April 10, 1997
Executive Director Warren H. Fox
California Postsecondary Education Commission
1303 J Street, Suite 500
Sacramento, California 95814-2938
Dear Warren:
This letter responds to your request to Provost C. Judson King for a "A Letter of Intent to Expand" in accord with the Commission's
1992 "A Guidelines for Review of Proposed University Campuses." The University has been carrying out planning activities for
building a tenth campus in the San Joaquin Valley, and we want to keep the Commission apprised of this planning effort. My staff and I
are working with State leaders to identify funding strategies that could make it feasible to plan and open the new campus by 2005 or
soon thereafter.
Let me stress, however, that a final commitment to build the tenth campus depends on adequate resources both to develop the new campus and to ensure the continued growth and health of the University's existing nine campuses. Because the funding issue remains to be resolved, the University cannot yet provide you with a resolution from The Regents authorizing the new campus, although we have enclosed their resolution approving the preferred site. Nevertheless, I am providing an update on the current status of our planning for the tenth campus and the best information available that is res- ponsive to the Commission's Guidelines, in light of your important role in advising the Legislature regarding the development of new campuses.
The tenth campus would enable the University to maintain overall undergraduate access at the levels contemplated in the California Master Plan for Higher Education. As part of the strategy to increase capacity at the University of California, the University has looked to the San Joaquin Valley. In the University's last period of new campus development in the late 1950s and 1960s, the need for a campus in the Valley was recognized and preliminary planning for such a campus was initiated.
The San Joaquin Valley is the only major California region of substantial population without a University of California campus. There is an important statewide interest in increasing the educational attainment and economic diversity of this part of the state. At the same time, a tenth campus located in the Valley would bring with it the benefits of economic development that accompany a public graduate education and research university. Finally, the tenth campus would fulfill the University's public service mission under the Master Plan by adding to and building on public service activities already located in the Valley.
1. Accommodating Demand for University of California Undergraduate Enrollment
The latest Department of Finance and University of California projections of demand for undergraduate enrollment in the University agree in showing steady increases to 2005, followed by even sharper increases between 2005 and 2010. By 2005 or shortly thereafter, many of our campuses will be at capacity; those that can grow will be unable to absorb all the growth that we and DOF are projecting. A tenth campus is essential for the University to continue to offer access to undergraduate students in keeping with the Master Plan. In order for the tenth campus to develop to the point that it can help accommodate the level of growth projected for the years to 2010, it will have to be opened in 2005 or immediately thereafter.
2. Serving the Higher Education Needs of the San Joaquin Valley
California has a substantial interest in ensuring that students in the San Joaquin Valley can fully participate in the advantages of higher
education. Attendance at the University of California by Valley high school graduates is about half the state- wide average rate. The
Valley is a region of extraordinary ethnic diversity. By working closely with Valley schools to improve K-12 preparation, the tenth
campus can influence improvements in eligibility and participation of all Valley students, including those from groups historically
underrepresented in the University.
The tenth campus will improve access by San Joaquin Valley students to undergraduate education at the University of California in
several ways. Eligibility rates and participation rates for the University are generally higher in areas that have University campuses. The
visibility of a University campus within a region focuses the attention of students, families, and local K-12 educators on University
admissions requirements. While attracting students from around the state, the nation, and the world, University of California campuses
work most intensively with the schools in their areas, and will do so to an even greater extent following the recom- mendations of the
current Outreach Task Force. When K-12 students achieveeligibility for admission at a nearby University of California campus, they
are eligible at all University of California campuses. In this way, our campuses can improve the participation of eligible students from
the geographical area in which they are located.
3. Serving the Region through Graduate Education and Research
The tenth campus will also contribute to fulfilling the University's graduate educa- tion and research mission under the Master Plan. In a series of invitational Valley forums held by the University this winter, Valley leaders stressed that what the San Joaquin Valley lacked and needed most was a public graduate education and research institution; they saw this as a key not only to continued economic development and diversification in the Valley, but also to continued social and cultural development. The research and graduate education programs of the University are pivotal contributors to statewide economic development. In particular, these programs provide a stimulus to regional economic development surrounding University campuses.
The University contributes in several ways. Each campus has faculty and produces graduates with advanced training reflecting the latest know- ledge and research techniques in their fields. The presence of the faculty and the pool of advanced degree holders attract businesses and industries to locate in the vicinity of the campus for the interactions and stimulation these talented and knowledgeable people provide. New knowledge produced by University researchers will lead to the creation of new or improved businesses and industries critical to expansion of the state's economy.
In addition, an outstanding research and graduate program will attract excellent undergraduates to the campus, undergraduates who may stay in the region and contribute to its development. The high quality of the University's undergraduate program is a product of the intellectual strength of a faculty working at the cutting edge of knowledge with some of the country's finest graduate students. Undergraduates share this world of discovery with faculty and graduate students. The new campus will share in the Universitywide goal to give undergraduates many avenues for participating in the research mission of the University.
In its January 1990 report, "Higher Education at the Crossroads: Planning for the Twenty-First Century," the Commission reviewed existing enrollment and capacity projections for the University of California. That report contained two recommendations specific to development of the tenth campus:
1. The Regents of the University of California are advised and encouraged to continue planning for the addition of at least one additional campus, with decisions about whether more are needed to be deferred at this time;
2. Plans for additional University of California campuses [the eleventh and twelfth campuses then under discussion] should be developed when
(1) the University better documents its needs for increased graduate enrollments, and
(2) the University re-examines the mix of graduate and undergraduate enrollments on existing campuses as well as the new campus.
In its discussion of the first recommendation, the Commission stated that "The Regents' process for site selection for this new campus appears reasonable on its face to the Commission, as the criteria for site selection include issues of access to historically underrepresented students as well as other geographic and economic concerns." We agree with the Commission's view that concerns about significant numbers of underserved students and regional economic development are important criteria regarding the location of the tenth campus.
With respect to the second recommendation, the Commission questioned the Uni- versity's plan that every general campus have a minimum graduate enrollment of 20% of the total. Since then, our graduate enrollment planning has been in a constant state of evolution. Currently, the University's planning to 2005-06 assumes a systemwide proportion of 18.5% graduate enrollments, which would yield less growth in graduate enrollments to 2005 on our existing campuses than was envisioned in 1988. The question of appropriate levels of graduate growth is now under review within the University. The graduate/undergraduate proportions planned for the tenth campus will not be based on a predetermined percentage, but will instead be grounded in initial academic program planning that is now under way.
The Commission's report concluded this way (page 52):
"At this point, projected undergraduate growth and the Commission's limited understanding of the need to expand graduate education in the University appear sufficient to warrant continued planning for the development of one additional campus. This approach will likely provide the University with sufficient capacity to continue to fulfill its historic commitment to undergraduate access, and will clearly provide it with substantial expansion potential after the year 2005. However, there are numerous factors outlined above, for which understanding is still far from complete, and which as a result can only be projected with limited confidence. These factors, and the undeniably strong effects that they will have on future enrollment levels argue strongly for an ongoing and dynamic planning process - a process in which old assumptions can be revisited and revised as necessary, with the understanding that the growth needs of the University will almost certainly not decrease, they may well need to be substantially redefined whether upward or downward between now and 2005."
This Commission statement reflects the University's own posture with respect to current tenth campus planning.
The Legislative Analyst's Office and others predict that beginning in 2005, there will be a surge in demand for higher education, after a period of steady growth between now and 2005. The Legislative Analyst predicts that the number of Cali- fornia eighteen-year-olds will increase by 50% to 2010, with about a 5% drop-off in the subsequent five years.1 As shown in the following figure, University of California enrollment projections, based on unofficial Department of Finance projections, anticipate an increase in the rate of enrollment demand after 2005.2
These comparisons suggest that the capacity of the existing eight general campuses to accommodate projected undergraduate demand
will be strained in 2010. The opening of a new campus with sufficient capacity to accommodate a portion of that
growth is not an event that will happen overnight. In order to do its share in con- tributing to Universitywide capacity by 2010, the new
campus needs to be opened by 2005 and developed quickly thereafter. We have concluded that a tenth campus will be needed by 2005
to help meet the demand by 2010.
The University has used the planning assumption that the tenth campus would open with 1000 students in 2005-06 and grow at the rate of 800 students per year to 5000 by 2010-11. For purposes of evaluating potential tenth campus sites, a maximum of 25,000 students was used. The assumption of growth of 1000 to 5000 in five years accords with historical patterns at other University campuses, and the maximum of 25,000 accords with Long Range Development Plan maximums approved for several University campuses. It is premature at this time to estimate the likely proportion of graduate students. Planning for graduate enrollments will be sensitive to an academic plan that will identify very distinctive needs for graduate education and research. The initial academic plan is currently under development and will be completed this fall.
A detailed assessment of enrollment growth and maximum capacity will be included in the new campus proposal, the next step in Commission review and approval of new campuses.
The following table shows CPEC, state Department of Finance, and the University's current planning figures for estimating demand and capacity to 2005.
Undergraduate Enrollment Demand Estimates | ||
| Fall Headcount | Year Average |
CPEC Baseline | 152, 930 | 148,342 |
CPEC Low Alternative | 143,088 | 138,800 |
Department of Finance | 154,677 | 150,000 |
UC 1997 Recalculation of 1995 Estimate |
| 147,900 |
Undergraduate Capacity Estimates (Headcount) | ||
UC LRDP Undergraduate Capacity at 20% graduate |
| 144,700 |
UC LRDP Undergraduate Capacity at 18.5% graduate |
| 153,000 |
The California Department of Finance projects a need for the University to accommodate year-average enrollment of 150,000 undergraduates in 2005, an annual growth rate from currently budgeted enrollment of 2.3 percent.3 In its 1995 report, "A Capacity for Growth," the Commission projected undergraduate enrollment demand for University enrollment to be 152,930 fall headcount students by 2005.4 In its 1995 enrollment projection, the University of California used a methodology that is sensitive to participation rates to assess potential demand; the University has been updating projections each year in light of changes in participation rates. The University's most recent recalculation of its 1995 enrollment projection estimates year-average headcount undergraduate enrollment demand in 2005-2006 at 147,900 students.5 The University has concluded that under these updated projections, demand for UC enrollment will exceed campus capacity soon after 2005.
The campuses's Long Range Development Plans to 2005, approved by the Regents, project a maximum undergraduate capacity for the University's eight general campuses of 144,700 stu- dents. That capacity is based on graduate enrollment of no less than 20% on each campus. If the graduate enrollment were projected instead at the 1997-98 budgeted level of 18.5%, the University's LRDP capacity would be 153,000 undergraduates. Though it is possible that one or more campuses will in the future revise their LRDP's to expand enrollments in excess of the 1988 LRDP's, we do not expect that such increases would be sufficient to meet demand after 2005.
The Regents' preferred site for development of the tenth campus is the Lake Yosemite site, located approximately eight miles north-northeast of the City of Merced.
The University of California Regents authorized planning for three new campuses in November 1988. This authorization was in
response to enrollment projections that capacity at the existing campuses would be inadequate to meet student demand for access at the
levels provided in the California Master Plan for Higher Education. This reflected work being done by the existing nine campuses to
update their Long Range Development Plans through 2005.
A site selection task force for the tenth campus was created in March 1989. The following September The Regents adopted a
methodology that established a six-step process for reducing the number of sites under consideration and delineated a set of 38 criteria
for evaluating sites. In February 1990, the Board directed the President to focus the search for the new campus in the central region of
the state where the freshman participation rate of University of California-eligible high school graduates is considerably below the
statewide average participation rate. Approximately 85 potential sites were identified and evaluated. University staff narrowed the list to
20 sites, which were then subject to more detailed examination by technical con- sultants. In July 1990, the Site Selection Task Force
presented eight San Joaquin Valley sites to the Board of Regents for approval as preferred sites.
In October 1991, the Site Selection Task Force visited each of the eight sites. Public meetings were held in Fresno and Modesto. In
March 1991, The Regents approved the Task Force recommendation that three sites be advanced for further consideration. The three
finalists were located in Fresno, Madera, and Merced Counties. For the next two years, the site selection process slowed owing to the
State's de- teriorating financial situation, which resulted in severe budget cuts to the University. Indeed, The Regents suspended the site
selection process in May 1993 after further budget reductions. However, the legislature appropriated $1.5 million specifically to fund
preparation of an environmental impact report to evaluate the three finalist sites. Preparation of the environmental impact report
included several public meetings and hearings in the San Joaquin Valley.
In September 1994, The Regents adopted eight factors to serve as the basis for the final site selection, and in March 1995, the Site
Selection Task Force held public meetings in Fresno, Madera, and Merced Counties regarding the three sites. At their May 1995
meeting, The Regents selected the Lake Yosemite site near the City of Merced as the preferred site for the tenth campus.
At this time, the University is planning only one new campus.
As noted in (1) Enrollment Projections, above, the University is using for planning purposes an initial on-campus enrollment of 1000 students for 2005-06, a sixth-year estimate of 5000 students for 2010-11, and an estimated enrollment at build-out of 25,000. This is, in fact, a tight timetable for achieving the rate of growth necessary to help the University accommodate anticipated demand.
The essential element of tenth campus academic development is the academic
plan. The initial academic plan is currently under development by the Tenth Cam- pus Academic Planning Task Force, chaired by UC
Davis law professor Daniel Simmons. The Task Force was formed in the Fall of 1996 and is meeting over the course of the 1996-97
academic year. The initial thoughts on the academic plan will be presented to various internal constituencies during the spring and
summer of 1997, and appropriate consultation and redrafting will take place.
The result will be submitted to the Academic Senate of the University and the Commission for review and comment. It is expected that this plan will initially guide the selection of a Chancellor and the founding faculty for the tenth campus, who will then refine the long-term academic plan. However, this initial plan will incorporate important principles that will guide the long-term planning, including exploration of new ways to deliver education using instructional technologies and new opportunities for cooperation with the California State Universities and California Community Colleges in the region. In order to ensure that the initial plan considers synergies with existing public universities and colleges in the San Joaquin Valley, we have invited a representative from the California State Universities and one from the California Community Colleges to be ex officio members of the Task Force.
A capital outlay and budget plan is being prepared by Associate Vice President Larry Hershman. He will provide this information as soon as a plan is finalized.
The Regents' resolution approving the Lake Yosemite site is included as Attachment 1. The Regents have not yet taken a formal action to authorize the building of a tenth campus.
As depicted on the enclosed maps, the Virginia Smith and Cyril Smith Trusts own a total of 10,000 acres northeast of the city of Merced. Each of the trusts is dedicated to providing scholarships for higher education. The two trusts are working with the University towards a joint development arrangement that will affect development of the campus and its surrounding community. The potential development agreement will provide the University with an unprecedented opportunity to work with two land owners dedicated to higher education in developing an integrated campus community.
The University has signed an option agreement to acquire 2,000 acres of a 2,550 acre portion of the Virginia Smith property (designated
for purposes of the agreement and the attached maps as "University Area") for nominal consideration, i.e.,
$10,000, at any time prior to June 30, 2007. The term of the option can be extended initially through June 30, 2008, and then again
through June 30, 2009.
The site selection environmental impact report includes extensive information about the Lake Yosemite site. We would be happy to supply a complete set of EIR reports to you on request.
As I mentioned at the outset, our ability to commit to building the campus depends on the availability of capital and operating resources not only for the tenth campus, but the existing nine campuses of the University as well. As you know, the University is engaged in continuous discussions with State leaders on that subject. I look forward to your input into the process and to the views of the Commission regarding our planning efforts.
We will continue to work with you and your staff as our planning efforts evolve. Provost King and his staff will be happy to answer any questions about the material provided here and to consult with your staff regarding ideas emerging in the aca- demic planning process. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Richard C. Atkinson
President
1 Legislative Analyst's Office, California's Fiscal Outlook:, The LAO's Economic and Budget Projections, 1996-97 Through 1998-99,
Table 5,
(November 21, 1996). The report states, AEstimates of increased enrollments beyond 1998-99 are based in large part on projected
increases in the young-adult population. As Figure 5 shows, for example, we project that the number of 18 year olds in California will
increase by 78,000, or 19 percent, from 1996-97 to 2001-02, and by 186,000, or 45 percent, by the year 2015. These relatively large
increases have been labeled by some as "Tidal Wave II" (the children of the "baby boomers").
2 UC Enrollment Monitoring 1997, table 4, p. 8.
3 Department of Finance, 1996 Projection Series by Segment, reported in University of California Planning Group, Enrollment Monitoring 1997 (February 1997). The figure is year average headcount as recomputed by the University.
4 California Postsecondary Education Commission, AA Capacity for Growth,@ Display 28, p. 54 (1995). Year-average headcount is
97% of this figure or 148,342.
5 UC Enrollment Monitoring 1997, supra note 2, p. 9.