<p>CSU SBAC Budget Meeting May 23, 2012</p><p>>> GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE</p><p>HAS THEIR CELL PHONES OFF. IF WE CAN MINIMIZE THE PAPER</p><p>MOVEMENT. THESE MICS ARE EXTREMELY SENSITIVE. WE HAVE A</p><p>MINUTE TO GO. I'M JENNIFER WICKS BY THE WAY. WELCOME.</p><p>>> JENNIFER I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PASS YOU THE</p><p>PRESENTER BALL NOW.</p><p>>> OKAY. I SHOW RIGHT AT 10:30 YOU READY? LADIES AND</p><p>GENTLEMEN THANK YOU FOR STANDING BY, WELCOME TO TODAY'S WEB</p><p>CAST. DURING THE PRESENTATION ALL PARTICIPANTS WILL BE IN A</p><p>LISTEN ONLY MODE. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I LIKE TO GO OVER A FEW</p><p>TOOLS THROUGHOUT TODAY'S WEB SEMINAR. TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN</p><p>QUESTION, LOCATE Q AND A PANEL ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF</p><p>YOUR SCREEN. WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO ASK QUESTIONS AT ANY TIME</p><p>DURING THE PRESENTATION. CLOSED CAPTION IS AVAILABLE AND IS</p><p>LOCATED IN THE RIGHT BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER OF YOUR SCREEN.</p><p>SOUND FOR TODAY'S EVENT IS BROUGHT TO YOU VIA AUDIO</p><p>BROADCAST. YOU EXPERIENCE ANY CHALLENGES WITH THE AUDIO</p><p>BROADCAST YOU CAN STOP AND RESTART YOUR AUDIO STREAM OR</p><p>SIMPLY DIAL INTO THE TELECONFERENCE. YOUR MODERATOR FOR</p><p>TODAY IS JENNIFER WICKS. JENNIFER, PLEASE GO AHEAD.</p><p>>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS</p><p>JENNIFER WICKS. WE'RE HAPPY YOU COULD JOIN US THIS MORNING</p><p>FOR THIS SYSTEMWIDE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING. AS</p><p>AARON MENTIONED, THE Q AND A WINDOW IS AVAILABLE. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THE Q AND A SESSION AT THE VERY END. THE</p><p>RECORDING WILL BE AVAILABLE. WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT IN THE</p><p>CHAT POD FOR YOU. I’d LIKE TO INTRODUCE DR. BENJAMIN</p><p>QUILLIAN.</p><p>>> THANK YOU. THIS IS REGULARLY SCHEDULED SYSTEMWIDE</p><p>BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING. HOWEVER, MANY OF YOU</p><p>KNOW THAT I GAVE A PRESENTATION ALONG WITH GAIL BROOKS,</p><p>ROBERT TURNAGE AND EPHRAIM SMITH, DISCUSSING AT OUR LAST</p><p>BOARD MEETING A NUMBER OF STRATEGIES THAT WE COULD USE OR</p><p>CONSIDER TO ADDRESS THE POSSIBILITY OF A $200 MILLION</p><p>TRIGGER, WHICH WAS A REDUCTION IN OUR BUDGET THAT MAY HAPPEN</p><p>IF THE GOVERNOR'S TAX INITIATIVE ISN'T PASSED. DURING THAT</p><p>PRESENTATION, OR AFTER THAT PRESENTATION, THE BOARD THOUGHT</p><p>IT WOULD BE A VERY GOOD IDEA IF WE USE THIS GROUP AND ALSO</p><p>SOLICIT INPUT BROADLY FROM OUR CAMPUSES ABOUT THOSE IDEAS</p><p>AND ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE. THIS MEETING</p><p>IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WE ARE UNDER LIGHTING. WE HAVE</p><p>LIGHTS AROUND AND CAMERAS AND SO FORTH AND WEB CASTING THIS</p><p>AS YOU KNOW SO OUR BROAD CONSTITUENTS CAN PARTICIPATE. WITH</p><p>THAT, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE ATTENDANCE. JEN I I'M GOING</p><p>TO ASK YOU TO TAKE THE ROLL OF THE SBAC MEMBERS.</p><p>>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE ROLL</p><p>CALL. IF YOU’D LET ME KNOW WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED. DR. RUBEN</p><p>ARMINANA. MR. GARY ASHLEY, MS. GAIL BROOKS, MR. PAT GANTT</p><p>PRESIDENT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, DIANNE HARRISON, PRESIDENT CSU MONTEREY BAY, MR. GUY HESTON REPRESENTATIVE</p><p>FROM THE CSU ALUMNI COUNCIL, TOM McCARRON, CSU NORTHRIDGE,</p><p>DR. JAMES POSTMA, FACULTY MEMBER AT CSU CHICO., DR.</p><p>POSTMA, DO YOU HAVE OTHER ATTENDEES YOU LIKE TO ANNOUNCE?</p><p>>> NO.</p><p>>> MR. MICHAEL QUIBUYEN? LOOKS LIKE HE'S NOT PRESENT</p><p>YET. DR. BENJAMIN QUILLIAN, WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER ON THAT.</p><p>JAMES ROSSER, PRESIDENT CSU LOS ANGELES, DR. EPHRAIM SMITH,</p><p>EXECUTIVE VICE CHANCELLOR AND CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER,</p><p>DR. ELOISE STIGLITZ, DR. LILLIAN TAIZ, FACULTY MEMBER AT CSU</p><p>LOS ANGELES, DR. ASHISH VAIDYA, CSU LOS ANGELES, MR. GREGORY</p><p>WASHINGTON PRESIDENT CALIFORNIA STUDENT ASSOCIATION,</p><p>DR. DARLENE YEE-MELICHAR, ACADEMIC SENATE CSU, MR. BILL</p><p>CANDELLA, SYSTEMWIDE LABOR AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONS,</p><p>DR. MARSHA HIRANO-NAKANISHI ASSISTANT VICE CHANCELLOR,</p><p>ACADEMIC RESEARCH AND RESOURCES. SHE'S LISTENING IN THIS</p><p>MORNING, OK. DR. DAVID HOOD BUDGET SPECIALIST, ACADEMIC SENATE</p><p>CSU LONG BEACH, -- MR. KEVIN LAXER CALIFORNIA STATE</p><p>UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES UNION, MS. PATRICIA LEE GENERAL</p><p>MANAGER, CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION, MS. OLGALILIA</p><p>RAMIREZ, MS. AMEE SHRECK, MR. PRAVEEN SONI, ACADEMIC SENATE</p><p>CSU, MS. SARAH VAGTS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CALIFORNIA</p><p>STATE UNIT ASSOCIATION, MR. RODNEY RIDEAU BUDGET DIRECTOR,</p><p>MR. ROBERT TURNAGE ASSISTANT VICE CHANCELLOR FOR BUDGET.</p><p>MS. KAREN YELVERTON-ZAMARRIPA ASSISTANT VICE CHANCELLOR, ADVOCACY AND STATE RELATIONS, WE HAD TWO OTHER FOLKS FROM</p><p>THE ACADEMIC PROFESSIONAL OF CALIFORNIA WHO ARE --</p><p>>> THEY'RE NOT PRESENT.</p><p>>> THEY'RE NOT PRESENT AT THIS MOMENT. WITH THAT, I'LL</p><p>TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU BEN.</p><p>>> THANK YOU JEN. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS TO</p><p>DISCUSS THE MAY REVISE. YOU ARE AWARE EARLIER IN MONTH, THE</p><p>GOVERNOR PROVIDED US WITH THE REVISION IN HIS BUDGET AND WE</p><p>WERE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I PRESENTED THE IMPLICATION</p><p>$200 MILLION TRIGGER THAT COULD BE PULLED. THAT TRIGGER HAS</p><p>INCREASED A BIT. ROBERT I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO UPDATE US</p><p>ON THE MAY REVISE.</p><p>>> THANK YOU. SINCE WE HAD THE DISCUSSION IN FRONT OF</p><p>THE BOARD THE GOVERNOR'S MAY REVISION COME AND RECASTLE</p><p>STAGE IN THE STATE CAPITAL HOPEFUL THE GAME FOR THE STATE</p><p>BUDGET. THE OVER ALL PROBLEM THAT THE STATE IS FACING HAS</p><p>GROWN FROM WHAT THE GOVERNOR ESTIMATED IN JANUARY WHEN HE</p><p>RELEASED HIS ORIGINAL BUDGET PROPOSAL. THE DEFICIT HAS</p><p>GROWN ACCORDING TO HIS CALCULATIONS FROM $9.2 BILLION IN</p><p>JANUARY TO $15.7 BILLION NOW. THAT'S $15.7 BILLION DOES NOT</p><p>COUNT THE GOVERNOR'S INTENTION TO CREATE A $1 BILLION</p><p>RESERVE IN THE GENERAL FUND. WHICH IS A REALLY A MINIMAL</p><p>RESERVE TO HAVE. WHEN YOU THROW THAT RESERVE IN, YOU REALLY</p><p>HAVE A BUDGET PROBLEM THAT'S $16.7 BILLION IN DIMENSIONS</p><p>BASED ON HIS OWN AND FINANCE CALCULATIONS. LET'S SAY ANALYST OFFICE RECENTLY COME OUT WITH A PRELIMINARY OVERVIEW</p><p>IN WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DONE AN EXPENDITURE CALCULATION OF</p><p>THEIR OWN, THEY ALREADY OPINED THAT THE BUDGET PROBLEM</p><p>ACTUALLY IS MOST LIKELY EVEN LARGER THAN WHAT THE GOVERNOR</p><p>HAS ESTIMATED. GIVEN THAT DIFFICULT CONTEXT, I GUESS WE CAN</p><p>CONSIDER OURSELVES LUCKY THAT THE MAY REVISION DID NOT</p><p>PROPOSE FURTHER DIRECT CUTS TO THE CSU BUDGET. BUT BEN</p><p>INDICATED, THE SIZE OF THE TRIGGER CUT THAT HE IS PROPOSING</p><p>HAS NOW GROWN FROM $200 MILLION TO $250 MILLION. IF THE</p><p>STAKES WEREN'T HIGH UP WITH REGARD TO THE NOVEMBER TAX</p><p>ELECTION, THEY'VE BECOME EVEN LARGER FOR THE CSU. THAT'S</p><p>REALLY THE MOST SIGNIFICANT THING IN THE MAY REVISION FOR US</p><p>IS THIS LARGER TRIGGER. WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BARE IN MIND NOT</p><p>FORGET, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE BOARD</p><p>OF TRUSTEES MEETING, IS THAT REGARDLESS OF THE TRIGGER, EVEN</p><p>IF THE TAX MEASURE PASSES IN NOVEMBER, THE PRIOR CUTS THAT</p><p>CSU IS TAKEN FROM THE STATE ARE SO LARGE RELATIVE TO THE</p><p>STEPS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO IN TERMS OF RAISING STUDENT</p><p>B REVENUES, THAT WE STILL HAVE A MOPEY $100 BILLION BUDGET</p><p>GAP TO SOLVE. BASED ON THE PRIOR CUTS. WE HAVE A TWOFOLD</p><p>PROBLEM, ONE IS STRUCTURE DEFICIT THAT HAVE TO BE OPENLY</p><p>RESOLVED. IF THE ELECTION DOES NOT TURN OUT AS WE HOPE, WE</p><p>HAVE ANOTHER $250 MILLION BASED ON A PROPOSAL THAT THE</p><p>GOVERNOR AHEAD. I HAVE TO ALSO STRESS BETWEEN NOW AND THE</p><p>END OF JUNE WHEN HOPEFULLY AND THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE FINALLY COME UP WITH A STATE BUDGET ACT.</p><p>THAT THINGS CAN STILL CHANGE FURTHER. THAT HIGHER EDUCATION</p><p>REMAINS VERY VULNERABLE IN THE OVER ALL MIX THAT IS BEING</p><p>PRESENTED. THERE ARE A LOT OF CUTS THE GOVERNOR HAS</p><p>PROPOSED IN HIS BUDGET IN OTHER AREAS THAT THE LEGISLATURE</p><p>ALREADY INDICATED IT DOES NOT WANT TO APPROVE. SO THERE</p><p>COULD BE SOME REARRANGING OF THINGS BEFORE WE SEE A FINAL</p><p>STATE BUDGET AGAIN. WE'RE HOPING THAT WOULD BE WILL BE THE</p><p>END OF JUNE.</p><p>>> IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMITTEE LIKE TO ASK?</p><p>>> THINK THIS QUESTION OF STRUCTURAL DEFICIT, WHICH</p><p>FURTHER AGGRAVATED WHEN $100 MILLION CUT WAS TEMPORARY WAS</p><p>MADE PERMANENT, IT REALLY -- IT'S REALLY A BIG HURDLE TO DO</p><p>THAT IN WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN LITTLE SYSTEM SOLUTIONS AND</p><p>BASICALLY HAVING TO FIGURE OUT. MY GUESS IS THAT WE ARE</p><p>STILL AT THE CAMPUS LEVEL, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE</p><p>THOSE TEMPORARY ISSUES PERMANENT AND THAT'S A BIG ISSUE, I</p><p>JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT.</p><p>>> I AGREE. IT'S A VERY BIG ISSUE. FOR THOSE WHO MAY</p><p>HAVE FORGOTTEN, WE STARTED THE YEAR EXPECTING $500 MILLION</p><p>CUT. THEN WE WERE TOLD THAT IT MAY GO TO AN ADDITIONAL</p><p>$500 MILLION. TURNED OUT THAT IT WAS 500 PLUS 150. I WAS</p><p>IN A STRANGE POSITION AT THAT TIME BEING HAPPY ABOUT A</p><p>$650 MILLION BUDGET REDUCTION AS OPPOSED TO A $1 BILLION</p><p>REDUCTION. BUT THEN, AS YOU JUST POINTED OUT RUBEN, WE HAD ANOTHER $100 MILLION REDUCTION, WHICH TOOK US TO</p><p>$750 MILLION THIS YEAR AND WE WERE HOPING THAT LAST</p><p>$100 MILLION WOULD BE ONE TIME. ROBERT AND HIS STAFF AND</p><p>ALONG WITH KAREN WORKED AS HARD AS THEY COULD TO MAKE THAT A</p><p>ONE TIME REDUCTION. WE COVERED THAT THROUGH ONE TIME FUNDS,</p><p>CREATING THE STRUCTURAL DEFICITS IN OUR BUDGET. WE DID IT</p><p>THAT WAY TO PREVENT LAYOFFS, MINIMIZE REDUCTIONS IN STAFF</p><p>THE IMPACT ON OUR EMPLOYEES AND OUR STUDENTS. WE HAVE NOT,</p><p>AS YOU POINTED OUT, WE HAVE NOT FULLY FIGURED OUT HOW WE'RE</p><p>GOING TO HANDLE THAT ABLE $100 MILLION ON AN ON GOING BASIS.</p><p>AN ADDITIONAL 250 ON TOP OF THAT WILL PRESENT SOME MAJOR</p><p>CHALLENGES AND THAT PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS MEETING IS TO</p><p>DISCUSS HOW WE CAN ADDRESS THAT LARGER ITEM. I TALKED TO</p><p>SEVERAL PEOPLE IN SACRAMENTO MYSELF AND I EXPLAINED TO THEM</p><p>THAT THE MAGNITUDE OF THE CUTS IS ONE THING. THE SPEED WITH</p><p>WHICH WE HAVE HAPPENED IS ANOTHER. TO THINK THAT WE COULD</p><p>ABSORB A BILLION DOLLAR REDUCTION IN OUR BUDGET OVER A</p><p>PERIOD OF LESS THAN TWO YEARS, HAS BEEN AN EXTRAORDINARY</p><p>CHALLENGE AND CONTINUES TO BE. I'M HOPING THAT THE</p><p>DISCUSSION TODAY WILL HELP US. WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS SOME</p><p>OF THE IDEAS IF YOU WILL THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR</p><p>ATTENTION. WE'RE GOING TO SHARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN</p><p>THINKING ABOUT. AT THIS POINT, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH</p><p>THE PRESENTATION THAT ALL WENT THROUGH AT THE BOARD MEETING,</p><p>GAIL, EPHRAIM, ROBERT AND I PRESENTED TO THE BOARD. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THE SLIDES UP THERE AND WE CAN</p><p>GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE BECAUSE AS JUST MENTIONED AT THE BOARD</p><p>MEETING, WE PRESENTED A NUMBER OF IDEAS. WE WERE TRYING TO</p><p>ADDRESS A $200 MILLION TRIGGER CUT THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE</p><p>POSSIBLY IN '12, '13. AS ROBERT JUST EXPLAINED, WE WERE</p><p>DEALING WITH $200 MILLION AT THAT TIME, IT HAS NOW GROWN TO</p><p>$250 MILLION. OUR GOAL TODAY IS TO DISCUSS THE IDEAS WE</p><p>PRESENTED AT THE BOARD MEETING AND PROVIDE THIS COMMITTEE,</p><p>AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS, OFFER INPUT</p><p>AND THERE MAYBE OTHER IDEAS THAT WE HAVE NOT THOUGHT OF YET.</p><p>I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE IDEAS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE</p><p>TALKING ABOUT TODAY ARE NOT RECOMMENDATIONS. THEY ARE NOT</p><p>EVEN SUGGESTIONS AT THIS POINT. THEY ARE MERELY THE IDEAS</p><p>THAT HAVE COME FORWARD. THEY REFLECT A BROAD MENU OF FOOD</p><p>FOR THOUGHT IF YOU WILL THAT I'VE RECEIVED FROM FACULTY AND</p><p>STAFF AND OUR PRESIDENT AND CFOs. SO, NOT ALL OF THESE</p><p>IDEAS ARE WORTH PURSUING. THEY ARE THE IDEAS THAT WE WOULD</p><p>LIKE TO PUT ON THE TABLE AND GET SOME INPUT ON. NEXT SLIDE</p><p>PLEASE. A FEW WEEKS AGO VICE CHANCELLOR ATTENDED SYMPOSIUM</p><p>ON FUNDING OF CSU ON NORTHRIDGE CAMPUS. IT GAVE US A CHANCE</p><p>TO HEAR A NUMBER OF IDEAS. ONE OF THE IMPORTANT TAKE AWAYS</p><p>FROM THAT SYMPOSIUM WAS THAT WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR CORE</p><p>BUSINESS. WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO TAKE SOME</p><p>THINGS OFF THE PLATE. WE CAN NO LONGER DO EVERYTHING THAT</p><p>WE WERE DOING. WE NEED TO ANTICIPATE THE FUTURE AND INVEST IN THOSE FUTURE NEEDS. WE'RE GOING TO TALK TODAY ABOUT TWO</p><p>CATEGORIES, COST REDUCTION STRATEGIES AND REVENUE</p><p>ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIES. GAIL AND EPHRAIM AND I ALONG WITH</p><p>ROBERT ARE GOING TO DISCUSS THESE. WE'LL ADDRESS THE COST</p><p>REVENUE IDEAS FIRST. SINCE THE FIRST SLIDE IN MY VIEW IS A</p><p>VERY IMPORTANT IDEA, IT'S ONE THAT WE HAVE ALREADY BEGUN</p><p>WORKING ON. THE NOTION OF CONSOLIDATION SERVICES.</p><p>MENTIONED TO THE BOARD AND EVERYONE HERE I'M SURE IS AWARE</p><p>THAT CSU HAS JUST ABOUT 23 OF EVERYTHING. 23 POLICE</p><p>DEPARTMENTS, 23HR OFFICES, 23 ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENTS AND THE</p><p>LIST GOES ON AND ON.</p><p>>> 24</p><p>>> 24 IF YOU INCLUDE THE CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE. THIS</p><p>IDEA ISED IDEA OF A SHARED SERVICES CENTER. IDEA TAKING</p><p>HOLD IN THE CORPORATE WORLD AND IT IS ALSO TAKING HOLD NOW</p><p>IN HIGHER EDUCATION. RECENTLY, UC ANNOUNCED THEY ARE</p><p>PLANNING HR SHARED SERVICES CENTER. EXPECT TO SAVE MILLIONS</p><p>OF DOLLARS, ACTUALLY THEY STATED $100 MILLION ANNUALLY WITH</p><p>DEBT SHARED SERVICES. RECENT ARTICLE DESCRIBED SHARED</p><p>CENTERS AT YALE. WE BELIEVE THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD</p><p>CONSIDER. THERE ARE SOME BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES AND THOSE</p><p>ARE IN FRONT OF YOU. HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS ONE</p><p>HOLDS A GREAT DEAL OF PROMISE. PRESIDENTS ARE ALREADY</p><p>LEADING A TASK FORCE TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF A SHARED</p><p>SERVICES CENTER THAT WILL HANDLE PROCUREMENT AND ACCOUNTS PAYABLE. WE BELIEVE THERE ARE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO BE</p><p>SAVED IF WE CAN MOVE INTO A SHARED SERVICES CENTER AND</p><p>CHANGE DRAMATICALLY THE WAY WE PURCHASE GOODS AND SERVICES.</p><p>BY COMBINING AND LEVERAGING THE SIZE OF THE CSU. THIS NEXT</p><p>ONE, CLOSURE OF CAMPUS. THIS CAME TO ME VERY EARLY. THEY</p><p>WERE USUALLY PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE SYSTEM SUGGESTING IF</p><p>YOU'RE IN TROUBLE, WHY DON'T YOU CLOSE ONE OF THE CAMPUSES.</p><p>YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT AS EASY AS THAT. YOU DON'T JUST WALK</p><p>AWAY FROM A CAMPUS AND JUST CLOSE THE DOORS AND SAVE MONEY.</p><p>I MENTIONED -- THAT'S JUST A FEW OF THEM. I THINK THE MOST</p><p>IMPORTANT THING IS CLOSING A CAMPUS WILL BE CONTRARY TO OUR</p><p>MISSION. WE WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO SERVE STUDENTS IN A</p><p>PARTICULAR REGION OF THE STATE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF</p><p>COMPLICATED FACTORS TO CLOSING A CAMPUS. YOU WOULD HAVE TO</p><p>DECIDE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY, HOW YOU'RE</p><p>GOING TO DO DEBT OBLIGATIONS WITH THAT CAMPUS ETCETERA. OF</p><p>COURSE THERE WILL BE STRENUOUS POLITICAL BARRIERS TO</p><p>OVERCOME. CANDIDLY, I DON'T SEE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN GET A</p><p>CAMPUS CLOSED IN TIME TO DEAL WITH THE UP COMING POSSIBILITY</p><p>OF $250 MILLION TRIGGER. IT'S AN IDEA THAT HAS BEEN AROUND</p><p>AND I WANTED TO PUT IT OUT THERE. THIS ALSO WAS AN IDEA</p><p>THAT WAS PRESENTED. THIS REALLY IS THE IDEA OF ESTABLISHING</p><p>A CHARTER CAMPUS IF YOU WILL OR IN SOME CASES CHARTER</p><p>PROGRAM. THE IDEA WOULD BE TO ELIMINATE THE STATE SUPPORT</p><p>THAT GOES TO A CAMPUS AND THEN USE THE MONEY THAT WERE GOING THERE TO DISTRIBUTE THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE SYSTEM. THE</p><p>PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT YOU WOULD INCREASE THE TUITION OF</p><p>THE CAMPUS, OF THE CHARTER CAMPUS SIGNIFICANTLY IF IT WERE</p><p>TO COVER ITS ENTIRE COST. OF COURSE, IF WERE TO TAKE ONE</p><p>OFF THE GRID, THAT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT UPON OUR MOST NEEDY</p><p>STUDENTS. THERE WOULD BE A GREAT DEAL OF DEPENDENCE ON</p><p>EXTERNAL FINANCIAL SUPPORT. THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A GREAT</p><p>DEAL OF FUNDRAISING AND SO FORTH. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT</p><p>LAST CHALLENGE, WE WOULD HAVE TO REACH AND AGREEMENT WITH</p><p>SACRAMENTO IF WE TOOK THE CAMPUS OFF THE GRID, IT WOULDN'T</p><p>REDUCE OUR OVER ALL FUNDING APPLICATION. EPHRAIM IS GOING</p><p>TO TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF DISCONTINUING CERTAIN</p><p>ACADEMIC PROGRAMS.</p><p>>> EACH YEAR WE RECEIVE FROM THE CAMPUS REQUEST</p><p>ACADEMIC MASTER PLAN, NEW BACHELORS MASTERS PROGRAM AND WE</p><p>ALSO RECEIVED DISCONTINUATION OF PROGRAMS. AS YOU MIGHT</p><p>EXPECT, THE ADD LIST IS ALSO MUCH LONGER THAN THE</p><p>DISCONTINUATION LIST. AS BEN MENTIONED EARLIER, IF SOME</p><p>ITEMS HAVE TO LEAVE THE PLATE BECAUSE OF THE DEEP BUDGET</p><p>CUTS, YOU REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT SOME LOW PROGRAMS TO SEE IF</p><p>RESOURCES CAN BE DONE TO PUT INTO THE PROGRAMS ARE HIGH</p><p>DEMAND SO WE CAN ADD SECTIONS SO STUDENTS CAN GRADUATE IN A</p><p>TIMELY MANNER. SPECIALIZATION ON CAMPUSES, THIS IS HAS BEEN</p><p>TAUGHT FOR YEARS THAT CERTAIN CAMPUSES COULD SPECIALIZE IN</p><p>CERTAIN PROGRAMS AND NOT HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS. THE DIFFICULTY HERE IS THAT MAJORITY OF OUR STUDENTS ARE</p><p>PLACE-BOUND STUDENTS. ESPECIALLY OUR TRANSFER STUDENTS. 60</p><p>TO 65 PERCENT OF OUR TRANSFER STUDENTS ARE PLACE-BOUND. TO</p><p>SAY THAT ONE CAMPUS IN THE BASIN WOULD GIVE UP ONE PROGRAM</p><p>AND THE STUDENT WOULD TRAVEL TO ANOTHER CAMPUS, EVEN THOUGH</p><p>THE MILES MIGHT BE -- IT'S AN EVENING CLASS AT 4:30 OR 5:00,</p><p>THE STUDENT NOT EASILY WILL BE ABLE TO GET FROM ONE CAMPUS</p><p>TO THE NEXT. SO THIS IS A CHALLENGE TO US TO HAVE -- LARGE</p><p>CAMPUSES NOT TO HAVE A FULL ARRAY OF PROGRAMS. GAIL?</p><p>>> BEFORE I ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, I WANT TO NOTE THAT WE</p><p>RECOGNIZE THAT MANY OF THESE IDEAS COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE A</p><p>DIRECT OR INDIRECT IMPACT ON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF</p><p>EMPLOYMENT FOR OUR FACULTY AND STAFF. THAT'S THE CASE,</p><p>THESE IDEAS COULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT NEGOTIATIONS</p><p>WITH THE AFFECTED EMPLOYEE GROUP AND THERE WOULD NEED TO BE</p><p>CONCERN FOR THE IMPACTED EMPLOYEES. LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVE</p><p>OR THE IDEA TO INCREASE CLASS SIZES. GIVEN THE AVERAGE</p><p>CLASS SIZE OF 31 TO 32 STUDENTS, 5% INCREASE IN AVERAGE</p><p>CLASS SIZE COULD SAVE AS MUCH AS $36 MILLION. BUT BEFORE</p><p>IMPLEMENTING THIS IDEA, WE WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER SEVERAL</p><p>ISSUES. STUDENTS FACULTY RATIOS ALREADY BEEN INCREASING AS</p><p>CAMPUSES HAVE TRIED TO COPE WITH PREVIOUS BUDGET CUTS. IT</p><p>WAS 20.6 IN 2007 AND 2008, 22.4 IN 2010 AND '11. WE WOULD</p><p>NEED TO PREPARE FACULTY AND TO CAREFULLY EVALUATE WHICH</p><p>CLASSES COULD BE INCREASED WITH SIZE WITH MINIMAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON STUDENT LEARNING. WORKLOAD IMPACT WOULD HAVE TO</p><p>BE MANAGED AND INCREASE IN STUDENT FACULTY RATIO COULD HAVE</p><p>AN IMPACT ON THE ABILITY OF FACULTY TO CARRY OUT THEIR FULL</p><p>RANGE PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDING SCHOLARSHIPS,</p><p>UNIVERSITY SERVICE AND ONE ON ONE CONTACT WITH STUDENTS. TO</p><p>MEET THEIR REQUIREMENTS FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION. LARGER</p><p>CLASSES WILL REDUCE OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONAL CONTACT AND</p><p>INTERACTION WITH THE PROFESSOR. RESEARCH SHOWS THAT SUCH</p><p>INTERACTION HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON STUDENT'S SUCCESS.</p><p>INCREASES IN FACULTY WORKLOAD --</p><p>>> BEFORE YOU GO THERE, YOU MISSING ONE ITEM, WHICH IS</p><p>CALLED THE PHYSICAL PLAN. MOST WALLS DO NOT EXPAND. IF YOU</p><p>ALREADY CREATED LARGE SIZES, THEORETICALLY, YOU CAN INCREASE</p><p>IT BUT PHYSICALLY YOU CAN'T. THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS ISSUES</p><p>WITH MOST OF THAT.</p><p>>> THANK YOU.</p><p>>> MANY OF OUR CAMPUSES DO NOT HAVE LARGE LECTURE</p><p>SPACE. FROM THE OLD DAYS THE ORANGE BOOK AND IT ISN'T A</p><p>CHALLENGE.</p><p>>> THE PRINCIPLE FOCUS ON UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION AND</p><p>THE QUALITY BY DESIGN --</p><p>>> IT ALSO TIES TO GRADUATION INITIATIVE. WHEN YOU</p><p>THINK OF LARGER CLASSES, YOU USED TO THINK ABOUT FRESHMAN</p><p>AND SOPHOMORE LEVEL CLASSES. RESEARCH SHOWS UNDER</p><p>REPRESENTED SCHOOLS IN THOSE FRESHMAN CLASSES WHERE WE NEED MORE ENGAGE THE. IT WOULD AFFECT US IN A NUMBER OF WAYS</p><p>FROM THE PHYSICAL CAPACITY OF OUR ROOMS TO WHAT'S ACTUALLY</p><p>HAPPENED IN THE CLASSROOM AND WHO GRADUATES FROM</p><p>UNIVERSITIES.</p><p>>> THANK YOU. INCREASES IN FACULTY WORKS LOAD AND</p><p>AGAIN YOU CAN SEE THE BENEFITS WHICH ARE COST SAVING, EVERY</p><p>TENURE TRACK FACULTY MEMBER TAUGHT ONE MORE COURSE PER YEAR,</p><p>WE COULD OFFER 10,000 FOR CLASSES WITH A VALUE OF ABOUT</p><p>$60 MILLION. HOWEVER, IF WE COULD CONSIDER THIS OPTION, WE</p><p>NEED TO KEEP SEVERAL THINGS IN MIND. CSU FACULTY ALREADY</p><p>HAVE A HIGHER TEACHING LOAD THAN FACULTY AT MANY FOUR YEAR</p><p>UNIVERSITIES. OUR RESEARCH ACTIVE FACULTY BRING IN GRANTS</p><p>AND CONTRACTS THAT BENEFIT THE UNIVERSITY AND THE STUDENTS</p><p>WHO PARTICIPATE IN THEIR RESEARCH PROJECT. WITH A HIGHER</p><p>TEACHING LOAD, THEY MIGHT NOT BE AS COMPETITIVE FOR THESE</p><p>GRANTS. TEACHING MORE CLASSES WILL REDUCE THE TIME THAT</p><p>FACULTY HAVE TO ADVISE AND MENTOR STUDENTS AND PARTICIPATE</p><p>IN OTHER ACADEMIC INITIATIVES. HIGHER TEACHING LOADS COULD</p><p>HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO RECRUIT NEW</p><p>FACULTY. REDUCTION OF SABBATICAL. IN THE MOST COMMON TYPE</p><p>OF SABBATICAL, FACULTY MEMBER RECEIVES FULL PAY OF SPENDING</p><p>A SEMESTER OR A QUARTER PURSUING A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN</p><p>APPROVED BY THE UNIVERSITY. WE SPEND ABOUT $12.5 MILLION A</p><p>YEAR REPLACING FACULTY MEMBERS WHO ARE ON SABBATICALS. WE</p><p>CANNOT NECESSARILY REPLACE THEIR UNIQUE EXPERTISE. SABBATICALS ARE BENEFITS OFFERED BY MOST UNIVERSITIES AND</p><p>ARE INTENDED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE FACULTY,</p><p>WHICH IS INTENDED TO HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THEIR</p><p>TEACHING. UNDER OUR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT</p><p>PROPOSALS FOR SABBATICALS ARE REDUCED FOR MERIT AS WELL AS</p><p>IMPACTS ON THE CURRICULUM AND THE DEPARTMENT OPERATION.</p><p>THEY ALSO REDUCED FOR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS. GIVEN OUR</p><p>CURRENT CHALLENGE IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE CAMPUSES TO</p><p>CAREFULLY REVIEW SABBATICAL PROPOSALS BEFORE THEY MAKE A</p><p>DECISION TO FUND THEM. IF WE WERE TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE</p><p>THE NUMBER OF SABBATICALS, IT WOULD LIKELY TO HAVE A</p><p>NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO RECRUIT NEW FACULTY.</p><p>CHANGE IN EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE SHARED HEALTHCARE PREMIUM. JUST</p><p>A BACKDROP FOR THIS. CALPERS PROVIDES THE BENEFIT PLAN,</p><p>THERE ARE VENDORS SO TO SPEAK FOR OUR HEALTH PLAN. THEY</p><p>DESIGN THE PLAN, THEY DETERMINE WHAT PARTICULARS TO BE</p><p>OFFERED TO OUR EMPLOYEES. THEY SET THE RATES AND THE</p><p>EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION, CONTRIBUTION TO THE EMPLOYER MAKES</p><p>FOR THE EMPLOYEE AND THEN THAT WHICH IS LEFT FOR THE</p><p>EMPLOYEE TO MAKE IS SET BY THE GOVERNMENT CODE. SO, UNLIKE</p><p>OTHER UNIVERSITIES OR OTHER INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE ABLE TO</p><p>DESIGN AND MANAGE THEIR OWN PLANS AND THEREBY MANAGE THEIR</p><p>COST, CSU HAS NO OTHER WAY TO MANAGE HEALTHCARE COST EXCEPT</p><p>TO CHANGE THE EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE SHARE OF HEALTHCARE</p><p>PREMIUMS. SINCE 2008 COST HAVE INCREASED $59.5 MILLION TO AN ESTIMATED TOTAL OF $335 MILLION IN 2011, '12. DESPITE</p><p>THE FACT THAT WE HAVE 3000 FEWER EMPLOYEES. COST ARE</p><p>PROHIBITED IN THE CONTEXT OF CUTS TO THE CSU. INCREASES</p><p>GOING FORWARD WILL ERODE CSU'S ABILITY TO CONDUCT THE CORE</p><p>OF ITS MISSION. THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION</p><p>AND THAT'S THE DEPARTMENT THAT MANAGES ALL OF THE CIVIL</p><p>SERVICE, THE OTHER STATE INSTITUTION, CONTRIBUTES 80% TOWARD</p><p>PREMIUM COST AND THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTES 20%. CSU HAS A</p><p>ROUGH ESTIMATE OF SAVING IF WE WERE TO MOVE TO THE SAME</p><p>80/20 SLIT THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $70 MILLION. SOME THINGS TO</p><p>THINK ABOUT. POTENTIAL PENSION REFORM MAY REQUIRE EMPLOYEES</p><p>TO CONTRIBUTE UP TO 50% OF RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS, WHICH</p><p>WOULD BE AROUND 11% OF PAY. THE CURRENT EMPLOYEE</p><p>CONTRIBUTION IS 5%. IT WOULD BE A DOUBLE HIT IF PAY</p><p>INCREASES IN BOTH HEALTHCARE AND RETIREMENT WERE TO HAPPEN</p><p>AT THE SAME TIME. OF COURSE ANY CHANGE WOULD REQUIRE</p><p>NEGOTIATIONS.</p><p>>> I WANT TO ADD SOMETHING BECAUSE YOU HAVE IT ON THE</p><p>SLIDE CONFORMS TO COST THROUGHOUT THE STATE GOVERNMENT. THE</p><p>OTHER AGENCIES IN THE STATE GOVERNMENT THAT HAVE THAT COST</p><p>SHARE FORMULA, ONE, WERE GIVEN MONEY TO COMPENSATE TO</p><p>OFFSET. TWO THEIR BUDGET HAVE NOT BEEN CUT CONTINUEIOUS ALL</p><p>LIKE CSU.</p><p>>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT SLIDE IS YOURS.</p><p>>> WE ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO PARTICIPATE SO THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A CHANGE IN GOVERNMENT CODE. THAT WOULD ENABLE</p><p>US TO NOT BE A PARTICIPANT?</p><p>>> YES.</p><p>>> THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A CHANGE IN STATUTE ALONG</p><p>WITH ANY NEGOTIATIONS THAT MIGHT OCCUR IF WE WERE TO MOVE A</p><p>DIFFERENT RATIO OF SHARING OF WHAT THE COST ARE IN HEALTH</p><p>BENEFITS.</p><p>>> YES.</p><p>>> WE CAN NEGOTIATE IT AND IF WE REACH AGREEMENT WITH</p><p>THE LABOR OF ORGANIZATION, WE CAN CHANGE IT.</p><p>>> I WAS THINKING OF TERMS IN TIMING OF THIS RELATIVE</p><p>TO THE MAGNITUDE OF THE ISSUES. SOME OF THESE THING THAT WE</p><p>CAN CONSIDER, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHERE WHETHER OR NOT THIS</p><p>IS LONG TERM OR SHORT TERM.</p><p>>> I WOULD CERTAINLY THINK THAT ONE WOULD BE MORE</p><p>LONGER TERM BECAUSE THE NEGOTIATIONS AND AS PAT JUST POINTED</p><p>OUT, I THINK THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS WOULD EXPECT SOMETHING</p><p>IN RETURN FOR THAT TYPE OF AGREEMENT. IN OUR SITUATION, I</p><p>DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'VE BEEN OFFER.</p><p>>> AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE WANT TO BE LOOKING AT</p><p>THINGS THAT DOESN'T MAKE SINCE. THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT</p><p>ARE SHORT TERM AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE LONG TERM.</p><p>MAYBE TO OUR ADVANTAGE TO CONFIGURE WHAT MIGHT MERGE FROM</p><p>THIS.</p><p>>> I LIKE TO TAKE A MINUTE ON YOUR FIRST QUESTION THAT RELATES TO OUR BEING ABLE TO GO TO SOME VENDOR OTHER THAN</p><p>CALPERS. WE'VE NOT REALLY CONSIDERED THAT BECAUSE OF THE</p><p>LEGISLATION. HAVING WORKED IN OTHER ORGANIZATIONS WHERE WE</p><p>MANAGED OUR PLAN, THERE IS CERTAINLY A SAVINGS IN TERMS OF</p><p>ABILITY YOU CAN CONFIGURE YOUR PLAN. IT REQUIRES GREAT</p><p>AMOUNT OF INTERNAL EXPERTISE AND STAFFING. IF WE WERE EVER</p><p>TO TAKE SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THAT, IT MAY NOT BE A LONG TERM</p><p>ADVANTAGE. IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A SHORT TERM ONE. THAT CAN</p><p>BE EVALUATED OVER TIME.</p><p>>> FIRST, BENEFITS TO THAT RELATES TO INTEREST AN TOP</p><p>OF INVESTMENT. IF YOU'RE A SMALL ENTERPRISE, YOUR ABILITY</p><p>TO HAVE A LARGER RETURN. THERE ARE SOME OTHER FINANCIAL</p><p>CONSIDERATIONS.</p><p>>> ACTUALLY ONE MORE PIECE, THAT IS MANY OF THESE</p><p>VENDORS DON'T HAVE NETWORKS WHERE YOU WANT THEM. SO IT'S</p><p>DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE THAT MEDICAL SERVICE TO YOUR EMPLOYEES.</p><p>HAVING WORKED FOR OTHER NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND</p><p>STATEWIDE ORGANIZATIONS, IT'S VERY CHALLENGING TO FIND THE</p><p>VENDORS WHO REALLY WANT TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE TO YOU IN</p><p>THE WAY YOU WANT AND WHERE YOU WANT IT. IT'S A GOOD</p><p>QUESTION THAT YOU'VE RAISED AND THERE'S A LOT TO CONSIDER.</p><p>>> INTERESTING EXAMPLE OF FACILITY -- [INAUDIBLE]</p><p>>> GAIL, MAYBE YOU CAN CLARIFY FOR US. IT'S MY</p><p>UNDERSTANDING, FOR THE MAY REVISE IS A PROVISION ALREADY TO</p><p>MODIFY THE GOVERNMENT CODE TO ALLOW COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OVER HEALTHCARE COST? IS THAT A FACT? IS INFORMATION I'M</p><p>RECEIVING INCORRECT?</p><p>>> NO, THERE IS A -- SPEAK TO THE TECHNICAL ISSUES</p><p>SURROUNDING IT.</p><p>>> THE GOVERNOR'S MAY REVISION HAS PROPOSED CERTAIN</p><p>LANGUAGE CHANGES. ONE OF THE LANGUAGE CHANGES PROPOSES IN</p><p>THIS AREA, THEY HAVE PROPOSED CHANGING THE GOVERNMENT CODE.</p><p>TO MAKE THE EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE SPLIT ON HEALTHCARE PREMIUMS A</p><p>SUBJECT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AS IT IS WITH THE DPA AND</p><p>THE STATE UNIT. HE'S PROPOSING TO REFORM THE GOVERNMENT</p><p>CODE FOR CSU TO WHAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR THE LAST 20</p><p>YEARS.</p><p>>> THIS IS LILLIAN TAIZ. THIS SUGGESTION WHILE THESE</p><p>ARE IDEAS THAT YOU'RE SHOWING TODAY, THERE ARE SOME THINGS</p><p>THAT ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY IN MOTION? AM I MISUNDERSTANDING?</p><p>>> THAT IS CORRECT. AS I POINTED OUT, THE NOTION WITH</p><p>THE SHARED SERVICES CENTER IS WELL UNDER WAY. THERE ARE A</p><p>NUMBER OF THESE THINGS THAT WE'RE TAKING ACTION ON ALREADY,</p><p>YES.</p><p>>> SO THEY'RE NOT JUST IDEAS. THEY ARE ACTUALLY THINGS</p><p>YOU ARE IMPLEMENTING NOW?</p><p>>> WELL --</p><p>>> UNDER CONSIDERATION --</p><p>>> THAT'S ACCURATE. FOR EXAMPLE, WITH THE SHARED</p><p>SERVICES CENTER. WE HAVE NOT MADE A DECISION TO MOVE WITH THE SHARED SERVICES CENTER. BUT IT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION.</p><p>WE HAVE A TASK FORCE THAT'S LOOKING AT IT. THEY WILL COME</p><p>BACK. I THINK THE PLAN RUBEN IS REALLY THE END OF DECEMBER.</p><p>THEY WILL COME BACK WITH AN ANALYSIS AND A DECISION WILL BE</p><p>MADE IF WE'RE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT. THESE THINGS</p><p>ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION BUT MANY OF THEM WE ARE TAKING</p><p>ACTION ALREADY TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE FEASIBLE OR NOT.</p><p>THIS NEXT SLIDE IS ONE THAT -- NO, GO BACK. IT IS ONE THAT</p><p>PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST DISTASTEFUL SUGGEST REDUCING THE</p><p>COMPENSATION OF OUR EMPLOYEES. I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT 85% OF</p><p>OUR BUDGET IS DEVOTED TO PERSONNEL COST. AS A RESULT, VERY</p><p>SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS CAN BE GENERATED BY REDUCING EMPLOYEE</p><p>COMPENSATION. IN FACT, EACH ONE PERCENT OF COMPENSATION</p><p>REDUCTION YIELDS ABOUT $28 MILLION. ON THE OTHER SIDE,</p><p>HOWEVER, THE REDUCTION IN COMPENSATION, CERTAINLY FOR OUR</p><p>REPRESENTATIVE EMPLOYEES, WOULD REQUIRE NEGOTIATIONS. WE</p><p>ALSO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT WOULD IMPACT MORALE,</p><p>PRODUCTIVITY, MOST OF OUR EMPLOYEES DO NOT RECEIVED RAISES</p><p>SINCE 2008. IN FACT, ALMOST ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES RECEIVED</p><p>2% PAY REDUCTION AS A RESULT OF FURLOUGH. THIS IS ONE THAT</p><p>MUST REMAIN ON THE TABLE GIVEN THE SEVERITY OF THE BUDGET</p><p>CUTS. AGAIN, NO DECISION HAS BEEN MADE IN THIS DIRECTION.</p><p>BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS CLEARLY ON THE TABLE.</p><p>>> HOWEVER, IN THE TRUSTEE MEETING, DID THE CHANCELLOR</p><p>SAY THIS IS NOT A CONSIDERATION? WAS THAT JUST OFF THE CUFF COMMENT THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO GO BACK TO FURLOUGHS?</p><p>>> HE DOES NOT WANT TO GO BACK TO FURLOUGHS. HE DID</p><p>MAKE A STATEMENT SO THAT EFFECT. HOWEVER, I HAVE TO SAY</p><p>THAT WITH THE INCREASE FROM 200 TO $250 MILLION TRIGGER,</p><p>WE'RE GOING TO NEED SOME TIME TO MAKE SOME THINGS HAPPEN.</p><p>VERY RELUCTANTLY, I HAVE TO SAY THAT FURLOUGHS TOO HAVE NOT</p><p>BEEN ON THE TABLE BUT NOW THEY ARE ON THE TABLE AS WELL. NO</p><p>DECISION HAS BEEN MADE. AGAIN, NO DECISION. WE'VE GOTTEN</p><p>TO A POSITION WHERE JUST ABOUT ALL OPTIONS, NOT QUITE ALL,</p><p>BUT CERTAINLY MOST OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE.</p><p>>> IN THE GOVERNOR'S MID-YEAR REVISE, HE ALSO PUT</p><p>FORWARD REDUCING STATE EMPLOYEES 5% BY ADJUSTING THE WORD</p><p>WEEK, BASICALLY MAKE IT A FOUR DAY WORKWEEK.</p><p>>> THAT'S RIGHT.</p><p>>> WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.</p><p>>> THERE IS SOMETHING THAT ROBERT HAS MENTIONED THAT'S</p><p>IMPORTANT HERE. WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT OF 4 TO</p><p>$500 MILLION. FURLOUGHS ARE TEMPORARY. BIG CUTS ARE NOT.</p><p>THAT'S SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF</p><p>DISCOURSE RELATED TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL --</p><p>>> THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IF YOU NOTICE I SAID WE</p><p>MAY NEED TIME TO PUT SOME OF THESE COST CUTTING MEASURES IN</p><p>PLACE WHICH WILL THEN PLACE FURLOUGHS POSSIBLY ON THE TABLE.</p><p>I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF PERSONAL DISLIKE FOR THE FURLOUGH.</p><p>OUR EXPERIENCE WAS THAT THEY CERTAINLY IMPACTED PRODUCTIVITY. I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO IT.</p><p>>> IT DIDN'T HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEM.</p><p>>> IT DOES NOT. IT JUST BUY US TIME.</p><p>>> IT REDUCE OUR EXPENDITURES FOR A YEAR BY</p><p>$270 MILLION. IT SOLVEDS BUDGET IMBALANCE FOR A YEAR FOR</p><p>$270 MILLION. IT DID -- IT MAY HAVE HAD SOME DISADVANTAGES</p><p>TO IT ONE THING IT DID DO VERY QUICK AND POWERFUL WAY</p><p>MAINTAIN OUR BUDGETARY BALANCE.</p><p>>> REDUCTIONS IN ENROLLMENT. WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK</p><p>TO THIS BY THE WAY.</p><p>>> REDUCTIONS IN ENROLLMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.</p><p>QUESTIONS COME UP. WE SHOULD BRING OUR ENROLLMENTS IN LINE</p><p>WITH OUR BASELINE BUDGET. THE BUDGET HAS BEEN DECREASING.</p><p>WE TRY TO MODERATE OUR ENROLLMENTS BUT THEY HAVE NOT COME</p><p>DOWN. WE ARE ALREADY DENYING ADMISSION 22 TO 28,000</p><p>ELIGIBLE STUDENTS EACH YEAR. THE MISSION OF CSU IS TO</p><p>ACCEPT ALL CSU ELIGIBLE STUDENTS. BRINGING DOWN ENROLLMENTS</p><p>WILL EXACERBATE THAT PROBLEM. THE LAST FEW YEARS, THE</p><p>NUMBERS OF ELIGIBLE STUDENTS HAVE BEEN COMING DOWN. WHAT'S</p><p>THE SAVINGS ON A REDUCTION ENROLLMENT? FOR EACH 1% OF</p><p>ENROLLMENT DECLINE, THERE IS A NECESSARY BUDGET IMPACT OF</p><p>$20 MILLION. THAT TAKE INTO EFFECT LOST REVENUE FROM THOSE</p><p>STUDENT AND THE SAVINGS ON FEWER PERSONNEL NEEDED BECAUSE OF</p><p>FEWER STUDENTS. CURRENTLY, WE'RE BASELINE BUDGET</p><p>APPROXIMATELY 331,000 FTS. 3% DECLINE WILL BRING US DOWN TO ABOUT 321,000 STUDENTS. AS YOU SEEN THE REPORTS THIS WEEK</p><p>FROM THE OFFICE CONCERNING APPLICATIONS FOR NEXT YEAR AND</p><p>WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT ADMISSIONS AND INTEND TO REGISTER THE</p><p>FORM ON THE CAMPUSES, IT LOOKS LIKE OUR ENROLLMENTS ARE</p><p>STRONG FOR THE FALL. BRINGING DOWN ENROLLMENTS IS GOING TO</p><p>BE A MAJOR CHALLENGE.</p><p>>> THE ENROLLMENT REDUCTION, MOSTLY FRESHMAN LEVEL</p><p>STUDENTS OR IS IT SPREAD OUT ACROSS ALL LEVELS. TWO, WHAT</p><p>ARE THE LONG TERM IMPACTS ON RECRUITING?</p><p>>> LET'S BEGIN WITH HOW IS IT BEING IMPLEMENTED. THE</p><p>SYSTEM HAS BEEN OVER TIRED. THIS YEAR WE'RE PROJECTING</p><p>COMING IN JUST UNDER 103%. NEXT YEAR, WE ALREADY SAID THAT</p><p>WE WOULD CLOSE A STRING OF 2013 FOR BUT SB14 STUDENTS SOME</p><p>CONTRACTS WE HAVE -- THE LAST TIME WE CLOSED WHICH WAS THE</p><p>SPRING OF 2010, WE WENT FROM SPRING ENROLLMENT IN THE SYSTEM</p><p>FROM APPROXIMATELY 16,000 STUDENTS TO ABOUT A THOUSAND. WE</p><p>WERE PRETTY TIGHT WHEN WE BRING IT DOWN. ALSO, WE HAVE A</p><p>WAIT LIST ALL STUDENTS FOR THE FALL OF 2013 UNTIL WE SEE</p><p>WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TRIGGER. WHEN WE OPEN ON OCTOBER OF</p><p>THIS YEAR, ALL STUDENTS WILL BE TOLD, THEY WILL BE PUT ON A</p><p>WAIT LIST. SECOND PART IS WHO IS AFFECTED MOST. IN THE</p><p>PAST YEAR, WHEN WE CLOSE FOR THE SPRING ONLY, THE GROUP OF</p><p>STUDENTS AFFECTED THE MOST IS THE UPPER DIVISION TRANSFER</p><p>STUDENTS. FOR SPRING, WE TAKE IN A VERY LOW NUMBER OF</p><p>FRESHMEN BECAUSE OF WHEN HIGH SCHOOL HAVE GRADUATIONS AND WHAT NOT. BY PUTTING ALL OF 2013 STUDENTS ON A WAIT LIST,</p><p>WE CAN COME BACK THEN AND TALK ABOUT WHICH STUDENTS WE</p><p>SHOULD PAIR DOWN. SHOULD IT BE FRESHMEN, UPPER DIVISION</p><p>TRANSFERS, CREDENTIALS GRADUATE STUDENTS. IT WOULD BE A</p><p>DIFFERENT DECISION IN THE FALL. IN THE FALL UNDER THE</p><p>UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL, TAKING ABOUT A EQUAL NUMBER MIGHT BE</p><p>SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN TRANSFER STUDENTS. IT'S FAIRLY EVEN.</p><p>IN THE SPRING YOU'RE TAKING IN THE BIG NUMBERS ON UPPER</p><p>DIVISION TRANSFERS.</p><p>>> THERE'S AN ADDED PROBLEM THAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO</p><p>EXPERIENCE AS IT RELATES TO TWO YEAR COLLEGES. SOME OF US</p><p>ARE FAR MORE DEPENDENT ON TRANSFER STUDENTS. INABILITY TO</p><p>OFFER TRANSFER COURSES -- SOME OF US EXPERIENCING A DECLINE</p><p>IN THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS.</p><p>>> WE'RE NOT ON A ISLAND HERE. THE OTHER SEGMENTS</p><p>BEING AFFECTED ARE THE SAME AS WE ARE. CLASSES BOTH IN THE</p><p>CSU AND THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES, IT'S DIFFICULT TO THE</p><p>STUDENTS. ONE TO GRADUATE AND SOME STUDENTS ARE HOLDING</p><p>BACK GRADUATING WANTING TO STAY BECAUSE OF THE JOB MARKET.</p><p>>> THE L.A. COMMUNITY COLLEGE INFORMED US THEY HAVE HAD</p><p>A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE. L.A. CITY COLLEGE HAD TO CANCEL ITS</p><p>SUMMER PROGRAM. WE AS A SYSTEM, ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE</p><p>STUDENTS GRADUATE FROM CSU TRANSFER IN FROM TWO YEAR</p><p>COLLEGE. WE ARE INTERLINKED HERE.</p><p>>> NEXT SLIDE. >> I'M GOING TO EXERCISE A LITTLE DISCRETION AND I HOPE</p><p>MY COLLEAGUES DON'T MIND. THE NEXT PART OF THIS IS REVENUE</p><p>ENHANCEMENT STRATEGY. I TRUST MEMBERS OF THE BUDGET</p><p>ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAVE LOOKED AT THOSE REVENUE ENHANCEMENT</p><p>STRATEGIES, READ THE BOARD AGENDA ITEM. I ALSO TRUST THAT</p><p>MANY OF THOSE THAT ARE PARTICIPATING THROUGH THE WEB CAST</p><p>HAVE DONE THE SAME. WE HAVE ABOUT 30 MINUTES LEFT IN THIS</p><p>PRESENTATION OR IN THIS MEETING. I REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE</p><p>THAT WE HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS THESE THINGS, ASK QUESTIONS,</p><p>FIELD QUESTIONS THAT MAYBE COMING IN FROM THE WEB CAST. I</p><p>LIKE TO JUST ASK YOU IF YOU WOULD, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, TO</p><p>TAKE A LOOK AT THE REVENUE ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIES. THEN</p><p>OPEN THIS UP FOR SOME DISCUSSION OF THINGS THAT YOU THINK --</p><p>IDEAS THAT YOU WANT US TO HEAR. THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DROP</p><p>OFF THE TABLE ALL TOGETHER, IDEAS THAT MAY NOT BE INCLUDED</p><p>IN THE PRESENTATION. AT THIS POINT, WITH NO OBJECTION, I'M</p><p>GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO THE FLOOR.</p><p>>> I NEED TO BE THE ONE TO SUGGEST TUITION INCREASES.</p><p>AS I WATCHED OVER THE YEARS, THE STATE GIVES US A BUDGET.</p><p>WE TAKE SOME TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REACT. THEN WE</p><p>SOMETIMES ENDED UP RAISING TUITION AND THEN THERE'S A FLURRY</p><p>OF PUBLIC REACTION TO OUR DECISIONS TO RAISE TUITION. SEEM</p><p>LIKE AN UNHEALTHY DYNAMIC BECAUSE WE HAVE NO OTHER SOURCE OF</p><p>INCOME BEYOND THAT IN THE STATE. SUGGESTION, IT IS TO SORT</p><p>OF TIE A STRING TO THE GOVERNOR'S TRIGGER, WHICH IS TO SAY AHEAD OF TIME IF THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE $250 MILLION OR</p><p>WHATEVER NUMBER FALLS OUT THE FINAL STATE BUDGET, WE ARE</p><p>COMMITTED TO RAISING TUITION BY A CERTAIN AMOUNT TO</p><p>ACCOMMODATE THAT. TRY TO PUT THE RESPONSIBILITY WHERE IT</p><p>BELONGS WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR RATHER THAN</p><p>MAKING IT LOOK LIKE IT'S OUR DECISION.</p><p>>> COMMENTS?</p><p>>> WE HAVE NUMBERS RIGHT NOW, HOW MUCH WE YIELD 1%.</p><p>>> IT EVERY ONE PERCENT. EVERY PERCENTAGE POINT</p><p>TRANSLATE INTO $15 MILLION. REVENUE ACTUALLY COLLECTED AND</p><p>CAN BE SPENT ON YOUR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS.</p><p>>> THAT'S BECAUSE OF CAL GRANTS SET ASIDE?</p><p>>> WELL, THAT ESTIMATED AMOUNT IS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT</p><p>THE TRADITIONAL POLICY WHERE WE CALL IT A SET ASIDE BUT</p><p>WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON INSTEAD ABOUT A THIRD OF THE</p><p>THEORETICAL REVENUE THAT WE COULD BE COLLECTING, WE'RE</p><p>ESSENTIALLY WAIVING. WHEN WE GIVE A STATE UNIVERSITY GRANT</p><p>TO STUDENTS WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO COLLECT</p><p>TUITION FROM YOU. WE HAVE TO FACTOR THAT IN WHEN WE ARE</p><p>CALCULATING HOW MUCH DOLLARS ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE RAISED</p><p>BY A GIVEN CHANGE IN TUITION RATE.</p><p>>> WE HAVE TO FACTOR IN AS WELL PELL GRANTS. SOME OF</p><p>US LIKE CAL STATE L.A., OVER 60 PLUS PERCENT OF OUR STUDENTS</p><p>ARE PELL GRANT RECIPIENTS. YOU GOT SIX YEARS. AVERAGE AGE</p><p>OF OUR STUDENTS IS HIGHER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF STUDENTS WHO ATTEND ON A GRADUATE INSTITUTIONS. BECAUSE</p><p>THAT DEPENDENCY ON TRANSFER STUDENTS. THERE'S A LOT THAT</p><p>HAVE TO BE FACTORED IN. IT COULD BE DEVASTATING FOR CSU.</p><p>>> JIM, THE ESSENCE OF YOUR IDEA THOUGH IS KIND OF</p><p>NOTION OF THE TRIGGER ON THE TRIGGER IF YOU WILL.</p><p>>> I THINK WE HAVE TO FACE THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER AND</p><p>WE HAVE TO WORK TOWARDS THAT IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER WITH OUR</p><p>STUDENTS AND STUDENTS PARENTS. IT'S KIND OF IRONIC THAT</p><p>THERE WAS NO NEW TAXES. BUT YET THEY DON'T SEEM TO MIND</p><p>REDUCING EMPLOYEES SALARIES AND THEY DON'T SEEM TO MIND</p><p>INCREASING STUDENTS FEES. THOSE ARE IN REALITY TAXES. I</p><p>THINK AS WE GO TOWARDS NOVEMBER, YOU NEED TO KEEP THAT IN</p><p>MIND.</p><p>>> THINK ALSO YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEW</p><p>MAJORITY IN CALIFORNIA OF WHO WE SERVE, A LONG TERM PROSPECT</p><p>OF THIS STATE. YOU HAVE TO BE VERY -- I THINK IT REQUIRES</p><p>DIFFERENT LEVEL OF TALK OF WHERE CALIFORNIA WANT TO BE.</p><p>UNFORTUNATELY, THE GAP IN CALIFORNIA BETWEEN HAVES AND HAVE</p><p>NOTES IS WIDER THAN OTHER COMPARABLE STATES.</p><p>>> I AGREE WITH YOU BUT IT'S NOT JUST WHAT WE WANT TO</p><p>BE, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY WHAT WE ARE.</p><p>>> THE QUESTION BECOMES INVESTING.</p><p>>> THAT'S RIGHT, INVESTING IN THE FUTURE. YOU DON'T</p><p>WANT TO DENY PEOPLE THEIR FUTURE.</p><p>>> I LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. I THINK ALSO IN PART OF OUR THINKING, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO FINANCIAL AID</p><p>FOR STUDENTS, REMEMBER THAT THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES IN</p><p>PELL GRANTS THAT WILL EFFECT A NUMBER OF OUR STUDENTS ALSO.</p><p>>> GREG?</p><p>>> I WOULD HAVE TO RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH JIM ON</p><p>THE ISSUE OF STUDENT TUITION INCREASE. ESPECIALLY A THIRD</p><p>OF TUITION INCREASE GO TO GRADUATE UNIVERSITY GRANT AN ALSO</p><p>IN THE CALIFORNIA BUDGET, THERE'S GOING TO BE A</p><p>DISPROPORTION IMPACT ON PELL GRANT RECIPIENT. IT ALSO</p><p>LOOKING AT IT FROM A PRAGMATIC SENSE, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE</p><p>A $250 MILLION SHORTFALL, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE</p><p>$250 MILLION FEE REVENUE GENERATED. ALSO THINK IN TERMS OF</p><p>ENROLLMENT REDUCTIONS, WHICH IS KIND OF THE OTHER BIG THING</p><p>THAT IMPACTS STUDENTS, THAT'S GOING TO SERIOUSLY HARM THE</p><p>INSTITUTION MOVING FORWARD. ALSO JUST ONE OF THE THING I</p><p>THOUGHT OF WITH THE WAIT LIST PROSPECT OF GIVING WAIT LIST</p><p>TO EVERY STUDENT THAT'S APPLYING IN THE FALL. I THINK THAT</p><p>MIGHT HAVE AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF DRIVING STUDENTS</p><p>AWAY. IF I'M 17 YEARS OLD AND I GET ACCEPTED SAY ARIZONA</p><p>STATE OR SOME COMPETITIVE INSTITUTION, I'M GOING TO DISCOUNT</p><p>THAT AS I GOT DENIED. THE IMPACT OF THAT YOU'RE GOING TO</p><p>DRIVE A LOT OF QUALITY TALENT FROM CSU. I WANT TO MAKE THAT</p><p>KNOWN. I WANT TO STRESS THAT ANY -- THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING</p><p>AT ALTERING EDUCATION QUALITY, I DON'T THINK IT'S</p><p>SUSTAINABLE NOR IS IT BENEFICIAL TO WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GO IN THE FUTURE.</p><p>>> GREG, JUST A COMMENT. THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. I</p><p>WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I WOULD BE CONFIDENT, 100%</p><p>CONFIDENT EVEN IF THE DECISION WERE MADE TO INCREASE</p><p>TUITION, WE WOULD NOT BE GOING AFTER THE ENTIRE</p><p>$250 MILLION. WE DO HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE MOVING ON</p><p>AND SO REST ASSURED, WE WOULDN'T BE GOING AFTER AN INCREASE</p><p>THAT WOULD BE AT THAT LEVEL OF $250 MILLION.</p><p>>> I ALSO WANT TO ADD THAT IN MY OBSERVATION OF THE</p><p>BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING SO FAR. THE PELL GRANT ISSUE IS</p><p>GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION. I DON'T KNOW IF THE LEGISLATURE</p><p>WILL BUY INTO THE GOVERNOR'S PLAN. IT REALLY DOES UNDERMINE</p><p>A VERY GOOD PROGRAM, GIVING ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION FOR</p><p>HUGE MAJORITY OF STUDENTS. YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE</p><p>BIGGER BUDGET PICTURE. THE LAO IS QUESTIONING WHETHER WE</p><p>NEED A $1 MILLION RESERVE AT THIS TIME. ALSO THERE'S SOME</p><p>ANALYSIS THAT SAYS THE GOVERNORS REVISE MAYBE OVER PAYING</p><p>$1.5 BILLION. RIGHT THERE THAT'S $2.5 MILLION CUSHION THAT</p><p>COULD GO SOME OTHER PLACE. ALL OF LOT OF BAD CUTS THAT MAY</p><p>REVISE. IF THOSE TWO REVENUE TYPE ISSUES AND OTHER PAYMENTS</p><p>IN THE PROP 98 GIVES FLEXIBILITY TO THE CAL GRANT AND</p><p>POSSIBLY SOME OTHER CUTS EVEN THE TRIGGER CUTS.</p><p>>> CONCERNING ENROLLMENT REDUCTION. WE GET ENOUGH FROM</p><p>OUR TUITION FEES AND HAVE A MARGINAL COST IN THE SHORT TERM.</p><p>I AM VERY PLEASED WITH SOME OF THE STRATEGIES, CONSOLIDATION OF SERVICES AND SHARED SERVICES. WE LOOKED AT CALPERS,</p><p>HEALTHCARE PREMIUMS. THEY ARE NOT SHORT TERM SOLUTIONS.</p><p>THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY LONG TERM. ONES WE HAVE ON THE PLATE</p><p>THAT I THINK TO BE LOOKING AT IS A FAIRLY SMALL LIST. WHICH</p><p>COULD BE POSSIBLE CHANGES TO STATE UNIVERSITY GRANT FORMULA.</p><p>SOMETHING WE DIDN'T DISCUSS YESTERDAY. BASICALLY PAY</p><p>REDUCTION. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT CAN HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT</p><p>IN THE SHORT TERM.</p><p>>> THAT HAS RECEIVED SOME CONVERSATION IS THIRD YEAR</p><p>TUITION. IN THE THIRD TIER TUITION WOULD BE STUDENTS ENROLL</p><p>IN SE OVER 13 AND 15 STUDENTS WOULD HAVE TO PAY AN</p><p>ADDITIONAL FEE.</p><p>>> THAT'S A REASONABLE SOLUTION BUT IT'S ALSO SOMETHING</p><p>STUDENTS WHO WANT TO TAKE ABOVE 15 UNIT, GEL -- GENERALLY</p><p>THEY WILLING TO PAY EXTRA. THERE IS ONE CAVEAT TO THAT.</p><p>FOR THE GRADUATING SENIORS, GENERALLY IN THEIR LAST</p><p>SEMESTER, THEY HAVE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CLASS AND WOULD TAKE</p><p>ABOVE 15 OR 16 UNITS. I KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE HAD THAT</p><p>SITUATION HAPPEN JUST THIS LAST SPRING.</p><p>>> EASIER IF YOU VOTE ON OR TAKE A POSITION ON THE</p><p>SENIOR ISSUE.</p><p>>> THERE'S NO FORMAL ACTION TAKEN. AS GREG NOTED, IT</p><p>WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED. THERE WAS ANTON OF</p><p>OPPOSITION TO THAT. I DID WANT TO NOTE NOT ALL SUPER</p><p>SENIORS ARE STUDENTS THAT HAVE MESSED UP DURING THEIR EDUCATIONAL CAREER. SOME OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY THERE</p><p>COMPLETING A SECOND DEGREE OR DOING SOMETHING ON CAMPUS.</p><p>THAT WAS SOMETHING THEY DID WANT. IT'S NOT SOMETHING</p><p>STUDENTS ARE MESSING UP. ONE QUICK QUESTION. FOR REVENUE</p><p>ENHANCEMENT, HAS IT BEEN DISCUSSED OR ANY OTHER SYSTEM DONE</p><p>AN ABILITY TO PAY TYPE SYSTEM? I HEARD THE IDEA A COUPLE</p><p>YEARS AGO, WAS CURIOUS I KNOW IT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED HERE.</p><p>>> TELL ME A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT.</p><p>>> JUST FAMILIES THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO PAY HIGHER</p><p>TUITION LOCKED INTO THAT COST. IT MIGHT MAKE IT A LITTLE</p><p>DIFFICULT. I'M CURIOUS IF ANY OTHER SYSTEMS HAVE</p><p>ENTERTAINED IT?</p><p>>> WE HAVE NOT YET ENTERTAINED IT. I THINK IT'S</p><p>ANOTHER IDEA TO PUT ON THE TABLE. I THINK IT MIGHT BE AN</p><p>ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGE BUT, WE'LL LOOK AT IT. JIM?</p><p>>> JUST OBSERVATION ON THAT. MOST FINANCIAL AID</p><p>POLICIES IN THE STATES ARE DRIVEN BY PELL GRANT STANDARDS.</p><p>THE QUESTION I HAVE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITIONAL THIRD</p><p>TIER, WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT THAT WOULD BE ON FINANCIAL AID?</p><p>FOR EXAMPLE, LAST YEAR CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON FINANCIAL</p><p>AID CHANGE HOW THEY ALLOCATE, IF YOU WILL, PELL GRANTS BASED</p><p>ON A NUMBER OF UNITS. OUR CURRENT TWO TIER CREATED A</p><p>PROBLEM. THEY SAID WE WILL ONLY REIMBURSE YOU FOR THE</p><p>NUMBER OF UNITS YOU'RE CARRYING. TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE</p><p>CARRYING 20 UNITS AND IT'S LEGIT, YOU GET REIMBURSED FOR THAT. THAT HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE PELL GRANT. THE OTHER</p><p>PIECE OF THIS IS REALLY INTRIGUING IS THAT PELL GRANTS ARE</p><p>THE PRINCIPLE SUPPORTERS OF THE FINANCIAL AID THIS YEAR. WE</p><p>DON'T GET A LOT OF MONEY IN TERMS OF DOLLAR TOTAL AMOUNT OUT</p><p>OF PELL GRANTS. IT'S EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL FOR EXAMPLE.</p><p>>> IT OUR BIGGEST SOURCE OF FINANCIAL AID BY FAR.</p><p>>> ON THE THIRD TIER, ONCE YOU PENCIL OUT, IT MIGHT NOT</p><p>BE THAT MUCH OF A REVENUE ENHANCER. WHAT WOULD HAVE IS A</p><p>BEHAVORIAL CHANGE BUT THAT DOESN'T BRING -- PEOPLE WOULD</p><p>ADAPT TO THAT CHANGE BUT WOULD NOT --</p><p>>> YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. DID YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON</p><p>JIM'S NOTION ABOUT FINANCIAL AID AND HOW WE WOULD HANDILY</p><p>ABOVE 15?</p><p>>> WE'VE ASKED OUR FINANCIAL AID PEOPLE TO LOOK INTO</p><p>OUR THIRD TIER WILL WORK OUT. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A THIRD</p><p>TIER, HIGH UNIT MAJORS WILL BE FACTORED IN. NO ONE WOULD BE</p><p>CUT OFF. THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE -- WE'RE ASSUMING OVER</p><p>16 UNIT. 120 MAJORS WILL TAKE 16. IF YOU'RE IN ENGINEERING</p><p>AND THAT REQUIRES 132 UNITS, IT'S ASSUMED THAT YOU WOULD BE</p><p>ALLOWED 18 UNITS IN THOSE SEMESTER SO THAT YOU CAN GRADUATE.</p><p>>> CAP ON PELL GRANTS AS WELL EPHRAIM?</p><p>>> MINIMUM OF 12.</p><p>>> YOU CAN USE UP.</p><p>>> WE MAY WANT TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.</p><p>>> OTHER IDEAS, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> DR. QUILLIAN, THIS IS DARLENE YEE-MELICHAR PEPT TO</p><p>THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AND THE DISCUSSIONS</p><p>THAT'S BEEN GENERATED. I HAVE ONE SUGGESTION. THAT IS</p><p>COULD THE CSU AS A SYSTEM PIGGY BACK ON OUR GOOD WORK ON THE</p><p>PROFESSIONAL MASTERS DEGREE WITH BIOTECHNOLOGY BUSINESSES BY</p><p>LOOKING AT OTHER INDUSTRIES TO PARTNER WITH? WHERE THEY</p><p>MIGHT INVEST IN PERHAPS EDUCATING OUR STUDENTS FULFILLING</p><p>SPECIFIC JOBS THAT THEY NEED MET?</p><p>>> GOOD IDEA. I THINK WE NEED TO WORK MORE IN THAT</p><p>DIRECTION NOW. USUALLY THE CORPORATIONS TEND TO BE MORE</p><p>INTERESTED IN GRADUATE RESEARCH. WOULD YOU AGREE EPHRAIM?</p><p>>> CORPORATIONS ON GRADUATE RESEARCH AND THE FEDERAL</p><p>GOVERNMENT, WE BRING IN QUITE A BIT OF MONEY FOR</p><p>UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH. EVEN IN THE FRESHMAN YEAR, WE HAVE</p><p>QUITE A FEW GRANTS.</p><p>>> VERY PARTNERED MUCH WITH OUTSIDE CORPORATION?</p><p>>> NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE DONE WITH THE FEDERAL</p><p>GOVERNMENT.</p><p>>> BUT IN SOME CASES, WE PARTNERED WITH HOSPITALS AND</p><p>OUR NURSING PROGRAMS.</p><p>>> OUR NURSING PROGRAMS, WE HAVE EXTENSIVE</p><p>PARTICIPATIONS IN THE STATE WITH HOSPITALS.</p><p>>> THE INVESTMENTS THEY USUALLY WILL MAKE MOSTLY THEIR</p><p>EMPLOYEES. RATHER THAN INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT THEIR</p><p>EMPLOYEES. >> BUT THEY HAVE BUILT FOR -- MUCH THE EQUIPMENT IS</p><p>COMING FROM PRIVATE OFFICE.</p><p>>> THANK YOU FOR THAT IDEA.</p><p>>> YOU'RE WELCOME.</p><p>>> CAN I ASK FOR A LITTLE DISCUSSION ABOUT STATE</p><p>UNIVERSITY GRANT NUMBERS. THIS IS DISCUSSED AT THE BOARD OF</p><p>TRUSTEES MEETING. ABOUT SKIN IN THE GAME CONCEPT. WE</p><p>CURRENTLY ALLOCATE APPROXIMATELY $700 MILLION A YEAR OF OUR</p><p>CSU BUDGET TO STATE UNIVERSITY GRANT. IT WAS SOME</p><p>DISCUSSION IF SOMEONE PUT IN LET'S SAY A 10% AT THE BOTTOM</p><p>OF THAT, THAT MIGHT BE $700 A YEAR. THAT WOULD BE A NUMBER</p><p>IN $70 MILLION A YEAR. I WANT TO TEST THOSE NUMBERS AND SEE</p><p>IF THEY'RE ACCURATE.</p><p>>> I THINK THEY'RE ROUGHLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.</p><p>THERE'S A WHOLE REALM OF POLICY CONSIDERATIONS INVOLVED WHEN</p><p>YOU START TALKING ABOUT FINANCIAL AID. I THINK THE NUMBERS</p><p>ARE APPROXIMATELY THE RIGHT MAGNITUDE. THE POINT IS THAT --</p><p>POINT UNDERLINING YOUR COMMENT IS THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE</p><p>ABLE TO PAY A LITTLE SOMETHING?</p><p>>> THAT'S EXACTLY IT.</p><p>>> RODNEY DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR SOMEONE?</p><p>>> ACTUALLY WE HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS.</p><p>>> OKAY, I'M GOING TO MOVE THIS CAMERA AROUND SO YOU</p><p>CAN SEE WHO'S SPEAKING HERE. WE HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS</p><p>COMING FROM PARTICIPANTS. THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY FOR TYPING IN THE COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE. KIND OF SUMMARIZE THESE IN</p><p>TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. IF YOU DON'T HEAR YOUR EXACT</p><p>QUESTION, IT'S BEEN SUMMARIZED HERE. WE WILL BE ANSWERING</p><p>EVERYTHING IN THE FAQ TO FOLLOW. QUESTION HERE, WHAT</p><p>PROPOSALS ARE BEING CONSIDERED TO IMPROVE RESOURCE</p><p>MANAGEMENT BY CAMPUS EXECUTIVES AND ADMINISTRATORS.</p><p>PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO TRAVEL CELL PHONES AND PERKS</p><p>FOR PRESIDENTS AND VICE PRESIDENT, OUTSOURCING OF WORK?</p><p>>> I CAN TAKE PART OF THAT. TRAVEL HAS BEEN REDUCED</p><p>VERY SIGNIFICANTLY.</p><p>>> SINCE OUR CRISIS BEGIN IN THE '07 OR '08 FISCAL YEAR</p><p>ARE OPERATING FUND TRAVEL EXPENSES HAVE DROPPED 45% THROUGH</p><p>SOME VERY TIGHT MANAGEMENT IN THAT AREA. WE'RE SPENDING</p><p>$14.7 MILLION LESS THIS YEAR THAN WE DID BEFORE THE CRISIS</p><p>BEGAN. THERE ARE OTHER AREAS LIKE THAT WHERE WE HAVE SEEN</p><p>SIMILAR EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS OF 30% DROP FOR EXAMPLE IN</p><p>I.T. EXPENDITURES THAT'S SAVING US $23 MILLION A YEAR.</p><p>WE'VE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD IN THIS AREA. BEN CAN</p><p>ELABORATE, WE CONTINUE TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE OF TRYING TO</p><p>FIND MORE.</p><p>>> WHAT ARE SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL ISSUES THAT</p><p>QUESTION?</p><p>>> LET'S SEE, THEY RELATED TO TRAVEL, CELL PHONES</p><p>EMPLOYEE PURCHASES, VICE PRESIDENTS AND PRESIDENT.</p><p>>> CELL PHONES WE HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED THE NUMBER OF CELL PHONES OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE. OUR EMPLOYEES, MANY OF</p><p>THEM PREFER THAT IS TO PURCHASE OF MY OWN PHONE THAT I CAN</p><p>USE AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE TYPE OF PHONE THAT IS</p><p>PROVIDED BY THE UNIVERSITY. MANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES ARE</p><p>MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION CARRYING THEIR OWN MOBILE UNIT. AS</p><p>FAR AS THE PERKS AND OTHER THING GO, THERE ARE ISSUES</p><p>RELATED TO BOARD DECISIONS AND I'M REALLY NOT IN A POSITION</p><p>TO SPEAK TO THEM.</p><p>>> THANK YOU. ANOTHER COMMENT QUESTION THAT'S BEEN</p><p>COMING IN. CAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES BE RUN WITHOUT</p><p>ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATION SUCH AS NO DEANS? OR ADMINISTRATION</p><p>SUCH AS FEWER VICE PRESIDENTS FOR INSTANCE?</p><p>>> WELL, I THINK, EPHRAIM MAY WANT TO SPEAK MORE TO</p><p>THIS. I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THE ROLE OF ADMINISTRATORS</p><p>WHETHER THEIR ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATORS OR NON-ACADEMIC</p><p>ADMINISTRATORS, I THINK THEIR ROLES SOMETIMES NOT</p><p>UNDERSTOOD. MOST OF THE ADMINISTRATORS THAT I KNOW</p><p>PERSONALLY, ARE ALMOST 24/7. THEY DO PLAY A VERY</p><p>SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THE OPERATIONS AND DECISION-MAKING OF AN</p><p>INSTITUTION. I DON'T THINK THAT YOU CAN HAVE A SCHOOL</p><p>WITHOUT SOME LEADERSHIP OF THE SCHOOLS BUT EPHRAIM WANT TO</p><p>SPEAK TO THAT?</p><p>>> WE HAD SEVERAL UNIVERSITIES LOOK AT THE COMPOSITION</p><p>OF COLLEGES THIS YEAR. THINK SAN FRANCISCO STATE WAS ONE</p><p>THAT ANNOUNCED A REORGANIZATION. I THINK THERE WERE SOME OTHER CAMPUSES THAT LOOKED INTO CONSOLIDATION OR REVIEW OF</p><p>THEIR COLLEGES ON THE CAMPUS. THE SIZE OF OUR PROGRAMS AND</p><p>NUMBERS -- THERE IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS TO BE IN PLACE</p><p>TO ACCOMMODATE THE STUDENTS. WE HAVE LOOKED AT CERTAIN</p><p>POSITIONS SYSTEMWIDE.</p><p>>> THE DIFFERENCE IS CONSOLIDATION AND ELIMINATION.</p><p>THE QUESTION WAS IF WE CAN ELIMINATE THING? I DON'T THINK</p><p>WE CAN ELIMINATE DEANS? CAN WE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DEANS</p><p>THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN PUT ON THE TABLE.</p><p>>> THIS IS LILLIAN TAIZ. I AM A TINY BIT CONCERNED</p><p>ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME IN WHICH THE FOLKS WHO ARE WATCHING</p><p>THIS AND I MUST SAY LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS IT'S ABOUT .005%</p><p>OF OUR CAMPUS COMMUNITY WHO'S BEEN TUNING INTO THIS. THE</p><p>LABOR COUNSEL HAS A MOTION TO OFFER OR SUGGESTIONS TO OFFER</p><p>TO THIS BODY THAT REGARDING THE SUGGESTION BY TRUSTEE GLAZER</p><p>THAT THIS GROUP RECOMMENDS PUBLIC HEARINGS BE HELD REGARDING</p><p>ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS. ONE IN THE NORTH, ONE IN THE SOUTH.</p><p>WE WOULD CERTAINLY COMMIT TO GETTING TURNOUTS. I IMAGINE</p><p>THAT THE REST OF YOU COULD ALSO COMMIT TO GETTING TURNOUTS.</p><p>WE'RE TEN MINUTES LESS AND LESS THAN 30 MINUTES ALLOCATED TO</p><p>CONVERSATION WITH OUR FOLKS OUT ON THE CAMPUS. SOMETHING</p><p>LIKE THIS WOULD REALLY BE ESSENTIAL IN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A</p><p>MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION. SOME OF THE IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN</p><p>TALKED ABOUT HERE TODAY ARE INTERESTING. SOME ARE IDEAS AND</p><p>SOME ARE OBVIOUSLY ALREADY BEING IMPLEMENTED. IT FEELS LIKE IT WOULD BE PRUDENT FOR OUR SYSTEM TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION</p><p>WITH A BROADER COMMUNITY ON CAMPUS OF REPRESENTED AND</p><p>ADMINISTRATIVE AND STUDENT FOLKS WHO MAY HAVE MORE IDEAS TO</p><p>OFFER BUT IN THIS LIMITED TIME, NOT BEING ABLE TO DO SO.</p><p>>> THAT'S UNDERSTOOD.</p><p>>> JUST ONE COMMENT. IF THE NUMBERS YOU'RE SEEING UP</p><p>THERE, THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY</p><p>CONNECTED. IT UP DOESN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD BE</p><p>IN THE ROOM WITH THAT CONNECTION.</p><p>>> IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW THE TURN OUT OF</p><p>THIS SO WE HAVE SOME IDEA HOW MANY FOLKS WE ARE REACHING. I</p><p>DO APPRECIATE THE WINDOWS WE'RE OPENING TO ALLOW FOLKS ON</p><p>THE CAMPUSES TO SEE. THERE WAS A VERY SHORT TIMELINE ON</p><p>THIS AND VERY EXPERIENCED WITH TURNOUT, I KNOW THAT IT TAKES</p><p>MORE THAN A FEW DAYS TO GET SIGNIFICANT PARTICIPATION IN A</p><p>CONVERSATION LIKE THIS.</p><p>>> UNDERSTOOD. RODNEY RAISES AN IMPORTANT POINT. WE</p><p>DON'T KNOW HOW MANY INDIVIDUALS ON EACH CAMPUS ARE ACTUALLY</p><p>LISTENING IN, WATCHING IN THE LOCATIONS THAT THE PRESIDENTS</p><p>DESIGNATED ON THE CAMPUS. YOUR POINT IS TAKEN. ONE OF THE</p><p>THINGS WE'RE DOING, WE ARE GOING TO PUT OUT A QUESTION AND</p><p>ANSWER. INVITE MEMBERS OF OUR UNIVERSITY COMMUNITIES TO</p><p>OFFER COMMENTS IN ADDITION TO THIS SESSION. WE WILL GIVE</p><p>ADDITIONAL THOUGHT. TO THE NOTION OF TWO MEETINGS, THERE'S</p><p>SOME EXPENSE AND TIME DEVOTED TO THOSE AND WE WILL THINK ABOUT IT THOUGH.</p><p>>> I JUST WANT TO ADD, WE TALKED ABOUT AND THOUGHT</p><p>ABOUT IT. THERE ARE SOME DECISION POINTS HERE MOVING</p><p>FORWARD FOR THE LONG TERM. THERE'S SORT OF SOME SHORT TERM.</p><p>YOU HAVE JULY TRUSTEE MEETING AND A SEPTEMBER TRUSTEE</p><p>MEETING. BOTH OF THOSE PROBABLY GOING TO BE DECISION POINTS</p><p>ON THE BUDGET. I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE ANY</p><p>DECISION POINTS UNTIL YOU SEE THE BUDGET. THEN WE WON'T</p><p>KNOW UNTIL WE GET AN IDEA CERTAINLY AWARE OF THE BUDGET</p><p>MIGHT BE PENDING THE NOVEMBER ELECTION AND TAX MEASURE.</p><p>EVEN AFTER THAT POINT, THERE'S OTHER DECISION POINTS. AN</p><p>OPEN CONVERSATION SO THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS HOW THE</p><p>SYSTEM AND A BROAD CONSTITUENCY CAN HAVE INPUT, MAY HAVE A</p><p>CAUSE BUT MAY GIVE US LONG TERM BENEFITS.</p><p>>> I DON'T MEAN TO SPEAK FOR THE TRUSTEES, THE</p><p>DEVELOPMENT OF, IF YOU WILL, THESE IDEAS EMERGED OUT OF A</p><p>RETREAT THE TRUSTEES HAD WITH REGARD TO THIS. THE</p><p>PRESENTATION WAS MADE IN RESPONSE TO TRUSTEE'S REQUEST. MY</p><p>EXPECTATION WITH REGARD TO THIS THOSE THINGS EMERGED THAT</p><p>PEOPLE CONSIDER SHORT TERM WILL BE SUMMARIZED AND SOME, IF</p><p>YOU WILL, ANALYSIS WE MADE ABOUT WHERE WE CAN IMPLEMENT IN A</p><p>SHORT TIME FRAME. OTHERS THAT ARE LONG TERM THAT HAVE</p><p>POTENTIAL WILL BE REPORTED BACK TO THE TRUSTEE AND THINGS</p><p>THAT SHOULD BE ON THE TRUSTEE'S AGENDA FOR FURTHER DISCOURSE</p><p>WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY AT LARGE. >> WE DO PLAN TO SHARE WHAT WE'VE HEARD IN THIS MEETING</p><p>WITH THE BOARD. I DO HAVE TO SAY THOUGH THAT, I THINK IT</p><p>BEHOOVES US TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS SOONER</p><p>RATHER THAN LATER.</p><p>>> WHAT ARE THE POINTS? WHAT ARE THE DECISION POINTS</p><p>THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US NOW?</p><p>>> I'M GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE CFOs</p><p>TOMORROW TO EXPLAIN TO THEM THAT THEY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD</p><p>WITH PLANNING FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF A $250 MILLION TRIGGER.</p><p>YOU CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE TRIGGER IS PULLED TO DECIDE WHAT</p><p>WE'RE GOING TO DO. I AM GOING TO TELL THEM THAT THEY NEED</p><p>TO MOVE FORWARD AS IF THE -- AS IF THEY KNOW THE TRIGGER IS</p><p>BEING PULLED. THERE'S SOME ISSUES OUT THERE THAT WOULD</p><p>SUGGEST THAT IT IS AN UPHILL BATTLE FOR THE INITIATIVE.</p><p>MAKE SURE THAT THE INITIATIVE IS PASSED. IF IT DOESN'T</p><p>PASS, WE HAVE TO BE READY TO MOVE. WE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL</p><p>NOVEMBER.</p><p>>> I'M A FORMER CFO. THEREFORE I SPEAK WITH IT. THE</p><p>SOLUTIONS ARE NOT AT THE CAMPUS LEVEL. YOU CAN ASK US AS</p><p>CFOs TO PLAN. I HAVE TO TELL YOU THE SOLUTIONS ARE NOT</p><p>THERE. THE SOLUTIONS ARE AT THE SYSTEM LEVEL. YOU'RE NOT</p><p>GOING TO FIND IN MY CAMPUS $5.75 MILLION IN LOCAL SOLUTIONS.</p><p>I CANNOT FIND, YOU KNOW, $2.3 MILLION OF PERMANENT SOLUTIONS</p><p>YET. THEREFORE, I'M -- THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS TO</p><p>MAKE THAT. WE CAN CLOSE THE UNIVERSITY ONE DAY A WEEK. WE CAN DO FURLOUGH ONE WAY A WEEK. WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY</p><p>OF THE CAMPUS TO DO THAT. YOU CAN SAY, I CAN REFUSE</p><p>ENROLLMENT BY A THOUSAND STUDENTS. WE DON'T HAVE THE</p><p>AUTHORITY TO DO THAT. THEREFORE, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE</p><p>ASKING IS A FAIR QUESTION FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE</p><p>TOOLS. THE TOOLS ARE NO LONGER AT THE CAMPUS LEVEL.</p><p>>> I LIKE TO OFFER AN OBSERVATION. WE HAVE ALREADY, I</p><p>WOULD SUBMIT, ALL 23 OF US PLANNED FOR THE $200 MILLION</p><p>TRIGGER. WE PLANNED FOR THAT WITHIN SOME GUIDELINES THAT</p><p>WERE ESSENTIALLY ESTABLISHED AND DISTRIBUTED TO US. THE</p><p>GUIDELINES ON MY CAMPUS TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THERE</p><p>WOULD BE -- WE PLANNED FOR THAT. THIS ADDITIONAL 50</p><p>PRESENTS ANOTHER ISSUE FOR US. IN TERMS OF WHAT'S MY --</p><p>WHAT'S MY SHARE OF THAT. I EXPECTED TO SERVE 16,000FTEs</p><p>NEXT YEAR. AS JIM POSTMA SUGGESTED, WE ADDED A TRIGGER TO</p><p>TUITION FEE INCREASE TO THE TRIGGER. IN SOME RESPECT WITH</p><p>REGARD TO THE 50, I NEED SOME GUIDANCE. WITH RESPECT TO THE</p><p>200, I GOTTEN THE GUIDANCE THAT I NEEDED. WE'RE PREPARED TO</p><p>MOVE FORWARD WITH 250. IT COMPLICATES.</p><p>>> IT CERTAINLY DOES. NOT ALL OF THE CAMPUSES HAVE</p><p>FIRMED UP A PLAN FOR THE 200. WHAT WE HAVE SEEN ARE VERY</p><p>PRELIMINARY PLAN. I EXPLAINED TO THE BOARD THE PLAN. I</p><p>SAID AT THE BOARD MEETING, ELIMINATION OF LOW ENROLLMENT</p><p>PROGRAM, ELIMINATION OF ATHLETIC SPORTS PROGRAM. THE BOARD</p><p>SAID, WE UNDERSTAND THAT BUT WE WOULD LIKE SOME ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES. SOME OF THESE ALTERNATIVES -- I HEAR YOU</p><p>RUBEN AND I HEAR YOU LOUDLY AND CLEARLY -- SOME OF THE</p><p>ALTERNATIVES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE MADE AT THE SYSTEM</p><p>LEVEL. I'M PLANNING TO ENCOURAGE THE CFOs TO DO IS TO GET</p><p>TO THE POINT YOU'RE THOUGHT JIM. I'M NOT CONFIDENT THAT</p><p>MOST OF THEM ARE READY TO ROLL.</p><p>>> LET ME CLARIFY. OUR PLANNING AN MY CAMPUS IS NEVER</p><p>COMPLETE UNTIL THE GOVERNOR SIGNS THE BUDGET. TO BE HONK,</p><p>ALL OF MY PLANNING FOR NEXT YEAR ALWAYS BEEN TEMPORARY OR</p><p>PRELIMINARY. THAT'S WHERE THE DIRECTION COMES FROM. I</p><p>CAN'T STOP PLANNING. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVEN'T</p><p>TALKED ABOUT THE BACK OF STUDENTS OF THE TIMING OF WHEN</p><p>DECISION MADE ABOUT ADMISSIONS AND WHAT THE BUDGET CYCLE IS</p><p>LIKE AND WHAT THE FAMILIES HAVE TO PLAN, ETCETERA. WE TRY</p><p>TO TAKE ALL OF THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE TRY TO PLAN.</p><p>THE MORE WE GET INPUT WHAT THE GUIDELINES ARE THAT WE MIGHT</p><p>EXPECT, THE BETTER I CAN ANTICIPATE AND PLAN. WHENEVER A</p><p>FINAL BUDGET COMES DOWN, WE ARE ON A CAMPUS BASIS MUCH MORE</p><p>INFORMED POSITION TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT</p><p>WOULD BE ON FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS.</p><p>>> GOING BACK TO RUBEN'S POINT TOO. I THINK THAT'S WHY</p><p>SO MANY OF THESE DISTASTEFUL OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE. LIKE</p><p>FURLOUGHS FOR EXAMPLE. IF I HEAR FROM THE CFOs THERE'S NO</p><p>WAY THEY CAN GET THERE, WE WILL HAVE TO PUT SOME OTHER</p><p>ISSUES ON THE TABLE THAT WE HADN'T PLANNED TO PUT ON THE TABLE.</p><p>>> ALL CUT BUDGETS WILL BE DEVASTATING TO MOST OF OUR</p><p>CAMPUSES. TRUSTEE MENTIONS AT THE LAST MEETING, WE SHOULD</p><p>NOT DILUTE OURSELVES BELIEVELY WE CAN JUST CUT. NATIONALLY</p><p>WITH OUR LARGE CAMPUSES. WE SPEND THE LEAST PER STUDENT. I</p><p>DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE PROUD OF. WE'RE</p><p>TALKING ABOUT REDUCING THAT SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THERE. THERE</p><p>THANK YOU. WE ARE JUST ABOUT OUT OF TIME. THERE WILL BE</p><p>MORE TO COME. WE WILL CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE</p><p>UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS</p><p>MEETING. I GUESS WE SHOULD ADJOURN THIS MEETING. THANK</p><p>YOU.</p><p>>> ALL RIGHT.</p><p>>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THIS CONCLUDES TODAY'S</p><p>TELECONFERENCE, YOU MAY NOW DISCONNECT YOUR LINES.</p>