Due to differing moral and ethical positions among board
members, the UC Board of Regents voted Thursday to postpone the
adoption of a policy that would restrict the funding the university
receives from tobacco companies.
Regents also discussed the 2007-2008 state budget, as well as
limits on compensation for university employees, and voted to
establish a permanent staff adviser to the board.
And though the board decided Wednesday that they would postpone
a vote on student fee increases until March, University of
California officials said Thursday they would send out letters to
families so they would have more time to plan in the event of a fee
increase, which was included in Gov. Schwarzenegger’s
proposed state budget.
The ban on funding from the tobacco industry would only apply to
tobacco-related research. But discussion on the topic has been
tabled until the board’s May meeting in order to allow the
regents to get faculty input on how the money is currently being
used and the potential impacts of restricting the funding, chairman
Gerald Parsky said.
The UC funds research projects through various sources,
including federal, state, corporate and industry support. There are
currently 13 projects being funded by tobacco giant Phillip Morris
at several UC schools, including UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UCLA and UC
San Diego.
Some regents expressed uneasiness about limiting funding, saying
such a decision should be made by the faculty whose research is
directly affected by the money rather than by the board.
Regent Sherry Lansing said she did not want the regents to
decide to drop tobacco funding at the Thursday meeting because it
would directly challenge academic freedom, which she called
“the basis on which the university stands.”
“I believe in the faculty. They can monitor themselves and
do research without being corrupted,” Lansing said,
suggesting that the regents should only vote to cut off money from
the tobacco industry if the faculty agreed.
The regents have made no previous restrictions regarding
acceptance of money from tobacco companies.
But funding from tobacco companies came under fire in 2004 when
the UC Berkeley School of Public Health banned the use of tobacco
industry funding for its research purposes. The UC Academic Senate
ruled the School of Public Health did not have the power to make
such a ruling and reaffirmed the power of the regents to make
funding decisions.
Regents who support the tobacco funding ban based their
reasoning largely on the morality of the tobacco companies.
Stan Glantz, a professor of medicine and director of the Center
for Tobacco Control and Research Education at UCSF, presented a
recent federal court ruling to the regents during Thursday’s
meeting which said the tobacco industry had created an
“enterprise” to defraud the public through its various
research funding across the nation.
Glantz, who published the first article that proved nicotine to
be an addictive drug, said a university that “is committed to
truth and enlightenment should not be working with the tobacco
companies,” and urged the regents to no longer accept that
money.
Current and former students urged the regents to adopt the
policy during Thursday morning’s public-comment section as a
means for the university to fight against the control of the
tobacco companies.
“The tobacco industry damages and manipulates the research
process. This policy makes a statement that the UC will not be a
means for the tobacco industry to buy credibility,” said
Laura Miller, a UC Berkeley alumna.
The regents also discussed Schwarzenegger’s proposed
budget at length, expressing their concern over the lack of funding
for university retirement pension plans and academic preparation
programs for students.
Parsky said that if the regents wish future budgets to be more
aligned with the goals of the board, they must be more involved in
the budgeting process.
“We need to look collectively (at the budget) and how we
can put forward longer-term needs so that it is not just a report
back to us, but that we’re engaged,” Parsky said.
Regent Richard Blum, who will take over as chairman of the board
in March, said he believes the only way Sacramento will allocate
more money to the UC is if the regents “lobby for a bigger
piece of the pie in a reasonable and credible way.”
The Compensation Committee also discussed and approved a revised
policy regulating the professional activities the
university’s faculty perform outside the UC. The policy
limits the number of boards ““ for both nonprofit and profit
organizations ““ from which university officers or staff may
receive compensation.
The limits were created to ensure that time spent on outside
activities, such as board memberships, were not preventing
university executives from successfully completing their jobs,
according to the UC Office of the President’s agenda.
The approved policy is only temporary until permanent guidelines
have been set, UC President Robert Dynes said.
Thursday’s meeting also saw the adoption of a staff
adviser to the regents in order to add more diverse representation
to the board.
Dynes said a staff adviser “adds a piece of the university
family to this table” and was enthusiastic about having
different points of view available to the regents.
With reports from Bruin wire services.