A bold new proposal suggests combining California’s community colleges, California State University (CSU), and University of California (UC) systems into a unified institution: California University. This sweeping recommendation, presented in a white paper by Su Jin Jez, CEO of California Competes, and supported by The Civil Rights Project at UCLA, aims to overhaul a fragmented higher education structure established in 1960.
The state’s existing master plan delineates distinct roles for each segment: UC focuses on research and top-tier students, CSU prioritizes undergraduate education, and community colleges offer open-access programs and vocational training.
“This arrangement may have been well-suited to midcentury California, but over succeeding decades, the college-going population has shifted dramatically (along with their motivations for attending college), higher education affordability has declined, and coordination among the three segments has weakened, leading to the current fractured system that hinders student access and success,” the report reads.
Under the proposed system, regional campuses would integrate existing institutions, offering programs from certificates to doctorates. This restructuring would aim to streamline transfer processes, reduce competition for resources, and provide seamless educational pathways.
“This new configuration eliminates transfer issues, reduces competition for resources, and provides seamless pathways for students through college and into careers,” the report reads.
Advocates highlight its potential to expand access and equity, particularly for underrepresented groups like Latino, Black, and Native American students, who are disproportionately concentrated in underfunded community colleges.
The report emphasizes the need for a statewide coordinating board to improve efficiency, accountability, and data sharing. While precise cost estimates are not provided, proponents argue that long-term economic gains would outweigh initial investments, driving equity and workforce readiness.
The proposal has sparked debate, with some praising its vision for transformative change and others questioning its feasibility.
