Monday, May 22, 2017

Brown Supports Schwarzenegger Dominant Imprint on the UC Regents?

Those closely following UC Regents ask this all the time...(and in the context of Arnold relationship with USC)

Why does Brown leave multiple UC Regents vacancies open for years while Arnold appointees take leadership positions (chair control of the most powerful finance, compliance, governance, committees on the future of UC type committees etc) on the UC Regents year after year?- in this July a Schwarzenegger appointee will chair the UC Regents, keep that in mind as you read:
Gov "Brown could overhaul the UC Regents"
http://www.capradio.org/articles/2017/05/22/jerry-brown-could-overhaul-uc-leadership-if-he-wanted-to-heres-how/
But unanswered in that article:
How does the Gov feel about his UC Regents reappointmens,ya know- the ones who served as chair of the UC Regents after those painful Dynes years when UCOP promised reforms and U C Regents said they would do things differently but now we find the ops situation at UCOP in the present day virtually the same bad state-- Napolitano briefly referenced 2007 events in her opening remarks to the board last Wednesday... Is that a sign she now is willing to look at that history and look at operations through that lens and why didn't she do so from the beginning? The previous UC Regents chairs apparently were not willing to tackle it, or didn't know how...

Also to consider gubernatorially: Will he/can he make himself a 12 year UC Regent on his way out of his last term? He enjoys his alumni status to Yale, Does he still want a connection to UC (other than that seemingly fraught alum relationship with UC Berkeley) to continue on- or is Yale his arnoldversion of USC?

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Roil 'n Rollback

The political fallout will likely play out well into the next academic year and 2018..
because the UC PATH and UC practices on contracted employees audit results will be made public in August,

UC PATH being a main driver of increases of the campuses 'assessment' they have to pay UCOP,
-along with how the audit process with UCOP went in this other instance
-just as students return to campuses...

So see :
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/california/articles/2017-05-18/the-latest-uc-regents-meeting-to-discuss-audit-is-underway


Included:
"The Latest on a UC Regents meeting to cap nonresident enrollment and discuss critical audit (all times local):

2:30 p.m.

A top California legislator is disappointed the UC Board of Regents did not talk of repealing a planned tuition increase in the wake of a critical state audit of UC President Janet Napolitano's office.

House Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, who sits on the board, has called for the board to reverse a hike approved in January."...
________


CapRadio picked up on the political (some of it indeed savvy, and some of it many might also call deeply disingenuous) moves of the UC Regents, see:

http://www.capradio.org/articles/2017/05/18/uc-regents-to-grill-uc-president,-state-auditor-thursday-over-controversial-audit/



"Update 3:45 p.m.: Call it a master class in political choreography, orchestrated by the University of California’s embattled president and Board of Regents chairwoman in the wake of last month’s audit that blasted UC’s budgeting practices."

Also see and hear more on the UC Regents meeting:http://www.capradio.org/news/insight/2017/05/19/insight-051917a/


- but it may be that the "Master Class" on this is ultimately taught by those who deal with Tuition and Fees...


____

Then see "Tensions high as UC regents meet to discuss audit response"
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/article/NE/20170518/NEWS/170519671


"But some UC students at the meeting thought the regents were blaming the messenger. “I’d rather they focus on their own accountability,” said Danielle Bermudez, a graduate student at UC Merced, who, along with others, said the regents seemed out of touch with the students they are supposed to serve.

The audit, released in late April, found that the UC Office of the President hid $175 million and suggested alterations to campus survey responses that were intended to be confidential, a move that sparked outrage from lawmakers and the auditor’s office, which threw out the responses as tainted.

The revelation has sparked an outcry among both Republican and Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento, and Gov. Jerry Brown said he would withhold $50 million from the university until they implemented the auditor’s recommendations as a way to hold their “feet to the fire.” When Napolitano took the job in 2013, she was heralded as someone who could build bridges with lawmakers, but the audit has complicated that task.

“The frustration is with the dismissiveness and the lack of candor, and I think we saw that from the UC Office of the President during the audit and during the hearing and even today,” said Assemblywoman Catharine Baker, R-Dublin, who has called for more transparency, during a phone interview after the meeting.

Regent Eloy Oakley, who leads California’s community college system, acknowledged that tension during the meeting. “There seems to be a disconnect between the … conversation happening in Sacramento and the response that’s coming out of Oakland,” he said."...

And "Parshan Khosravi, a UCLA graduate student chosen as a student advocate by UC’s student association to attend the meeting, didn’t like all of what he heard. The central office should do more to be accessible to students, he said, and the regents should do more to oversee the system. “I think the regents have to be more involved in that,” he said. “They are often very removed from our campuses.”

“As much as they talk about deep dives, I don’t feel like they’re reflecting on the public’s reaction,” said Bermudez, the UC Merced student. Her classmate, Violet Barton, agreed. She came from Merced with lots of questions about how regents interact with students and choose which initiatives to support. “They’re not satisfactorily answered,” she said."
__

Regionally some campuses seem to be catching up to the fact that UCSC survey responses were altered, but there appear to be other facts besides the survey responses and that infamous conference call to come out, the CSA alluded to behind the scenes phone calls and SMG preferred responses write up that CSA was made aware of too, so that part will be reported on at the July UC Regents meeting...

_____

And there is this :

https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/05/17/state-assemblywoman-catharine-baker-wants-tuition-freeze-after-troubling-uc-audit/

"California Assemblywoman Catharine Baker (R-Dublin) is calling for a subpoena of budget documents from the University of California Office of the President, as well as a freeze on tuition hikes and salary increases at the 10 UC campuses. "

_______

And also recall all that transpired at that Sacramento meeting on UC Audit
You have to toggle thru
http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=4488

- it routinely seems Cal Channel doesn't make it user friendly to access, share the content on UC, is that a political posture too?

Friday, May 19, 2017

Oversee and Don't Know...

Some coverage of second day of the 'nothing to see here- move along, dog and pony show koolaid drinkers':

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/UC-regents-defend-Napolitano-thank-auditor-for-11157476.php
Includes:
"Kudos on this tremendous improvement,” Regent Bonnie Rees congratulated the staff, then peppered Napolitano’s chief operating officer, Rachel Nava, with questions about the document that revealed just how confusing it was.

Nava promised the budgets would be easier to understand as more changes were made.

But the regents realized that if they approved the president’s new budget, they would be rubber-stamping it in the dark — just as they’d done in the past.

In the end, the regents approved the budget on a contingent basis. They directed the finance committee to study every line of it and said they would take it up again in July.

Regent Dick Blum, a financier, voted against that plan. He said: “We think we know what we’re doing, but we’re simply kidding ourselves.”"

_____
NBC local:

""

______

Earlier, this interview with Napolitano:



____

UCOP seems to have hired all the Cal Berkeley admin failings- and they are paying them $200,000 and $400,000 and up ...
Folks who in the CSA report could not answer basic questions even after being in their jobs for two + years..

Folks who rolled out campus shared services debacle that in large part took down Dirks (whom they glaringly did not give a standing O at his recognition goodbye moment in open session) and the creators of Op Ex and offensive PR moves now at the helm of UCOP budget and largest expenditures...

It would be comical but:

Current UC Chair Lozano in her community message on the UC Audit:
"I and my colleagues on the board oversee all the exemplary work that you do"...

Then also tell us after sitting for fifteen years on the UC Regents board:

"We think we know what we’re doing, but we’re simply kidding ourselves.”"

-Btw, they've elected Kieffer to become UC Regent chair in July...

______


Also see:
A FACULTY OVERVIEW OF THE UC BUDGET--TENTH ANNIVERSARY EDITION
http://utotherescue.blogspot.com/2017/05/a-faculty-overview-of-uc-budget-tenth.html





Thursday, May 18, 2017

UC Regents Meet May 18

See:
http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/may17.html

To view:
http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/videos/may2017/may2017.html#invest

Thursday, May 18
8:30 am

Board (closed session) (pdf)
Location: Robertson Auditorium


Board (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Times indicated and order of business subject to change


9:00 am - 3:00 pm



Wednesday, May 17, 2017

UCOP's Inflated? Or Increased Budget and Increased Campus 'Assessments'..

See SF Gate:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Students-protesting-hidden-funds-shut-down-UC-11152991.php

"Napolitano’s office will also offer its 2017-18 budget to the regents for approval, and one difference from last year’s budget is already obvious.

Last year’s budget was seven pages long. The new one is 30 pages, packed with details about spending and expected fund balances that were previously absent.

Another difference: The new budget, $813.5 million, is 19 percent higher than this year’s $686 million.

The president’s two-part budget document for programs and administration says the budget grew because of the rising cost of the university’s education abroad system, patent management and other programs. In addition, the president’s office has been gradually taking over payroll functions for the university system.

The president’s office raises money in part by charging a fee to campuses. In her audit, Howle criticized the president’s office for repeatedly increasing the fee even as it squirreled away millions of dollars in reserves it didn’t report to the regents. Many of Howle’s recommendations call for the president’s office to consider returning money to campuses.

In her new budget, Napolitano offers for the first time a chart showing details of the campus assessment.

It shows that her office raised the campus fee by 7 percent last year and 3 percent the year before, but that it had reduced it by nearly 1 percent the year before that. In the new budget, the campus fee remains at $312 million from all campuses. That’s an average of $31.2 million for each campus, although the amount varies depending on the number of students, employees and expenditures.

But another campus charge for the payroll service had not been previously included in the budget. The new presentation shows that the fee will rise by 16 percent to $52 million per campus, up from $20 million last year."


- in Sacto there was talk of a deficit in OP's gen counsel section
And of course the driver of UC PATH history and currently in this...

____
Other coverage:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/05/17/protesters-call-for-rollback-of-uc-tuition-hike-outside-regents-meeting/



_____

http://dailybruin.com/2017/05/15/uc-regents-preview-may-16-18/


____
http://www.ktvu.com/news/255315895-story



____

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-essential-education-updates-southern-uc-regents-meeting-opens-with-raucous-1495040665-htmlstory.html


And LA T had some USC vouching for higher education expenditures:
“I'm troubled that the UC is a punching bag for fiscal extravagance when in the grand scheme of things this is not what the audit found,” said Tierney, co-director of the USC Pullias Center here:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uc-regents-meeting-advance-20170517-story.html

And then some coverage of today's meeting,
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uc-regents-meeting-20170517-story.html

but no mention of Regent Perez taking issue with opening comments from Lozano, chalfant, Napolitano as the sole representation of UC Regents position on audit findings- he wanted it clear that there was no uniform UC Regents position other than to adopt the 33 recommendations...

____

And then check out what's being peddled to the Cal alumni here:
https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2017-05-17/uc-reserve-fund-debacle-more-complex-it-appears

Includes:
“The legislators who are complaining about this reserve fund are the same ones who have been starving UC, CSU, and the community colleges for a very long time,” he said. “I understand that there’s only a limited amount of money to go around. And maybe K-12 education, Medicaid, and low-income housing are more important than higher education. But our universities have been hurt a great deal over the past few decades by a lack of state appropriations. That’s the real issue.”
And,
"The University of Alabama pays their football coach [more than $11 million a year],” he said. “Is it worth it? Apparently it is to Alabama: they make a lot of money on football, and being number one in college football is important to people in a state with significant poverty and other problems. Alabamans are proud of the University of Alabama. And we’re proud of Berkeley, but for reasons of research and academics. But if we don’t stay competitive, the best and the brightest grad students and undergrads will go to Harvard or Stanford or MIT.”

“The optics are not the greatest here, and the president is now vulnerable.”

Returning to his main thesis, Sugarman noted UCOP ultimately isn’t responsible for ensuring the university is adequately funded: That’s the job of the state legislature. He does believe, however, that Napolitano didn’t handle the survey issue well and that she was not forthcoming in providing information to the state auditor on specific discretionary spending programs. And this legitimate criticism, he said, has hobbled UCOP."






UC Regents Meet May 17

See http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/may17.html


And to view:
http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/videos/may2017/may2017.html#invest


Wednesday, May 17

8:30 am

Board (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium



Concurrent Meetings
9:30 am

Academic and Student Affairs Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room


National Laboratories Subcommittee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room



9:30 am

Finance and Capital Strategies Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Finance and Capital Strategies Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium




12:30 pm

Lunch
Concurrent Meetings
1:00 pm Public Engagement & Development Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Public Engagement & Development Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room



1:00 pm Compliance and Audit Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium



Compliance and Audit Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium


3:30 pm Governance and Compensation Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Governance and Compensation Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium




Tuesday, May 16, 2017

UC Regents May 16 meeting

http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/may17.html

Tuesday, May 16

2:00 pm

Investments Subcommittee (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf)
Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Investments Subcommittee (closed session) (pdf)
Location: Fisher Banquet Room






____
CA Speaker Rendon writes this
Opinion: UC Regents need to better supervise Napolitano
The Mercury News
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/16/speaker-rendon-in-wake-of-audit-uc-regents-need-to-wake-up-better-oversee-president-napolitano-and-roll-back-tuition-hike/

UC Regents preview – May 16-18
Daily Bruin

http://dailybruin.com/2017/05/15/uc-regents-preview-may-16-18/

And,

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/16/uc-regents-vote-nonresident-enrollment-policy-state-audit-findings/

Sunday, May 14, 2017

Some UC Regent Belligerence, and ''Why not those UCOP answers earlier??' and 'How much'' all over the place...

Is this the tone for the UC Regents meeting this week?
http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Key-UC-regent-is-standing-by-Napolitano-11143082.php
Includes:
"It’s total nonsense,” Regent Richard Blum, a major financial contributor to UC, said of the Board of Regents-ordered audit. “But if I were still (the board’s) chairman, I might feel the need to do it as well.”

Blum said there was nothing improper about keeping millions in reserves and that a portion of the money was mandated to be doled out over time.

As for the state investigation’s finding that Napolitano’s staff reviewed UC campuses’ responses to the auditor’s surveys before they were sent to Sacramento, Blum says he buys Napolitano’s argument that the campuses asked for the help....

“I’m not easily snowed over, and in my opinion Janet Napolitano is an excellent UC president and I support her,” Blum said.

Blum is hardly alone on the board in his view of Napolitano. Even Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sits on the board and who criticized Napolitano for holding back the money while raising tuition, said, “I continue to believe in her ability and capacity to turn it around.”

Not that Blum exactly embraces Newsom as an ally. In fact, he said the lieutenant governor’s criticism of Napolitano’s money handling was “chicken s—.”

“And you can print that.”"
_______
SF Chronicle now has some UCOP comments, explanation they are floating in advance of this week's meeting, one wonders why they did not give such answers earlier -in the report they(budget and operations directors VP etc.) are asked about the same things but the answers were...

See now:
http://www.sfchronicle.com/education/article/Closer-look-at-175-million-UC-hid-from-the-public-11144359.php

"Emails obtained by The Chronicle show that auditors had to repeatedly ask Napolitano’s office to show what the reserves were going to be used for.

“This is a very complex budget,” Nava said Friday. “Some of these things are difficult to explain — not because we don’t know what’s going on, but because of the complexity.”"
And,
"Uncommitted funds ($38 million). This money represents savings from unfilled vacancies in the president’s office, interest income from the university’s endowment, and annual fees from campuses that finance most of the budget for the president’s office, according to Nava, Goode and Thera Kalmijn, executive director of operations at the president’s office.

Howle said that $32 million of the unspent $175 million came from the fees paid by campuses, and she recommended that this money go back to them.

Discretionary commitments ($54 million). These are projects Napolitano specializes in, her staff said. She has set aside funds for practical purposes, like broken heating systems in UC buildings ($2.5 million); improving cybersecurity ($7.2 million); and fixing the homes of campus chancellors ($250,000).

MORE ON UC AUDIT


But she has also started large projects — “multiyear commitments” — of a kind her predecessor, Mark Yudof, never did, said Napolitano’s spokeswoman, Dianne Klein. Napolitano became president in July 2013."
And,:
"budget for the Global Food Initiative shows that Napolitano started it in 2014. But the budget hasn’t been updated since December and shows no expenditures from the $3.3 million touted by her office last summer in a news release.

It does show, however, that past expenditures ranged from $606,000 on food research; about $430,000 on food projects for kindergartners through 12th-graders, and nearly $1 million on communication about food, obesity and agriculture.

Napolitano’s staff will present a new budget for her office to the regents on Thursday for their approval.

Unlike in past years, Nava said, “there will be a very detailed, lengthy budget presentation.”"
___
-But the Regents said they didn't want "granular", details right?, And they also want the meetings to end earliest possible cuz they have to get back to wherever, whatever...

Then there is at LA Times:

"$350 hotel nights, limo rides in Europe: UC audit finds more questionable travel expenses"
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-state-auditor-questions-uc-expenses-for-1494621391-htmlstory.html

___
This at Daily Cal:

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/11/california-state-assemblymember-member-calls-janet-napolitanos-resignation/

Includes:" external vice president of Berkeley College Republicans, critiqued Napolitano, saying in an email that it would be “immoral” for Napolitano to continue as UC President. Tahmas also alleged in an email that Napolitano “lavishly” spent California tax dollars that could have been reinvested into the UC system.

The board of Cal Berkeley Democrats also supports Janet Napolitano’s resignation, according to Cal Berkeley Democrats President Caiden Nason.

“We’re happy that an elected official said it,” Nason said. “The UCOP has put profit over students … Janet Napolitano has time and time again shown she is more concerned with other aspects of the UC, not the students.”

UC Student Association President Ralph Washington Jr. said that he’s not surprised that members of the assembly no longer have confidence in Napolitano.

Washington added that when one is critical of leadership, one should also be critical of the institution as well.

“The students have been making the case for a long time that the stakes are different between students and those who are making the decisions,” Washington said. “When the costs become too high, students are the ones who cannot eat and have nowhere to sleep. The decisions need to be based on an understanding of students.”


____

Also see:

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/11/uc-berkeley-professors-paid-2nd-highest-salaries-among-public-doctoral-institutions/
Includes:
"Therefore the campus, according to Hermalin, has to “match the competition or … be within striking distance of it.”

He also cited Bay Area’s higher cost of living as another factor behind higher salaries.

“Average professor salary at the University of Michigan is 93% of Berkeley’s, but Ann Arbor is a 51% cheaper place to live than Berkeley,” Hermalin said in an email. “If Berkeley matched Michigan on a cost-of-living basis, the $162,846 average salary at U of M would need to be $329,553 at Berkeley.”

Campus spokesperson Michael Dirda said UC Berkeley professors are “accomplished” but its place on the list reflects a combination of factors including campus prestige, quality and geographical location.

In response to a question about high professor salaries in light of the current campus budget deficit, Hermalin said all costs have to be considered."

And:
"Hermalin added that maintaining UC Berkeley’s excellence is a priority, a goal achievable by remaining competitive in the job market, which makes professor salaries one of many priorities. Dirda said equal consideration is also given to student welfare and campus safety.

The Daily Californian created a database of professor pay-checkers in 2016 that shows the variation in inter-departmental salaries for the 2015 year. For example, average professor salary was $326,230 for the economics department, $202,711 for the electrical engineering department and $163,035 for the English department. The database also highlighted salary variations between professors within these departments.

Hermalin said salaries vary because different academic fields have different markets. Differences are also based on past work, research load and seniority, with longer serving professors getting paid more than those with lesser service, according to Dirda."

___

In Sacramento, Napolitano cited the spending justification : press releases, hundred+ press releases out of OP ..

Dirk's and Christ decide to announce this on graduation day, slipped in:

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/05/12/new-avc-for-communications-and-public-affairs-named/

Just left with the question:
-How Much?

___

And is UCOP changing content on their site in advance of this week's meeting, or??

Thursday, May 11, 2017

"Gov. Brown on withholding some funds from UC: "I put the $50 million (hold) in there so we can hold their feet to the fire."

That's a tweet today from Sacramento LAT news

See:Gov. Jerry Brown's budget holds back $50 million from UC to 'hold their feet to the fire' on reform
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-s-budget-holds-back-50-1494524407-htmlstory.html


Includes:

"Gov. Jerry Brown’s revised budget holds back $50 million from the University of California until it adopts reforms recommended by a scathing state audit that found the system has tens of millions of dollars in undisclosed reserves and paid excessive salaries to administrators.

“I put the $50 million in there so we can hold their feet to the fire,” Brown told reporters in announcing the May revision to his annual budget. “That’s the way we will reinforce the audit. They have to make some reports and create some transparency, and we will keep the money until they perform to the auditor’s satisfaction.”

Brown stopped short of calling for the resignation of UC President Janet Napolitano when asked about it by a reporter.

“I’m not in the business of opining on my colleagues,” Brown said. “Most people think she’s doing a pretty good job. That’s certainly the view of the regents and I think a lot of others. I have my issues with the university. I think their salaries are way too high, especially the administrators.”"

___

And :"California Today: A Cloud Over the University of California
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/california-today-university-of-california-audit.html?_r=0


Includes:
"But many faculty members have had another reaction: no big surprise.

“It would be nice if anyone were surprised — but nobody is,” said Eyal Amiran, a professor of comparative literature at the University of California, Irvine.

Faculty leaders say cynicism has crept into their ranks for years, a result of painful funding cuts by the state, profligate manager salaries, and a sense that their voices are being increasingly sidelined in university governance."
And,
"Some faculty leaders have argued that campus administrators have been cowed by the president’s office, which oversees the system’s $31.5 billion budget.

In an essay on the recent turmoil, Christopher Newfield, a professor of American culture at the U.C. Santa Barbara, wrote in part, “Much if not most of U.C. has become a culture of silence, of conformity.”

Dianne Klein, a spokeswoman for Ms. Napolitano, rejected the characterization. “Under this president has there been more of a move to centralize? Yes, that’s true,” she said.

But, she added, chancellors have not been shy in offering opposing views to Ms. Napolitano.

“I really do not believe that there’s this clicking of the heels and saluting when Janet Napolitano walks in,” she said."



___
also see immediate last post for other updates, like the one on Rendon-- and the info on today's UC Regents meeting etc.

____

You can toggle to archive of today's meeting here:




Some coverage:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/social-affairs/20170511/uc-regents-to-probe-whether-napolitanos-office-interfered-with-audit

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

The Independence of the 'Independent Review'? UC Regents May 11- Special Meeting - Other things...


Some important updates, now Napolitano has this in SF Chronicle:
"UC president responds to critical audit
By Janet NapolitanoMay 10, 2017 "

http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/UC-president-responds-to-critical-audit-11137041.php
Includes:
" understand that all this might be lost in a blur of daily headlines. As too often happens, incomplete details obscure the facts. There is no secret pot of money that funds dubious priorities. The systemwide and presidential initiatives — such as those that benefit undocumented students, that help prevent sexual violence and sexual harassment, that further our and the state’s goals on climate change — have been widely publicized. The monies spent are budgeted and accounted for.

We can do better, and we will. The hallmark of institutional excellence is the eagerness, and resolve, to continually improve. "


And LA Times has this on Speaker Tendon:
"California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon is 'frustrated' with UC President Janet Napolitano over scathing audit"
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-assembly-speaker-rendon-is-frustrated-1494450258-htmlstory.html
Includes:
"I’m very frustrated with the lack of communication coming out of the office of the president,” Rendon said during a meeting with Times reporters Wednesday in Sacramento. “Personally, the higher ed chair and I went to great lengths to spend a lot of time with the president and members of our caucus who have been very critical. We went out on a limb and we feel that to an extent it was cut off.”

Rendon stopped short of saying Napolitano should resign, but said he has a lot of questions to be answered when the regents hold their regular meeting next week. The regents have also called a special closed-door meeting for Thursday to appoint an outside consultant to look at the auditor’s concerns that budget reserves have not been properly handled or disclosed.

“I’m very concerned right now,” Rendon said when asked if he thought Napolitano should step down. “I will ask my questions next Thursday. I think we have an oversight function that we need to perform as a Legislature. I am suspending judgment until I ask my questions and we continue with our process.”

Rendon said any review of the UC budget process needs to be "independent and trusted," adding there is a "need to dig deep in terms of how that has been done in the past and how it is done in the future.”

The Speaker said he is open to a recommendation of State Auditor Elaine Howle that the Legislature take a more direct role in approving the budget for the UC Office of the President.

“We don’t want to manage the UCs, but [the budget role] certainly tends to make a lot of sense,” he said."


And here is some Op-Ed:
Editorial: Transparency needed for UC to regain trust

http://www.dailydemocrat.com/article/NI/20170509/LOCAL1/170509858


And this Daviscentric one:

http://www.davisvanguard.org/2017/05/commentary-shoe-foot-napolitano/
___________________________________
Earlier:
UC Regents phone it in:

Notice of Special Regents Meeting, May 11, 2017

** Revised - Location Changes**

A Special Meeting of The Regents of the University of California will be held by teleconference on Thursday, May 11, 2017
http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/mayspecial.html

Agenda – Closed Session
B1(X) Discussion Review of Certain Issues Related to the State Audit Report on the
University of California Office of the President Administrative Budget
Closed Session Statute Citation:
Personnel matters [Education Code §92032(b)(7)]

Agenda – Open Session
Public comment period2
(20 minutes)
B2 Action Authorization to Retain an Independent Consultant to Investigate Certain
Issues Related to the State Audit Report on the University of California
Office of the President Administrative Budget
_______

See 3 UC campuses change responses in state auditor's survey
San Francisco Chronicle -


Includes:
"In one survey, UC Santa Cruz rated the technology help it received from the president’s office as “poor.” But after Napolitano’s office intervened, UC Santa Cruz administrators changed the “poor” rating to “good.” They also changed ratings for three services previously judged “fair” to “good.” And they changed their ratings of three other services, including help in identifying top-performing high school students, from “good” to “exceptional.”

In a letter accompanying the survey, Howle told the campuses to keep the surveys confidential and not to share them “outside of your campus.”

But emails show Napolitano’s staffers learned about the surveys in October when a UCSF administrator informed them she had received one. Subsequently, Napolitano’s office contacted all the campuses and began directing administrators on how to respond to the surveys.

On Nov. 22, Napolitano’s Deputy Chief of Staff Bernie Jones wrote UC Santa Cruz:

“Our expectation is that we review an updated version of the survey responses before it is resubmitted to” the California State Auditor.

Jones’ email was among a flurry of correspondence between Napolitano’s office and UC Santa Cruz from Nov. 21 to 23 showing that the president’s office monitored the survey submissions.

On Nov. 23, an email from UC Santa Cruz Chancellor George Blumenthal to his staff revealed that Napolitano’s office had a problem with even their revised survey.

“The feedback I received from (the president’s office) is that they are happy with the entire submittal except for the long paragraph at the bottom of page 39,” Blumenthal wrote. “I suggest you remove the paragraph and submit it.”

The paragraph contained complaints about Napolitano’s office’s division of Ethics, Compliance and Audit Services.

The final version replaced that criticism with a statement that the ethics division provided “high-quality” services that UC Santa Cruz could not otherwise afford, and was “a critical partner” for the campus."

And:
"On Tuesday, regents Chair Monica Lozano expressed confidence in Napolitano, calling her a “capable and effective leader.”

At the same time, she said the regents will oversee an independent review of how Napolitano’s office handled “certain aspects” of the audit. On Thursday, the regents will livestream a meeting to appoint an outside consultant to monitor UC’s compliance with 33 recommendations from the state auditor to improve financial accountability."
And:
To see all Chronicle stories on the UC audit, visit: www.sfchronicle.com/uc_audit/
______

Coverage mentions the UCOP Deputy Chief of staff by name, (coincidentally/apparently he is said to have previously worked at the firm that did the recruitment of Napolitano to UC...attended Haverford and Harvard -did they express the import of survey responses in research?)-- but names of other UCOP people higher up were included in hearing on topic of changing survey responses, but that is not getting much coverage. As mentioned earlier CSA named the Chief financial Officer by name at the hearing in relation to an incident she learned of on UCLA responses to her survey and his name was brought up in relation to his preference on certain answers...

At the 3:53:30 time mark she reads the exchange directly to the legislative committee, here:

http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=4488


Seems it can't just all be blamed on Bernie??
And it isn't just about the actual changes but also the outreach phone calls from UCOP to discuss changes etc
Why is a CFO involved at all in audit feedback from campuses?
______

http://www.chronicle.com/article/Janet-Napolitano-the/240039
"Janet Napolitano, the ‘Political Heavyweight,’ Now Finds Herself Under Fire"

"Professors React

Chris Newfield, a professor of literature and American studies at the Santa Barbara campus, said that state audits can have real power if there is a response from the Legislature, and that the recently concluded one represented a setback for public transparency.

When Ms. Napolitano was hired, many people thought having a former U.S. secretary of homeland security and former governor of Arizona leading the system would signal political power for keeping up relationships with the statehouse in Sacramento. "Basically, she was hired because she was a political heavyweight," Mr. Newfield said.

"I didn’t agree with it, but I saw the logic of hiring someone like her. If you think your problem is Sacramento, then you hire a politician to deal with the pols of Sacramento," he said. "I don’t think that’s worked out."

To regain the trust of the State Legislature, faculty members, and students, Mr. Newfield said it will take full disclosure from the president’s office of what happened with the audit, and a reform process that doesn’t hire outside consultants.

“I suspect that it will raise larger questions about President Napolitano and about the organization of the Office of the President.”
Michael Meranze, professor of history at the Los Angeles campus, said the audit certainly has increased skepticism in the Legislature. "I suspect that it will raise larger questions about President Napolitano and about the organization of the Office of the President."

Shane White, vice chair of the systemwide Academic Senate, said any controversy is demoralizing, especially if it carries the potential to damage the university. But this audit, said Mr. White, who sits on the Board of Regents as a faculty representative, seems like a distraction from addressing the issues facing the university’s long-term funding plans.

"It appears to me there’s no intent here to hide any money," Mr. White said. "It appears to me that the audit is a criticism of some of these central programs rather than a question of dollars and cents.""

- the spin to try to say it is all just a criticism of the initiatives themselves -to try to play off the politics of them- isn't a tactic that will work at this point...The optics have long since moved beyond, so have the facts

BTW a resigning or fired UC President once again is not going to solve the systemic problems...

Nonresident Admissions Policy At UC Proposed, more

They don't include info on how it works for the grad, prof schools specifically, (UCSF , Hastings not mentioned eg), but see:

UC revises its plan to limit the share of spots going to out-of-state students

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-uc-nonresident-enrollment-20170509-story.html
Includes:
"Chalfant said the Senate was happy that the cap was dropped. But he said faculty members considered the debate an exercise in “haggling over arbitrary percentages” rather than a serious conversation about how to support UC with enough dollars to maintain its vaunted excellence.

“A conversation about a funding strategy that preserves both access and excellence is long overdue and should start the moment this policy is adopted,” he said in an email."
________

After State Audit, UC President Napolitano Discusses Budget Practices and Tuition Hike

https://www.newuniversity.org/2017/05/09/after-state-audit-uc-president-napolitano-discusses-budget-practices-and-tuition-hike/
Includes:

"For instance, UC’s Chief Financial Officer makes an annual $412,000, while CSU’s Chief Financial Officer makes $341,000.

According to Napolitano, comparing UC employees to other California employees and university employees nationwide is “like comparing apples to oranges.” UC employees have responsibilities that similar employees do not, including managing medical centers, an internal retirement program and “different markets, the size, scope and scale of which is not comparable,” she said, noting that UC’s CFO manages $31 billion, while CSU’s manages $6 billion."

______
-A sign there will be 'scandal, what scandal?' performances at UC Regents meeting next week?

___
Meanwhile:

"Napolitano is not worthy of the public’s trust’: Lawmaker calls on UC president to resign"

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article149610404.html

____

And SJ Merc on proposed legislation. As result of UC Audit:

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/09/after-blistering-uc-audit-interfering-with-state-auditor-could-become-crime/

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

To 33 or not to 33? And the UC Regents part in UCOP Extravagances, updates

See :

"UC audit reveals president’s office has extravagant taste"

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/UC-audit-reveals-president-s-office-has-11131371.php

Includes:

"Financial records obtained by The Chronicle through the state auditor’s office Monday give some insight into spending habits in the UC president’s office, but the auditor’s office warned that the records it received from the university are incomplete. Auditors who examined the finances of Napolitano’s office said they were blocked from accessing many documents they say would have shed light on how some of the $175 million was spent.

The itemized records that were produced show that Napolitano’s office spent generously on employee retirement parties — including more than $4,200 on a retirement party in 2015 for Laine Farley, who was then the director of the UC’s California Digital Library. The Chronicle identified 20 parties for departing employees that cost more than $500 between 2014 and 2016. Ten of those were more than $1,000.


Also included in the itemized spending was a dinner tab worth more than a year of tuition. The president’s office paid $13,000 for dinner and security at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco for 86 people in January 2016 to honor two departing members of the Board of Regents, Fred Ruiz and Paul Wachter. Dianne Klein, a spokeswoman for Napolitano, said the regents dinners are paid for through a private endowment, not state funds.

The January 2016 dinner was one of many the president’s office hosted for governing board members and guests, which were usually tied to regents meetings, Klein said. From November 2015 to May 2016, for example, the president’s office paid $36,400 to host the regents dinners, as they are called in the itemized records.

Other spending highlighted in the audit was $862,000 spent on Napolitano’s Oakland apartment over the past four years. That cost includes the $11,500 monthly rent for the 3,400-square-foot apartment, which is also paid through endowment funds. Klein said Napolitano, as part of her employment, is required to live in a university-owned or -leased home, and that the apartment is used for official university business.

Among the documents the auditor says UC never fully produced were those detailing foreign and out-of-state travel, catering, airfare and entertainment expenses. UC said auditors failed to ask for the right budget codes in making their request. The records that were turned over to auditors show that the president’s office paid for employees to attend meetings and conferences in Bermuda, Iceland, Germany, China, India, Australia, France, Italy, Mexico and many other destinations.

Auditors said that even when they did receive financial records, vague information on other spending left them unable to determine the appropriateness, such as at least $2 million spent on cell phones and iPads over four years.

The number of cell phones and other devices issued by the president’s office increased 29 percent from 2012 to 2016 . During the same period, under orders from Gov. Jerry Brown — who was working to decrease state costs — the state was drastically cutting the number of cell phones issued to state workers by an estimated 30 percent.


“This is really a punch in the gut,” Assemblyman Dante Acosta, R-Santa Clarita (Los Angeles County), said on Monday. “We need to ensure money is being managed correctly.”

Acosta and other GOP lawmakers sent a letter to legislative leaders urging them to subpoena financial records from Napolitano’s office. Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Paramount (Los Angeles County), declined their first request. On Monday night, the Republican lawmakers sent a second letter asking Rendon to reconsider in light of The Chronicle’s story that raised questions about the accuracy of Napolitano’s testimony to state lawmakers.

State Auditor Elaine Howle charged that the president’s office interfered with the audit and tampered with surveys intended to provide independent opinions from the 10 campuses.

“In my 17 years as state auditor, we have never had a situation like this,” Howle told lawmakers during a 4½-hour hearing last week in the state Legislature to go over the findings.

Napolitano said campuses asked her office for help with the survey and apologized that the actions were seen as obstruction. However, emails released by the auditor’s office, including a new batch of emails released Friday to The Chronicle, show that Napolitano’s office went far beyond offering guidance, instead editing surveys and emailing campuses that they expected to see the final draft before surveys were sent to auditors.

“The only way we will get candor is if there is a legal order in terms of subpoena,” said Assemblywoman Catharine Baker, R-San Ramon, who sent the first request to Rendon. “That’s the most thoughtful and disciplined way to get to the bottom of this.”

Monica Lozano, chairwoman of the Board of Regents, said a third party will review the possible tampering.

Ting and Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance (Los Angeles County), plan to introduce a bill that would make it a crime to intentionally interfere with an audit in California.

“There appears to be a culture of arrogance and the need for frugality in spending state dollars,” Muratsuchi said.

The audit’s findings come as UC will raise annual student charges beginning this summer by $336, or nearly 3 percent, to $12,630. That includes tuition and a student services fee, which are expected to generate $143 million next year for the UC system.

Critics of the UC administration say it’s tone-deaf to ask students and their parents to pay more when spending in the president’s office has been steadily rising in recent years. Auditors said administrative spending in the president’s office increased by 28 percent, or $80 million, from fiscal years 2012-13 to 2015-16.

“Tone-deaf is a good way of describing it,” said Assemblyman Jose Medina, D-Riverside.

Napolitano’s office has 60 days to provide written documentation to the auditor’s office on how it is implementing recommendations from the audit. Napolitano said her office will accept all 33 recommendations from the state auditor on improved accountability and efficiency."

See the full article here.
__

--some thoughts, at first thought maybe the retirement party was for the chief compliance and audit officer at UCOP, ya know the one who announced she was leaving apparently in the middle of the same time frame of the audit survey and survey recall was going on and CSA was fighting with gen counsel and OP over those mangmnt directives access, but -no it was for a party for someone else - the November UC Regents said the chief compliance and audit officer was leaving at the end of December 2016, but the page is still up, yet she has provided no comment on the findings or come up in the coverage or even mention of her or her replacement accompanying Lozano and Napolitano to that Sacramento hearing etc.etc..??!!... But both she and CFO come up in the report itself and the CFO came up in the hearing regarding instances of changes to UCLA audit responses (that happened in q and a -Howle said something about it in response to question)



-- coverage continues to say that UC accepts all 33 recommendations -but other various coverage states Napolitano as 1-pushing back on the salary range narrowing,

And -2they still do not accept UCOP being funded by leg separately:


http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/UC-secret-salary-fund-sparks-bill-to-curb-autonomy-11128287.php
that part: "Yet when Howle included 33 recommendations in her audit for how UC should reform the troubled financial practices of its president’s office — including “adjusting” the range of executive salaries and benefits — Napolitano said in her written response that most were “reasonable” but that she expected to analyze the impact of “narrowing our salary ranges before committing to doing so.”

Lozano, the regents chair, gave a slightly different answer when faced with state lawmakers in person last week. She said the president’s office “will be adopting all of the state recommendations.”

The state Constitution says it’s the regents’ choice."

And,
http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/08/napolitano-discusses-ucop-audit-controversy-student-press/

"stating that her office will be accepting all of the recommendations in the audit, with the exception of one.


“The exception is the recommendation that the legislature directly appropriate the budget of the Office of the President,” Napolitano said. “The Regents have filed a separate response contesting that recommendation on the grounds that it interferes with the constitutional autonomy of the University, and that they as Regents are better positioned to ensure that we are implementing the audit’s recommendations.”

__

--and then the complicated ways UCOP transacts for UC regents expenses to consider ...

The regents books mixed in with UCOP books...

--and how is that "third party" to assess UCOP and going to contract with UC as the client but provide full findings to the CSA or CA Leg ?? Or anyone else?...

PS and according to other unrelated coverage to audit-a kind of tabloids type story not pointing to here- there may even be a third(?)home for the UC president...(of course remember Blake House is number 1, and Oakland number 2.

A final thing: the audit said that there are statements from UC that full audits of individual components of UC would be cost prohibitive in several instances --but no one gave an estimated number and guess no one asked for those estimates...

Rendon said the hearing went "two plus hours" in this interview, maybe he didn't catch the second half?

Update, now it seems that Dem Leadership is placing slot of weight, onus, stakes on a getting answers from UC through a closed session of the UC Regents meeting next week ,see:
California AG punts on probe over allegations against UC President Napolitano
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/09/california-ag-punts-on-probe-over-allegations-against-uc-president-napolitano.html

Includes reference to UC Regents closed session agenda on the matter and :

"source within the Republican caucus of the California Legislature told Fox News that while they’d like to say Becerra’s decision was a “cop out,” the proper channel for further investigation is through Speaker Rendon.

On Monday, Republican members of the Assembly sent a letter to Rendon calling for a subpoena of documents relating to the audit.

“We believe this is not a partisan or political issue, but an issue of trust in our institutions,” the letter reads.

“We should not fear the truth, in fact I believe it is one of our key roles on behalf of our constituents to seek it out zealously," Republican Assemblyman Dante Acosta told Fox News. "The legislature has the power to issue a subpoena, and my Republican colleagues and I are urging the Speaker to take this necessary step to bring transparency to the UC Office of the President. California’s students, parents, and taxpayers deserve answers.”

Rendon's office pushed back, however, making clear they will not grant the request at this stage.

"The legislature does have the power to subpoena various agencies but that’s only done in cases where there is criminal malfeasance. But in this case, the speaker hasn’t seen that. At this point, he will not be asking for a subpoena,” a Rendon spokesperson told Fox News"

And now see from Republican leadership in CA Leg writes:

UC president’s budget scandal should not be swept under the rug

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article149549204.html

"Some people may characterize recent actions by the University of California Office of the President as a “misimpression,” but in reality, the only appropriate word Republicans and Democrats agree on is “scandalous” (“Watching the Capitol go Benghazi on UC’s Napolitano”; Insight, Shawn Hubler, May 4).

To sum things up, the UC Office of the President used misleading budgeting to amass an undisclosed $175 million slush fund that it spent on things such as administrator bonuses and renovating the homes of campus chancellors. When people started asking questions, UC President Janet Napolitano’s staff worked overtime to interfere with the audit. These are not my words, this is how the state auditor portrayed their behavior. Were this a criminal investigation, Napolitano’s staff wouldn’t be able to just apologize for interfering; they would be charged with obstruction of justice.

At the request of Napolitano’s staff, UC chancellors sent auditor surveys to her office for review and censorship instead of directly to the auditor, despite specific instructions not to do so. This broke the chain of custody required to keep whistleblowers protected. The edited surveys made it impossible for the auditor to find out what chancellors actually thought.

Even after the cover-up had been exposed, the apparent lying continued. At an oversight hearing, Napolitano claimed her office attempted to edit surveys at the request of individual campuses. Newly published emails prove that to be false.

This pattern of deception is why we need a subpoena and forensic audit of UC Office of the President’s records. We simply cannot trust the word of Napolitano or her staff. Calls for the UC regents to review the situation are woefully inadequate. This scandal happened and it is the duty of the Legislature to determine the truth.

California students were hit with a tuition increase shortly before the slush fund was made public. They deserve to know their money is being well spent. Calls to give the UC benefit of the doubt do students and parents a disservice. Napolitano’s office violated their trust, and as a result we’ve seen bloated administrator salaries, budget trickery and resistance to oversight. If the Legislature won’t look out for students and demand accountability, who will?"
___
There's also:

https://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2017/05/napolitanos-emails-complicate-state-audit-investigation

Napolitano’s Emails Complicate State Audit Investigation



Students Demand to Rollback, Redistribute and Restructure the UC After Audit

http://www.davisvanguard.org/2017/05/students-demand-rollback-redistribute-restructure-uc-audit/



At Cal there is what reads like finals exhaustion, a distance from direct grappling with all the facts , mixed with deep disillusionment, see: on the UC audit.. 'grandstanding' etc

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/08/399878/
___

Now,
After UC probe, interfering with state auditor could soon be a crime

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article149578954.html


Monday, May 8, 2017

Apparently, UC Faculty Don't Believe In Shared Governance Either- more

See:
http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/07/chancellor-dirks-announces-faculty-led-peer-review-committee-address-sexual-misconduct-violations/


"new PRC will reflect “a peer-panel model,” consisting of faculty “with experience in matters related to faculty discipline, undergraduate and graduate student life advising and discrimination and harassment,” according to the email. The PRC’s membership will not consist of students or campus staff, according to campus spokesperson Janet Gilmore."

- not Faculty led, just faculty only...And why is it Dirks who is putting this in place on his way out the door?

______
And there's:
"Napolitano responded by explaining that UCOP creates its budget in a different manner than the auditor was expecting."

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/08/napolitano-discusses-ucop-audit-controversy-student-press/
- but is that in keeping with what CSA said?
_____

See first 7 minutes of this vid in this story on :
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Xavier-Becerra-on-the-UC-Investigation-421585014.html
"Xavier Becerra on the UC Investigation | NBC Southern California"
_______

UC system's exposed reserves present an unignorable breach of trust
Highlander Newspaper

https://highlandernews.org/29364/uc-systems-exposed-reserves-present-unignorable-breach-trust/

______

UC audit emails shred Napolitano claim she didn't interfere - The San Diego Union-Tribune
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-napolitano-interference-uc-audit-20170505-story.html

____
This new post:
"UC Ethics? Responding to the Audit"

http://changinguniversities.blogspot.com/2017/05/uc-ethics-responding-to-audit.html
Ends with:
"Faculty need to wake up and take back the university."

Sunday, May 7, 2017

'Thinking that the storm clouds had passed'?

They've moved the release date on this from June 2017 to August 2017- not clear if that is because UC is causing delay again or they just need more time or..
New release date:
2016-125 - University of California—Contracted Employees and Contracting Practices
Est. Release Date: August 2017
See:https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/scope/2016-125

____

See article: "Hiring at UC Merced too much of a family affair"
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/opinion/article148730804.html
Includes other UC audits coverage:
The audits revealed sham recruitments in which a hiring process was undertaken when someone known by the hiring manager had already been selected. These so-called “target hires” are a common tell-tale of nepotism and cronyism.

The audits found another troubling telltale: Departments would sometimes interview unqualified candidates while qualified candidates were never contacted.

For any qualified applicant who has ever sent a resume in good faith to UC Merced’s human resources department, the casual comment from another manager will be maddening: “Human Resources involvement in hiring takes more time and we end up with employees who aren’t a ‘good fit.’”

Signs of a problem at UC Merced first came to light in the University of California’s most recent Annual Report on Ethics and Compliance. The report is usually a dry affair, unless you find details about federal billing codes titillating. The report for fiscal year 2015-16, released in September, was no different – with the exception of a couple of sentences nested in a paragraph filled with compliance-speak about an internal audit at UC Merced concerning hiring practices.

Two months after the release of that report, the webinar and accompanying report by three UC Merced administrators popped up on the University of California’s Ethics, Compliance and Audit Services Web site. Buried in that material were the audits’ findings of widespread nepotism at the campus.

Amid the collegiality, insider banter and free-flow of acronym-laced HR-speak were some of the gritty details. Besides revelations of nepotism and sham recruitments, the sampling found:

▪ As many as 75 to 100 candidates would sometimes apply for a position.

▪ Some candidates did not meet the minimum requirements but were interviewed and sometimes hired.

▪ Hiring managers were found to be marking a large portion of candidates as “Not Qualified” after certain number of candidates applied.

▪ A hiring manager had hired a relative and was now supervising the relative.

▪ Human Resources had very little involvement in most recruitments.

▪ Managers never received hiring candidate information from recruiting firms."

Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/opinion/article148730804.html
_______

"Making a difference in 4 years at UC Berkeley" | Nicholas Dirk's in The Daily Californian

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/04/making-difference-4-years-uc-berkeley/

"Thinking that the storm clouds of financial difficulty had passed along with California Proposition 30 — which boosted funding for the state’s public services — I began to consider the ways in which I could make a positive difference in Berkeley, further building on its core strengths while expanding them at the same time."

-Recall in his interview with CHE his parting comment on Jerry and Pat Brown relationship... He seems to blame his early departure on Sacto or...??
________

See together these stories:

https://m.soundcloud.com/politics-california/may-6-napolitano-under-fire


And


"Political Road Map: So why can the UC regents thumb their noses at the Legislature?"
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-road-map-university-california-independence-20170430-story.htm


Then:
http://www.capradio.org/articles/2017/05/03/assembly-speaker-not-our-desire-to-strip-ucs-constitutional-independence/

____
And don't miss this new post by M. Meranze:
The UCOP Audit and University Governance
http://utotherescue.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-ucop-audit-and-university-governance.html


_____
A couple more to add in,
This Op Ed at Sac Bee:

"Watching the Capitol go Benghazi on Napolitano"
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/shawn-hubler/article148516849.html


This new article at SF Chronicle:

"UC secret salary fund sparks bill to curb autonomy"

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/UC-secret-salary-fund-sparks-bill-to-curb-autonomy-11128287
.php

Friday, May 5, 2017

UC Pension and recent UC Regents Moves, more

Comes up in:
25 University Of California Retirees Each Receive $300,000+ In Annual Pensions
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/05/05/25-university-of-california-retirees-receive-300k-pensions-annually/

" Twenty-five University of California retirees are each collecting pensions of at least $300,000, totaling more than $8 million annually, public documents show.

The non-profit California Policy Center obtained documents from the Office of the UC President this week through a California Public Records Act request, and shared those documents with CBS San Francisco.

The revelation that such large pensions are being received by UC retirees — both teaching faculty members and non-teaching staff — comes at a time when the Office of the President faces severe scrutiny after a slush fund of up to $175 million was discovered during an audit.

UC President Janet Napolitano has apologized for how she handled the audit but maintains that amount of money not in the public view was much less.

In addition to the hefty pension packages, California Policy Center Director of Policy Research Marc Joffe says some UC employees not only receive their pensions, but also get a salary if they return to work in the UC system while still in retirement." See full article.
______

Editorial: Answers from UC’s Napolitano do not engender confidence
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/05/05/editorial-answers-from-ucs-napolitano-do-not-engender-confidence/


And see:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-uc-audit-20170505-story.html
"The audit of UC's management shows that the real threat to higher education is inside the house"

And it refers to this post on the OP audit content too:

http://utotherescue.blogspot.com/2017/05/what-ucop-audit-means.html


____

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/01/global-studies-editorial/

"Berkeley’s financial deficit has has backed the administration into a corner, forced to celebrate privately funded programs like M.E.T. while important aspects of the public mission fall by the wayside. Moreover, the formation of global studies seems to be a way for the IAS department chairs — who are both political economists — to solidify political economy’s position on top of the hierarchy.
"


Don't miss

AFTER 4 YEARS IN THE SPOTLIGHT, DIRKS LEAVES THE STAGE
http://www.dailycal.org/2017/05/01/4-years-spotlight/


Strawberry suit: UC Davis and former professors clash over who owns the fruits of research
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-strawberries-uc-davis-20170505-story.html

And Sac Bee on it too
____

There's this on sports and healthcare bennies:

http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2017/04/baseball-med-deal.html



And on the topic of UC Regents and sports:
http://www.dailycal.org/2017/04/25/lawsuit-uc-regents-emblematic-issues-facing-college-football/

UC Regents Meeting, May 16-18, 2017

See agenda items below at
http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/meetings/agendas/may17.html


Tuesday, May 16

2:00 pm

Investments Subcommittee (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf)
Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Open Session
Public Comment Period2
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 14, 2017

I-1 Discussion Update on Investment Products

I-2 Discussion Investment Policy Statement Review

Investments Subcommittee Membership: Regents Elliott (Vice Chair), Kieffer, Sherman (Chair),
and Zettel; Ex officio member Makarechian; Advisory members Lemus and White; Chancellor
Block

Investments Subcommittee (closed session) (pdf)
Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of October 26, 2016

I-3(X) Discussion Update on the Office of the Chief Investment Officer Regarding
Organization and Personnel
Closed Session Statute Citation: Personnel matters

Wednesday, May 17

8:30 am

Board (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Concurrent Meetings
Agenda – Open Session
Public Comment Period2
(20 minutes)
Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017
Remarks of the Chair of the Board
Remarks of the President of the University
Remarks of the Chair of the Academic Senate
Notable Honors and Achievements

9:30 am

Academic and Student Affairs Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting March 15, 2017

A1 Discussion Current University of California Policy on Residency and Plans for
Review

A2 Discussion Strategies to Increase Transfer Student Enrollment at the University of
California

A3 Discussion Financial Aid Policies and Funding for Students in Programs that
Assess Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition

A4 Discussion Graduate Student Well-Being Survey

A5 Discussion Accountability Sub-report on Diversity: Graduate Academic Student
Diversity Outcomes

Committee membership: Regents Brody, De La Peña, Lansing, Newsom, Ortiz Oakley
(Vice Chair), Pattiz, Pérez (Chair), Ramirez, Reiss, and Rendon;
Ex officio members Brown, Lozano, Napolitano, and Torlakson;
Advisory members Chalfant, Mancia, and Monge; Chancellors
Block, Dirks, and Wilcox; Staff Advisor Valdry

National Laboratories Subcommittee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting March 15, 2017

N1 Discussion Preparations for Anticipated Competition for Los Alamos National
Laboratory Contract

N2 Action Amendment to the Allocation of Los Alamos National Security, LLC and
Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC Fee Income to be Expended
in Fiscal Year 2016-17
Committee Membership: Regents De La Peña (Vice Chair), Napolitano, Pattiz (Chair), and
Schroeder; Ex officio member Pérez; Advisory Members Chalfant
and Mancia; Chancellors Khosla and Yang

9:30 am

Finance and Capital Strategies Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017

F1(X) Discussion Purchase and External Financing of a Commercial Building upon
Completion in Downtown San Diego, San Diego Campus
Closed Session Statute Citation: Acquisition or disposition of property
[Education Code §92032(b)(6)]

F2(X) Action Approval of Acceptance of Conditional Gift of Real Estate;
Approval of Business Terms of: Master Ground Lease, Sub-
Ground Lease, Lease Disposition and Development Agreement,
Space Lease; Approval of Financing; Approval of Budget; and
Authorize Third-Party Indemnification and Ancillary Actions;
Child, Teen, and Family Center and Department of Psychiatry
Building at 2130 Third Street, San Francisco Campus
Closed Session Statute Citation: Acquisition or disposition of property
[Education Code §92032(b)(6)]
Committee membership: Regents Blum, Elliott, Kieffer, Makarechian (Chair), Schroeder,
Sherman, Varner (Vice Chair), and Zettel; Ex officio members
Brown, Lozano, and Napolitano; Advisory members Lemus and
White; Chancellors Blumenthal and Hawgood

Finance and Capital Strategies Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017

F3 Action Approval of Amendment #3 to the UC San Francisco 2014 Long
Range Development Plan and Design following Action Pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act, Child, Teen, and Family
Center and Department of Psychiatry Building at 2130 Third
Street, San Francisco Campus

F4 Action Approval of Budget, External Financing, and Design following
Action Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Joan
and Sanford I. Weill Neurosciences Building, San Francisco
Campus

F5 Action Approval of Budget, External Financing, Amendment #4 to the UC
San Francisco 2014 Long Range Development Plan, and Design
following Action Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act, Minnesota Street Graduate Student and Trainee Housing,
San Francisco Campus
…continued

F6 Action Approval of Design following Action Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act, East Campus Apartments Phase IV-A,
Irvine Campus

F7 Action Approval of Preliminary Plans Funding, Student Housing for Five
Sites, Los Angeles Campus

F8 Action Approval of Budget, Standby Financing, Interim Financing, and
Design following Action Pursuant to California Environmental
Quality Act, Warner Graduate Art Studio Renovation and
Addition, Los Angeles Campus

F9 Discussion Update on Student Housing, Riverside Campus

F10 Discussion Update on the President’s Student Housing Initiative

F11 Action Consent Agenda

A. Approval of Short-Term Secured Working Capital Loan
Agreement with Armand Hammer Museum of Art and
Cultural Center, Los Angeles Campus
B. Authority to Indemnify Los Gatos Homeowners for a
License Agreement Related to Operation and Maintenance
by the Berkeley Seismological Laboratory of an Unmanned
Geophysical Seismic Observatory on their Private Property,
Berkeley Campus
C. Adoption of Expenditure Rate for the General Endowment
Pool
D. Adoption of Endowment Administration Cost Recovery
Rate

F12 Discussion Update on Governor’s May Revision to the 2017-18 Budget
Committee membership: Regents Blum, Elliott, Kieffer, Makarechian (Chair), Schroeder,
Sherman, Varner (Vice Chair), and Zettel; Ex officio members
Brown, Lozano, and Napolitano; Advisory members Lemus and
White; Chancellors Blumenthal and Hawgood; Staff Advisor
Richmond
1 All times indicated and the order of business are approximate and subject to change.

12:30 pm

Lunch

Concurrent Meetings
1:00 pm Public Engagement & Development Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting March 15, 2017
P1(X) Discussion Discussion of Fundraising Strategies and Implementation
Closed Session Statute Citation Gift matters [Education Code §92032(b)(3)]
Committee Membership: Regents Kieffer (Chair), Lansing (Vice Chair), Ortiz Oakley,
Pattiz, Ramirez, Reiss, Rendon, and Schroeder; Ex officio
members Brown, Lozano, and Napolitano; Advisory members
Lemus, Mancia, and White; Chancellor Leland and Interim

Public Engagement & Development Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017

P2 Discussion University of California Alumni Relations Overview

P3 Discussion Community Outreach and Impacts, Los Angeles Campus

P4 Discussion Overview of the Federal Budget and Its Impact on the University of
California

P5 Discussion State Government Relations Update

Committee Membership: Regents Kieffer (Chair), Lansing (Vice Chair), Ortiz Oakley,
Pattiz, Ramirez, Reiss, Rendon, and Schroeder; Ex officio
members Brown, Lozano, and Napolitano; Advisory members
Lemus, Mancia, and White; Chancellor Leland and Interim
Chancellor Hexter; Staff Advisor Richmond


1:00 pm Compliance and Audit Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium

Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017
C1 Discussion Draft Internal Audit Plan for 2017-18

C2 Discussion Compliance Risk Assessment Process Update

Compliance and Audit Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15 and the
Special Meeting of April 3, 2017

C3(X) Action Recommended Settlements for Board Action
1. Affirmative Recovery Litigation – Proposed Settlement –
Antitrust – Office of the President
2. Former Employee – Proposed Settlement Agreement and
Mutual Release – Davis
3. Mayfield v. Regents – Proposed Settlement – Medical
Malpractice – Davis
4. Sugimoto, et al. v. Regents – Proposed Settlement –
Indemnity, Contribution, Breach of Contract – Davis
5. Vasquez v. Regents – Proposed Settlement – Medical
Malpractice – San Diego

C4(X) Discussion Appellate, Trial Court Developments and Updates
1. ANDERSON v. REGENTS – Trial Commencement –
Disability Discrimination – Davis Medical Center
2. BARRETT v. REGENTS – Plaintiff Appealed Dismissal –
Breach of Contract – Berkeley
3. BRONNER, SIMON, et al. v. LISA DUGGAN, et al. –
Motion to Dismiss by UC Faculty Defendants Denied –
Breach of Contract – Davis, Santa Barbara, San Diego
4. CALIFORNIA BERRY CULTIVAR v. REGENTS –
Motions for Summary Judgment for Ownership and Non-
Infringement Heard – Breach of Contract and Patent
Infringement – Davis
5. DOE v. REGENTS – Denial of Petition – Administrative
Mandate Challenging Student Discipline – Santa Barbara
6. DOE v. REGENTS – Hearing on Motion to Dismiss –
Student Sexual Misconduct – Santa Barbara
7. DOE v. REGENTS – Adverse Ruling on Writ Petition to
Stay Interim Suspension – Student Sexual Misconduct –
Santa Barbara
8. FERNANDEZ v. REGENTS – Complaint Re-Filed in Los
Angeles Superior Court – Consumer Privacy Statute – Los
Angeles
9. THE KOALA v. KHOSLA, et al. – Second Amended
Complaint Dismissed and Notice of Appeal Filed – First
Amendment – San Diego
10. LEFF, et al. v. REGENTS – Petition Denied, Appeal
Anticipated – Public Records Act – San Diego
11. MARTIN v. REGENTS – Trial Commenced – Medical
Malpractice – Irvine
12. MISSION BAY ALLIANCE v. HAWGOOD – Motion for
Summary Judgment to Be Heard – Taxpayer Petition – San
Francisco
13. MONFARED v. REGENTS – Verdict in Favor of the
Regents – Medical Malpractice –Irvine
14. NADAF-RAHROV v. REGENTS – Trial Commenced –
Medical Malpractice – San Francisco
15. POLEQUAPTEWA v. REGENTS – Preliminary Injunction
Granted and Hearing on Petition Set – Public Records Act
– Irvine
16. REGENTS v. AISEN – Remand Order and Appeal –
Breach of Fiduciary Duty – San Diego
17. REGENTS v. CALIFORNIA CLINICAL TRIALS LLC –
Motion Filed and Temporary Restraining Order Granted – fraudsystemwide

18. REGENTS v. LAKE – Motion to Continue Trial – Breach
of Contract (for Damages) and Peremptory Writ of
Mandate (to Compel the Processing and Payment of Valid
Claims for Medical Services) – Davis Health System
19. REGENTS v. MEDIVATION – Summary Judgment
Motions Denied – Intellectual Property – Los Angeles
20. VALLE v. REGENTS – Hearing on Demurrer – Writ
Petition and Complaint for Injunctive Relief, Due Process
Violations, and Misrepresentation Torts – Irvine
21. YOUNG AMERICA’S FOUNDATION, et al. v. JANET
NAPOLITANO, et al. – Complaint Filed – Constitutional
Claims Regarding Campus Speakers – Berkeley
22. General Counsel’s Update on Pending or Threatened
Litigation
Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]

C5(X) Information Settlements and Separation Agreements Under Delegated
Authority Reported from February 3, 2017 to April 3, 2017
Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]

Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]
…continued
Committee membership: Regents Brody (Vice Chair), De La Peña, Elliott, Makarechian,
Newsom, Pérez, Sherman, Varner, and Zettel (Chair); Ex officio
members Brown and Lozano; Advisory members Chalfant and
Monge; Chancellor Gillman
1 All times indicated and the order of business are approximate and subject to change.

3:30 pm Governance and Compensation Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium

Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Special Meeting of February 23
and the Meeting of March 15, 2017

G1(X) Discussion Appointment of and Compensation Using Non-State Funds for
Senior Managing Director, Office of the Chief Investment Officer
Closed Session Statute Citation: Personnel matters [Education Code §92032(b)(7)]

G2(X) Action Recommendations for Election of Officers and Appointments to
Standing Committees and Subcommittees for 2017-18
Closed Session Statute Citation: Nomination of officers and members
[Education Code §92032(e)]

G3(X) Discussion Collective Bargaining Matters
Closed Session Statute Citation: Collective bargaining matters
[Government Code §3596(d)]
Committee membership: Regents Blum, Elliott, Lansing, Ortiz Oakley (Vice Chair), Pattiz,
Pérez, Reiss (Chair), Schroeder, and Varner; Ex officio members
Brown, Lozano, and Napolitano

Governance and Compensation Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Agenda – Open Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 15, 2017

G1 Action Approval of Appointment of and Compensation Using Non-State
Funds for Senior Managing Director, Office of the
Chief Investment Officer as Discussed in Closed Session

Thursday, May 18
8:30 am

Board (closed session) (pdf)
Agenda – Closed Session
Action Approval of the Minutes of the Special Meeting of February 23
and the Meeting of March 16, 2017
Committee Reports Including Approval of Recommendations from Committees:
Compliance and Audit Committee
Recommended Settlements for Board Action
Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]
Finance and Capital Strategies Committee
Approval of Acceptance of Conditional Gift of Real Estate; Approval of Business
Terms of: Master Ground Lease, Sub-Ground Lease, Lease Disposition and
Development Agreement, Space Lease; Approval of Financing; Approval of
Budget; and Authorize Third-Party Indemnification and Ancillary Actions; Child,
Teen, and Family Center and Department of Psychiatry Building at 2130 Third
Street, San Francisco Campus
Closed Session Statute Citation: Acquisition or disposition of property
[Education Code §92032(b)(6)]
Governance and Compensation Committee
Closed Session Statute Citation: Collective bargaining matters
[Government Code §3596(d)]
Health Services Committee (meeting of April 13)
Closed Session Statute Citation: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]
1 All times indicated and the order of business are approximate and subject to change.

Investments Subcommittee
Closed Session Statute Citation: Personnel matters [Education Code §92032(b)(7)]
Public Engagement and Development Committee
Closed Session Statute Citation: Gift matters [Education Code §92032(b)(3)]
Officers’ and President’s Reports:
Report of Interim, Concurrence, and Committee Actions
Closed Session Statute Citations: Litigation [Education Code §92032(b)(5)]

Location: Robertson Auditorium
9:00 am - 3:00 pm

Board (open session - includes public comment session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium

Agenda – Open Session
Public Comment2
Roll Call
Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of March 16, 2017
Committee Reports Including Approval of Recommendations from Committees:
Academic and Student Affairs Committee
Compliance and Audit Committee
Finance and Capital Strategies Committee
Approval of Amendment #3 to the UC San Francisco 2014 Long Range
Development Plan and Design Following Action Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act, Child, Teen, and Family Center and Department of
Psychiatry Building at 2130 Third Street, San Francisco Campus
Approval of Budget, External Financing, and Design, Following Action Pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Joan and Sanford I. Weill
Neurosciences Building, San Francisco Campus

1 All times indicated and the order of business are approximate and subject to change.
2
This session is for the purpose of receiving public comment on University-related matters. If you wish to address
the Board, you may sign up to do so at the meeting. You are encouraged to inform the Secretary and Chief of Staff
of your intent in advance of the meeting by calling (510) 987-9220. The University of California subscribes to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. If you need reasonable accommodation, please contact the Secretary and Chief of
Staff’s Office by 10 a.m. on Thursday, May 11, 2017.
Guidelines
In fairness to all who wish to address the Board, each speaker must abide by the individual time limit allotted and
announced at the convening of the session. At the end of the allotted time, each speaker will be asked to yield to the
next one. The custom is to provide up to three minutes to each speaker. Three or more speakers may pool their time
to provide up to seven minutes for a group representative. Depending on the number of those on the sign-up list, the
amount of time per speaker may be reduced and there is no guarantee that all individuals who do sign up will be able to address the Regents

Times indicated and order of business subject to change
________________
Don't Miss: Sacramento meeting on UC Audit
http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=4488

And first 15 minutes of this is solely focused on UC Audit reactions statewide and the they discuss "May Revise"
after that and more: