Monday, March 30, 2015

Peeved over and over, on tuition, more

UCSD Guardian with: Report Finds Tuition Hike in Violation of State Law
The UC Board of Regents did not abide by state law when it raised tuition last November, according to a recent report by the California Legislative Analyst Office. The Required Report on the Implementation of the Working Families Student Fee Transparency and Accountability Act, issued on March 21, stated that the University of California did not comply with four out of the six consultation and notification requirements prior to the increase.
- see the full article.

and this op ed there: Blatant Disregard -The Editorial Board laments the sheer lack of attention that UCOP has paid to California state law regarding student tuition increases.

here is a link to that LAO Report: Implementation of the Working Families Student Fee Transparency and Accountability Act dated March 25, 2015

UCLA Fac Blog with a new LA Times link on the Peevey GSPP story.

Saturday, March 28, 2015

a UCSF talk earlier This Week

is the subject - see this article from IHE: Should a University Partner with a Political Organization host an Event on Campus? Guilt By Association

"I’m not saying they should not be allowed to set foot on campus, but they should not be allowed to do so as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, with an institutional endorsement,” he said, noting that the institute -- not the university -- originally pitched the idea to Keith Yamamoto, San Francisco’s vice chancellor for research."
HuffPo/AP: Colleges Are Getting Out Of The Health Insurance Business

and HuffPo reporting on: New Federal Data Show Student Loan Borrowers Suffering More Than Previously Believed

Have a UCMeP laugh?: Public Education and Public Lands: Two Ideas Worth Privatizing - In conjunction with the summit: Universities for Corporate Science, Private Profit from Public Land
Though the Brinkley bit is more complicated than that satire might lead...

(Not to be confused with David from the original This Week...)

Friday, March 27, 2015

GSPP...'these days'

UT San Diego with a three page article on: UC struggled with Peevey party funds -
Dean of public policy school felt loyalty to utilities boss

“The crucial fact is that we were the victim of events that developed very quickly so that I had to make decisions about whether to abandon a longtime supporter of the school and Cal or to join a chorus of self-righteous indignation about him,” the dean wrote. “I chose loyalty over self-serving indignation. I think that was the right choice given that Peevey is only under investigation. I think our trustees and friends should know that we will not just cut and run on them.”

The some of the key coverage on it compiled earlier here if you don't recall.

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Boalt, Where are the female athletes and female academics in it?

see the headshots panel assembled and currently listed here now: Berkeley Law lines up all-star roster to speak at Sports & Law Conference

Just one female rates 'all star'?

..."concerns that the state will likely approve a budget this summer that will fall well short of what the nation’s largest four-year public university system has requested."

Cal State University talks cost cuts as state budget looms
Long Beach Press Telegram
Trustees for California State University fear they won’t be able to make do with less, they said today, predicting even more crowded classrooms and a lesser quality education.

Hearing about several staggering cost-savings measures the 23-campus system has implemented didn’t assuage concerns that the state will likely approve a budget this summer that will fall well short of what the nation’s largest four-year public university system has requested.

The presentation prompted Chancellor Timothy P. White to issue yet another warning about the state budget’s impact on the CSU, particularly regarding overcrowding in classes as campuses struggle to meet student demand with adequate faculty staffing.

“It’s the truth that quality has been affected in the CSU,” White told trustees. “It would be a hell of a lot worse had these efficiencies not been found, but you cannot tell me that the increased number of students in classes, that are designed for discussion, improves instructional quality.”

at the US Senate level there's IHE: Alexander’s Higher Ed Act Agenda
"Notably, though, while the Senate Democrats’ proposal would exclude community colleges and historically black colleges from risk sharing, Alexander’s paper emphasizes that such policies ought to apply to “all colleges and universities.” That’s a common refrain of for-profit colleges, which argue that they are unfairly singled out for scrutiny and federal regulation in a way their nonprofit counterparts are not."
a "flame out ahead of the tape"?! University of Phoenix's Wings Get Clipped-Wall Street Journal

CNN: University of Phoenix has lost half its students. Stock plunges 28% - Mar. 25, 2015

For those white papers, see directly:
Alexander is seeking public feedback on his policy papers. Comments are due by April 24.

Alexander released the following three staff white papers today:

1. Higher Education Accreditation: Concepts and Proposals

2. Risk Sharing: Concepts and Proposals

3. Consumer Information: Concepts and Proposals

He requested input on the topics to inform the committee’s reauthorization process. Comments should be sent to the following corresponding email addresses no later than 5:00 pm on Friday, April 24, 2015. All comments will be shared with Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and all members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

--and to provide feedback see the same link above for those direct links there.

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

In Search Of A Higher Ed Democratic Model

First see Sac Bee: More Than Money At Stake In UC Budget Negotiations

The Daily Tar Heel Higher Education Governance Must Be More Democratic
On both coasts of the U.S., students are advocating for accessible education, and administrators are looking away. To secure a democratized future for higher education, this dynamic must be upended.

At the UC Board of Regents meeting, Board President Janet Napolitano was recorded saying, “We don’t have to listen to this crap” in regard to students protesting proposed tuition hikes.

Though Napolitano later apologized for the remark, her words and the setting in which they occurred, much like the results of the UNC Board of Governor’s meeting, demonstrate how little these unelected bodies are accountable for listening to student voices.

Napolitano and California Gov. Jerry Brown are the only two members of a committee that will recommend changes to the system’s operating budget.

Phoenix Biz Jrnl: Napolitano and Crow Together Again

“California Gov. Brown asked President Crow to share his experiences in developing a model for a New American University, and he was pleased to have an opportunity to discuss how ASU has been able to increase enrollment, graduation rates and its research enterprise during a period of declining state investment in higher education,” said ASU spokesman Kevin Galvin.

In 2003, Napolitano yelled at Crow and told the ASU chief to get out of her office when the two squabbled over a state budget battle. That time, it was Arizona that faced a $1 billion deficit. Crow had been negotiating with Republican lawmakers over research funding. Napolitano didn’t like that. Crow responded by asking the governor whether her consternation was based on emotion or fact, according to various accounts including by Phoenix Magazine. Napolitano liked that less and tossed Crow from her ninth-floor office.

-"Crow" -so many literary references available, so pick your fav...

San Jose Mercury with more on reaction to Napolitano's crap comment

Daily Bruin Editorial: Napolitano responsible for regaining student trust after protest comment
Last week, University of California President Janet Napolitano expressed an insultingly cavalier attitude toward student protesters at the UC Board of Regents meeting, endangering her already precarious relationship with a distrustful student body and toppling her carefully crafted image as a concerned and understanding administrator.

To make matters worse, it was clear at the meeting that Napolitano has made little progress creating tenable solutions for the UC’s financial woes. Napolitano and Gov. Jerry Brown updated the regents on the progress of their two-person committee, tasked at the last board meeting with creating solutions to the UC’s funding problems as it faces yet another tuition hike. They said the committee will not be making recommendations for several months. Napolitano said they might have something to bring the regents “hopefully, some time in the near future, without putting a date on it.”

It’s rather audacious of the UC president to say that she does not want to hear students protest their rising tuition even as she fails to bring concrete solutions to the table.

Napolitano entered her tenure as UC president on rocky terms with students in the system who were concerned with her track record in the Obama administration and with the circumstances of her appointment.

She’s worked hard to overcome that initial mistrust, but this comment threatens the progress she’s made – not because the word was “unfortunate” but because it betrays a troubling sentiment.

Sunday, March 22, 2015

A Design and A Plan?

DailyCal: Employees, administrators negotiate problems as campus transitions to paperless timekeeping system

Under CalTime, UC Berkeley is expected to save $2.6 million annually. The project began in 2012 with an initial investment of $2.9 million, but the scope of the project and the timeline for implementation have expanded significantly since then, according to Melanie Hurley, spokesperson for Operational Excellence, the office through which CalTime is administered.

This has largely occurred due to the requirements of UCPath, an initiative from the UC Office of the President, or UCOP, that aims to implement a single payroll, benefits, human resources and academic personnel solution for all UC employees. The new payroll and timekeeping system created under UCPath would replace CalTime at UC Berkeley, but according to Hurley, the campus would be unable to comply with the UCOP directive without first completing the CalTime project.


Despite efforts to prepare employees, some still faced difficulty understanding how to operate the new system and communicate with the campus.

While Nelson said supervisors have been responsive, others have said attempts to contact supervisors and higher officials to resolve problems were deflected or went unanswered. Additional concerns have been raised that employees have less access to human resources officials since representatives were moved to an office off campus at Fourth Street as part of a cost-cutting and efficiency measure implemented by UC Berkeley in 2012.

“Morale is pretty much down for all workers,” said Armando Voluntad, who works within facility services on campus. “They’re disappointed in the whole CalTime system and how it doesn’t seem to be working.”


In recent months, multiple unions, including Teamsters Local 2010, the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County and a union representing UCPD, have filed CalTime-related grievances — formal accusations of a breach in their bargaining agreement.

Errors in vacation and sick leave accrual have been the source of many of the grievance complaints. Unions have alleged that leave hours tallied under CalTime have been incorrectly documented or were lost entirely when employee information was transferred over to the new payroll system.

Much more in this Daily Cal article, once again check it out in full: HERE.

Also, consider in the mix this past coverage:
SF Biz Jrnl: UC Berkeley Hasn't Quite Mastered Marriage of Time and Money

This earlier Daily Cal piece included: In a press release, UPTE-CWA local 9119 president Tanya Smith states that the estimated costs of $20 million for the move does not include the $26.2 million lease for the center, increased work for campus staff, and the loss of “face-to-face time … inclusion and diversity.”

There's this post on: University of California’s $220 Million Payroll Project Reboot

- and many other headlines out there on it now, see right hand column for some of them.

Why is Cal so resistant to UC Path? Or, why aren't UCOP and UC Berkeley coordinating their projects in advance?
Daily Cal: Online webcasts may be restricted to UC Berkeley students, campus tech service says

According to Hubbard, the benefits to the students-only model include quicker availability of videos online, faculty members feeling more comfortable with webcasting their lectures and availability of all lecture materials to student viewers. He also said there will be fewer concerns among faculty about infringement of their intellectual property. But he said ETS will no longer have the capacity to improve low-quality videos or edit poor audio.

The recommendation is currently being considered by an Information Technology Governance committee.

UC Former Pres. Peltason Dies
I shouldda quit you Baby -- a looong time ago
or-- also could call it -- It Might Get Loud Part II

- a 'pretty rude sound'...

"Swan Song" turned around..."he lays the rhythm on it"

It might be California's influence- or not,
but "all of this stuff is planned -it wasn't everyone just chipping in - it really was a sort of design..."

Friday, March 20, 2015

C.O. Two and H20

There's this post A Billion From The State Appears - Like Magic- perhaps with a subtext of 'Can't that same magic happen for CA public higher ed, specifically for UC?'

So, here's some background on CA's greatest commodity right now, and how others are winning the solar power race:
MSNBC with California Drought Reaches Critical Point

And, this interview: Top NASA scientist expressed extreme concern about the multi-year drought plaguing California, depleting resources and causing wildfires. UC Prof. Jay Famiglietti discusses his findings.

Also, KQED on it:

The President of the UC Regents on H20 and CA will come up on MTP
The Politics of Climate Change - As the Golden State faces its fourth year of drought and commits $1 billion to relief, Governor Jerry Brown addresses his environmental advocacy, the fight over Proposition 30 taxes, 2016 and more. -- but can Mr. Todd get some answers for Californians on UC and the C.O. Two -Co2- Committee of Two?

UPDATE- At NBC News: in his MTP interview he mentioned universities:

Brown said the potential candidates for 2016 should be focused on the budget, climate change and investments in science, technology and the nation's universities.

"I'd like to see a positive agenda and not the mythology that somehow the government can retract to what it was in 1929," he said.

Benefits, Demands, Awards .

Remaking the University on The Council of University of California Faculty Associations has drafted a letter/petition to President Napolitano in response to proposals to reduce the health care options available to UC Employees.

Sac Bee: Unions, retirees blast Jerry Brown’s state worker medical plan

SF Gate: UC Berkeley black students demand fixes to 'hostile' climate includes a 'list of demands' sent to Dirks.
14 winners of $50 million college innovation awards named
includes UC Riverside To be eligible for the prize money, institutions had to show how they were increasing the number of students who earn a bachelor's degree within four years and make it easier for students who start at two-year colleges to finish at four-year universities — and that their model could be replicated across the state.

this other story from HuffPo:
The top 10 finalists, which included two other teachers from the U.S. and others from Afghanistan, India, Haiti, Cambodia, Malaysia, Kenya, and the U.K., were flown to Dubai, United Arab Emirates for the ceremony.
and, more here:
In theory, Common Core is supposed to give teachers freedom over what is taught in their classrooms on a day-to-day basis. Some teachers, however, echo Atwell's complaints and say the standards actually limit them.
IHE with NYU Professor is Denied Entry to the UAE, where the University has a Campus -news now includes this add'l info involving a UF professor

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Napolitano on Student Protest: ‘We Don’t Have To Listen To This Crap’ - then apologizes For The Use Of A Word at start of today's UC Regents meeting. - UPDATED.

March 20 updates: UCSA rejects Napolitano's apology for using the word 'crap' --See LA Times UC Student Group Rejects Napolitano's Apology For 'Crap' Remark

--She apologized for the use of a word, she did not apologize for 'remark' or 'disparaging', 'calling' etc.

You can read the UCSA statement in full here: it raises other issues in addition to the apology, rejection of apology etc. "UC Student Association Responds to UC President Napolitano's Dismissive Remark of Student"

Daily Cal: Napolitano’s ‘crap’ comment reveals her perceptions of protesters


see CBS Local: Napolitano Says ‘We Don’t Have To Listen To This Crap’ As Half-Naked Students Protest Potential UC Tuition Hikes

Protesters suspect the meetings were scheduled during a busy week of midterms, but they say they won’t stop protesting until their message is heard.

Students raised concerns over the UC Regents scheduling their meetings at the same time midterms and finals are occurring - those comments/sentiments were repeated by multiple students during each public comment section at this week's UC Regents meetings.

The UC Regents adjourned from today's meeting at 10am- the rubberstamping concluded early.

As this video clip makes the rounds --other FAQ comes up: Does the UC President run the UC Regents or do the UC Regents run the UC President- or??...

The decorum b/ween UC Pres and the UC Regents (through the way their Chair was spoken to) didn't come across so great in the mix, either.

LA Times covers it too: UC President Napolitano says regents don't need to hear protesters' 'crap'
along with coverage of the vague committee of two confab report

San Jose Mercury includes that today she also apologized: UC President Janet Napolitano calls protest 'crap,' later apologizes

Napolitano opened the UC board of regents meeting Thursday by apologizing for using a word she doesn't normally use, said spokeswoman Dianne Klein, and stressing the importance of the issues being discussed by the board and in public comment.

But Pritchard said that to him and other student-activists, the damage was done. "I know what she said is what she felt," he said, "and so the apology means nothing to me anyway."

You can see: Napolitano's apology for the use of a word at the 00:03:00 mark here

Also, one additional note and scribble: something that came up in public comment yesterday during UC Regents meeting public comment- at the 22:20 mark here- a student, in also discussing SB 967, said that some UCSB Title IX policy was not updated for over a year and was not in compliance with UC systemwide policy - she said UC Student Regent Oved and she discovered it and brought it to the attention of UC administration and she raised concerns about why that was the case--since UC Title IX policy has been in the spotlight as a serious issue for UC now for several years...

Once again, You can watch archive of this week's UC Regents meetings at this link:
--and just click on the presentation title link, the video will load and you just toggle to the section where you see the meeting in progress.

-- but remember the archive is only maintained for one year- the UC Regents do not preserve it as a permanent archive.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Coverage of Today's UC Regents Meeting - Shirts Off Their Backs to Fight the Hike

in a is some coverage of today's UC Regents Meeting:

ABC local: UC Students May Not Learn About Tuition Increases Until June
and includes comments from UCSC:

LA Times Students Strip Down In Demonstration At UC Regents Meeting

NBC Bay Area: UC Students Strip to Protest Tuition Hike; Brown, Univ. President Give Few Details on Budget Talks

SF Gate: Jerry Brown, Janet Napolitano Stand Their Ground on UC tuition

Brown said software is capable of doing the job of college counseling and said Arizona State University had increased its graduation rate using such technology.
“In England, I hear they were drowning in their horse manure at the turn of the last century,” he said, offering another analogy. “Then they got motor cars.”
Napolitano said that UC has many online options already but that what worked for Arizona wouldn’t work for UC.
“Their graduation rate increased because it was already pretty low, so it’s easy for them,” she said, noting that UC would have a harder time improving on its rate that is already high. She said 83 percent of UC students graduate within six years, with the median graduation rate four years and one extra term.
In the end, it appeared that both sides were still far apart. Napolitano said the two would meet again in April.

San Jose Mercury UC funding: Napolitano, Brown Give Initial Report on Budget Stalemate

"At the end of the day the Legislature and the governor do provide the ultimate yes or no," he said. "Inevitably I am the one who has to say no, and ultimately I will if I have to."

Daily Cal: UC regents Meet to Discuss Audits, Medical System Finances

while there also see: Bill aiming to increase number of Cal Grants issued passes through Assembly committee

Daily Bruin: Napolitano, Gov. Brown briefly update regents on their committee

DB coverage of yesterday's meeting includes : Regents consider recommendations from UC medical centers

notes not quotes scribbles...
Public comment for today's meeting mostly revolved around
-groups requests for the UC Regents to sign a community agreement with Richmond on the Richmond Bay project;
-groups requesting a stop to Gill Tract development;
-Black Students at Berkeley and campus climate issues they face, their comments at Dirks directly
-and support from some UC Merced students for the development project discussed later in the meeting.

Napolitano asked UC Regent Chair Varner to schedule a presentation to UC Regents on UC Path for May or July UC Regent scheduled meetings -- that topic came up repeatedly today and repeatedly during the compliance and audit section of yesterday's meeting- the $50-60 million cost overruns on the project, etc.

Varner also tasked Regent Island with a project on 'updating, modernizing UC Regents governance documents'.

Regents Perez and Makerachian and others raised concerns to UCM Chancellor Leland, CFO Brostrom and General Counsel Robinson over how UC Regent agenda items on UC Merced 2020 project building etc. were moved from Buildings and Grounds Committee to Finance Committee without prior consultation of the chairs of both committees. (See this Merced Star story on the project for some background: UC Merced to present plans for growth to UC leaders)
The UC Merced project is going to try to use the same exclusive developer for a 20 year build out (all of the buildings = one developer) which is something not seen or done before and this was discussed at length on pros and cons of the novel approach. It is still in the bid submission stage.
The agenda items being moved b/ween UC Regent committees without notifying the committee chairs in advance, or getting their approval, agreement etc. -- this is a UC Regents governance issue that keeps cropping up (Newsom raised it on the issue of student athletes and grad rates)... and Perez also raised it along with the fact that an agenda item he requested months ago was never placed on the agenda.
(Perez also mentioned this in comments to NBC Bay Area- but not included in video clip above- will post it here if it becomes available.) Also, want to add in here a recollection that the agenda scheduling without advance notification to the chairs concerns were also raised on UCSD Med Jacobs building project- and Regent De La Pena and Regent M also were surprised on that, too.
The presenters on UC Merced 2020 were asked 'why this agenda item was moved out of building and grounds committee', 'why did the General Counsel receive inquiry and provide feed back to administrators etc. on moving the item away from buildings and grounds committee' questions persisted throughout the presentation.
It was also strange to hear Leland tell the UC Regents when and what the agenda items for the project would include for their September UC Regents meeting. Aren't the UC Regents supposed to be in charge of their own agenda items and committee work and they inform the UC Chancellors and public? Not vice versa?
Finally, there's Sac Bee: UC budget talks with Janet Napolitano headed in ‘right direction,’ Jerry Brown says
Melvin Singh, a student at UC Santa Barbara, told regents he appreciated the work of Brown and Napolitano. But he objected to the exclusivity of their meetings.

“We need a committee that not just represents a committee of two, but a committee of 240,000,” he said, approximating the number of students in the UC system.

...Student leadership from UCSA presented to the UC Regents today and informed the UC Regents of a planned April Town Hall at UC Davis Mondavi Center to discuss in open forum tuition and the university - they invited the Committee of Two and UC Regents to attend and participate.

You can watch archive of yesterday's and today's UC Regents meetings at this link:
--and just click on the presentation title link, the video will load and you just toggle to the section where you see the meeting in progress.

and background and tomorrow's schedule etc. can be found: here

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

O' Bannon on St. Pat's Day, more, updated

First see: UT San Diego: UC Won't Get Peevey Party Money
Soiree for embattled former PUC president was supposed to benefit Goldman school

Aguirre vs UC Regents on CPRA issues gives the details here

Earlier in San Jose Mercury: Goldman School Should Send Back Peevey Cash

You can: also check out the lack of diversity here
There's also this: CA Bill Introduced to Bring Transparency to University of California Investments

After a battle that was fought in several courtrooms, a Court of Appeal decision in the Regents of the University of California v. Superior Court (2013) held that if the Regents choose not to obtain performance information about individual investments, the Regents can avoid the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act (CPRA).

While UC has provided performance information under the CPRA for their other investments, they have denied requests for two investments: Kleiner Perkins and Sequoia. The UC’s total commitments as of 2014 were $80 million for Kleiner Perkins and $107 million for Sequoia.

SB 574 would simply require that the University of California obtain performance information for their investments in Kleiner Perkins and Sequoia, just as they do with their other investments.

Daily Cal in support of Daily Bruin: UCLA Administrators Stonewalled Daily Bruin’s Access -Student newspaper sees blocked access to Chancellor Gene Block

Daily Cal: Campus accreditation reaffirmed, but inspectors stress need for rational tuition policy, nonresident enrollment

While the accreditation review team’s report of its visit commended the campus for these measures, the team also recommended that the campus reconsider its reliance on nontenure track faculty, especially for lower-division classes. In identifying upcoming challenges, the report noted that the campus needs to “configure its faculty in order to support the mission of advancing knowledge while simultaneously meeting student needs.”

The visiting team also noted in its report that despite the campus’s efforts to implement cost-cutting measures and improve administrative efficiency, “no institution can cut its way to excellence.” The team wrote that any attempt to cap out-of-state and international student enrollment or keep tuition rates flat would have “dire consequences for Berkeley’s ability to maintain competitiveness, quality, access, and excellence.” As a result, it recommended that campus administration continue to work with the university and state government to implement a “more predictable and rational tuition policy.”

SF Gate: What's next for City College of San Francisco?
The Economist: The Log-On Degree- College in America is ruinously expensive. Some digital cures are emerging includes:
That touches on another idea that could change the way other courses are taught, paid for and accredited: the SPOC (Small Private Online Course).

The present design of colleges he sighs, resembles “a 19th-century factory that builds everything on site”. In the next few years, Mr Ferreira says, at least one of America’s large elite institutions will break ranks and accept credits from the best online courses as part of a mainstream degree. At that point, he reckons, “the rest will quickly follow.”
O' Bannon on St. Pat's Day
"untethered" ughh--
NCAA Fights To Undo Historic Ed O'Bannon Ruling

The lead plaintiff, Edward O'Bannon, won a national basketball championship with UCLA in 1995. He testified during trial that he usually spent about 40-45 hours per week on basketball and "maybe about 12 hours" on academics.

Monday, March 16, 2015

"surface level remarks...broader discussion among the regents" -Is it just a delay tactic?

Committee of Two --It wasn't just supposed to be a late breaking May Revise scrum...remember promises of something like 'rolling disclosure', substantive updates to the community - not just for the UC Regents--etc.
Now see: Daily Cal on the Committee of Two Update
and a list of some agenda items for the UC Regents meeting this week.

According to UC spokesperson Dianne Klein, no official written report has resulted from the committee’s first two meetings, which occurred in late January and early February. She said that Napolitano will make a few brief, surface-level remarks about committee discussions at the regents meeting, but that the update is mostly meant to open the door to a “broader discussion among the regents.”

- Would that be a broader discussion in open session or closed session of the UC Regents meeting? Or, at one of their dinners? Or, what?

The: JLAC has delayed audits as a result of Committee of Two - are the CA Leg getting updates on Committee of Two proceedings?

btw: it's Sunshine Week this week...

and EFF with Happy Sunshine Week: Introducing The Foilies, Round 1

Should UC Regents and/or the Committee of Two- get a Foilies Award?

Here: is a link to materials for this week's UC Regents meeting

Napolitano and Daniels in Chron. Higher Ed-- 2 Former Politicians, Now College Chiefs, Lament the Pace of Academe

"I was afraid when I was appointed," she said, "that I’d get this immediate reaction: What am I doing as the president of the University of California — kind of a ‘How dare she?’ response. And I did not get that at all."

it also includes this section:
Now on the other side, both presidents lamented the hoops they say they have to jump through in the name of "accountability." Ms. Napolitano sounded particularly dubious of the word.

"A lot of it is not really about accountability," she said. "It’s really about challenging why do you charge what you charge."

and then there's:
"My definition of what a crisis is has really changed over the years," said Ms. Napolitano, who was preoccupied with terrorist threats and natural disasters in her previous position. "If I make a mistake in this job, nobody dies, by and large, so I think that’s a good thing."

Their comments from this event:
Monday, March 16 President Daniels will join Janet Napolitano, president of the University of California, former Arizona governor and Secretary of Homeland Security, in a special session of the American Council on Education annual meeting. Daniels and Napolitano will discuss "Path to the Presidency: The Transition from Government to Higher Education."

Here is some info on the ACE meeting this year
and check out some of the ACE content here

and for how these higher ed junkets go-- more here, including:
"Strengthening America’s Higher Education System"
both presidents lamented the hoops they say they have to jump through in the name of "accountability." -- there are hoops and then there are hoops...

HuffPo: University Professors Form Coalition To Fight For NCAA Basketball And Football Players

Sunday, March 15, 2015

Out of Touch, Forgetful - or Forgettable, and Shut Out and Hungry

Maybe She Wanted To Head USC -or mixed it up with her alma mater SCU- and just got confused? see:
San Jose Merc with a good overview of issues in advance of this week's UC Regents meeting-See: UC Tuition Debate Threatens Its Independence - it includes:

Napolitano declined to be interviewed for this article, but some observers doubt UC's politically astute president has been surprised by the fierce blowback to her tuition strategy. As budget negotiations go on, she will continue to argue UC needs to be made whole from the debilitating cuts of the Great Recession, predicts Bill Tierney, co-director of the University of Southern California's Pullias Center for Higher Education.

"She's a politician at heart, and I think she is going to use all there is at her disposal to try to make that case," Tierney said. "Personally, I'm not sure I would have chosen raising tuition as the starting point for the conversation, but she's gotten our attention."

If the flurry of bills and proposals on UC spending is any sign, that attention could erode UC's relative autonomy.

One example: The committee combing through UC's finances has zeroed in on its pension costs as an area ripe for trimming, noting that the salary limit for calculating UC employee pensions -- $265,000 -- is more than twice that of other state employees.

Panel members also say faculty should teach more -- which could reduce their time for research -

Also recall:Tierney was one of her hosts for her USC Pullias lecture where she made an announcement that UC students found to be 'out of touch' : see in Daily Cal...

It was out of touch-- or, maybe she is a pol after a different target audience, constituency...
Jerry Brown On Memory, Data and Why It’s Okay To Forget

Brown, touched on everything from Hillary Clinton to climate change to immigration, the University of California system and whether one could learn Greek tragedies just as well in a digital setting as in a traditional classroom setting.

and the Gridiron Dinner

Brown said his father, Pat Brown, had spoken at a Gridiron dinner when he was governor of California.
“He spoke at the Gridiron in 1959, but I was in the seminary, so I don’t know what he said,” Brown said.

--in it Governor Brown laments email and digital trails yet at the same time there's reference to his talking up digital settings over traditional classroom settings... and he talks about the benefits of forgetting, being able to forget...

---Can't find any sections where WaPo covers what he had to say specifically about UC...
Does this position have anything to do with higher ed athletics? (The Governor had strong views on UC athletes and grad rates recently) see Sac Bee: Jerry Brown appoints brother-in-law to state athletic commission and LA Times on it here
OC Reg. Op Ed A Disconnect In The UC System by Tom Lackey who represents Assembly District 36

There is no debate the UC system has endured huge cuts and needs further funding increases to stay affordable. But it has also resisted good-faith efforts to fundamentally reform its operations to ensure undergraduate degrees remain financially viable for middle-class families. It has even refused to provide transparent data to the Legislature on the costs of providing undergraduate degrees. Actions like these make it very difficult for advocates – like me – in the state Legislature to make a strong case to the governor for higher university funding.

Part of the problem is the unelected UC Board of Regents is accountable to no one because they wield tremendous power guaranteed by the state constitution. Unfortunately, this has led UC leaders to be more interested in representing the needs of the academic elite than its undergraduate students. This was evident even before state budget cuts forced fee costs to soar.

Take UC Irvine, for example. Located in an extremely expensive real estate market, UC Irvine officials undertook a large expansion of on-campus housing about 10 years ago. However, instead of increasing affordable housing, they built high-end apartments that will cost most student residents $10,000 or more for their one year lease – nearly equaling tuition costs. Baffling decisions like this do not show an administration trying to make the cost of attendance more affordable. Instead it shows a primary concern for image and status.

You might recall a recent Sacto hearing where a UCOP official took a jab at the CA State Senate members who were raising concerns over low admission, acceptance rates of Black African Americans to UCLA law school-- a UCOP rep wanted it to be known that that tale circulating widely around the state capitol was wrong-- UCOP wanted it known that it was not just 1 student admitted but something like 15. Some in the CA Senate then retorted back that 15 was also too low a number as representing/in proportion to the demographics of CA population. (You can see this kind of stuff go down in the embedded video of some key Sacramento meetings listed below and in prior posts etc.) So, it is against that backdrop that this next on the effects of 209 comes up again:

ABC Local- KGO UC Berkeley Struggles With Black Student Admissions - includes article

Blacks represent only 3 percent of undergraduate students at UC Berkeley.

Odd Coverage here-- the start up of many of the student pantries predates Napolitano's arrival to UC so--how do we end up with this coverage? - Would it be more accurate to say that she is giving increased support to existing student initiated programs?

Saturday, March 14, 2015

Napolitano: "This Tuition Increase Won't Even Affect Them" - and her pivot on Title IX

There's KPBS with Napolitano Says UC Tuition Hikes Won’t Affect Neediest Californians

Compare that with what Newfield said a few days ago in the last fifteen minutes of this: KPFA interview on that very point
read this: Remaking The University post "The Impact Of Tuition Hikes On Undergraduate Debt"
--and consider again what Napolitano is claiming above.
What is to be believed?

In the accompanying article to that KPBS Napolitano interview above, it has:
The center said it awarded Napolitano the National Peacemaker Award, in part, for how she is addressing campus sexual violence.

and includes this:
"Napolitano: To be very clear that, yes means yes, and that there had to be a knowing and an intentional acquiescence before any acts occur and also now to have kind of a culture change, to really focus on prevention and how people should relate to one another, so a lot of our program will involve training and we also want to make sure we conduct adequate quick investigations and that appropriate sanctions are imposed."

""adequate" "quick" "acquiescence" "sanctions"

Yesterday pointed to an article Napolitano wrote for WaPo, here it is again:
Higher Education Isn’t In Crisis by Janet Napolitano
In it, she gets into:
Two recent contributions to the higher education commentary are Ryan Craig’s “College Disrupted” and Kevin Carey’s “The End of College.” Craig, a former management consultant, is a founding managing director of University Ventures, self-described as “the only investment firm focused exclusively on the global higher education sector.” Carey is a higher education policy analyst who serves as director of the education policy program at the New America Foundation, a Washington think tank.

Likewise, neither book really addresses new roles that our universities have undertaken. They are now being asked, for example, to prevent and prosecute sexual assault — and rightly so.

Is CA really asking Universities to do that?
New roles undertaken?!:
Title IX has been around since the very early 1970's
and Clery has been around since 1990
- so, what is with the "now being asked" bit?
Or, is it really about universities undertaking/bestowing other powers upon themselves?

It is a change from her earlier comments in August 2014:
“I support the principles of the McCaskill bill, but we are not waiting for federal legislation."
She said that it’s especially important to bolster relationships between campuses and local law enforcement agencies.
"That's one of the areas that have somehow slipped through the cracks in the national debate," she said. "A rape is a rape and universities and colleges are not in the best position to prosecute crimes, so you need to have a way for the campus to have a connection with local district attorneys."
Without taking a stance on the legislation, Napolitano did allude to some concerns that have been expressed from the American Council on Education.
“It’s very difficult for a piece of legislation to appreciate all the differences between institutions of higher education -- big and small, rich and poor, residential, nonresidential,” she said adding that the “lengthy and laborious” rule making process further compounds that problem.
see IHE: Some Colleges Embrace Tepidly Federal Scrutiny On Campus Sexual Assaults for a more complete reminder.

As with: UC PATH '$50 million+ and counting over budget' developments note: here at this link what interesting thing happened in February 2015, YEARS after UC Path project launch
It seems the usual... wasting time on in-fighting and power grabs: UC campus vs UC campus; UC campuses vs UCOP; and UC vs CA; and vice versa on all of that plus UC 'bolstered relationships' as CYA games --and it's feeling less like it is about protecting community members, completing properly managed projects timely.
The price stays high for- everyone.

Maybe UC should stop trying to pose as CA AG or Robin Hood... or, are they the same?

Napolitano toured a garden in SD, too. Maybe she can stop by this one in LA?

Friday, March 13, 2015

"If you are a student and seek counseling at your college's counseling center, your medical records are most likely not protected by the typical medical-privacy laws, otherwise known as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act," Guest Pryal wrote in the Chronicle of Higher Education. "Instead, they fall under the aegis of FERPA, just as Oregon said. And compared with HIPAA, FERPA is about as protective as cheesecloth."

see: Congresswoman 'Troubled' By Privacy Loophole On Student Health Records Confronts Education Department

and here: is the Chron. Higher Ed story on it as well.

'No Paper' or 'It's In the Papers'- and, again --"the project is far from done and is $50 million over budget."

U-T San Diego: Computer Fiasco Confirms Fears About UC Mismanagement

University leaders in 2009 adopted a four-year, $170 million plan to create one central payroll for all UC campuses, medical centers and offices. According to a Sacramento Bee report, the project is far from done and is $50 million over budget.

Rather incredibly, the office of UC President Janet Napolitano won’t even provide a forecast of when the project will be complete or what its final cost will be. As an information-technology expert told the Bee, not having publicly identified baselines is a huge red flag because that suggests that six years after the project launched, UC officials don’t have a handle on how to fix it.

and more: here on it also.
(Remember when Yudof was UC Pres, when asked about (usually) compensation practices, he would frequently say "it's in the paper" at UC Regents meetings and in interviews i.e. his way of saying we're being transparent etc. Keep that in mind when reading this next...)

So, see NPR pointing out HRC in headlines and --when reading those articles...well, these articles also crop up:

Napolitano: "I Didn't Do Email" As Homeland Security Secretary

LA Times Janet Napolitano says she never sent email, texts as Cabinet secretary

Corn and Alter explain the elements of it in the HRC example that are important : here scroll to the 10:00 mark in the video: at this link or, alternatively, :here, at this other outlet, for a transcript of that section on the important points Alter and Corn make.

If DC folks are going to continue to pursue the top positions in higher ed leadership - particularly at public universities... it sounds important to look at how they view, operate in DC and their approach to business systems overall and any change they make or don't make once they leave DC etc.

Is 'the privilege of no paper trail' extending from DC into public higher ed?
What's the example being filtered down?

Also, a certain UC Regent's spouse comes up, in fact, they say played a pivotal role, in: Calbuzz Press Clips: 6 Takeaways on Hillary’s Email ‘Scandal’

There's also:
Higher Education Isn’t In Crisis by Janet Napolitano at WaPo

Minding the Workplace- Leaders who yammer “transparency”: The more we hear it, the less we see it

Not Mentioned Directly...

Varner and Napolitano (below) don't mention the latest at UC Irvine - in case you dunno- the latest being:
Crisis Over Expression Continues at UC Irvine

Nothing directly on UC Irvine in this:
Statement from UC president, Board of Regents chairman

and the Daily Bruin on it here

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

They Don't Want 'Teachable Moments' Anymore?

Can't miss:
Boren gettin' lots of nat'l headlines and kudos today for handling this latest...
- and more on it here in USA Today with video.
but, when you turn to UC news-- a sharp 'compare and contrast' with:
UCI leadership getting called out for not handling things so great-- and maybe creating even more of a problem, or, worse yet- even fomenting the very kind of unacceptable 'environment' mentioned in the UO story above?!- Check Out: what is said in mid-paragraph here: in this UC Irvine Student Support Letter

btw, UC Irvine is going to be the site of a rare 'not UCSF located' UC Regents meeting later in the year- September.

Maybe they will discuss the questionable UCI communications and FB, Fox content mentioned above...
Or, this from WaPo:
U.C. Irvine Law School didn’t make the top 20: What went wrong?
part of that includes discussion of CA Leg funding and a theory on impact at the UC professional schools... and a discussion on the value, or lack of value, of public service discussed in it.

On other UCI vibes out there: a UT search is bringing up 'UCI's Drake to Ohio State salary' flashbacks:
UT Regents Have Hurdles to Jump to Hire Hamilton

Finally, Hamilton is also said to be a candidate for the presidency at private New York University, a search process that is not as far along as the one at UT. NYU's current president was making about $1.4 million a year in 2012, according to the Chronicle.

Hamilton is the former provost of Yale University. He was previously a chemistry professor at Yale, and before that he was a faculty member at Princeton. While at Yale, he re-established the Yale School of Engineering and Applied Science following a 40-year hiatus. Hamilton became the vice chancellor of the University of Oxford in 2009.

If the regents do not pick Hamilton, they are expected to offer the position to Fenves. UT System Chancellor William McRaven does not want to re-open the search, according to system officials, because he is happy with the two final choices. Several regents, unhappy with Powers, oppose Fenves because he has worked closely with the embattled president. A simple majority of the nine regents is required to hire a president.

Before becoming UT-Austin’s provost in 2013, Fenves spent five years as the dean of engineering, during which time he helped raise millions of dollars for the university. The ability to fundraise is often a key factor in university president searches. Previously, Fenves served as the chairman of the department of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California, Berkeley.

When that 'UCI to Ohio State salary story' comes up- as it does, over and over- keep in mind also
Napolitano mentioned Michigan (Snyder), Texas (Abbott) and New York (Cuomo) Governors are said to be moving toward increasing higher ed funding as a trend (she said that to the CA state assembly budget subcommittee to prod them to fund UC in video clip here.) Does she also mean to say that- implicit in her comment- that their (NY,TX,MI) salary and tuition approaches should be followed by CA as well? Did she just forget to include Kasich?
CA Assembly moves noted in Daily Cal New State Assembly Bill Would Cap NonResident Population At 10 Percent Per UC Campus

And, also at Daily Cal: sometimes important to remember not all divestment interest based around any one particular political movement- and so, maybe should not be marginalized as such- sometimes multiple special interests, could this be an example of it: here.
There's UCLA Fac Blog writes: "We have noted on this blog that administrators on UC campuses really can't control what student groups do or don't do, say or don't say. But we have also noted that current institutional arrangements seem to force UC officialdom to become involved and to have to defend or explain to the outside world whenever incidents occur. More separation of student activities from official UC structures would help. Students would be free to do/say whatever they like without official intervention. And UC could more readily say that what may be done by some of its tens of thousands of students does not represent any official stance."
(Where Teachable Moment = dialogue, interaction
Instead of controls, edicts, sanctions passed down - or ostracizing and 'other'-ing in policy debates)

Was the 'flag flap' a teachable moment for UC admin leadership that was passed up and instead devolved into admin jumping on a band wagon and immediately ostracizing a group of students?

Was that UCLA student hiring committee meeting -their questions in particular- a teachable moment for UC admin leadership? (It certainly was a teachable moment -student to student- when some students raised their objection to those questions and explained why they objected to the questions during that meeting-- Big kudos to the Bruins who did that teachable moment work!)
And, while at it... was it appropriate for Dirks to use a batch of new hires for handling campus sex assault as the reason for admin bloat, compensation practices at Cal? (Perhaps those hires were more in response to the UCB being on Title IX review rather than to anything else) - Listen to the way it sounded in this interview -at the 28:30 mark-.

Does it sound that way to you?

[Admin bloat existed before the Title IX review and before,during and after Op Ex, remember this here:
“Over the past seven years UC’s core spending has increased 27%, while the enrollment of California undergraduates rose only 4%,” Atkins said, noting that between 2007 and 2013, the number of UC employees making more than $200,000 has doubled.

Anyway, why did Dirks raise that subject matter in response to admin bloat, hiring compensation ? That was a disappointing section of the interview, but he also talks about faculty teaching loads; campus climate issues; the liberal arts as a salve for policy and societal problems; his interest in teaching again; Richmond Global/Richmond Bay/ Richmond Field Station dreams; the 'Committee of Two' as taking all the oxygen out of the room-- C.O.2-- and other things covered in the audience Q & A in the last half.

Remember 'I am --' and 'I am not'...
a Cal author w/ this NPR post, good read: Who Was Spock?

it all goes back to the Kobayashi Maru

Friday, March 6, 2015

UPDATED - Reminder: UC Regents Agenda Items and background docs For March 17-19 Meeting

Original post:
agenda items background docs and scheduling info see: UC Regents For March 17-19 Meeting "Ten days before each scheduled meeting, the Notice of Meeting (agendas) will be available on this website." but are subject to change up to the actual meeting.

The UC Regents have not posted the items above, yet. Once they do - will add them in here.
UPDATE- The basic agenda now has this listed (on March 8) no background docs for the committee meetings -- but you might continue to check up to day of the meeting for them at the UC Regents site: link here.

Tuesday, March 17

11:00 am Committee on Compliance and Audit (Regents only session)
Agenda – Closed Session – Regents Only
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of November 18, 2014
A1(XX) Action Appointment of Expert Advisor to the Committee on Compliance
and Audit
A2(XX) Discussion Compliance and Audit Personnel Matters
A3(XX) Discussion Pending Litigation

11:20 am Committee of the Whole (public comment)

11:40 am Committee on Compliance and Audit (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of November 18, 2014
A4 Action Approval of External Audit Plan for the Year Ending June 30,
A5 Discussion Summary of Results of the University’s 2014 A-133 Audit
A6 Discussion Using Data Analysis to Enhance Auditing and Monitoring
A7 Discussion International Activities Report
A8 Discussion Ethics and Compliance Activities Report
A9 Discussion Internal Audit Activities Report

1:00 pm Committee on Health Services (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 22, 2015
H1 Discussion Overview of UC Health’s Clinical Enterprise
H2 Discussion Medical Center Update on Transactions Completed in Fiscal Year
2013-14 and Fiscal Year 2014-15
H3 Discussion UC Health Challenges
H4 Discussion Update on Student Health and Counseling Centers
H5 Discussion Future Challenges and Updates to the Committee

Wednesday, March 18

8:30 am Committee of the Whole (open session - includes public comment session)
Public Comment Period
(20 minutes)
Remarks of the Chairman of the Board
Remarks of the President of the University
Remarks of the Chair of the Academic Senate

9:30 am Committee on Finance (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 22, 2015
F1 Action Authorization of 100-Year Taxable External Financing
F2 Action Authority to Indemnify the City of Davis in
Durable Encroachment Agreement and Union Pacific Railroad in
Pipeline Crossing Agreement, Davis Campus
F3 Action Continuation of Life-Safety Fee, Berkeley Campus
F4 Discussion Update on the 2020 Project, Merced Campus

10:30 am Committee on Grounds and Buildings (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 22, 2015
GB1 Action Approval of Preliminary Plans Funding, Downtown Center,
Merced Campus
GB2 Discussion Annual Report on Sustainable Practices, 2014

11:15 am Committee on Long Range Planning (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
L1 Discussion Update on the Select Advisory Committee on the
Cost Structure of the University

12:00 pm Lunch

1:00 pm Committee on Educational Policy (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
E1 Discussion Background on the Origins of the Structure of Undergraduate

1:45 pm Committee on Compensation (closed session)
Agenda – Closed Session2
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
C1(X) Discussion Collective Bargaining Matters

2:00 pm Committee on Finance (Regents only session)
Agenda – Closed Session – Regents Only2
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
F5(XX)3 Discussion Real Property Development, Operation, and Maintenance
Considerations for the 2020 Project, Merced Campus
F6(XX) Action Approval of Amendment of Ground Lease to J R & K
Development LLC for International Village Student Apartments,
Riverside Campus
F7(XX) Action Recommendations for Board Action
1. Cronin v. Regents – Proposed Settlement – Medical
Malpractice – San Francisco
2. Nitta v. Regents – Proposed Settlement – Personal Injury –
San Francisco
F8(XX) Discussion Appellate, Trial Court Developments and Updates
NATIONAL SECURITY, LLC – Upcoming Mediation –
Employment – Office of the President
Settlement and Resolution – Copyright Infringement –
3. BROOME, et al. v. REGENTS – Demurrer and Motion to
Strike Challenging Complaint Filed – Breach of Contract,
Promissory and Equitable Estoppel, and Breach of
Fiduciary Duty – Office of the President
al. v. REGENTS – Hearing on Attorney’s Fees Motion
Held – Public Records Act – Davis
5. LOZANO v. REGENTS, et al. – Mediation Scheduled –
Confidentiality of Medical Information Act – UCLA
Medical Center
6. MALDONADO v. REGENTS – Demurrer Hearing
Postponed – Confidentiality of Medical Information Act –
San Francisco Medical Center
7. MILNER v. REGENTS – Verdict in Favor of the Regents –
Medical Malpractice – UC San Diego Medical Center
8. REGENTS v. AONHEWITT, et al. – Status Update –
Professional Negligence and Breach of Contract – Office of
the President
9. REGENTS v. LAKE – Trial Date – Breach of Contract (for
Damages) and Peremptory Writ of Mandamus (to Compel
the Processing and Payment of Valid Claims for Medical
Services) – Davis Health System
10. REQUA, et al. v. REGENTS – Class Notification Sent –
Breach of Implied Contract for Retiree Health Benefits –
Office of the President
al. – Settlement in Principle Reached – Public Records
Act – Los Angeles
Demurrer Overruled – Public Records Act – Berkeley
13. URIELL v. REGENTS – Appeal from Judgment Affirmed
in Favor of Plaintiff – Medical Malpractice – UC San
Diego Medical Center
14. VALENTINI v. SHINSEKI, et al. – Settlement Reached –
Invalidation of Agreements to Use Department of Veterans
Affairs Property, Including Campus Baseball Stadium –
Los Angeles
15. General Counsel’s Update on Pending or Threatened
F9(XX) Information Settlements and Separation Agreements under Delegated Authority
Reported from December 1, 2014 to February 2, 2015

3:00 pm Committee on Educational Policy (Regents only session)
Agenda – Regents Only Session2
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of September 17, 2014
E2(XX) Action Appointment of University Professor

3:10 pm Committee on Governance (Regents only session)
Agenda – Closed Session – Regents Only
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
G1(XX) Action Appointment of Regent to Standing Committee
G2(XX) Action Reappointment of Members to the Investment Advisory Group

3:15 pm Board (Regents only session)
Agenda – Closed Session – Regents Only2
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
Reports of Committees:
EXX Report: Action Committee on Educational Policy
FXX Report: Action Committee on Finance
Officers’ and President’s Reports:
Personnel Matters

Thursday, March 19
8:30 am Committee of the Whole (open session - includes public comment session)

8:50 am Committee on Oversight of the DOE Laboratories (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 21, 2015
O1 Discussion Update on the Department of Energy Laboratories

9:15 am Committee on Educational Policy (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
E3 Action Amendment of Regents Policy 3106: Policy on Waiver of Tuition
and Fees to Comply with the Veterans Access, Choice, and
Accountability Act of 2014
E4 Discussion Serving Those Who Serve – An Update on Student Veteran
Services at the University of California

10:00 am Board (open session)
Agenda – Open Session
Roll Call
Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of January 22 and the Meetings of the Committee of
the Whole of January 21 and 22, 2015
Report of the President
Reports of Committees:
E Report: Action Committee on Educational Policy
F Report: Action Committee on Finance
G Report: Action Committee on Governance
GB Report: Action Committee on Grounds and Buildings
GG Report: Amendment of Standing Order 100.4 – Duties of the President
(as noticed at the January meeting)
Officers’ and President’s Reports:
Report of Communications Received
Report of Materials Mailed Between Meetings

Times indicated and order of business subject to change


A Sunday cartoon and blurb asks in a different way-- What is the Governor gonna do with all those millions? asked again here in the SacBee
'Til then, there's:
Merced Sun Star Brown and Napolitano must put students first
Rethinking various support systems – from campus health care to marketing to the UC’s unnecessary role in approving high school curriculum – could yield significant savings. Beyond that, systems that aren’t working to students’ satisfaction (and there are several) could be put on the road to recovery.

If Napolitano makes a sincere effort, perhaps Brown could be convinced to put his considerable political capital behind a drive for excellence.

If they can’t, both will be responsible for dashing the long-held dream of a UC education for thousands of students just graduating from high school or ready to transfer from a community college. If those dreams die, don’t ask those students – or their parents – to support a university system that disappointed them. And most will blame Napolitano.

UT San Diego: More power ploys from UC's Napolitano

Brown plans a 4 percent increase in state funds for UC so long as there are no tuition hikes. He has the backing of the Legislature. The governor is only, say, 100 times more likely to prevail with his demands than Napolitano is with hers. And if the review of UC finances turns up the waste and lethargic management that many lawmakers expect, the UC president will lose what remaining credibility she has with state leaders.

Fresno Bee Editorial : Napolitano-Brown standoff persists, and students lose

then see Dan Walters: Brown, Walker wage similar funding battles

Brown is jousting with University of California President Janet Napolitano and many of his fellow UC regents by insisting that increases in the state's $3 billion-per-year commitment to the system be contingent on freezing tuition and making the system more cost-effective.

His rivals contend that Brown is being too stingy and breaching UC's traditional independence from political control. UC regents have voted to increase tuition if more state aid is not forthcoming, citing increasing costs of instruction — although the data cited by the university may be questionable.

The amount of state UC aid involved is relatively tiny and were it just about money, a compromise could be easily found. But the underlying issue is how much control governors and legislators should exert over university operations, given the system's constitutional independence, and that point is less susceptible to compromise.

*bold emphasis added here.

Thursday, March 5, 2015

You Want Caps? And a Path of "Unknown Sums" and Unknown Timelines.

see East Bay Express: Should the University of California Cap It’s Pay at Half a Million?
California Assemblymember Roger Hernández, a Democrat representing West Covina, has introduced a bill that would put a $500,000 cap on the maximum allowable compensation paid to University of California employees.
Daily Bruin: Delays to UCPath Project to Cost Millions

The UC Office of the President would not provide specific information on the added costs despite multiple requests, Cianca said. He added that the new timeline has not been finalized yet.

University of California officials said this week that a University-wide payroll and human resources project is now two years behind schedule and will cost millions more than originally expected.

The UC Payroll, Academic Personnel, Timekeeping and Human Resources project, or UCPath, was initially slated to cost about $175 million but will now likely cost much more since its deployment date has been delayed multiple times and the UC has had to modify its loans to pay for the project. At the July 2014 UC Board of Regents meeting, officials estimated that the project would cost the University $220.5 million, about $45 million more than the initial estimate.

The project, which began in 2011, seeks to replace campuses’ outdated and decentralized systems with one processing center. The program, part of the UC’s Working Smarter initiative, was initially predicted to save up to $123 million annually by cutting down on administrative inefficiencies.

The University has delayed the project because testing has not yet been completed thoroughly enough, said Mark Cianca, the UC deputy chief information officer in charge of the project, in an email.

Daily Bruin Editorial Board: Costly delays in implementing UCPath reflect poorly on UC
What was supposed to be one of the University of California’s biggest cost-saving initiatives is draining hundreds of millions of dollars and lagged in development for more than four years.

Now, because of yet another logistical delay, it will take even longer and likely cost more money for the University to see any benefits of the project.

The University began the UCPath initiative in 2011 to create a uniform payroll system to replace its outdated, unsustainable 35-year-old one. At its launch, officials boasted that the initiative serves as proof of the University’s financial efficiency amid lower state funding. In May 2012, officials said they expect to save up to $100 million annually by the eighth year of its implementation.

But a disturbing number of delays with the project – and the extra expenses that come with them – mean that campuses have to wait much longer for the savings they were promised, while the University’s pockets continue to be drained.

In January 2012, the UC Board of Regents was told to expect the new payroll system to go live in January 2013. In March 2013, that launch date was pushed back to July 2014. Then again to December 2014. Finally, UC officials revealed to The Bruin this week that the system is now expected to launch no earlier than September 2015.

and includes: "The delays are costing not just UC headquarters, but money from our own campus. Associated Students UCLA, which has been working with UCPath to test the new system, has said the most recent delay will cost its own departments an unknown sum of money."
remember Napolitano to Sac Bee:
"Every time CSU or UCs give out raises, journalists write about them.

And you’re wrong.

How do you explain to a student that pay raises are justified?

I know these people. I have worked with them for a year. They work all the time. They are among the hardest-working individuals I have ever seen. But they haven’t had raises and, in their market, the University of California is like falling off the low end. The raises that were given are an attempt to bring us up over time, not even at top of the comparator schools but toward the middle. If these were football coaches, nobody would raise an eyebrow."

'Committee of Two' and Delay of JLAC Audits on UC- Or, 'UC Admin In Tights'- 'til July 2015?

Remaking the University: Will The legislature Continue To Support A Research University
UC Falsely Describes Tuition Plan as "Robin Hood" Scheme
see:Wall Street Journal on Goldman Sachs and UC new partnership:

Goldman also recently disclosed a new partnership with University of California’s Board of Regents, a committee that has fiduciary responsibility for a more than $90 billion pool of pension, endowment and other assets.

In July, the university’s regents and Goldman each put up $100 million through a Delaware limited liability company, under an agreement that will see Goldman source senior middle-market loans for a 50/50 joint portfolio, subject to a quorum of a six-member board review.
The University of California’s Board of Regents, known as Cal Regents, has invested alongside Goldman before, in assets ranging from real estate to private equity, the group said, and Goldman manages money the university has already invested in publicly traded debt securities, including from below-investment-grade borrowers.
“We wanted to partner with Goldman, so we can to some degree ‘go to school’ on their credit process,” said Randy Wedding, senior managing director overseeing about $25 billion of fixed income at the university, in an interview. He said senior loans are attractive assets because their rates float above a moving benchmark and “when rates go up, these [loans] will be insulated to some degree.”

see San Diego Reader with this story on UCSD: "Million-dollar Annie"

Word that Ann Spira Campbell, formerly number two at the San Diego Opera, has become the senior executive director for principal gifts at UCSD has tongues wagging among local rainmakers. The ex-wife of former opera honcho Ian Campbell grabbed the job early last month even as the California attorney general’s office continues to investigate the opera’s financial operations during the couple’s tenure. ”
-and the short but interesting article goes on in detail from there...
See this SF Chronicle Editorial: UC Negotiations Aren’t Getting Us Anywhere

Then, consider the following --that two proposed audits of UC received almost unanimous JLAC approval votes- but also note that the start of the audits are also now being delayed until the Committee of Two (Brown, Napolitano) complete their meetings - a delay until July 2015...

See CA Joint Leg Audit Committee on Two New UC Audits
First they discuss this audit "UC and CSU Funding for Public Safety Services" where UC Development also comes up in the discussion.

Here is the video of the full March 4th meeting:

At the 55:00 mark another audit on "UC Budget Process, Non Resident Enrollment & Executive Compensation"
Rebenching covered in detail.
Graduate Student population also discussed, included.
Resident and Nonresident enrollment targets - and how does it compare to competitors?
A ten year review approach.
below is a video clip of only that section of the meeting:

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Don't Wanna Be In It, Don't Wanna See It. And, 'if we wanted to ...just by snapping our fingers'

Available for getting movie credits in that 4 hour-long (Wiseman) documentary on Cal, but not available for a campus safety subject matter documentary?
What is the signal being sent?
Berkeley and Davis come up in:

IHE: 'Hunting Ground' Updated
It now lists only the University of North Carolina, Harvard University, Florida State University, the University of California at Berkeley, Occidental College and the University of Notre Dame, as well as its sister institution, St. Mary’s College. These colleges are the ones most frequently highlighted in the film, in particular UNC, where the documentary’s two primary subjects were students. Their story, in which they become activists who travel around the country to inspire other victims to speak out and use the gender discrimination law Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to hold colleges accountable, provides the film’s narrative arc.
Along the way, “The Hunting Ground” takes frequent detours to call out a number of other institutions for mishandling or ignoring the issue, including Arizona State University, the University of California at Davis, George Mason University, the University of Southern California, Swarthmore College, Columbia University, Yale University, Brandeis University, Stanford University, Vanderbilt University and Amherst, among others.

Even Dirks had time to give thumbs up and thumbs down on that other stuff, remember: "I also want to offer two big thumbs-up for our very own double bill: Robert Reich’s Inequality for All and Frederick Wiseman’s must-see documentary, At Berkeley."

- But, no interest in having the cameras 'at Berkeley' for this other stuff?

HuffPo More Than 1,000 Requests From Colleges To Screenings Of 'The Hunting Ground'
- includes trailer.

Didn't look like Cal was in that list. They don't wanna see it?
Doesn't matter, pretty soon it will be widely available for viewing.
It will also air on CNN in the Spring, just as Ivory Tower did- that was another documentary on higher ed, and, funny enough, some key UC leadership complained then about a lack of opportunity to participate in or contribute to that content, discussion: and: tried and tried to catch up to it late ...some seem to only want to dip toes in occasionally.

Then, see -on UC admissions and enrollment caps- this from UCLA Faculty Blog, it points to this quote from Napolitano:
“If we wanted to, we could make Berkeley and UCLA 50/50 (resident and nonresident), easily, just by snapping our fingers. The demand is that high,” Napolitano said.

-Not conflating the 'cap and snap approach' with the 'no movie credits this time for us' Cal admin approach-- but it's just a 'tone and tenor of the approach' /culture observation...
SF Gate: with more on the 'cap and snap'- includes comments from Speaker Atkins

“I am frustrated over UC’s latest attempt to use students as bargaining chips by agreeing to admit 2,000 new out-of-state students, but threatening to limit the enrollment of new California students,” said state Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, who has proposed eliminating the tuition increase by giving UC more state funds, raising out-of-state tuition, and limiting out-of-state enrollments.
In a statement, Atkins said Napolitano’s plan to cap out-of-state enrollment at just two campuses “does not solve the problem. UC’s job is to educate California students, not wait-list them.”
The speaker also accused UC of failing to keep its own spending in check, despite Napolitano’s assertion that UC has saved more than $660 million by reining in pension expenses and other costs.
“Over the past seven years UC’s core spending has increased 27%, while the enrollment of California undergraduates rose only 4%,” Atkins said, noting that between 2007 and 2013, the number of UC employees making more than $200,000 has doubled.

Atkins comments (and other parts of that article) sound similar to what Regent Perez said earlier about the tuition hikes - his comments caused Napolitano to grimace and say 'well he's a new regent... that's unfortunate language..' etc. here: in an interview at KQED.
There's also this opinion piece on the proposed UC Tech
and this at UCSC from SC Sentinel.
The snap of fingers quote came from (correction) this event a Sac Bee Ed Board interview here when
Napolitano addressed the CA Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance - her remarks begin at the 24:00 mark -- the other CA public higher ed segment leadership also presented just before her:

and CA Assembly Higher Education Committee also met on other items, agenda for that here and video here.