<p>In the time I have been here, I have read countless posts about out of state students trying to come to California to attend one of the UC’s all while paying in-state tuition. After doing some research, I found out that gaining California residency for in-state tuition is not that hard since the UC system only requires one year of residency to qualify. I find this really upsetting. To pay for these universities, California has had to make a lot of cuts to other parts of its budget and raise a lot of taxes. </p>
<p>I think don’t it’s fair to offer out of state students in-state tuition since they have not put in nearly enough money to justify a reduction in price, especially when there are many decent universities in their home state. It seems to me that many of these students are coming from from states where education is not a top priority on the agendas of their elected representatives. These people would rather give huge tax breaks to giant corporations, even if it guts their universities, rather than funding their higher education system. </p>
<p>I think that if out of state students can’t afford out of state tuition, than they should lobby their state government to better fund their higher education system, so they don’t have to go to a UC for a good education. People want the benefits of an elite higher educations system, but they don’t want to pay for it. This is really unfair to California, especially when we are already having enough financial problems.</p>
<p>Well brining in out of state students for college means that they’re likely high(er) achieving students. And coming for college means a high likelihood of staying after school to live. This in turn brings in more educated students that will be likely to obtain higher paying jobs and contribute to the UC system afterwards in tax payments, thus putting more money into the system. A person who lives up to 18 in California then goes to school has not contributed in a major way to the system, although his parents have. However, a student graduating will immediately begin to contribute after graduating and going into the work-force. Increasing the time period to obtain residency may turn some potentially good taxpayers off of the idea of coming to California. If the high taxes weren’t bad enough. Additionally, California wastes money in a lot more areas than the UCs. Just my two cents. </p>
<p>I get how someone might be frustrated. However it just doesn’t bother me. I think statistically not that many people are doing it. And if you’re doing it right out of high school it’s more difficult because the parents to whom you are dependent are out of state. </p>
<p>Because for the most part people can only if this if they’re 24+, I think it’s more likely that they’ll stay in CA after school. In addition, they’re more likely to work while they’re in school, and therefore start contributing sooner. </p>
<p>I also don’t think it’s a major issue. I think to deny someone a top notch public education because they were born in a different state sounds a bit elitist. If a student is willing to jump through the hoops and legitimately do what’s needed to gain residency, then that’s the kind of student I want sitting next to me in class. They’re determined and I respect that.</p>
<p>I grew up in CA and went to school here all my life. In my 20s I decided to move to texas. I stayed there for several years, and came back. I had to re-establish CA residency before I could start school. I was shown no favoritism as a native Californian. It’s a fair system.</p>
<p>@lindyk8 I see where you are coming from, but to me, that is like saying that you would not worry if an elected representative were stealing from California because statistically speaking not many people were doing it. If a state senator were to steal 20,000$ from California’s budget, would it not bother you? 20,000$ is a very small amount of money when compared to the total amount of money California spends. Would you just write it off because it wouldn’t make much of a difference? I guess what I am trying to say is that my opposition is based of principles. </p>
<p>Is it that easy to get instate status as an undergrad student in CA? The student just has to live in state for one year? No parental move there needed? </p>
<p>"Students under age 24 who didn’t attend the university prior to fall 1993 and are not dependent on a California resident parent who meets the university’s requirements for residence for tuition purposes (one year physical presence with intent to remain in the state), also must meet the university’s financial independence requirement in addition to the 366-day physical presence and intent requirements.</p>
<p>Note: This requirement makes it extremely difficult for most undergraduates who do not have a parent living in California to qualify for classification as a resident at a UC campus. This includes transfer students from community colleges and other post-secondary schools in California." </p>
<p>It doesn’t seem that easy to me. I don’t think that many undergrads take advantage of this. UCs don’t have that many out of staters even in freshman year, and the number doesn’t decrease (showing hordes becoming state residents thereafter) in later years.</p>
<p>I think more costly to the state is the “Dream Act”. </p>
<p>@CollegeDropout1 I actually do get what you’re saying. I was kind of surprised when I read the details of residency a couple of months ago and saw it wasn’t that hard. A person can come to CA in the summer, and basically apply to UC in the upcoming fall from a CCC, assuming the year of residency kicks in by the following fall UC enrollment. (I might be slightly off on this, but that’s the gist.) </p>
<p>I think maybe 18 months-2 years would be a better wait period, but I guess trying to change it would be insane. </p>
<p>The one caveat for those who don’t like it is there are hurdles, simple but often overlooked - how often you leave town to go to a former residence, where you are during summer. They want detailed info on vacations. Plus ppl forget to change banks or license plates, things like that.</p>
<p>@2016Candles You missed my point, my position has nothing to do with elitism. I’m not saying that out of state students should not come to the UC’s. I am saying that if they want to attend a school in the UC system, then they should pay out of state tuition. It has nothing to do whether they were born in California or not, it has to do with whether they have helped fund California’s higher education system. I would have no problem with an out of state student attending a UC as long as he had been paying taxes to California, but he can’t because to pay taxes to California, you have to live in California. </p>
<p>@cptofthehouse It’s definitely hardest if you’re still a dependent of your parents. They calculate the parent’s residence. So that’s a buzzkill.</p>
<p>However there are provisions if one parent lives in CA and another somewhere else. It becomes slightly more doable then. </p>
<p>Seriously, I think the stats on this are probably kind of low.</p>
<p>Many colleges are easy on those students who have an instate non custodial parent. I wouldn’t be concerned about that situation. A parent has been paying state taxes, working in the state, etc and not using state resources during earlier years for the kid if that kid is going to school OOS with the custodial parent </p>
<p>Given that most students are dependent on their parents as freshmen, i don’t see how this can easily be done. How would an 18 year old come up with payments to make a go of it at a UC without parental support especially at OOS prices? There is that minor detail of who is coming up with the money for a student to pay that first year expense. Really, it’s not like this is a gold rush for those to go to CA and take advantage of this. Look at the OOS numbers. A big drawback of the CA college system is that so many students are in staters. They can use some more out of staters to freshen things up a bit. Good private colleges want geographic diversity to make it a richer climate in terms of meeting people from other placed in the country as well as the world. State schools do not have that luxury because of having to answer to state legislators and tax payers as to most of the spots going to those in state. </p>
<p>It would be interesting to know how much the UC’s are funded by the state now. I know at UCLA it’s like maybe 20% funded by CA. </p>
<p>From what I’ve heard, actually getting residency is harder than it seems. My OOS cousin is going to be a junior at UCLA now after two years and I know he’s still classified as OOS. </p>
<p>“Well brining in out of state students for college means that they’re likely high(er) achieving students. And coming for college means a high likelihood of staying after school to live.”</p>
<p>I wouldn’t go as far as saying OOS students are likely “higher” achieving. Obviously they are high achieving though. I’d be interested in comparing stats of IS and OOS students who apply to the UC’s to really see if there is a difference. </p>
<p>I’m not so sure there’s a “high likelihood of staying after school to live” if the kid is coming from OOS. I mean, honestly, CA is going down the toilet at an exponential rate. </p>
<p>@CollegeDropout1
You said that if a student can’t afford to pay oos tuition they should lobby their state to better fund higher education. That’s the same type of logic that was behind “separate but equal”. The fact is, that all state universities are not equal and it is not the fault of students that that is so. I still say if a person wants to move here, stay for a year, likely get a job, and go to school, why in the world would I have an issue with that. </p>
<p>Do you know how many lifelong CA residents milk all the benefits of CA state schools, then move right out of state to earn a living, buy property, etc? Ca residents are basically taking the education and running. That is more of a hit to the CA economy than a relative few oos students trying to get a CA education. </p>
<p>Agreed. More people leave the state to work, then stay. Cost of living is too high.</p>
<p>@Zalrons your cousin is still probably a dependent of OOS parents. That could be one of the major setbacks for him. And then, establishing independence is the next hurdle.</p>
<p>@2016Candles You said that if a student can’t afford to pay oos tuition they should lobby their state to better fund higher education. That’s the same type of logic that was behind “separate but equal”. </p>
<p>There are so many things wrong with the statement above that I don’t know where to begin, so I’ll just ignore it. California residents don’t milk the system because to live in California, you have to pay taxes. When you buy something, you pay sales taxes. When you own a home, you pay property taxes, when you have a job, you pay income taxes. The bottom line is that California Residents pay taxes for the services they use! How is that milking the system? If doesn’t matter if they move because they have been putting money into the system when they live here. It is nothing like the situation with the UC system.</p>
<p>It is nearly impossible (I’d say impossible) to get in state tuition at UCLA if you are out of state. </p>
<p>I love it when you see people say “my parents didn’t claim me as dependent on their taxes”, “I will get a California drivers license”, “I will get a job here” etc etc. And then just get straight out rejected because they thought they were clever and could alter the system. </p>
<p>People who have lived and paid taxes for all their life (or a good portion, not a year or two) should get the in state tuition. We get taxed out the ***. </p>
<p>@CSB111 That what I am saying, but I according to some people that makes me an elitist since I am trying to get out of state students to pay out of state tuition. Is that really all that bad? </p>
California residents don’t milk the system because to live in California, you have to pay taxes. When you buy something, you pay sales taxes. When you own a home, you pay property taxes, when you have a job, you pay income taxes. The bottom line is that California Residents pay taxes for the services they use! How is that milking the system? If doesn’t matter if they move because they have been putting money into the system when they live here. It is nothing like the situation with the UC system.</p>