The Davis Equestrian Program: Running the Clock

As blog readers will know, we have been interested in the UC-Davis decision to cut its equestrian team.* It's not that your truly has any special interest in horses. But what strikes him about this story is its similarity to the tale of the Grand Hotel (Luskin Hotel and Conference Center) at UCLA back in the day. As really long-time readers will know, that tale began with a decision that appeared to have been made BEFORE a faulty report had been prepared that supposedly justified the project. That faulty report - along with a push-poll that was intended to show popular neighborhood approval of the project - was so bad that the notion of demolishing the Faculty Club (now University Club) to make way for the hotel had also to be abandoned.

But the project itself was simply moved to the center of the campus and then justified by a business plan that was withheld from public view until it had to be given to the Regents. The Regents initially rejected the campus plan - which itself is very rare action. But they eventually approved a modified version. The moral of this story seems to be that once the powers-that-be commit to an idea, even if flawed, it's very hard for anyone in authority in campus administration to admit error. Egos are involved, if nothing else. In one form or another, the project goes forward. The parents protesting the equestrian termination at UC-Davis are (re)discovering this lesson. From SFGATE: 

It was an otherwise calm Friday in January when UC Davis officials called the equestrian team into a meeting with almost all of the school’s athletic administration in attendance, alongside sports psychologists. At that moment, Zadie Stack, a sophomore at UC Davis from Santa Cruz, sent a distressing text message to her mother, Jen Landes: “Oh my god, Mom, I think they’re going to cut the team.” Landes could hardly believe what she had read. The UC Davis equestrian team was in the midst of an undefeated season in their conference, and was ranked No. 7 in the nation at the time. They won back-to-back conference championships in 2023 and 2024, won again in 2026, and took part in the NCEA national championships in 2019 — their inaugural season — and 2024. It was a celebrated program that gave her daughter a chance to continue the sport she loved closer to home after transferring from the University of Tennessee at Martin. The athletes themselves couldn’t even imagine the possibility as they entered their team meeting room.

...But moments later, the unexpected became reality: After eight seasons as a varsity program for the Aggies, UC Davis Equestrian would be relegated from its status as a Division I sport and only be supported at the club level. Along with this stunning announcement, Trimble said that Davis’ athletics department told the women on the team not to fight this because it’ll be a lot harder for them if they do. This was presented as an open-and-shut case of simple accounting, a cold but calculated decision made after “detailed financial analysis and an independent assessment of the national competitive landscape,” the school said in its initial announcement on Feb. 17. And in line with how other colleges across California have handled the aftermath of cutting college sports teams in recent years, UC Davis leadership is refusing to do interviews about the topic. UC Davis spokesperson James Nash declined to answer SFGATE’s request for an update about the program’s status. 

But in April, the school acknowledged it is reviewing its own decision to cut the team after others accused the school of manipulating the numbers it used when making the decision. And now, only days remain until the program officially ceases to exist, with no word from the school on the status of that review. That there is this waiting period at all is because of the Aggie student-athletes and their parents, who formed a group called Keep Davis Riding to keep pressure on the school and the athletic department. From the start, many in the group felt the school’s explanation didn’t add up. Whether that was because one parent was still getting fundraising calls for the program shortly after this news broke or because the school allegedly wouldn’t let the public see the data Davis referenced in its meeting with the student-athletes, they felt there were plenty of reasons to be suspicious.

UC Davis released a third-party report from Atlanta-based firm Collegiate Consulting that it used to inform its decision to cut equestrian on Feb. 17, about six weeks after the student-athletes learned they were losing their team. However, since Davis is a public school, it is subject to public records laws, and parents were able to receive additional information about the decision around that same time. And what the parents discovered only raised more red flags.

The most damning information they received in the documents, which the group shared with SFGATE, was that the athletic department began to consider cutting equestrian nearly a full year prior to its announcement. The university had tasked athletics with making a 10% cut to the department’s budget (approximately $1.05 million), and the athletic department said in March 2025 that cutting equestrian would supposedly save the school $1.02 million. After a few months of deliberation, the official decision to cut the program was made in August — five whole months before the school informed the student-athletes — pending an external review.

In an emailed response to SFGATE..., Nash said the “final decision” to cut the program wasn’t made until “shortly before” the Jan. 9 announcement. Documents SFGATE reviewed show a Dec. 18, 2025, email from athletic director Rocko DeLuca discussing the “previously aligned campus direction” about cutting the equestrian program and detailing precisely how UC Davis planned to message the decision on Jan. 9, a full 22 days later. In the cutthroat world of college recruiting and the transfer portal, both the students currently on the team and rising high schoolers recruited to Davis were left in the dark about the school’s plans for weeks, if not months...

But when the parents looked deeper, they found what they felt were major flaws in the third-party report, which compared data to schools without equestrian programs. Collegiate Consulting counted the value of donated horses as part of the overall cost of the program at Davis. It also failed to account for out-of-state tuition as part of the revenue that the program brought into the university. By the parents’ estimation, some of the costs were off by hundreds of thousands, and were reportedly 10 times higher than Fresno State, the only other California school with an equestrian team... 

But when the parents looked deeper, they found what they felt were major flaws in the third-party report, which compared data to schools without equestrian programs. Collegiate Consulting counted the value of donated horses as part of the overall cost of the program at Davis. It also failed to account for out-of-state tuition as part of the revenue that the program brought into the university. By the parents’ estimation, some of the costs were off by hundreds of thousands, and were reportedly 10 times higher than Fresno State, the only other California school with an equestrian team. 

...When presented with these concerns, UC Davis announced on April 3 that an independent auditor would review the initial report it based its decision to cut the team on. But Keep Davis Riding wanted to independently confirm that their conclusions, and math, were sound. They hired an independent firm called OSKR to do their own audit of the report. OSKR’s audit claimed the value of the donated horses was, in fact, counted under the program’s expenses for $665,000. Another expense was the boarding fees that the team paid the university, which should have been considered an “internal transfer where the expense item burdened by the team is a revenue item for the school,” the OSKR analysis said. Davis also reported that the team’s direct overhead costs in 2024 were 45 times its average from 2019-2023, and the Collegiate Consulting report did not consider coaching salaries when comparing expenses to other Davis sports, OSKR said.

UC Davis reportedly overstated the equestrian team’s expenses by more than $850,000, more than double its actual amount, OSKR argued. UC Davis had initially claimed the equestrian team was second among the school’s 25 sports teams in terms of per-athlete spending. But without the overstated amount, OSKR’s audit said the equestrian team was actually 15th. 

...Initially, the parents felt equally vindicated in their efforts and hopeful that this could, in fact, be the final push to help save the program. But the celebrations could only last for so long. ...[The] announcement of an audit was 86 days ago, and UC Davis Chancellor Gary May told the school’s student newspaper, the California Aggie, “It’ll be completed by the end of June.” But the school continues to provide no update to the status and, when asked by SFGATE when it expects to publish said audit, school spokesperson Nash said, “We’ll release it to you once it’s public.” 

The end of June also marks the end of the athletic school year, meaning the program will be officially demoted after June 30. According to Trimble, who served as an officer for the team, just three of the 40 riders were able to transfer to another program, leaving the remaining 37 without a D-I team to compete on and, in some cases, a scholarship...

Full story at https://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/uc-davis-cut-equestrian-22317870.php.

It appears, in short, that that administrative strategy in this case is to run the clock and thus "win" by default.

===

*https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2026/06/want-of-horse.html.

Faculty Club Transition

As faithful blog readers will know, years ago this blog was instrumental in opposing a plan to replace the Faculty Club with what is now the Luskin Hotel, which was instead built where a parking structure stood in central campus. Ultimately, the hotel was built elsewhere. We will be watching the developments described below closely.

====

November 7, 2024

Faculty Club Members

Dear Colleagues,

In October, I sent an email to members of the Faculty Club detailing the serious financial issues facing the Club and affecting our operations. I also described the intensive efforts of the Board to secure a new and viable organizational structure that would sustain us into the future. Now, I am pleased to announce a new partnership with UCLA’s Housing & Hospitality (H&H) in managing the Club’s food and beverage services, as well as its meetings and events program. This has involved close collaboration with Human Resources. Under this new model, the Faculty Club will continue to serve its core purpose and will retain its General Manager and elected Board of Governors. Food and Beverage, and event and meetings services will be managed by H & H. Yesterday, November 6, I shared the news about the pending changes in the operations of the Club with our staff and how it will affect them. 

Under the direction of Peter Angelis, Assistant Vice Chancellor - H&H, manages a wide range of business operations, including the Luskin Conference Center and the extensive student residential facilities on the Hill, known for their award-winning food service and dining operations. These operations are so well regarded that the facilities have been selected as the site for the 2028 Olympic Village. Peter and his team have been working with our General Manager, Andrea Curthoys, and members of the Board to make a detailed assessment of every aspect of our Club’s revenue and operations.

I want to stress that this new operational model is not a “takeover” by the Administration. In fact, Administrative Vice Chancellor Michael Beck and Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Steven Agostini have been fully supportive in helping us confront our situation and in envisioning a sustainable future for the Club. We are fortunate that H&H is willing to help find operational efficiencies that could ensure the Club’s future viability. We are working on these details now. To ensure a smooth transition, the Board established a Transition Team led by President-Elect, Victoria Steele, that has been working through the operational details, with an implementation date of January 1, 2025.

We are excited about this partnership and remain committed to transparency as we navigate this new model. I understand that many of you may have questions regarding this partnership and the potential changes to the Club. I am available to answer any questions you may have, either via email or in person. Due to circumstances beyond our control, we will be having our planned All Members’ meeting via Zoom on November 14th at 4:30 to introduce the partnership and answer questions. Peter Angelis also will attend.* In December, we will host a reception to honor the Club’s past and the many members who have supported it over the decades.

Even with these operational adjustments, the continued success of the Club depends on the support of UCLA faculty and staff to secure the Club's future.

On behalf of the Board of Governors, thank you for your membership, for your continued support, and understanding.

Sincerely,

Linda Sarna

President, UCLA Faculty Club

===

*Members will have received the Zoom link.

Faculty Club Concerns

There was a general meeting of the Faculty Club yesterday, in-person and on Zoom. Yours truly tuned in, but a few minutes late. There is interim leadership through August 31 at present at which point a presumably newly-elected board and president will take office. Exactly what led to the turmoil in leadership was unclear. However, the Club was reported to have a large, but diminishing operating deficit. There was a loss of membership due to the pandemic and the period when the Club was closed for renovation. The Luskin "Grand Hotel" has taken business that would otherwise have gone to the Club. (Surprise, surprise, and more evidence that the Grand Hotel was a low priority for the campus which already had sufficient meeting space.) 

During the Q&A session that followed the formal presentation, it was noted that the Club didn't apply for the forgiveable pandemic "loans" from the federal government that might have provided a revenue source. It was not explained why. Was the Club not eligible? 

Anyway, with the help of new leadership and the new general manager, hopefully the Club will see its way to a sustainable budget situation.

And More on the Way We Live Now

With the Regents meeting at UCLA's Luskin Hotel later this week, look for some kind of spillover from around higher ed into those meetings. (See also earlier posts on this blog.) When yours truly used the public comment segment over the summer - there are three of them on the agenda this time - security was extremely tight with police presence, metal detectors, etc. And that was well before the current war had broken out. 

More on goings on from other universities below:

Harvard to Add Antisemitism to DEI After Ackman Criticism

By Janet Lorin, Bloomberg

November 10, 2023 

Harvard University President Claudine Gay responded to criticism by students and alumni including Bill Ackman that the school isn’t doing enough to protect Jewish students, saying it would expand its diversity program to combat antisemitism. The Ivy League university has come under intense criticism that started the day of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel. More than 30 student groups issued a statement that blamed Israel for the attack and not Hamas, which is classified as a terrorist group by the US and European Union.

Since then, protests at Harvard by pro-Palestinian groups have included intimidation, online messages and shouts of “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Shall Be Free,” Ackman said. In a letter to Gay posted on X over the weekend, the hedge fund manager described the situation on the Cambridge, Massachusetts, campus as “dire” after meeting with students and faculty. “Our community must understand that phrases such as ‘from the river to the sea’ bear specific historical meanings that to a great many people imply the eradication of Jews from Israel and engender both pain and existential fears within our Jewish community,” Gay said in an email to the Harvard community Thursday. “I condemn this phrase and any similarly hurtful phrases.”

Harvard has heard from furious alumni who have threatened to stop donating — from billionaires like Ackman to dozens of alumni who have pledged $1 and condemned Harvard’s failure to address the campus culture. In response, Gay has issued multiple letters denouncing antisemitism, formed an advisory group and planned to create training for students, faculty and staff on antisemitism broadly and at Harvard specifically. She attended a Hillel dinner and posted comments on her web page.

In her latest message, Gay also addressed an incident on the Harvard Business School campus on Oct. 18 that is being investigated by the FBI and the Harvard University Police Department. Videos circulated online show what appears to be Harvard students harassing a Jewish student during an anti-Israel protest. “Consistent with our standard practice, once law enforcement’s inquiry is complete, the University will address the incident through its student disciplinary procedures to determine if University policies or codes of conduct have been violated and, if so, take appropriate action,” Gay wrote.

In addition, Gay said the school will “build on the initial steps taken” by the its diversity, equity and inclusion office to more fully integrate antisemitism into the group’s work. The university will also examine how it might strengthen scholarship on antisemitism, she said. Ackman had asked for immediate responses, and in a post Friday, slammed Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for failing to discipline protesters who violate their rules, further emboldening those to more “aggressive, disruptive and antisemitic actions.”

‘This has created a climate of fear that is not conducive to a university education,” Ackman wrote on X. “The failure to discipline students who have bullied, assaulted or otherwise been abusive to Jewish students under the guise of free speech or a supposed requirement to wait for the completion of a police and FBI investigation is similarly absurd.”

Ackman included a post from MIT Professor Retsef Levi* who wrote of continued harassment on his campus, including protests supporting Hamas, despite the administration setting guidelines to avoid “unsafe protests on campus.”

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-09/harvard-to-add-antisemitism-to-dei-policy-after-ackman-criticism.

====

*https://twitter.com/RetsefL/status/1722852140245254559.

If we can't shrink the room, maybe we could have smaller students...

Affordable housing?

We'll be reviewing the Regents meeting of this past week as time permits. But here's a piece on part of the meetings from the LA Times: 

UCLA has been planning the best deal in town for student housing: a new residence hall featuring shared living, study and socializing spaces with most rooms going for just $600 a month — 66% below projected market rates in the pricey Westwood neighborhood where the campus is located. But the eight-story, 545-bed project hit a roadblock Thursday, when the University of California Regents deferred a vote on its budget and design after raising crucial questions about whether the rooms were too small and what potential impact that might have on student mental health. The planned space is 265 square feet for three beds, desks, closets, storage space and a refrigerator.

“I don’t want to call these jails,” Regent Hadi Makarechian said during finance committee discussions Wednesday, “but ... these aren’t really good dorms.”

Regent John A. Pérez noted that research has found that “micro-units” have been linked to negative mental health effects. When a UCLA official said he was trying to keep costs down for low-income students, Pérez took umbrage at the implication that “for poor kids, this density is OK.” This prompted an apology from the official, Pete Angelis, UCLA assistant vice chancellor of housing and hospitality.

Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, an ex-officio regent, lamented the trend of “smaller and smaller” spaces as campuses cram more students into rooms to address the affordable housing crisis.

“It really is worrisome,” she said. “What it comes down to is your efforts to use every square foot of land to produce space for as many students as possible. But there is a limit that can get us to the point where students can ... really experience negative mental health impact by the way that they’re being asked to live.”

The regents asked UCLA to come back with more information comparing the project’s room size and cost per bed to others across the UC system, along with student feedback on their living spaces. They will reconsider the project in November...

Full story at https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-09-22/uc-regents-question-small-room-size-of-new-ucla-dorm-delaying-approval.

If past history is any guide, there will be some modification and reframing and the project will be approved. At least, that was the history of the UCLA Grand Hotel (at which the Regents met) when in was up for approval, as long-time blog readers will know.

Watch the Regents Health Services Committee: April 12, 2023 (& see Regent Pérez annoyed by a UCLA project)

The Regents met last Wednesday at UCLA's Grand Hotel. During public comments, the topics mentioned included disabled students, UC-Berkeley safety issues, the $500,000 hike in the UC-San Diego's chancellor's salary, Blackstone, affordable housing, divestment from gun manufacturing, a $25 minimum wage for UC health support workers, and management practices at UC health. There was a demonstration in favor of the minimum wage that temporarily disrupted the proceedings.

After public comments, the committee approved an executive pay matter for UC-Riverside health. It also approved a partnership with Children's Hospital of Orange County for pediatric congenital heart surgery. It was said that although the hospital was in the territory of UC-Irvine, this particular arrangement was narrowly based on talents only available at UCLA. There was then a general review of COVID noting the decline in hospitalizations and deaths.

The next item was a discussion of the creation of an Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy at UCLA by an unnamed and somewhat mysterious group of donors referred to as the "founders group" who insist that a new building will be necessary for the Institute. This project was said to be started pre-pandemic, but it then was delayed by the pandemic. The governor was including funding over a period of years in his budget, but now is proposing a more spread-out release of the funds due to increased budgetary stringency.

Regent John Pérez - whose background was in the state legislature - said he has been approached by unnamed legislators who are upset about not being in the loop regarding the project. He indicated that the Regents don't know at this point who the "founders group" is and they, too, have been out of the loop. He effectively tried to shut down discussion after the presentation by UCLA representatives. (Chancellor Block was among them.) One regent did succeed in asking a question about where the proposed building would be. Apparently, there are preliminary alternative plans to have it located roughly at the southeast area of the campus east of Westwood Boulevard and just north of Le Conte. After that question was answered, Pérez declined an offer to see a video prepared by UCLA about the project and ended discussion. He seemed annoyed that funding for a project would be included in the state budget without the regents knowing anything about it until now - and apparently still in the dark about the "founders group.".

The final discussion involved affiliations with religious hospitals and abortions in cases of emergencies at such hospitals.

---

We continue to preserve recordings of Regents meetings indefinitely since the Regents apparently have no policy regarding how long they will maintain them online. You can see the meeting at:

https://archive.org/details/regents-health-services-committee-4-12-23.

Munger Hall or Munger Hell - Part 3 (International Edition)

As can be seen above, the story of the UC-Santa Barbara dorm has gone international; it has now arrived in the British publication, The Guardian. You can read that version of the story at:

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/nov/04/torture-experiment-architects-appalled-windowless-student-megadorm

However, the headline pretty much gives you the tone of the article.

So, there is an interesting question. Will the Regents kill this proposal? As we noted in an earlier posting, the closest the Regents ever came in recent times - 2012 specifically - to stopping a campus-level capital construction project was UCLA's Grand Hotel. And yet, in the end, after slamming the project and embarrassing Chancellor Block initially, at a later meeting they blessed it.

Yours truly, after the initial regental blocking (pun intended!) - but before the Regents later approved - predicted that in the end they would approve it. You can hear and see that presentation - a report to the UCLA Emeriti Association board - at the link below (which contains excerpts from the Regents meeting):

https://archive.org/details/PresentationOfDanielJ.b.MitchellOnUclaHotelconferenceCenterProjectTo

(If you have trouble seeing/hearing it using that link, try a laptop or computer rather than an iPhone.)

An (audio) recording of the full Regents initial meeting about the Grand Hotel is at:

https://archive.org/details/UniversityOfCaliforniaRegents3-28-2012Part2

Listeners will note that then-Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom - an ex officio Regent - was one of the skeptics.*

There are some differences between the Santa Barbara dorm and the UCLA Grand Hotel:

*The donor in the Santa Barbara case is paying for only part of it. In the case of the Grand Hotel, the donor promised to pay for project in the future and UCLA borrowed against that project.

*The donor in the Santa Barbara case - Charles Munger - has made himself the issue by insisting on designing the project himself and generally coming across in interviews as an obstinate old billionaire grouch. 

*The Santa Barbara project has received far more adverse external publicity than UCLA's hotel. It's hard to imagine that the Regents are unaware of the negative PR related to the Santa Barbara project.

*Santa Barbara actually does need more dorm capacity and is getting bad publicity for not having enough capacity to house admitted students. UCLA's need for a hotel in the midst of the budget crisis that existed back in 2012 was, to be charitable, less obvious. Santa Barbara's "business plan" for the dorm - in the sense that dorm fees will cover operating costs - will likely be more credible than what UCLA presented to the Regents.

*The existing Santa Barbara dorm plan - with its very high population density and limited exits - raises severe safety issues, unlike the Grand Hotel.

Still, it's (apparently) hard for the Regents to say no to something a campus chancellor absolutely wants. Doing so could be seen as a vote of no confidence in that chancellor and chancellors are regental appointees.

====

*There were also (negative) public comments about the UCLA hotel project in the public comments section of the initial Regents meeting. You can hear those comments at:

https://archive.org/details/UniversityOfCaliforniaRegents3-28-2012Part1

starting at about minute 15:07. Not surprisingly, Westwood area hotels objected to competition from a state-funded enterprise, i.e., from UCLA.

Munger Hall or Munger Hell - Part 2

Our Halloween blog post dealt with this matter.* But the discussion continues:

Architect slams UC Santa Barbara mega-dorm as ‘social, psychological experiment,’ quits in protest

Los Angeles Times (Christian Martinez)

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-01/uc-santa-barbara-mega-dorm-slammed-architect-quits-in-protest

 

Editorial: Donors should give to universities with no strings, not dictate their look or academics

Los Angeles Times (Editorial Board)

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-11-02/editorial-donors-should-give-to-universities-with-no-strings

 

Opinion: Why the mega dorm at UC Santa Barbara will be disastrous for student life

Los Angeles Times (Dennis McFadden)

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-11-01/ucsb-megadorm-santa-barbara-charles-munger-design

 

Opinion: Dear UC Santa Barbara: Don’t let a petulant billionaire build a prison dorm on your campus

Los Angeles Times (Carolina A. Miranda)

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2021-11-01/charlie-munger-designs-uc-santa-barbara-windowless-dorm-billionaire-prison-dorm

 

Here's what it's like to live in one of Charlie Munger's windowless dorms

CNN (Ramishah Maruf)

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/02/business/munger-residences-michigan-windowless/index.html

 

Munger on controversial UCSB dorm: Fake windows are better than real windows (Video)

CNN (Matt Egan)

https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2021/11/02/munger-hall-ucsb-dorm-controversy-gr-orig.cnn

 

Planned windowless dorm at UC Santa Barbara stirs controversy

EdSource (Carolyn Jones)

https://edsource.org/news-updates#planned-windowless-dorm-at-uc-santa-barbara-stirs-controversy 

========

*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2021/10/munger-hall-or-munger-hell.html.

========

Comment: At the end of the day, if a UC chancellor gets fixated on having some large, externally-funded capital project go forward, it eventually happens. Even if regents express doubts, it goes forward. Long time readers of this blog will recall UCLA's Grand Hotel as our campus's runaway train.

Seems like there was a movie along these lines:

Or direct to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A02F0InR-dw.

UCLA Lockdown

From an email circulated late this afternoon:

Dear Bruin Community:

As you may be aware, the California Department of Public Health has introduced a regional stay at home order (PDF) and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has implemented a targeted order (PDF) aimed at curbing the latest surge in COVID-19 cases and preventing hospitals from being overwhelmed.

Importantly, under these orders, all gatherings of any number of people outside your household are prohibited, with few exceptions. Additionally, as previously announced, a curfew is in place for Los Angeles County and many other California counties from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. daily.

As we continue to embrace our shared responsibility for limiting the spread of the disease, we encourage all members of our Bruin community to abide by these regulations: Remain inside your homes as much as possible, avoid contact with others outside of your household and wear a face covering when you must be outside of your home, including while indoors and outside at UCLA facilities.

Because the vast majority of on-campus activities remain scaled back, the new directives should not lead to major changes in our operations, but we will temporarily cease any ramping up of on-campus activities, effective immediately. Key areas that will be affected are:

• Research. On-campus and field research activities that have already been approved through the Vice Chancellor for Research’s research ramp-up plan will be able to continue, according to the terms of the approved research operational plans (ROPs). New researchers can be added to approved plans so long as the total number of personnel in an approved ROP does not increase. Approved ROPs must be amended to reflect new research personnel. Instructions for modifying an approved ROP can be found on the Research Operational Plan FAQs (PDF). With very limited exceptions, review and approval of new on-campus or field research plans is suspended until further notice. For more information about research operations, email c19@research.ucla.edu.

• UCLA Meyer & Renee Luskin Conference Center and Lake Arrowhead Lodge and Conference Center. While the regional stay at home order is in effect, only people associated with essential activities are permitted to stay at these facilities. Previously made reservations for stays involving nonessential travelers will be canceled and refunded.

Most other on-campus activities — including the limited in-person courses and remote courses taught by faculty who are coming to campus — have been determined to be essential operations and will be able to continue as such. As we have throughout the pandemic, we will keep you apprised of how UCLA is affected by future regulations related to COVID-19.

In the meantime, please visit the UCLA COVID-19 Resources website and Bruins Safe Online for the latest information. If you have any questions, please email covid19@ucla.edu.

Thank you for your continued partnership and resilience during this very trying time.

Sincerely,

Michael J. Beck

Administrative Vice Chancellor

Co-chair, COVID-19 Response and Recovery Task Force

Michael Meranze

Immediate Past Chair, Academic Senate

Professor of History

Co-chair, COVID-19 Response and Recovery Task Force

Listen to the Regents' Afternoon Sessions of Sept. 16, 2020

We'll now go back to the Regents meeting of last Wednesday afternoon (Sept. 16) which featured meetings of the Governance Committee, Academic and Students Affairs, and Finance and Capital Strategies.

The Governance Committee was a routine approval of various items heard in closed session, notably pay for the chief investment officer. In Academic and Student Affairs, there was initial discussion of racial issues and then the meeting largely turned to discussion of the impact of the coronavirus crisis on student learning. 

There was a cautionary note by one regent about the Learning Management Systems (LMS) offered by various commercial providers. A suggestion was made that if UC, CSU, and the community colleges bargained in coordination with such a provider, more leverage could be had. (Exactly how much value such systems add was not evaluated.) 

Finally, there was related discussion of the A-G course requirements for entrance into UC in high school. UC has a program, which includes an online component, called UC Scout which is supposed to supplement or aid offerings by school districts.

In Finance and Capital Strategies, some projects were given routine approval. However, a dorm project at UC-San Diego - the theater district project - ran into trouble, with Regents' questions somewhat reminiscent of what went on when UCLA proposed its Grand Hotel.  Apparently, the project is located near the La Jolla Playhouse. There were questions about financing including about the general financial condition of the campus. Documents given to the Regents included confusing exhibits with tables which didn't seem to add up. Concerns were raised about the potential litigation from neighborhood groups that were opposed. 

Committee chair Makarechian said he could not vote for the project, given current documentation. He suggested that clearer documentation be provided at the next meeting of the Regents in November. UC-SD's chancellor said that if the approval was delayed by two months, the project would be set back a year. That assertion was debated. Finally, it was agreed that the campus and UCOP should come back to the next day's meeting with a figure of what it would cost to keep the project intact until November and it would be approved.

Another UC-SD ran into trouble as well. It involved the creation of a shell corporation that would allow a UC-SD extension building to benefit from a federal tax credit. Several Regents found the device to be an unseemly gimmick and abstained. However, the endorsement by the committee passed.

You can hear the various committee meetings at the link below:

https://archive.org/details/governance-committee-academic-and-student-affairs-committee-9-16-20

===

We again note 1) a change in the Blogger system does not allow embedding of a player, although the link above will take you to the site of the recordings, and 2) we provide audios of the meetings because the Regents preserve their recordings for only one year. There is no apparent reason why they cannot preserve them indefinitely. The one time yours truly inquired about the one-year policy he was told that the Regent do it because CSU does it. (Perhaps CSU does it because the Regents do it.)

What to do with the Grand Hotel in the fall

Yesterday, we posted some history of UCLA's Grand Hotel.* And we noted that the hotel now sits in a campus which is currently in a lockdown mode. Current plans are to have some kind of reopening in the fall. When yours truly perused the fall quarter course offerings, he couldn't find any that were not online, but supposes that there must be some. Still, reopened education in the fall will consist mainly of students in dorm rooms doing online education.

Given the fact that reopening in the fall is a "done deal" (as was said about the hotel when it was proposed), there is a problem with student housing. The existing dorms were not meant for social distancing and isolation. To maintain such distancing, dorm capacity will have to be cut. So where will the excess of students go? Well, there are 250 rooms in the Grand Hotel, all with wireless capacity. Those rooms could house 250 students. The Grand Hotel also has some food preparation capacity. Conference rooms might be reconfigured into student rooms with some work.

In short, use the Grand Hotel as a dorm. As they say, if you are stuck with a lemon, make lemonade.
==========
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2020/06/anyone-want-grand-hotel.html

Anyone want a Grand Hotel?

Coronavirus time is not a good time to be in the hotel business for all the obvious reasons. It is particularly not a good time to be in the hotel business on the UCLA campus which is currently shut down. Even the Regents, who - after expressing severe doubts about the project when it was proposed - did their best to use the space there for meetings, are now meeting online.

Of course, there never was any good reason for UCLA to be in the hotel business, even pre-coronavirus. And those who recall the origins of the project will know that it was originally proposed as an even grander edifice right next to Murphy Hall as a replacement for the Faculty Center. After a major fuss by the faculty, the edifice was somewhat downsized and moved near Ackerman where the chancellor is now spared from looking at it.

The other thing about the coronavirus crisis is that there are lots of online streaming webinars and Zoom presentations available for those locked into their homes. So we present our own contribution to this art form: "UCLA's Grand Hotel - From Macro to Micro" as presented to the Emeriti Board by yours truly back in 2012:

or direct to:
https://archive.org/details/PresentationOfDanielJ.b.MitchellOnUclaHotelconferenceCenterProjectTo

UCLA Anderson Forecast still suggests a slowing state economy

The UCLA Anderson Forecast met yesterday morning in Korn Hall of the School. It projects a somewhat more robust national economy - slowing but not as much as forecast last September. The national economy spills over into California, which also is still projected to slow. No recession is projected, but it was noted that there is always some probability that events could occur that would trigger a downturn. Although state revenue was not discussed, projected slowing in the pace of economic activity could put some constraints on the budget.

From the official media release's section on California:

The improvements in the national economy, along with associated optimism in the national forecast relative to the past few quarterly reports, have made a positive impact on the California economy. The key word is “relative,” as it would be a mischaracterization to call the latest state forecast much of an improvement.

“Since national economic growth is slowing at a slower rate than the forecast three months ago, the California forecast is now slightly stronger than predicted last September,” writes UCLA Anderson Forecast Director Jerry Nickelsburg.

To be clear, however, “slowing at a slower rate” is still slowing.

Nickelsburg’s analysis, thus, is largely one of perspective. On one hand, growth in California is slowing. On the other hand, this is, in part, because unemployment rates are very low.

“Therefore, it follows that the rate of hiring should slow down,” Nickelsburg writes. “Through April of this year, that had not happened. Indeed, the rate of hiring for non-farm payroll jobs increased by 0.2 percentage points from 2018’s hiring rate. At some point, capacity constraints become binding, and with the October job numbers in place, there are indications that [the slowdown in hiring] has occurred.”

According to Nickelsburg, the economic news remains positive, in spite of trade tensions between the United States and China. As an example, the July 2019 countywide unemployment rates from Marin to Santa Clara counties are below 2.2%; from Sonoma through the East Bay are below 2.7%; and in Southern California, Orange and San Diego are at 2.8%.

In 2020 and 2021 California’s total employment growth rates are forecast to be 0.9% and 1.3%, while payroll jobs will grow at rates of 1.9% and 0.9%, respectively. These reflect the stronger growth in payrolls over the last year, even while total employment growth was weaker.

“Home building will be lower by about 5,000 units in 2020 than previously forecast,” Nickelsburg writes, “but we remain optimistic with regard to 2021 new residential construction.”

Weakness in home building, even with the new eased regulations and zoning, means that the prospect of the private sector’s solving California’s housing affordability problem over the next three years is nil, he writes.

Full release at http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ucla-anderson-forecast-upgrades-outlook

Note: As always, the photos remind us of the availability of conference venues in many locations around the campus. The Regents - when they meet at UCLA - always now use the UCLA Grand Hotel and have yet to ask for an outside accounting of how it is doing in meeting its business plan. Yet, as long-time readers of this blog will know, the hotel project was controversial at the Regents when proposed. We will keep reminding folks of this failure to follow through.

We also like to point to the UCLA Anderson Forecast...

...first, because it gives a sense of where the state economy (and, therefore, the state and UC budgets) are going, and second, because it demonstrates that large facilities are available for conferences around the UCLA campus (apart from the Grand Hotel). Here is a summary from the official news release:

Stopping just short of predicting a recession in the U.S. through its 2021 forecast horizon, the UCLA Anderson Forecast, in its third quarterly report of 2019, expects the national economy to slow to 0.4% in the second half of 2020, before rebounding to 2.1% in 2021. Given the slow growth rate nationally and the weakness in the housing market, the Forecast expects California's unemployment rate to rise to an average of 5.1% in the fourth quarter of 2020. For the entire years of 2020 and 2021, the unemployment rate in the state is expected to average 4.6%...

Full text of release at: https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/news-and-events/press-releases

Possible Trump Jam Today

President Trump will be landing at Santa Monica Airport today and going somewhere from there. Usually, the somewhere is fundraisers in places like Beverly Hills and Bel Air - which means potential traffic disruptions around UCLA.

President Trump to Use Santa Monica Airport Tuesday: Military presence expected around SMO

By Sam Catanzaro, 9-16-19, Santa Monica Mirror
https://smmirror.com/2019/09/trump-to-use-santa-monica-airport-tuesday/

President Trump is expected to use the Santa Monica Municipal Airport (SMO) on Tuesday, September 17 and in preparation for his visit, the City of Santa Monica anticipates military helicopter activity at and around SMO on Monday, September 16 and Tuesday.

Trump is in California Tuesday for several fundraisers in both Los Angeles and the Bay Area. Geoff Palmer, the real estate developer and one of the president’s biggest donors, is hosting a Los Angeles fundraiser for Trump.

Very few details have been made public about Trump’s visit to California, a state where his approval rating is under 40 percent according to a poll released by the Public Policy Institute of California.

As Airport staff release additional details about potential street closures as a result of the visit this article will be updated.

===
Apart from possible disruptions from the presidential visit, the Regents are meeting at the UCLA Grand Hotel starting today and continuing Wednesday and Thursday. So there could be some on-campus traffic issues.
===

UPDATE: The Trump visit largely will be felt this evening in areas near UCLA, possibly affecting some late commutes:

7 to 8:30 p.m. Tuesday

The area around Bundy Drive between Airport Avenue & West Pico Boulevard
The area around Sunset Boulevard between South Sepulveda Boulevard and Bedford Drive (Beverly Hills)

8 to 9 p.m. Tuesday

The area around Sunset Boulevard between Bedford Drive and South Sepulveda Boulevard (Beverly Hills)
The area around West 9th Street between the 110  Freeway and South Flower Street
The area around South Figueroa Street between Olympic Boulevard and West Sixth Street

Beverly Hills street closures
5-9 p.m. Tuesday

Sunset Boulevard between Ladera and Beverly Drives will be intermittently closed (suggested alternative east/west routes: Santa Monica, Wilshire and Olympic boulevards
Benedict Canyon Drive between Sunset Boulevard and Mulholland Drive will be intermittently closed (suggested alternate north/south route: Coldwater Canyon Drive)

Source: https://www.dailynews.com/2019/09/17/trumps-la-visit-is-closing-these-downtown-streets/

Competition for the UCLA Grand Hotel

Competition for the UCLA Grand Hotel

From the Bruin: A new hotel opened in Westwood this month.

Palisociety, a real estate development and hospitality operating company, opened the Palihotel in Westwood Village on May 8. The Palihotel occupies the same building as the former Claremont Hotel, which was established in 1939 and was the first hotel in Westwood before it was sold in 2017.

Palisociety has four other Los Angeles hotels in West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Melrose and Culver City.

Palisociety founder Avi Brosh said in an email statement that the company chose Westwood as its location due to the neighborhood’s historical appeal and the atmosphere surrounding it.

“When this unique, historic building found its way to us, we knew it was the right opportunity to bring the Palihotel brand to the neighborhood,” Brosh said. “Along the way, we’ve found so many new things to love about the area and are happy to be a part of the community.”

Brosh said he thinks Westwood offers tourists and UCLA families a convenient place to stay.

“We also think Westwood is a hidden gem for leisure and business clientele coming to LA to explore the city and hope we can attract people to the neighborhood to see it in a whole new light,” Brosh said.

Andrew Thomas, Westwood Village Improvement Association executive director, said he thinks the Palihotel is part of a trend of new hotels opening in Westwood Village. The number of hotels in Westwood has risen from two to five since 2011, Thomas said.

Thomas said the Claremont Hotel was originally zoned to be outside of the Westwood district, which meant it could not receive services or benefits from the WVIA. The association is looking into whether the zoning for the building has changed since the Palihotel opened, he added.

Thomas said he thinks the Palihotel will benefit the Westwood community whether or not it is zoned within Westwood.

“They’ve obviously put a lot of money, thought and energy into developing a great use, and I think that helps us all,” Thomas said. “The more development, attention, money and energy that we have that comes into our district, the better off I think we are.”

...Brosh said the Palisociety hotel seeks to offer an inviting place for UCLA students and parents, as well as to tourists and those who desire to travel the city.

Full story at http://dailybruin.com/2019/05/22/palisociety-hotel-opens-for-ucla-students-families-in-westwood-village/

Something to think about - Part 2

Back in late April, we reprinted an op ed from the Daily Bruin complaining of the "hotel empire" that has been built up at UCLA.* So, in fairness, we reprint the empire's reply:

This is a letter responding to the Opinion column titled “Mind Your Business: UCLA hotels detract funding from more pressing issues, compromise local business.”

The purpose and function of UCLA facilities, like the UCLA Tiverton House, the Guest House, the Lake Arrowhead Conference Center and the Meyer and Renee Luskin Conference Center, is to support UCLA’s mission of education, research and public service at a lower cost than other alternatives.

UCLA Tiverton House, for example, provides affordable and convenient lodgings for Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center patients and their families, making it possible for them to stay close to the hospital when support and proximity are most needed.

Far from amounting to a hotel empire, as the columnist claims, facilities like Tiverton House support the families of patients undergoing treatment at UCLA’s medical center by providing more affordable lodging – its purpose isn’t only humane, but also an integral part of the university’s public service mission.

Similarly, the UCLA Guest House – which has been operating since 1985 – serves the campus’ recruitment needs and accommodates visiting scholars and guest speakers who enrich students’ education. It also supports medical patients and visiting administrators from other University of California campuses, among many others.

UCLA acquired the Lake Arrowhead Conference Center in 1985. Since that time, the property’s summer alumni camp and conference programs have grown significantly. The Bruin Woods summer alumni camp is arguably the most successful in the country, customarily selling out every day for the entire summer quarter, with more than 250 waitlisted families who wish to participate; it’s a summer tradition that has become an annual touchstone experience for so many, some of whom have returned each of the past 35 years. In addition, the property has hosted 345 UC conferences in the past five years alone.

In the same vein, all conferences at the UCLA Luskin Conference Center must have an eligible educational purpose, and its guests need to have legitimate educational or business reasons connected to UCLA in order to stay at the facility. The center has allowed UCLA to host a wide variety of compelling events on campus that would otherwise not have been accessible to as many students, faculty and staff.

Almost two-thirds of the business at the Luskin Conference Center comes from academic conferences and 40% of all guests are recharged travel – meaning UCLA departments are able to save money and have their visitors conveniently located on campus.

All of these properties have employed a large number of student staff, who develop service industry skills that can be useful as they pursue a variety of career paths. Roughly 300 to 400 students work for UCLA Housing & Hospitality Services in any given year, and many eventually join the management team pursuing career options within the department.

Providing guest housing and conference centers is a growing practice at top universities. These facilities allow campus departments to use the savings for other academic and campus needs. Also, true to its public mission, UCLA uses the net income from all of these facilities to retire debts or make ongoing property and programmatic improvements, with the goal of better accommodating the needs of our campus, alumni and visitors for generations to come.

Pete Angelis, Assistant Vice Chancellor of UCLA Housing & Hospitality Services

Source: http://dailybruin.com/2019/05/06/letter-to-the-editor-ucla-hospitality-facilities-further-universitys-public-service-mission/

===
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2019/04/something-to-think-about.html

Something to think about

Mind Your Business: UCLA hotels detract funding from more pressing issues, compromise local business

Mariah Furtek, April 25, 2019 12:33 am, Daily Bruin

UCLA is an institution with many moving parts. Something that goes under the radar, though: its side business ventures that don’t directly relate to its educational mission. In this series, staff columnist Mariah Furtek looks at how the blue-and-gold laden university’s often questionable cash grabs affect the campus and local community.

The nation’s top public university has a raging mental health crisis, an overcrowded and exhausted infrastructure, a student body reeling from loans and food insecurity and a distinct lack of resources for its nearly 100,000-person population.

Amid all this, UCLA somehow had the time to construct a hotel empire.

And it really is an empire.

UCLA’s lodgings include the UCLA Guest House, UCLA Tiverton House, UCLA Lake Arrowhead Conference Center and Luskin Conference Center, which net millions of dollars.

UCLA Guest House, located right on campus, has 61 rooms to cater to university visitors. UCLA Tiverton House offers 100 rooms to patients and families of patients at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. The Lake Arrowhead Conference Center provides more than 100 “chalet-style” rooms for conference attendees and University of California families.

And there’s more: The Luskin center, constructed for a whopping $162 million, has 254 rooms to serve conference attendees and UC visitors. But to call it a conference center is a bit misleading: 91.5% of the square footage is devoted to hotel rooms.

This classification, though, saves the university’s legal hide. According to the Westwood Community Plan, UCLA’s campus is zoned for public facilities. This zoning prohibits hotels. The university, however, avoided this scrutiny with its build first, ask questions later approach.

UCLA operates businesses, generates income and milks its identity as a university to avoid paying business-related expenses, allowing it to undercut Westwood businesses.

Put bluntly, while students are racking up tens of thousands in college debt, UCLA is raking in millions each year from its hotels.

The untaxed

Every hotel room sold in LA is subject to a 14% transient occupancy tax. Accordingly, hotels advertise rates plus tax.

California’s constitution shields UCLA from paying this money.

Though UCLA operates four campus lodgings and conference centers, the university is a part of the UC system – a legal entity governed by the UC Board of Regents, which the city of Los Angeles cannot tax.

This allows UCLA to avoid paying taxes other hotels pay on a monthly basis. These taxes support LA infrastructure and services, like the fire and police departments, that spend so much time managing our student-related issues.

Typically most hotel guests do not qualify as tax exempt. Some guests are, though, due to the nature of their business. This includes diplomats; federal, state and local government employees; and university employees traveling on business. Nonuniversity hotels can grant tax exemptions to these individuals.

These exemptions are quite rare because nonuniversity hotels are held to a higher standard when granting these passes. LA city hotels must verify the identities and travel itineraries of their guests to sideline the tax, and must maintain these records for regular city audits.

UCLA, however, doesn’t always do this. The reason: Everything it operates is, somehow, university-related.

Consumers view this tax exemption as a discount because they are paying a smaller amount of money to stay at UCLA hotels than at nonuniversity ones.

All this puts nonuniversity hotels at a competitive disadvantage. In addition to avoiding the 14% transient occupancy tax, UCLA also doesn’t pay the 0.975% California tourism tax or the 1.5% tourism and marketing tax. This amounts to about 15.5% in taxes, all of which nonuniversity hotels cough up on a monthly basis.

This complete exemption is abnormal.

Universities in San Diego and San Francisco, for example, are required to pay the transient occupancy tax unless the university itself pays for guests’ rooms.

Hotels at other state universities, including the Indiana University’s Biddle Center and Conference Center and the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Fluno Center, also pay hotel taxes for their guests.

In addition to avoiding the occupancy tax, the UC also manages to shirk income tax on its earnings from these businesses by claiming they are university-related.

Ricardo Vazquez, a UCLA spokesperson, said the revenue from the Guest House, Tiverton House and Luskin center does not classify as unrelated business income.

Essentially, UCLA is claiming here that this income cannot be taxed.

But UCLA’s mission as a public research university is to create, share and apply knowledge to improve society – not to build and operate hotels that cater to nonuniversity conference attendees.

In fact, the Luskin center has wandered so far from the UC’s educational purpose that it has trespassed on the territory of local hoteliers.

And UCLA had always planned to do so. Its 2009 market analysis, prepared by consulting firm PKF International, anticipated 35% of the demand for the Luskin center would come from noneducational, conference use. The report also projected that 40% of that demand – equivalent to 18,500 room nights – would be completely unrelated to the university.

Where were these guests staying before they had the Luskin center? Local hotels.

A wolf in sheep’s clothing

Benjamin Gunter studied at UCLA. Now, his alma mater is competing with his business.

Gunter, vice president and general manager of the Hilgard House Hotel and Suites in Westwood said the hotel competes for the same business as the Luskin center.

“People would rather everyone be subject to the same tax,” Gunter said. “It is seen as a competitive disadvantage to collect the 14% occupancy tax when some of our competitors are not forced to.”

The Luskin center’s own advertising makes it evident UCLA is trying to compete with local hotels for all business, not just university-related business.

Its March 8, 2018, email advertisement read, “If you are visiting L.A. or you are an Angeleno looking for a great place to stay-cay in L.A., book your room now at the fabulous new UCLA Meyer and Renee Luskin Conference Center and Hotel!”

The October 2017 Luskin center newsletter had similar language.

“Start the holidays off bright by making the UCLA Luskin Conference Center your home base for enjoying all that L.A. has to offer this season,” it read.

These advertisements make no attempt to distinguish between university-related business and Angelenos looking for a “great place to stay-cay.”

But UCLA doesn’t stick to email advertisements. The Luskin center also seeks out customers on traditional hotel sites, such as Trivago and TiCATi. It receives sales leads from the LA Tourism and Convention Board and is listed on the LA Tourism website.

Clearly, the Luskin center is competing with nonuniversity hotels by marketing itself not just as a university hotel, but a high-end home base to explore the LA region.

Moreover, the visitors to these sites, who would otherwise have to verify their university affiliation, are seemingly only required to confirm they will visit UCLA at some point during their stay.

But “visitor” is a pretty broad term.

Are you a visitor if you walk across the street from the hotel room to the Henry Samueli School of Engineering? Can you simply swing by the Bruin Bear for a morning selfie before going about your Los Angeles holiday?

Compare this to the Berkeley Lab Guest House, where you must clarify your exact affiliation with the UC and provide the contact information of your individual UC Berkeley host.

The bar is even lower for conference attendees.

The Luskin center hosted, among other noneducational events, the 2017 America’s Connect conference run by the International Association of Conference Centres – a conference about how to hold conferences. It’s hard to imagine how any of UCLA’s nearly 45,000 students could have learned anything from this.

UCLA may be profiting but the neighborhood is not. Without the UC’s tax dollars, there’s less money to go toward infrastructure and municipal services.

“We have a lot of strain when it comes to traffic and congestion,” said Andrew Thomas, executive director of the Westwood Village Improvement Association. “Westwood Boulevard is essentially a highway to UCLA.”

And there’s a lot of money in the tax loophole UCLA is exploiting. In the 2017-2018 fiscal year, the Lake Arrowhead Conference Center made $11,318,517 in revenue, the UCLA Guest House made $3,595,980, and the Luskin center made $31,343,449.

Imagine the number of Los Angeles potholes that could have been paved and the city firefighters who could have been paid better if all of this revenue was fully taxed.

California trusts the UC to use its funds for educational purposes. Los Angeles trusts UCLA to be a conscientious, contributing member of the community. And students trust administrators to provide for them.

Instead of building classrooms, the nation’s top public university is building hotels and lodges. Instead of tending to food-insecure students, UCLA is using its catering services for conference attendees. And instead of expanding its overburdened counseling center, the university is expanding its brand as a luxury destination.

Like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, UCLA is masquerading as a university as it preys on local hotels.

It’s almost like UCLA has forgotten what it means to be a public university.

Source: http://dailybruin.com/2019/04/25/mind-your-business-ucla-hotels-detract-funding-from-more-pressing-issues-compromise-local-business/