The Sacramento Bee once again airs the dirty laundry from the Katehi scandal, this time airing a string of emails showing the chancellor and administration scuffling to figure out a response to the public relations crisis.
Perhaps the most telling quote was from Director of Executive Communications, Gary Delsohn, a former Sacramento Bee reporter who also wrote speeches for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who said in an early morning email April 16, “We are the laughingstock of the world right now, and we’ve given a pathetic, dying newspaper a day in the sun.”
These articles seem less about providing the region with the news they need to know about the chancellor and the continuing investigation, and more about the salacious details aimed at embarrassing both the university and its current chancellor, still on paid administrative leave.
Ms. Katehi’s team increasingly believes that the Bee has a vendetta against the chancellor. While there are certainly a number of explanations for their coverage, Attorney Melinda Guzman wrote on Facebook in response to the latest story, “The Bee has reached a new tabloid low. There is no news here and they are reduced to reading emails which only show that the campus took the issues seriously.”
While the chancellor has filled out the highlights for the news media, from the perspective of Davis and probably the broader region, there is a much more important story that has been undersold. For years under the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, UC Davis has presented a big vision to Davis and the region, but more recently has stumbled in its commitments.
In 2013, UC Davis and the City of Davis applied for and eventually received in 2014 $600,000 for the City of Davis Downtown University Gateway District Plan. The joint planning for Nishi was supposed to take place in conjunction with and connected to UC Davis plans for densifying and redeveloping Solano Park.
As a press release from June 2014 indicated, “The competitiveness of the application was greatly enhanced by the participation of Yolo County as co-applicant, UC Davis as a collaborator, and SACOG as a partner.”
But something happened along the way – UC Davis started facing student protests around the same time and just six months later the university balked at a UC Davis option when it came time to do the EIR.
Bob Segar, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Campus Planning, in January of 2015 indicated that the campus would not even commit to the dual option at that time.
“For the roadway plan to be fully analyzed, it has to be in the context of our future growth as well as potential future growth at Nishi. Those scenarios would get fully developed this spring.”
“At least for implementation of it, it would require an approval and I think it does require being part of the growth plan,” he said.
Sources told the Vanguard that, while many in the region had been warning that Davis would not hold up its end of the bargain, it was UC Davis that dropped the ball. In the aftermath of the narrow defeat of Nishi last month at the polls, one of the issues that loomed large was whether UC Davis would commit to a grade-separated crossing.
At the same time, policies in the upper reaches of UC have trickled down to UC Davis and are greatly impacting the Davis community. The university is planning to add another 6000 students with additional faculty and staff over the next decade.
Growth of UC Davis has led to shrinking vacancy rates, the transition of single-family homes to mini-dorms, and tremendous pressure on the city of Davis to grow. While it is clear now that the city cannot rely on UC Davis to provide for all of the housing for new students, and it is questionable whether UC Davis will reach its goal of providing 90 percent of new student housing on campus, it is clear that the city council is going to push back.
In a discussion last week, the council looked into the possibility of creating a City-UCD two-by-two.
Mayor Pro Tem Brett Lee pointed out the lack of overall coordination between the university and the city. He said that while the LRDP process gives the council something specific to sink its teeth into, other entities and the city have a two-by-two where they can meet regularly and coordinate in a public process. “Where’s the two-by-two with the university in general?” he asked. “They’re the most important entity in close proximity to the city of Davis.”
However, there is a catch, the two-by-two’s are in fact public meetings, and several sources have told the Vanguard that the university is reluctant to do public meetings with the city as it would put many of the aspects of the discussions on the record.
Marjorie Dickinson, Assistant Chancellor from UC Davis’s Government and Community Relations team, last week speaking at council complained, “I need to express a little frustration that we’re not better utilizing my office. I heard about at least two issues tonight that I’ve not heard about before.”
She continued, “I hope I can remind you that if there’s any question, any issue that emerges, anything that you think about doing, the first thing that you think is to call me or Mabel Salon. That’s what our work is and that’s what our commitment is.”
But in many ways this illustrates the problem that the city faces with dealing with a huge bureaucratic entity like UC Davis. The city needs to figure out a way to cut through the red tape and work with UC Davis as partners who both need each other in order to achieve their fullest potential.
From the city’s side we need to work with UC Davis to alleviate pressure for housing. The university previously had looked to the Railyards in Sacramento to potentially house the World Food Center, but many of the faculty and staff that would run that facility balked at the idea of leaving the UCD campus and it is unclear where that project currently stands.
We have also noted the work of other universities like USC, who have pumped hundreds of millions into the USC Village, and Purdue, which has formed a city-private partnership to create their own innovation district. This is the kind of investment and collaboration that Davis needs from UCD.
Chancellor Katehi had a vision for greatness for UCD, but UCD needs to work with Davis to make some of these aspirational goals come true. Willingness for UCD to be a full partner with the city may make private entities more likely to take a chance on the city’s fickle land use polices and rules.
For us, this becomes a far more important issue than the nervous emails that were sent about Mrak Hall back in April. This not only has local significance, it has regional significance, as UCD is a billion dollar plus entity that provides numerous jobs and investment opportunities, not only to Davis but to the region.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
The latest economic impact report for the University of California, Davis, shows that the university is an economic driver for the Sacramento region and for California, generating $8.1 billion in statewide economic activity in fiscal year 2013-14 and supporting 72,000 jobs. The report, prepared for the university by Economic & Planning Systems Inc., is available online.
“By any measure one chooses, it’s clear that UC Davis pays big dividends to California and to its taxpayers,” said Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi. “We know education and innovation are key to economic growth in the 21st century and as this report shows, we work hard to be at the forefront on both counts.”
The economic analysis includes three elements: direct expenditures and employment by UC Davis itself, students and visitors; indirect spending and jobs resulting from demand for goods and services as a result of direct activity by the university; and economic activity induced by spending by UC Davis employees.
The analysis found that in fiscal year 2013-14, every dollar spent by UC Davis generated an additional 80 cents of economic activity in the Sacramento region, and one job was created in the region for every two university jobs.
Overall, the university generated $6.8 billion in economic output and 65,000 jobs in the seven-county Sacramento region (Sacramento, Yolo, El Dorado, Placer, Sutter, Yuba and Solano counties). Statewide, the total economic impact equates to 72,000 jobs and $8.1 billion of economic output annually, according to the analysis. UC Davis’ two campuses are second only to the state of California as the largest employer in the Sacramento region, and the Davis campus is the largest employer in Yolo County.
I share that vendetta against the – #choke# – “chancellor”. Go Sacramento Bee!
Racist and bigots have same goals . Vendetta and lynching .
You caught us . . . as all who know will tell you, the Sacramento Bee editorial board and Alan C. Miller share one common trait: a racist-based desire to lynch Greeks.
Exactly . No any doubt about . Ask Diana Lambert
YA! What you said . . . sort of . . .
“UC Davis’ two campuses are second only to the state of California as the largest employer in the Sacramento region, and the Davis campus is the largest employer in Yolo County.”
And yet we have those who contend that “the government” does not generate jobs, only the private sector is capable of that !
Tia wrote:
> And yet we have those who contend that “the government”
> does not generate jobs, only the private sector is capable
> of that !
When you ask your friends that are UCD professors or UCDMC MDs do they say “I work for the government”?
South of Davis
“When you ask your friends that are UCD professors or UCDMC MDs do they say “I work for the government”?”
The one’s who are being honest or the one’s who prefer not to see that public universities are government supported ?
“And yet we have those who contend that “the government” does not generate jobs”
I believe the term is the government does not “create jobs”. Sure they take money from some people and hire other people, but they are not creating anything to expand the overall economy by just being an employer. Sure they educate people that may end up creating jobs, but the UC system did not create any jobs.
Here is an example of how that works. Ashton Kutcher was making $18,000,000 per season on 2 1/2 men. From that income he would have to pay about $2,400,000 in California state taxes. The State then takes those funds and pays 10 professors for one year at UCD.
Lets say the State did not collect any taxes from Ashton. Say instead he used that $2,400,000 to invest in the company Foursquare, like he did in 2009. With his investment the company was able to expand and now employs over 200 people every year, year after year.
So if the government takes the money they “create” 10 jobs for one year. If Ashton keeps the money then he creates a few hundred jobs for the foreseeable future.
(I know that UCD is a little different in that you hope that what the professors teach will enable students to one day create jobs, but UCD still does not directly create jobs)
Foursquare might not be a great example, as it has yet to turn a profit in its 7 years of existence. It’s valuation is way down, and those 200 jobs might not be around “year after year.”
My hope for UCD is that a new chancellor will view the world not solely in competitive terms, but rather in collaborative terms. I see great potential for a truly integrated approach amongst UCD, the city of Davis, the Yolo county / Sacramento region and private interests ( both for profit and non profit) if the new leadership can see the world less in terms of competition driven by appearance and more on actual achievement driven by collaborative effort. This to me, far more than being “Number One”, would be a sign of true excellence and leadership. I see cause for cautious optimism.
My hope for this campus, and this town, Tia, is that you and others of your ilk leave these forums for good…
My hope, as is the hope of many of the most highly regarded faculty on campus, that the Chancellor is welcomed back very soon…and the Napo will be gone..
My hope for this town, is for it to become a kindler, gentler place before developers ran amuk…
How about that….moderators???? does that pass muster?
So, like go back to 1948/1950? If you look at greatest %-age growth (housing units and population) that would be the 1950’s-1960’s.
1950-1960 Davis grew by 150% (more than doubled the population)
2000-2010 Davis grew by 8.8% (we added about 44 people a month)
Sorry Marina, none of your hopes will come to pass.
they are hopes right, Missie….I also hope that you will go away…that the nonsense you share on these forums will not be missed by a soul and so on….but that is only my hope, right????
we will see what happens….the chances of some of the truly not quite bright around here leaving this addictive game are very slim indeed…. the chance of the Chancellor returning is actually much higher…… LOL>>>.
Marina
“My hope for this campus, and this town, Tia, is that you and others of your ilk leave these forums for good…”
“My hope for this town, is for it to become a kindler, gentler place before developers ran amok”
And do you see yourself as setting an example of your kinder, gentler vision with your tolerance of the ideas of others who do not agree with you ?
Could someone tutor Marina in English? and good manners? Her comments do not speak well of UCD.
I agree. Marina’s comments are frequently incoherent and unsubstantiated. She claims to be “In the know.”, however I suspect she is just an office gossip spreading rumor and innuendo. I avoid her comments if I can and would appreciate some type of ignore or hide comment feature.
It seems that the City needs UCD slightly more than UCD needs the City. The problem is that people want to dictate to the University how to develop and expand. The latest letters to the editor protesting housing on Russell Field is an example. There is a disconnect with the desparate lack of teaching facilities, faculty research space and, now, student housing on campus. Community activists want to extend their influence onto campus, but UCD cannot tolerate any delays – demands for additional studies, EIRs, defending lawsuits, etc. The City does not have a good planning process – not one to work well on campus anyway.
wow Ryan…for once you make some sense……and yet, I was gonna lump you in with Tia in that last comment….
Of course, there would be NO Davis without UCD>>>.it would still be Davisville and a tiny dot in the ag land of Yolo…
Davis was a town of 5K in the mid 60s when Woodland was the “booming’ county seat of many times that population…
Patently untrue… Davisville became Davis (a Municipal Corporation = CITY) in 1917… when the ‘campus’ was University Farm… a tiny outpost of UC Bezerkley.
I’ll give you that Woodland and West Sac would both be much larger than Davis, had UC not developed a full campus here. Your population for the CITY (not a “town”) in mid 60’s appears to be a factor of 2 low, but have no cites immediately available… Davis was pretty good-sized when I came in ’72, and they had out-grown the old High School, had developed Community Park.
Hunt’s came to town ~ 1964.
hpierce again you miss the forest for the trees – the University farm was started back in 1905 and you can mince my words all you want…but the fact remains……
if not for UCD albeit first known as the university farm there would still only be a davisville…
I visited many a time prior to choosing UCD over UCB in 1970 at the age of 17…..
my dad was the SF structural engineer in charge of Orchard Park…and some other buildings which are not being torn down…
my good friend, who started at UCD at least 4 years prior to that, shared with me that he finally left Davis after many decades here because of how disappointed at the changes of Davis….just last week, he told me that statistic from the mid 60s… of course…do I have time to fact check….
I have people like you who have way more time on their hands to “help out”….he he
This conversation is both speculative and not particularly helpful. How do we know that absent the university if Davis absent the progressive movement of the early 70s wouldn’t have taken on a totally different trajectory closer to that of Fairfield and Vacaville? Those two along with West Sac and Woodland have taken on much more robust growth than Davis even without a university. So this discussion diverts from the main conversation and isn’t helpful.
Marina is correct about UCD’s impact on Davis. Pumping billions into the local economy has been good for Davis. Without UCD Davis would be like Dixon. Fairfield and Woodland are county seats. West Sac is the bastard child of Sac like Kansas City, Kansas to Kansas City, Mo.
None of the communities people usually compare Davis to make any sense for comparison. Instead of Woodland, Fairfield, West Sac or Elk Grove, Davis should be compared to Irvine, Arcata, Corvallis, San Luis Obispo, Columbia MO. or Bellingham. Each of these places has issues similar to Davis and each has addressed them differently, some for the better some worse.
As for Davis remaining as it was in the past it has about the same chance as California returning to a population of 16 million as it had when I arrived.
Marina… Davisville becoming Davis had absolutely nothing to do with University Farm… the town became a City due to the recognition that they needed a more reliable water system, and something more than just volunteer firefighters… there were many fires in the downtown area in particular… the septic tank systems were inadequate, and a unified system of stormwater collection and disposal was lacking… none of those were related to the nascent campus.
We need a modern Galileo to help prove that UCD and its personnel are not the center of the universe.
I would be happy to be lumped with Tia. I’d pick Tia – with her thoughtful, considerate comments – over someone like you who buries your thoughts under a barrage of insults and offensive language and incorrect data.
Davis has been growing steadily since the 60’s, along with the rest of the State. Davis was not a town of 5,000 in the mid-60’s. Davis would still be as large without the University, but maybe have more industrial and commercial areas instead of a large University.
Bravo Ryan.
Population growth of Davis
Davis had a population of around 9,000 in 1960 and grew to around 24,000 by 1970. UCD became a general campus and started hiring faculty and accepting students in greater numbers starting around 1962. This was Davis’ greatest surge in growth by decade. However, the growth of Davis cannot be attributed just to the growth of the University in the following decades.
ohh gag me, Ryankelly….really…
thoughtful and considerate…still nonsense…no matter what lipstick you put on it.
PS> I used to be more thoughtful and considerate…I get little more feisty now…
thanks for the numbers…
In 1970 there was only Davis…not east, west nor south nor north…except for the little houses on the other side of the tracks..
there was my fave, willowbank…
as a very busy pre-med student, I didn’t watch statistics…I was too busy volunteering and protesting and heading to the bay to save the birds from the oil spills and so on…
Thank you for the “numbers”….I knew someone else would have more time, as I worked this morning and fought traffic to the Silicon valley for my business appointments tomorrow….
some may be happy to hear that my new place in the countryside outside of my Davis house has limited wifi options, so I cannot spend much time on the DV… have a good night 🙂
Now you are just making stuff up. Davis had west Davis and West Davis Elementary and West Davis Intermediate. We had North Davis Elementary. Valley Oak Elementary served the children across the RR track in East Davis. Then Pioneer Elementary opened in 1966 to serve students in South Davis.
…and Birch Lane.
That’s right. Two elementary schools to serve students in East Davis, plus the new Holmes Jr. High.
Some may.
“a barrage of insults and offensive language and incorrect data.”
You must be one of the low level types. Don’t you know that she’s too busy to fact check? or be civil…
I read the Sacbee article and agree there was not much new however we are getting close to the end of the suspension period so perhaps that was the reason.
What struck me was the number of PR type staff that were cited in the emails (do we need all those admin people?) and why would there need to be talking point documents for the Chancellor to answer questions she should just answer honestly? These were issues (Internet consulting company contracts, relatives’ hiring and promotions) that she should know how to answer honestly without PR help.
It would be interesting to know how the current numbers and salary total of ‘admin’ staff compare to the previous chancellor’s team.
The term is “empire-building”… the more admin staff, the larger the employee count and the more vassals you have… think the trend started LONG before Katehi, but it tends to have an inertia of its own.
SODA wrote:
> It would be interesting to know how the current numbers and
> salary total of ‘admin’ staff compare to the previous chancellor’s
> team.
This is not just UCD but it is amazing the UC was able to function “way back” in 2000
http://www.trbimg.com/img-56219465/turbine/la-me-g-adv-uc-spending-web/650/650×366
The same could be said of every politician ever.
Not sure, but wouldn’t surprise me if Chancellor = 1/3 manager/CEO of the campus; 1/3 politician; 1/3 fund-raiser…
I assume you have never read the position description of a chancellor, nor a CEO, nor a president of a company, have you HP? well, too bad….but it appears you are surprised by what you just posted….really????
No, I said I wouldn’t be surprised… wrong again Marina… but, I understand the notion of ‘don’t let facts get in the way of a desired narrative’… problem with understanding plain english?
Interesting comment BP; maybe that is the issue?
The point being why does anyone ever need their lawyer sitting next to them when they’re answering to an investigation? Why can’t they just tell the truth? Why do they need talking points. Do we ever hold others accountable for doing just that? So why now are we going to roast Katehi for doing exactly what others do?
yes BP…her integrity is being attacked, her livelihood is being taken away, and her future is in jeopardy by the illegal actions of the Napo …..does that not merit someone to be a support person to sit beside her???
while she was being grilled for how many hours???
the guys who beat up and killed a wedding guest not long ago had teams of people….and yet they were guilty as hell..
were they subjected to the hours on end, nonstop, that the Chancellor was for what???? not doing a piece of paperwork in time….and that was all a lie even…
so far investigations into the minutest molecules of the allegations into the Chancellors supposed “mistakes” have turned up not an iota of any wrongdoing…..
and yet, she is subjected to way more attacks than the gang members who ruined the lives of many that fateful day at Ket Mo Ree…
of course, those of us who have a clue are outraged at the continuing attacks, and the attacks still today….. and HERE>>>>
Hey BP, my comment was in response to the Sacbee article which describes emails about ‘talking points’ she could use when responding to some of the early issues (nepotism, Internet, etc). Didn’t have anything to do with a lawyer sitting next to her. To me that is different and agree, when under investigation, for sure have your lawyer advising you.
“So why now are we going to roast Katehi for doing exactly what others do?”
It is called individual responsibility. If someone breaks rules or acts unethically, it does not matter how many others are doing the same. Each should be held responsible for their own actions.
Earth to Tia, the conversation wasn’t about breaking the rules. It was about talking points.
[moderator] Edited. Presidential politics is off topic.
Everyone is paranoid they are going to say the wrong thing in the heat o f the moment. It’s not an unreasonable fear. Clearly the Bee would pressing hard and Katehi is not the best person on her feet, speaking.
She is an immigrant…likely English is her 4th or 5th language….
Yet, the Chacellor is a very caring and compassionate speaker…
English is my 4th language….lol… and yet, I know grammar and spelling…now typing is another story…
The Sac Bee has waged a jihaad against Chancellor Katehi over the past few months and it is now coming out that all they have managed to do is cost the taxpayers money and essentially eliminate the shreds of credibility they used to have. In short, they have become a scandal rag hoping to get attention. In 2006 they had a market cap of $1.19B, in 2016 it has fallen to $116.7M… at the same time UCD under Katehi has soared to becoming the leading job producer and revenue generator for the region. Perhaps there is a touch of jealousy going on here?
Sac Bee- let it go, you are embarassing yourselves.
I wanted to commend Council member Brett Lee for recommending the UCD-City 2 X 2 and explaining the need for it and for Council member Lucas Frerichs who then make clear his support of the concept as well understanding the need for it. Our City has needed this 2 X 2 with UCD for many years and it is likely that we would not be dealing with as serious a lack of on-campus housing if we had. That said, better late than never, and to our current Council’s credit as the discussion continued they all seemed quite supportive as a whole of the concept of a new City – UCD 2 X 2. Between the new City Council UCD LRDP sub-committee, and then having a 2 X 2 which would address non-LRDP issues, communications can only improve between the City and University so we can hopefully develop solutions by now having avenues for dialog.
As UCD Assistant Chancellor for Government and Community Relations spokesperson Marj Dickinson is quoted, she seems receptive and is inviting these collaborations to occur and her office would assist by helping to coordinate these discussions. This all sounds positive so we just need to move forward and get the dialog going. Also, it is clear that we need to have a long-term 2 X 2 into the future between the City and UCD to help resolve the housing issue problems, as well as have an ongoing conversation about solutions to other current problems, and to get ahead of evolving problems by addressing them before they become more difficult to resolve. So I am glad to see that our City is moving forward with organizing more communications with UCD which really needs to continue regularly into the future.
Eileen
I also see these as potentially very positive steps forward. And I also think that it is worth a thank you to you for your longstanding efforts to call attention to the responsibility of the University in the housing of students, faculty and their families.
Tia,
Thank you for the kind words. I think there are challenges but we need to get started with getting the conversation started on addressing these issues with UCD. Hopefully they are understanding the need for UCD to step up the provision of significantly more on-campus housing, particularly student apartments, to address their own growth needs since they have plenty of land on which to provide it.
“treating sexual matters in an indecent way and typically conveying undue interest in or enjoyment of the subject.” I seem to have missed the salacious details as the ones I have read about were allegations of greed, pride and mismanagement. Could someone please repost the dirty bits?
When I read about Katehi, Napolitano, and the other UC leaders, as well as their expected behavior, I wonder: If you are a woman, ethnic minority, or white from a poor background, is it reasonable to expect the rules to be the same for you, if you make it through the glass ceiling? I don’t think so. I think that just by getting there, you’ve changed the institution and the institution is changed. And, whether it’s fair or not, you are held to a different–and higher–standard of behavior. When the ceiling breaks, things change. Where our eyes and thoughts ought to be directed is on the future and what we want our future to look like, not lamenting that even though you tried to mimic the behavior of historical male leaders, you aren’t one of them.
MrsW
I think that you have made an interesting, and somewhat time dependent observation. I have been a doctor long enough to see the tide turn from women having to “be better” than their male colleagues to achieve the same level of advancement, to ( at least in Gynecology), men having to be better than women to achieve the same level. But there is a critical difference in having to be better in terms of competency and being held to a different moral or ethical standard. I completely agree that our focus should be on the desired future, not some imagined glorified or vilified past.
That’s the thing. To succeed in a workplace, a worker has to adapt to its culture. An insular culture can have characteristics of a club or fraternity. And some of those groups have normalized what I would call unethical behavior. I wonder how many outsiders, i.e. woman, ethnic minorities, and/or raised poor, step in it, believing their job requires it and they’re just “behaving like everyone else”. And I wonder, being more visible and different, how many have been caught because the rules are still different.
Delsohn: “We are the laughing stock of the world right now…”
April 16, Picnic Day. This is after the internet scrub story broke, an unprecedented number of legislators had called for Katehi’s ouster, the students had left Mrak, almost every news outlet in the world was covering the story and I was trying to start a pool on how much longer until Katehi was out. It seems that even her people in Mrak could see the writing on the wall and yes, UCD was at that moment a laughing stock. I suppose UCOP and perhaps some of the regents had also had enough. Less than two weeks later Katehi was out. What is good to know is that there are some people running the University who understood what it all meant.
Delsohn even nailed the part about the Sacbee, a dying newspaper, being revived for a day by breaking a story that went international.
BP
“Earth to Tia, the conversation wasn’t about breaking the rules. It was about talking points. “
Same principle. Different application. If there had not been accusations of various forms of “rule breaking” and or “missteps” there would have been no investigation and no need to use or not use “talking points”. I happen to see this lack of transparency as one of Chancellor Katehi’s biggest drawbacks. When faced with the option of making a full claim of responsibility for an error and outlining an action plan for change vs. dissembling, hiding, and distraction from the issue, she has nearly universally chosen the latter path.
[moderator] Nice try. No. Presidential politics is OFF TOPIC.
“A review of company filings shows the chief executive officer of UCSF Medical Center sits on the boards of two companies that jointly do millions of dollars of business with the hospital and have paid him more than $5 million in stock awards and cash fees over the past nine years.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Mark Laret has received the money from Varian Medical Systems of Palo Alto and Nuance Communications, a Massachusetts software company. He also earns a $1.6 million annual salary.”
“On Thursday, the UC Board of Regents will meet in San Francisco to weigh in on a plan to strengthen its policy on executives moonlighting, including how the extra work helps the university. The proposal covers only future cases and will not apply to Laret.”
How can this not be considered conflicting? Why is this being swept under the rug? Double-standard? The proposal only applies to future cases, really Napolitano?
The evidence is really piling up, Katehi has one heck of a case.
http://www.davisenterprise.com/local-news/associated-press/hospital-chief-paid-5-million-for-board-seats/
UCOP defended Katehi’s involvement with John Wiley and Son; stated that it was approved by the previous UC president. Janet Napolitano defended her Devry misstep as well.
These 2 incidents are not the focus of the investigation.
http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article74371162.ece/BINARY/UC%20President%20Janet%20Napolitano%20letter%20to%20UC%20Davis%20Chancellor%20Linda%20Katehi
BP
Again, this speaks to the appropriateness of the actions of Ms. Napolitano. It says nothing at all one way or the other about the actions of Chancellor Katehi. This seems like a relatively simple principle to me. I am having a hard time understanding how you do not see that each individual is responsible for their own actions and that poor performance on the part of Ms. Napolitano in no way exonerates Chancellor Katehi.
Just another example of UC administraters having outside board positions, which in this case amounted to $5 million dollars, which were deemed okay to have. How can Katehi then be reprimanded for doing precisely what the good ole boy’s club was doing? Not buying your two wrongs don’t make a right argument and quite frankly it’s getting monotonous hearing it from you.
BP
Unsure what you are saying. Do you think they all should be censured, in which case one would have to start somewhere, so why not with Chancellor Katehi ? Or are you saying that you do think that two wrongs make a right ? Or do you think that it is ok for people to act unethically as long as you allow everyone to act unethically ?
“Not buying your two wrongs don’t make a right argument and quite frankly it’s getting monotonous hearing it from you.” Maybe Tia and others wouldn’t repeat it so often if it wasn’t such a difficult concept for you to come to terms with. It appears that they’re actually concerned that you seem to think Napolitano’s wrongdoings exonerate Katehi from her own.
[moderator]Edited. Presidential politics is off topic.
Another commenter who appears to have trouble comprehending what they read. Where did I ever say that Napo’s misdeeds should exonerate Katehi?
Yup, that’s gotta be it.
If it looks like a duck…..
Gee, what happened to your comments? pffff…………
Looks like they got BP’d
It is always fun watching the liberal political class rock, paper, scissors card game.
The moves are the various victim classes: blacks, Latinos, women, poor, Muslims, LGBT, etc.
But each can trump the other with certain other cards.
And then there is the hard left social justice liberal “get out of jail card.” And the conservative card that means no other victim card will work.
For example, Katehi is a piece of paper… a woman and so she get that victim card, but she is white, wealthy and well-compensated. Too bad, so sad… she gets cut to shreds by the media scissors.
But what if she was a black, Muslim lesbian woman? Hmm… that might be enough to change her to a rock and smash those media scissors. Certainly if she was all or some of these things and had a sad life story being raised by a single-mother in poverty, recovered from breast cancer and working her way up to the pinnacle of male-dominated power… but she might be a conservative… and like Carly Fiorina…. none of that other victim card stuff means a thing.
Being a hard-left social justice liberal must simplify the challenge for evaluating true human character… it is just a rock, paper, scissors card game!
Almost as fun as watching conservative white males claim that they’re the real victims of the injustices in society. “Oh, woe is me!”
[moderator] edited.
Looking for an example. Do you have any?
[moderator] You guys know what the topic of this thread is, right?
I have been on track… I think you should direct your question to Loki
Frankly
I don’t know where you ever came up with such an absurd notion. I believe that you consider me a member of the left. And yet, I have consistently held that it is not her ethnic background, not her gender, not her linguistic strengths or weaknesses that matter, but rather her actions. And yet you trot out your silly “rock, paper, scissor” analogy. Equal actions should be treated equally regardless of the identity of the perpetrator. How is that difficult to understand ?
It is not difficult to understand, just not how it is done. “Fairness” from the perspective of a social justice liberal is assessed relative to the degree of victim card. She had a hard life. She is the member of a group that has been oppressed. She marches to the beat of the liberal drum. She made a mistake and we should all give her a break. No wait…she is none of things except “she”… .so off with her head!
Frankly
I don’t know where you ever came up with such an absurd notion. I believe that you consider me a member of the left. And yet, I have consistently held that it is not her ethnic background, not her gender, not her linguistic strengths or weaknesses that matter, but rather her actions. And yet you trot out your silly “rock, paper, scissor” analogy. Equal actions should be treated equally regardless of the identity of the perpetrator. How is that difficult to understand ?
Tia
You are not left . You are a an American doctor with the Scandinavian point of view .
Best to you
Jerry
If Tia isn’t “left” then God help us if and when the left takes over.
You can say that again Frankly!
Thank you for stating that straight up, Tia. Hard to believe Katehi supporters attempt to wheel out the gender or racial card to defend Kathei . It’s not even a good try, it’s just pathetic – as if once-maybe-poor Greeks are a class that is shat upon by other white people and deserve special treatment. Of course, your statement stands for oh so many situations way beyond this one.
Also amazing is the traction the Katehi lawyer fiction stories are getting in the Vanguard cyber-fantasy world. That of course will end once the U breaks its silence. Bye, bye Linda.
“Equal actions should be treated equally regardless of the identity of the perpetrator”
I read my own statement and realized that I cannot stand by it as written. I make two exceptions. Both involve those who cannot be held fully accountable for their actions. 1. The mentally ill. 2. Those whose brains are not fully developed ( children and adolescents). I do not believe that either applies within the current conversation.
bye bye Alan….and so long to anyone else who hides behind phoney names and their not so hidden agendas….
bye bye to anyone who still doesn’t have a clue..
I am on my way out of town on business and I may not have such great internet access where I am heading….
cya…and have a lovely time…
I am sure some of the others will carry on very well while I am away…
PS>> did I mention some stuff about what the Napo has on the Gov….I thought the Gov had some stuff on the Napo…..sighh…many things are becoming even more interesting…
perhaps Jerry would like to share – not yet…was advised against it…
oh well….look at the pet project of the Gov and then drive down I-5 and look at the myriads of new orchards and vineyards being planted next to the signs of lack of water, and how the gov is killing off farmers
I just did that drive a week ago….isn’t there a drought? doesn’t it take huge amounts of water to establish and plant orchards and vineyards….
why are those signs posted there and many thousands of acres of the highest water useage being planted…
drive down the country roads outside of Davis…head throughout yolo…and up and down Capay…highway 16 and tell me what you see…going in everywhere..
even old established orchards ( take much less water) are being killed with new trees being planted..
many faculty at EVE and Engineering speak out against the twin tunnels…
That is the gov’s favorite pet project…it will kill off the delta and the ecosystem….
and, it is not even needed…
just like Davis didn’t need the massive and hugely overpriced surface water project…
Dixon just dug a new well as they wanted to put in some new housing developments….
open your eyes and some things may become more obvious….