Brown and Napolitano must put students first

Just as many students (and their parents) are anxiously awaiting acceptance packages from colleges, the president of the University of California appears to be threatening to keep at least a few deserving applicants out of our state’s most prestigious public universities.

Janet Napolitano told an Assembly budget subcommittee Tuesday that unless the state increases funding beyond the 4 percent Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed for next year, the university will be forced to cap in-state admissions at last year’s levels and add 2,000 new slots for out-of-state students. That’s on top of a planned 5 percent tuition increase already announced.

It’s also in open defiance of Brown, whose proposed increase in UC funding was based on having no increase in out-of-state enrollment.

Why are they arguing over out-of-state students, who already make up about 20percent of UC admissions overall and 30percent at UC Berkeley and UCLA? One reason is that non-residents pay a premium of about $23,000 per year to attend a UC, and that helps subsidize the tuition and financial aid for in-state students. Letting more into the UC is one of the few ways the university can make up for the long slide in state funding – which has continued despite the priority most Californians put on higher education.

Many parents now fear an out-of-state student will get their child’s slot on a UC campus. Taxpayers won’t like that.

Napolitano is wrong to make bargaining chips out of students.

If Brown believes there are any silver bullets – three-year degrees or increased online classes – capable of making up the budget shortfall, he’s wrong.

Brown is a consummate politician. Napolitano, a former governor of Arizona, is almost as skilled. Surely there’s a compromise in this latest smackdown between two incredibly hard-nosed politicians.

First, we are convinced the governor can find some extra money for higher education in a $164 billion state budget. Second, Napolitano could – and should – be able to find substantial savings we are convinced exist by initiating a thorough and clear-eyed review of the UC system’s management.

Rethinking various support systems – from campus health care to marketing to the UC’s unnecessary role in approving high school curriculum – could yield significant savings. Beyond that, systems that aren’t working to students’ satisfaction (and there are several) could be put on the road to recovery.

If Napolitano makes a sincere effort, perhaps Brown could be convinced to put his considerable political capital behind a drive for excellence.

If they can’t, both will be responsible for dashing the long-held dream of a UC education for thousands of students just graduating from high school or ready to transfer from a community college. If those dreams die, don’t ask those students – or their parents – to support a university system that disappointed them. And most will blame Napolitano.

Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen speaks for many in saying: “UC needs to knock off the cheap negotiating tactics ... It is not helpful for UC to act like a stubborn bully during this process.”

Added Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego: “UC’s job is to educate California students, not wait-list them.”

That’s true, but it’s also the UC’s job is to educate them well. We can do both.

This story was originally published March 5, 2015 at 11:10 PM with the headline "Brown and Napolitano must put students first."