Tuesday, May 31, 2016

UC Regents Committee on Compensation - May 31, 2016


Meeting of The Regents Committee on Compensation is scheduled for Tuesday, May 31, 2016, by teleconference as follows. Please note that all times indicated and the order of business are approximate and subject to change.

Live Video streaming of the meeting will be available while the meeting is live in session:


Archive may one day soon be available here, for a limited time:

As of June 2 the archive still was not posted in UC archives link provided above.

But you can listen here:


The meeting was important b/c it discussed the percent of time commitment senior management group, SMG, members may or may not engage in outside commitments like board service, and proposed changes were discussed

There also was a plan to limit such paid service to private industry
And significantly loosen controls on anything under non profit advisory board type of service that SMG might engage in -which can be come very murky waters...

And also contrasts and comparisons on policy regarding
academic title/professor compared with
SMG compared with
solely UC Chancellors
And comparisons if whatever review of UC Regents conflict of commitment/interests oversight occurs
-- all were part of the discussion if you ever get access to the archive

BTW the academic Senate rep said he and his designate were not familiar with this policy or well versed enough to speak to the regents on it-- that was an odd moment in the meeting, but they said the academic Senate group that does work on this policy will be meeting June 20 or 22, so...

Some of the regents like Island recommended UC seek best practices on this from Stanford and USC

Other regents like Elliott asked some very good questions related to how this policy works in practice particularly with UC Hospitals CEOs etc who receive significant sums for their engaging in such service on non UC boards

Those who joined the meeting from UCLA closed the meeting by talking about what they had for lunch -prime rib, ribeye BBQ...so, try to listen to the meeting once available , it runs about an hour and a half.

Sunday, May 29, 2016

That 'Michigan Model' UC Talks Up... Now, For Out Of State Students at UC?

See: California considers huge tuition hikes for out-of-state students


"Students from other states and countries have flooded into the UC system's campuses since the recession, smoothing over gaping budget holes with their tuition payments. Although they are a much smaller proportion of the UC student body than at the University of Michigan, where about 43 percent of new freshmen hail from out of state, nonresidents now make up 21 percent of last fall's freshman class, up from 7 percent just five years earlier and about 15.5 percent of all UC undergraduates.

But the influx -- amid soaring demand and plummeting in-state admission rates -- has infuriated many Californians, who feel the system they help fund has slipped out of their reach."

Includes " Out-of-state tuition, 2015-16

Virginia $43,822
Michigan* $43,476
UC $36,948
Washington $34,278
North Carolina $33,673
Arizona. $32,600
Oregon $32,022
National average $23,893
*Michigan's rate for freshmen and sophomores

Source: the above universities,
U.S. News & World Report"

--Is the Michigan rate for Juniors and Seniors even higher?

For some of the instances when UC Talks up the Michigan Model see





See: University of California at Goldman Sachs, has a special commencement address that notes all the resilience...

University Diaries also noted it

Audit of UC PATH and UC Contracting, --and similar at CSU

UC PATH, UC contracting to be audited, see at the 1:20:00 time mark, it is the last item of this meeting 2016-125 UC Contracting Practices approved unanimously for audit
OP says "UC is in a business practices revolution" as response.


How's it going for former UC now CSU Chancellor White?:

JLAC audit of CSU executive compensation

"Legislative Committee Votes for State Audit of CSU Management Growth

As the direct result of CSUEU efforts, the California Joint Legislative Audit Committee voted unanimously yesterday, May 25, to direct the State Auditor to launch a state audit of management growth within the California State University system.

The committee, chaired by Assemblymember Freddie Rodriguez (D-Chino), acted in response to Assemblymember Shirley Weber’s (D-San Diego) request for an investigation of disproportionate growth in CSU management positions, exorbitant pay increases of CSU executives, and ineffective state oversight of the CSU budget.

“We’re convinced that this state audit is a significant step in the right direction,” said Pat Gantt, president of CSUEU, which served as sponsor of Assemblymember Weber’s audit request. “Light must be shed on CSU’s upside-down organizational structure, with the ever-growing number of managers often far outnumbering support staff. The resulting tilt toward executive salaries is a disservice to CSU’s academic mission and its students.”

The committee also approved a request from Sen. Ricardo Lara audit UC contracting practices. That report may well address the privatization of our state’s public universities in general.


As state audits typically take up to nine months for completion, the State Auditor’s report is expected early next year.

Read CSUEU’s press release with further details."


There is also SF Examiner on:

Friday, May 27, 2016

UC Davis CFO Suddenly Quits, and some other moves

Update: now Davis Enterprise has this detail:

UCD’s CFO Lawlor resigns after just 18 months
When "asked if Hexter needed approval from the UC Office of the President to remove people from their positions or request their resignation, spokeswoman Dana Topousis said, “While Acting Chancellor has the authority to make the decision on his own, he consulted with President Napolitano” about Lawlor."


That kinda news that posts on a Friday of a three day weekend, what could it mean?:

UC Davis top financial officer makes quick exit

There's also

Steyer: Students must lead on climate solutions. Students: We’re on it.

And then,

Big oil vs. billionaire: A fight for California legislative votes

Democrat-on-Democrat races for Legislature aren’t the norm

Oil companies are supporting business-friendly candidates

Environmentalist Tom Steyer is weighing in with his own money

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article79929662.html

"This new proposal not only reduces savings but could potentially hurt the current pension system and (asks) taxpayers to subsidize the enrichment of UC’s growing executive class,”

The Daily Cal piece has some important corrections - UCI New U also now covers it:
State Assembly Votes to Withhold UC Funding as Result of Costly Regents Retirement Plan

Update see also: http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2016/05/ill-defined-contribution.html

"Since 2004, the number of UC Employees receiving salaries in excess of $265,000 per year has grown by more than 500% and an annual cost of more than $1 billion. In 2004, 629 employees earned these salaries at an annual cost of $222 million, and in 2014, 3,343 received these high-end salaries at an annual cost of $1.3 billion"
When factoring in the total cost of the new Retirement Benefits—including the 401K “opt out” approved by the Regents in March--UC is slated to save only $9 million per year. According to the actuarial analysis, if UC were to eliminate the Opt-Out program and keep all of its employees in the same defined benefit pool, the savings would jump to $49 million per year, or another $580 million over fifteen years.
“The Legislature is deeply troubled by not only the cost of UC’s new 401K plan, but by what appears to be an effort to circumvent the terms of the 2015 Budget Act,” said Assembly Budget Education Subcommittee Chair Kevin McCarty. “State taxpayers should not be expected to subsidize the destruction of UC’s defined benefit plan, nor the enrichment of UC’s growing executive class.”"

Original post:

See : State Assembly withholds funding to UC because of new retirement plan

"They are devaluing the pension fund and giving priority to faculty with higher salaries,” Stenhouse said. “It is clearly a plan to benefit UC’s richest employees and carries additional costs by virtue of offering a choice.”


Daily Cal
Fence around chancellor’s residence completed at 2.5 times original budget

"formally known as University House "

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Notes not quotes, scribbles UC Regents May meeting

And once again you can view the *May *full board *UC Regents Meeting *held in Sacto * video archive * available for exactly one year only* via these links:

Buildings and grounds committee on the first day, and the governance committee on the last day were 'Don't Miss'


Also don't miss discussion of audit services to review hiring, compensation, and admissions practices-- it comes up toward the tail end of this section, you have to toggle to it.


May 10th
Afternoon video continued

Comments on audit report of clinical enterprise
Academic med school audits , trends etc.
00:05:00 item A5 on reducing violence, harassment efforts
Prohibitive conduct outlined
All employees mandatory reporter
Clery discussed, policy initiative
Campus camera initiative privacy concerns discussed
HR and VP Nava efforts on other non sex abusive conduct effort, - defining it, bullying, other harassment
International global engagement on risk management training needs will be discussed at July meeting
Efforts like live acting troupe events for training staff
Health science compliance arena discussed- as a specialization in auditing needed
00:15:00 A6 external audit plan
OP VP CFO Brostrom and Rivas present
Then at
00:23:00 Discussion of State Auditor report rebuttal by UC to UC
00:40:00 Chair Lozano makes claims about UC enrollment, state funding, finance committee decisions she made as chair of that committee during econ downturn 2009
00:46:00 Regent Sherman asks about correlation funding relationship to enrollment of CA residents
00:47:00 Regent Davis encourages a UC response that is less adversarial and more collaborative on issues of Californians enrollment at UC, try to improve relations which are “poor” right now with state; unique opportunity right now to respond to CA Leg highlighting UC commitment to welfare of the state and highlight buildout plan for UC Merced
00:53: Alumni Regent designate Schroeder
00:54:00 Regent Oved concerns of disparaging tone on out of state students on this issue. Concerns that UC and state have fiscalized their relationship to UC
00:55:30 Regent Perez UC also should not disparage the work of the state auditor, her team is talented. He believes that there was a failure of OP to include regents ( possibly in discussions parameters of audit during JLAC proposal of audit and during the audit) No opportunity for regents to engage. No board discussion, answers were already given to the state. agrees that relationship of out of state students have been discussed by UC as fiscal and overtones similar to how prop 209 began to label segments of student population . Tone similar to 209. He says he did not get comfort in how UC fit out of state students in enrollment decisions.
Out of state students representation on three UC campuses is very very high – so we are denying the benefit of their value with our other six UC campuses- we’ve fiscalized the conversation on admitting them.
And conversation is better than accusations back and forth.
01:00:45 More regents arrive to meeting so quorum and so some action approval votes happens. Regent Zettel closes compliance and Audit and Regent Sherman opens Buildings and Grounds because Chair Makarechian is not present to chair this committee meeting.
UCOP President’s student housing initiative
01:15:47 Perez affordability questions on housing costs for students- housing, dining compared with tuition percentiles. More questions on RFQ processes
01:23:00 conversions of doubles and triples into quads and consequences and other
Climate-mental health-housing density correlations discussed
01:25:00 Regent Zettel has questions on non housed on campus experience- she asks if UC has considered a “large tent city to house UC students” question.

01:27:00 Housing increase effect on dining commons
01:28:15 housing on campus inculcating student loyalty to UC studied by OP admin, they claim correlation
GB2 UCSFproject
GB3 01:46:00 Stiles Hall UC Berkeley
02:02:50 Questions on comparisons of density b/ween Stiles and Foothill housing and Clark Kerr housing indicates crowding at Stiles
Regent Sherman asks retail space, restaurant space questions
Meal card, swipes questions asked
02:05:30 Unit III housing experience for students discussed – question on whether their dining commons will be able to absorb Stiles add’l 800 students in to Unit III
02:07:30 Oved also has concerns asks why third party vendor rather than existing dining vendors? Oved discusses the financial losses students experience on meal plans and swipe cards.
Swipes for homeless program mentioned (is he talking about homeless UC students?)
02:11:00 Perez concerned about staff report focused on revenue motivation but light on environmental impact study
02:12:45 Berkeley staff ask approval without study Perez requests
Perez says he cannot vote for it without addressing his concerns, he asks for staff to come up with MOU in next 24 hours that will ensure study will be done, happen
Perez requests eval on Thurs for item and full ERI, Brostrom replies
UCSD GB4 02:15:00
Other agenda items close out meeting

Morning Session 05/11/16


05/11 Morning session
00:09:00 Meeting begins
Public comment ends 00:34:00
00:34:00 comments of Chair
00:38:00 comments of UC pres
00:52:00 Faculty Representative comments – his mic cuts out at various points but he has critical comments about state audit/or
01:00:00 Committee on Finance
01:41:20 Supplemental fee tuition discussion, procedural questions concerns raised by Regent Davis
Criteria for tuition increase discussed , Davis remains dismayed by why the item is being put before the regents at this time.
01:48:45 UCSA president addresses regents
01:50:00 Committee on Education Policy
Student Athlete policy
02:30:50 Undergraduate Financial Aid
02:51:00 Oved says this agenda item was requested by him as a discussion item but he is disappointed by the discussion- he hoped that there would be a clear discussion on the middle class in depth
Oved says representation of middle class income students in serious decline at UC and UC has no policy or rules of what middle class is- brackets like $80,000-$125,000 at one UC campus and another UC campus says $80,000-$150,000 and then other UC campuses don’t make clear what their bracket for middle class is.
Are these discrepencies? Has UC decided there is a system wide definition or not? Has the UC decided there are regional differentials as a written policy?
03:28:00 Diversity of Faculty Hires and Student Body composition discussed
They have numbers on staff but they are not including it in the meeting discussion intentionally
03:58:00 numbers on positions filled by Underrepresented minority staff in leadership positions are bad/low, mentioned by staff advisor Acker
But issue not included for presentation
Other regents say accountability, infrastructure, resources approach on issue
04:01:00 Regent Oved discusses lack of trustee/regents access to disagreggated data – denied to regents when they request it

Regent Reiss also mentions her discussions with UC admissions and how GPA and SAT are still the anchor high weight criteria -even in claims of holistic review so neither model is resulting in numbers on composition of student or faculty body that are satisfying to Regents.

04:05:00 Regent Oakley says no accountability in UC accountability report
Chair of Education committee Regent Island agrees with him
04:14:00 Regent Elliott says he was denied materials he requested as well- Elliott mentions he requested UCSD materials on admissions enrollments efforts, claims and never received them.


Morning Session 05/12/16


Goverance Committee
Chair Gould says Lozano, Napolitano and Secretary and Chief of Staff to UC Regents Anne Shaw ( the person with the egg timer during public comment) and General Counsel Charlie Robinson have been working on a template to reshape how the UC Regents operate
1- Finance and Capital strategies
Would absorb the current Grounds and Building committee and Finance committee and Investments committee
It would become the ‘1 % elite’ committee
2- Compliance and Audit
Give visibility, "currently has been meeting ‘off cycle’"
3- Health Services – recently changed
4- Academic Student Affairs
Labs committee would become a sub committee (ROFLMAO
Unfortunately the current labs committee has gotten into the habit of doing presentations on research for a general audience in open session rather than discussing pleasant and unpleasant aspects of UC and Labs relationships or other areas of concern about the labs that the general public reads in newspapers or at POGO or GAP unfortunately. UC misses an opportunity to engage UC, public on Labs.)
5- Public Engagement Development
Described as fundraising, philanthropy,PR, lobbying
6- Governance and Compensation
Would be comprised of only the chair of board and five chairs of the above 1-5 committees
It would be super committee
Grounds and Buildings eliminated – currently chaired by Makarechian
Long range planning and governance committees eliminated – both currently chaired by Gould
Chancellors would become active, non voting committee members
Gould reassures “We’ll keep public comment- that’s fine”
Committees would be with intentional time conflicts for audiences – they would meet concurrently
Gould says committee report need to be descriptive at time of vote, chairs would give 10-20 minute report to full board
Currently just ‘moving documents without disclosure’
All of this was last reviewed in 1969, needs freshening up
Committee assignments decided by Governance committee
01:15:48 Regent Davis makes important comments encouraging this body to “take a deep breath and consider being more deliberative” on proposal
He says two areas UC regents should be thoughtful about “we currently have a pending charge for adjudication for conflict of interest of one of our colleagues’
Davis also says new proposal makes a significant change to how such a charge is handled vests plenary absolute authority in governing committee—that’s a pretty dramatic step.
Curtails bringing charge before full board
Confusion on where authority is for dismissal of a UC Chancellor
This proposal clarifies it is the board – very, very significant issues and there needs to be a very robust discussion on this
Details of document itself has conflicting language in it
01:07:00 mark Perez asks for a ‘red line markup’ version of template

01:08:30 Regent Reiss comments says will result in deeper dives on issues
She mentions Berkeley cost structure issues and that during this meeting in closed session Berkeley says revenue from online will improve their situation
She also mentions fundraising disinvestment of state funding
Govt affairs - our engaging politicians more directly
Reiss sees these as good for UC.
01:11:46 Regent Lansing describes what is currently happening at UC Regents meetings as she sees it
New approach “will require our trusting other regents”
She says “we can pick up the phone with each other” to address concerns on agenda items
She says thrilling opportunities delegating authority to committees
01:14:05 Regent Oved asks Gould How many committee members on each committee?
Gould seems puzzled at first then says 10-12 members on each committee.
Oved says he is overall supportive
Regent Davis adds in more comment he says he has become aware UC Chancellors have looked at this template to reorganize the UC regents and that the chancellors have written a response to the uc regents but Davis has not been provided with an opportunity to see their response. Davis says it is the feedback he is most interested in receiving, hearing. Other regents also state they have not seen it either.
Gould says he has not been aware of it or seen it.
Lozano interjects that the chancellors comments can be added to other comments received – as though it is not important to include it in a public meeting open session dialogue- it seems like she was trying to tap the chancellor feedback down imo
01:20:40 Regent Pattiz has some problems with proposed template
Concerned about concentration of power
Influence of governance committee
Says he is a regent other places too and they ask about uc regents and he likes things discussed as full board
He is concerned about conflicting scheduling of committee meetings
He says press, public attendance, viewing important
At 01:23:50 Pattiz makes some comments about “UC Scandals and Intrigue and the Dynes Years”
He says I was here during the Dynes presidency there was a lot of scandal intrigue by comparison
He says scandal intrigue came out of board not wanting to engage what was happening at campus level
Pushed more delegated power to UCOP so regents become more out of touch with issues like Berkeley and including its $150 million shortfall budget deficit
Whole board heard yesterday that it could affect all campuses
Whole board important
No concentration of power
We got out of Dynes situation by regents digging deep going to CA legislature cleared up situation
I mean someone committed suicide over that whole thing, by God ( he is likely referencing UCSC chancellor jumping off SF skyscraper, but there were news stories of staff suicides at that same time too—and it should be remembered that some current Title IX cases where suicidal ideation on the part of the victims has been chronicled, so we are not so far removed from those days…)
He says Labs should not be ‘subcommittee’ – DOE NSA affiliations – yet, although Pattiz has asked for a UC Regent no one willing to become permanent member of LLC because it takes time.
01:28:00 Gould responds to Pattiz comments
Pattiz responds to Gould responding
Gould tells Pattiz be brief
Pattiz says improper to be responding to comments made as request for comment on discussion item- it is solely a time for feedback
Pattiz raises example of regent
01:30:20 Chancellor Leland comes to a table microphone to say their responses were given to general counsel Robinson
01:30:50 Keiffer say that at UC Regents Retreat there was near uniform agreement that this change needs to be done Pattiz interjects to say some regents were not present at the retreat
(want to note here that Keiffer has been resistant to adding student regents or expanding board and has previously made comments that seem to place open sessions in neg light. He also has routinely been supportive of compensation actions and characterizing them, and has in the past addressed his comments directly to a member of the press -L Gordon- from the regents table on suggestion for how to characterized their compensation votes)
01:32:40 Oakley asks are regents going to get involved with donors directly?
He has two recommendations
1- Opportunity for each member to pull agenda items if they did not receive materials in advance
2- Survey tool for regents to provide periodic comments on regent governance, procedures needs to be implemented , created and used on an ongoing basis
(staff and student orgs have already used these sorts of tools for years, surprising UC Regents haven’t been using one)
01:34:30 staff advisor says staff advisor role not included in template or delineated. She btw mentions staff advisors still not included in closed sessions.

01:36:35 Perez agrees with comments from Davis, Pattiz. He comments on culture of board. Questions comment by Lansing on her comment on level of trust among regents and also a need to talk about public trust in the by laws. University is a public trust. Current proposal sounds overly corporate. Trust is an issue b/c of this possible move to concentrated power – yet experiences of regents not getting info they request
Perez says he was denied info that has already been provided by OP to Press, others
Perez relies on student and regional papers because he was not getting info from OP
Issue of chancellors response letter not being provided to all regents is troubling
Chancellors feel that they cannot talk directly to regents is troubling
OP making presentations to regents and OP answer questions on behalf of campuses to the regents is also troubling, raises concern
Missives can’t just be sent to the Regents chief of staff and no discussion among all regents.
01:43:00 Governor Brown speaks
Says smaller groups better b/c otherwise ‘big debate society’
Mentions his time as regent in 1970’s
Says this new approach is a ‘clubby way of doing things’ , more practical
He likes ‘committee of one’
‘all power to committees’ – he did not like it in ‘70’s but sees it now as more effective
01:44:45 Regent Island not satisfied with current template – agrees with Pattiz, Perez
Worries about concentration of power of supercommittee
The draft template misunderstands, misapprehends the Labs - they should not be just a sub committee
He references actions when Parsky was chair of regents- many issues like affordability, access should be full board discussions etc
Ability to make them agenda items for all board
Island says Regents oath requires full active engagement in all issues
Silo issues authority - results in exclusion of some regents
01:50:00 Gorman on culture and governance comment
01:51:20 student regent designate raises concerns over how regents with abbreviated terms shorter cycled terms are addressed or not addressed in template
Governance committee ends
01:53:05 Committee on Buildings and Grounds reconvenes
01:53:50 Perez says he has now received a “backwards engineered answer” from OP UCB staff on concerns he raised about UCB Stile hall project- not satisfied with response or respondents approach
The issue of student meal swipes concerns not fully addressed – lack of student input assessment
But measure passes by voice vote anyway
Oved says he did not receive even a copy of the backwards engineered answer that Perez received
Sherman who is filling in as chair for Regent M of this comittee tries to address
01:57:00 Committee on Compensation rubber stamping ensues
01:59:00 state funded or non state funded positions question from Island and exchange with Napolitano
02:00:00 they close the meeting briefly to handle another action item
02:09:00 Regent Davis objects to supplemental fee tuition action because he says it is a premature action given the reorganization of the board and other unknowns.
They adjourn the usual way.

Report claims Higher Ed favors the rich

Hechinger Report: Policies to help students pay for college continue to shift toward favoring the rich
The surprising degree to which tax credits and financial aid flow to wealthier Americans

References: this UC Stanford collaborations report
And there's:

Mark Cuban interviewed on his potential Veep aspirations gives him space to opine on higher Ed


"On student debt: “My solution has been put a limit on the amount of money that a family can borrow per student. If you limit that to, say, $30,000 in total, then the easy money is gone for colleges and tuition will drop like a rock, no ifs, ands or buts about it.”
On Sanders’ tuition proposal: “His idea for paying for free college tuition is delusional because it’s even more easy money for the colleges, which means they’re going to raise tuition even more and it’s going to cost taxpayers even more.”"

They only recognize gender bias when it occurs within their own class, etc.? Because...

Frozen eggs and Title IX
"These announcements are largely aimed to attract in-demand highly skilled tech workers, and"..." excludes many of its low wage workers from the policy"

"We said in part: “Women who are married with children in the sciences are 35 percent less likely to enter a tenure track position after receipt of their Ph.D. than married men with children, and they are 27 percent less likely than their male counterparts to achieve tenure upon entering a tenure track job. The same phenomenon has appeared in non-STEM fields, as studies indicate that married mothers who earn Ph.D.s are 28 percent less likely to obtain a tenure track job than are married men with children who earn Ph.D.s.”

The first such state law to be enacted, the bill orders compliance with Title IX’s protection of graduate student women against pregnancy discrimination and offers protection beyond the explicit scope of Title IX. The bill requires California colleges and universities to provide a minimum of twelve months of leave for graduate students for pregnancy or childbirth. It also includes leave for fathers and partners who are not the birth parent.

This is a step far beyond Title IX, which only requires universities to provide leave for pregnancy, childbirth and related conditions for as long as medically necessary. Both Title IX and the new California law require that students who take this legally protected leave be allowed to return in the same status they held when they left; a far cry from current practice of some institutions that make students reapply as if they never even attended the school.

The law also provides extensions for normative time, and time to take preliminary and qualifying exams. Finally, for those students not on leave, the law makes clear that pregnant students are entitled to reasonable accommodations to allow them to continue their studies

The new California law states that a student may choose to take a leave of absence for childbirth according to the policies of the institution “or for a period of 12 additional months, whichever is longer” and return in good academic standing. It also allows a graduate student who is not the birth parent, to take a leave of up to one month.

Impact, compliance, implementation

The most important impact of this new law, to my mind, is not just the language itself, but the implementation. Students, postdocs, and even employees have long had rights to leave and accommodations under Title IX, but no one informed them."

Why does power make us lose our way?
"social scientists showing that upper-income people tend to feel more entitled and less compassionate, and are quicker to behave unethically than their less affluent cohorts.

Conversely, studies found that lower-income people tended to be more closely attuned to others’ needs."

BTW, SCA1 was placed into suspense file yesterday

UC Meetings...Talking passed again

This week there is this in Sacto:

Assembly Budget Subcommittee #2 on Education Finance: Close out Higher Education Issues May 24, 2016 - 09:00 AM


The UC section of the meeting begins about twenty minutes in to the archive, and runs for about a half hour.


Remaking the U has this new post:
North Carolina Republicans Take Aim at State's Historically Black and Native American Colleges

And, this a retweet of this: "UC Faculty Assoc. ‏@uc_faculty
CA spends $2,000 less per higher education student than the average US state. Only NV, MT, LO and FL spend less."

But that tweet does not reconcile itself with this earlier May 10 CA Leg discussion of UC

"I- UC Enrollment issues starts at 30:00 mark

II- Gov's Proposals

III- UC Pension Actions at 01:07:51 time mark

IV- Student outreach efforts reviewed 01:34:22

V- Other UC Spending"

You can watch all of that go down in this archive of May 10 : Assembly Budget Subcommittee #2 on Education Finance

Watch the video: http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=3682

And don't miss there the discussion of
$45 million could be funded by other sources per OP VP
And discussion of 18 programs and $337 million

And the claims of possible add'l funding that could have been found for 4500 CA residents to have open slots to attend UC in recent years

And then a new proposal for adding 30,000 spots in UC System for CA residents

And proposal for creating an inspector general of UC position that reports to CA Gov and Leg to monitor these matters on an ongoing basis -- rather than try to continue to catch these persistent UC problems via JLAC voting or not voting for ad hoc special efforts to 'look into',

or just continue hoping uc regents will end their ongoing culture and governance crisis, or the faculty leadership will stop claiming to uc Regents that the audit concerns are misrepresentations on uc admissions, enrollment, hiring while faculty Deans and directors and other senior managers have enrollment and hiring info and the UC SMG group continue to deny access to the disaggregated data on admissions, enrollments, faculty hiring data to UC Regents even when multiple UC Regents state in open forum they at various times request the information and are repeatedly denied it

(Want to note here that the regent claims of being denied access to information are similar to other (UCOP?) actions from over the past two years in particular - multiple instances where other UC Regents claims of being denied access to information on what is being prepared to be placed on the UC Regents agenda in advance of a UC Regents meeting-
e.g. on UC regents
Newsom complained about how student athlete items were being or not being placed on agenda
that happened midway thru his efforts on that issue..

At this month's meeting alone the following incidents occurred:
Perez complained similarly that he requested other items to be placed on agenda and they never were

Multiple Regents complained they were denied access to the UC chancellors letter to the Regents regarding actions the UC Regents Governance committee is currently engaged in, even chair Gould of the governance committee claimed he did not receive the communications from the chancellors to the Regents, but the letter was in the hands of staff who are not Regents.

Student regent Oved and Perez also claimed they did not receive materials on UCB Stiles Hall when it came before them for a vote to approve funding, construction etc -but they never received info on student meal swipe cards arrangements info, outside food/restaurant vendor agreements info,etc these Regents requested- on the last day of their meeting Perez said he received an unacceptable "backwards engineered answers" to his questions and some presentation slides -- but Oved then responded to that and said Oved did not even receive those items...

Also in prior meetings there seemed to be a pattern where
De La Pena And Makarechian complained they were denied planning info for items in health committee at the time when De La Pena chaired that committee , and in buildings and grounds when Makarechian chairs/ed that committee-- both chairs claimed some agenda items had overlapping jurisdiction in both, and they sometimes wanted a joint committee meeting for those specific items but their wishes were not honored in the Regents agenda and they were surprised in the middle of the meeting with the agenda items -that happened on at least two pricey projects, including big projects at UCSD and SF-Now consider the events that have occurred in the Heath committee and it's reorganization,
and now also new moves to reorganize buildings and grounds committee away from Makarechian as chair ...
It can make one wonder what is really going on..
so if UC is having these problems like this, of long duration, it seems clear something like an outside IG is indeed needed.
JLAC requests, even if approved- and it is important to remember that it was the JLAC chair reguested JLAC audit that found many areas of concern - that was only eventually approved by vote but it went on to suffer months long delay before launching it etc- That approach might not be able to catch all uc issues and connect governance issues with funding, enrollment, capital projects issues etc re: UC decisions-- perhaps an IG could

Now today they decided against an IG and instead to give the state auditor $1+ million for the continued review of items from the audit of UC


Or download it as mp4 from the archive list

And, there has been discussion in Sacto on this next issue as well, now the Regents committee will discuss it in this just posted committee meeting: see this :
"Regents meeting calendar now lists a May 31 special session of the Committee on Compensation to discuss "Regents Policy 7707, Senior Management Group Outside Professional Activities." [http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/regmeet/may16/comp31.pdf] This item seems to be the result of the corporate board memberships of Katehi that formed part of the Davis Drama."


And once again you can view the *May *full board *UC Regents Meeting *held in Sacto * video archive * available for exactly one year only* via these links:

Buildings and grounds committee on the first day, and the governance committee on the last day were 'Don't Miss'



Afternoon Session 05/10/16


Afternoon Session 05/10/16 continued

Morning Session 05/11/16

Morning Session 05/12/16


Sunday, May 22, 2016

UCD on Katehi raises questions on UC Academic senates, rumor mills, denials of PRA, whistleblower cases at UC

See: UC Davis faculty weigh in on Katehi’s saga

"main goal of the Academic Senate to be “fact-finding … the Senate deals in facts.” But rumors have been running rampant about which whistleblower complaint is being investigated — speculation is that it is a complicated complaint "


And Sac Bee:
"If we were counting – and we are – it’s been 56 days since request for UC Davis records

Reporters requested records including travel expenses, hiring packages, emails

Awaiting records regarding intellectual property rights tied to UCD research

UCD staff say they hope to provide all records by end of month"

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/joyce-terhaar/article78788997.html

Inferred, gleaned

this link for initiatives PR like:

"The cross-departmental Staff Retirement Metrics team conceived and developed a dashboard project that addresses the growing problem of an aging workforce at UC Berkeley. The team realized that by putting information about the composition of the workforce in the hands of units, it would help managers make better decisions regarding their workforce planning and even help with project prioritization. Within four months of the project launch, it was live on the Cal Answers portal, and within weeks, it had the second highest query traffic. The goal of the team was to provide an effective workforce planning tool for units that was intuitive and easy to use. This type of tool had never been created by any of the UC campuses, and the team had to study dashboards across other industries and use their own creativity to come up with unique solutions. This tool has had a great impact on units, and it will be in high demand as the a percentage of the workforce prepares for retirement in the next decade."

Could that effort have anything to do with that story on:


As folks are graduating, headed out- Dirks puts out:

See also

5/10/16 afternoon session regents part I

Toggle to time mark

time mark 00:14:30 public comments
00:26:00 discussion of draft internal audit development discussion
00:38:25 UCB and UCD collaborations such as:

Berkeley, Tsinghua mark partnership’s progress

in relation to IT Sec. concerns raised in question from uc regent Davis

00:39:45 internal audit evaluation of campus diversity metrics, advisor Acker asks about it

00:41:30 regent Sherman asks about efforts in campus strategic sourcing metrics

You can also try to follow along uc regents may meeting via audio clip and text synopsis at these links, the audio runs without interruption, breaks but can make it difficult to identify speakers, proceedings:




Saturday, May 21, 2016

The possible or impossible

UC postdoctoral scholars to be included in new overtime pay rule

"The Department of Labor ruled Wednesday that UC postdoctoral scholars making less than $47,476 are now qualified for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act, with the ruling coming despite a petition from the University of California to exempt them from the act."

Hexter: Campus is moving forward

- on status of hiring some new Deans and other key positions, the nature of his communications with Katehi during investigation and various possible/impossibilities are entertained.

Gov. Brown's push for more undergraduates to get teaching credentials


UC President Napolitano meets with Washington leaders


UC student regent nominated for 2017-18

More details on the expensive gate in :


Where does Higher Ed fit in to this story? : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/vulture-fund-lobbying_us_57350001e4b077d4d6f2a374

Thursday, May 12, 2016

UC on Post Doc Compensation, more

See: UC Postdocs are Worth $50K (and Then Some...)

"Despite ten or more years of higher education, some postdocs effectively make less than $15 per hour because of the long hours.

Now the Department of Labor appears poised to offer some financial relief for UC postdocs and other researcher job titles (such as Specialists) as well as 13.5 million additional workers. Last year the DOL proposed to increase the threshold for overtime pay for salaried employees from $23,660 a year to $50,440. But in their public comment on the proposed overtime rule, the University of California asserts that postdocs are “entry level academic employees...who should be excluded from the proposed rule.”

The University of California then proceeded to use talking points straight out of the Chamber of Commerce and Republican congressional playbook by claiming that “higher compensation for trainees... will necessarily result in the placement of fewer of them in our research institutions.”

Despite these claims, UC’s position is not backed up by reality. As recently as six years ago, postdocs were warned that salary increases in a new union contract would lead to a decrease in positions, but in fact the number of postdocs at UC has increased under the new salary scale. Another analysis of postdoc hiring trends nationwide over the past two decades found that annual salary increases for postdocs (which included two 10 percent increases and one 25 percent increase) did not lead to fewer postdoc positions.

UC researchers produce an average of five inventions a day and win grant applications that bring in nearly $6 billion a year in research funding. But postdoc compensation makes up only a fraction of 1 percent of those research dollars. Given this reality, it seems the UC may have better luck looking towards its executive ranks (John Falle, the author of UC’s public comment opposing the overtime rules makes $285K in his role as Associate VP of Federal Government Relations) if it wants to make a credible argument about compensation costs impacting the quality of research."

The University of California Board of Regents today (May 12) approved Christine Gulbranson as senior vice president for research innovation and entrepreneurship at UC’s Office of the President...Gulbranson will earn $325,000 annually.

Wasn't it Regent Blum who would say 'they don't teach any classes at UCOP' when Regents discussed the necessary reorgs of OP?
Regents M , Varner, Blum and De La Pena...were either no shows for this week's UC Regents Meeting or was their absence some sort of protest,- or were they only hanging out in the background, closed sessions-- or, were they just wallflowers this week?

UC Regents Meet May 12th

You can view it via:



Meeting Agendas and Schedule

Dates and locations of scheduled Regents meetings are listed below. Ten days before each scheduled meeting, the Notice of Meeting (agendas) will be available on this website.
Live video streaming of the open sessions is available while the meeting is in session

Thursday, May 12

8:30 am
Committee of the Whole (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf)

8:50 am Committee on Oversight of the DOE Laboratories (open session) (pdf)

9:15 am
Committee on Governance (open session) (pdf)

11:00 am
Committee on Compensation (open session)

11:15 am
Board (open session)

Other news:
UC regents’ cluelessness is unbecoming

Gavin Newsom places his stamp on UC sports policy; it’s a start

Regents consider systemwide policy to expand protections for student athletes

Product of yearlong effort seeks balance between academics and sports

Policy breaks ground for Division I and II athletes, but should be strengthened long term

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article77062657.html

And, http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_29881057/university-panel-adopts-expanded-student-athlete-protections

‘Needle Has Not Moved’ on Increasing Diversity on UC Campuses

UC regents are frustrated that campuses haven't made bigger strides on diversity


"We open with the campaign by UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi to save her job, move to Gavin Newsom’s plan to save college sports,"

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article77126277.html


"First, states should shift to a not-for-profit model of governing boards, where members are chosen outside of political channels. This move would provide public research universities with a critical layer of insulation from political distortion.

Second, more states should adopt arrangements that provide universities with greater latitude in areas such as procurement and budgeting, in exchange for a commitment to reach certain benchmarks.

Third, states should move to multiyear guarantees of funding, to allow universities to more predictably engage in strategic planning. California, for example, has experimented with this approach.

Finally, states might explore using a bond offering to shift public universities from an unreliable annual appropriation to a self-sustaining endowment. Although not a solution for every public university, such a mechanism could offer certain institutions greater control over their budgetary future; Oregon considered such a proposal several years ago."

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

UC Regents are being denied access to UC Student Enrollment, Admissions Data,Faculty hiring recruitment numbers at each UC Campus

See  statements made by Oved, Pattiz, Elliott regarding denial of access to disaggregated data to regent Oved on his request for disaggregated data for each campus and, separately, another request and denial of access to UCSD data when UC Regent Elliott requested it (their report on yield of underrepresented minority student enrollment at UCSD specifically) and comments from Pattiz and others UC Regents about it...when the archive of this morning's UC Regents session is made available

It happens in the last hour of this video:


Then compare their comments

And Reiss comments on GPA and SAT weighting on admissions decisions

All of that compared and contrasted with what the UC Faculty Representative said from the Regents table this morning regarding the state auditor and her report on UC admissions and Enrollment.
The UC Faculty Rep speaks about the CA State Auditor and the JLAC report at the 56:00 mark, once again, here at this link:


(FYI, there were microphone and archiving the video problems today especially during public comment period and during the faculty rep statement to Regents, so just hang in there, the comments are made in full, the archive is now available etc.)

Why can't UC Regents have access to campus specific disaggregated data on
student admissions, Enrollment?

And employee, Faculty personnel numbers on recruitment/hiring?

Why are UC Regents being denied this information?

And who on the board or at office of the UC president is denying the UC Regents access to that information? Are the UC Chancellors denying the UC Regents access to those numbers,?
Which UC Chancellors are denying access to those numbers, data?

Will add in news coverage/ round up of today's meeting below

Could it be former LA Times Larry Gordon? Writes:

UC regents lament persistent low African-American enrollment
about another set of comments regents Oakley and Island saying there is no UC accountability in the UC Accountability Reports

Frets or claims of misrepresentation?

The Regents table is all over the place on responding to the way they characterize the state audit report on UC admissions

The LA Times calls it frets http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-uc-regents-audit-snap-story.html

But that was before this morning when the faculty rep at the Regents table characterized the state auditors findings much more harshly...

Are UC Admin trying to use a soft touch with pols while the faculty throw themselves out there with a more aggressive approach?


"Sacramento lawmaker would expand UC resident enrollment by 30,000

Plan would take six years to add Californians, reduce nonresident enrollment

Would combine state funding with UC efficiencies, nonresident tuition hike

Caught off-guard by proposal, UC expresses initial opposition"

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article76804622.html

University Of California Considers Expanding Student-Athlete Protections



UC President Napolitano proposes multi-year support for undocumented students

"We did not foresee this number of cases coming forward,"

Emotional town hall addresses sexual harassment, assaults at UCS

"Is it true no tenure-track faculty has ever lost their job due to a Title IX violation,” asked associate professor Lora Bartlett.

Galloway conceded this was the case, but insisted that “things have changed and there is a different approach now.”

Last month, UC President Janet Napolitano said investigations involving UC faculty are ineffective, cases are inconsistently handled and sanctions frequently don’t fit the offense. In an April 18 letter, she directed the UC’s 10-member review committee to expedite investigations and democratize the process of propose sanctions, which are currently decided by top administrators.

Michelle Armstrong, who said she was sexually harassed eight years ago as an undergraduate student by a tenured faculty member, said she thinks Title IX failed her and showed bias toward the faculty member.

Tsugawa said the incident occurred before she joined UCSC as its Title IX officer, but promised to look into the incident.

Armstrong also expressed frustration that Title IX reports did not remain in faculty members’ records and thus were not taken into account during professional reviews.

“I have watched this individual continue to advance in his career over the past eight years despite multiple reports,” Armstrong said. “How many chances does faculty get?”

UC Regents to meet May 11th

ou can view it via:



Meeting Agendas and Schedule

Dates and locations of scheduled Regents meetings are listed below. Ten days before each scheduled meeting, the Notice of Meeting (agendas) will be available on this website.
Live video streaming of the open sessions is available while the meeting is in session

Wednesday, May 11

8:30 am
Committee of the Whole (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf)

9:30 am
Committee on Finance (open session) (pdf)

11:00 am
Committee on Educational Policy (open session) (pdf)

12:00 pm

1:30 pm
Committee on Compensation (closed session) (pdf)

1:45 pm
Committee on Compensation (Regents only session (pdf)

2:00 pm Committee on Finance (Regents only session) (pdf)

3:00 pm Board (Regents only session) (pdf)

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

On UC:" Critics say it appears the public university is twisting the state's open-meeting law to shield itself from embarrassment over the growing scandal. The agenda item at Wednesday's meeting -- "Update On Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence Matters" -- does not specify what board members will address behind closed doors, nor which public-meeting exemption the regents are using to discuss it privately in a closed-session finance committee meeting. ""

See: Experts: UC skirting the law by discussing sex harassment, violence matters in secret

SCA 1 passed unanimously at this:


1:30 p.m.

Committees: Elections and Constitutional Amendments

Today, a low turnout, even among Regents:

"UC regents convene for three days of meetings in Sacramento

Five UC Davis professors say Katehi has made positive contributions

Unclear if regents will discuss Katehi’s situation in closed session"

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article76856522.html

Assemble Budget Subcommittee Agenda on UC Pension, spending etc: Here


A Game

UC Regents Meet May 10th

You can view it via:



See also UC regents get their first chance to weigh in on scathing audit of admissions policies

UC Regents preview – May 10-12

Meeting Agendas and Schedule

Dates and locations of scheduled Regents meetings are listed below. Ten days before each scheduled meeting, the Notice of Meeting (agendas) will be available on this website.
Live video streaming of the open sessions is available while the meeting is in session

Tuesday May 10

1:30 pm Committee on Compliance and Audit (Regents only session) (pdf)

1:40 pm Committee of the Whole (public comment) (pdf)

2:00 pm
Committee on Compliance and Audit (open session) (pdf)

3:00 pm
Committee on Grounds and Buildings (open session) (pdf)

Credibility tests for this week's UC Regents meeting

Sac Bee op ed on SCA 1

"Another offensive attack on UC

State legislators rewrite attempt to hobble UC Board of Regents

Revised attack would limit regents to one term, for reasons that are unclear

SCA 1 is solution in search of a problem and should be voted down"

--but avoids the point that even Regent Blum, when going through his reconfirmation at Sacto Senate rules committee he thought perhaps second terms for UC Regents should have length of term shortened, etc and other Regents have sometimes made similar comments regarding their length of service, even commented on their abilities and limits of understanding administrative decisions for the university...Blum said it to Steinberg and there were also many culture and governance questions raised - can watch the video just scroll down this page to it embedded and titled: CA SENATE RULES COMMITTEE UC REGENTS REAPPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION HEARING AUGUST 2014

Included several questions on UC culture and governance issues from from this new candidate

The UC Regents and OP will try hard to sell this at this week's Regents meetings,
UC’s climate of innovation pays off for California

but the sum total of all the bad headlines this academic year are really too much,may put in question UC credibility across the board...

UCSB Economic Forecast Project Executive Director Peter Rupert, left, moderates a panel discussion among (l to r) Santa Maria City Manager Rick Haydon, Allan Hancock College President Kevin Walthers, Pacific Coast Business Times Editor-in-chief Henry Dubroff and Sacramento Bee journalist Dan Walters

"Education is how we all get out of an economic downturn,” Walthers said. “But right now, the State of California is not investing in higher education.” Student enrollments at public institutions are up, but the state budget has not grown with it, he explained. Compounding the problem in the North County, according to Walthers is that access to four-year institutions is limited, forcing students to drive, or live far away if they want to get their university degrees. Among possible solutions, he suggested, were satellite campuses of four-year institutions, and perhaps even the conversion of"... - See more at: http://www.news.ucsb.edu/2016/016780/examining-options#.dpuf


SF Gate on funding for higher ed

Monday, May 9, 2016

"certain men are counted as members of the UCLA women's basketball team and a number of women counted in another UCLA sport (rowing) who didn't seem to think they were on the team."

A quote from UCLA Fac Blog Group Questions UCLA's Arithmetic on Female Athletes

On this article and episode from:

Center For Investigative Reporting with their new website :https://www.revealnews.org

UCLA’s sports equity numbers for women include phantom players and men

UCLA provides far fewer opportunities to female athletes than its public reports suggest, Reveal has found.

Audio episode here

Is it that the Los Angelism at work?

Continued Contradictions, Irony

Supplementary Legal Involvement by State Needed to Hold UC Regents Accountable


Dirks announces major changes to cost-cutting efforts

"The announcement of the dissolution of the Office of Strategic Initiatives in favor of what Mogulof referred to as a return to “operating within the usual management structures” was met with widespread satisfaction at the meeting."


"This speaks to a lot of the backlash that the handling of the Office of Strategic Initiatives received, as well as changing leadership within California Hall,” said incoming ASUC President Will Morrow. “There is definitely an opportunity now to move toward more productive conversations about addressing our budget deficit.”

Leadership changes within California Hall were also discussed at the meeting. Though no direct action was taken against Dirks, multiple faculty members expressed their disapproval of his handling of recent events.

Political science department chair Eric Schickler said in an email that there was no longer a bond of mutual trust between faculty and the administration. He added that there were concerns among faculty that major donors were being steered toward supporting the Berkeley Global Campus project in Richmond rather than core campus research and teaching missions.

“Shared governance requires a shared vision and shared trust between faculty and those at the top,” Schickler said. “Many of us believe that the chancellor’s poor decisions have eroded that trust to the breaking point.”

Glazer, however, expressed concerns at the meeting of the repercussions of taking any action against Dirks at this stage.

“I don’t think it would be in our best interests to start a process that would lead to a new chancellor being put in place,” Glazer said, adding that a replacement would not be better suited to serve the campus. He added that he was concerned that the regents and UC President Janet Napolitano may not be thinking of putting someone in that position who would be better suited to serve the campus."


Dirks OP Ed today

Chancellor’s Corner: Challenges create stronger campus and community

A launch at UCLA?:
I wholeheartedly support Secretary King’s ‘Beyond the Box’ initiative, and I believe there are better ways to ensure campus safety than stigmatizing those who are trying to better their lives through higher education,” University of California President Janet Napolitano said." http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/education-department-pushes-alternatives-criminal-history-questions-college-admissions

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Sweet Sixteen- "the status of lecturer with security of employment (LSOE). In 2014, among hundreds of lecturers, only 16 were listed with the status of security of employment,", - and other things

Davis Enterprise: Questions raised about Katehi’s family employed by UCD

"It is not uncommon for the spouse of a university hire to be hired as well. At UCD, “associate of the chancellor” is a common role for spouses — both Rosalie Vanderhoef, wife of Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef, and Joan Hullar, wife of Chancellor Ted Hullar, had no university employment but were known as associates of the chancellor.

Less common is the teaching position that Tseregounis received, with the status of lecturer with security of employment (LSOE). In 2014, among hundreds of lecturers, only 16 were listed with the status of security of employment, documents show. Tseregounis was the lecturer with the highest regular base salary.

By comparison, Dr. Douglas Gross, who teaches in the School of Medicine, which generally pays more, earned $160,606 in 2014 ($142,606 regular pay, $18,000 in “other pay”). And Liz Applegate, who runs a large program and teaches many nutrition courses, earned $137,716 in regular pay and $32,802 in other pay.

Additionally, the teaching workload of a full-time LSOE is normally greater than that of a full-time faculty member, documents show. Yet looking at his teaching load for the spring quarter"


UC Berkeley-UCSF Community Medical Program At Risk of Closure
SF Chron


Funding Ideology, Not Research, at University of California 'Labor Institutes'
An effort in the legislature to urge UC regents to refrain from expanding labor institutes to UC-Irvine met with union opposition.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Cal student housing crisis compared with

Matier and Ross

"Dirks and his wife have agreed to buy Alice Walker’s home in the Berkeley hills, which the Pulitzer Prize-winning author listed for $2.65 million."

"Meanwhile, back on campus, workers have finally finished putting up that controversial fence around the chancellor’s residence. Campus officials ordered up the extra security after Dirks and his wife reported being unnerved by a series of security breaches.

As we reported in August, complaints from students and faculty over the amount of public space being gobbled up by the fence prompted the campus to move it back a bit. That pushed up the cost of the 7-foot-tall fence, which had been pegged at $400,000, to $700,000.

P.S.: While Dirks plans to stay put as chancellor, his wife, a South Asian history professor at UC Berkeley, will be taking a one-year sabbatical starting this fall to pursue a writing fellowship — at rival Stanford."

UC Berkeley student housing comes up as next week's UC Regents meeting items

In the Building and Grounds committee agenda:
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 24, 2016

GB1 Discussion President’s Student Housing Initiative

GB2 Discussion Update on Student and Trainee Housing Strategy and Discussion of
Minnesota Street Student and Trainee Housing, San Francisco

GB3 Action Approval of Design Pursuant to California Environmental Quality
Act for the Stiles Student Resident Hall Project, Berkeley Campus

GB4 Discussion Overview of Capital Priorities, San Diego Campus

GB5 Action Approval of Preliminary Plans Funding, Nuevo West Graduate
Student Housing, San Diego Campus

GB6 Discussion Plans for the Geffen Academy, Los Angeles Campus

GB7 Action Approval of Preliminary Plans Funding, Anderson School
of Management Addition, Los Angeles Campus

GB8 Action Approval of the Budget and of External Financing, Medical
Center Electrical Plant, Irvine Campus

Crammed into Berkeley's Housing Zone, Students Get Creative—and Desperate | California Magazine - Cal Alumni Association



Dirks also comes up in this on unfunded mandates, buildings and grounds at Columbia:


"In 2012, Nicholas Dirks, then-executive vice president for Arts and Sciences, created the organization's executive committee—composed of the "

Friday, May 6, 2016

Katehi and Journalism Awards, and UC and Political Influence Moves

Katehi now sends regrets on attending awards event for... Journalism scholarships
- and her people mention UCOP gag order...

Then , Davis Enterprise has:

"Enterprise got word late on Thursday that UCD faculty were circulating a San Francisco Chronicle story from March 24, 2015, that is likely to generate some negative sentiment by faculty about Haag’s suitability.

The story, headlined, “Kamala Harris accuses U.S. attorney of ‘unethical tactics,’ ” details a complicated situation where “attorneys for Harris’ office charged that Haag ‘actively misled’ … two witnesses when she interviewed them (in 2007).”

However, a follow-up column a week later, headlined, “Kamala Harris backtracks on claim accusing U.S. attorney of bias,” softened the accusations.

“After we reported the story,” the authors wrote, “the AG’s office filed a ‘substitute’ petition — one that made no mention of Haag’s supposed bias or unethical tactics.”"

--Here are links to those SF Chron stories mentioned:



"Meanwhile, UCD Academic Senate chairman André Knoesen told Senate members Thursday after the announcement of Haag as investigator, “I have not yet been contacted by President (Janet) Napolitano regarding the Executive Council resolution, which was supported by the majority present at the Representative Assembly on Tuesday, that ‘the Davis Division of the Academic Senate, through representatives, play a role in defining the scope of the investigation, the manner in which it is conducted, and the substance of the analysis and its conclusions.’

Further negative sentiment about Haag’s assignment came from Katehi’s attorney, Melinda Guzman, in a statement Thursday.

“It is unfortunate that President Napolitano is needlessly spending state resources hiring a criminal prosecutor when there is absolutely zero evidence to suggest there has been any criminal activity,” Guzman said.

“This is yet another reckless, politically driven effort"

And UCLA Fac Blog gets into some of the UC Regents agenda items for next week, including UC Regents want a new UC political influencing (correction) machine?/committee


If one is a staff or student member at UC considering making a IX Or other type of complaint while witnessing the UC leaks etc etc ---well, sheeesh--what messages are being sent to them?

Thursday, May 5, 2016

The value of those THE rankings of UC in light of::


"As UC’s scandals spread, Janet Napolitano plays tough cop"

When you have to repair a gigantic, self-proclaimed ‘best public university in the world,’ you have to be ruthless,” Kamer said. “You can be so ruthless that everyone hates your guts and you lose support. You’re not always going to get everything right. But you have to make decisions.”


"Her decisions “are a day late and a dollar short,” said Michael O’Hare, who teaches public management at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy. “She should have been on top of this before it came out as public scandals. Her response has been largely to tighten up on bad behavior and punish it more severely. And I think that’s missing a very large part of the task — which is to have less offending and less punishing.”"

- much more .


First layoff notice at UC Berkeley spurs rally, criticism of chancellor

Former U.S. attorney to lead investigation into allegations against UC Davis chancellor
UC Office of the Presiden
Thursday, May 5, 2016


"Former federal prosecutors to lead UC probe of Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi

Melinda Haag, who oversaw Barry Bonds prosecution, will oversee Katehi inquiry

Haag to work with law partner McGregor Scott, former U.S. attorney for Sacramento

Katehi lawyer says there is ‘zero evidence’ of criminal activity, looks forward to ‘transparent’ investigation"

Read more here:


Woodland resident named acting provost of UC Davis
"Burtis, a professor of genetics and past dean of the College of Biological Sciences, has served as faculty adviser to the chancellor and provost since 2011. In that role, Burtis served as a liaison with key campus constituencies and had a lead role in the 2020 Initiative, which involved strategic planning for campus growth, including enrollment management, facilities planning and academic resources.

“I am delighted that Ken will be serving in the role of acting provost at this critical moment,” Hexter said. “Ken has a long history with UC Davis, having been here as a student, a staff member, a professor and an administrator. He is already very engaged in many of our most important projects.”"


UCOP appoints former U.S. attorney to lead investigation into allegations against UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi

Cost of cutting UC Berkeley program? Desperately needed doctors


Wednesday, May 4, 2016

"We accept that the cost of doing that was we had to change the makeup of the students."

"Some UC majors see balance shift toward out-of-state students

Engineering programs at Berkeley, UCLA saw big nonresident increase

Recent state audit concluded some resident students were displaced

Lawmakers’ constituents are complaining"


"On campus, the response has been akin to a shrug. Students and professors in Berkeley and UCLA’s engineering departments say the sharp increase of nonresidents in recent years has led to few noticeable differences in their classes and jobs, and it’s a rare topic of discussion.

“We are the most apolitical part of the campus. We are stubbornly ignorant of the politics of anything,” said Jeff Eldredge, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at UCLA.

The university handled the financial downturn “really well,” he added. “We accept that the cost of doing that was we had to change the makeup of the students.”"

--There was also some scrutiny of the engineering deans travel and campaign budget for international outreach to potential applicants came up in Sacto and at Regents meetings.

UC Davis 'Leakers' Were UC Berkeley Faculty, - and OP Personnel?

See: Faculty want their voices heard on Katehi

"Indeed, Bisson said that UCD faculty first heard about Katehi’s investigatory administrative leave not from UCOP, but from UC Berkeley faculty. She said UCD faculty became upset, thinking “they (UCOP) told something to the Berkeley faculty and not us.”

Eventually, UCD faculty learned that a copy of the memo from Napolitano’s office had been leaked to Cal faculty, which was subsequently forwarded to UCD faculty. Bisson cited this as an example of how poor the communication between the Academic Senate and UCOP has been because UCD faculty were so quick to believe Cal was given UCD-related news before UCD faculty."

Looks like two rounds of leaking, 1-a leak from OP to UCB then 2- from UCB to UCD...
Demand transparency from Katehi investigation https://theaggie.org/2016/05/02/demand-transparency-from-katehi-investigation/

"The Editorial Board appreciates the precautionary action taken by the UC in investigating decisions made behind the doors of Mrak Hall. As a top research university, UC Davis must be managed by trustworthy administrators who take students’ best interests to heart.

UC Davis students have played an active and vital role in bringing awareness to the chancellor’s actions. On March 11, the student Fire Katehi group began a sit-in on the fifth floor of Mrak Hall, calling for the chancellor’s resignation. The protesters left Mrak on April 15 and have since organized additional demonstrations, continuing to elevate the issue.

It is only fair that the investigation progresses transparently, avoiding suspicious actions similar to those it is reviewing. As the investigation commences, students should remain informed and continue to take interest in campus events.

In the event that Katehi is dismissed from her position, we hope that student involvement is welcomed in the process of appointing a new chancellor. Student committees and other forms of respectful involvement can add to increased productivity and avoid disruptive behavior. "


Student activism key in uncovering UC Davis chancellor’s corruption

Just UC ethics violation, no big deal (East Bay Times editorial)

It starts off: "The hits just keep on coming for the University of California. Another day, another black eye.

Sexual harassment scandals involving faculty at UC Berkeley and UCLA -- two of the system's pre-eminent universities -- have rocked those campuses and prompted charges that UC isn't serious about dealing with harassment. Last week, UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi was placed on investigative administrative leave after she apparently refused a request from UC President Janet Napolitano to resign because of a series of embarrassing blunders.

Now, a secret investigation concluded that a doctor on the University of California Board of Regents -- the governing board of the whole system -- has violated ethics rules by trying to strike a deal for the purchase of his eye clinics by UCLA. "