these tuition increases when applying to colleges.

    “I have younger siblings, and I think I would encourage them not to go to four-year college,” she said. “As a first-year, I would recommend any junior college so they can get some units under their belt at first, if the cost is increasing so much.”

    Gabriela’s story gathered by California Student Journalism Corps member Arabel Meyer





    Source link

  • How are UC and CSU students managing the cost of textbooks?

    How are UC and CSU students managing the cost of textbooks?


    San Diego State University’s Equitable Access textbook program costs students $19.75 per credit, but some opt for cheaper textbooks outside of this program.

    One student who opted out is Kimberly Watkinson, leading her to search for textbooks on her own.

    “I do it through my own means. I buy them on Chegg or Amazon, or sometimes I look for students who have the same class as me, and maybe they can sell me their books,” she said.

    Some of her professors offer the class materials for free, through PDFs and other alternatives.

    “There are some classes, mostly in childhood development, where we only look at articles and they are usually free and posted on Canvas. Or they use books that are from friends of them,” Watkinson said.

    She added that collaborating with classmates is a good way to lower individual costs.

    “I’ve had classes where I even share a book with another person to do the assignments because it’s so expensive that I cannot afford it,” Watkinson said.

    While her textbook plans are constantly shifting and the costs are demanding, they haven’t had a bearing on her academic ambitions.

    “I learn about how much the books cost when I am in the class because there’s some professors who post how much they are,” Watkinson said. “But I haven’t dropped out because I find my ways around and maybe share with another person, buy it somewhere else, or rent it.”

    Kimberly’s story gathered by California Student Journalism Corps member Noah Lyons.





    Source link

  • Anticipating less state aid, CSU campuses start making cuts

    Anticipating less state aid, CSU campuses start making cuts


    Gov. Gavin Newsom announces his 2024-25 state budget proposal, including his plans to deal with a projected deficit in Sacramento on Jan. 10.. Credit: Brontë Wittpenn / San Francisco Chronicle / Polaris

    The Cal State System is anticipating more university-wide budget cuts as it faces expected cuts in state aid due to the state’s budget deficit for the 2024-25 budget year. 

    Already many campuses have started consolidating programs, freezing hiring, eliminating positions, deferring maintenance projects and restricting purchases. 

    At San Francisco State, President Lynn Mahoney said the campus has a hiring freeze and is starting a “voluntary separation program” this spring. It is also restructuring courses with actual enrollment. Last fall, the campus said it would need to cut about 125 positions this spring. 

    “The reductions have been and will continue to be painful,” Mahoney said. But the campus’ reductions and changes will “hopefully within about four years achieve enrollment and budget stability.” 

    In 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom made an agreement to give CSU annual 5% base funding increases over five years in exchange for increasing enrollment and improving graduation rates. However, with the state’s $38 billion projected budget deficit, this year the governor proposed delaying the $240.2 million increase for the 2024-25 budget year to the following year.

    While CSU would then get two years’ worth of increases, the system would have to borrow the money to get through next year. 

    The plan is still risky for the university system if the state’s budget situation worsens and it is unable to fulfill its commitment next year. 

    “The governor’s administration has supported and continues to signal future support for the CSU and its compact,” said Steve Relyea, executive vice chancellor and chief financial officer for the system. “But the proposed deferral raises significant concerns, and we must proceed with fiscal prudence and caution.” 

    The 23 campuses are already being asked to help cover a $138 million shortfall this year. The system is projected to be short at least $184 million more from 2024-26.

    Relyea said the system will move forward with cost-cutting strategies but still find support for compensating faculty and staff, protecting students’ education, improving the handling of Title IX complaints and other priorities. 

    Trustee Julia Lopez warned the board that CSU’s financial commitments may have put the system in a deeper financial hole than is being projected once it includes promises like improving Title IX and repatriating cultural and human remains to Indigenous people. The only revenue outside of state dollars is the tuition increase, and at least a third of that money will go to improving financial aid, she said. 

    “There’s a huge gap between what we have to pay for in commitments and the revenues we identified,” Lopez said. “The conversation in Sacramento is just beginning. We need to have our voices heard, and we need to be very clear.” 

    Trustee Jack McGrory said the message to the Legislature has to be what happens if CSU doesn’t receive funding. 

    “There are courses that are going to be cut, there will be employees that are going to have to be cut, and that’s the reality of what we’re dealing with,” he said. 





    Source link

  • CSU to expand student grants to cover full  tuition and living expenses

    CSU to expand student grants to cover full  tuition and living expenses


    Briana Munoz felt forced to take seven courses last semester to graduate on time and protect her financial aid status.

    Courtesy, Briana Munoz

    California State University trustees voted Wednesday to expand grants to fund the full cost of tuition and living expenses for students who show they need it to attend college. 

    The decision is the first step in a commitment the trustees made to students last fall that at least a third of revenue from a  6% annual tuition hike would go to financial aid. A more detailed plan will be presented to the board in May.

    Over the five-year period of the tuition increase, more than $280 million will go toward financial aid, increasing total funding to the State University Grant to $981 million by the 2028-29 school year.

    About 87% of Cal State students have their tuition fully or partially covered by grants and aid. Yet, some students still struggle with the cost of attending college due to living expenses such as food, housing and transportation. 

    Although there is regional variation of housing and food costs, total attendance costs statewide range from $22,000 to $32,000 annually. Nearly 40% of CSU students rely on loans to make up the difference between financial aid and actual costs.

    “The fact is tuition as the price of admission is not what keeps students away from CSU,” trustee Julia Lopez said. “Almost nine out of 10 students get some sort of tuition grant, but it’s other costs.” 

    The trustees favored giving students stipends, once their tuition costs are met, to cover their expenses, with the expectation that students would work less and graduate sooner. The State University Grant has traditionally been used to cover tuition. The stipends would be up to $5,000 and prioritize students with the greatest needs. 

    The trustees also voted to create consistent financial aid measurements and communications for students and their families after learning of significant differences across the 23 campuses, making it difficult for families to compare financial aid offers.

    But there is one immediate challenge CSU is facing in its financial aid improvement goals – the current national rollout of FAFSA simplification. The new, simplified Free Application for Federal Student Aid application was delayed from Oct.1 to Dec. 31. Colleges and universities received notification on Tuesday that they wouldn’t receive students’ financial aid information until March, squeezing students who generally have until May 1 to select a college.

    Nathan Evans, CSU’s vice chancellor for academic and student affairs, said the problems with the new FAFSA may be even worse for California.

     Students who are permanent residents or U.S. citizens, but who have an undocumented parent, are unable to complete the new application because the system requires a Social Security number for each parent or guardian. Parents without Social Security numbers are also locked out of contributing to existing FAFSA forms.

     Evans said leaders from CSU, the University of California, the community colleges, and the state’s independent colleges met earlier this week with the California Student Aid Commission to plan potential workarounds. 

    Another complication for CSU’s financial aid plans – the scheduled expansion of the Cal Grant, which aids the state’s low-income students – was expected to also begin in 2024-25. But the Legislature must first approve funding. CSU’s institutional aid numbers to students would depend on the amounts students receive in other federal and state aid. 

    “This is a year like none other,” Evans said. “There are some additional complexities this year, given that not only has the application been revamped, but calculations are changing … so there is a lot of unpredictability in the process.”





    Source link

  • Interactive Map: Most California high school students don’t take courses needed to apply to CSU or UC

    Interactive Map: Most California high school students don’t take courses needed to apply to CSU or UC


    This is a very important chart to raise awarement across schools, districts, and the state; however, I think it needs to be corrected that these are students who don’t pass these college-prep courses with a C or higher. It sends the wrong message to say that these “students don’t take courses needed to apply to CSU or UC” as I know that most students in many schools/districts do take these courses — they just … Read More

    This is a very important chart to raise awarement across schools, districts, and the state; however, I think it needs to be corrected that these are students who don’t pass these college-prep courses with a C or higher. It sends the wrong message to say that these “students don’t take courses needed to apply to CSU or UC” as I know that most students in many schools/districts do take these courses — they just don’t get a passing grade, which is another systemic issue that needs to be tackled.





    Source link

  • Legislature rejects ‘draconian’ cuts to UC and CSU, keeps TK-12 funding intact

    Legislature rejects ‘draconian’ cuts to UC and CSU, keeps TK-12 funding intact


    Students study in the main lobby of Storer Hall at the University of California, Davis.

    Credit: Gregory Urquiaga / UC Davis

    Top Takeaways
    • The Legislature has until June 15 to present their budget bill to the governor.
    • The proposal received praise from speakers grateful to see more funding for higher education.
    • Student teachers would receive $600 million in new funding in legislators’ plan.

    The Legislature is challenging Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed funding cuts to higher education for next year, while largely leaving intact the relatively more generous TK-12 spending the governor called for last month.

    “In many ways, it’s a tale of two budgets,” said Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, chair of the education subcommittee, who characterized Newsom’s higher-ed cuts as “draconian.”

    In 2025-26, schools and community colleges will receive a record $118.9 billion under Proposition 98, the state formula that determines the minimum portion of the state’s General Fund that must be spent on schools and community colleges. Laird credits the law for “protecting schools from the hard decisions of what is happening to the other side of the ledger with higher education.”

    Legislators would nix Newsom’s proposal to cut next year’s funding to the University of California and California State University by 3% and instead restore that money as part of a joint agreement of the Assembly and Senate. 

    The Assembly and the Senate published their version of a spending plan for education on Monday. The Legislature has until June 15 to present their budget bill to the governor, who then has until June 27 to sign, veto, or line-item veto the bill.

    Higher education

    The latest version of the 2025-26 budget may provide some relief to the state’s college students and public universities, who in January were told by Newsom to expect an 8% ongoing cut, a figure he revised down to 3% in May. Uncertainty regarding federal funding for higher education has compounded budget anxieties in California, as the Trump administration proposes reductions to programs like the Pell Grant and TRIO.

    “I think many of you recognize that we’re facing some pretty devastating budget challenges this year,” said Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, D-Pasadena, at a budget subcommittee hearing on June 10. “It has been incredibly, incredibly tough, and we are continuing to face ongoing challenges with potential cuts coming from the federal administration that will impact our higher education systems, and so we are going to be having ongoing conversations about the budget.”

    While the Legislature’s take on the budget may seem more generous, it is not without asterisks. By forgoing the 3% ongoing cut, the Assembly-Senate recommendations would reinstate $130 million to the 10-campus UC system and $144 million to CSU’s 23 campuses. However, the Legislature would defer those payments until July 2026, giving the universities permission to seek short-term loans from the General Fund to tide themselves over. 

    Additionally, lawmakers parted ways with the governor on a plan to defer a 5% increase in base funding from 2025-26 to 2026-27. The legislative proposal instead splits the deferral, offering the universities a 2% ongoing increase in 2026-27 and the remaining 3% in 2028-29.

    The legislative proposal was met with praise from many speakers attending the subcommittee hearing. Representatives from the California State University Employees Union, which represents non-faculty and student assistants, the Community College League of California and the Cal State Student Association all spoke in support of the Legislature’s version. 

    Eric Paredes, the legislative director of the California Faculty Association, which represents professors at CSU, thanked the Legislature for restoring funding to the university system. “We know it’s been a difficult budget year, and just are really appreciative of the Legislature’s ongoing commitment to higher education,” he said.

    The legislative proposal also alters a plan to defer nearly $532 million in community college apportionment funding from 2025-26 to 2026-27, instead offering a smaller deferral of $378 million. 

    To pare back the 2025-26 deferral, the Legislature’s plan would reappropriate $135 million from the 2024-25 part-time faculty insurance program. A representative of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, speaking at the budget subcommittee hearing opposed that move, calling the funds for the part-time health care pool “necessary.”

    The Legislature is also turning down a Newsom proposal to provide $25 million in one-time Prop. 98 dollars to the Career Passports initiative, which would help Californians compile digital portfolios summarizing the skills they’ve built through work and school.

    The Legislature’s plan, in addition, calls for a variety of one-time Prop. 98 funding for community colleges, including $100 million to support college enrollment growth in 2024-25, $44 million to fund part-time faculty office hours and $20 million for emergency financial aid for students.

    For the state’s public universities, the budget bill would set in-state enrollment targets, asking UC and CSU to enroll 1,510 and 7,152 more California undergraduates, respectively, in 2025-26. 

    The current draft of the budget bill would also require CSU campuses that have experienced “sustained enrollment declines” to submit turnaround plans to the chancellor’s office by the end of 2025, outlining how they will increase enrollment and any cost-saving strategies they have planned. The chancellor’s office, in turn, will summarize those plans in a report for the Legislature by March 2026.

    Finally, the Legislature’s proposal also includes a sweetener for the state’s financial aid budget by restoring funding for the Middle Class Scholarship program. It provides grant aid to more than 300,000 recipients and would receive $405 million in one-time funding in 2025-26 and $513 million ongoing.

    TK-12 spending

    A stipend for aspiring teachers is the single largest difference in spending between the governor and the Legislature’s version of the TK-12 budget for next year. California would go all-in on paying student teachers working on their credentials if the Legislature can persuade Newsom to build in the $600 million expense in the 2025-26 state budget. Newsom is proposing $100 million for what would be a new program.

    To make room for this and other changes, the Legislature would cut a one-time Student Support and Discretionary Block Grant that Newsom is proposing, from $1.7 billion to $500 million. 

    Brianna Bruns, a representative with the California County Superintendents, expressed concern, noting that this is an important funding source for “core educational services” in light of the expiration of one-time pandemic-related federal funds.

    Lawmakers are recommending two other significant changes that reflect their worry that state revenues may fall short of projections amid an uncertain economy. 

    It would put $650 million into the Prop. 98 rainy day fund that would otherwise be depleted, under the expectation that it will be needed next year. And in a proposal that districts and community colleges may welcome, they would substantially cut back on late payments from the state, called deferrals, under Newsom’s May budget revision. 

    The governor is proposing to push back $1.8 billion that the state normally would fund in June 2026 by a few weeks to July 2026, the first month of the new fiscal year; the Legislature would reduce the deferral to $846 million. As a debt that must be repaid to make districts fiscally sound, the Legislature would pay most of it back in 2026-27 and the rest in 2027-28.

    Advocates for paying teachers at the daily rate of a substitute teacher while they are student teaching say it is critical to encourage more people to become teachers. During a one-year graduate program to earn a teaching credential, candidates are required to spend 600 hours in the classroom. Many candidates earn no income while accumulating between $20,000 and $40,000 in debt, based on the program they attend, according to an analysis of a bill proposing the stipends before the Legislature. 

    “California is facing a persistent teacher shortage that disproportionately affects our most vulnerable students,” said Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, the bill’s sponsor. “Many aspiring teachers struggle to complete their required student teaching hours due to financial hardship.”

    The proposed $600 million in the budget would cover two years of stipends for all teachers seeking a credential, according to an analysis of the bill. 

    The Legislature would support Newsom’s $200 million to support reading instruction for K-2 teachers and $100 million for training teachers in literacy and math instruction, although that would be $400 million less than Newsom favors. The Legislature also rejected $42 million to establish a math professional learning partnership and a statewide math network.





    Source link

  • CSU campuses focus on new strategies to help students of color 

    CSU campuses focus on new strategies to help students of color 


    CSU’s Young Males of Color conference in October 2023.

    Credit: CSU Dominguez Hills

    Last year, Cal State campuses received some sobering details about the growing gaps in graduation rates between students of color and their white counterparts. Instead of decreasing, the graduation equity gaps between Black, Latino and Native or Indigenous students have been increasing. 

    But some campuses are targeting new dollars and deploying new strategies to specifically target students of color that will help increase graduation, persistence and retention. 

    CSU’s Young Males of Color Consortium, which is housed at Cal State Dominguez Hills, received $3.2 million from a group of organizations including Ballmer Group, College Futures Foundation, ECMC Foundation and Ichigo Foundation to create new programs that support men of color on Cal State campuses. Sixteen CSU campuses and their neighboring community colleges will deploy those programs with the goal of improving rates of transfer, retention and graduation for up to 800 students. The partnered universities and colleges will start working with up to 40 young men each to pilot the new strategies.

    The consortium, which started in 2017, has the goal of working across campuses to share information and data, and find solutions to help CSU’s Black and brown men. 

    The main challenge the consortium realized it needed to tackle was “institutional complacency” because many campuses failed to have the right data on students of color, or limited their investment in improving their academic performance, said William Franklin, vice president of student affairs for the Dominguez Hills campus.

    Last year, during CSU’s Graduation Initiative 2025 event, new data revealed the graduation gap between Black, Latino and Native American students and their peers increased by 1 point to a 13% difference. The 2023 six-year graduation rate for Black students, for example, is at 47% but 62% for all students. 

    The rates on the Dominguez Hills campus, for example, are lower for Black and Latino men. The six-year rate for Black men is 36.4% and 38.9% for Latino men on the campus. Data for Native American and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander students was not available. 

    “We need to hire full-time folks and we need to really give them training,” Franklin said. “We need to begin to connect with our institutional research office and understand our data better. It doesn’t necessarily mean we need more money, but we do need to spend the money that we have differently in order to ensure that those male of color programs get the kind of support they need.” 

    With the new funding, the campuses will work together to assess and evaluate instructors and staff, while also providing professional development opportunities. The campuses would also work with their community college partners to better assist them in transferring more Black and brown students to the universities.

    Members of the consortium have already visited other universities outside of California that have seen success in improving graduation rates for Black and Latino students such as Georgia State University, Urban Prep Academies in Chicago and the University of Texas at Austin, Franklin said. 

    And while they’re unsure which strategies will work best for Cal State students, figuring it out is part of the funding. 

    “Our funders have also given us an opportunity to take the funding they’ve given us to provide it as seed money for campuses to put some innovative programs and strategies in place,” Franklin said. “Fail fast or succeed fast, and learn what they need to do in order to scale those things that work.” 

    Black Honors College

    Sacramento State is also trying something new to help not only the Black students on its campuses but across the system. 

    This fall, the university will debut the country’s first Black Honors College. Sac State has one of the CSU’s largest populations of Black students, and low graduation rates. The six-year rate for all Black students is about 45%. 

    “We’re the No. 1 institution serving Black students and we’re in the bottom third when it comes to graduation rates,” Sac State President Luke Wood said. “Our 75-year history has shown that what we’re doing is not working. I don’t just speak about that from the perspective of being president here, but I was a student here at Sac State. I got my bachelor’s degree here. I got my master’s degree here, and many of the people who are my contemporaries never graduated because the institution is not designed to support Black students.” 

    Sac State officials also looked outside of California for solutions, particularly at historically Black colleges and universities where graduation rates are much higher. 

    “We’re creating an institution within the institution so students have a standalone experience with their own curriculum, their own faculty, their staff, their space,” Wood said. 

    The college would be open to students of all majors, but the first two years of curriculum would have an African-American focus. For example, political science or statistics classes would have a unique focus on Black politics, issues and community. 

    Wood said the idea is built on research that shows creating a “family-like environment” and offering a curriculum relevant to students’ lives and experiences improves their academic success. 

    The new college will have 6,000-square feet of dedicated space with its own faculty, dean, counselors, academic advisers, support staff and outreach. But the ultimate goal is to see more Black Honors Colleges appear statewide and nationally, despite the conservative attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion happening in other states. 

    But Wood anticipates more Black Honors Colleges appearing on community college campuses, some of which have already contacted Sac State for guidance or information, with the potential to establish a transfer relationship with the university. 

    “We’re going to grow this Honors College pretty extensively,” he said. “Our goal right now is 500 or 600, but when we can get more resources, our goal is to get to a thousand students.”

    NOTE: EdSource receives funding from several foundations, including the College Futures Foundation and ECMC Foundation. EdSource maintains sole editorial control over the content of its coverage.





    Source link

  • Newsom again pledges to spare cuts for TK-12 and community colleges, but not for CSU and UC

    Newsom again pledges to spare cuts for TK-12 and community colleges, but not for CSU and UC


    Gov. Gavin Newsom unveils his revised 2024-25 state budget during a news conference in Sacramento on May 10, 2024.

    Credit: AP Photo / Rich Pedroncelli

    Despite a further deterioration in state revenues, Gov. Gavin Newsom again pledged Friday to protect ongoing funding and the large-scale initiatives for TK-12 schools that he has set in motion.

    “I just don’t want to see education cuts,” Newsom said during a news conference on the revision to the proposed 2024-25 state budget he presented in January. “Right now, I want to see us preserve the progress we have made on community schools, on preschool, on after-school-for-all, summer school — all the work we’ve been doing.”

    Newsom’s comment during a two-hour session with reporters reflected the challenge of writing annual budgets subject to volatile revenue fluctuations dependent on the incomes of the top 1% of earners. Receipts from capital gains taxes that soared to $349 billion in 2021-22 dropped to $137 billion in 2023-24. The current fiscal year ends June 30.

    As a result of the projected shortfall, other state operations could face additional cuts. Newsom didn’t make the same promise he made for schools to higher education, leaving California State University system officials on edge. In a statement, CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia said she was “deeply concerned” about a revised state budget that would grant no increase next year, then a 2% increase in 2025-26, instead of a 10% increase over two years as promised in January.   

    “As the institution that educates the evolving workforce of California, this budget places us in a position of making difficult decisions,” Garcia said.

    It was not clear whether the University of California would face similar cuts, although Newsom typically treats both systems similarly. UC officials would not comment on the issue. In a statement Friday, UC President Michael Drake said that the system is hoping to “finalize a budget that sustains the University’s research, public service, and education mission.”  

    The summary of revenue reductions and spending cuts Newsom released lacked the details that usually accompany a May budget revision; however, more information is expected by Tuesday, the deadline for statutory budget language. 

    Some TK-12 advocates expressed relief, nonetheless. 

    “Given the magnitude of the fiscal crisis, that the governor could put together a budget that largely protects K-12 is remarkable,” said education consultant Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors.

    Derick Lennox, senior director of governmental relations and legal affairs with the California County Superintendents, was more cautious. “We can appreciate the governor’s commitment to hold schools harmless to the extent he can, but so much will all depend on the details for Proposition 98 and what is available,” he said, referring to the portion of the general fund that determines funding for TK-12 schools and community colleges. 

    Newsom said general fund revenues were expected to decline an additional $7 billion for a total of $27.6 billion for the three-year period from 2022-23 through 2024-25. The total deficit would be nearly twice as big, but the Legislature has made a combination of cuts, savings, and deferred spending since January.

    The shortfall for TK-12 and community colleges, due to lower Proposition 98 funding, would be about $4.2 billion. Although details are scant, Newsom would make up for it mostly by emptying nearly all the remaining $9 billion rainy day fund for schools and community colleges.

    Newsom said the average TK-12 per-student funding for 2024-25 would be $17,502 — $151 per student less than proposed in January. Despite that, funding would include a 1% cost of living increase, a smidge higher than in January. 

    The May revision lists about $1 billion in cuts for early education through high school. Most of the programs are funded by the general fund, not Proposition 98. It would preserve ongoing funding for the expanded transitional kindergarten program for 4-year-olds and long-awaited pay raises for child care providers.

    Cuts would include:

    • $425 million to the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative out of a $4 billion investment, which Newsom said would reflect directing more funding to wellness centers at school sites. Carl Pinkston of the Black Parallel School Board expressed concern. “In the aftermath of the pandemic, many students continue to display signs of trauma, adversely affecting their academic performance and overall well-being,” he said. The initiative “is a critical program that champions equity, aiming to improve behavioral health outcomes for children and youth.”  
    • Delayed funding for additional slots for state-funded child care. Instead of funding 146,000 as planned, the state will continue funding 119,000 new slots funded so far. “Delaying access to child care for the next two years to our youngest Californians is deeply troubling,” said Mary Ignatius, executive director of Parent Voices CA, an advocacy group. “Their childhoods do not pause. Their undiagnosed speech or other developmental delays will make it harder for them two years from now.” 
    • Elimination of $550 million in facilities funding for preschools, transitional kindergarten and full-day kindergarten programs. Newsom suggested funding could be included in a statewide school facilities bond. He said Friday that negotiations were continuing with legislative leaders for a bond on the statewide ballot in November.
    • A cut of $60.2 million to the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, which pays up to $20,000 to teacher candidates enrolled in credential programs who commit to working for years in priority schools. 
    • Elimination of $48 million in 2025-26 and $98 million in 2026-27 for increased payments for state preschools that serve additional students with disabilities.  
    • A cut of all but $100 million in ongoing funding for the Middle Class Scholarship Program, which previously received more than $600 million annually. In past years, more than 300,000 students across UC and CSU have received scholarships, which are available to students whose families earn up to $217,000. 

    Criticism of a key fix to the shortfall

    Newsom’s solution for minimizing cuts to schools and community colleges would rely on a controversial maneuver. He would fill in the biggest piece of the shortfall — $8 billion in an unanticipated drop in Proposition 98 revenue in 2022-23 — by treating it as an overpayment of the state’s funding obligation.  Since schools and community colleges have already spent the money, he’d fill in the gap by cutting the general fund — but not until 2028-29, when the state’s revenue picture presumably would have improved. Since Newsom announced the idea in January, the repayment obligation has grown to $8.8 billion.

    An accounting move of that magnitude hasn‘t been done before. The Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) has questioned the tactic, and so did the California School Boards Association in a statement Friday in which it implied it might sue.

    The association’s logic reflects the complexity of the Proposition 98 formula for determining funding. The school boards association asserts that the 2022-23 funding level was not a voluntary overpayment but rather a constitutional obligation on which subsequent years’ levels of funding are set.

    “This accounting gimmick would lower the baseline for calculating education funding in subsequent years, subjecting California schools to lower revenue for the foreseeable future,” school boards association President Albert Gonzalez said. “This sets a terrible precedent that potentially destabilizes education funding and undermines the voters’ intent when they passed Proposition 98 more than 35 years ago.”

    The California Department of Finance has insisted that the solution is legal. However, on Friday, Newsom did acknowledge that Proposition 98 is complicated.

    “You need not only a Ph.D., but a physics degree, an engineering degree and everything else to unpack its complexities,” he said.





    Source link

  • CSU reports only indirect investments in Israel; no plans to divest

    CSU reports only indirect investments in Israel; no plans to divest


    Hundreds of San Diego State students protest in support of Palestinians in April.

    Credit: Jazlyn Dieguez / EdSource

    The California State University system disclosed on Tuesday that it does not have direct investments in any companies that might profit from Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories and the war in Gaza but has a small amount of indirect holdings through mutual funds.

    The disclosure was made in response to demands by pro-Palestinian student and faculty protests on campuses for CSU to divest from any such companies.

    However, CSU officials again said they will not sell off any of that indirect investment, echoing the position of the University of California. “The CSU does not intend to alter existing investment policies related to Israel,” according to a statement on the CSU website.

    The 23-campus university system had disclosed in April it does not invest in “direct stocks or equities in any companies,” regardless of location. Officials on Tuesday offered additional details about indirect investments in Israel-based firms via holdings in mutual funds that include equities and corporate bonds. Those total $3.2 million, or 0.04%, of all CSU investments, according to a report discussed during Tuesday’s systemwide board of trustees meeting.

    A list of funds CSU invests in was included in a report to the trustees. However, that did not include holdings that individual campuses and related foundations might own separately from the central system. A portal on the university system’s website details revenue and other financial details on each campus.

    A newly published page on CSU’s website says: “Consistent with their legal structures, CSU investments and auxiliary investments are distinct from one another.”

    But given a recent controversy at Sonoma State and the retirement of its president over his promise to discuss possible divestment from firms with ties to Israel, it seems unlikely that any campus would take such an action now.

    Students have also called on the university to divest from all defense and aerospace investments, but officials have refused to do so. CSU has direct ownership of $20.8 million in such bonds and some exposure via mutual funds, totaling $30.6 million of the system’s investments. In total, defense and aerospace investments make up 0.62% of the CSU system’s central investment portfolio.

    CSU Chancellor Mildred García, during her address to the board, made no direct mention of the calls for divestment. But she did urge any protests to be peaceful and to not harm other members of the CSU communities. “The CSU stands unequivocally against acts of hatred, violence, injustice, discrimination, and more specifically antisemitism and Islamophobia,” Garcia said.

    University campuses nationwide have struggled with how to handle protests in recent weeks, actions mainly against Israel’s invasion of Gaza. Israel’s bombardment of the Hamas-controlled Gaza followed the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, which killed about 1,200 people and resulted in hundreds of hostages being taken. Since then, more than 35,000 people in Gaza have been killed, mostly civilians, and thousands more have been injured, according to Palestinian health authorities.

    The new CSU webpage also details the university’s response to common questions regarding investments in both Israel and the defense and aerospace industries. But one trustee questioned the focus on Israel.

    “I’m not comfortable singling out Israel on a website without singling out Sudan and Russia,” said trustee Leslie Gilbert-Lurie, regarding the information on the webpage. “I’m on the side of human rights and following countries that follow international human rights law.”

    Among the individual CSU campuses, Sacramento State has disclosed that it has no direct investments in assets that might violate its policies forbidding “direct investments in corporations and funds that profit from genocide, ethnic cleansing and activities that violate fundamental human rights,” according to a statement on the university’s website. Reporting by The Sacramento Bee found that Sacramento State “has more $150 million in indirect investments that would be subject for review” under its policy.

    Most recently, Sonoma State University President Mike Lee was disciplined for agreeing to some terms proposed by student protesters on his campus. One such term was “to determine a course of action leading to divestment strategies that include seeking ethical alternatives” to companies with ties to Israel.

    The system’s chancellor, García, then said Lee would be placed on administrative leave for “insubordination and the consequences it has brought upon the system” and acting “without the appropriate approvals.”

    Lee has since apologized and announced his retirement. “In my attempt to find agreement with one group of students, I marginalized other members of our student population and community,” he wrote in a memo last week. “I realize the harm that this has caused, and I take full ownership of it. I deeply regret the unintended consequences of my actions.”





    Source link