Pages

Monday, March 24, 2025

Will we be side swiped by a San Francisco scandal?

From the San Francisco Chronicle: San Francisco no longer wants to do business with a nonprofit that received lucrative city contracts from a disgraced former department head who previously worked for the organization and lived with its executive director.

City Attorney David Chiu said in a statement that his office has temporarily suspended the nonprofit, Collective Impact, from receiving city funding and will seek to prohibit the organization from getting city contracts for as long as five years. The decision is the result of a long-running city investigation into the nonprofit and its ties to former Human Rights Commission Director Sheryl Davis.

“Collective Impact has paid thousands of dollars to support Davis’ personal ventures, her travel, and her son’s graduate school education,” the city attorney’s office wrote in a legal filing against the nonprofit... The city attorney’s office said that Collective Impact submitted improper claims for reimbursement from the city, including more than $19,000 to pay Davis’ son’s tuition to attend graduate school at the University of California, Los Angeles... Asked about the $19,000 tuition payment for Davis’ son, [a spokesperson] said Davis’ son, Henry Davis, was part of Collective Impact for the last 13 years, and that he applied to the nonprofit’s college financial assistance program “like everyone else” and he did not receive special treatment. The city’s proceedings say the program limits tuition support to $5,000 per year...

Full story at https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/s-f-suspends-nonprofit-paid-questionable-expenses-20232190.php.

Watch the Regents Meeting of March 19, 2025

We're catching up with last week's Regents meetings, specifically the meeting of March 19. We have already covered March 18.* 

At the opening public comments session, there was a series of remarks that were pro-Israel and/or against antisemitism and some opposing comments. Other issues included staff pay, sexual violence, funding for undocumented students, basic needs, alternatives to CalFresh for undocumented students experimental fellowships, DEI issues, staff job loss, staff flexible work schedules, AFSCME pay issues, disabled masking needs, childcare and parental needs, nurse bargaining issues, and anti-abortion. After a disturbance involving bargaining issues, the room was cleared.

Among the remarks made when the meeting resumed were those of UC president Drake who noted that UC-Merced had achieved R1 status. However, most of his remarks were focused on problems in Sacramento with UC's budget and problems in DC with regard to research funding and Medicare-Medicaid funding. He talked about a legal response (not clear what that is) and the installation of Time-Place-Manner rules on UC campuses.

The Regents spent a lot of time in closed session, presumably dealing with the issues Drake outlined. In fact, they spent so much time that the rest of the March 19 program was sufficiently delayed so that one scheduled session had to be delayed until the next day. One guesses that the decision to drop required required DEI statements for hiring and advancement of faculty was made in the closed session, although there was no announcement in the meeting.

At Finance and Capital Strategies, the committee approved a hospital replacement building at UC-San Diego, student housing at Berkeley, a faculty and staff housing project at Santa Barbara, and a classroom and office building at Merced. The committee reviewed a proposal for a Berkeley Venture Capital Fund, initially to be financed by gifts. A student regent proposal to have a student on the board of the Fund was more or less squelched without a vote. There were some concerns about whether time that UC employees put into the Fund would be paid for by the Fund. Again, assurances were made - but without a specific vote. It was noted that the Fund could invest in projects related to any UC, not just Berkeley.

The Academic and Student Affairs Committee discussed support for transfer students and disabled students. The latter topic evolved from a situation at Berkeley in which a disabled student was unable to evacuate from a building in an emergency situation. The Committee then turned to a segment on entrepreneurship and commercialization. Examples were provided of a system for supporting coral reefs and a treatment for bladder cancer.

The Governance Committee swiftly approved compensation for a football coach at Berkeley and an executive pay matter (although the dollar amounts entailed were somehow not mentioned), some procedural changes regarding the Nominations Committee, stipends for expert advisors to the Health Services Committee, and the allowing of across-the-board "cost of living" adjustments for managerial employees without specific regental approval. There was a change in future meeting dates due to what one suspects was a scheduling screw up regarding venue availability. Finally, in a joint session with Health Services, four positions in the health sector were combined into two and the resulting two were elevated into the senior management group. This combination and elevation was said to save money on net.

A planned session of Public Engagement and Development was postponed to the next day.

As always, we preserve Regents meetings indefinitely since the Regents have no policy on video retention. You can see the sessions described above at the links below:

The general webpage link is: https://archive.org/details/1-board-3-18-2025 (Ignore the 18 - The link is for Mar. 19)

The Board meeting is at https://ia600202.us.archive.org/0/items/1-board-3-18-2025/1-Board%203-19-2025.mp4.

Academic and Student Affairs is at https://ia600202.us.archive.org/0/items/1-board-3-18-2025/2-Academic%20and%20Student%20Affairs%20Committee%203-19-2025.mp4.

Finance & Capital Strategies is at https://ia600202.us.archive.org/0/items/1-board-3-18-2025/1-Board%203-19-2025.mp4.

Governance (& Joint with Health Services) is at https://ia600202.us.archive.org/0/items/1-board-3-18-2025/4-Governance%20Committee%2C%20Joint%20Meeting%20Health%20Services%20and%20Governance%20Committees%203-19-2025.mp4.

===

*https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2025/03/watch-regents-meeting-of-march-18-2025.html.

Sunday, March 23, 2025

Just a reminder

Perhaps you saw the recent article in the LA Times about the shifting landscape down in Palos Verdes, not far from the campus UCLA bought from a defunct Catholic college for a cool $80 million.* Nobody seems to know yet what to do with it. As we have pointed out, transportation between Westwood and Palos Verdes is a (big) problem. And nobody has said anything about the issue below, which we from time to time point out:


I know. It's unpleasant to think about. But still...

==

*https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-03-21/palos-verdes-considers-toll-road.  

The Hills to Die On Keep Coming...

...although in the latest legal development, there could be casualties on both sides. A case has been filed in which the plaintiffs are mainly those injured when the encampment last spring was attacked by outside vigilantes.* Most were in the encampment; one was a Daily Bruin reporter covering the event.

The case was posted in a way that blocked downloading but yours truly managed to get around the block. You can find it at:

https://ia600402.us.archive.org/9/items/2-final-hjaa-report.-the-soil-beneath-the-encampments/People%20v%20UCLA%203-2025.pdf.

This is a case that is messy for both sides. Creating the encampment violated campus rules. You can't block public access, control public access, block doorways, vandalize walls, etc., without violating university rules and laws. The UCLA police chief at the time - later made a scapegoat - apparently advised immediately dismantling the encampment. Had that occurred, the subsequent events described in the lawsuit would not have occurred. UCLA apparently told its police to stay away. And when vigilantes arrived in the void of safety thus created, there was no police response for an extended period. So UCLA has culpability, but some of that culpability is for not preventing the plaintiffs from doing what they did. 

Were the case to proceed to trial, a lot of information would come out about what the university did (and didn't) do, but also about what the plaintiffs did. There would be a process of discovery. Documents would be obtained. Testimony would be taken. Many of the plaintiffs are anonymous, although how they would remain so in an actual discovery process and trial is unclear. Presumably, they could be asked to testify and be questioned by opposing counsel. This is a be-careful-what-you-wish-for case for the plaintiffs.

One suspects there would be a lot of dirty laundry from both sides hanging in Royce Quad before the case ended, if it ever really went to trial. So yours truly guesses it won't. But how that occurs is unclear. 

====

*https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-03-21/demonstrators-sue-ucla-over-handling-of-pro-palestinian-protests.

Saturday, March 22, 2025

Watch the Regents Meeting of March 18, 2025

The first day of the Regents meetings at UCLA - March 18 - consisted of sessions of the Investments Committee and the Health Services Committee. 

At the Investments Committee, we have already posted about CIO Jagdeep Bachhar's statement at the end that he was looking at reinvestment in fossil fuels, given the changed policy coming from Washington, DC.* However, the meeting began with public comments. Several speakers called for anti-Israel divestment. Representatives of UPTE - which recently carried out a systemwide strike - spoke about staffing and other labor issues. Other topics included funding for undocumented students, funding for disabled students, Cantonese language instruction, and a UCLA sexual abuse scandal at a daycare center.**

CIO Bachhar then provided updated data through mid-March on returns of the various portfolios. The pension fund earned 4.1% over the previous year and the endowment earned 4.5%. As we noted in a prior post, documentation provided to the Committee indicated that the two portfolios had underperformed their benchmarks over 10 years and 5 years respectively.*** However, members of the Committee did not raise this issue or ask for any discussion of it.

Bachhar indicated that he thought that investments abroad were looking more attractive than in the past. Regent Makarechian pushed investment in tech stocks, but Bachhar pointed to the danger of stock picking. There was a lot of discussion of the turmoil coming out of Washington but no conclusions - other than the above-mentioned reconsideration of fossil fuels.

The Health Services Committee heard a discussion of maternal care with an emphasis on the high mortality rate of Black pregnant women compared with the general population. It was noted that lack of prenatal care was associated with high-risk pregnancies as conditions that contributed to the risk were not treated.

The Committee then turned to student health care systems. It was noted that these systems operate differently on each campus and can have complicated governance. Economic viability is becoming a concern. Students are going to emergency rooms, adding to costs. Money is left on the table because third-party payers (insurance companies) are not being billed. The chair of the Committee, Regent Sures, pushed for third-party billing, integration with campus health centers for those campuses with such centers, and obtaining funding that is apparently available for mental health services from counties.

Finally, with time running out, a segment on use of masks to reduce infection was postponed.

As always, we preserve recordings of Regents meeting since the Regents have no policy on duration of retention. You can see the March 18th program at the links below:

General website: https://archive.org/details/2-health-services-committee-3-18-2025

Investments: https://ia601202.us.archive.org/18/items/2-health-services-committee-3-18-2025/1-Investments%20Committee%203-18-2025.mp4

Health: https://ia601202.us.archive.org/18/items/2-health-services-committee-3-18-2025/2-Health%20Services%20Committee%203-18-2025.mp4

===

*https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2025/03/reversal-of-divestment-in-fossil-fuels.html.

**https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-22/teacher-at-ucla-child-care-center-arrested-on-supicion-of-child-sex-abuse.

***https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2025/03/were-waiting-for-explanation.html.

Beware!

From Inside Higher Ed:

The Trump administration has sent questionnaires to U.S.-funded Canadian and Australian researchers asking whether their research is a “DEI project,” whether it defends against “gender ideology” and whether it reinforces “U.S. sovereignty,” according to organizations in those countries...

[Examples]

“Can you confirm that your organization does not work with entities associated with communist, socialist, or totalitarian parties, or any party that espouses anti-American beliefs?” ...

 “Does this project reinforce U.S. sovereignty by limiting reliance on international organizations or global governance structures (e.g., UN, WHO)?” ...

“What impact does this project have on protecting religious minorities, promoting religious freedom, and combatting Christian prosecution [sic]?”

Full story at https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2025/03/20/trump-admin-questions-canadian-australian-researchers.
===

Note: Image above from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Republican_Party_%281843%29.

Friday, March 21, 2025

Letter to Columbia University Detailing Conditions for Restoration of Funding - Part 3 (Columbia accepts)

From the NY Times:

Columbia University agreed on Friday to overhaul its protest policies, security practices and Middle Eastern studies department in a remarkable concession to the Trump administration, which has refused to consider restoring $400 million in federal funds without major changes...

Columbia, facing the loss of government grants and contracts over what the administration said was a systemic failure to protect students and faculty members “from antisemitic violence and harassment,” opted to yield to many of the administration’s most substantial demands. The university said it had agreed to hire a new internal security force of 36 “special officers” who will be empowered to remove people from campus or arrest them. The wearing of face masks on campus will also be banned for the purpose of concealing identity during disruptions, with exceptions for religious and health reasons.

Columbia will also adopt a formal definition of antisemitism, something many universities have shied away from even as they, like Columbia, faced pressure to do so amid protests on their campuses over the war in Gaza. Under the working definition, antisemitism could include “targeting Jews or Israelis for violence or celebrating violence against them” or “certain double standards applied to Israel,” among other issues. Taken together, the administration’s plan — issued in a an unsigned, four-page letter — reflected a stunning level of deference to the Trump administration from a top private research university...


From Columbia (acceptance document):

Advancing Our Work to Combat Discrimination, Harassment, and Antisemitism at Columbia

Columbia University has, throughout its storied history, faced many challenges and obstacles. We have worked hard to address the legitimate concerns raised both from within and without our Columbia community, including by our regulators, with respect to the discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts our Jewish community has faced in the wake of October 7, 2023. We are proud to share key parts of our comprehensive strategy to make our campus safer, more welcoming, and respectful of the rights of all. Columbia is announcing several additional actions as part of that effort. They include:
Implementing Our Rules and Policies
 Application of consistent, rigorous, and effective disciplinary actions for violations of University Rules. Students who violated our rules during Columbia’s first encampment or at Hamilton Hall have been suspended, expelled, or had their degrees temporarily revoked. Disciplinary proceedings against other encampment participants are ongoing. Columbia is committed to rigorous and impartial enforcement of its rules and antidiscrimination policies to ensure a safe campus environment and continuation of all academic functions. 
Improvements to our disciplinary processes, including the University Judicial Board
(“UJB”). The University understands the critical importance of the effectiveness and impartiality of our disciplinary processes. To achieve that goal, the UJB will be situated within and overseen by the Office of the Provost, who reports to the President of Columbia. Given the risk faced by participants in this process, each UJB five-member panel will be restricted to faculty and administrators only. All panel members will undergo a rigorous vetting and conflict review process to ensure objectivity, impartiality, and commitment to following and enforcing our community’s rules and policies. The Provost will have final approval of all panel members and appellate Deans. Final determination of appeals of disciplinary decisions will remain with the President.
Clarification of time, place, and manner restrictions. 
We support free speech. Freedom of expression is what enables the rigorous debate and free inquiry on which our academic mission depends. But demonstrations and other protest activities that occur inside academic buildings and places where academic activities take place present a direct impediment to maintaining our core academic mission. Based upon the experience of peer schools, Columbia is clarifying that such protests in academic buildings, and other places necessary for the conduct of University activities, are generally not acceptable under the Rules of University Conduct because of the likelihood of disrupting academic activities. All demonstration activity is subject to the University’s anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies. 
Identification of individuals participating in demonstrations. 
All individuals who engage in protests or demonstrations, including those who wear face masks or face coverings, must, when asked, present their University identification to the satisfaction of a University Delegate or Public Safety officer. Individuals who fail to comply with these policies will be subject to discipline, being escorted off campus, and detention for trespass where appropriate. 
Addressing risk of masked individuals creating disruption. 
Public safety has determined that face masks or face coverings are not allowed for the purpose of concealing one’s identity in the commission of violations of University policies or state, municipal, or federal laws. We have had important instances in the recent past where individuals unaffiliated with the University have caused significant disruptions on our campus. Face masks or face coverings are always allowed for religious or medical reasons. 
Expansion of public safety personnel with new training and staff. 
The University has hired 36 special officers who will have the ability to remove individuals from campus and/or arrest them when appropriate. Those individuals are near completion of their training and credentialing under New York law to work on our campus. We will continue to assess the necessary size of this force to achieve our goals. The University has a longstanding relationship with the NYPD. While we train and credential our internal security force, we will continue to rely on our relationship with the NYPD to provide additional security assistance when needed. 
Oversight and support of student groups. 
Columbia’s Office of Institutional Equity (“OIE”) has promulgated a policy and processes for discipline of all student groups that stems from discriminatory conduct. OIE has the ability to sanction these groups, including to defund, suspend, or derecognize. In addition, in the next few weeks, the Office for University Life will announce a sanction policy for violations of University policy unrelated to claims of discrimination with sanctions for registered student groups. Both the existing OIE policy and the new policy will permit sanctions from defunding, suspension, to derecognition.
Continued compliance with legal obligations. 
As a global leader in research and education, Columbia is subject to a variety of legal regulations governing our activities. These range from Education Department anti-discrimination rules, to student-visa and immigration laws, to HHS rules of our medical school and hospital services, and countless others. In all that we do, we are committed to full compliance with these other federal and state laws that govern Columbia, while safeguarding constitutional protections.
Addressing Discrimination and Harassment
Implementation of effective antidiscrimination policies. 
The new Office of Institutional Equity substantially revised the University’s antidiscrimination and discriminatory harassment policy for students and groups, including the ability to sanction groups, (i.e. defund, suspend, or derecognize). The University’s approach and relevant policies will incorporate the definition of antisemitism recommended by Columbia’s Antisemitism Taskforce in August 2024.
Requirement of University-wide Title VI training. 
The University will continue to require its community to complete training on Title VI, including Columbia’s commitment to protecting fairness and equal opportunity for all on campus. To date, 32,243 faculty/staff, contractors and other affiliates have completed this mandatory Title VI training. On February 13, 2025, all students were assigned a mandatory training module on the Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment Policy and Procedures for Students and Student Groups. To date, 5,232 students have completed the mandatory training, which is due by March 24, 2025.
Advancing Knowledge and Understanding
Appointment of new Senior Vice Provost. As part of our ongoing efforts, we are appointing a new Senior Vice Provost this week with a focus on promoting excellence in Regional Studies. As part of this portfolio, the Senior Vice Provost, acting with the authority of the Provost Office, will conduct a thorough review of the portfolio of programs in regional areas across the University, starting immediately with the Middle East. This review will include the Center for Palestine Studies; the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies; Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies; the Middle East Institute; the Tel Aviv and Amman global hubs; the School of International and Public Affairs Middle East Policy major; and other University programs focused on the Middle East (together, the “Middle East Programs”). In this role, the Senior Vice Provost will: 
  • (1) review the educational programs to ensure the educational offerings are comprehensive and balanced; 
  • (2) review all aspects of leadership and curriculum; 
  • (3) steward the creation of new programs to address the full range of fields; 
  • (4) create a standard review process for the hiring of non-tenured faculty across the University, partnering with the Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and the schools;
  • (5) review the processes for approving curricular changes; 
  • (6) following academic procedures, make recommendations to the President and Provost about any necessary changes, academic restructuring, or investments that will ensure academic excellence and complementarity across all programs in the given academic areas. 
Expansion of intellectual diversity among faculty. 
Faculty searches have begun and will be expanded to ensure intellectual diversity across our course offerings and scholarship. As part of this effort the University will appoint new faculty members with joint positions in both the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies and the departments of Economics, Political Science, and School for International and Public Affairs (“SIPA”). These faculty members will contribute to a robust and intellectually diverse academic environment, reinforcing the University’s commitment to excellence and fairness in Middle East studies.
Engaging Our Community and Advancing Our Mission
Review our admissions procedures to ensure they reflect best practices. 
Our current admission processes comply with existing law. Columbia has and will continue to engage outside academic experts to review our admissions practices across all of our many schools for students from the United States and around the world, and make recommendations to the President and Provost about how to improve them and ensure unbiased admission processes.
As consistent with our practice when faced with concerns over discrimination against a particular group, we have established an advisory group to analyze recent trends in enrollment and report to the President. For example, we have identified a recent downturn in both Jewish and African American enrollment, and we will closely examine those issues. 
Commitment to greater institutional neutrality. 
Columbia’s President has adopted a position of institutional neutrality. The Provost’s Office is working with a faculty committee to establish an institution-wide policy implementing this stance. 
Advance Columbia’s Tel Aviv Center. 
Columbia has many ongoing activities and collaborations through its global efforts, including in Tel Aviv. Programing for the Columbia Tel Aviv Global Hub will launch in Q2 2025.
Creation of additional opportunities for constructive dialogue programing.
Columbia has and will continue to introduce numerous programs to improve dialogue among those with differences of opinion, and engaging with others with different and distinct viewpoints.
Development of K-12 Curriculum. 
Columbia will develop and make widely available to K12 schools at no cost online products focused on topics such as how to have difficult conversations, create classrooms that foster open inquiry, dialogue across difference and topics related to antisemitism.
All of these steps have been underway and are intended to further Columbia’s basic mission: to provide a safe and thriving environment for research and education, while preserving our commitment to academic freedom and institutional integrity. 


===
Letter from Columbia president:

Dear fellow members of the Columbia community:

As I have shared with you, we have been working this year on critical priorities for our University, which you can find on our “Fulfilling Our Commitments” website. We have shared our progress on several of our key priorities with the U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the General Services Administration. You can find that document here, and on our website.

This past year has been one of enormous progress, where our community of thoughtful faculty, students, and stakeholders has shaped a principled and methodical approach to meeting the moment’s challenges. Our response to the government agencies outlines the substantive work we’ve been doing over the last academic year to advance our mission, ensure uninterrupted academic activities, and make every student, faculty, and staff member safe and welcome on our campus.

We have much to be proud of as a community, and it has been a privilege to share our progress and plans. In the spirit of great American universities, we expect Columbians to engage in robust debate and discussion about our way forward, and we welcome it as an opportunity to shape the future of Columbia.

The way Columbia and Columbians have been portrayed is hard to reckon with. We have challenges, yes, but they do not define us. We are a community of scholars who have deep respect for each other and our mission. We teach the brightest, most creative students in the world, and we care deeply for each and every one of them. I have every faith in our ability to overcome the greatest of challenges. We stand resilient and brilliant.

At all times, we are guided by our values, putting academic freedom, free expression, open inquiry, and respect for all at the fore of every decision we make.

Standing together for Columbia,

Katrina Armstrong
Interim President, Columbia University in the City of New York