Senate Standing Committee on Rules

The Senate committee on rules will come to order. Before we begin today's agenda, can we please establish quorum? Secretary, can

we please call the roll? Limon. Here. Limon here. Grove?

Here. Grove here. Laird?

Here.

Laird here. Ochoa Bog?

Here.

Ochoa Bog here. Reyes?

Here.

Reyes here. Quorum. Thank you. A quorum has been established. If there are no objections, I'd like to take up first on today's agenda, governor's appointments not required to appear, starting with item two f, the appointment of Arthur Baguette Junior JD as a member to the Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region.

I'll entertain a motion.

So moved.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove. Can we please

call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Aye. Grove, aye. Laird.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bog. Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Reyes?

Aye.

Aye. Reyes, aye. Five to zero.

Alright. That item is approved five to zero. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear is item two g, Elena Lee Reeder, to the Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region. I'll entertain a motion.

So much.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove. I would get fired.

Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Grove, aye. Laird?

Aye.

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoobog? Aye. Ochoobog, aye. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. Five to zero.

Thank you. That item is approved five to zero. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear is item two h, Nancy Wright to the Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin region. Can we please call actually, I need a motion, please.

So moved.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye.

Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Laird?

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue? Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Reyes?

Aye. Reyes, aye. Five to zero.

Alright. That item is approved five to zero. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear is item two Aye. Gregory Giusti to the Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. Can we please can I please get a motion?

Move it. Thank you, vice Chair. Grove, can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye.

Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Laird?

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue? Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. Five to zero.

Aye.

Alright. That item is approved five zero. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear as item two j, Molly Myers to the Water Quality Control Board, North North Coast Region. Can I please get a motion?

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Laird. Can we please call the roll?

So moved.

Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? No.

Grove, no. Laird?

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bog? Aye. Ochoa Bog, aye. Reyes?

Aye. Reyes, aye. Four to one.

Alright. That item is approved. Four to one. Next item for governor's appointments not required to appear is item two k, Dale Romanini to the Water Quality Control Board North Coast region.

So moved.

Thank you. Senator Laird, can we please call the roll?

Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Not voting.

Grove not voting. Laird?

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bog? Not voting. Ochoa Bogue not voting. Reyes?

Aye.

Aye. Reyes, aye. Three to zero.

Thank you. That item is approved. Three to zero. The last item for governor's appointments not required to appear is item two l, Mark Ransom, to the water control Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region. I will entertain a motion.

So moved.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove. Can we please call

the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Aye. Grove, aye. Laird?

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bog?

Aye.

Aye.

Ochoa Bog, aye. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. 50. Alright. That item is approved 50. Next, I'd like to take up item three, reference to bills to committees.

I'll entertain a motion. Thank you, vice Chair Grove. Can we please call

the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Aye.

Grove, aye. Laird?

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochobogue? Aye. Ochobogue, aye. Reyes?

Reyes, aye. Five to zero.

Aye.

Alright. That item is approved. Five to zero. We will now, turn to governor's appointees required to appear. We have item one a through one e.

We have, the appointments, as members to regents of the University of California. We have Rusty Reyes, Amalabelle Houston, Janet Riley, Chip Robertson, Gregory Sures, PhD. I welcome you all to come forward. You each have a nameplate. And I think shit.

But it's gonna be here perfect too. Alright. You'll each have one to two minutes to provide your opening testimony. In that, opening testimony, if you have any guests who are here, you're welcome to make those introductions. We'll, flag for you, especially since there are five of you.

We will flag to you for you if you are, approaching those two minutes. They do go fast. And, then we will ask some questions, and open it up for public testimony after we ask our questions or make our comments. So with that, we are going to, start with Rusty Reyes.

Thank you, madam Chair and members of the Senate Rules Committee. I am honored to be here as a governor's appointment. Before my formal comments, I wanna introduce my best work, my wife, Julie Sandino, my daughter Alexis Arreas, and my my son Austin Arreas. Austin is playing hooky from school at McClatchy High School. So anyway, I was born and raised in in Las Vegas, California when it was a small farming town.

I was born in a community of 2,500 people, had 34 aunts and uncles, 32 of them lived in town. There was a lot of accountability. He was valedictorian or class president of every school he ever went to. One kid in his high school class went to college, and it wasn't him. It was someone who could run the hundred and nine nine and and and went to Stanford.

So he raised his children, and my mom raised my sisters and and I with a long strong emphasis on on on getting an education that was that was drilled into us. They never asked for report cards, nothing like that, really didn't understand the system. Just get just get an education. I was elected to the state legislature in 1982. I was the first Democrat in, I think, since the beginning of the state to represent to represent that district, and I represented it for twelve years.

My proudest accomplishment as a as a state legislator was getting UC Merced located in Merced. A lot of people built it. Certainly, Tony Coelho and Dennis Cardoza and Dick Monteith and and many others were responsible for building it. But I put the votes together to get it there. And I still get choked up when I think about it, but I was driving back from UC SF where the vote took place.

And I was in front of the San Luis Reservoir, and it came over the radio that UC Merced had been selected as the tenth campus of the university. And I pulled off by the side of the road and grabbed the steering wheel and and and wept because I knew it would be the most important thing I would ever do for my home county. Merced County is a county with a lot of problems.

And when I look at what Davis did for Yolo County, I think that's the temple and and and UC Riverside is doing for Riverside County. It's the template of what UC Merced can do for for Merced County.

Also was responsible working with Sam Farr and John Laird and and and others for a satellite campus in Salinas for San Jose State that ultimately became Cal State Monterey Bay. And, you know, very very very proud of that as as well. And, anyway, I

We we are just over your your time. So

Anyway, I'm I'm glad to be here, and I hope I'll have your favorable consideration. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much. And sorry for but we we do have a few so apologize for having to interrupt.

My name is Mabel Houston. I'm from Southern Utah. That's where I grew up. And I moved here about forty years ago with my husband, and we had our four kids in Southern California. Good afternoon, Chair and committee members.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I want to express my deepest gratitude to governor Newsom for nominating me to serve on the U University of California regents, Board of Regents.

I'm deeply honored to serve as a UC regent to help advance the University of California's mission of teaching, research, public service, and patient care throughout my career in student affairs, I've had the privilege of working alongside students, families, faculty, and staff, and I've seen firsthand the student success is strengthened when campuses foster opportunity, belonging, and the support needed for every student to thrive.

As a native woman and a leader dedicated to preserving and revitalizing indigenous languages, I understand the importance of cultural heritage, community partnership, and ensuring that our institutions reflect and respect the diverse communities they serve. Those experiences have reinforced my belief that higher education has a unique responsibility to expand opportunity while honoring the many perspectives and traditions that enrich our university.

As a regent, I'm committed to thoughtful governance, careful stewardship, and working collaboratively with my fellow regents, Students, faculty, staff, and university leadership. I look forward to listening, learning, and contributing to decisions that strengthen educational opportunity to support student success and ensure the University of California continues to serve California with excellence, integrity, and steadfast commitment to its public mission. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Miss Riley? Well, good afternoon. My name is Janet Riley, and I wanna thank you so much for the opportunity to appear before you and for you to reconsider my reappointment to the board of regents. And I think I speak speak for all of my colleagues here today, and probably every single person who has come before you for the board of regents that this really is a privilege of a lifetime. And I say that because it's true.

It really is. I am a first generation, college, graduate. I'm one of six children. I grew up right here in Sacramento, not far from here. Neither of my parents attended college, and they were determined that all six of their children would have a college education, and we all do.

And most of us have graduate degrees as well. And so I went to UCLA. I am indebted to the University of California. It really laid the foundation for everything that has come later in my life. And I am particularly, thankful and so happy that I had the chance to serve as Chair of the board of regents for the last two years.

And that was was quite an experience. And as you know, you know, the University of California is facing an enormous amount of challenges. And it's not just the University of California, but it's universities across the nation. And we're under attack like we've never been before, I think, in the hundred and fifty eight year history of the University of California. And so I think the board of regents and the work that we do has never been more important.

And so, you know, we're navigating a challenging fiscal environment. You know, our families and our students are experiencing pressures that they've never dealt with before. I think the cost of living and how expensive things are and the threats to to our research enterprise and academic freedom, you know, are real. And we are trying to fend off those attacks and those threats every single day. And so, it is my hope that I am reappointed.

I think I still have something to to to bring to the university, particularly with my experience as Chair. And, you know, my biggest priority is really making sure that we can expand access to the university and that we are finding talent wherever it is in the state of California, that we continue our campuses to be engines of economic and social mobility, and that we can continue to be the greatest research enterprise and engine, really around the globe.

And so those are big aspirations, but, you know, we have always done it to the University of California, and I hope to continue that legacy if I'm reappointed. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Mister Robertson?

Thank you. Thank you. I'm Chip Robertson from Los Angeles. And honorable members, thank you for taking the time today. I appreciate the effort each of you have put forth toward my confirmation process.

It means a great deal to me. I am truly honored to be selected by governor Newsom as a UC regent. Before I make some general comments about my desire to serve on the board, I'd like to thank my wife, Carrie, who has joined me today. She's not only my strongest advocate, but the only person who's been patient enough to tolerate me through this journey. I'd also like to acknowledge my kids Lou, Rose, and Lila who have joined online as well.

I bring a unique combination of higher education governance experience, public policy expertise, and a lifelong connection to the university. I'm a product of the UC system, a three time graduate, close to a decade as a student. I've experienced what the system has to offer, and I've the best of what the system has to offer, and I've seen it endure periods of profound turbulence. I was afforded tremendous opportunities being taught by some of the world class professors. And simply put, my time at UC was transformative.

My desire to become a regent was born from my wish to ensure the opportunity as my generation experience remain accessible for those that follow. In 2011, I was appointed to the board of UC Law SF, formerly Hastings, an autonomous affiliate of UC. And through my service, I've become familiar with governance, state budget process, compliance issues, student housing, collective bargaining, and academic policy. In 2019, I worked closely with the legislature to develop the UCCSU Collaborative for Neurodiversity and Learning based at UCLA.

The collaborative is a unique, co equal, co managed, intersegmental collaboration focusing on teacher training for neurodiverse k to 12 students, a significantly underrepresented population in higher education.

To be able to act in the capacity of a fiduciary at one of the greatest university systems in the world, one which provides such extensive social mobility and economic vitality, is an absolute honor. I am truly humbled. Thank you again for your time and consideration in my appointment.

Thank you.

Good aft good afternoon, committee. I'm so honored to be here. And Senator Grove, it was just three years ago, but it seems shorter. I don't wanna use our time. But, it's been it's been busy.

My name is Greg Sarris. I'm chairman of the Federated Indians of Creighton Rancheria and also a former professor of UCLA. I grew up, on the on the streets. I didn't read a book till eleventh grade. I went to Santa Rosa Community College, transferred to UCLA, then went to Stanford, got a master's, and then was hired as a adjunct lecturer as we used to say adjunct lecture at UC Santa Cruz.

And developed the EOPSA writing program for students there and oversaw that for five years before I realized I wanted to be able to have some power in the university and I needed to be on a tenure track. So I went back to Stanford, got a PH another master's in PHD, and then, in record time became a full professor of English at UCLA.

My experience as a young person, and as my record of teaching and my experience with what UCLA gave UC has given me both as a student and ultimately what I was able to give back as a professor is now manifested in this incredible opportunity to serve on the UC Board of Regents with all that I know and that I've experienced. It's been a remarkable time of the last three years.

I've learned a lot, a lot of what I didn't know before, things that I wasn't familiar with.

But certainly, my experience has helped me, with discussions that had to do with faculty, student learning, and now the big issues that we're facing around student learning, not to mention SAT and those other questions that are coming up, the challenges that we have. But at the end of the day, I can't be prouder to have the opportunity to be in the employ of this incredible university once again in order to give back what was given to me. Thank you.

Thank you. Alright. So with that, we will turn it to the dais and, members questions or comments. Alright. Senator Grove.

Thank you.

The former Chair of Natural Resources deferred to me to start. So

But not on a single natural resources issue.

So, the first question I have is to Regent Riley. In 2020, you voted to support proposition or repealing proposition two zero nine, which prohibits California institutions from granting preferential treatment based on race and other aspects. The voters rejected that. And, so I guess my question to you is what concrete oversight enforcement measures can you support to or can you support that would ensure the university fully complies with proposition two zero nine as they're also, I believe, being sued by the federal administration. I could be wrong.

And, in title six of the students fair admissions.

Well, there are numerous lawsuits actually going on right now. So, yes. But, you know, I feel like that we are completely compliant with Prop two zero nine. You know? I mean, we wanna find talent, as I said earlier, in every single place that we can.

And we wanna make sure that our university is diverse and looks like the state of California of which, you know, we serve in particular. And so we have, you know, lots of programs that we try to get, to reach out to, to some schools that otherwise may not be know about the University of California and what those requirements are. We make sure that, you know, every student who is qualified has the opportunity to be a UC student.

And so, you know, that way, we're a very diverse state. And at the University of California, we're very, very proud of our diversity.

I mean, about 63% or 36% of our, students are first gen. And so, you know, as I said earlier, this great, engine of economic mobility, I mean, you really see the transformative power of the University of California.

Thank you. And a different question to miss miss Riley and miss Houston. You, in 2025, the UCLA reached about a $6,130,000 settlement on the handling of the encampment issue. The DOJ filed that it was against Jewish students and teachers. How are you gonna make sure that Jewish students and Jewish teachers are protected in the future as a board?

We have about that great diversity.

Yeah. We have done so much work. You know, this board has spent you know, we really had to reflect upon a very difficult spring in 2024. And, you know, not everything was handled perfectly. You know, I mean, we are not fulfilling our mission at the University of California or any great university if we're not protecting academic freedom and freedom of expression.

But we also have to make sure that our students are safe, that our students can walk anywhere that they want, that they are welcome. And in some places, we fell down. So we have very clear time, place, and manner, you know, programs that we've put in place, and they're consistent across all 10 of our campuses. We've done all kinds of education and training for students, for faculty. We've worked very, very closely with the Jewish community around our campuses, with our Jewish students, with our Jewish faculty.

And really, probably most importantly, is trying to create safe spaces where people who disagree on issues can come together and have a dialogue as they should in a place like a university. And so I'm proud of the work that we've done.

Thank you. Miss Houston? And

I I can't add to what she said, but, I think we were very reactive, and I think, moving forward, I think we've set the groundwork for being proactive. And, I think thanks to a lot of the work that was done, previously when the issues came up. So I'm looking forward to understanding, what we can do moving forward. And, I really appreciate the diversity that's also in the UC regions because I think we get the, viewpoint from lots of different angles.

And as long as we can keep using that to address a lot of these issues that come up, I'm I'm very confident that we'll make great decisions.

Thank you. Mister Arreas, I've been on this committee for six years and I have never in my life received so many phone calls about this appointment for you. After the second day, I'm like Googling you because I'm who is this guy. So just FYI.

And the latest one was this actually, there was, like, eight this morning, but the latest one on my way into work today was one of my farmers from the Central Valley and Modoc area who's actually on a cruise to Canada in Canada with his wife, and he bought the Internet so that he could call me and tell me to support your nomination, which was crazy to me.

Not that they support you, but that somebody would go out of their way that much to do that. So, I appreciate your heart for the Central Valley. I appreciate your heart for Merced. I think that if we train up students in the medical facilities, they'll stay there. They'll treat people there.

The Central Valley needs doctors, nurses, like we need that. We have, some of the we have, we have great hospitals, but they're financially distressed and we have very few people to fill those slots. And so what are your thoughts about UC, Michelle, specifically in the steps that you would support to make sure that that came to fruition?

I'm sorry. The last part of it?

That that that that medical facility was established and came to fruition. I know it's on its way, but, like, how are you gonna complete it?

Well, I I think it's a huge opportunity. I mean, when you look at the UC medical system system here at Davis, UC Davis, it's different in that there are huge hospitals in Sacramento that can facilitate internships and residences and fellows and all those kinds of things. In in in Merced, you you need a a more of a distributive approach.

So you would have the UC medical facility in in Merced, but the the, much of the research as well as as the residencies and fellows would take place at the hospital, which is the largest hospital in California. It's the largest trauma center in California.

And as you know, because you represent it, there is a health desert in the Central Valley. I was the first appointed regent in the history of UCSF Fresno ever to visit. Ever to visit in its in its over thirty year to fifty year history. And what I quickly saw there, and congressman Costa and Senator Caballero, and assemblywoman Soria, and I know yourself, you have been working working on this, although UCLA has a facility in in Bakersfield that they're working on.

I'm I'm I'm aware of that also.

But they have the capacity for 1,500 residents and fellows. Studies have shown that where where you spend your residency is where you will probably practice medicine 50% of the time. So we have the opportunity to add 750 doctors in a very short period of time in the Central Valley. You know you can go from Bakersfield to San Jose and not find one neurologist. That is tragic.

And and so I think there is an enormous opportunity there. I've talked to a gubernatorial candidate Becerra about this. His wife, of course, is a doctor and from the Fresno area. He is he is very interested in it and I plan on making this a very high priority. I think it's low hanging fruit relative to the health challenges in the Central Valley.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Last question to you, miss Riley. And I'm sorry I'm focusing on you.

I don't mean it like that. I have confirmed them before, so I'm good. I'm good with them. So last question I have for you in 2020, you voted to phase out the SAT and ACT, which you guys just mentioned. Yeah.

And given the concerns now being raised by the UC faculty, are you open to reconsidering that decision or are you still plowing ahead with that? Rate?

A 100% open. I mean, as you know that there's a process that's going on right now. BORES has the is gonna be studying it, evidence based data, bringing that to the academic council in February, and it should come before the board of regents in June. So absolutely look at the at the data and the evidence that shown there.

Okay. I guess, Mister Sarris, you voted in 2025 to increase tuition for incoming students and, at an inflation plus 1%, 1%. And, but there was also UCs have the highest paid executives. Again, we have to pay those professors as educators. We need the quality that we have there for education.

Given the UC budget pressures that we have right now, what's your cost constraints? What's your plan to make sure that the board meets those cost constraints that we have? What's raising cost to students?

Thank you for the question, Senator. One big word and then we can go from there. Accountability.

Thank you.

And, so again, I think we need to, look at our ranks. We I think it's important to look at administrative costs, all of those things. Without pushing anybody under the bus, I think the University of California, as I believe any good organization, should be a thoroughbred racehorse. No fat on the animal.

Thank you. Thank you, madam proton. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Laird.

Thank you very much. And thank you all for meeting although meeting five of you at once for half hour was kinda like speed dating. And and we could not get through a lot of the issues we really wanted to get through, but I really appreciated the chance to do it.

And and normally, one question I would ask off the top is that you're all appointed by the governor and then the governor proposes a budget with UC and about whether or not you were willing to lobby your appointing authority heavily, but he will never present another budget because he's termed out. So hopefully, he will join us all in lobbying his successor on things.

I'm not sure how to do this with five of you and so many different issues. So I thought I'd sort of do what I did in our meeting is ask a question that wraps about three issues into it and let each of you pick what part of it you you wish to speak to. And I think that there's an issue of enrollment growth and being able to accommodate it.

There's an issue of out of state tuition and adhering to the deal so that there are the students from California have a fair shake at at getting in. And then there's housing to make sure that people actually can be housed when we do the enrollment and get there since that is such a challenge in some of the communities that are that are host communities.

And I know we talked about a couple of specific issues that relate to my district about a medical school at UCSC and it's just about some of the housing issues there so I don't need a field to belabor it that I should just acknowledge to everybody that we talked about this. But I think it's just maybe if each of you could address a piece of that about enrollment, out of state tuition housing, enrollment growth, how you deal with the facilities.

You don't have to answer every one but maybe each of you pick something. And maybe this time we'll start from the left and go right with Regent Farris.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator Laird. The opposite direction from in your office. I appreciate you noticing. With all due respect, there's to answer your question, there's there's there's an answers.

You answered your question to some extent because again, if we're gonna accommodate and the end, we have the largest incoming class this fall that we've ever had. But the issues remain of housing and there's, you know, so what are we going to do in terms of housing? And of course, that all becomes budget stuff as you well know. How do we pay for the housing and for the students?

We have people, the students who are housing challenged, food challenged, and this again has to do in large ways with us unable in many ways to accommodate the growing numbers.

I believe that of course we should have more as many out of state students. We get the tuition. That's important. But that's still the the the elephant in the room is still what do we do with the students when they come here? We're already exploring things like online education, online classes and things like that.

But then of course the question is to what degree do you compromise the university experience if the student isn't able to experience on campus life.

Great. Regent Robertson, you wanna take a crack on some piece of it?

Thank you for the question, Senator. I think as we discussed in your office, this is a lot here. I think with regard to enrollment growth, as I mentioned, you know, there's a variety of ways to look at it. Right? Since the compact with financial stability, the university has been able to enroll 19,000 students, which is the size of a full campus.

As I mentioned, I'm very interested in looking at traditional and non traditional routes for enrollment. And I think that is a way to moderate growth that you see, especially in particular, non traditional routes of of enrollment. And then there's the modalities. We have to get efficient. We're going to face constrained state and federal budgets funding, and we're gonna have to be more efficient in the way we deliver teaching.

And that will require online, that will require specialization in campuses, that will require different ways, different experiences for students. With regard to housing, we have 9,000 beds ready to go. The housing bond fully leveraged will provide us with $700,000,000. So we appreciate the Senate and your work and

And let me just interrupt you because I hope you didn't do what a lot of people vote No. Still have to say about this in November. And so we all have to remind them

Yeah.

What the value is as it goes along.

That's that's a good point. But we do have 9,000, but we do have 9,000 project beds ready to go. Correct. And then with regard to basic need as Regent Sarris responded, we need to work with the legislature to broaden the definition of basic needs. So it covers more, that it's more holistic, that it covers, childcare, housing, you know, that we can respond to our students' needs because the the the demographic is not a typical a typical student.

70,000, students required basic need in 2024. So we need to be responsive to that, and that is and if we are, then we can increase enrollment as well by supporting them and meeting them where they are.

Alright. Thank you very much. Thank

you. You know, I think one of the biggest frustrations that we have at the board of regents is that we just cannot accept every qualified student that wants to be at the University of California. Last year, we had 200,000 applications at the university. And so we are clearly leaving some talent on the table. And so I believe that we have to continue to expand enrollment.

But we have to be very careful the way that we do that because we in no way want to diminish the quality of a UC education. So not only does more students require more faculty, more infrastructure, more housing, more wraparound services, But

it, you

know, so it's it we have to have the resources to do that, and we wanna make sure that we grow in a way that is responsible. Really, the number 1 responsibility of the University of California Board of Regents is that we are fiscally responsible, and we leave this place in a better, state than it was when we got here. So future generations can benefit from the UC education that many of us had here.

I'm really proud that we have 85% of our students this year are Californians. So I think, you know, I love that we have I think having the cap is terrific.

I think we need out of state students as well. I don't wanna, by any means, say a 100% of California students. But that's really wonderful. And we've worked out the buyout where we cap it, but, three of our universities have received some money for taking more universe more state in state students than out of state students. So I think it's terrific.

You know, we need to work with, you, the legislature, and hopefully this this, bond, housing bond will pass because it is an absolute, necessity. I mean, you know, you see the housing and security, you know, that kids are living in accommodations that are not ideal. And we always have to make sure that the student experience is one that we want our students to have. You know? And so housing is a big issue.

It's not the cost of tuition, you know, that really is the is the barrier to entry for many of these students is the housing. It's the transportation. It's the food. It's the books. It's all of that.

And so having more housing on campus would be an absolute, you know, win for the state of California, for the University of California.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Regent Houston.

Hi. And I don't have anything to add to what they have said. However, I'm thinking what comes to mind are two things, and they're not things that are being brought up yet. One is the housing for people that actually work at the schools because I—since I've been here on May, in May, I've heard the people working in the medical center saying how they had to travel two hours just to get to school and to get to work.

And I think that a lot of students might have those issues as well.

And then, the other thing is there's a population, the native population that's in California, that doesn't have access to the UC school system as much as many of the other populations in California, and I keep that in mind as well. So, I have other issues that I would like to bring to the forefront, including the ones that you have recognized.

Regent Areias, thank you.

Thank, thank you, Senator Laird, and expanding on our discussion in, in your office, I think there are a number of icebergs that face higher education in this country, and certainly, the University of, of, of California is, is no different. The challenge to research facilities, I mean, when you think about what it costs a professor to buy a house in California, compared to, you know, some other state, our universities are great not because of the brick and mortar.

It's because of the scholars, the researchers, the intellectuals that we're able to attract and we've got to keep them. If we lose those research dollars, then we're gonna start losing the scholars because they'll have better opportunities to go to go other places. So, that is, that is front of mind for me. Then, the value proposition of, of a higher education.

People are beginning to question that because of the lived experience, because of the, the, the the cost of that education and, and paying back the money that's, that, that, that's required.

And then, that unique compact between the people of California and the University of California system, which they've always been very proud of, but when we lose the confidence of the general public, then we've lost everything, and the quality of our system will begin to degrade and, and, and erode. And then, you know, other issues that, that, that come to mind are enrollment growth. I think we've gotta be concerned about enrollment growth. If people question the value proposition, then they're not gonna wanna get a college education.

They're gonna go off and do do something else. And then, the impact of artificial intelligence. I think that's another iceberg that is facing us. I'm trying to get up to speed on that issue, as I think we all are, as public policy makers. And, you know, it changes monthly.

It changes monthly what its potential, what its threats are. You know, it is an ongoing education just to keep up with it all. And how we adopt policies that, that adopt for the opportunities to take advantage of the opportunities, as, as well as the dangers of artificial intelligence and how that that affects the, the delivery of, of, of higher education.

Thank you. Then, I have a couple more questions. And the next one, I know there's a couple of you that have a particular interest in what I'm about to ask about, but I just hope one or two of you will step up that have been regents. And that's it. There's this long term problem about the repatriation of Native American artifacts.

And there was an audit recently. It's been the subject of hearings over years and years, and I just wondered what the status was and whether you're all committed to try to get this to the end because I never understand why it's still going. So, and I can see who's leaning toward the microphone.

Mister chairman.

Yeah.

Yes, it's been a preoccupation of mine. I have ancestors' remains in UC Berkeley, for instance. So, I was very happy to get on here and push and push with a previous provost. As a result, we have finally got the position and have interviewed for a person who will be coordinating all the campuses and all the NAGPRA activities on all the campuses. You are absolutely right.

This has gone on and on, and we are out of compliance in major ways on three campuses in particular. And the, we—there, there was just a report the other day, our audits were not doing very well. And we have a federal audit that will be coming, the NAGPRA audit, which is gonna be 01/01/2028, and we better move. So, in fact, one of the people that was on the committee, to hire this coordinator, is a Vice Chair of my tribe.

The other person was Carol Goldberg, a former professor of law at UCLA and she taught Native American studies there.

So, I'm happy to talk about the success, and I also wanna give credit. When this came up and it seemed to be lagging, I pulled together the Chair of the Board, and, two other people, and, from the board—on, on our board—at a committee to address Provost Newman directly, which resulted finally in some action here.

And I will assure you that I will see this through and do everything I can and come back if I have to come to you to make sure that we are compliant and ready for that 2028 audit.

I would prefer that you come to me than my native American spouse who will be really worked up about this. So, I appreciate that response. Then, the last question I had was there have been just ongoing labor relations issues at the university and the previous president. I know because I was Chair of the Education Budget Subcommittee for five years and he would say to me, "Well, we have 25,000 vacancies. We have 25,000 positions we can't fill because it's struggle to fill," and, and of course, the labor organizations are convinced it's because they're not—they don't pay enough in some of the high-income areas.

Just maybe a couple of you and I don't know, maybe we'll start with Regent Reilly, who had the misfortune of being Chair during some of this, to just sort of talk about what your view is about sort of labor relations in the university.

Yes. Thank you. A big issue. A really big issue. 50% of our workforce is union right now.

And so, you know, we have had some contentious times over the last couple years, particularly when I was Chair. You know, our workers at the university are the reason why we are such a great university. And so, we always have to make sure that we are fair with them, that in negotiations, as you know, the Board of Regents is not in those negotiations, but we are kept up to speed regularly at every single board meeting.

We are able to ask the very tough questions, and we are able to ensure that our labor strategy is consistent with the mission of the university.

But my feeling about this is we need to not just talking—be talking—to our friends in labor when the negotiations are happening, but what we need to do is to have ongoing relationships and build coalitions. We, we all want the same thing. We all want the same thing. There are realities of how much money that we can spend, how much revenue we have.

And so, there will—it will never be perfect, but I think, you know, better relationships with, with labor, and I think we've come a long way, actually, in just the, the last two years. And so, we're—it's a, it's a regular topic at the Board of Regents and we're committed to making it work for both sides.

I don't know if anybody has anything they wanna add to that. That was a very good response. Then, I'm at the outer limits of my time, so let me just make a comment about one issue and I won't ask about it. And that is, is that one of the most popular things the University of California does is UC Cooperative Ag Extension.

And there was a time when I was first in the Senate where it had not been given a cost of living increase in twenty years. It was a 58% reduction and the Farm Bureau in one of my counties was debating tithing its own farmers to be able to raise money to fill in behind the cuts that were done. And so, in that year, we did a 58% increase.

We, we made good the cuts by no cola in twenty years, and they have hired something like a 150 or a 170 of farm advisors and other staff. And it's very important because small farmers, they can't hire a scientist for pesticides.

They don't have the advice to do water management better. They can't pay for the four H's that, that are paid for, that sort of is a, a way that that there's a track for people to come into agriculture. And it's ironic because the very first year after we did this restoration, Finance wanted to not give a cost-of-living increase again. And I went to the mat, saying, "That's how we got in this mess in the first place.

And, and former President Drake pointed out that when he was head of Ohio State.

I'm so sorry.

I didn't—I just didn't know they were that trendy in Bakersfield. So, so, the...

It's his ringtone.

Just, you know, I gave her a birthday cake a few months ago here in the Rules Committee with an oil rig on it and she has never let anything go since then. So, the point being that President Drake went to every Ohio county to when he was president of Ohio State to call out how important cooperative ag was.

And I just wanted to just put it on you to—you have partners here and, and we need to—and it's one way the university gets a good wrap in places where there's not a campus or anything else because they're really helping people. I think somebody from the Central Valley has a comment.

Thank, thank, thank you very much. I, I grew up with cooperative extension. And, you know, in reading the research, history of the university, applied research versus a research university, cooperative extension was a very important part of that when they started it because agriculture and mining were the important industries in the state, and science and engineering and all those kinds of things came, came later. I'm a product of, of, of 4H.

You know, before, be, be, before our AI meant artificial, before AI...

...The committee of your class picture.

Yeah. There you go. Before a—before AI—meant artificial intelligence to all of us, it meant artificial insemination and cooperative extension were the biggest promoters of that, that the dairy farmers should use artificial insemination to improve their, their, their dairy herds.

That was all cooperative extension. I could not agree with you more. And if I am confirmed today, I think I'll be the, the only member of the Board of Regents that has the kind of agricultural background that I have that...

Unless I'm mistaken, somebody that's sitting here worked in worked in—right. We got Sonoma County. We have Cheyenne, Wyoming.

I work on a Jersey dairy. I know—I did AI and I showed my Jersey heifer in 4, 8.

We'll do it together then, Greg. We'll, we'll do it together.

On that note, since that wasn't designed to elicit responses, I, I will thank you for your comments. I appreciate the response from this and I appreciate the indulgence of the committee to let me ask those questions. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Next, we have a Senator Ochoa Bogh.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a great pleasure to be here in front of our future regions of one of our great institutions for the state of California. It is quite an honor to meet you all, just before the committee. I do want to start, really quickly—you know, we acknowledged a little bit earlier with my colleagues about the lawsuits that the university system, the UC system, is actually facing on various issues on that end.

So, one of the questions that I have for you is, given the, the concerns, the public optics that are, you know, that are being perceived on whether or not, the, the process of admissions is fair and really representative of the values that we, we have, have you folks considered making the admissions process and qualifications public? What that looks like, what are the qualifications? What are the considerations being made?

Basically, the formula that is taken into consideration when the admissions happens. And I say that, one, to address some of the concerns that we have by the public. And number 2, because I think the public trust needs to be there.

And number 2, I also, with that, if you could share your thoughts about the UC San Diego's report that came out, in which the, you know, earlier, you, Ms. Reilluy, you were referencing the, you know, we're leaving a lot of qualified students at the table because we don't have the room, as of right now, to be able to admit these students.

However, the UC San Diego report that came out this past summer stated that the incoming freshman class for UC San Diego, when assessed for math preparation, they were scoring around middle school grades, eighth grade.

So, with that in mind, we also have to, if you would like to share, in addition to that, your thoughts on the concerns of grade inflation and how do we address that in the admissions process. So, a little bit of a lengthy question, but I'm trying to touch as many subjects—subject areas of concern by the public—that is obviously evident through the lawsuits that the university is facing and how as a UC system, as a Board of Regents, you folks can address some of those concerns.

Well, it goes for all of you, but being that you are the Chair, please feel free to, to to lead.

The former Chair. But yeah. My Chair was up on July 1st. No. That's okay.

Well, it's like a Senator. Once a Senator...

Right. Right. Exactly.

Once a Chair, always a Chair.

Well, let's just talk about the transparency of our admissions policy. And it is transparent. It is transparent. We have very clearly stated on our website about what the requirements are to be eligible for the University of California, talking about the A to G requirements, talking about how we do the comprehensive review, and we publish data every year on what the admissions have been for every single campus.

So, there is that. I think where some of the difficulty and where we could be better is sometimes we don't distinguish between eligibility and selection. And like I said, there are—I know we are leaving talent on the table. So, we could be maybe giving profiles of students who have been accepted, to talk a little bit more about what does comprehensive review mean. So, what do we take into consideration?

We don't necessarily rate them like GPA is 10% of your, you know, of what, what we count. You know, extracurricular activities is another. It's not broken down in that way. So, maybe we could give a little bit more information around that. I think that may be important. But it is there. It is there.

And, you know, we—when the UC San Diego, you know, study came out, or report came out, of course, it's troubling. Of course, it's troubling. And so, we're talking a lot about the regions. So, what—how does something like that happen? Is that, you know, is it, you know, how, how prevalent is that issue?

We also have, and the Regents have spent a lot of time and resources on, you know, making sure when students get to the University of California that they're supported, that they are supported. So, how are they—if they need some, you know, tutoring, if they need peer to peer tutoring, if they need advising, if they need a summer bridge program, if they need—we are providing that. And so, not everybody comes into the University of California with exactly the same qualifications. They never could.

But what we're looking at is what is the student success rate?

Are these students successful? Are they graduating? Are they workforce ready? So, those are the outcomes that I think that we should be looking at. And we just had at our last board meeting, which has had a full report on graduation rates, and they're up.

You know? And we're lowering the gap, equity gap, you know, not as fast as we want to in terms of graduation and time to graduation. So, of course, there's more that we can be doing, but I also think, sometimes we're criticized for things that really are available. The other thing that the University should do, I think, is we do have these—we have great relationships, our admissions folks on the campuses, with high school counselors.

We need to get this information to the counselors in every single high school as quickly and as early as possible.

What does it take to get into a University of California or a CSU school? So, they know that not when they're starting to look at colleges when they're juniors, but with the freshmen. So, if that's an interest that these college counselors are fully prepared with the most up to date information, and that's a place where I think UC could be maybe do a little bit better.

Thank you. Mr. Areias?

Sure. If you, if you look back at, at the history, you know, whether it's Clark Kerr, David Gardner, or Atkinson, or any other president, their greatest frustration was admissions policy. And I don't think there's any panacea. I don't think we're gonna find a panacea. I think it's something that you've gotta be adjusting for, for cultural and, and, and, and economic and demographic changes all the time.

And admission policy is something that that we've gotta be just, you know, moving the dials on constantly and contemplating. You know, we're studying it now. The Academic Senate is, is studying it now. I've gotten I, I don't know how many messages from physics and—physics teachers—and, and, and others that are saying that their high school students—that their students don't know basic high school algebra and they've gotta go back and and, and, and teach it.

Well, I—it didn't surprise me to hear it from physics teachers.

But when I start hearing it from social science teachers that kids can't read and write, that got my attention. And then, former President Napolitano said, we tried the, you know, to get rid of the SAT and it didn't work. It's time to bring it back. That, that all got all of our—all of our attention. But it begs the basic question also.

You know, we're talking about bringing in college tutors to get kids up to speed. Why aren't these kids prepared? What's going on with K-12? So, I mean, that raises all kinds of questions. That's the 800-pound elephant in the room.

And, you know, look at the Post Secondary Education Commission. Why did we get rid of it in 2014? It was a report card on student achievement in California. Somebody didn't want a report card. So, you know, maybe it's time to bring it back.

Thank you. Dr. Sarris?

How are you? We talked about some of these things for quite a while the other day. But there are some things we can really look at. Proficiency test should be strengthened in high school, so we see exactly where these students are and to what extent they are proficient or not.

And the, as Regent Reilly indicated, our graduation rates are up. They are up. We—if you wanna see a little bit of a slide that aren't quite as up, it's, it's often among some of the first-generation students. Has nothing to do with their ability. I would argue that those are the same students that are working, taking jobs, to support themselves outside.

So, how can they carry a heavy load and be working more than lots of other students? So, those, those are just some of the, shall I say, nuances that we have to consider when we're looking at these students. But again, I think there's issues that we there's opportunities to strengthen summer bridges. I did that at Stanford. I did it at UC for, Santa Cruz, Senator Laird, for five years.

And I saw the results of what can happen there to raise the proficiency rates that are going on. And I do have to say as a footnote, as a person who's taught English, university English for over thirty years, I have seen a decline that began about fifteen years ago in reading and writing proficiency. There's certain authors that you can't teach because the language is too dense. Students don't wanna read it. And now, I think, remember, there's something else.

There's the online—there, there, everything's Twitter. So, we're competing about—from a, a, with a, with a, students who from 10 years old now are on Twitter rather than reading Hemingway or Shakespeare. And so, we're up against those huge challenges.

Okay. Thank you, Dr. Sarris.

I'd just like to—I agree with my, my colleagues. I would just like to tag on two comments. One is we need to have a larger discussion with the SBI, State Board of Education, and the Legislature. We need to look at the AG requirements, how they're being implemented, how they're being taught. And then, we also need to look at our other re—our other segment resources.

Some are bridge programs done by UC are fine, but they're also we can't afford to do it in a, in a manner which is—might not be as effective as we want it to be. So, we need to look to the community colleges to provide programming for our students as well. And so, I think there's a solution here. We're, we're in a rubric right now. You asked about the SAT.

It's under study, but we're in a rubric where we have to respond to the student that we have, and we have a moral obligation to make sure they're successful. And we need to provide those direct services to them, in any, any way we can, and if that means bringing in resources from another system, then we should be doing that.

Thank you, Mr. Robertson. Ms. Hueston?

I'm, I'm learning something new all the time and looking forward to learning more. I, obviously, am catching up to speed, and I appreciate the expertise of the people that have brought us information about the very issues that we find very important, and I'm still looking forward to learning more.

Thank you.

I'll just say one last thing. I think there is room for the UC to collaborate more and really try to strengthen the education pipeline with k through 12, with our community colleges. You know, we're all really, you know, after the same thing. And I think sometimes, you know, we're working in silos. And I think we've gotten better about that.

I mean, you see our college transfer, you know, pipeline is is better than it was, certainly, when I started as a regent in 2019. But the same kind of thing, and I think, you know, we have to take the lead on that. Not waiting for somebody else to come to us, but really trying to trying to help our k through 12 colleagues. How can we strengthen this educational pipeline so everybody has a shot at the UC or CSU?

And I think, so a couple of thoughts on on that end, and I'm gonna follow-up with some questions, with that, but I wanna give a little bit of context. So it's very troublesome for someone that's been on the education committee for six years, English language learner, seeing the, recognizing my personal, academic deficiencies growing up through my experiences.

And I want to ensure that we have a system that actually works for all of our students in California, which is why this is a very passionate topic for me personally. And I feel a huge responsibility to ensure that we're having honest conversations about what is expected, what we're providing in in in in light of it. So, along with Senator Laird, I've been able to sit on on budget one.

And on that, we've we're allocating and we have been allocating quite an unprecedented amount of money for, towards education where if you combine both the k twelve fourteen and the higher ed, almost almost 50% of California's budgets goes towards education. Almost. And so with that in mind, we we really have to look at, you know, and I appreciate Mister Robertson's comments with regards to we have to really meet the needs. We have a moral obligation to meet the needs of the students that we currently have.

Absolutely.

If they're being admitted, absolutely. We have to. But the question then that we need to ask is whether or not a summer bridge is going to be enough to meet the gaps that have existed for twelve or fourteen years depending on how long that student has been there. Is it enough?

And if we're going to if you make a statement that one summer bridge program is going to be enough to cover the material, then why haven't we covered it and met the requirements in the K-twelve through 14 system.

So having said that, we have, you know, based on these past couple of years, we've seen the most number of bills coming in addressing the, the different systems that we have, the educational California, institutions, community colleges, CSUs, and UCs. So within that, there's been conversations about the master plan and what that master plan looks like if it's outdated, not outdated. Originally, with the master plan, the UC system had its role, research based.

You had the CSU, which was primarily workforce development, and you had community, which was more technical on in its nature. But we've also used the community college as a means to step into preparation when the when the rigor wasn't there to prepare the students to be able to then transfer to the CSUs and the UCs.

That has been normally the case. And so when we look at conversations and legislation in which, the legislature's coming in and compelling collaboration between all systems, When they're coming in and, requiring you all to, work on the, matriculation of, transfer courses, so we're not having students who are repeating courses and extending that time period. And then what's another area?

There's another there's one more area where, oh, the conversations with regards to bachelor's degrees, whether or not we offer them in highly impacted degrees or not at UCs, at community colleges, or masters and doctor programs at CSU.

When we're having those conversations there, and we're looking at whether or not the incoming class that you're accepting, are up to par academically considering, because that's the other part that we did not discuss and and I would like you folks to be able to answer each of you the great inflation concern.

What are your thoughts about the master plan? Does it need to be reevaluated, updated, or is there still a a necessary component for the particular roles that they were initially, designed to fulfill? Community colleges, CSUs, and UCs, or are we gonna be meshing them?

And why in your opinion do we need the the legislature to come in to tell you how to collaborate and do the work and not be have the initiative to just have those conversations between all those bodies because you do have a faculty association that comes in or the Senate, that comes in and makes and has these conversations.

I think I can start a little bit on that.

I know. It's kinda loaded. I have Yeah. I'm trying to get it all in so that

But but I think that, Chair Riley said, said it well earlier especially with, working with the community colleges. I'm a person who, had to go to the community college because I was not academically prepared, having not gone to ninth and tenth grade, basically. But I also am an example of what the community colleges can do to prepare one, to make one prepared.

I I think that, what, Regent Riley said was was quite on that we are doing much better at working, at doing the work that you suggested. Why should you be doing some of these things that we should be doing?

Right? And, I I will say I know that we should be doing those things, and more. One of the things we really need to do is be working more closely with community college, but also high school counselors so that they the people who advise these students who want to transfer to make sure that they're prepared, to make sure they have the requirements.

And I think we can do more there and should do more there to help the the the for us to get the students, the best students, and the students who are best prepared.

And I think that, to be fair, I think it's best prepared. And I and I Yes. And I and I say that because I don't I don't it is not the intention to discriminate. Right? I I there's it's not a question of discrimination, but it's about preparation.

Preparation.

And when we remove, SATs with the, to me assessments, test assessments are an assessment of where that that student is, whether it's at first grade, second, third, fourth grade, which I think holds people accountable. But also in the higher grades is where can they best perform because, yes, we can give them the support system and they can be successful, but it becomes very stressful and also for some students. And this is where and this is where I I think it's very important to know.

Success and the definition of what that means for graduation rates for a student. A student that comes in and has a desire growing up to be a doctor, to be a scientist, to be an engineer, and then gets to college, gets to the university, realizes that they cannot do the math or the science and changes their course to, say, a social science because there's no there's no math requirement or science requirement, that they that there are being challenges is not success.

That is an actual, lack of, fulfillment of what their desire was. To me, a child or a student who goes into university with a goal and then you they cannot perform and say, I'm not I'm gonna I'm gonna change their social because it's easier. Is that truly a success? And yes, we're graduating those students but not in what they desired. And that's the that's that I want folks to have that income because we talk about graduation rates.

But how many of them actually go and finish with a degree that they desire to have? And how many changed because it was too hard to be able to do that? I was one of them. And that's why I speak from first and experience. I wanted to be a veterinarian.

I wanted to be an architect. But guess what? The math was not something that I could fulfill. And so, we have to be honest about what success and graduation means and whether or not the intent and why those students chose what what major. And that's why I think it's important to have these conversations because there needs to be a role.

And by admitting students who are not prepared, who are not prepared into your just so that we can say we're inclusive, we're diverse, but we're not really giving that child. We're also implicating that our community colleges are not are not up to par. Because we're saying, no, you you know, well, let's admit you here.

Let's not give you an opportunity to to get better at reading and writing and math before you come to the UCs and compromising the integrity and the and the rigor of our UC students. So that's something just to just to consider.

But please, feel free to to, continue your responses.

Oh, I I don't wanna take all the time here. But I think we talked about and I think people should hear that, when I was at Stanford doing graduate work, 40% there was a 40% attrition rate of American Indian students compared to 2% overall. And that was because even though they had straight a's from their reservation schools or inner urban schools, they were not prepared.

On top of that, although I saw so many students that was heartbreaking and you you you put your finger on something very important. They have dreams.

They believe if they have A's and

all of that. I'm gonna be a doctor. I'm gonna be a lawyer and all of that. And you get to Stanford and you can't pass the basic science or math courses. You don't even take your freshman English course till your senior year.

What kind of education is that? Right? And so, what I did there is I started with, Condoleezza Rice, as I told you, was the provost at the time. And I went to her and, you know, she first argued. She said that everybody that comes to Stanford is equal.

And I kind of talked about reservation schools versus a high school in Beverly Hills or a charter school. I got money for a, summer bridge and with did basic math. All of the in and the admitted Indian students had to come. And they all of it was 15 students. All of them passed or graduated within four years and were able to take and meet the sciences.

It was also important that these students from diverse and first generation backgrounds bonded with one another so that when they came in the fall, they weren't foreign as I was when I first went to college. It was a cultural shock for me to to go to UCLA amongst students who come from families that weren't like mine. So, there were there's a those their models are out there, Senator, and we should look for ways to develop and strengthen those models.

Mister, Arias?

Yes. Thank thank you, Senator. I think it it it goes even even deeper than that. You know, there there are still high schools in California that don't offer advanced play placement classes. I don't care how good a grades a student gets and how promising they are.

You know, they are not gonna get into the University of California. And, you know, my kids have college counselors, you know, they have parents that that both got higher educations. But you take a farm worker family that that that that never graduated from college, Kids that have great promise and but just ended up going to the wrong schools that don't have advanced placement classes and they're not they're never gonna be able to realize their potential. It's not fair.

I used to work in the Cal State system at Cal State Long Beach and I saw the master plan work. A lot of my students came in from community colleges and we're not a residential campus and everyone was commuting. But the brightest students, went on to go, to get their PhDs or their masters in UC schools. And these are our brightest kids. Right?

The ones that hardworking. They're all hardworking, but, you know, these could have a job but still have these amazing grades and we're proudest about the of of them.

And the other place that we spent a lot of energy were on the students that were very promising and needed the extra care and needed a lot of extra assistance in in a lot of their classes and the fact that they were able to go on and move on and get master's degrees especially in social work are really really proud moments for us.

And for me it's not a disappointment when they came in wanting to be doctors and lawyers and engineers and had these high dreams and then decided to change their minds you know once they got to campus because they have other talents that they didn't know about and luckily for them they found somebody on campus at at Cal State Long Beach who was able to say hey listen you're amazing in art you know you're super amazing in in social work you're you have a much better opportunity of success if you want to change routes and it's not a failure.

You just have to kind of change, pivot a little bit.

Like my husband, is an amazing, attorney but when we were undergrads, we went to college together. He really wanted to go into psychology. If he ever did, he would have been the worst. Luckily, he changed his mind and somebody was able to give him the the information about, you know, it's okay. You'll still be successful.

It's okay to change your mind and I think you need that as well. You need that kind of person to be, to have your back And I think you can find that a lot of a lot of the schools. You just need to look for them and we have them. They're available. We just need to match them up with the students.

And just for clarity, I I wasn't referring to people who change interest because they find something that they like.

I'm referring more of the students who are dissuaded from pursuing certain majors because they do not have the aptitude or the preparation for the rigor of the courses that they're taking, which goes along with the line of the letter that has been signed by over 3,000 professors across over 500 disciplines at our universities that are concerned about the preparation of of our students coming in, the incoming classes. That's what I was referring to, ma'am.

I think that's an interesting metric, you know, and and see if we can drill down on that and see, you know, if we can actually figure out how many of, you know, our graduates we think are changing majors because they don't have the aptitude. You know, one of the questions that I asked when we were presented with the data about the increasing, number of graduates, four year graduates, was what's the what's the grade point average? What's the average grade point average?

Not that grade point average means everything, but are they just, you know, getting by, just passing? Has the grade point average, the the median grade point average lowered?

You know? So I think that, you know, adding some of these instead of just saying our graduation rates are up, adding some of these metrics would, you know, maybe tell, you know, more of the story. So I think that's I think that's really interesting, and I'll and I'll ask for that. The other thing is I just didn't want us to leave with the impression that there's not collaboration. We have a whole menu of they're called CEPEP programs.

If you ask me what that exactly what that meant, that acronym in, I couldn't tell you. But they're basically outreach programs to our k through 12 schools. And there are things like UC Scout. We know that in California, not all high schools, I'm I'm gonna botch the percentage, don't have AGG requirements. They don't offer them.

So right there, it eliminates your ability to get into a to get into a UC. But with UC Scout, it's online. We offer that to every single school free of charge, those a to a through g requirements, getting that word out. The peer tutoring programs have proven to be really, you know, incredibly taking our students into the high schools and do tutoring programs have been incredibly successful. We talked about the summer bridge programs, Mesa programs, where kids need help with STEM particularly.

And so we do have a lot of that outreach, and we put a lot of money thanks really to the legislature in giving us more money to to to have these programs to try to, you know, collaborate with k to 12.

One of the things that I would like to see us do, and I'm on the I am the vice Chair to Regent Sarris for academic affairs, and I haven't been on that committee before just for maybe six months when I first got to be a regent, but was let let's actually evaluate those programs, those 30 programs that we're offering. Which ones are working? Which ones were we actually seeing that it's moving the needle.

And that's instead of throwing money at, you know, a whole bunch and saying, we've got 30 programs.

Well, how about taking 12 of those that are actually we see that there is a significant, you know, benefit to those programs. So that's something that I that I'm gonna ask for.

I am an absolute yes. 100%. We had conversations about them, and I think that's what we need to do because we are expanding programs and allocating more and more funding. But the question that we need to start really addressing is, well, what are what is currently working? If they're not working, toss them out and and continue forward because, we just have a lot of and just, you know, for the record, when it comes to and then the same thing with our k twelve fourteen education system.

Right now, the I think the allocation is, well, hopefully, I have not don't know exactly yet the the final, but, the goal is to have about $28,000 per pupil, per student in California, which is unprecedented. And so that's why I'm saying we really it's it's not a money of issue. It's not an issue of money. It's how we're spending it and how we're using and ensuring that we are accountable to ensuring that those programs work. Yes.

I I just wanna tag on two items. One is that the we have a transfer plus program with certain Community Colleges that guarantee admission to certain campuses. I'd like to see that expanded. I think that addresses some of your concerns and is an interesting way. Also, concurrent enrollment at Community College while in high school, I think is a great opportunity for students to gain those skill sets that are make them successful in a University of California setting.

And I think that's something that we should be working

Yes and yes.

With the community colleges.

I don't I I we're time is of the essence. So I'm not gonna continue, but I do just if just a final thought, the tuition rates and and the inflation. I think it was alluded to by my colleague, Senator Grove on there. When you look at the at the data and the and the, what it costs and what it's been going up, is way too much.

So the ability in evaluating the programs, but also how do we, streamlining cost, streamlining our and be more cost effective when it comes to the, to running our universities.

I think that is going to be at your at your purview and I and I strongly encourage that you folks look at, you know, how can you best utilize today's technology, AI, to an evaluation of programs to ensure that we are running the most effective, most rigorous, institution, that is worldwide renowned. Thank you for your time today.

Senator Reyes. I always appreciate the comments from my colleague, because of her deep, deep, commitment to our students beginning in k through 12 and making sure they're prepared. And as you were asking the questions, I almost felt like we need to all just go out to dinner and have these conversations and just be able to to to talk back and forth and come up with ideas.

Because even though it sounds philosophical, these are necessary conversations so that we know what the foundation should be, where where we are. It's not so much failing but we're just not doing the best that we can.

It it we we have to deal with the with these bigger issues because they're also bigger dreams. This is what we want for our students. We want them to have the best education possible. I do have the bridge program at UCLA. My sister taught there initially and when she first invited us, I'm a Trojan so I wasn't sure I wanted to go but I I did go.

I I did I did go. But it was just to see these students, first time on campus and getting to know each other. Now they have friends for the next few years. And what they were learning was something just incredible to me. I I she was then became a provost at UC and is now was just appointed president of a UC of of a of a CSU.

We're so so proud of her. And coming from, you know, parents with the third grade education, my mother and a sixth grade education, my father. And I have a sister who was with a doctorate from, in social social work. My sister at UCLA PhD, myself a JD. It's it's it's because the parents, I forget.

Yeah. The parents knew that that is what they needed for their Children. And even those who didn't want to continue their education, they were the superintendents, they were the supervisors, they had their own business. My sister was a, police officer and then a, a detective. Just knowing that education was such an important part of of our upbringing.

When we talk about missed opportunities, for me, I I realized that, our students were not filling out the forms for financial aid in high school. And so that was something that I took on a few years back and now it is a requirement that a student has to fill out the FAFSA or the KEDA form before they graduate unless their parents ask that they be excluded. It it this opens doors and that's what we want for the students.

What they feel it's I I think, miss Houston, you talked about belonging. You want to make sure that the students feel that they belong.

Well, if the doors aren't opened and they didn't fill out the forms, they can't go to college or they feel they can't. And now everybody can go to college. These are important things and very, very, very important to all of us. I I do wanna ask some questions. Let's start with the regents Riley and Sarah's.

This appointment is for twelve years reappointment. You will have been through a period with three governors. You have governor Newsom. I'd like to say who the next governor is, but I won't. We have two that are running.

And then you'll have another governor after that. So tell me what lens have you used when approaching the work of the UC, and how do you think your perspective could change as we navigate the next decade with new state leadership?

Thank you for the question, Senator Reyes, without sounding flippant. So much also depends on what happens in the meantime as as we're navigating these challenges that go forward. But I think the most important thing here is that we work collaboratively, and we will need the support of the governor and the legislature to ensure that this university remains the best unit public university in the world and that we, adhere to its mission of equity for all of our students.

I mean, I Aye, you know, I I I I don't wanna prognosticate about the future because I don't know. I think I know who the next governor may be, but, you know Me too.

I'll be

like you, so I won't say anything. So but I think that I feel very positive about that and that relationship, that possible or potential relationship, should I say. So I Aye, you know, I think going forward. But when I was called about this reappointment for twelve years, I said, oh my god, I'll be dead. And and the response was, we'll get enough out of you, Mister Sarris.

So, but I I am looking forward to it. And if I have to go down, this way fighting for our students. And I and I I wanna say something that if I may a little not to address was something you said earlier. What we haven't talked about are the parents. You talked about third grade education, parents with third grade education.

So many of our parents want the American dream, education for their children. But they don't quite know how to ask the questions. They don't even know how to support their students their their students, but they want them to do that. And that's the other thing. We have to make sure the parents are engaged as much as possible if our students are gonna succeed, particularly coming from these populations of

people. It's so true. I mean, my parents immigrants from Mexico. So they the good thing is that they had great neighbors, who had gone through the educational system here and

with their children and they were great supporters for for my family. And so we I mean, we're grateful, you know, for neighborhoods, for village. Exactly. I I'll never forget going to UCLA and hearing these students on phone calls with their, there's only phones in those days, phone calls with their parents talking about Shakespeare and all these books. And I'm going, oh, you know, at home they'd say, well, who's that?

What's that? Which has nothing to do with the greatness of our people.

That's right. Thank you.

Well, thank you for the question. And I had a similar not such a dire response when I was told that I was gonna be, you know, would be maybe reappointed to another twelve year term. Mine was well, I'll definitely be in assisted living by then. Not not that I'd be dead, but an assisted living for sure. A little bit.

Just a little bit. But, you know, you think twelve years

You're talking about the demographic of some committee members and you're really on thin ice. That's all I can say. But look look at the issues that we're talking about. Like, you think twelve years is a long time, which it is a long time. But these are big issues. You know, the future of the master plan, you know, it does that still, you know, resonate, you know, sixty years later? These you know, we're not gonna decide that in a day. And then will my perspective change? I hope so. I hope so. Because I think as, you know, members of the Board of Regents or members of the legislature, we better be open to new information. You know, we have to be open minded. The question was, would you reconsider, you know, reinstituting the SAT? Of course.

I'm gonna look at the data.

Of course, I am. You know? And then, you know, to come in with some sort of, you know, a a closed mind, I think, would be detrimental to the university that is best known for innovation and discovery and change. You know?

And so but one thing that we cannot change and that we really must abide by and I'm really proud to be on a board that understands the fundamental mission of the University of California, understands that it is our, you know, responsibility to make sure that we have ex excellence in academic teaching, in research, in in, healthcare, and that we are a public university for the public good.

And so as long as we keep those core values intact, other things can change. But it's really important that we adhere to those core values. And if we start straying from that, you know, our university would would not be we would not be, you know, good leaders of this great institution.

Thank you. My next question has to do with the UC medical schools and diversity. And I want to give some information and then is it pronounced Arias? Aureus. Aureus.

Alright.

Aureus Sunrise.

Alright. About seventy five percent of doctors who complete their graduate medical education in California remain practicing in California. And most of them are being trained at UC's. UC Riverside School of Medicine for example, I'm so proud that we now have that medical school and they have spent a lot of time. I was part of the initial community group that helped to bring it in.

I didn't have the the the the importance and impact that you did, but I was one of those community members. But it ranks among the top medical schools for Hispanic and Latino enrollment with about twenty eight percent and a graduation rate of thirty percent. UC Davis also ranks high with underrepresented groups making up forty five percent of medical students. This year, the UC implemented UC prime.

Education program programming at each medical school to target a specific communities needs from improving rural health care access to serving, African, black and Caribbean, indigenous, Latino or urban populations.

Seventy six percent of this year's UC prime matching graduates, will remain in California for residency training, and nearly 40% will train in primary care in California. However, as we look at this, we do know that there are laws we have to abide by as we are trying to figure out the enrollment of our students While still following our various laws and court cases, what can UC medical schools and eventually UC Merced Medical School do to attract and retain Latino and black and indigenous medical students?

But, you know, I I think they're they're doing a pretty good job of that right now at at at UC Merced. I I I visited often and, I mean, it's just wonderful to see 70% of the kids are the first generation in their family to go to college.

About medical schools now. Yeah. Medical schools. But but yes.

Well, I I I I think the same thing. If you look at the population in the Central Valley, I mean, they're they're likely, you opportunity that I talked about earlier at UCSF Fresno and working with the largest trauma center in the state and the ability to add 1,500 fellows and and and and and residents. You know, they're gonna be students from that area and it's a great opportunity.

Residents know that they're gonna get a great education in an area where there's a lot of industrial accidents and sadly, a lot of gunshots. You know, I I remember the nursing program when I was in college.

The nursing program at CSU Chico was at Fairfield during the Vietnam War. And the education that those nurses got working at the hospital, the the the veterans hospital in Fresno, putting our soldiers back together, serve them and and all American health all their lives. So that opportunity exists in in in Merced and Fresno, and I'm I'm sure in Riverside as well.

And, you know, I think we've you know, people are are always going to be more comfortable when they're working with a a doctor that understands their culture and their background. And so it's just like our admissions policies.

You know, we constantly have to be adjusting them to address the cultural, economic, and demographic changes in California. And and, you know, as I said, there there is there is there is no panacea. It's it's something we've gotta be adjusting to all the time, You know, to serve our students, to serve our population.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Houston, I wanna talk to you about federal funding. Over the past fifteen years, federal funding has accounted for roughly one third of UC's overall budget.

Helps to support UC budget in various ways. 58% patient care at UC, UC's medical centers, 32% for research, and we've talked about how we're losing this money for research, 10% for student financial aid. With tighter medical eligibility rules and reductions in federal funding for health care, which are expected to lower reimbursement rates for UC medical centers, It's this is going to cause an increase in uncompensated care.

What strategies should the UC regions pursue to help UC medical centers respond to the financial pressures resulting from HR 1, including lower federal reimbursement and higher Un Uncompensated care?

I have absolutely no idea. But it's, important and it's something that we're gonna have to address and I need to learn more about it and I am depending on the information that we get to figure out what it is that we have to do. I'm really confident that if we get the issues to talk about and discuss that we'll come up with something that keeping the UC mission in mind, we we can work together moving forward. And I don't have an answer for you.

What are there steps that you that that you can think of that the UC should take because now they're more vulnerable knowing that they're going to have less money? Are there steps besides increasing the fees for students? Are there steps that you think the UCs should take?

I don't know. I'm just thinking of the example that I come from the Navajo Nation, which is in Southern Utah, Northern Arizona, and New Mexico. And we are too dependent on federal aid. And we have to make a case all the time about why we need the funds that we get to run our medical centers, our education systems, our law, our laws. And I'm familiar with that system.

I don't know what it is that we do here in California for that. So I'm willing to figure out and learn. So I still don't have an answer for you but I do have experience with my own tribe and how we have to work and we work together collaboratively with the states. And with the local governments to make sure that we get the resources that we need.

And to come to think of it, it's probably an unfair question to ask you because you had not been a regent, and the budget is a big part. It's all fair because I'm learning. Alright. Very good. We're all learning.

That's the good thing.

But I'm glad that I'm willing to learn.

And that's the important thing is that we all bring something or you all bring, different experiences, lived experiences that make you as a totality, a great a great group. My last question has to do with university labor relations, so I will go to Mister Robertson, another JD. I love that. Reformed. I guess I am too. I've been out of it now for ten years. So we're we're just dangerous.

That's right. We know just enough. Although, it makes us better at what we do, I think. It's been mentioned earlier about the fact that UC is the biggest employer in the state of California, employing over 270,000 people. Our largest employer in many of the counties, in California.

A 152,000 of them are represented by either one of the 19 statewide or the 14 campus specific bargaining units. We have seen that labor organizing activity and strikes have increased at the universities across the country, including a series of strikes at various UC campuses and their medical centers. How do you think UC should balance, between the fiscal responsibility, with the need to value skilled academic and professional staff through fair labor agreements? I would relate back to Regent Riley's comments. We we need to have a collaborative relationship with labor and really bring them into the conversation and have a open and honest conversation about our financial trajectory, the needs of our students, the needs of our medical centers, and how the labor constituency fits into the picture, because they're very important. And then as fiduciaries, let the university negotiate those contracts, but but set the policy as a collaborative policy.

Very good. Let me just look at my last notes.

One one comment that you made is the value of higher education is being questioned. And I hope that as you proceed in your various roles that we recognizing that that is true. We have many students who are graduating with wonderful degrees and are not able to get a job in their chosen profession. And it isn't that that they didn't study something that they loved. It's just that there isn't a job for them.

And trying to to work with whoever it is we need to work with on workforce development to make sure that we do find the jobs for our students.

Senator, I I think we we we we both grew up in an environment when, you know, we were told get an education and buy a house and the rest of it will take care of itself. It's not true anymore.

It isn't in our It's not true. Students.

And they graduate, they've got those those big loans. They can't they they can't buy a home. They can't take that vacation they earned after studying all those years. It it it's it's such a disservice to our students who've got to find, as was mentioned earlier, how we take care of the students and maybe what what it is that California needs to do specifically to help with with, making sure that that education at least many levels is it a free education.

I think that's something we need to work towards.

Thank you all very much. And madam PT, I yield back to you.

Thank you. So thank you all, for answering a series of questions. A lot of my colleagues have had the chance to touch on a variety of issues that I think are important, for us. And you've also heard some themes. Themes related to access, themes related to wanting good and productive relationships with labor.

Certainly, as we think about access, the implication it has for all of our students and scholars at the university, to enter world renowned academic and research institutions. I oftentimes have described that, sometimes there have been moments that have been, moments between the legislature and the regions in particular that cause a lot of conversation and discussion. But they always are rooted from a very good place. From a place of recognition that this legislature understands that we want more of the UC. More opportunities for students.

And sometimes the chat the limits that we've had are what cause a lot of debate. How do we get, more of our constituents, more of the students that we, you know, wanna see at the university, at the university, more Californians, all of those things. But they're rooted from a place of good and place of wanting the same outcome that you all have. Over the last few months, the conversation around SAT has reignited.

And I say reignited because, as someone who spent almost eleven years working at the UC, this is not a new conversation.

It's actually decades old conversation for the university in terms of the metrics that we use to consider admission to these institutions. And, as we followed over the last few months, some of this that's come up. I also think a lot about, you know, the experience of our students who are applying, how we determine whether they are ready, prepared, or able, to be productive scholars at our institutions. And I also think, about the fact that, the metrics differ.

As someone who also spent time looking at, graduate admissions, it turns out that you can get really qualified and prepared students not using the exact same metrics, because it depends on a program by program.

And so there is not one universal form to determine whether a scholar, a researcher, or a student is going to be ready. There are different things that tell us and, give us information about what that admission, process looks like. In 2024, this legislature passed a bipartisan bill, SB 1195. And, that bill was signed by our governor into law.

And it was a bill that was generated from a lot of students who wanted to get into the UC, that required the same, entity that administers the SAT to, offer the AP exams more than once a year.

Because for a lot of students, and it turns out thousands of parents, thousands of parents felt like, hey, this is actually a barrier to admissions. It's a barrier to admissions not to have it be offered more than once a year. It's a barrier, and we see that at the k through 12 system, and we want our students to be competitive. It turns out that that law went into effect signed by, you know, the governor, bipartisan support.

And the same institution that administers the ACT has actually not implemented the law.

They've been very reluctant to find a way to solve a problem about access. And you are now faced with the decision to allow the same entity that has not offered access to our students, on the, exams, on the AP exams, to say that, you know, potentially their product, which is the SAT, might actually be used as a metrics. Why do I share this? These items are not necessarily connected, but they are related.

And I wanna know if there are a group of legislators, of member of the public that don't have full trust in one of the tools that you may or may not use, how do you, as regents, respond to the fact that you may be moving down a path of instituting a metric that has resisted access in other place and has lost the trust of the same people that you and I want to serve here in California.

How do you navigate that, and how do you build trust on potentially asking for a new metric to be introduced, one that has previously used from an entity that there is a lack of trust in.

Pro Tem Limon, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You just opened the door and exposed something that is not very much at all talked about. So thank you.

And the most important thing is that the public be educated, that we educate so that there is transparency on these issues.

So that if we were to make a decision, and that's all the more reason why right now in the student and academic affairs committee, we are making sure that every one of our meetings are when the board comes together, we have an item on that agenda from now until June so that we are up to speed and are able to address that very question given the information that you just exposed. Thank you.

I'd love to hear from others on how you bridge trust. How is California going to trust that if you go down the path of the ACT SAT, that it is one that Californians can trust will offer access to the university and that it will indeed be a system that is equitable. And I might and I'm not asking for your answer on how you will vote when the time comes. This is a, you know, a process.

But I I wanna make sure that that's we we as Californians have to trust that the metrics used for admissions to a highly sought university system are the metrics that allow not just for rigor, not just for the best students, but also ensure access and equity in this state.

I don't mean to catch you off guard and it's

super You're not catching us. I don't I at least you're not catching me off guard. I think what the question is assuming is that we just have limited information about these decisions that we're making. And I think in my head, I'm trying to figure out basically to answer your question. That's more than just one question that we have been presented with.

So we can't answer your question because we still have so much other information to sift through before we can come up with a decision. And yes, you're right. We may not all agree on the same thing, but I think collectively, I think we make a pretty decent job in making the right decision for the students as well as the UC schools. And I'm confident we're gonna get to that point.

And eventually, we're gonna we're on public record that we're gonna be making a decision and that decision's gonna be made public.

But even in that, we're not gonna all be in agreement.

Thank you, madam Chair. It's a it's a very good question. I'm interested in knowing, you know, more about about the tests and and your concerns about it and and and and what they are. But it comes down to, you know, basic fairness. It comes down to it's basic to everything we do, ensuring equal access to everybody.

A meritocracy that that that is the great equalizer in our society. And if we fail at that, we fail at everything. So, you know, I I I have a a colleague who served on the Board of Regents for for many years. And she asked me as when she found out I was appointed, she said, Rusty, when you figure out who runs the Board of Regents, let me know. Or who runs the university, let me know.

And is it the academic senate? You know, is it the is it the office of the president? Is it the Regents? Well, it's supposed to be the Regents. It is supposed to be the Regents.

If we have an active, interested, involved, prepared group of regions. And that's your job, to make sure that we know what our responsibilities are and we carry them out, and we're capable of doing it. And that's what you're doing here today. So the question you're asked is basic to everything we do. Fairness.

It's about fairness. And in a multicultural society like we live in, you know, fairness can be elusive. Fairness can be a mirage. You know, we've got to work on it all the time. And that's when, you know, why I say when it comes to admissions policies, I think we've got to have our hands on the dials all the time.

I'm going back and and and and reading, the recollections and and memories of of of of Sproul and and and Clark Kerr and Gardner and Atkinson and and and all of them. And every one of them every one of them, what their greatest frustration was admissions policy. It's been consistent over the years and I think it will be a theme of of our experience as long as we're here. It is politically charged. There's no question about it.

It's hard to take the politics out of politics. Somebody somebody told me once, you know. We had a a governor that was later president of The United States that that fired the president of of the University of California and was popular for doing it. He was popular for doing it. He cut UC funding, and his successor, a Democrat, cut UC funding.

And it took a Republican, George Duke Majan, to increase funding 32% in his first year as governor. Unheard of. Unexpected. But the university had fallen out of favor. That compact between the public and the university had eroded for the prior sixteen years.

And in one year to his credit, working with president Gardner, they restored 32% funding to the university. And this university would look a lot different today if it weren't for him. So it is something we've got to be doing all the time, working on all the time, and we look forward to working with you. And I'd love to have an offline conversation about your concerns and and and how we address them.

You know, on our board, we have a faculty representative, as you know. And so as Boris is looking at at the, the data and analyzing and making a recommendation ultimately to the academic council, which will then come to us. I'm gonna ask the faculty representative about this issue and see if that is any way factored into the analysis or just what the response is. But I was not aware of this. So it's it's new information, but we certainly can make some inquiries.

Yeah. I would like this to be factored by Boris too. I mean, I have a fundamental problem that the SAT is ignoring California law, which is sort of probably a step before the admissions policy. But it does raise some significant issues. And but as being respectful of of the co governance process, you know, I think we need to let boards do their job and see where it comes out.

But but this is a much bigger discussion. I mean, having access is critical and providing that access through multiple bytes of the apple for the AP exam is seems pretty an easy ask. And so, if they're not gonna do it, then we need to look at other options that will qualify our students to be admitted. I mean and I'm that I'm pretty certain about.

Thank you. And I think you hit at the core of that region because if the entity is not willing to create access through an AP for students in California, what does that mean about the entity and the product we use for more permanent decisions. I think that it's it's not that the AP exam is all and be all for admissions. It is one of multiple factors that are considered. But it I think it is more telling about that.

And today, you know, in front of us is is we are trusting you as regions to make these decisions. And I wanna make sure that in turn, that that trust is also, manifested through the people that we represent who are asking themselves, how do I get into the UC? There are people in this state. There are students in this state whose dreams are to enter the UC. And so that's why this topic is heated.

It is, you know, debated. And I think it's a healthy debate. I actually think it's a very healthy debate. You know, and I have a lot to say as someone who worked at the UC, but it's a it's a healthy debate. But I also don't want us to lose that the fact that if we don't have trust in the decision makers that are deliberating these issues, for a multitude of reasons that actually are not in your control.

What is that then translate to to the greater public? I came into the UC as a first generation college bound student. I was not the best test taker. The system worked for me even if I had to take a remedial class. It worked.

It worked for me. And there are others that it will work for. There are many students, you know, across the state who could benefit and who will, in turn, give back to the university, who will come back, and double down the investments that the university gave, through work, through time, through energy, and through legislation as well.

There is no surprise that that is why I have been so involved, in some of these conversations because they are conversations that have impacted me at the personal and professional level and certainly now at the legislative level. I appreciate the robust discussions that we've all had.

I appreciate also that you've made yourself individually available to all of us both not just for, you know, for for some of the the newer regions. Some of the more experienced regions have also made themselves available, to us through throughout, time to discuss some of the subjects, and issues that come forward. It I I would not be doing my job if I also, did not say, to Senator Reyes that, dinners are very appropriate so long as we don't hit quorum, on any side.

But they are very appropriate to continue the dialogue and exchange of information. And I've that is one thing I also appreciate that in my time here, I have seen an increase of that.

I have seen engagement from the regions themselves in in a way that I hadn't seen, you know, when I started. But it's just increased, and I feel like it's made for really healthy discussions. And I want the public to know, that they're hard discussions. That we, you know, as legislators, we're not shy to bring up the things that make it to the front page of the news.

We're not shy to make sure, that, you know, our brothers and sisters in labor, have a voice, you know, I mean, those are things that we do absolutely bring up.

And what I've appreciated is the regions have just been, very open to, again, not breaking any of the rules and not breaking quorum rules, having those conversations. So thank you all, for your time. Thank you for this robust discussion and for serving, for the University of California and for all the scholars and students who are part of that, the faculty and staff as well. So with that, we are now going to open it up, for members of the public to come forward.

And if there are any members of the public that are here to speak in support of any of the regions that are here in front of us, this is your moment to please come forward, state your name, affiliation, and your position.

Hi. My name is Ethan m. I recently graduated high school, and I'll be headed to University of Arizona in just a week from now. And I just wanted to say, you know, thank you all of you guys for serving California. It means a lot.

My both of my parents are immigrants, and they're also Bruins, and they're able to grow and become doctors and service not only, you know, you know, not only to build wealth, but also service back, give back to their community. And, they have a lot of pride for, servicing towards California. But I'm here today, to just, mainly ask what is the long term goal for the UCs? What are the UCs?

What is the what is the look, that UCs want to have in twenty, thirty years from now, you know.

There's a lot of things that

I appreciate that question. It is a good question. However, this is just the moment where you speak either in support or in opposition

Right.

Of those in front of us, and we don't have the chance to ask questions and dialogue through public comment. So if there is someone here you would like to support, in terms of their confirmation, this is the moment where you're able to do that, and perhaps the regions can make themselves available to have answer that question upon the confirmation, if that is okay. Sure thing.

Yeah. I support, you know, all the, you know, efforts that you guys have for not only, you know, ensuring diversity, but also, you know, funding, you know, making sure that you're, you know, less vulnerable from federal cuts. You know, I know it's really hard. It's hard to run a institution. I I can't imagine that.

Yeah.

So thank you all for Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anybody else in the room here speaking in support? Alright. See no additional members of the public to speak here and support any members of the public, who are here to speak in opposition of any of the appointees.

Alright. Seeing no one here in opposition. We are no one here to support. Through that. Kidding. I have a whole list of people.

Public yeah. I mean, we do. We all have a list of people, by the way. We do. So just because they're not in the room doesn't mean they're not supportive.

So we're going to go ahead and bring this back to members of the committee. We are going to go, through each one, and I will, begin by, entertaining a motion for Russi Reyes as a member to the regents of the University of California.

So moved.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove.

Can we please call the roll? Limon. Aye. Limon, aye. Grove.

Aye. Grove, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye.

Ochoa Bogue?

Not voting.

Ochoa Bogue not voting. Reyes?

Reyes, aye. Four votes.

Aye.

Congratulations. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with the four o vote. Next, I'll entertain a motion from a Bell Houston as a member to the Regents of the University of California. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Thank you, Senator Reyes. Can we please call

the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove?

Not voting.

Grove, not voting. Laird?

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue?

Aye.

Not voting.

Ochoa Bogue not voting. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. Three to zero. Congratulations. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with a three o vote. Next, I will entertain a motion for Janet Riley as a member to the regents of the University of California.

Can I please have a motion?

So moved.

Thank you, Senator Laird. Can we please call the roll?

Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Yep.

Grove, no. Laird?

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue?

No.

Ochoa Bogue, no. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. Three to two.

Congratulations. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with a three to two vote. I will entertain a motion for Chip Robertson as a member to the regents of the University of California. Can I please have a motion?

So Okay.

Good. Always can I go at least

Thank you, vice Chair Grove? Can we please call the roll? Limon. Aye. Limon, aye.

Grove. Aye. Grove, aye. Laird. Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue. Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Reyes.

Aye. Reyes, aye. Five zero.

Congratulations. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with a five zero vote. I'll entertain a motion for Gregory Sarris as member to the regions of the University of California.

So moved.

Thank you, vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon. Aye. Limon, aye.

Grove.

Grove, aye. Laird?

Aye.

Aye.

Laird, aye. Ochoa Bogue?

Aye.

Ochoa Bogue, aye. Reyes?

Aye.

Reyes, aye. Five to zero. Congratulations. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate for confirmation with a five zero vote. Thank you all for participating and being part of this process.

Thank you.

I didn't mean to dismiss you. First, I like you. You did a good job. Oh, here. I'll go there.

That's right. I'll go there.

Alright, members. As we, have folks make their way out of our hearing room, we do have to adjourn the public portion of this agenda. We will be adjourning to the executive session once members of the public and guests have been able to leave our hearing room.