Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Was it supposed to turn out that way? Secrets and Shadows.

backlash on the secrets:
in some quarters the pick on Napolitano is still not going over well
LAT also briefly mention a kinda black out on interview requests with her.

Recall at last week's UC Regent meeting during public comment the student leadership begged for a response to their requests to schedule a meeting with Napolitano.

anyway, in that LAT article:

Similarly, after Napolitano's selection, UCLA's Daily Bruin student newspaper called on UC regents to explain "how they picked an individual with no experience in California politics and no familiarity with its public universities."

The differences among states is personified in Kim Wilcox, who was hired last month as UC Riverside chancellor in a process that did not reveal competitors. Over the last two years, he had been publicly identified as a finalist, and later lost bids, to head public universities in Wisconsin, Wyoming and Hawaii. Wilcox declined to comment.


Added to it this: more on Blake House - and Napolitano.
__
The Memorial Stadium Seat Sales Take Dip
__
There are Occidental updates on the Title IX issues at LAT- recent activism on this issue also linked to UC Berkeley.
__
Will there be backlash on the shadows? Some staff might recall being told -- "you don't need a shadow accounting"-over and over. So many hours and hours spent on it. Will this program or that position survive the numbers, or not?--painful. Wasn't BFS, BAIRS supposed to be the system (w/ the numbers) all budgets were to be developed around? Didn't a bunch of people start listing at the top of their resumes a bullet point accomplishment that they fixed the 'how do we formulate, implement UCB budget?' -and didn't the special few start enjoying all sorts of career advancement and higher salaries as a result?

The flagship as the shining example for the entire system...

Still trippin' off: "we couldn’t even figure out where any of the money was,”

Does the fix come every five years as one senior admin comes in and another leaves? Does it just get labeled 'well, its an iterative process' each time? 'This admin gets to claim they fixed it this round, then that admin takes the laurels next'- now, throw more money at the problem- shampoo, rinse, repeat, repeat, repeat. Condition the lower ranks for it.

High paying salaries, titles and careers have been advanced at UC based around some folks claiming they fixed these things- only to find those things maybe weren't really fixed when the new person comes on board and says different...

Berdahl's folks signed off on purchasing major systems/fixes in 2000 (before he departed) and Gore comes in in 2009 to discover...

Was it a decade lost? What gives?
__
Billionaire Venture Capitalist Michael Moritz Gives $30 Million For UC San Francisco Basic Science PhDs
Forbes ‎- The donation from Moritz and his wife, Harriet Heyman, funds the largest endowed program for PhD students in the history of...

Sequoia Capital is mentioned
-- you might: recall the Reuters vs UC stories.
__
and UC, Moody's and state here.
__
Does any of it even matter?

No comments:

Post a Comment