Sunday, September 17, 2017

Flexibility or Special Treatment?

More new updates: With less than 6 days notice -apparently UC admin has now sent out a final itinerary with a new updated list of speakers *some of whom are still unconfirmed or deny their participation* and *new locations*-listed here:

"UC Berkeley says Free Speech Week is on"

See also: " Berkeley's attention turns to 'Free Speech Week'"

All that press coverage given to a non event? See:

“it would be completely wrong to call this a cancellation,” Mogulof said. As of late Friday, he said, “nothing has been scheduled. There is nothing to cancel.”

Original- earlier post:

Update on logistics for “Free Speech Week”

..."They were told on 8/11 they needed to sign and execute these contracts by 8/18. They did not. They were told on 8/22 they needed to sign and execute these contracts by 8/25. They did not. They were told, in writing, for the last time, on 9/13 that the contracts must be signed and executed by 9/15 at 5pm. They did not."...
"The campus has shown flexibility where it is allowed to do so in working with a small group that appears to be struggling to fulfill responsibilities it accepted as a result of the decisions it made. The campus cannot allow this student organization to disregard policy and thus provide it with special treatment that would not be provided to any other student organization on the Berkeley campus.

Should the student organization fail to complete the necessary steps to hold its remaining 10 reservations, there is absolutely nothing to prevent them from seeking to reschedule the events they hoped to host for a later date so that they can fully comply with the policies that apply to them and their peers."

Remember in Politico UC Berkeley characterized like this: "UC Berkeley assistant vice chancellor for communications Dan Mogulof told POLITICO Tuesday that the student organization ... — whose membership is estimated by Mogulof at between 5-10 members "

UCB says "no regrets" on the $600,000"?:


This LAT op ed quibbles on part of the provost's statement: "UC Berkeley is sending mixed messages about freedom of speech"

-One might be of the opinion that paper didn't give significant/comprehensive coverage of what happened at this September UC Regents meeting (which was held closer to their neck of the woods at UCSD, which their Times Trib folks could have also covered...??) - but who did?
DB tapped out a bit of coverage of the UC Regents meeting:
UC Regents recap – Sept. 13

UC regents recap – Sept. 14

Friday, September 15, 2017

Bitter peels?

She doesn't get into the details of what is happening on campus real time,but has this at a conference:

"Napolitano spoke at a conference promoting "civil discourse" attended by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in a section of the federal courthouse called the Kennedy Learning Center. Kennedy, a Sacramento native, said in opening remarks that he fears “the idea of free speech is slipping away from our young people” in an increasingly polarized nation.
“The answer to a wrong or insulting or immoral idea is more speech, not less,” he said. Universities, in particular, Kennedy said, “must step up to the plate and insist that there's a place for thoughtful ... robust disagreement.”"

But Justice Kennedy doesn't say what young people should do when these costs hit campus budgets??:

"Price Tag to Protect Speech at Berkeley: $600000"
New York Times

"The cost of free speech isn't cheap at UC Berkeley"

Even for events with unconfirmed speakers, details like contract for facilities etc. almost to the moment the event is to take place all unconfirmed, not finalized...and UC allows it...

Should their tuition dollars go to the drip drip drip inconclusive administrative process that allows it? Or is it too snowflakey to expect advance planning from campus administration so the students, staff,faculty, other visitors, community etc can access services and parts of campus necessary - including for matriculation? What would Kennedy recommend to resolve that part of the problem that UC admin has the ability to control? Did that come up at that Sacto conference?

On the UCD berries saga:

"UC won. In May, after five days of trial testimony in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, a jury found that California Berry had improperly used the UC plants. But the case wasn’t over. Damages hadn’t been sorted out, and after the jury rendered its verdict the judge said he believed UC Davis was as guilty of “bad conduct” as the two scientists. Settlement negotiations ensued, leading to the agreement filed in court Friday.

University officials declined to comment on the settlement
. "


And this at UCLA
"UCLA pharmacy closed after state finds it sent out drugs with expired, potentially dangerous ingredients"

Thursday, September 14, 2017

On other things...with updates

After athletics probe, UC Berkeley under indefinite federal Title IX monitoring

UC regents give pay raises to eight chancellors

"UCSF Chancellor Samuel Hawgood was the highest paid campus leader to receive a raise. His salary will increase from $795,675 to $819,545 a year.
The others chancellors were:
•UC Irvine’s Howard Gillman, $499,550 to $514,537
•UCLA’s Gene Block, $454,574 to $468,211
•UC San Diego’s Pradeep Khosla, $449,208 to $462,684
•UC Santa Barbara’s Henry Yang, $401,020 to $413,051
•UC Merced’s Dorothy Leland, UC Riverside’s Kim Wilcox and UC Santa Cruz’s George Blumenthal, $394,655 to $406,495"
- they also get money from outside boards they serve on, usually they are asked to serve on those boards precisely because they are UC Chancellors not just subject matter expertise.. but good luck on getting a news paper to list out the true total remuneration...

University of California committee OKs $1 million bonus for CIO Jagdeep Singh Bachher
There is this on LANL:


Lawmakers OK free year of community college for all; bill goes to governor

Court leans toward allowing protesters' to sue UC administrators


UC Irvine chancellor apologizes after school rescinds admission offers
Los Angeles Times


UC to make process of verifying student admissions information more effective
University of California

University of California investment assets under management show strong gains
University of California

"University of California hints at tuition increase, starts review of overturned admissions | EdSource"


Dirks is tweeting some items he is reading or attending lately, this is one of the items:
Revolutionizing the university for the digital era - The Washington Post

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Then why not make CA community college free?

See: "California Gov. Jerry Brown and top lawmakers announced Tuesday that they plan to spend $30 million" helping young immigrants with legal services and college financial aid.

Daily Cal has it like this:

-some will see it, frame it as more about maintaining exploitable labor and beholding student populations while marginalizing CA residents interests for the sake of Corp and industry political contributors? Is it too jaded to look at it that way?

Remember $30 million came up as 'make it or break it' key figure on the CA community colleges tuition free legislation mentioned in an earlier post:

See: When it comes to affordable college education, conservative Tennessee has so-called progressive California beat

Includes: "Pending on the state Senate floor is a bill that would take a significant step toward free community college throughout California and return it to more affordable public higher educations. AB 19 would waive fees for all first-year, full-time community college students taking at least 12 units....

his bill faces a tough slog to be sent to Gov. Jerry Brown before the year’s legislative session ends Friday. It’s considered a second-tier bill — the kind that becomes a leverage tool for legislative players seeking what they consider a bigger prize. “You want that, give me this!”

Moreover, Brown’s Finance Department is opposed to the measure. Although the community college system pegs the cost at around $32 million annually, Brown’s budgeters say it could hit $50 million. That’s too risky in an iffy economy, they contend"

- that iffy economy??

UC Regents Investments Committee September Meeting


Academic Freedom Gets Bumped at Cal?

We were told that a new UC Berkeley calendaring system would allow admin and others to be able to view events like talks etc in convenient time blocks, peruse the list of speakers in a given time frame etc, remember?

That would seem like a basic bell-whistle-functionality, right?

So then how does this happen: "
Who Gets Rescheduled at Berkeley?
It's Not Milo"

Looks like the talks bumped are speakers who are minority, female UC faculty. (There are other talks mentioned as bumped in the comments there btw)
Which could raise its own academic freedom, even Title IX issues for the campus .

It is a reminder of the fact that even that "serious debate" Dirks claims to view as urgently necessary and that his then EVCP, provost C. Christ participated in - which also was held on the same night other similar controversial invited speakers scenario took place a few months ago - and no effort was made to memorialize/record/transcribe -the 'serious important debate' that the previous and current Cal Chancellors claim to want to engage the entire community on,- why no contingency planning to make sure other important scholarly talks are not suddenly falling down as lower priority with no means of archiving them even? Or to, from an administrative angle, plan and understand what other talks might be impacted by having to do something like this in advance?.. so, what's up?
There's endless ad nauseum content on the non academic talks which end up also archived in some form but the academic level talks/debate content goes unarchived, or is incompletely archived, no content or in depth coverage etc- it seems to be more than a trend, is it a strategy?

And this new update: apparently non academic sponsored talks can give the campus less than 12 days notice on major event/events that require high $ value logistics?

"both publicly said they will be speaking on campus during Free Speech Week, the campus cannot confirm exactly when or if they will be here.

“We have repeatedly asked representatives confirm that contracts have been completed between the student organization and each of these speakers; to date they have not,” Mogulof said in his email.

Mogulof added that information ...shared with the campus regarding the scheduling of the proposed speakers conflicts with information ...

According to Mogulof, security arrangements for the week of Sept. 24 are also unconfirmed. Rental fees for venues have not yet been paid and contracts with venues have not been signed, Mogulof said in his email.

“Simply put, the University cannot provide the security and support the student organization has requested, and the campus wants to provide, if we do not receive the essential information,” Mogulof said in his email."

So that's a perk previous classes have not enjoyed, neither as students, alumni, nor staff. But now diff policy, rules? Seems handling differently than hisorical precedent...

And UC Berkeley administration fails to spell out the "critical deadlines" they vaguely mention in their statement,here:

seems like those deadlines are pretty squishy, lax, and capable of gumming up the UC campus ops pretty easily-- or should we just look upon it as more operational excellence?

See politico for more:

In any case, Berkeley is making it's own planning decisions on all of it as well, likely costs for them in this pre-planning debacle...will they pass on those costs to UC and then UC pass it on to students as more Tuition increases?


Is Christ a place holder?:

Overview of this week UC regents meeting agenda items:

Is this the result of a now predominantly Southern Cal appointed UC Regents board influence?: