CSU Chief Financial Officer Richard West
Responds to
the California Faculty Association Communication
of October 10, 2001
Concerning FY 2002/03 Budget Priorities


From: "Deborah Hennessy" 
Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001  09:32:40 AM US/Pacific
To: ascsu@calstate.edu, campussen@calstate.edu
Subject: Richard West response to CFA
Reply-To: Deborah Hennessy 

From:
Dr. Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, Chair
Academic Senate of the California State University
401 Golden Shore, Suite 139
Long Beach, CA 90802
phone: 661.664.2249 or  562.951.4015  (fax 562.951.4911)
e-mail:  jkegley@csub.edu
dhennessy@calstate.edu
http://www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/

-----------

Colleagues:

Following is a letter sent earlier this week from Richard West,
Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer, to CFA.
FYI, I am sharing Richard West's letter with you, as well as a
CFA report, and a report from Sam Strafaci, Employee Relations,
CSU Chancellor's Office.

s/Jackie Kegley

------

November 19, 2001

Dr. Susan Meisenhelder
President
California Faculty Association
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1950
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear President Meisenhelder:

Chairman Gould, through Chancellor Reed, has ask me to respond to
your October 18, 2001 letter describing the California Faculty
Association's fiscal year 2002/03 budget priorities. I was happy
to have this opportunity to respond because it is important to me
that in this difficult budget year we consider CFA's views. Let
me respond to each of the items you raised in your letter.

1. No Less Than Full Partnership Funding-Despite the very real
adverse economic conditions present in the state and in the
country right now and probably for at least the near term, the
Board of Trustees has adopted a full partnership budget proposal
for next year. While I think the chances of achieving that level
of funding are slim and that there will be many very difficult
choices to be made during the next several months, I hope we can
work together for the system and our students.

2. Improve Student Services Funding-The partnership budget
proposal does contain a significant increase in funding for
Student Services ($10,100,000). Of that amount, $7.1 million is
intended to expand and improve academic advising opportunities
for first-time freshmen and upper division community college
transfer students and to provide permanent funding for the
CSUMentor program. The remaining $3 million is for implementation
of the Common Management System's (CMS) student services
module which I will comment on more below.

3. Maintain Current Student Fee Levels-CSU has the lowest
student fee levels of any of our comparison institutions and the
Trustees are proud of that fact. The 2002/03 budget proposal
seeks to maintain fees at their current levels. There may come a
time during the upcoming budget discussions that alternative
revenue sources beyond the General Fund will need to be part of
those discussions if we are going to maintain access and quality.
We hope this is not the case and will do all we can to ensure
that the state maintains its commitment to the CSU.

4. Marginal Cost Funding Adjustment-In last year's budget
request the Trustees included a proposal to increase the basis on
which the average salary for new faculty hires is computed. This
year in presenting a partnership only budget request it was not
possible to include all important items or programs that have
widespread support. The difficult choices for this budget process
have already begun. However, I believe that the hiring of
tenure-track faculty is a priority of the campus presidents and
that despite fiscal problems we will see the numbers of new
faculty hired for tenure-track positions increasing this current
year and next.

5. Common Management System Cost Controls-The CSU is on course
with the implementation of CMS and costs have remained
essentially the same as when this effort was begun. In some
cases, precise funding sources have had to be adjusted but not
increased. It is vital to the healthy operation of the CSU that
outmoded, unworkable and obsolete administrative systems,
including the infrastructure and equipment, be replaced and
revitalized. There really is no choice in this matter. All areas
of campus and system operations will benefit from this multi-year
program. Curtailing our effort now will literally waste the fine
work of all the people involved to implement a technology-based
network that links CSU financial, human resources and student
information on a common network that will assist in providing
more and better services to students, faculty and staff, more
efficiently.

I cannot agree with you more that CSU is a vital state resource.
And as you can see from the above comments the Trustees have
recognized in their budget request for next year many of the
priorities of the CFA. As you join with us on the System Budget
Advisory Committee to help us shape our budget for next year, I
hope we can count on CFA's support for funding CSU's
2002-2003 budget priorities.

Sincerely,



Richard P. West
Executive Vice Chancellor and
Chief Financial Officer


RPW/ps


cc:	Laurence K. Gould, Chair, California State University Board of Trustees
	Charles B. Reed, Chancellor, California State University
	Members, CSU Board of Trustees
	Members, California State University Academic Senate
	Members, California State University System Budget Advisory Committee
	The Honorable Jack O'Connell, Chair, Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education
	The Honorable Joe Simitian, Chair, Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education
	Amy Springer, Consultant, Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education
	Max Espinoza, Consultant, Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education
	Tim Gage, Director, Department of Finance
	Jennifer Kuhn, Legislative Analyst' Office
	Karen Yelverton-Zamarripa, Assistant Vice Chancellor
	John Richards, CSU Budget Director