Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Listen to the Regents Afternoon Meeting of Sept. 13, 2017

With this post, we complete our archiving of the Sept. 2017 Regents meetings. Here is a summary from the Bruin (below). It might be added that there was reference to the upcoming rebidding on the Los Alamos lab as well:

...Academic and Student Affairs Committee (includes labs subcommittee)
  • UC Irvine Chancellor Howard Gillman apologized for rescinding a large number of new student admission offers during the summer for those who did not submit transcripts and test scores on time. Gillman said the university had to over-enroll students because more applicants had accepted offers than the university expected.
  • Ruben Canedo, a research coordinator at UC Berkeley and co-chair of the UC’s Global Food Initiative Basic Needs committee, said the UC will be releasing a Basic Needs report in November with details on students’ experiences with food and housing insecurity.
  • Several regents, including Regent John Perez and Newsom, said they think the University should do more to help student athletes and make sure that they are performing well academically. Michael Williams, director of athletics at UC Berkeley, said the campus provides student athletes with academic support and mentoring, and said that athletes at UC Berkeley have been improving their academic performance.
Finance and Capital Strategies Committee
  • The committee approved plans and funding for several construction projects, including the Northern Regional Library Facility at UC Berkeley, a science and engineering building at UC Irvine and a medical building at UC San Francisco. However, several regents, including Makarechian, said they think the costs for the building in UC Irvine are too high, and asked the campus to look into offsetting some of the construction costs.
  • Napolitano said the University needs more funding to support increases in enrollment and added the University also faces costs for compensation increases from collective bargaining and expanding and maintaining infrastructure. She added that any tuition increases proposed for the 2018-2019 year would be offset by need-based financial aid, with a third of the revenue from a tuition increase going to financial aid.
  • Brostrom gave the regents updates on the UC’s development of its budget for 2018-2019. Brostrom said when developing the budget, the UC is considering costs associated with enrollment growth, improving the student to faculty ratio, employee retirement benefits and financial aid. He added the UC is looking into additional sources of funding, including a tuition increase.
  • Brostrom said that while the UC has not yet developed a specific tuition proposal, it is currently consulting with campus and student leaders. He added the UC will present its budget proposal for approval by the regents during the board’s November meeting.

Link below to audio: (Academic & Student Affairs with labs)

Finance and Capital Strategies:

Berkeley May Cancel - Part 2

The "free speech" event at Berkeley next week is looking progressively more dubious, although "progressively" is probably not the preferred word of its sponsors. From the Washington Post:

Organizers of the “Free Speech Week” at the University of California at Berkeley insisted Monday that the event will go on, despite school officials’ announcement that some large indoor venues could not be rented for the events.

“We’ll do it outdoors if we need to,” said Pranav Jandhyala, a sophomore who is a member of the Berkeley Patriot, the student group that invited provocative writer Milo Yiannopoulos and others to campus. He said that conservative commentator Ann Coulter, frequent critic of Islam Pamela Geller and former chief White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon are all planning to speak there next week.

Coulter, and a spokeswoman for Bannon, did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday. Geller said she is planning to speak. University officials released a list of speakers they said had been confirmed that did not include Coulter, Geller or Bannon...

Full story at

Somewhat related: A UCLA faculty member does a study on student attitudes toward the First Amendment/free speech for Brookings:

What could possibly go wrong?

Orange County philanthropists Susan and Henry Samueli will donate $200 million to UC Irvine, one of the largest gifts ever to any public university, to create a college that educates medical students in holistic practices as well as traditional ones and treat patients with a wide-ranging perspective...

“Susan has completely converted me into an advocate for integrative health,” (Henry Samueli) said. “When I feel a cold or flu coming on, rather than run to the doctor, I run to Susan to figure out which homeopathic remedy or Chinese herb I should be taking.”...

Full story at

What do ducks say?

Monday, September 18, 2017

Strawberry Settlement

For those blog readers who have followed the Davis drama, this item from the Sacramento Bee appears to be the grand conclusion:

Fear not, strawberry lovers. A nasty lawsuit over the strawberry breeding program at UC Davis – the wellspring of about half of California’s strawberry crop – is history.

The university on Friday settled a lawsuit against two berry breeders who quit UC Davis, formed their own company and began developing new strawberry varieties without the school’s permission. The scientists can continue using some of the strawberry plants they developed at UC Davis, but have to return others. They also will forfeit $2.5 million in royalty payments they stand to collect from the university for work they did at Davis.

The lengthy dispute has been closely watched in the food industry. California’s $1.9 billion-a-year strawberry crop accounts for more than 80 percent of the nation’s supply. About half of the berries grown in California are grown with seeds developed in UC Davis’ greenhouses.

Over a two-decade run, UC Davis plant breeders Douglas Shaw and Kirk Lawson bred new generations of plumper and sweeter strawberries that boosted sales and helped cement California’s leadership in the business. While many of the largest strawberry growers breed their own varieties, including Driscoll Strawberry Associates of Watsonville, the UC varieties have been licensed by major brands like Dole and California Giant, as well as many independent farmers.

The strawberry breeds have generated tens of millions of dollars for the University of California, and Shaw and Larson have earned millions themselves through a royalty-sharing arrangement.

The relationship soured, though, and Shaw and Larson quit UC Davis in 2014. They formed a company called California Berry Cultivars in Orange County. The divorce quickly turned messy. UC sued the two men and their new company, saying they had violated their “duties of loyalty” by attempting to breed new varieties using plants that were the property of UC Davis. California Berry sued back, accusing the university of stifling innovation by refusing to grant Shaw and Larson a license to use the plants.

“If you want more and better strawberries on your table … you should care about whether the university should be able to keep these varieties in a lockbox,” the breeders’ lawyer Greg Lanier said in an interview earlier this year. “Strawberry farmers need new varieties to battle changing weather – it’s rain, it’s drought, it’s changes in what pesticides you can use.”

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. California Berry’s chief executive, A.G. Kawamura, a former secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, couldn’t be reached for comment.


Yes, but

The Chronicle of Higher Ed runs a flattering piece largely about Secretary to the Regents Anne Shaw:

Six times a year, 10 days ahead of each meeting of the University of California system’s Board of Regents, a notice goes out to the public. In that document is a carefully prepared agenda, complete with extensive background write-ups and relevant attachments — compliance reports, audits, budget documents.

Anne Shaw, secretary and chief of staff to the board, is responsible for these meticulous preparations. But Ms. Shaw, like many university board secretaries, fills far more roles than just that of fastidious note taker and organizer. Board secretaries are diplomats — strategic advisers who have the ear of the president and the responsibility of liaising with the governing board...

Ms. Shaw and her staff of about eight essentially exist as the bridge between the two most powerful entities in a university: the chief executive and the trustees. Much of the work of the president’s office will eventually come to the governing board for approval: new degrees and programs, approval of tuitions and fees, budgets, all end up on board agendas.

Ms. Shaw is a conscientious record keeper, archiving information from public commenters at board meetings — for example, their opinions on the system’s immunization and vaccine policy. Following up after a meeting, Ms. Shaw and her staff will take down "reminders" about questions regents had that couldn’t be answered at the time. She and her staff will then work to compile and present that information to the inquiring regent...

The reference on archiving caught the eye of yours truly, who continues to note that the Regents do not really archive the recordings of their meetings. They post them for only one year. Yours truly, in contrast, does archive them - at considerable time cost. So we ask for the umpteeth time, why - if the Regents are now putting their meetings on YouTube for just one year - they can't just leave them their indefinitely? How about the UC Regents stepping into the 21st century in that regard? The only answer we have ever gotten regarding the one-year rule is that CSU does it that way. Is that a reason? Let CSU be CSU. Bad practice there is no excuse for bad practice at UC.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Listen to the Regents Meeting of Sept. 14, 2017

Yes, we have a gap in our coverage so far of the recent Regents meeting, namely the afternoon of Sept. 13th. We will fill that gap in a later posting. But, in the meantime, below is a link to the audio of the full board meeting of Sept. 14th, which in part summarizes what came out of the various committees that met the day before, both morning (which we have covered) and afternoon.

Some of the topics on the 14th: DACA (in the public comments), controversy - with some negative votes - on a pay increase for chancellors, discussion of the state auditor's report on contracting out procedures, the rebidding of the management contract for the Los Alamos lab, pension funding and the gap between the assumed earnings rate of 7.25% and the actual long-term earnings rate in the past of 6.7%, and the cost of carbon neutrality in construction standards for UC.

You can hear the discussion at:

Berkeley May Cancel

We noted yesterday that the "Berkeley Patriot" which is the supposed organizer of "free speech week" at UC-Berkeley seems to be a flaky organization with a largely non-working website. Some of the speakers that are supposed to come know nothing about the event.

The LA Times reports that the organization has not put down a contractually-required deposit for the event within a specified deadline, raising the possibility that the entire affair will be cancelled.

UC-Berkeley officials said Saturday that organizers of a far-right speakers’ series scheduled for later this month have missed the deadline to reserve two of the largest indoor venues on campus for the event, but that they will continue to work with organizers on planning for the festival.

“The University cannot defend spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide security arrangements for events” based on the press releases of organizers, Dan Mogulof, assistant vice chancellor of the university’s Office of Communications and Public Affairs, said in a statement.

Mogulof said the Berkeley Patriot student group that is working with right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos on the “Free Speech Week” festival had failed to meet the university’s requirements to reserve Wheeler Auditorium on Sept. 24 — the first day of the festival — and Zellerbach Auditorium on Sept. 27. He said organizers failed to submit the necessary payments to reserve the halls by 5 p.m. Friday.

Berkeley Patriot also failed to provide the university “with evidence that speakers are actually confirmed, such as e-mails, evidence of travel arrangements, or contracts,” Mogulof said. In both instances, the student organization missed three previous deadlines set by the university, he said.

“This failure to confirm, combined with the refusal to provide unqualified speaker lists and schedules has led the campus to question whether Berkeley Patriot actually intends to, and/or is able to, carry out the proposed events,” Mogulof said in his statement...

Full story at

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Listen to the Regents Meeting: Morning of Sept. 13, 2017

We are gradually catching up with archiving the recent Regents meetings.

Just a technical note and rant: The Regents currently put their recording on YouTube for one year. There are various web-based programs by which yours truly extracts the audio from these temporary YouTubes and then archives them. Given the revised format of Regents meetings, there is substantially more to record at the meetings than their used to be, due to the various sessions that go on at the same time.

In one case for the morning meetings, the recording was posted in such a way as to make it impossible to use the online programs to preserve the audio directly. In that case, the audio had to be played into an audio recorder in real time.

All of this hassle could have been avoided if the Regents simply kept their recordings on YouTube indefinitely. We ask for the umpteenth time: Why isn't this being done, especially since the Regents are already posting to YouTube? What is the point of removing the recordings after one year.

Below are links to the audio of the meetings. One highlight from the public comment session of Sept. 13 was the many speakers protesting potential cuts in retiree health care. A cut was proposed and then withdrawn after protest from the agenda of the July meetings due to lack of Senate consultation.

Full Board:

Other links to the morning meeting:

Governance and Compensation:

Public Engagement & Development:  Note: After the meeting ended, the mike remained on briefly and a regent can be heard complaining about state audits and opining that "Sacramento" wants to control the university.

Compliance and Audit:

Possible Traffic Hassle

If you commute to UCLA from the Valley, there may be issues this weekend:

A natural gas pipeline improvement project will prompt some lane reductions and ramp closures near the San Diego (405) Freeway in the Bel Air area this weekend.
The closures are part of a multibillion-dollar safety enhancement program, according to the Southern California Gas Co.
Saturday and Sunday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., the work will be conducted on North Sepulveda Boulevard at the Moraga Drive on-ramp and off-ramp at the 405 Freeway.
The ramps at Moraga Drive will be closed to traffic, and northbound and southbound traffic on Sepulveda will be reduced to one lane in each direction...

The Next Berkeley Drama

It looks so calm.
Now that one speaker has come and gone without major incident, there is "free speech week" coming up at UC-Berkeley. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The University of California will uphold its free-speech tradition by hosting provocateurs such as Milo Yiannopoulos regardless of their message, unless they resort to personal threats or attacks on audience members, UC President Janet Napolitano says.
“If we at UC unreasonably limit the ability of speakers like Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter to safely express themselves on our campuses, we are telling the world that we would accept suppression of our own speech,” Napolitano told a legal conference Friday in Sacramento.
She spoke a day after conservative commentator Ben Shapiro spoke at UC Berkeley's Zellerbach Hall under heavy security, while several hundred protesters held a rally nearby but were kept from entering the campus. Yiannopoulos, Coulter and another right-wing commentator, Steve Bannon, former chief strategist for President Trump, are scheduled to appear at UC Berkeley during a four-day event, starting Sept. 24, that sponsors are calling “Free Speech Week.”
A speech by Yiannopoulos at the campus in February was called off after violent clashes, and Coulter canceled a Berkeley appearance in April, saying she had been warned of possible violence.
Some faculty and others want to close down the campus (boycott) during this period. (Editorial note from yours truly: Is it a good idea to give Milo & Co. the ability to shut down the campus by simply announcing an event?) From the Daily Cal:
UC Berkeley faculty members circulated a letter Wednesday morning calling for campus and the Berkeley community to boycott the “alt-right presence” by canceling all classes and campus activities for the duration of “Free Speech Week.”
The letter, signed by about 130 campus staff memberswas written by seven professors from the African American studies, ethnic studies, gender and women’s studies and film departments. These departments house populations of students targeted by the “alt-right,” according to Leigh Raiford, campus African American studies professor and co-author of the letter...
And it turns out that the group sponsoring this event is announcing speakers who aren't confirmed; at least one has never heard of the event:
Although Milo Yiannopoulos released a full list of speakers Thursday that are scheduled to attend “Free Speech Week” at UC Berkeley in the coming weeks, both the campus and the Berkeley Patriot have revealed that not all the speakers have been confirmed.
Yiannopoulos issued a press release naming the speakers who he said were confirmed to speak at the UC Berkeley campus from Sept. 24-27. Prominent speakers on the list include former White House chief strategist and Breitbart editor Steve Bannon and Ann Coulter, whose previous campus event was postponed. Not all the speakers on the list, however, have been confirmed.
Charles Murray, a libertarian conservative political scientist, posted a tweet Friday saying that he has “never heard of this event.”
“I was never contacted by the organizers of this event,” Murray said in an email. “The inclusion of my name in the list of speakers was done without my knowledge or permission. I will add that I would never under any circumstances appear at an event that included Milo Yiannopoulos.” ...

PS: The group that seems to be somehow involved in "Free Speech Week" is something - apparently a newspaper - called the Berkeley Patriot. When yours truly searched for it on the web, there was a link to: If you click on that link, you get a page of headlines with broken links to the actual text. So maybe it's not surprising that in the article above you find:

The Berkeley Patriot was under the impression that those speakers were confirmed and it’s seeming like some speakers didn’t know that they were invited,” (a spokesperson for the Berkeley Patriot) said. “That’s a big issue and we’re going to try to figure this out with Milo and his team.”...

If you look at the Wikipedia page for the Berkeley Patriot, everything it references in the history of the newspaper went on in the early 2000s. So no one is bothering to update its page. In short, the powers-that-be at Berkeley are dealing with an event that seems to be under the jurisdiction of an entity that at best has a shaky existence. See It's not clear even whether its name is Berkeley Patriot or California Patriot.

Friday, September 15, 2017

Illicit Drugs?

A state pharmacy inspector made a surprising discovery last year while conducting a routine records review at a Westside facility that compounded drugs for patients at UCLA medical centers. More than 1,000 IV bags of sterile medications for heart patients and others with serious health issues had been made with expired and potentially dangerous ingredients, according to state Board of Pharmacy records. At least 350 bags of the adulterated medications were delivered to patients in the sprawling UCLA Health system, which includes Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center and UCLA Medical Center in Santa Monica, the records show.

Whether any patients were harmed is unknown, and UCLA, which owned and operated the compounding pharmacy, has refused to comment. It’s unclear if the university attempted to warn patients who might be at risk or to recall the adulterated medications that were sent to them. UCLA quietly closed the pharmacy within days of the inspection. By then, pharmacist-in-charge Richard C. Graul had already abruptly quit his $173,000-a-year job and declared his license “inactive.”

The inspection triggered an investigation by the pharmacy board, which in July filed an accusation, a formal action seeking disciplinary sanctions against Graul and the off-campus facility, UCLA Medical Center Pharmaceutical Technology. Possible sanctions include license revocation, suspension or “further action as deemed necessary and proper,” according to the board. The accusation, which is pending, alleges that the pharmacy lacked the proper licensing, used expired drugs in compounding sterile medications, and failed to meet state standards for quality assurance and product testing.

Graul, who had been the chief pharmacist since 2005, declined to comment on the inspection results when contacted at his home in Arcadia earlier this year. “No thanks,” he said, then closed his front door. He has not responded to repeated telephone and email messages since then.

Compounding pharmacies combine, mix or alter ingredients of a drug to create prescription medication suited to individual patients. The UCLA facility compounded large quantities of antibiotics, intravenous nutritional products and sterile solutions administered during heart surgeries and other procedures. The expired drugs cited by regulators in the UCLA case include monosodium glutamate monohydrate (MSG) and monosodium aspartate monohydrate (MSA), both of which are used in cardiac surgery and other surgical procedures; clopidogrel, which is used to prevent blood clotting; mexiletine, used to treat arrhythmia; and the hormone estradiol, which in intravenous solutions is sometimes used to treat heavy uterine bleeding.

The expiration dates on those drugs ranged from November 2015 to September 2016, a month before the inspection. Using expired ingredients is potentially dangerous because they can become tainted, lose their potency or change the efficacy of the compounded medication...

Full story at

The Buck Stops Here (With 1,013,958 Others)

The University of California board of regents approved on Thursday a $1,013,959 incentive award for Chief Investment Officer Jagdeep Singh Bachher for the 2017 fiscal year. The bonus is in addition to his $652,454 base salary. The compensation and governance committee, after meeting in closed session Wednesday, issued a statement citing "strong" investment results for the June 30 fiscal year as its reason for making the incentive payment. The $10.8 billion endowment returned a net 15.1% for the fiscal year, while the $61.6 billion pension fund returned 14.5%...

Full story at

Sometimes, less is more

In the end, not much happened at the Shapiro talk at Berkeley (compared to what might have happened), which is a Good Thing. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro delivered his speech at the UC Berkeley campus on Thursdayunder extraordinary security that required attendees to pass through metal detectors and police barrcades that held back hundreds of protesters.

The event at Zellerbach Hall appeared to do what UC Berkeley Chancellor Carol Christ has said she hoped for when she declared a free speech year on campus: provide an open exchange of ideas. Shapiro’s speech included a question-and-answer session in which audience members respectfully challenged his opinions.

Security cost the university an estimated $600,000. Police from all nine Bay Area counties were brought in to keep order on and off campus and to secure Zellerbach and the surrounding area, which was off-limits to anyone without a ticket to the event. The large contingent of law enforcement was a deterrent, said Margo Bennett, of the UC Berkeley police. crowd in the street was loud, but not violent.”

The evening stood in stark contrast to the Feb. 1 fiery chaos that shut down an appearance by right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos and resulted in $100,000 worth of damage to the school’s student union and smashed windows at downtown businesses. At that event, black-clad protesters infiltrated police barriers. None of those so-called antifa protesters showed up for Shapiro. Still, UC Berkeley officials said they went to “unprecedented lengths” and used extraordinary measures to prevent a similar result...

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Stepping Down

The director of the Los Alamos National Lab is stepping down after some problems in lab management. UC plays a significant role in the management of the lab - with a history going back to the Manhattan Project. The management contract is up for rebidding by the Dept. of Energy. Yours truly hasn't reviewed the Regents recording of the lab review at the recent meeting to know if there was discussion of this issue. But in 2018, there will be a decision of the Dept. of Energy on who will do the managing in the future. The politics of this matter are evident, given California's policies on immigration, climate change, etc.  
The director of Los Alamos National Laboratory has told employees there that he will retire at the end of 2017, eight months before the private contractor he leads is scheduled to be displaced as the laboratory’s manager.
The announcement on Tuesday follows years of costly turmoil at the nuclear weapons facility and comes on the heels of the Center for Public Integrity’s disclosure in June and August of harrowing safety incidents and other snafus there during McMillan’s tenure.
A laboratory press release about McMillan’s announcement did not say why he was resigning after 6 years as director, ahead of next year’s unusual handover of the lab by his consortium to another group of private companies, still not yet chosen by the Department of Energy. A spokesman for the laboratory, Kevin Roark, declined to elaborate.
But the Center’s articles about the laboratory’s troubles had attracted the concern of Washington lawmakers and the mishaps at the lab had angered senior officials at the Energy Department and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a unit of the department that directly oversees the lab’s work...

Admissions Rescissions

The recent scandal over admissions rescissions at UC-Irvine led to discussion at the Regents yesterday. (Yours truly has not yet reviewed and archived the recording.) At Irvine, bureaucrats attempted to deal with a situation of unexpectedly large enrollment by un-admitting students on technical grounds, an action that had to be undone when it was revealed in the news media. (Did any heads roll? Doubt it.)

Anyway, the UC prez released the statement below ahead of the Regents meeting:

UC to make process of verifying student admissions information more effective

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

University of California President Janet Napolitano today (Sept. 13) announced the formation of a task force that will review how UC’s nine undergraduate campuses verify academic credentials, such as grades and test scores, that admitted students provide before enrollment.

The Admissions Verification Task Force will evaluate current procedures and recommend policies and best practices in order to standardize and make UC’s academic verification process more effective, efficient and student-friendly.

The review comes in the wake of problems with the verification process at UC Irvine that led to the rescission of a number of admission offers. The campus, which has publicly apologized, has since resolved those problems.

Each summer, UC campuses verify the academic accomplishments of admitted students to ensure they have met all the conditions of their admission to UC. Campuses typically request official high school or community college transcripts, as well as official test scores from testing agencies. 

These documents are used to verify that students have earned a high school diploma, completed all necessary “a-g” courses, maintained at least a C average in their senior year of high school, and in the case of transfer students, completed pre-major requirements for transfer at the junior level.

“As a public institution, the University of California has an obligation to maintain the integrity of its admissions process by verifying the credentials of the students we admit,” Napolitano said. “We are also committed to ensuring that all admitted students are afforded every opportunity to supply the necessary documentation to validate their academic credentials. I expect the task force’s recommendations will help us strike just the right balance between our responsibility to verify and the need to serve as advocates for our students.”

In developing its recommendations to make UC’s admission verification process more efficient and responsive to UC students, the task force will:

  • Consider the effectiveness and timeliness of communications to admitted students regarding the verification of official transcripts, test scores and other documents, as well as the appeals process;
  • Review whether the number and type of solicited documents can be reduced or provided in other, more effective ways;
  • Review the extent to which UC’s need for transcript and test score information is aligned effectively with the ability of K-12 schools, community colleges and testing organizations to generate this information;
  • Assess the needs of the campuses to maintain the academic integrity of the admissions process;
  • Consider the adequacy of the appeals process at each campus; and
  • Recommend practices that may better serve students and the institution in verifying the academic qualifications of admitted students.
  • The task force will complete its review and present its findings and recommendations in a report to the president that will be presented at the November 2017 meeting of the Board of Regents.

Provost and Executive Vice President Michael Brown will chair the task force, whose members will include representatives from campuses, the Academic Senate, the student body and the Office of the President. 


Of course, even with reforms, it will be hard to get in:
(Click twice if necessary: center & lower.)

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

Listen to the Regents Investments Subcommittee of 9-12-2017

The Regents are currently meeting and yours truly, as always, will dutifully archive the audio - since the Regents won't preserve their recordings beyond one year. (But it takes time to capture the audio so there won't be instant posting.)

The Investments Subcommittee met yesterday and had a lengthy discussion. Apart from the usual review of the portfolio returns, the session was devoted in part to a world review, especially of India and Asia, via two outside guests.

You can hear the audio at:

Perhaps of note was the brief remark by one of the guests, Larry Fink (CEO of Blackrock) that in Asia, the North Korean crisis as seen from the U.S. is a non-issue as seen from Asia:

Tied for #1


Nothing more needs to be said. But a little music wouldn't hurt:


From California Today of NY Times: 9-13-17

A stunned look fell over the hot dog vendor’s face as a police officer, ticketing him for lacking a permit, reached into the man’s wallet and pulled out $60. The vendor and a passer-by recording the exchange protested. “That’s not right,” said the cameraman.

“That’s how it works,” replied the officer, of U.C. Berkeley’s police department.

And now, video of the encounter outside a Golden Bears football game Saturday has become a fixation of the internet outrage machine. Uploaded over the weekend, it’s been watched millions of times and prompted demands for the officer’s firing. It’s also reinvigorated a debate in California over civil forfeiture, which allows the authorities to seize cash and property from people suspected of wrongdoing. Last year, the practice brought the state’s law enforcement agencies more than $115 million, according to government figures.

Policing groups argue that it’s an essential tool in combating drug trafficking. Critics say it’s been misused to generate revenue, in some cases from suspects never convicted of wrongdoing. That was part of the reason for a California law that went into effect this year tightening civil forfeiture rules. A spokeswoman for U.C. Berkeley’s campus police, Sgt. Sabrina Reich, said in an email that it was “routine to seize money as evidence of an illegal transaction.” The money, she explained, is needed as evidence.

That rationale drew skepticism from some criminal justice experts. “If the hot dog vendor is operating without a permit, the proper mechanism is to give him a ticket,” said Lee McGrath, senior legislative counsel at the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm that has been critical of civil forfeiture practices. “The idea that certain serial numbers on certain bills are evidence is an absurd concept,” he added.

By Monday, the clamor over the case was so intense that the university opened an investigation. In a statement, Vice Chancellor Scott Biddy said in part: “We are deeply committed to building a climate of tolerance, inclusion and diversity, even as we enforce laws and policies.” An online fund-raiser to help the vendor, identified in reports as Beto Matias, has raised nearly $70,000.

Martin Flores, who recorded the video and initiated the campaign, said some of the money would be used to buy Mr. Matias a proper food truck. “I’m going to tell you this,” he said, “when we get the truck for him, he’s going to have a permit. He’s going to be ready to rock ‘n’ roll.”

Source: and

The video:

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Running ahead

State revenues are running ahead of revenues for the first two months of the fiscal year, according to the monthly cash report from the state controller. Needless to say, two months does not a year make. But the report is at:

Getting Bumped at Berkeley

From Inside Higher Ed:

Anthropologists at the University of California, Berkeley, and other scholars are drawing attention to some rescheduling issues on campus. The university's library encouraged the rescheduling of a long-planned lecture by a leading scholar because it coincides with a planned appearance on campus the same day this month by Milo Yiannopoulos, the conservative speaker known for inflammatory statements and drawing protests, some of them violent.
Some reports on social media indicated that Berkeley required the rescheduling, but the administration said only that the library -- where the anthropologist's talk was scheduled -- recommended rescheduling a lecture by Anna Tsing, a professor of anthropology at UC Santa Cruz. (The lecture has been postponed until November.) Berkeley officials have said that they are determined to show the university's commitment to free speech by letting Yiannopoulos speak on campus
An open letter from scholars questions whether something is wrong when efforts to protect Yiannopoulos result in scheduling conflicts for scholarly events planned months ago.
"While we understand the library administration’s concern for the safety and security of people on campus, we are deeply troubled by the fact that the university is willing to prioritize a vitriolic white supremacist speaker, who seeks to disrupt academic life through his performance, over and above a renowned scholar and thinker committed to thoughtful scholarly engagement," says the letter. "If this 'Year of Free Speech' is about giving an equal platform to all speakers, it would seem that it has already failed. Hate speech has taken precedence over academic discourse."
Source (with link to letter):

Monday, September 11, 2017

Seeking to join the club

...Many Merced-area leaders want to bring a medical school to UC Merced.

Regents gave the Merced university the green light in 2008 to start work on a medical school, but those plans have since stalled.

“What’s frustrating is a medical school was always part of the vision of having UC Merced,” Assemblyman Adam Gray, D-Merced, said in a recent interview with the Sun-Star. “That obviously hasn’t happened. My perspective as an elected official who represents the Central Valley is we have a moral obligation to improve healthcare here and the vehicle we have to do it is the UC (Merced).”

U.S. Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, said more residency programs could bring more doctors to the area and having a medical school at UC Merced is a way to do that.

But it may never happen.

Within the last year, some UC officials have suggested a university medical school might not be the answer to the Valley’s doctor shortages...

Full story at

Sunday, September 10, 2017

We're number 37!

No, not in some ranking of universities by various metrics. The consulting firm Willis Towers Watson has a ranking of world pension funds by assets. It appears to include defined benefit, defined contribution, and savings plans in the pool. Some are government-run, some are private. And there may be some serious omissions. Yours truly could not find TIAA in the listing, for example. (Maybe it's there somewhere, but - if so - it ought to be pretty close to the top of the ranked list, based on its value of assets.) Anyway, CalPERS comes in at number 7, CalSTRS comes in at number 11, and UCRS (denoted "California University") comes in at number 37.

You can find the listing at:

Saturday, September 9, 2017

UC Prez's Op Ed on DACA Lawsuit

From the LA Times: 

As secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, a little more than five years ago I signed the directive that created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. On Tuesday, President Trump ended DACA on little more than a whim. On Friday, in my capacity as president of the University of California, I filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to prevent the government from stripping DACA recipients of their ability to live, study and work in our country free from fear of deportation.

By definition and practice, DACA recipients were brought to the United States when they were children. They know no other country other than the one we share. They pay taxes. They contribute to our economy — nearly 55% of them have bought cars, 12% have bought homes and 6% have launched businesses that create jobs for U.S. citizens. They seek to serve in our military and better themselves through education. In all ways except one, they are American.
I recognize that it is unusual for a former Cabinet official to sue the agency she once led. It may be even more unusual to challenge as unconstitutional, unjust and unlawful the elimination of a program originally established by the plaintiff — me — in this litigation.
My anger at DACA’s rescission doesn’t stem from pride in the work done to create this program, although I am very proud of the program. Instead it is motivated by the harm that eliminating DACA will cause to the so-called Dreamers at the University of California, the 10-campus system I now lead, and to the nearly 800,000 Dreamers across our country.
As UC president, I’ve seen the exceptional contributions Dreamers are making to the nation. They represent the very best of our country. All DACA recipients have gone through a rigorous application process that verifies they are productive members of our communities and have clean records, including more than 100,000 who have had their applications renewed by the Trump administration.
Yet the Department of Homeland Security, in rescinding DACA, baselessly claims that the program was unlawful. It offers no rationale based on the merits of DACA itself, but rather on the purported illegality of a separate program with different rules and aimed at different immigrants (the parents of DACA-eligible young people), a program that never went into effect. That justification is flat out wrong. The DACA program was a legal exercise of the department’s prosecutorial discretion and no court has found DACA to be invalid.
In fact, in 2014, the Department of Justice office that reviews the constitutionality of executive branch actions determined that DACA was lawful. Now the Trump administration’s DOJ offers no reasoned analysis for its about-face.
The Administrative Procedure Act prohibits federal agencies from acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner, but that is exactly what Homeland Security has done in its rescission of DACA. It has entirely failed to consider the reliance interest of the Dreamers, such as their expectation that they could study, work and live in the only country they know, or if the program ends, what will happen to the communities and universities where DACA recipients thrive.
Finally, the department’s rescission of DACA tramples on the due process rights of the University of California and its students and employees. DHS cannot take away those rights by executive fiat.
The Trump administration’s action harms DACA recipients from a legal perspective and harms our country from a moral perspective. The government is telling these young people that , as a country, we do not value their obvious worth, and that we intend to treat them no differently than a recent adult border crosser. This is wrong, unjust, mean and legally dubious.
As president of the University of California, it is my job to protect the students on our campuses. As the author of DACA, I know its legal basis and its aims. As both, I am suing the administration because its actions on Tuesday will harm innocent young people and, by extension, all of us.

The Visit

Note: Maybe, if the plans for security, etc., went quietly ahead with less buildup and drama, this event would just come and go and be forgotten. As it is, official items - such as the one reproduced below - don't engender positive coverage in the outside world.* Do we really need to be the object of mirth? Yours truly never heard of Mr. Shapiro before the upcoming event. But a quick look at his website and podcast suggests that if someone needs counseling because of Shapiro's mere presence on campus, there is a deeper problem that goes beyond political opinions. Maybe it doesn't matter much in California or for UC. But the item below just adds to the conservative "snowflake" narrative that is harmful to the larger world of contemporary academia.
Text below from UC-Berkeley; images from elsewhere.

Ben Shapiro visit: Campus details logistics and resources

Thursday, Sept. 7, 2017

In advance of talk show host Ben Shapiro’s appearance next Thursday, Sept. 14, at UC Berkeley, Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Paul Alivisatos today sent out this message detailing campus logistics for the event:

Dear UC Berkeley community,

This is an important time for all of us as we work together to uphold our commitment to free speech and to the principles of community, including respect for the dignity of all members of our UC Berkeley community. I recommend that you consider viewing Chancellor Christ’s recent Berkeley Forum speech and the Q&A that followed.

Today I write about specific commitments we are making to support our community, as well as to share logistics and security arrangements for Sept. 14. That evening, from 7-9 p.m., political commentator and radio talk show host Ben Shapiro will speak at Zellerbach Hall at the invitation of one of our registered student groups. Our commitment to free speech, as well as to the law, mandates that the students who invited Shapiro be able to host their event for those who wish to hear him speak. Our commitment to the principles of community mandates that all students, faculty and staff be able to be present on campus, engaging in their regular academic activities without fear. Achieving this poses unusual challenges for us; this memo lays out the arrangements that we are putting in place.

Building closures and parking restrictions

At 4 p.m. on Sept. 14, UCPD will establish a closed perimeter around Zellerbach Hall and surrounding buildings. Buildings near Zellerbach Hall will be closed at 4 p.m., with no access permitted. The perimeter will be assembled over the course of the day starting in the morning. Affected buildings include: César E. Chávez Student Center, Alumni House, Martin Luther King Jr. Student Union, Sproul Hall and Eshleman Hall. There will be a limited number of access points along the perimeter; beginning at 5:30 p.m., a ticket to the event will be required to gain entry into the perimeter.

Parking will be closed ALL DAY on Sept. 14 at Barrow Lane Parking Spaces, Peppertree Lane Parking Spaces, North Sproul Lot and the ASUC Garage.

Alternative options for those who work in closed buildings

We will offer as many options as possible so that students, faculty and staff who work in buildings being closed can access alternative spaces and services. Campus colleges and schools have made spaces available to help meet these needs and to welcome those affected. A system is being set up to match those needing alternative spaces with the available spaces. Please check with your manager or faculty leader about any changes to your work or class activities on Sept. 14. I encourage managers and supervisors of staff, as well as faculty, to exercise discretion and flexibility as they explore alternative arrangements.

Logistics and security at Zellerbach Hall

Tickets to the Shapiro event will be available shortly, pending final decisions on logistics and ticket distribution.

Based on UCPD’s security recommendations, attendees must present a photo ID when picking up their tickets. No blocks of tickets will be made available to individuals or groups.

As is standard practice, prior to the event UCPD will provide a list of prohibited items. Our police will seek to deter and confront unlawful behavior, while strictly enforcing laws and policies regarding individuals wearing masks or carrying weapons of any sort.

Members of the campus community are encouraged to subscribe to Nixle to receive security updates.

An increased and highly visible police presence will be on campus on Sept 14.

Engage with respect and keep safe

Some may wish to attend the event and hear the speaker to form their own views. Others may wish to stay away. Some may wish to protest. All activities can be done peacefully and with respect. If you choose to protest, please seek ways to protest peacefully and safely while observing rules related to the student code of conduct and our Principles of Community. If events escalate around you, please strongly consider leaving.

Support and counseling services for students, staff and faculty

We are deeply concerned about the impact some speakers may have on individuals’ sense of safety and belonging. No one should be made to feel threatened or harassed simply because of who they are or for what they believe. For that reason, the following support services are being offered and encouraged:

Student support services
Employee (faculty and staff) support services

Logistics for future events

We will learn from what transpires next week and write to you again afterward with an assessment of whether these arrangements for Sept. 14 have met our commitments. We will also explore and what will be needed for future events, such as those proposed by another registered student group that involve Milo Yiannopolous and other possible guest speakers.

Commitment to building community, fostering greater understanding of free speech issues

Much investment — human resources, financial resources and more — is being made to enable student groups to hold events at Berkeley, even those that may include speech that is antithetical to our values. As a consequence, many on campus are calling for deep, incisive examination of our community values and what it means to uphold them.

To enable this discussion, the division of Equity and Inclusion (E&I) will revive the Campus Climate Speaker Series, which introduces powerful national voices, diverse scholars, cultural critics and activists to our collective discussion of campus climate. E&I will also launch a series of Community Affirmation and Empowerment workshops that will focus on helping our students, staff and faculty to thrive and affirm their varied, rich identities in our community, as well as our campus values.

Many activities are also being planned by academic and administrative units to affirm Berkeley’s commitment to a deep understanding of how these challenging times impact our campus’s diverse communities and climate.

Berkeley will uphold its campus values and principles of community by encouraging more speech. There is a Faculty Panel on Free Speech this Friday, Sept. 9, and a series of Point-Counterpoint events will take place throughout the academic year. I hope you will make time to attend.

We will continue to add information and provide updates on this page.


Paul Alivisatos, executive vice chancellor and provost


Friday, September 8, 2017

UC Lawsuit Against DACA Recission

University of California sues Trump administration on unlawful repeal of DACA program

UC Office of the President, Friday, September 8, 2017

The University of California today (Sept. 8) filed suit in federal court against the Trump administration for wrongly and unconstitutionally violating the rights of the University and its students by rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program on “nothing more than unreasoned executive whim.”

The lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its acting secretary, Elaine Duke, is the first to be filed by a university seeking to stop the Trump administration’s recently announced decision to end the DACA program, which has allowed nearly 800,000 undocumented young people to legally live, work and study in the United States.

UC President Janet Napolitano, who was secretary of DHS from 2009 to 2013, created the DACA program in 2012, setting in place a rigorous application and security review process. Applicants for DACA were only approved if they were in or had graduated from high school or college, or were in the military, or an honorably discharged veteran. They cannot have been convicted of a felony or major misdemeanor or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

“Neither I, nor the University of California, take the step of suing the federal government lightly, especially not the very agency that I led,” Napolitano said. “It is imperative, however, that we stand up for these vital members of the UC community. They represent the best of who we are — hard working, resilient and motivated high achievers. To arbitrarily and capriciously end the DACA program, which benefits our country as a whole, is not only unlawful, it is contrary to our national values and bad policy.”

The lawsuit asks the court to set aside the Trump administration’s rescission of DACA because it is “unconstitutional, unjust, and unlawful.”

“As a result of the Defendants’ actions, the Dreamers face expulsion from the only country that they call home, based on nothing more than unreasoned executive whim,” the complaint reads.

“The University faces the loss of vital members of its community, students and employees. It is hard to imagine a decision less reasoned, more damaging, or undertaken with less care. ... Defendants’ capricious rescission of the DACA program violates both the procedural and substantive requirements of the APA (Administrative Procedure Act), as well as the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

UC has approximately 4,000 undocumented students, a substantial number of whom have DACA, as well as teachers, researchers and health care providers who are DACA recipients.

The lawsuit was filed with the pro bono support of the law firm Covington & Burling, LLP.

As today’s legal action demonstrates, UC continues to take a leadership role in protecting its DACA and other undocumented students. The university is committed to using all available resources to support the thousands of Dreamers who are currently enrolled at UC campuses, as well as other undocumented students. Those resources and services include:

  • Continuing to allow California residents who are Dreamers to pay in-state tuition;
  • Maintaining the DREAM loan program for financial aid;
  • Offering legal services to our undocumented students;
  • Supporting campus-based student service centers; and
  • Directing campus police not to contact, detain, question or arrest individuals based on suspected undocumented status, or to enter agreements to undertake joint efforts to make arrests for federal immigration law violations.