The ambitious verve that sold Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to
California’s voters is going up in flames: No amount of ambition can overcome
the state’s $14-billion deficit. Now that Sacramento’s lawmakers are
reconciling their dreams with harsh fiscal realities, officials from the
University of California must do the same with the intense financial scrutiny.
This week’s UC Board of Regents meeting should be the site of that wake-up
attitude.

Short $400 million in expected state funding, the
university’s regents are now charged with the heady task of trimming financial
fat. The problem is that the system is already dead skinny from year after year
of shrinking state support. Students themselves have felt the pinch: bigger
classes, less programs, less services and higher fees.

Amid this clamor, UC President Robert C. Dynes is presenting
his Long-Range Plan for the system, a collection of initiatives and goals that
will set the groundwork for advancement. Academic growth is one overarching
initiative, which Dynes proposes should be achieved by upping faculty salaries
to market-competitive levels. The problem? It will cost $263 million over four
years. The same problem goes for Dynes’ hope to see technology infrastructure
supported by state finances, a move with a one-time pricetag of over $300
million in improvements.

The plan, presented Jan. 15 at the regents’ meeting, will
require major readjustments that take the state’s newfound crisis into
consideration.

So where should this fat be cut from? A heavy money-spender
is the university’s collection of academic preparation programs, which form its
main outreach tool. The Legislature blocked Schwarzenegger’s move to cut the
programs by $19.3 million; it’s a repeated move from years past, when he
demanded the university report on the effectiveness of outreach.

This year sees a complete turnaround, with outreach
receiving more money and less oversight (the governor vetoed language that
would have demanded such accountability, though he encourages it). While
accessibility is a major concern for the state’s universities, especially in
today’s era of middle-class malaise, this fiscally tight year marks the worst
time to give outreach proponents free reign over their programs. Instead, the
university needs to scrutinize its most efficient outreach tools, and funnel
more money toward those efforts.

Many research projects have now been deemed extraneous: the
Legislature rejected a proposal to expand funding to the system’s Institutes
for Science and Innovation, while Schwarzenegger vetoed $1.5 million for
agricultural research and $1.5 million for oceanographic research.

While it is heartbreaking to see such hallmark UC projects
be downsized, it is necessary to preserve the core needs that should be
addressed first: Enrollment growth must be sustained, ensuring accessibility
for incoming students.

At the same time, fees must remain at a reasonable level, or
the university will see an exodus of students fleeing the system for an
education that is worth its cost — the picture is sadly moving the other way.