CHANCELLOR REED GIVES AWAY CSU MONEY - TELL HIM WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT
CFA HEADLINES
October 27, 2008 - SPECIAL EDITION FROM CFA
CHANCELLOR REED GIVES AWAY CSU MONEY -
TELL HIM WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT
Dear Colleagues & Friends,
We are deeply disappointed to tell you that the sudden funding cut of $31.3 million to the CSU announced last week turns out to be, not a requirement, but rather a voluntary give back to the governor by CSU Chancellor Charles Reed.
Correspondence between Chancellor Reed and the governor’s Dept. of Finance reveals that the Chancellor understands that he is making a voluntary cut.
CHANCELLOR GIVES GOV CSU’S MONEY
The California Faculty Association’s officers are troubled by the Chancellor’s unilateral decision to give up this funding, especially in light of the good work done by the entire CSU community and its supporters through the Alliance for the CSU this year.
We worked hard to mitigate as much damage to the university as possible in this difficult economic period and we met with some success. The Alliance won $97.6 million for the CSU.
The Chancellor’s action gives back one third of that money.
He did so without even a word of public protest on behalf of the state university system, of which he is the chief executive.
In a communication to “All CSU Employees” last week, the Chancellor misled the campus community by incorrectly reporting the CSU is among the agencies that “need to cut a total of $390 million from the current budget.”
As the attached documents show, the CSU is not covered by the order requiring this cut. Do not be deceived by misinformation: The Chancellor's give-back of $31.3 million is voluntary — and he knows it.
CRISIS IS TIME TO FUND, NOT CUT, HIGHER ED
Chancellor Reed also knows this cut is exactly the wrong thing to do for California, especially in an economic crisis.
Public higher education helps to solve financial crises because it prepares people for better paying jobs in sectors that revitalize the economy. College graduates pay more taxes, rely less on social services, and play a bigger role in solving society’s problems.
We must remind Chancellor Reed that all of us must drastically revise our thinking about public higher ed funding, including him.
He, first and foremost, must stand strong for policy that will help to end the financial crisis, and not give in to cuts that make things worse.
TELL THE CHANCELLOR TO GET THE MONEY BACK
CFA calls on the Chancellor to
• rescind his give back of $31.3 million, and
• take a strong stance in defense of CSU funding
Enough damage was done in the budget bill adopted in September -- $215 million cut from the CSU -- combined with another steep student fee increase while closing the doors on 10,000 potential students.
Please join us in sending a fax to Chancellor Reed and the CSU Trustees with this message.
To send an automatic fax
• go to the CFA Web Site at http://calfac.org/ and click on “CFA Action Center,” or
• go to http://capwiz.com/calfac/state/main/?state=CA
BACKGROUND
At http://www.calfac.org/Oct08cuts.html you will find these documents that support the facts:
• Executive Order S-09-08: This was the governor’s executive order last July 31, 2008, addressing spending during the state budget stalemate. In it, the governor acknowledged he does not have “direct authority” over the CSU.
• CSU News Release “CSU works to ensure employees receive paychecks,” July 25, 2008: In this news release, Chancellor Reed was referenced saying, “CSU is not under direct executive authority and subject to the requirement” to enact the governor’s order.
• Office of the Governor (Dept. of Finance) Memo, October 9, 2008: Extends the above Executive Order S-09-08 to achieve another $50 million in savings from agencies that receive money from the state’s general fund.
• AB 88 (Budget) Chapter 269, Statutes of 2008: This is the section of the budget bill, known as “control language,” in which the legislature explains its intent regarding implementation of the adopted budget. It gives the governor authority to cut another $50 million without getting additional approval from the legislature.
• Dept. of Finance letter to Chancellor Reed, October 20, 2008: Notes an ongoing conversation with the Chancellor over the new additional cut of $31.3 million to the CSU.
• Office of the CSU Chancellor letter to governor’s Dept. of Finance, October 21, 2008: The Chancellor chooses the “’alternative compliance’ approach” to the cut, meaning he knows that executive order cannot force him to make the cut. He states, “We are committed and able to attain $31,314,000 of savings requested by the (governor’s) Administration” and that the cut can be made “without directly affecting instructional programs and educational services.”
• Chancellor’s Communication – October 23, 2008: Email to all CSU employees stating that “we have been informed by the state Department of Finance that state agencies and departments receiving General Funds need to cut a total of an additional “390 million from the current budget. For the CSU, this amounts to $31.3 million…” The email fails to indicate this is a voluntary cut on the part of the Chancellor and overstates the size of the governor’s cut.
October 27, 2008 - SPECIAL EDITION FROM CFA
CHANCELLOR REED GIVES AWAY CSU MONEY -
TELL HIM WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT
Dear Colleagues & Friends,
We are deeply disappointed to tell you that the sudden funding cut of $31.3 million to the CSU announced last week turns out to be, not a requirement, but rather a voluntary give back to the governor by CSU Chancellor Charles Reed.
Correspondence between Chancellor Reed and the governor’s Dept. of Finance reveals that the Chancellor understands that he is making a voluntary cut.
CHANCELLOR GIVES GOV CSU’S MONEY
The California Faculty Association’s officers are troubled by the Chancellor’s unilateral decision to give up this funding, especially in light of the good work done by the entire CSU community and its supporters through the Alliance for the CSU this year.
We worked hard to mitigate as much damage to the university as possible in this difficult economic period and we met with some success. The Alliance won $97.6 million for the CSU.
The Chancellor’s action gives back one third of that money.
He did so without even a word of public protest on behalf of the state university system, of which he is the chief executive.
In a communication to “All CSU Employees” last week, the Chancellor misled the campus community by incorrectly reporting the CSU is among the agencies that “need to cut a total of $390 million from the current budget.”
As the attached documents show, the CSU is not covered by the order requiring this cut. Do not be deceived by misinformation: The Chancellor's give-back of $31.3 million is voluntary — and he knows it.
CRISIS IS TIME TO FUND, NOT CUT, HIGHER ED
Chancellor Reed also knows this cut is exactly the wrong thing to do for California, especially in an economic crisis.
Public higher education helps to solve financial crises because it prepares people for better paying jobs in sectors that revitalize the economy. College graduates pay more taxes, rely less on social services, and play a bigger role in solving society’s problems.
We must remind Chancellor Reed that all of us must drastically revise our thinking about public higher ed funding, including him.
He, first and foremost, must stand strong for policy that will help to end the financial crisis, and not give in to cuts that make things worse.
TELL THE CHANCELLOR TO GET THE MONEY BACK
CFA calls on the Chancellor to
• rescind his give back of $31.3 million, and
• take a strong stance in defense of CSU funding
Enough damage was done in the budget bill adopted in September -- $215 million cut from the CSU -- combined with another steep student fee increase while closing the doors on 10,000 potential students.
Please join us in sending a fax to Chancellor Reed and the CSU Trustees with this message.
To send an automatic fax
• go to the CFA Web Site at http://calfac.org/ and click on “CFA Action Center,” or
• go to http://capwiz.com/calfac/state/main/?state=CA
BACKGROUND
At http://www.calfac.org/Oct08cuts.html you will find these documents that support the facts:
• Executive Order S-09-08: This was the governor’s executive order last July 31, 2008, addressing spending during the state budget stalemate. In it, the governor acknowledged he does not have “direct authority” over the CSU.
• CSU News Release “CSU works to ensure employees receive paychecks,” July 25, 2008: In this news release, Chancellor Reed was referenced saying, “CSU is not under direct executive authority and subject to the requirement” to enact the governor’s order.
• Office of the Governor (Dept. of Finance) Memo, October 9, 2008: Extends the above Executive Order S-09-08 to achieve another $50 million in savings from agencies that receive money from the state’s general fund.
• AB 88 (Budget) Chapter 269, Statutes of 2008: This is the section of the budget bill, known as “control language,” in which the legislature explains its intent regarding implementation of the adopted budget. It gives the governor authority to cut another $50 million without getting additional approval from the legislature.
• Dept. of Finance letter to Chancellor Reed, October 20, 2008: Notes an ongoing conversation with the Chancellor over the new additional cut of $31.3 million to the CSU.
• Office of the CSU Chancellor letter to governor’s Dept. of Finance, October 21, 2008: The Chancellor chooses the “’alternative compliance’ approach” to the cut, meaning he knows that executive order cannot force him to make the cut. He states, “We are committed and able to attain $31,314,000 of savings requested by the (governor’s) Administration” and that the cut can be made “without directly affecting instructional programs and educational services.”
• Chancellor’s Communication – October 23, 2008: Email to all CSU employees stating that “we have been informed by the state Department of Finance that state agencies and departments receiving General Funds need to cut a total of an additional “390 million from the current budget. For the CSU, this amounts to $31.3 million…” The email fails to indicate this is a voluntary cut on the part of the Chancellor and overstates the size of the governor’s cut.
Comments