By Sean Raycraft
The wealthy and powerful play by a different set of rules than the rest of us. We see it manifest in the political world, the media, and the criminal justice system. The Linda Katehi affair is no different. Those of you who know me, know that I work for a grocery store. I am prohibited by the terms of my employment to seek further employment in the grocery industry, because it would create a conflict of interest. Clearly, those same standards of conflicts of interest do not apply to Chancellors of the UC system. Linda Katehi was (and still is) paid very well by the State of California taxpayers to be a public servant. In fact, her compensation package was well over $400,000. One would think that 400,000 a year of taxpayer money would be enough to buy the people of California a Chancellor committed to the mission statement of the University of California at Davis.
The mission statement of UCD is as follows, according to their website:
“The core purpose of UC Davis as a comprehensive research university is the generation, advancement, dissemination and application of knowledge. To that end, UC Davis is committed to offering leading programs throughout the academic disciplines and in its professional schools. These programs integrate three purposes: teaching students as a partnership between faculty mentors and young scholars; advancing knowledge and pioneering studies through creative research and scholarship; and applying that knowledge to address the needs of the region, state, nation and globe. UC Davis is committed to the land-grant tradition on which it was founded, which holds that the broad purpose of a university is service to people and society.”
One wonders how serving on the boards of for profit institutions like DeVry University and textbook giant John Wiley and Sons and being Chancellor of a public university is not a conflict of interest. Katehi received $420,000 in compensation from the textbook company. DeVry University was set to give her 70,000 per year in compensation. Both DeVry and Wiley and Sons have a legal responsibility to their shareholders to pursue profits above all other endeavors. How does that mesh with the mission statement of UCD? The pursuit of profit and the broad purpose of a university to service the people and society are mutually exclusive. Linda Katehi cannot both serve the interests of a giant textbook company or a for-profit university and the public interest, for which she is paid for by the public.
So why write this now? Linda Katehi’s lawyer yesterday publicly released a triumphalist statement, arbitrarily declaring her largely exonerated of all improprieties. I write this because I am offended as a California taxpayer by the cavalier attitude expressed by Ms. Guzman her public statement. At best, the former Chancellor’s actions were unsavory, or unwise. Both are traits unbecoming of a public servant who makes 400,000 a year of California taxpayer and student tuition money. While Katehi has resigned, it is important for citizens to remember just what occurred and why. How many of us who had so egregiously violated the mission statements of our places of employment be given such preferential treatment? How many of us would be given lofty titles like Chancellor Emeritus and a six figure, tenured position? I think the vast majority of us would be tossed out on our butts and told not to complain about it. The rich and powerful always seem to win, even when they lose.
The whole Katehi affair has been a symptom of a wider disease. People who work in the public sector ought to serve the public good, and not to improve the bottom line of private enterprise. The Katehi scandals have only come to light after intense public protests, including a sit in that lasted more than 30 days. The local and national media were also not friendly to the now Chancellor Emeritus as well. Let’s also not forget that she probably should have been fired after the pepper spray debacle. Special rules for the rich and powerful right?
But what has all the protest and media attention done? Katehi will still be wealthy and influential on campus and in the Capitol halls. The conditions that allowed her to explore employment opportunities that violate the public trust still exist. How many other UC Administrators have similar employment or obligations? Why do highly paid UC Administrators even seek such employment? Why do they get to play by a different set of rules than the rest of us? When can the UC return to the mission of furthering human knowledge and servicing the public good?
I would like to see UC students and UC Workers and faculty be involved in the search for a new Chancellor. Students pay the high tuition rates, which pays the salaries of all these highly paid administrators. The workers and faculty are the people who make UCD the institution that it is. They deserve a say in who runs this institution. I would also like to see the new Chancellor as someone whose primary goals in life are not personal enrichment, but the furthering of human knowledge and progress. But mostly, I would like a Chancellor who plays by the same rules as the rest of us.
Sean Raycraft is a lifelong Davis resident, and a proud shop steward
Good article. I especially agree with your last four sentences.
P.S. I also wonder why a highly paid person needed a second job.
“While Katehi has resigned, it is important for citizens to remember just what occurred and why.”
I completely agree. The question goes far beyond the actions of Linda Katehi. I hope that this will only be the beginning of a broader look at the practices of all of the high level administrators of the UC system and the policies under which they are acting. I see this entire sad affair as an opportunity for the UC system to distance itself from the use of high level academics from private wealth generation and a return to its primary mission of education in the service of the public.
oh, gag me, Sean….truly????
and, you truly think that for $70K and so on….that is why she was doing the DeVry board…how about she cared for and wanted to help those who are being taken advantage of – the students…..
how about she was shocked to hear about that but thought she could help right the organization…..
really, this time…your union side is coloring observation of the obvious…
For those who are not aware, the paid protestors hanging around her office bringing up the pepper spray incident 5 years after most had moved past, were paid union protestors trying to put focus on the Chancellor and such as the union contracts for most staff were in negotiations as they were expiring..
that is why they were there…to cause havoc and such… and put the focus on campus money issues and such…
and, ask me why I know all of these tactics so well??? anyone????
“put the focus on campus money issues”
I believe that this is exactly where focus should be put. Do you not think that there should be focus on how public monies are being used by a public institution ?
“you truly think that for $70K and so on….that is why she was doing the DeVry board…how about she cared for and wanted to help those who are being taken advantage of – the students…..”
If this were true and the $70,000 did not matter, then why did she not decline the fee or better yet, contribute it towards student funding ? Her actions with regard to her board engagement would certainly suggest that the profit from these activities certainly did matter to her.
she announced she was donating $200K to students – oh how fast, Ms. Will, you forget….and that was announced before the investigation.
edit
Actually, she said that she would donate the proceeds from $200,000 worth of Wiley and Sons stock. Not the actual $200k. So, if the stock yields 5% per year, she was donating $10k per year. A donation to be sure, but less than what you suggest.
Wiley and Sons stock (JWA) doesn’t pay any dividend so there are no yearly proceeds.
As a Sacramento assemblyman called for her to resign Friday, UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi apologized for accepting questionable corporate board positions and pledged to give $200,000 in textbook company stock to a scholarship fund for UC Davis students.
Katehi, 62, was initially under fire this week for taking a board position last month with DeVry Education Group, a for-profit company under federal scrutiny for allegedly exaggerating job placement and income statistics. She resigned that post Tuesday.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/the-public-eye/article64041327.html#storylink=cpy
“she announced she was donating $200K to students – oh how fast, Ms. Will, you forget….and that was announced before the investigation.”
And has not yet been done. Nothing to forget since no action has been taken and the fund not established.
Paid protesters? I know those folks. If you mean they are paid by the sandwich shops they work at then I suppose they are paid. But they are certainly not paid for protesting. Thats ridiculous.
did you know every single one Sean…. some were very old and which student could sit in protest for weeks and still go to classes?
perhaps some of the older grad students, but wouldn’t that be shocking that the UC paid for them to sit outside the Chancellor’s office and cause havoc…while getting stipends?
finally, some actually destroyed public property and then a few of the students cleaned up after them…saying they felt bad for the custodians….
I know many of them very well, and I know the leaders especially. You implied they were paid protesters, as in they were paid by some outside group to protest. That is a clear falsehood. Who exactly would pay people to do such a thing? Some of them are grad students, who draw a stipend from the University, but protesting certainly is not in their job descriptions. The protesters also took steps to make sure the custodial staff was not burdened by their presence. They steam cleaned the floors of the room they were occupying, and made sure the area was kept clear of any refuse, and they made arrangements to help the custodial team after the fact in case there was anything they missed.
Sean wrote:
> The wealthy and powerful play by a different set of rules than the rest of us.
The “wealthy” do have the advantage of being able to afford good lawyers, but the people that get the most special treatment are the the “connected” and “powerful”. When (Republican) governor Schwarzenegger cut the sentence of the killer kid of his friend (Democrat) Nuñez it was not because the kid (or his Dad) was wealthy it was because the Dad was “connected”.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/03/local/la-me-arnold-pardons-20110103
> I am prohibited by the terms of my employment to seek further employment in the
> grocery industry
Are you just prohibited from seeking a “second” job in the grocery industry, or “any” other job in the grocery industry? If a courtesy clerk at your store ran in to a member of the Stille family in town would they be prohibited from asking what they paid courtesy clerks over at Nugget looking for a “new” job or are they only prohibited from seeking a “second” job (like night stock clerk) at Nugget?
> I would like to see UC students and UC Workers and faculty be involved
> in the search for a new Chancellor.
So would I, but it will never happen. The powerful and connected will chose the new Chancellor without any input at all from the rich or poor that are not powerful and/or connected….
actually, this is all a lie….students and all stakeholders are on the committees and were when Linda Katehi was chosen and will be on the new search committees…
ALL campus and off campus were invited to seminars, and meet and greets and such….and input was solicited and anyone with an interest could have sent an email or a memo and etc…
She had broad support of ALL constituents who cared enough to spend the time needed and participate….
And, guess what, she still does…of all who supported and many who only showed up in more recent years…..
Marina wrote:
> actually, this is all a lie….students and all stakeholders are on the
> committees and were when Linda Katehi was chosen and will be
> on the new search committees…
Do you really think that some students on a committee can stop the powerful and connected from picking the chancellor that they want?
P.S. If Katehi was “helping” DeVry for $70K was she giving John Wiley and Sons even more “help” for $420K?
P.P.S. To Highbeam, unlike Rich I don’t have an AP stylebook on my desk but shouldn’t all dollar amounts have a dollar sign in front of them?
SOD, I do not normally edit guest articles, but Sean would probably not object. I see the omission of his $$$ marks as reflecting his conversational stating of simply the numbers, as we do not always say the word “dollars” when listeners know what we are talking about. I can hear him saying the word “dollars” in some places but not necessarily in all places.
Sean, let me know if you do want the $ signs inserted. –ca
By all means please fix my grammar lol.
The only thing that is prohibited is actually having 2 jobs in the industry. So you couldnt work for both companies at the same time. I should have made that clearer.
I see….actually, Sean, did you know that Alex worked for the Nugget when he was 16? they had way better benefits and rules and regulations than any of the union shops in town..
He left after a while due to various reasons…but he even could have insurance et al.
At some point, certain things became too expensive…and then the Nugget had to lower what they could do for their employees…and at some point they said well, we are just matching what the unions do in town..
They got too big and yet, they still have not ever laid anyone off….that was from a few years ago…so may not be accurate.
Withe the advent of Obamacare, that actually hurt a lot of people and now there are way more temp jobs under the number of hours where Obamacare kicks in…
New hires at TJs no longer get medical…and so on..
I am sharing this as I thought you may be interested in some of this ancient history…often things are done that were supposed to help workers, and actually make things work.
The premise that there are different rules for the wealthy and powerful don’t really work in an an educational institution like the UC…. while they may be more appropriate for industry and especially large corporations.
At the UC, most rules apply to all and very few extra perks or such no matter what the standing…
Usually the only thing one can truly be “caught on” is not having done some piece of paper on time or at all…often it is because the policies are so vast that one may not even know that a piece of paper is due….
And, that is where competent managers and staff come in.
I have also shared that before on other Katehi threads.
I have always been fond of you and I look forward to that tea we were going to have together.
Truly, there is always way more to everything…it is never all black and white and yet when passions are strong, things happen..and postshots are taken and sides drawn…it is a shame, as in this case, we all lost someone truly good and yet, it won’t be apparent for some time still…
She will go down as the Chancellor who did the most for the campus, and got hung out to dry for her efforts..
I dont bear any malice towards you Marina. Reasonable people can disagree without being disagreeable. The decline of the power of unions in general has been bad for the working class as a whole. The decline in working standards at nugget is a good example of this.
Somehow I doubt this very much. I think she will be remembered for pepper spray, corruption and scandal, and it would be right to remember her as such.
the advent of unions at UC caused more issues than they helped, Sean…
and, yet, I don’t expect any of that to be clear to you yet…
and, they still do…I have lots of specifics I could share with you sometime, but that is not why I am looking forward to sharing tea..
you may find my life in the 60s fascinating, and you may find that even today, you and I are on the same page of many causes..
today my younger son was upset with me…said “why do I spend so much time on so many things”…he doesn’t get it…
you will…
enjoy your evening Sean, and if you see the folks, say hi…for now, I am still in the same house but we are selling and moving to the countryside…would already be living there, cept for a few problems…
I will likely buy a smaller place in Davis, which won’t hold so many bad memories…and will be way cheaper and less stress to upkeep…I may wait until after the next correction…
PS> I thought the issue was that it was not a “good enough” company therefore the UC didn’t want to be known as trying to help them.
that was what the real issue was, I was told my many higher than me on that totem pole…
it was an “embarassment”….and so on.. that she stuck her neck out because she thought she could help..
and, yet, it was not against any policy….
but somehow it was construed that she should have shown “better judgement” and stayed away due to investigations???? hello, why would that scare someone who is trying to help and make it better????
Time to move on Marina. I’ve written Linda a personal email to thank her for her extraordinary service to UCD. Not sure if she will respond but nevertheless I hope you will do the same.
Good advice David. Hopefully the witch hunters will move on, they already got their prey.
I left Emily a voice message, and a personal email from my personal account and a text on her non UCD cell phone……she will share with Linda..and the rest of Linda’s family…
Since the Napo instituted the NSA at UCD….I no longer send anything sensitive on UCD channels…and since we have the new digital phone service, I no longer leave any sensitive voice messages anywhere either.
Linda is exhausted after the witchhunt, but this is truly only the first battle of many…
And, your help is going to be needed even more as other things come to light…
And, in the meantime, there is a reason to continue to set the matters straight on this “blog forum”… don’t know yet what the reasons are, but it is never a waste of time to correct inaccuracies and lies, especially on such public forums..
You and some others may understand as time progresses….and hopefully those that don’t get it, will move on to other matters, then you, and I, and BP won’t have to waste so much of our valuable time here trying to set matter straight…
enjoy the day…
I don’t have all the information you have, but if you take the lead, I’ll for sure follow.
well, DavidSmith, and anyone else interested..
you know how to find me… I always use my real name, sometimes to the horror of family, friends and especially in the last months, higher ups at UCD>…
I am on leave, trying to rest and relax, on “vacation” until my retirement date..
I may not retire now, there are many reasons why not….
But, my replacement is hired and I don’t really have a job now to go back to..
I was planning on working with the Chancellor upon her return… now that is not an option…and though I like Ralph, I don’t have that connection with him..
I don’t want to deal with the “application and interview” process…..done with that..
and, I no longer need the money, but I cannot walk past any injustice or cause without being compelled to try to help…..
there are other personal reasons, why I am not ready yet to retire….
I still have my UCD phone number, and my UCD email, though do not leave anything sensitive…if you leave a number or a personal email address I will contact when I have decent wifi…
wishing everyone here the very best…..that includes the new friends I have made, and even the shills….you also served a purpose…we won’t yet know what…
Marina
You have not yet addressed two issues that I see as relevant.
1) What about the judgement involved in her participation in KAU ? Is it your position that she thought she was going to improve that institution?
2) If the money from these boards was not an issue for her, then why did she not set up a student fund with these funds right from the beginning? Or why did she not donate her time the way those further down the economic “food chain” do ? I know many, many doctors, nurse practitioners, Certified Nurse Midwives, PAs, nurses and medical assistants who donate their time and knowledge to the education of future medical professionals and are not compensated a single dime for their help in “making things better”. None are nearly as well compensated as was the former Chancellor.
do your own research, edited
[moderator] You need to stop all personal attacks on other Vanguard participants. I urge you to address issues and stop replying to others directly.
why? she addressed me directly and I responded directly???? and why did she she not get told not to address me directly? am I missing something??????
Marina is correct on this point. In the interest of fairness, if not clarity, I will stop addressing her directly.
Good article Sean. Katehi is only the tip of the iceberg and they need to take a very hard look at the UCSF Medical Center guy and the rest. The growth of the university administrator class is one of the most alarming trends in higher education. I would reference Voltaire “in this country, it is good to kill an admiral from time to time, in order to encourage the others”
quielo wrote:
> The growth of the university administrator class is one of the
> most alarming trends in higher education.
It is scary how fast the “administrator class” is growing.
http://www.trbimg.com/img-56219465/turbine/la-me-g-adv-uc-spending-web/650/650×366
what is the date of this?
and yet, the biggest change happened a few years ago, when the UC took positions just the next step over me (MSO IV it was called) and lumped many new people into into Senior Managers”….
I didn’t qualify as I was paid too low…and yet, each year I sign off on a document where I swear as a ” Senior Manager” that everything my department did all year was totally by the book and that we didn’t do a single improper thing so help me god….and the Napo and everyone else who could come after me..
no s–t…that is what I had to sign starting some years ago…and everywhere else I am a lowly mid range PPS staff employee…
“People who work in the public sector ought to serve the public good, and not to improve the bottom line of private enterprise.”
Amen.
amen but how does that apply in this situation? she doesn’t appear to have done anything in that regard that was improper. the report actually cleared her on most of that stuff and you have at most her improper reporting of use of money (which they claim did not result in personal gain or university loss) and on devry she didn’t get permission first before seeking permission. all of that is largely procedural.
amen but how does that apply in this situation? she doesn’t appear to have done anything in that regard that was improper. the report actually cleared her on most of that stuff and you have at most her improper reporting of use of money (which they claim did not result in personal gain or university loss) and on devry she didn’t get permission first before seeking permission. all of that is largely procedural.
So, theres a little to unpack here. Consider these statements, and assess their worth. The Chancellor has a duty to pursue the mission statement of the university. (Which is to further the public good) This public good includes the welfare of all UCD students, including their financial well being. DeVry and Wiley and Sons are for profit, publicly traded enterprises, who have a legal obligation to their shareholders to pursue profits over all other intentions. The mission statement of UC Davis is incompatible with the motives of these for profit entities, and therefore the Chancellor could not in good faith be loyal to the University and the companies she was hired to work for.
The point is that the Katehi taking those positions and money from DeVry and Wiley and Sons is inherently unethical, regardless of what official UC policy is. She has a duty to serve the public interest, and is well compensated for that service. The mere fact that she considered, and then took the money from these institutions is bad enough. It shows how she spends her time, and what her priorities are. Was she thinking about helping UC students when she decided to take money from a textbook company? Or was she doing it for the $420,000 and personal enrichment? At *BEST* its an example of extraordinary poor judgement.
actually, the Chancellor and many faculty on campus have been working with Wiley to put more things online, reduce costs for students, etc…have smaller updates annually rather than new textbooks and so on…
that was one of the missions well known on campus to accomplish…and it is hard to do when the publishers are entrenched in paper volumes and wanting books to be redone annually etc..
in fields that change so rapidly it is harder to do.
in fields where there are fewer students, like in Engineering, economies of scale play against cheaper books..
MMG and CBS were working very hard to reduce book costs for students…and I know that was also a goal of the Chancellor..
Many of her meetings with Wiley were along those lines and progress was being made..
too bad, she got attacked for that
Justic4All
As a faculty member, I do work with publishers a lot. As I mentioned before, if I’m to write a textbook in my field of expertise, my first choice would be Wiley. You seem to have a strange attitude toward publishers. How do you suppose our students get textbooks without publishers? Your comment exhibits no reason or logic.
Its true that I have a measure of animosity towards textbook companies. I think they over charge for their books, and that students (as always) are the ones who bear the brunt of these excessive costs. The Chancellor being on the payroll of a for profit textbook maker is what offends me. She cannot in good faith represent the needs of the students and the public good, and the shareholders of Wiley and Sons. The two interests are inherently at odds at one another. I dont blame Wiley and Sons for seeking advantage, that fits their mandate of expanding profits. Katehi on the other hand is a totally different story.
I agree with DP here.
And this comment is too over-simplified to be of any value.
As the Chancellor of a world-class public research university her leadership role key accountability should be to focus on both what is good for the university and what advances academic access and excellence in general. It is those leaders that seek to enrich themselves at detriment to their key accountability that need to be held accountable.
The point of compensation is separate.
I think some people get their underwear all twisted and in a bunch over personal envy over financial success and bypass the actual assessment of conflict of interest. For example, what if a Chancellor is advising a major book publisher on working to make textbooks more affordable as a strategy to gain market share and improve their bottom line? That advice would be valuable to the publishing business while also meeting a high performance expectation for the key accountability of advancing academic access. But then, because of the class-hypersensitivity of those liberal arts types that loath pursuing a career that actually pays a reasonable salary, we forbid the chancellor (who by the way is 62 and has has a long career to establish leadership mastery of the subject matter) from receiving any compensation for that extra work, then we also probably destroy some of the incentives for doing the extra work that could benefit a large constituency.
I think much of the attacks on Katehi reflect a more general national conflict that is rooted in emotional tirades over personal economic circumstances. It is part of the class-war primary promulgated by the political left of politics. Those against Katehi appear to be the type that recoil against private business, capitalism, free enterprise and an economy that tends to reward STEM mastery over artistic mastery. These are the anti-competition types. Those of them that have money are racked with guilt and join in advocacy of a sort of self-mutilation and self-flogging of their economic circumstances. They attempt to act like a poor person. Low-materialism they say (while conveniently ignoring their significant real estate holdings).
The problem with this army of class-envious and guilt-racked low-materialism folk… they are destructive to the whole. They will only be made happy when everyone else grovels at their low-economic achievement life-style. But it pushing what is a misery-loves-company policy direction, they will be made even more economically miserable.
Here is what they are missing.
A robust, growing economy with lots of successful and well-off people means more customers that will purchase art.
A Katehi working to advance STEM research into actual products and services in the private economy is a benefit to all.
She wasn’t the enemy. She was a convenient target that was lynched by an upset demographic that tends to pour gas on its own flames of discontent.
“what if a Chancellor is advising a major book publisher on working to make textbooks more affordable as a strategy to gain market share and improve their bottom line?”
And why exactly could she not do that for free, or donate all of the proceeds from her work to a fund for students ? Do you suppose that Wiley would have turned her away if she had chosen to provide free advice or donated the funds ?
Happily submitted without one trace of guilt.
There are no truly selfless people. Every human pursues their own self interest unless forced to do otherwise by someone in a more powerful position. It is human nature. Once you accept that you will have your answer.
and why would she do that, when she could earn $200K to give to student scholarships? in her tax bracket, for fed and state, that $200K is more than what she would take home…after the $400K “earned” for her hard work on her “spare time”….
why not take the money from publishers and give it to the students?
I challenge anyone here to give a good reason why not…
(besides the obvious one of “no good deed goes unpunished”…..)
in this case, the loss of her UCD job….sighhhhh
I think that the Chancellor Emeritus Linda Katehi’s saga is far from over. Napolitano is in Charge and Linda Katehi is in UC Davis . It is not going to work. One of them has to leave to end this ethnic cleansing which is being monitored by the Statue of Dr. Martin Luther King in UC Davis King Hall . Napolitano got herself into mess with Katehi which most likely was created for her by the UC Davis ollie Steven Drown who had been fired by Katehi in 2013 and resigned to the UC Office of General Counsel Charles Robinson in Oakland. Vendetta.
Linda Katehi has nothing to do with the wealthy and powerful play as the article imply . Linda Katehi was and is an unwelcomed outsider who did not fit the UC Davis old boys and girls club philosophy and profile “ Black is Beautiful’ but White is Right.
Sean, thank you for writing this and countering the Katehi-apologist wave.
Four Years, Eight Months, and Twenty Days . . . that is how long it took for us to get rid of Linda Katehi after the Pepper Spray incident of November 18, 2011. All that happened in between is mere noise. The important finality is that SHE IS GONE!
“Dancing, dancing, dancing in the streets! Dancing, dancing, dancing in the streets!”
Alan
I did not know that your are the Donald Trump’s supporter. Hmm. Ay Carrrramba !
Alan just confirmed what many have been saying all along. This wasn’t about any current wrongs, it was payback for the pepper spray incident. At least AM is honest about it.
It’s somewhat more complex than that. I think the pepper spray incident factors in and creates the baseline for people’s view of Katehi. The latest events added on top of that and for a lot of people pushed them over the top. That said, Alan is in a small group that was probably fire Katehi before the latest problems – but I think that group is relatively small.
BP
No possibility in your mind that different individuals could have different motives ? Gee, didn’t know that Alan Miller was so powerful as to control my feelings and actions.
I don’t know, Alan is a very persuasive guy especially when he’s wearing that Tank the Tank t-shirt.
The salary Katehi received is not all that unusual today. Several months ago the Wall Street Journal published a report on university presidents. (The title of “president” is seemingly used at most universities, whereas UCD uses the title of Chancellor because it is part of a system headed by a “President.”) The article profiled the president of Michigan State Univ, one of the highest paid presidents in the country. (I believe she gets about $475,ooo., more than Katehi got.) The article explained that the listed salary is in many cases just the starting point. Many of the presidents have contracts with provisions for performance bonuses, especially as it relates to meeting fund raising goals. Some have contracts that provide for highly faculty positions upon retirement, and positions for spouses. And of course, there’s housing and a car. My problem is not so much with the salary, but the proliferation of other high level, highly paid administrative positions at UCD. Universities did not have so many administrators–regardless of pay–when I attended college and grad school in the 1970s. I’ve also heard through the grapevine that Katehi discouraged planning and spending for on-campus student apartments, thereby intensifying the impacts on Davis resulting from students being forced to find their own housing after freshman year. There did not seem to be any shortage of funds for facilities such as the new art museum and international student center. I hope the next Chancellor charts a new course for the campus Long Range Development Plan (LRDP). The current draft expects to only house 40% of the 2027-28 enrollment of 39,000 on campus. The other 60% will be looking for scarce housing in Davis, Winters, Woodland, West Sacramento, Dixon and beyond.
Most public sector “business” is top-heavy with bloated compensation at the upper ranks. The problem is a lack of mandated operational transparency and a lack of mission-based performance requirements for leadership… together that lead to crappy business outcomes.
From a business perspective UCD is failing. It continues to raise tuition much faster that the rate of inflation without any commensurate increase in customer value. It fails to admit enough resident students, and it fails to facilitate an adequate supply of housing for students. Lastly, it failed to partner with the city to help secure adequate space for technology transfer.
It’s “successes” have been those things that might stoke the egos of UCD management and the alumni, but it is like a big tech company being lauded for building a new campus while the cost of their products skyrocketed without them adding any compelling new features. The difference being that UCD business gets propped-up by State government income that the tech company would pay.
The entire focus of UCD leadership needs to change… to one where everything is directed toward the welfare of the current and future student. In fact, the entire US system of education needs to similarly change.
It isn’t the high compensation of UCD leadership that is the main problem here. It is the high compensation of leadership in consideration of their failed performance.
but the Chancellor’s performance was exceptional…according to her Chancellor 5 year review (done by the Napo and approved by the Regents)…and also her merit/promotion process…so what is meant by “failed performance”… not sure who you are referring to here Frankly…
Big Sis is just another of those in failed leadership.
actually, those real “failed” performers, like the Napolitano, sometimes manage to get rid of their underlings ( like Chancellors) ie: those who are more brilliant and cause them a few problems by not cowing down to their “authority”…..if the Napo hates anything, is those who don’t cow down to her…
and, as proof, why was the Academic Senate in an uproar about the Katehi issue, and many other Napo “led” issues over the recent year?
overwhelming support by the Academic Senate on this campus and even other campuses for the Chancellor and against the Napo……there are many reasons and I have tried to share them on many a thread…..
this is why I say what I say sometimes….and why this battle is done, unfortunately for UCD and UC, and faculty, staff and students….though this just means the war is starting…
Frankly
It is the rare day that you and I see an issue eye to eye, but I agree with your post entirely.
Agree, entirely.
“The entire focus of UCD leadership needs to change… to one where everything is directed toward the welfare of the current and future student. In fact, the entire US system of education needs to similarly change.”
This is applicable to other institutions, as well. Change “student” to “customer,” “client,” “patient” or just “person.”
OMG…!
Complete agreement with Tia and Biddlin!? I feel like hugging someone or a tree or something politically and environmentally correct!
and, who is Highbeam? I thought only Don Shor was a moderator..
I would be happy if someone would fix my typos and wordos….
I was always an abysmal typist…and often a few minutes to proof is not enough when I am responding to many things simultaneously, waiting on hold, etc…
Don Shor is the only moderator. Highbeam is our volunteer copy editor for the articles written by David and the Court Watch interns. The rest of us are on our own.
I see…..sometimes there is not enough time to edit when one is multitasking….it would be good to be able to go back and edit later….
I hope that some of these latest answers to some of the questions clarify why faculty and administrators agree that these were non-issues…
For those who were dancing in the streets, you can take personal pleasure to realize that your actions will now result in over $200K in student scholarships no longer being available to be funded…
Unless the Chancellor choses to continue trying to right things on the book issues, she won’t have those excess funds.
I would also bet that she has blown through any such “savings” from the prior years to pay the legal costs, which likely are in that range…
Keep dancing, pals……