<p>"PALM DESERT, Calif. -- Gov. Jerry Brown laid out the possible consequences Wednesday of balancing California's budget only through spending cuts.</p>
<p>This comes as he pushes for a compromise with Republicans on the remaining $15.4 billion gap.</p>
<p>Brown says University of California tuition fees could hit $25,000 a year, if he signs an all-cuts budget.</p>
<p>not sure how much of it is politicking as opposed to financial reality. They are either going to have to increase in-state tuition dramatically or accept a much, much higher % of OOS. I think it will end up being some combination of the two, as in-state furor over a doubling of tuition would be untenable. I’m a UC grad, hope it all works out for them and the students. If you see them building more dorms, watch out, class sizes will all be 300-500 students. Already UCLA triples in some of its dorm rooms.</p>
<p>BTW some fearful OOS that have been accepted are looking elswhere, afraid of what their already high OOS tuition will be by the time they are juniors and seniors. Also a growing concern over being able to graduate in 4 years, as even some seniors complain of getting locked out of needed classes, despite being higher on the preference list (given the number of already completed credits).</p>
<p>The problem is that with Blue & Gold guaranteeing that those who come from families earning less than $80k per year will pay ZERO in fees. That money has to come from SOMEWHERE…it’s going to come from the paying customers. </p>
<p>Another question is…how much will the OOS costs rise?</p>
<p>and how much will OOS cost rise after you have already accepted and paid $50-55K for year one? Will that number be $75K+ by the time your child is a senior? I believe it is a real imponderable and the UC system will have to assure a rate ceiling in years 1-4 (maybe allowing an escalation of 3-5% annually), or OOS students will begin rejecting the offers.</p>
<p>If you can guarantee an in-state kid 4 years of financial aid, you have to be able to guarantee an OOS who is full-paying that his costs will not rise above a certain reasonable amount. I don’t think the UC system will be able to do either a year from now.</p>
<p>I agree that Jerry Brown and the UCs are trying to sell fear to voters by throwing out big numbers and worst case scenarios. But you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows…prices will be going up and by more than the approximately 5% that most private colleges’ tuitions have been rising.</p>
<p>Jerry Brown has a LOT of fat to cut from California. He thinks fear mongering will get people to vote for a tax increase, and unfortunately, as this IS California, he may be right. I, however, will NOT agree to any tax increases. We are taxed to death in California. Lay off 10,000 pencil pushers that are pushing the pencil back to the other 10,000 pencil pushers. THAT would be a start. Also, they need to turn our prison system into something more affordable. I like the Mexican method: make the prison into a town, drop in supplies, and let them fend for themselves. We spend more on prisoners that schools.</p>
<p>You know the legislature is not serious about the state budget when there is a pending bill to give state financial aid to illegal aliens to attend UC’s. They already get in state tuition which is a complete waste of money since they will not be able to work legally in the U. S. after graduation anyway.</p>
<p>TatinG:
If Calif. didn’t have to pay for free K-12 educations for all the illegal aliens in this state, we could probably fund free tuition for all the legal residents of California to attend a CU or UC. FA to illegal aliens for CU and UC tuition is ludicrous!</p>
<p>At several of the UCs my kids were looking at a large number of students take 5 years to graduate. The administration seems to believe that it is because the students really don’t want to leave the nest. However, my son (who attends CalPolySLO and not a UC but with the same issues) found that class avaialbility was his reason for taking 5 years. </p>
<p>The first of a sequence were the hardest to get into. The first class acted as a filter and it was easier to get the second class. The administration would say that the class avaialbility was budget limited. With all the proposed cuts in state funding, you know which way it is going in the future.</p>
<p>For my daughter it came down to a UC and an east coast private school. The private school has a very good 4 year grad rate and the UC not so good. She got some decent merit money from the private school. It is still more per year to go to the private school, but when you figure in a possible/probable 5th year and the state budget situation, I told her don’t let money be the deciding factor as I viewed them as equal (actually cheaper at the private school comparing it to the worst case UC scenario).</p>
<p>I agree that costs are gonna increase, but doubling is impossible. Think about it…who in their right mind would pay $50k/yr instate to live in and attend Merced? Or Riverside? Those campuses would have no students, or it would be left with only Blue&Gold students. The Regents’ Field of Dreams for Merced (‘build it and they will come’) would be shown the folly that we have all known.</p>
<p>Heck, for many in the middle incomes, it is actually cheaper to attend a private school with good/great need-based aid than a UC at instate rates.</p>
<p>Conceivably, they could crank up the costs significantly for Cal and UCLA, but that won’t happen for a long time in this blue, egalitarian state.</p>
<p>Being a blue state got you in the fix you are in. Spending without regard for eventually paying for it even using bonds to balance the budget unlike any other state in the US. No sympathy for Cali here. </p>
<p>Have you even seen the long lists of UC employees earning over $100K?? Of course they are in trouble now. And they got that why by offering outlandish high pay and easy teaching loads to profs all over the US to move to the UC schools so they can claim their academic superiority. Now thy can’t pay for it? Too bad–we don’t care one bit.</p>
<p>Voters also voted for propositions in the past that required the state to spend more on certain things. E.g. an overly broad “three strikes” law that greatly increased prison costs (and the prison guards’ union has the Republicans in their pocket (“tough on crime”) as well as the Democrats). In general, the problem California has is that it is much easier to raise spending than taxes, so the spending always expands during good times, and the budget falls into crisis during an economic downturn.</p>
<p>bluebayou, UCM fees/tuition are around $9k a year, so doubling that takes COA up to $35k, not $50k. But yes, the point stands. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are plenty of folks in Sacramento who don’t get this. A close friend who does policy analysis work for the legislature told me of a discussion where people were insisting that UC fees could go up, because it was still a bargain compared to what people pay at private schools or high-ranking non-California publics. They don’t understand the concept of merit aid, and how some full-pay-at-UC students can find better deals than UC if they look in the right places. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Comparing $30k COA at Cal/UCLA vs $55k COA at a private is one calculation. $40k for Cal/UCLA vs $55k for privates is another. I’m not sure what ends up happening to the student body demographics, the mix of majors, the level of public support for UC, etc etc etc.</p>
<p>This was the situation my son was in. With merit scholarships and grants, our COA was cheaper to attend the private instead of UC. </p>
<p>Much better shot of graduating in four years at private school. At that point we were hearing stories from friends with kids at UCs and CSUs who weren’t always getting the classes they needed and delaying a four year graduation to five, or more years.</p>
<p>It’s worse now. I have a kid who is considering UCs for the next app cycle. We are weighing all those considerations and more.</p>
<p>I agree that for many middle income families, a private college offers a better option than a UC, both financially and educationally. As a UC grad myself, it makes me very sad to say this, but for our family it is completely true. </p>
<p>Comparing the FA from the top private Ivy with the UC where my D received merit money as a Regents Scholar, the private is actually CHEAPER when comparing COA (although I will admit that it is close - just a thousand dollars difference). So, when you add in the other factors, such as the crowded dorms (UCLA putting 3 kids in doubles), lack of individual attention, difficulty signing up for classes, and the general concern about the future costs/quality of the UCs, we find the decision to leave the state for the private to be a no brainer. Moreover, if you care about prestige, the private Ivy is up there with any UC. (And of course, some would argue that the Ivies trump the UCs with respect to prestige.)</p>
<p>can’t get the prestige factor of UCLA and Berkeley out of my head. But realizing my daughter is going to graduate from UMich in 3 years, while it took my niece 5 years to graduate from UC Davis–well, let’s just say we may decide to cross Berkeley and UCLA off the application list for my son this fall.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t assume that it would take 5 years to graduate from a UC. Because of AP credits and full loads each quarter, my D just informed me she thinks she can take a quarter off in senior year and still graduate on time. She hasn’t had any trouble getting classes. And remember, private school tuition goes up every year, too. And 5% of $40,000 equals 20% of $10,000 a year, doesn’t it? Even if the tuition goes up, it is still way cheaper to go a UC if you are full pay like we are.</p>