Pages

Saturday, November 12, 2011

A modest request for a little more (information on the hotel/conference center)

As a prior post on this blog noted, apparently the powers-that-be have a business plan for the new version of the hotel/conference center but – according to a letter in the Daily Bruin from the chancellor – they are reluctant to release it until some future Regents meeting. See http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2011/11/chancellor-says-we-need-patience.html

Perhaps the request below will encourage adjusting the timing:

As a prior post on this blog noted, apparently the powers-that-be have a business plan for the hotel/conference center but – according to a letter in the Daily Bruin from the chancellor – they are reluctant to release it. Perhaps the request below will encourage adjusting the timing:

Sent by email:

Faculty Association at UCLA

P.O. Box 33336

Granada Hills, CA 91394-3336

Nov. 11, 2011

Gene Block

Chancellor, UCLA

2147 Murphy Hall

Campus 140501

chancellor@conet.ucla.edu

Dear Chancellor Block,

On behalf of Dwight Read, Chair of the Faculty Association at UCLA, and the Executive Board, I am making a request for information as part of the California Public Records Act, Information Practices Act of 1977.

Please send a copy of the business plan for the proposed $152 million conference and guest center to be built at UCLA to the FA as soon as possible.

The FA understands that the business plan has not yet been submitted to the Regents for a vote early next year, but that is even more reason for the faculty to see what the industry experts have said about the proposed conference center before the Regents take a vote.

The address is:

Faculty Association at UCLA

P.O. Box 33336

Granada Hills, CA 91394-3336

Or email the plan to: ucfa@earthlink.net

Thank you for your attention to this request.

Sincerely,

Susan Gallick

Executive Director

Faculty Association at UCLA

ucfa@earthlink.net

Just a little more info. Is that so terrible?

2 comments:

cloudminder said...

also found it strange that when you mentioned the scope meetings in previous posts you always included an e-mail that attendees had to register at in order to attend- was/is that mandatory? is that in compliance with Bagley Keene?

California Policy Issues said...

At the actual meeting, the reception desk did check off the names of those who pre-registered. Whether they would have let in anyone who appeared without registering, I do not know. My guess is that anyone who showed up would have been allowed in since there were seats in the room available.