Students storm UCLA building to protest expected UC system fee increase [Updated]
About 30 students stormed UCLA’s Campbell Hall and barricaded the doors with chains and bike locks early this morning to protest a student fee increase that is expected to be endorsed by the University of California’s Board of Regents today.
[Updated at 8:39 a.m.: The UC Regents have started to meet, and hundreds of students have surrounded the building, protesting the proposed fee hike.]
Students who spent the night were sprawled outside Campbell Hall in sleeping bags. They carried posters and signs that read, “Don’t take our education away” and “Don’t privatize, democratize.” Many wore bandannas over their faces.
Dozens of other students spent the night camped out in tents on top of Parking Structure 4. Hundreds of other students are expected to join the protesters and demonstrate at the UC Regents meeting that will take place later today.
The proposed two-step student fee increase would raise UC undergraduate education costs more than $2,500, or 32%.The annual cost of a UC education, not including campus-based fees would rise to $10,302.
Kyle Tramberly, a junior at UC San Diego, said he did not sleep since arriving at UCLA late Wednesday night.
“I’m here in solidarity with people across the state of California that are being subjugated to these outrageous fee increases,” he said. “I can’t afford the fee increases, personally. I have to take out private loans in order to cover this. It’s completely unjust to put the burden on students.”
A key committee of the UC Regents backed the two-step hike Wednesday, despite appeals from students who urged the board to at least postpone a vote. About 500 student and labor-union activists demonstrated outside the meeting. Fourteen were arrested.
-- My-Thuan Tran
Photo: Students march in front of Covel Commons at UCLA, where regents will be voting on a fee increase later in the day. Credit: Al Seib / Los Angeles Times








I used to be so poor that the "middle class" looked way up there for me. So I had to borrow enough money to take care of rent and living expenses. I lived with roommates to split the cost. Some of my undergrad friends bought computers with their financial aid money.
Which is why this outrage over the fee hike baffles me. Some of these students probably borrowed up to 40 thou, and they should have some money left after the tuition and books. If you just make even some minor adjustments, a 2,500 hike in fees should not be that big a deal - unless you live alone, and have to make car payments and other humongous bills with your finanaical aid.
Hey, I was poor. I lived within my means at college. I could have went to a community college for a few hundred bucks a unit, but I chose the prestige. I made the choice and lived with it. And these protesters should also.
Posted by: lee | November 19, 2009 at 01:47 PM
These students should acknowledge the fact that UCLA turns away approx. 77% of students applying each year. What about those students who were denied, many of whom are straight A students. And, what about the fact that 5,700 students at UCLA are not US citizens, they are foreign students, and in addition to that approx. 2000 students are illegal immigrants. UCLA should prioritize admitting American citizens before international students, especially with all of the taxpayer funding this State college receives.
Posted by: michael | November 19, 2009 at 01:49 PM
I am glad that those 100 students took time out of their lives to fight in what they believe in. It saddens me that only 100 students protested out of the millions and millions of pupils that go to either a CSU or a UC. Both schools are etting raised nby not only student fees, but as well as taxes. It saddens me how we do not care if we do get raised cuz apparently everyones simply just do not mind getting raised fees. This nation talks about how we are the future. We are the generation that will become doctors, lawyers, dentists, etc yet they are targeting us from getting those degrees. How will that benefit our economy?? people who think jobs will cover it or financial you do not know that they are planing to cut the people that get financial aid and that taxes will b e raised again by 10%.. THIS IS NOT RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BUT I AM GLAD ATLEAST SOME PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD HAVE A BRAIN!!!!!
Posted by: JESSICA LOPEZ | November 19, 2009 at 01:55 PM
I do agree that the tuition is still a great deal in California. I am a student at University of Michigan and my tuition is twice as much.
However a 1/3rd tuition hike is giant.
Posted by: William Cook | November 19, 2009 at 01:55 PM
For those of you who want to keep blaming Prop 13 for not making businesses pay their fair share of taxes let me give you some real world economics that they must not be teaching at UCLA. Businesses don't pay taxes. We the people pay taxes. Businesses just raise their prices and pass it on to us the consumers. You make the taxes higer on businesses and they'll either do that or leave the state. This is one reason why the state is broke. We're not a very business friendly state. Lower the taxes for the people and we'll spend the extra money we make. It's pretty simple if you think about it.
Posted by: G.G. | November 19, 2009 at 01:57 PM
Proposition 13 comes home to roost. Education led California into prosperity, and when the rich decided to pull the rug out from under education, the steep decline in education was forthcoming. Surely, illegal immigration also pushed and strained government to the point of bankruptcy, with its costly demands on the prison system, welfare system, education, and health care providers. The UC system produces too many Mickey Mouse majors. Government money should go towards disciplines that pay back society: mathematics, computers, science, and medicine. Instead, lots of money has been wasted on liberal arts. California's educational system has itself to blame, especially its ultra-liberal flagship, Berkeley, that turned off the powers to be. Why put money into a system that bites the hand that feeds it?
Posted by: whamo | November 19, 2009 at 02:02 PM
OBVIOUSLY THE IDIOT THAT IS BLAMING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR THE EDUCATIONAL WOES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS NOT QUITE AS OLD AS I AM. AFTER MY SENIOR YEAR IN HIGH SCHOOL, I JOINED THE MARINE CORP. AT THE RIPE OLD AGE OF SEVENTEEN. I WAS ONE OF TWO MALES IN A FAMILY OF EIGHT AND JUNIOR COLLEGE WAS $6.25 PER UNIT IN 1968. AFTER TWO TOURS IN VIETNAM, I FOUND MYSELF PAYING OUT OF STATE TUITION ON THE EAST COAST. I RETURNED TO CALIFORNIA AND REGAINED MY RESIDENCY AFTER ONE YEAR. I TRANSFERRED AND COMPLETED THE DUAL BACHELORS PROGRAM IN THREE YEARS.
Posted by: DARIUS KENNEDY | November 19, 2009 at 02:08 PM
I'm disheartened by the rosy future painted by some college fans here. Check the facts - not a small amount of students take on majors that has little appeal in the job market, and end up taking 10 bucks an hour jobs held by people without a BA.
Former students should remember how they wasted money on a bunch of required courses that often have no real relevance to your field of study (second language requirement, some sort of "diversity" or ethnic studies, random theatre and poli sci courses). They'll often chase "easy" classes or professors who babbles on and hands out a bunch of multiple choice quizzes.
As long as students forsake affordable junior colleges and trade schools (actual job skills learned!!!!!!) and take out big loans to chase prestigious institutes, nothing will change. Why haven't we promoted underrated institutions that best serves the needs of the poor / minorities whose expenses / grades aren't quite good enough for UCLA? Nah, instead, we have to spend gazillions on places like UCLA and whine all day about "public education is for the rich"
Posted by: lee | November 19, 2009 at 02:09 PM
This is a very sad day in our state. The public sector is being starved, and our educational system undermined. I find the situation to be heartbreaking.
Posted by: Glenna Matthews | November 19, 2009 at 02:12 PM
Say good bye to your non-resident students who are already paying close to 50,000 per year.
Posted by: david | November 19, 2009 at 02:20 PM
There are ways around the high fees. For example, work at the Medical Center while attending UCLA, and get a significant discount from the Regents. I attended school Monday thru Thursday, and worked 12 hour night shifts Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. That's how I could afford UCLA. I lived on my own and graduated without debt. I said the whole time that UC(LA) can't and won't give anything away. It's our responsibility to be creative, and find the ways and means to help our dreams come true. UC students should be smart enough.
Posted by: Niels Hansen | November 19, 2009 at 02:21 PM
There are ways around the high fees. For example, work at the Medical Center while attending UCLA, and get a significant discount from the Regents. I attended school Monday thru Thursday, and worked 12 hour night shifts Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. That's how I could afford UCLA. I lived on my own and graduated without debt. I said the whole time that UC(LA) can't and won't give anything away. It's our responsibility to be creative, and find the ways and means to help our dreams come true. UC students should be smart enough.
Posted by: Niels Hansen | November 19, 2009 at 02:21 PM
And would their parents be the ones who voted for Prop 13? And flipped houses during the real estate boom?
Posted by: Baffled Observer | November 19, 2009 at 02:24 PM
College education is FREE in France...just saying.
Posted by: Joanna | November 19, 2009 at 02:32 PM
UC Students - get a loan for the extra $2500 and stop whining!
Everyone else is hurting too just get used to it and stop acting like spoiled brats
Posted by: GetReal | November 19, 2009 at 02:35 PM
i do get that the state is broke, its not our fault for the state's mistake!!!!!!!!!!!!! 32% is a lot, the UC Reagents arent the ones who are going to be in debt in a few years. Instead of jacking up the prices, they should stop building schools, in the LA area, those are millions of dollars thrown in the gutter, use that money to cover what we need to in order to survive, not everybody is rich, or has the money to pay for higher education,
Posted by: J.B | November 19, 2009 at 02:38 PM
"Learn about how a university is run: While everyone in the private sector has seen pay cuts or losses in benefits, university employees have been immune from this. Plus, most university employees are overpaid to start with."
@Jason, sorry, but you're wrong. I could get paid twice as much in the public sector--and that's before my recent pay cut. Most university employees aren't paid what you seem to think they are.
Posted by: KateNonymous | November 19, 2009 at 02:39 PM
Why does a degree take only three years in almost every other industrialised country but four years in the US?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Posted by: GetReal | November 19, 2009 at 02:41 PM
Why does a degree take only three years in almost every other industrialised country but four years in the US?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Posted by: GetReal | November 19, 2009 at 02:41 PM
While I do feel that UC should be free as a public resource, the average family income of UCLA students exceeds $150,000 a year. Last time I saw the data, statewide, the average family income for UC students is about $100,o00. (Yes, there are exceptions). At Cal State University, the income numbers are far lower. If they care about social justice, the UCLA students should be demonstrating for their compatriots of lower socioecomic classes at Cal State and the community colleges.
That UCLA is raising $185 million for its basketball stadium is, as mentioned by some writers on this blog, a scandal. I challenge Chancellor Block to go back to the donors for Pauley Pavillion and ask them to donate an equivalent amount - $185 million - the the academic program, and to publicly state that UCLA will not accept any donation just for athletics but that anyone who wants to give to sports programs must give an equivalent amount to academics.
Posted by: DonW | November 19, 2009 at 02:43 PM
It is the responsibility of the University of California Regents to do two things: provide access to higher education for all qualifying California students and facilitate a quality education environment in America's premier public universities. Their actions today undermine access, both economically, by pricing out middle income and lower income students, and physically, by further reducing enrollment. And all at the expense of the quality of the student experience, with furloughed staff, reduced classes, and decreased graduation requirements.
As a senior at UCLA, I could have easily ignored the fee hikes, but I joined the demonstrators since 9 a.m. this morning because I refuse to give my tacit consent. They are undermining what was once a great Californian success and a model for the rest of the country. I have no doubt that the Regents made the wrong choice today, by continuing to take on financial liability in the face of increasing budget shortfalls, which I guess more student fee increases, furloughed staff and cut faculty will inevitably resolve.
Posted by: nassim agange | November 19, 2009 at 02:43 PM
I'm a UCLA Alum.
The fact that this is being protested is stupid, but not surprising.
Just a few years ago, students were protesting low pay for hourly workers on campus, without any forethought about where the money to pay them would come from. Well who the hell do you think will be let go first if these fee hikes don't go through?
True, Yudof makes a sickening amount of money. Even if we reduced his salary to $100K, it still wouldn't put a dent in the ENORMOUS debt that the UC system must make up for.
To the UCLA students bitching and moaning about how this is an affront to public education, I say this: Would you rather the university close its doors? Would you rather that low-income employees of the university - the employees that students say are 'oppressed' by low pay - lose their jobs entirely just so you can have a cheap education?
There is more at stake here than just tuition. We're talking about the livelihood of adults with families.
Posted by: thisisridic | November 19, 2009 at 02:46 PM
It's all simple economics.
If the market has priced you out, stop buying.
When the regents see that admission rates are abysmal, maybe they'll reconsider the fee hikes.
What I don't understand is that the 30% increase that is applied here is to people whose families make more than 120k a year.
Your rich parents can't afford that?
Cry me a river.
Posted by: Shanes Werld | November 19, 2009 at 02:48 PM
I suppose the other way to look at this is the students are paying higher tuition to support the illegal aliens getting a free ride. ( like the prison system too ) So much for the talk of nobility etc.
Posted by: John | November 19, 2009 at 02:49 PM
Regarding Nan's comment - From the article, a lot of other UC students from other faraway campuses like Santa Cruz are coming to LA to protest. So your argument is moot about not having the money to fly to Sacremento. Try carpooling to Sacremento if you want to have some sort of impact on your protest.
Anyways, protesting The Regents is like protesting at Ralph's when your food costs go up; andthe increase in those costs are the results of collusion by a corporate behemoth (see the ADM lysine as an example).
Posted by: You Know | November 19, 2009 at 02:50 PM