On Tuesday at the Davis Chamber’s lunch, the presence of UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi may have been overshadowed by the departure of Chamber CEO Kemble Pope and his steady transition to Matt Yancey who has taken over the position.
Chancellor Katehi has had her successes and her low points during her tenure as chancellor, however, there is no doubting that she has a vision that could transform the university and the community that surrounds it. On Tuesday, she was at her best when she stuck to the vision of greatness and noted that UCD could become the most important of the UC campuses this century.
Indeed, it is the connection of UC Davis to food, agriculture and health care that she sees as the driver. At the same time, she remains inexplicably tone deaf when she talks to a group of local business leaders about the World Food Center and the Third Campus concept.
Here her soaring rhetoric became flat and she sounded more like a politician stumbling to cover up a misstep than the visionary leader wanting to lead UCD into greatness.
She argued that the third campus is not an effort to move things away from Davis, but rather the opportunity that would put the center to where it would have easy access to policymakers in Sacramento.
She said, “There is no better place than Sacramento for that type of work.”
She would add that locating the World Food Center, not on the main campus in Davis or in one of the newly-built innovations parks, but in Sacramento near the health campus would strengthen links between food and health. She stated that there would be a School of Population and Global Health located there, as well.
The financing for such an enterprise is not yet in place, and the World Food Center still has a ways to go.
The chancellor talked about partnership with Davis and Davis is starting to step up to the plate – maybe in the eyes of many in a belated way. However, we are talking about a multi-billion investment, we are talking about the center of the future not only of the University of California, but perhaps the center of feeding the world’s population.
The World Food Center talks of addressing the food needs of nine billion people.
And yet, Roger Beachy, the center’s director, said a few months ago, “We think that Sacramento — because of its growing importance as the capital of a state that has an enormous amount of influence in food and food policy nationally — seems to us quite logical to take on an increasingly international position, and UC Davis can help with that.”
Chancellor Katehi first mentioned the idea of a third campus in her annual State of the Campus presentation to the Academic Senate in February. At that time, she said the campus would emphasize UC Davis’ commitment to education, research, clinical and policy aspirations, with a focus on food, health and the environment.
“Because of our location, history and expertise, UC Davis is in a unique position to be an even greater positive source for California state government and policy than we have been in the past,” Chancellor Katehi said in a letter announcing her plans to create the advisory group to help crystallize the vision for a third campus.
“To take full advantage of that opportunity and raise the profile and reputation of the entire university, we have been thinking for some time about developing a third campus somewhere in Sacramento,” she wrote. “The time is now right to begin moving forward with this process.”
Chancellor Katehi on Tuesday all but said that the World Food Center was going to Sacramento on a third campus – and she said this to a group of Davis business leaders, many of whom will be doing the heavy lifting on the creation of innovation centers in Davis that will carry out tech transfer and allow the research, backed by funding that Chancellor Katehi has helped to augment, to become commercial enterprises.
The event featured the presence of all five Davis City Councilmembers, both its Yolo County Supervisors, and Senator Lois Wolk. Only outgoing Assemblymember Mariko Yamada was not in attendance.
Did the chancellor really believe that the listeners at this event – both business and political leaders – would be assuaged by her assurances that she was not attempting to move things away from Davis, but rather seizing an opportunity to locate in Sacramento? Does she not understand that she is taking billions in investment and moving them across the river?
Does she not understand that, by pushing the World Food Center across the river to Sacramento, she is undermining UC Davis’ own brand?
Listening to the chancellor it is more clear than ever that the chancellor has made up her mind and now her efforts are focused on attempting to soften the blow.
And it was really a shame. One of the highlights of the luncheon was HM Clause, who sponsored the luncheon, and their CEO Matthew Johnston who articulated the vision of his company which chose to relocate its corporate headquarters in Davis to better develop his company’s relationship with Davis and UC Davis.
The company represents a key cog in the future, helping to develop seeds for vegetables and food across the world. It is a global company with 1800 worldwide employees, 120 of which are here. It represents both the present and potential of what Davis and UC Davis can bring.
And yet, at the same time, it is clear that the biggest university ventures are likely headed to the other side of the river. This is a huge blow and it comes at a critical juncture as Davis attempts to move forward with its part of the deal – providing space for startups and opportunity for growth for current companies.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Maybe Katehi saw how our local activists treated Monsanto with picketing and shutting down access to their Davis business location over gmo products and figured why deal with it? As was discussed in another recent article there are consequences to our local troublemakers actions causing businesses to not want to locate in Davis.
So you’re saying that we make billion dollar decisions based on the non-disruptive protests? They picketed Monsanto in the county, that didn’t stop Monsanto from locating there. I think that’s an absurd explanation when there are many others that seem more likely – such as land use policies and also the explanation given about the proximity to the capital as well as the investment from Sacramento interests.
I’m sure many things played a role, they all add up. But we’re talking about the possibility of locating a world food center here in our little town we have our usual local bunch disrupting a world food business, that certainly didn’t help.
I disagree that they “disrupted” a world food business.
They could make every new building, development, and program a royal pain.
Yes, I agree, our local activists are a royal pain and end up hurting Davis in the long run.
If activist protests had the kind of influence that you imply, Katehi wouldn’t be holding her current position. Heck, everything in the world would be different.
Or maybe because of our local activist’s treatment and the hatred of her she’s now giving the finger to Davis.
I have heard that as one possibility.
Fire Katehi!
I’ts a college town. Protests go with the territory. Any university chancellor is quite accustomed to local opposition, both from within and from outside. You could make a list of the things college students have been protesting over the last decades, from divestment in South Africa to animal testing to GMO’s and a lot in between, and the only thing consistent is that college students protest stuff and many faculty are sympathetic.
There were a lot more than just college students at that protest. We have a core of a few hundred activists in this town that protest anything that moves and I feel that’s one of the reasons that we lose out on some things.
My point is that’s always been true. You get a college town, you get college-town activism. I’ve watched the Occupy protests at Monsanto’s offices down the street from my store. There’s a hundred or so people, certainly some coming in from out of town. Young idealistic folks. They often come in to my shop and they remind me exactly of the people who were doing similar sorts of things when I was a student, decades ago. It is really hard for me to imagine that a sophisticated professional who has spent her career in academia would pay that even the slightest bit of mind.
Sure… some of those “young idealistic folks” were at the heart of a pepper-spray event that almost cost her a job and left a stain on her reputation, and certainly influenced her sophisticated professional opinion about the ongoing risks to UCD operations and her reputation.
It just adds to the perception that Davis is not very welcoming nor is it very appreciative.
Did she say anything about UCD deciding to voluntarily allocate a portion of the new tuition money coming in (from international students and out-of-state domestic students) to the City of Davis to help mitigate the expense to the City that those new students will cause?
I am not sure that the Chancellor has anything to “explain away”. She is a representative of the university, not the city of Davis.
While this move will disappoint many ( better be sitting down, perhaps even me) she has the obligation and the right to make the decision to place the proposed center in what she perceives as the best location for the overall success of the university. I agree with David that I believe that the actions of a handful of local activists were probably at the very bottom of the Chancellor’s list of reasons for preferring Sacramento if they reached her radar screen at all.
I agree, but don’t forget that the faculty has an effective (informal) “veto power” over any such kinds of decisions that are made by administrators.
Brian
How does this “veto power” get exercised ?
By simply refusing to follow up and carry out scholarly activities within the proposed context. Katehi can decide to build a satellite campus in Sacramento, but she can’t force professors to agree to transfer to the programs that operate there.
Grant money, bonuses, perks, plum assignments, telecommuting and such could help soften those obstacles.
Maybe, but in general if an issue is important enough, then the faculty will exercise their veto power. You can’t pull off something as major as this without clearing it through the faculty first.
The Chancellor has a regional perspective, and is less Davis-centric than many of those on this blog and, presumably, many of those in the room where she spoke.
And if she was addressing the Sac Metro Chamber or SARTA you may have a point, but she was addressing the Davis Chamber.
Maybe she is just responding to your farmland preservation extremism.
Maybe the Mace 391 decision was the last straw.
Except that I’m not an extremist and Mace 391 had nothing to do with any university project or decision. You need to let this go.
Don: I think you’re being a bit dismissive. I have heard from at least one source that the council vote in June 2013 was a critical factor in the university’s thinking.
Since by far the easiest place for them to build the World Food Center is right here, on campus, on land they own — they wouldn’t need permission from anyone, nor would there be significant acquisition costs — then I would say your source has a misperception. Clearly there are other factors in the Chancellor’s thinking.
You are correct, Don. And also people need to remember that the UC Davis campus is the *largest* campus within the UC system in terms of acreage.
David: I have heard from at least one source that the council vote in June 2013 was a critical factor in the university’s thinking.
Don: Since by far the easiest place for them to build the World Food Center is right here, on campus, on land they own.
Nice deflection Don.
And just think about all the hootin’ and hollerin’ that would result from the more easily activated NIMBY, no-growth, open-space and farmland preservation people of Davis over another big university development.
We have one of the largest land holdings in the US. Chancellor Hullar made a wise move in adding acreage when he served.
As I listened to the Chancellor yesterday I couldn’t help but wonder how a common campus for the existing medical center, med school and the food center could be accomplished. The image below shows the existing UCD Sacramento Campus and the area around it, which is fully built out as residential housing. It is hard to imagine where the Food Center and Global health (Public Health) complex would fit in. On possibility is the “house shaped” parcel bordered by 49th Street, 50th Street and Broadway in the middle of the image that currently houses the California Department of Justice, but that would mean a major relocation of those state functions. Another possibility is the old Fairgrounds, further to the east on Broadway which is now Greenfair Park, but that too would mean relocation of the existing residents.
Bottom-line a combined UCD Sacramento Campus is going to be challenging to accomplish.
Matt, There’s plenty of room. Convert surface parking into structured parking. That’s how it is done all the time.
I hear you Gum Drops. Having worked at the Med Center for five years I’m very familiar with the Sacramento campus. With that said, the number of surface parking lots has dwindled substantially in recent years. The Lot between the Med School/Library buildings and the Ambulatory Care Center is one and the lot between V Street and Y Street across from the Ambulatory Care Center is a second. The lot between the Cancer Center and V Street is a third, but after those three the pickings get pretty thin.
In relationship to the existing Ambulatory Care Center, how big would you expect the footprint of the combined World Food Center and Global/Public Health facility to be? Would you expect greenhouses as part of the complex?
I don’t know how much space they would need, and would expect they wouldn’t build too much initially, as you can’t go from nothing to something large right away. They would likely start something at a temporary location downtown, and then would transition into the new space once it was completed. The permanent space could be a little while given UC’s need to raise the funds, come up with a design and then actually construct it. I believe that the Med Center is simply a placeholder, and that prior indications are that they are looking at other downtown proximate sites such as the Railyards or perhaps West Sac on Mark Friedman’s property. You can’t talk about any of that in any real way until you have a deal in place.
David,
I think what we’re really talking about here is the decade-long failure of the city’s leadership in recognizing the revenue side of its structural fiscal imbalance and the importance of reaching out to engage the university in a manner where the university could respond accordingly. But it all starts with recognizing the need on the one hand and the opportunity on the other – and then communicating them both accordingly.
To your point, the university does seem to be stuck in the view that bringing another 5,000 students and 700 faculty/staff is just the ticket to help fix Davis economic problems. Somehow, Councilmember Greenwald’s admonitions that housing is a net negative demand on city services hasn’t quite sunk in. So who’s fault is that?
Even today, as we speak, the city doesn’t seem have the means, motivation or desire to acquire the necessary tools of analysis that might otherwise clearly draw the nexus between our weak technology employment base and the current fiscal imbalance.
How do we expect the leadership of the university, with all it has to do to keep its own engines running, to have time to take care of matters which clearly should belong with the leadership of the city and the community? Does Mayor Kevin Johnson have any problem articulating the virtues of a new stadium (or two) and high praise for the potential benefits of a World Food Institute? Does Mark Friedman have the slightest hesitation in explaining the nexus between a world leading institute and the ongoing economic health of Downtown Sacramento?
Where are these voices in Davis?
“Where are these voices in Davis?”
Picketing gmo’s?
You’re not only overplaying the point, but devolving the conversation from more critical issues.
Consider:
Community Davis City B
Yr. Univ Built 1906 1906
Current Pop. 66,000 66,000
Local Univ. Med Ctr NO YES
Big Box Retail Target NONE
Daytime Workforce 32.000 120,000
Per Capita Retail Sales-FY2011 $7.00 $20.00
Annual City GF Budget $48MM $125MM
And the point is…………………………..?
David,
Could use some help with formatting the above table?
Davis is just too small and too stasis to effectively partner with UCD at this point in time. I see it like an impending divorce. Two partners, Davis and UCD, have evolved and developed on different paths, and now there are irreconcilable differences. One has grown dynamic and forward-thinking, the other has grown more grouchy and irritable and more determined to avoid change.
And when we add up the no-growth tendency to the history of hostility to business… and the hotbed of irrational activism against GMO… well there we have it. D I V O R C E, as the song says.
And to some degree this is a manifestation of the business side of the university against the academic side of the university. The academic side being far left of center and having every indication being the product of a eugenic social demographic filtering phenomenon of people having weak money-math skills and a propensity to pursue a weird utopian goal of a smaller and less-material population constrained by more rules to live by.
Thinking about this… it is UCD administration distancing the new business side of the university from the existing academic side. I don’t see that as being a divorce but rather a separation. The two have to work together, but they don’t want to live together.
Can this be overcome and UCD brass change their minds to focus on growing the third campus in and around Davis? I doubt it.
Let’s just assume the university is simply being pragmatic in context of its cultural and institutional imperatives.
What does it take to elicit and articulate a similar, pragmatic perspective from the host community -given its cultural and institutional imperatives? One major difference is that we don’t have a CEO and the city, as an organizational entity, isn’t a competing enterprise (as is a leading university). Tell somebody at the university that their departments need to come up with a new plan and figure out how to make the numbers work and things happen. How do you impart or imbue a “community” with a similar perspective – particularly if it is operating in an information vacuum?
I suspect there are a number of reasons UCD made the decision to locate a third campus and World Food Center in Sacto. Davis did not think seriously about developing an innovation park until recently – and I am talking only the last two years. It sounds like the third campus has been in the planning stages for a lot longer. Secondly, there is no question UCD would like to have more leverage with legislators. Thirdly, the City of Davis does have a reputation for having an antagonistic relationship with UCD. And fourthly, Davis citizens are not shy about making any entity uncomfortable that a block of citizens might not agree with. And lastly, as someone said previously, UCD is thinking regionally rather than locally – UCD wants to increase its sphere of influence beyond the borders of Davis.
I would say it is incumbent on Davis to extend the olive branch, start working with UCD, so that in the future, the university will see more reason to collaborate with the city in developing future innovation parks. Nishi is a good example of this. Complaining that Katehi is tone deaf, and essentially saying “shame on her for coming to a Davis Chamber of Commerce meeting to explain her vision” is not helpful. If anything it will drive UCD even farther away.
I concur 100% Anon.
How would this be different or better to the College of Agriculture, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) at the University of Illinois? “ACES research encompasses initiatives in bioenergy, biotechnology, integrated landscapes, environmental sustainability, food and agricultural systems, global climate change, family resiliency, public policy, and more.”
How would this be similar or different from ag programs at Cornell, or Texas A&M?
Will having existing faculty teaching in Sacramento, diminish educational resources and capability on our core campus?
Is it that difficult to get politicians to travel 10 miles west to Davis? Would new conference center(s) on campus or in town, and shuttles, help make a City of Davis alternative more realistic?
Where did the original idea come from? The Office of the President in Oakland, Katehi, Mrak Hall, College of Ag?
I do not see how what we do in Davis prevents the development of a World Food Center on UCD property they already own–the UCD campus. If she wanted it here she could have it here. Seems like access to ‘world class’ soil would be as big a plus as innovation centers. As far as proximity to the state Capitol, wherever the campus is located in SACTO it’s likely to take about 20 minutes to get to the actual Capitol same as from Davis. Likewise, if Davis doesn’t develop innovation parks, they can be in West Sac, SACTO or even Vacaville. I don’t think the proximity agrument holds water.
Anyone know where the new campus will be located in sacramento? Can’t imagine it will be anywhere near the med center.
Her comments yesterday led me to believe that there would be one campus for the Med School, Med Center, Public Health (Global Health was her term) and Food Center.
DG: “One of the highlights of the luncheon was HM Clause, who (sic) sponsored the luncheon, and their (sic) CEO Matthew Johnston who articulated the vision of his company which chose to relocate its corporate headquarters in Davis to better develop his company’s relationship with Davis and UC Davis.”
David, can you elaborate on what Mr. Johnston said. You say his presentation was a highlight, but you give no details as to what he said and why it was important.
What I wrote in the article was the key point he made which was the connection of the city-university-global.
That’s it? You can add nothing more? Why did he move his company’s headquarters, for example? You say this was some part of an equation, but you give no details in your story, or, obviously, in your 11:20am explanation. I am left wondering if the real problem is that he said nothing of importance?
Rich, his comments were an ad hoc response when Kemble Pope called him up to the microphone to add an HM Clause perspective to the answer to an audience question that Chancellor Katehi had just given. It was very clear from his body language when responding to Kemble’s call out that he was not expecting to speak again after he had given the prepared remarks about HM Clause as the event’s sponsor.
So it wasn’t that what he said didn’t have substance/importance. it was just ad hoc. Hopefully someone recorded it.
After reading the VG for several years now, I can no longer resist making a comment. It has been interesting to follow the commentary above — it seems that BP and Frankly are always trying to view events through their right wing lenses. Don’t you guys every tire of doing this? It is very repetitive.
The fact is the chancellor is trying to pave the way for her next job, as is the case for all administrators. She is trying to show what an effective organizer she is, to make a splash. Davis’ attitudes towards development have NOTHING to do with her decisions — as DavisBurns notes, she has a lot of property to develop outside the city and the county. No, the choice of Sacramento is obvious: it is closer to the center of power and she sees an ally in Mayor KJ. Sites discussed for the new campus are NOT near the med center but rather near the area to be developed for the new stadium, north of downtown. If she can get on board with the downtown stadium/development it will certainly help KJ as well as creating a very visible edifice.
Another canard I am tiring of hearing about (David, unfortunately you also buy into this) is about how Bayer-Agraquest moved out of Davis because we could not give them what they wanted. The actual truth is that they got a phenomenal deal for Affimetrix’s old facility, 160,000 sqft loaded with biotech equipment and labs, ready to go including permits. There is NO WAY that Davis (or any other non-industrial city) will EVER have a facility that size and certainly not for the price ($425M, $2.5K sqft) OR the timescale required. So get over it!
That’s what I suspected. She got her five years in last month, in August, and so now is vested in the UC pension system. The time is ripe for her to be seeking new employment.
TOBS nailed it in my mind. All of the Davis-centric comments fail to consider that the relocation to Sacramento has little to do with being “pushed” from Davis rather than the “pull” of factors in Sacramento. Katehi cares nothing about Davis small-town politics.
@Dave Hart — “TOBS” is mostly likely a DV insider, though, so let’s not get our hopes up that TOBS is some kind of Deep Throat character giving us a report from inside the UCD administration. The chances of that being true are very slim.
Brian, are you speculating about “demons” again?
No, I am not speculating. If you must know, TOBS is obviously David. It’s glaringly obvious.
Funny… “glare” tend to cause one to not be able to see as well.
You might want to brush up on your detective work.
Brian, there’s a lot of games that get played on here. I have suspicions about a few and am pretty sure about some others posting under more than one name. The Vanguard says it’s within its rules to do so, so maybe we all should join the party.
Actually and I want to make this clear: what I said was that as long as it doesn’t get abused, we decided to make no rule about, however, that can change quickly. Don, enough of this conversation, all further posts need to be on topic.
TOBS – the price of a facility is only a fraction of the decision criteria for company location. Otherwise we would have every company in the US going to the Midwest where land is super cheap.
I don’t discount your theories here, but I think you might be a bit out of your league considering the business perspective. If these UCD plans are public-private… which they are… then the business side is pushing and pulling the decisions.
Davis is absolutely known by business to be a difficult place to do business in. That is on-top of the state that is the most difficult to do business in.
This has nothing to do any right wing lens as you put it… any more than your points are through an left wing lens. I know what the business side says and thinks. My thinking is that this is a very strong driver in the university’s plans and directions.
Chancellor Katehi was brought in to UCD because she had a track record of fundraisiing and successfully leading large initiatives. She is also more entrepreneurial and private sector oriented than most chancellors. Her job was, and continues to be, to do big things for the UC system.
While I agree that there are probably many reasons why a Sacramento location is the direction they are taking (and I also believe they are trying to negotiate something in the downtown area, such as the Railyards, but have to look to their existing property at the Med Center as their stated location until they lock something down). I wouldn’t discount the state of the relationship between UC Davis, and Chancellor Katehi in particular, with the Davis community. She is human like the rest of us, and we all prefer to go where we are more wanted. While the University has its own land, those who would populate the new World Food Center still need to live somewhere. While student housing can be constructed, that isn’t either an easy or speedy process, as we have seen, and other forms of housing start consuming more and more land. Housing development also isn’t the University’s core competence or mission, it only does it when it needs to do it to support its primary mission.
While getting a project such as the WFC developed in the city would be challenging, getting it done on University property and within the decision making process of the University itself is no cake walk. Having to construct housing would also require additional capital and other resources. Add to that the incessant chirping from many of the residents of the City of Davis from the beginning of this process until its end about every matter large and small, and if I’m the Chancellor, I look to the place where I don’t have to worry about housing and where there is a friendlier and far more supportive environment. Other cities might look to financially help support the creation of a World Food Center. I think its fair to say that that possibility never crossed any of our minds for the City of Davis.
Unfortunately, it is endeavors such as a World Food Center and private sector spin-offs that are some of the biggest benefits of having a university in our backyard. We as a community should work to support such ends if we want to see more of the benefits of having UCD as our neighbor. If not, we shouldn’t complain about why they go elsewhere. Does anyone doubt that the odds of successfully building a World Food Center in Davis versus closer to the Downtown Sacramento core are significantly more favorable in the former, rather than the latter? Also, site it in Sacramento and you not only have the supporters of UCD behind the project, but also have the broader Sacramento community behind you.
Thanks for your very thoughtful observations.
Your one comment, in particular:
“I think its fair to say that that possibility never crossed any of our minds for the City of Davis.”
speaks volumes to the underlying issue – that is the disconnect between the community and the university in their mutual understanding of the relationship between a community’s inherent employment base/economic vitality and the underlying fiscal sustainability and prosperity of both the community and its model of municipal services.
Employment in this town, at 32,000 daytime jobs, for a population of 66,000 residents – is but a drop in the bucket for a community like Palo Alto with 120,000 jobs and a population of 66,000.
That this subject has been “off the radar screen” – particularly during this past decade of challenging economic circumstances – is the case in point.
Perhaps, moving forward, there can be more and better opportunities for a more open dialogue between the community and our generous benefactors at the university.
So where do the 120,000 workers in Palo Alto live? In adjacent communities? They commute? WOW! We have adjacent communities and we also have freeways. Guess we can build more commercial here after all.
Palo Alto is 26+ square miles. Davis is under 10 square miles.
Palo Alto has focused on economic development and not housing development. That has served the city’s economic interests very well if not their affordable housing needs.
Davis has done neither and so neither are served well.
But boy do we have a lot of open space. Yippee!
Frankly –
Take a look at Google Earth, of the 26 SM, a very large percentage of the difference in land mass is set aside as greenbelt and nature preserve. It’s not like Palo Alto is “occupying” a developed footprint which is 2.5X the size of Davis.
DB: Sort of funny that UCD felt it necessary to construct more student housing given the easy ability for folks to commute. Davis is more of an island, surrounded by undeveloped land, including the Yolo bypass. It is a far cry from Palo Alto in terms of its proximity to housing from adjacent communities. Additionally, people are willing to commute farther where housing is more expensive. UCD is also not Stanford although I’m sure that Chancellor Katehi would very much like to emulate some of what Stanford helps to create in terms of entrepreneurial spin-offs from the work done at the university.
The university agrees to house a certain percentage of its student population. My understanding is that UCD doesn’t even come close to the systemwide average, or even to the percentage that it agreed to. UCD has fallen far short of providing the housing needed for the current enrollment, much less for 5000 more students. They are thousands of beds short, and West Village doesn’t even cover the shortfall from previous enrollment increases.
You think she is that small minded? With previous jobs in academia she likely has a set retirement, and her patents. If she wanted a new job, I think the Office of the President or any other college would take note of a Chancellor who helped spearhead a $1 Billion fundraising goal, and got there a year early!
I thought you might be alluding to her ownership of Sacto land, or land owned by a certain prominent real estate development company which is know for funding politicians and power brokers.
TBD, you aren’t setting your sights high enough. Larry Summers has been both President of Harvard University and Secretary of the Treasury. Which of those two jobs do you rank higher?
In a similar vein, if Katehi were offered the Presidency of MIT, do you think she would leave UCD? Retirement has nothing to do with “it.”
@TrueBlueDevil,
The patent thing is way over-hyped. Out of 19 patents, she is only listed as the primary inventor on *one*. She is listed as the sole inventor on *none*.
I wondered about this. I have no dog in this fight, but I did wonder years ago when an alum breathlessly told me that she was by far “the most intelligent chancellor we have ever had”.
Phew! Finally a voice of reason on this blog.
As a public university, is UCD subject to the freedom of information act? There is a lot of speculation here, but somewhere there are the breadcrumbs of criteria used to set strategy and develop plans. Who are the decision makers and key stakeholders? Who is providing influence? With plans this complicated, I can’t imagine that the Chancellor just makes up her mind in a vacuum.
The FOIA is a federal law, so UC Davis is not bound by it, however there is a state level equivalent called “California Public Records Act” (CPRA).
Is it possible this was initiated in Oakland?
There once was link to this page: http://cityofdavis.org/ed/Health-and-Prosperity-Report/
It was the location for the City of Davis – “Health & Prosperity Report – Executive Summary 2009” issued by the City of Davis – Business & Economic Development Commission in 2009.
Comparison communities were Palo Alto, Irvine and Santa Monica.
It’s not like the issue of the relationship between university related employment spin-offs and their impacts on host communities has been absent from the discussion table. It just hasn’t been the subject of much discussion.
ARCO Arena at the UC Davis World Food Center?
How many acres are they looking for?
It is is somewhere downtown, I hope they are smart enough to get some riverside land … great for views, color, and maybe a restaurant. The Greenery on the River @ The World Food Center, at UC Davis-Sacramento campus.