UC Davis Reacts to End of Mrak Sit-In, Corrects the Record

MRAK-OccupationProvost and Executive Vice Chancellor Ralph Hexter’s message to the campus community:

I write to inform you that the protesters who had been on the fifth floor of Mrak Hall left voluntarily at around noon today. It was becoming increasingly stressful for the protesters as well as for staff and faculty. The chancellor is open to meeting with the protesters and other members of the community to discuss any concerns.

Let me also address recent stories concerning our marketing budget and the hiring of external vendors to change online search results. These stories mischaracterize the facts. The campus hired outside consultants, using no public or student funds, to optimize search engine results in order to highlight the achievements of our students, faculty and staff.

Even if such a thing as eliminating stories and images from the Internet were possible, “pepper spray” will always be part of UC Davis’ history. Every day we are trying to make sure we incorporate the hard lessons we learned. Our sensitivity to and acknowledgement of the importance of free speech and protest is evidenced by the approach the campus took to the sit-in on the fifth floor at Mrak.

Tomorrow is Picnic Day, a great example of what UC Davis is all about — a unique celebration of our incredibly diverse, talented and strong community. It opens our university and our city to our Aggie family and the community at large to showcase the people and activities that make us unique. I hope to see you there.


FAQ on Strategic Communications Budget

Q: Is it true UC Davis tried to “scrub” the Internet?

A: No. The external vendors referenced in The Sacramento Bee article on April 14 were brought in primarily to improve our capacity and expertise in digital communications. We recognize that it is not even possible to remove content from the Internet, and that was not our intention.

Q: Did the consultant try to influence search rankings?

A: Yes. Search engine optimization is standard practice in any organization that has an online presence that includes tagging of online content to improve search rankings.

  1. Was the $175,000 contract paid for by either state funds or student fees?
  2. No taxpayer funds or tuition dollars were used to pay for these services.

Q: Why did the communications budget increase about $2.5 million since 2009?

Regarding a rise over six years in the campus’s communications budget, further reporting would have revealed $800,000 for increased health care and retirement costs, as well as a $1 million statewide campaign to increase awareness about our College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and School of Veterinary Medicine, both rated the best in the nation. Campaigns such as these — as well as hiring more employees with social media and web management skills — have taken on more prominence at UC Davis as we strive to increase private fundraising and philanthropy.

Q: How does UC Davis respond to PRA requests?

A: UC Davis received over 1,200 requests for records last year and we reviewed hundreds of thousands of documents. It is a time-consuming task.  For example, each relevant record must be reviewed to ensure we do not inadvertently disclose protected information, such as the personal information of our students, staff or faculty. We respond as quickly as possible.


Statement from UC Davis

Communicating the value of UC Davis is an essential element of our campus’s education, research, and larger public service mission. Increased investment in social media and communications strategy has heightened the profile of the university to good effect.

As part of this overall communications strategy, it is important that the excellent work underway at UC Davis with respect to educating the next generation of students, pursuing groundbreaking research, and providing important services to the State is not lost during a campus crisis, including the crisis that ensued following the extremely regrettable incident when police pepper-sprayed student protesters in 2011. Communication efforts during this time were part of the campus’s strategic communication strategy. In fact, one of the main objectives during this time was to train staff on how to effectively use digital media to improve engagement with our stakeholders.

Communicating the value of UC Davis is among the many reasons why our campus was able to increase its endowment to $1 billion last year, garner more than $700 million in research grants, and attract the highest caliber of students and faculty from around the country, with a record number of student applications this year.

Most of the growth in the communications budget is tied to raising the visibility of our College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and the School of Veterinary Medicine, both rated the best in the nation.

In a 2014 Chronicle of Higher Education Report titled, “Higher Ed Marketing Comes of Age,” the mean amount that universities spend on marketing was reported as $3.7 million, with the highest at $25 million. We believe UC Davis compares favorably with other institutions of higher learning. Communications spending represents a small fraction of the $4.3 billion operating budget of UC Davis.

 

About The Author

Disclaimer: the views expressed by guest writers are strictly those of the author and may not reflect the views of the Vanguard, its editor, or its editorial board.

Related posts

34 Comments

  1. Tia Will

    I am having difficulty reconciling previous information with this statement from Mr. Hexter.

    No. The external vendors referenced in The Sacramento Bee article on April 14 were brought in primarily to improve our capacity and expertise in digital communications. We recognize that it is not even possible to remove content from the Internet, and that was not our intention.”

    This statement would seem to me to be in direct contradiction of the quoted company intent posted by David previously.

    1. No taxpayer funds or tuition dollars were used to pay for these services.”

    So if it is true that none of the money used to hire this firm came from public funds or student tuition or fees, where did it come from ?

    hiring more employees with social media and web management skills — have taken on more prominence at UC Davis as we strive to increase private fundraising and philanthropy.”

    I hardly find it reassuring that at a time when our own qualified children cannot gain acceptance because of the strategy to “attract the best qualified students from across the country ( and I would add throughout the world ) as long as they can pay higher fees, that my private dollars and money saved through my hours donated for teaching are now going to fund more individuals with “more social media and internet skills” rather than to the public education of our own students as was my intent at time of donation. ”

    Further, I do not find it reassuring that at a time when professors, lecturers and other lower level instructors are being more and more burdened with increasing work loads, that the university is choosing to spend more and more money on “public relations”. I would hope that the solid work done on the UC campus in terms of actual research and education could speak for itself and that the campus would choose to rely on promoting the actual work that is done rather than use money from whatever disclosed source in a vain attempt to hide its less than lustrous activities.

     

    1. VG

      Hah! Hah! LOL. As I pointed out in the previous post, those people that are occupying the higher administration posts at UC Davis are the problem. No matter how bad, Linda Katehi is one of the brighter spots in this “Hall of Darkness”. (BTW: Mrak Hall was named after the former Chancellor Emil Mrak, renowned food scientist of Czech origin. Translation from Czeck “Mrak = Dark”). The explanation given by Ralph Hexter would make children laugh -“external vendors referenced ….. were brought in primarily to improve our capacity and expertise in digital communications”, like Ralph wanted to learn what TCP/IP, packet switching or physical versus software layers in the information packet ……is!

      Had he said something like: “bad publicity affects our fund raising (no one will be donating to UC Davis reading all this bad stuff), so we have to clean it up in whatever way we can” – I would tend to agree and even approve. After all, their job is to protect UC Davis. But, he is twisting and turning the truth that, I am sure, is making everyone sick. Why is he doing that? Because this is the only way they know: hide the truth, lie, operate in the dark, destroy any opposition and any protest, by any means. Notice, that Executive Vice Chancellor Ralph Hexter has been very quiet during this entire time. Why? Likely, he has been waiting (like a snake in the grass) to see which way the wind is going to blow. The “Hall of Darkness” is not a happy place. It is a snake pit. He is receiving $374,920 (as of 2014 data), while being quiet, though he is “Executive”, while Linda is being roasted on the pit. Linda is done. They are just waiting for an opportune moment to dump her body into the Sacramento river (at night). He may be her replacement. Did the students win? Yes, but what is the end result? At least Linda does understand research and knows how to move UC Davis from a mediocre institution to something better, what she has been doing from the start.

      What you Tia, and many that write here, do not understand is that those posts are not taken by people who have high moral standards, dedication for the common good and our future generations, integrity and truth. Those with integrity do not want to be even close to the “Hall of Darkness”. Those who stood up to abuse of privileges, irregularities, miss use of funds, cronyism, etc. were eliminated from UCD.  We will replace one – bad one, buy a worse or equally bad one. I think nation-wide we have seen deterioration of academia. What used to be a premier public university is charging fees that are not lower than those of private universities. This mode of operation inevitably leads to DeVry quality of education. The responsibility for this situation is with the community, all of us, parents of those protesting students, and perhaps some of them as well.

      If the community stays silent and does not show solidarity with the faculty that is being abused, research funds stolen, injustices and even racial discrimination swept under the rag (see: http://www.davisvanguard.org/2011/04/ucd-professor-ordered-to-pay-30k-for-violating-universitys-first-amendment-rights/) , this UC Davis saga will continue. What is sad is that there are many far more serious abuses that go unpunished at UC Davis, that are far more damaging, with far reaching consequences, than mere $70K that Linda pocketed (actually did not have time to do so)). Academinc Senate at UC Davis, which is supposed to keep administration straight, has turned itself into a helper and accomplice of the corrupt administration. All praise to Davis Vanguard for reporting and keeping UC Davis in the spotlight, while others (Davis Emptyprise, Sac Bee) shy away from antagonizing all too powerful administration that is occupying “the Hall of Darkness”.

       

      1. Tia Will

        ContextMatters

        What you Tia, and many that write here, do not understand is that those posts are not taken by people who have high moral standards, dedication for the common good and our future generations, integrity and truth.”

        It is not that I do not understand this. It is a change in this, and its equivalent throughout the UC system that I call for. I want to see a system wide shift to administrators whose goal is the best possible education for the students of California which would imply to me that they would have ” dedication for the common good” .

        I do not see Chancellor Katehi nor Mr. Hexter as the core of the problem. But the Chancellor is an integral part of our local problem and we do have to start somewhere. What I would like to see is the replacement of all administrators who have a philosophy more compatible with a private sector model. I would like to see them located where they will fit in best, namely in the private sector. I do not believe that they are evil, merely incompatible with a public service institution.

    2. Barack Palin

      So if it is true that none of the money used to hire this firm came from public funds or student tuition or fees, where did it come from ?

      No surprise, it’s like our  underfunded city having tens of thousands of dollars to spend on art or other unneeded programs.  Where does that money come from?

      1. hpierce

        The “art in public places” is primarily funded by a “tax” the City imposes on itself @ 1% of most City construction projects (other than for utilities)… ex.  street maintenance contracts.  They may also get some ‘donations’ for the ‘Municipal Arts Fund’.

      2. Miwok

        No taxpayer funds or tuition dollars were used to pay for these services.

        To answer that question, the $4.3Bil for UCD only has 12-16% of State money in that. They just put out a Press release saying they took in $786Mil in “research Funding” this year and are trying each year to get that up to a Billion.

        They have a rich contract with Google to provide internet services that have improved the services to the Staff and students, yet they need an outside “vendor” to do more. They also slush money away into their “foundation” that is secret and never comes out.

        Those who stood up to abuse of privileges, irregularities, miss use of funds, cronyism, etc. were eliminated from UCD

        Exactly right. There are more “confidential settlements” than you can count through the years. When I stood up years ago, I thought I was talking to people of integrity, instead I only got support when no one else was watching, and never official support, because they were just as scared. Too much nepotism. After a while I am surprised they didn’t arrest me. Luckily I had evidence, but it didn’t matter.

      3. Tia Will

        BP

         to spend on art or other unneeded programs”

        What is clear is that we both pay taxes but do not have a mutually agreed upon definition of what is “unneeded”. I would much prefer that my taxes be spent on art, parks, music, recreational facilities and events than on road repairs…..but we all have different values and have chosen to live in a city thus making compromise necessary.

  2. Frankly

    So here is some clear admission of school administrative expense that is connected to the building of all those ego shrines.   The communications department appears to primarily support outside fundraising. Check out the alumni department too.  And then once these ego shrines are constructed they will need maintenance personnel and other personnel to manage them and keep them operating. And all this new personnel will require more HR personnel and more managers to oversee them.  And all of this leads to higher administrative costs that get passed on to the students.

    1. Miwok

      Except the old mare is looking a bit worn the last five or six years. Enough Custodial Staff has been laid off that trash in offices is picked up once a week in most buildings, floors and bathrooms get serviced once a week or less and the outside of the buildings are covered with spiderwebs and dirt.

  3. Eileen Samitz

    I have the same question as Tia, where does the money come from for this enormous “communications” expenditure?

    Also, it is outrageous that UCD is spending $5 million (note that thet number is not mentioned in this press release  by UCD) on communications, has an operating budget of $4.3 BILLION, and has raised over $1 BILLION in endowment funds, yet UCD will not put any significant funding into the on-campus student apartments that they have promised for over two decades on their 5,000+ acres of land.

    All of these housing needs for the UCD students are then deflected to our City, and other cities like Woodland, Dixon, Winters, Sacramento and even Vacaville, which are also now complaining about the growing influx of UCD students moving into their rental housing. It is disgraceful that UCD has been so negligent for so long having the resources they obviously have. UCD needs to address this enormous problem that they have created for their students, our City and the other cities being impacted by UCD’s inaction for so long.

    It is time that UC’s autonomy status ends, since it is now clearly not needed and quite the contrary, it is now necessary to have transparency on UC, and especially UCD, spending. It is clear that UCD has mismanagement problems and these problems are very directly and negatively impacting our community, and our City planning.

    It is good to see that our legislators are as fed up as our community is and continuing the investigations and audits of UC and UCD. Now our community needs to speak up for itself to let UCD know that they need to start taking responsibility for their own student housing on campus.  UCD needs to take action now to build the massive number of on-campus apartments that they have been stalling on for so many years since UCD certainly has the financial resources to do so.

    Again, I encourage folks to email Ass’t. Vice Chancellor Bob Segar (campus planning) about this issue at rbsegar@ucdavis.edu and please take a moment take the on line short survey for the UCD LRDP at campustomorrow.ucdavis.edu which will only be available another week or so before the input period for demanding on-campus housing will end. I also invite folks to join our citizens group focusing on this issue of the lack of  UCD on-campus housing impacting our community by emailing us at citizens@dcn.org.

  4. Anon

    It certainly appears that all those efforts to bring “the highest caliber” administrator to campus has been less than successful in regards to the office of UCD Chancellor.  I’m not convinced Katehi was worth the extra dollars, considering her lapses in good judgment.

    And if the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and the School of Veterinary Medicine are both rated the best in the nation, why the need to “raise their visibility”.  If they are the best in the nation, I assure you that type of rating brings all the visibility necessary.  “Though doth protest too much methinks…”

    I have to wonder is this UCD’s way of saying nothing is going to change?

  5. ssc

    Provost Hexter: aren’t you ashamed of this rather pathetic attempt at whitewash? It reminds me of former Secretary of State Colin Powell (a person I once admired) who, at the prodding of his boss,  destroyed his credibility by insisting on the existence of Iraqi WMDs as a casus belli.

  6. Jerry Waszczuk

    THE NEWEST UC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY
    From: Amy Panoushek
    Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:41 AM
    To: Alejandro Espinosa; Allen Dellinger; Andrew Kalon Fray; Angelo Saldana; Anthony Sanchez; Anthony Wilson; Arturo Nunez Madera; August Branstner; Bart L Miller; Bill Doran; Billy Cross Jr; Bonifacio P Aguilar; Brett Haines; Bryon Lopez; Carlos A Gutierrez; Carlos A Rivera; Casey J Fleenor; Cesar Vasquez; Christopher Gangl; Corey Nommensen; Dan Radulescu; David Rodriquez; David W Pross; David Zeiher; Dereck R Cole; Donald Whitley; Dorin Daniliuc; Edgar Perez; Edward Daniels; Ephraim Treadway; Frank Gonzales; Fred Jewell; Gabriel W Waterman; Gary Brown; George Ursu; Gregory M Mcvey; Gregory Russ; Helen Paulazzo; Isaac Barrios; Isidro Molina Alarcon; Jaime DeGuzman; James Gonzalez; Jay Scott Wedsted; Jeffrey S Migdal; Jeremiah W Moon; John Joseph Jr Rodrigues; John W Bersch; Jose D Esparza; Joshua C Hodges; Kathryn Ransom Perry; Keith A Williamson; Kenneth B Felkins; Kenneth W Duthler; Kevin T Lance; Kimberly T Ross; Louie Hernandez; Luis A Rojas; Marcus A Newton; Mariano A Molina; Mark Baker; Mark Boskovich; Mark H Ladd; Mark Montoya; Michael A Strickland; Michael C Belcher; Michael Khoury; Michael Martinez; Michael Mosca; Michael R Adams; Michael Shelley; Michael Vechtomov; Michel Rossi; Mike Medina; Nick A Ures; Oleg Puzin; Oscar Letourneau Jr; Patrick Putney; Philip Anthony Galik; Phyllis R Reginelli; Ralph Escobar; Randal Violet; Randy Lott; Ravindra Pratab; Raymond A Flores Sr; Raymond G Gregorich Iii; Rebecca L Villarreal; Richard A Saiya; Richard Bealer; Richard Brown; Robert Clayton; Robert Hale; Roland Rosello; Russell D Ewing Sr; Russell L Poteat; Ryan T Salinas; Samir Brozovic; Sandra Aguilar; Scott Northouse; Scott Smith; Sheryl Hallerman; Steven H Beishline; Steven McGrath; Susan Carter; Susan Wells; Thomas Kavanaugh; Thomas Scanlan; Timothy French; Victor Sugimoto; Vlad Sarioglo; Werner O De Boer; William Buckans; William D Rider; William Miller; William Robideaux; Zoey B Walton
    Cc: Charles Witcher
    Subject: Social Media Policy

    Good morning All.
     
    I would like to share with you the UC Davis Health Systems Social Media Policy. There was an incident last week in which a UCDHS employee inappropriately used social media. Please refrain from using disparaging comments or unprofessional behavior on social media if they are going to tag the health system.  Violations of this policy could lead to disciplinary actions up to and including dismissal and the risk of civil and criminal  fines under state and federal laws.
     
    Your Superintendent/Assistant Superintendents will be reviewing this policy with you next week and obtain signatures from each of you acknowledging you have read and understand the policy.  Phyllis will be coordinating this with your Superintendent/Assistant Superintendents.
     
    Thanks
    Amy
     
     
    Amy S. Panoushek
    Business Manager, Plant Operations & Maintenance
    UC Davis Health System
    Facilities Services Support Building (FSSB)
    4800 2nd Avenue
    Suite 1500, Office 1501
     
    Sacramento, CA 95817
    Phone (916)734-2185
    apanoushek@ucdavis.edu

  7. Jerry Waszczuk

    NORTH KOREA
    From: William Buckans
    Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 4:07 PM
    To: Stephen Chilcott
    Cc: Amy Panoushek; ‘Charles Witcher (clwitcher@UCDAVIS.EDU)’; ‘Phyllis R Reginelli (preginelli@ucdavis.edu)’; ‘Steven McGrath (semcgrath@UCDAVIS.EDU)’
    Subject: FW: Social Media Policy

    Mr. Chilcott,
     
    I sent this email on March 11 to Amy Panoushek and have not receive a response. I am asking you the same question that I asked Ms. Panoushek below.
     
    Will you please advise me which state or federal statutes, codes or law you are making reference to in your e-mail. I don’t post anything about my job on social media. However before I will sign anything, I have the right to know if this policy does not violate my constitutional right to free speech and First Amendment of the United States of America Constitution. Also, it is my opinion that this policy does not correspond with the UC Davis Principal of Community which is not official UC or UC Davis Policy. See. The Principles of Community is not official University of California, Davis policy; nor do they replace existing policies, procedures or codes of conduct. http://occr.ucdavis.edu/poc/
    William Buckans
     
    Central Plant
     

     

  8. Jerry Waszczuk

    NORTH KOREA 
    From: Travis J Lindsey
    Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 11:03 PM
    To: William Buckans
    Subject: Questions regarding Social Media Policy
     William,
     I’m responding on behalf of Steve Chilcott regarding the questions you posed to him and Amy.  I was not involved in creating the policy, so I need to gather some information to respond to your questions.  I will be in touch.
    Travis 
     Travis J. Lindsey, JD, SPHR  |  Manager  | Employee & Labor Relations | UC Davis Health System 

  9. Jerry Waszczuk

    Social Media Policy

    UC Davis Health System

    Hospital Policies and Procedures
    Policy ID: 1307
    New 03/01/2013
          I.        PURPOSE

    The purpose of this policy is to provide UC Davis Health System (“health system”) personnel with standards for participation in social media, such as online blogs, podcasts, webcasts, and social network sites. This includes health system-hosted social media and non-health system social media in which the individual’s health system affiliation is known, identified or presumed.
         II.        SETTING

    UC Davis Health System
     
        III.        DEFINITION

    Social media–incorporates various forms of electronic communication technologies that expand online communications into an interactive dialogue among organizations, communities and individuals. Social media allows for the creation and exchange of user-generated content to be shared and discussed over the Internet and includes, but is not limited to, blogs, microblogs (like Twitter), online forums and chat rooms, other social networking sites (like Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Pinterest) and all other social media channels.
     
       IV.        POLICY
                        A.        Existing Applicable Policies: University electronic communication policies, patient privacy policies, the UC Davis Principles of Community, the health system Code of Conduct, health system graphics standards (including wordmark usage), the health system’s editorial style guide and copyright laws should be observed in all online activities. All the rules that apply to other health system communications apply here, specifically: respecting patients, customers and one another; protecting confidentiality, privacy and security; and safeguarding and proper use and handling of University and health system assets.
                        B.        Appropriate Conduct: Employees who identify their health system affiliation on their personal social media accounts shall be respectful and professional and may not post any material that personally attacks others or is defamatory, obscene, profane, sexually explicit, libelous, threatening, violent, harassing, abusive, hateful or embarrassing to another person or entity.
                        C.        Endorsement: Employees will not use the University name or their affiliation with the University to imply or do anything that might reasonably create the impression that the individual opinions they express represent the official views of or are supported by the health system. Employees who identify their health system affiliation on their personal social media accounts should include the disclaimer: “The following views expressed here are my own and may not reflect UC Davis Health System’s positions, strategies, or opinions.”
                        D.        Accuracy: Employees must ensure that facts are authentic, accurate, fair and thorough. Employees should identify source material, including links, as appropriate.
                        E.        Legal Restrictions: Employees may not post content or conduct any activity that fails to conform to any and all applicable state and federal laws, including copyright laws.
                         F.        Proprietary Information: Employees may not disclose any confidential or proprietary information of or about the health system, its affiliates, vendors or suppliers. Proprietary information includes information in any form or media that is created by or on behalf of the health system in the course and scope of its business, regardless of whether that information is maintained or stored by the health system and others on the health system’s behalf, such as company competitive information, financial information, intellectual property and business e-mail messages.
                        G.        Patient Confidentiality:  Employees shall not use or disclose any patient identifiable information of any kind on any social media without the express written permission of the patient. Even if an individual is not identified by name within the information to be disclosed, if there is a reasonable basis to believe that the person could still be identified from that information, its use or disclosure could constitute a violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and health system policy. All patients referenced, quoted, described or otherwise identified (in a photograph, etc.) in any social media environment must complete a health system Patient Authorization for Training, Media, Public Communications, Fundraising or Marketing Purposes form that specifies consent for social media as one of the approved uses of PHI (see UCDHS Policy and Procedure 1426, Authorization and Consent to Photograph or Interview and 1302, Protected Health Information (PHI)/Personal Information (PI) Notification).
                        H.        Interaction with Patients: Health care providers are discouraged from “friending” current or past patients on personal networking sites such as Facebook. Staff in patient care roles generally should not initiate or accept friend requests. Social media (even those with “private” or “direct” message features) shall not be used to discuss a patient’s health information. Patients who attempt to use social media to communicate with their provider about their health status should be directed to an approved, protected or encrypted medium, such as MyChart or a phone call to a provider’s office. No health information should be repeated, divulged or discussed.
                          I.        Public and Private Profiles: Employees are encouraged to establish separate public and private profiles and avoid mixing the two.  Employees shall ensure their personal social networking activity does not interfere with their work or workplace.
                         J.        University Generated Social Media: When authorized, employees communicating on behalf of the health system will review posts and comments regularly – ideally at least once daily – to ensure any issues or concerns are addressed in a timely manner. Authorized employees will delete comments that personally attack others or are inappropriate, inflammatory, offensive, profane, threatening, violent, obscene or sexually explicit. Complaints will be acknowledged and handled appropriately and in a timely manner, not deleted without consulting Public Affairs and Marketing. Mistakes will be acknowledged and corrected promptly. Good judgment and accuracy are imperative in all online communications. Errors and omissions reflect poorly on the organization and may result in liability for employees and the health system. All official health system social media channels must contain a link to the health system’s social media participation guidelines: http://healthsystem.ucdavis.edu/welcome/socialmedia/index.html. The unit/department/person that initiates a social media site is responsible for its maintenance and day-to-day management and monitoring.
                        K.        Health System-Hosted Blogs: Employees must obtain approval from department managers and Public Affairs and Marketing before setting up a health systemsystem-hosted blog or other social media site. Health systemsystem-hosted blogs must focus on subjects related to the health system’s missions of research, education, patient care and public service. Bloggers must be related to UC Davis as faculty, staff, graduate students, postdoctoral fellows or students and identify themselves and their affiliation prominently on the blog’s homepage. Bloggers should not be anonymous and should follow the spirit of the UC Davis Principles of Community. Bloggers will disclose conflicts of interest. Blogs must contain a link to the health system’s social media participation guidelines: http://healthsystem.ucdavis.edu/welcome/socialmedia/index.html. The unit/department/person that initiates the request for a blog is responsible for its maintenance and day-to-day management and monitoring. If a blog is no longer being updated, after six months Public Affairs and Marketing has the right (but not the obligation) to remove it.
                         L.        Use of the University Name: Employees may not use the University name, seals or trademarks when establishing websites, blogs, social media representation such as a Twitter account or Facebook group or domain names unless authorized to do so by the University. See UC Davis Policy and Procedure Manual (PPM) 310-65, for information about the use of University name, seal and other trademarks for commercial use, noncommercial use by organizations and groups and by individual employees. UC Davis Health System does not endorse people, products, services or organizations. (See UCDHS Policy and Procedure 1318, Advertising and 1302, Protected Health Information (PHI)/Personal Information (PI) Notification.)
                        M.        Consultations with Public Affairs and Marketing: Employees may contact the health system Public Affairs and Marketing department for assistance in identifying appropriate content for social media outreach, including proper use of health system logos and branding. Health system departments/units shall be responsible for the regular review and updating of materials published in social media. If an employee is approached by the media regarding a social media site, the employee must get authorization from Public Affairs and Marketing prior to responding or speaking as a health system spokesperson. The Public Affairs and Marketing department, along with the Compliance and Legal Affairs departments, maintain the right (but are not obligated) to ensure sites meet all relevant policies.
                        N.        Communication Tools: Additional guidance and information regarding social media and its usage can be found on the Insider under “Communication Tools.”
        V.        SANCTIONS

    Violations of health system polices or state and federal privacy laws may result in disciplinary actions up to and including dismissal and the risk of civil and criminal fines under state and federal laws.
     

    1. South of Davis

      Eileen wrote:

      > UCD needs to take action now to build the massive number of on-campus apartments

      Should Davis ACE and Shilling Robotics also be required to build housing above their places of business for their employees and customers?

      I hope  that Eileen will eventually realize that “hoping” that someone who does not want to build housing (UCD) builds it while working to stop the people that want to build housing (Davis Developers) is not the best way to get more student housing.

      P.S. The kids that left Mrak Hall jumped in to the Picnic Day parade today and had a decent size “Fire Katehi” group (I actually looked to see if they were on the list of parade people).

      P.P.S. It looks like Will and Lucas were the only city council candidates to join the parade and go after the student vote (I was hoping to see Matt or Brett on the big wheel bike Joe has ridden the parade in past years)

       

  10. Tia Will

    Yesterday really illustrated for me the difference between reputation building by highlighting strengths , educating and inspiring as opposed to attempting to hide weaknesses.

    My picnic day involved visiting displays and talking to the truly dedicated grad students, professors and emeritus professors at a number of different departments including bioengineering, entomology, wildlife displays including birds and fish, and exotic plants. Some of the work done at our university is truly exceptional and a chance to highlight it publicly is where we should be concentrating our efforts, to educate the public on current projects , to demonstrate how far we have come over time, and to inspire new generations in areas of science, social science and the arts that they might never have otherwise encountered in such an engaging fashion.

    Most of these displays are put together on a shoe string. Imagine what could be done in terms of productive outreach if some of  that several million dollar PR budget increase were put into highlighting the campus positives in ways designed to attract our future California science leaders rather than attempting to distract ( see how well that turned out !) from our errors.

    1. Biddlin

      “Most of these displays are put together on a shoe string. Imagine what could be done in terms of productive outreach if some of  that several million dollar PR budget increase were put into highlighting the campus positives in ways designed to attract our future California science leaders rather than attempting to distract ( see how well that turned out !) from our errors.”

      Imagine what could be done if the monetary excesses of administrators were applied to cutting the escalating costs of  attending UC!

      1. Tia Will

        Biddlin

        Yes, that too ! Or to allowing for the admission of more qualified California students. Or any myriad of legitimate educational purposes. UCD is a great university in many fields, and a good one in many others. Too bad we are not choosing to support the primary functions of the university over the wealth accumulation and reputation of administrators.

  11. ContextMatters

    You have to be kidding me. there are – literally – 10’s of press releases daily from UC Davis on the good stuff the university is doing. No one picks that stuff up and runs with it. They only focus on and escalate the negative.

    I will say it again – this whole thing with Katehi is sexist plain and simple. No one else on this blog (or even in the larger news community) is calling for Dirks resignation. Let’s see…he oversaw (and personally signed off on) 15 campus harassment settlements and one wrongful death settlement. Yet, not one person calls for his resignation, so he bumps off the provost to hold his job.

    The piling on of Katehi has hurt UC Davis as a whole. The inflammatory language has been out of line with the perceived ‘sin’. Actually take the time to look at the UC Davis budget: administration is down 2% in spending and faculty numbers are up something like 24%. The campus fundraising has gone up dramatically. The numbers of diverse students and faculty – UP, so much so that Forbes calls it the best place for STEM education. UC Davis has more CA undergraduates than any other campus. On campus housing has tripled. UC Davis has a sustainable budget plan; UC Berkeley: $150 now, and $250m in the hole in 5 years. Everything that people note on this listserve as being important, Katehi has done.

    You may not like what Katehi did with media or the boards, but it was allowed by policy; Devry was dumb.The pepperspray incident – terrible – but did any of you actually read the Cruz report? It exonerated Katehi and laid the blame squarely on some key people, including the police chief.

    In these current things, UCOP has allowed her (and the UC Davis campus) to take the hit for a much, much larger and more egregious group of individuals (check the SF Chronicle on UCSF). I would also say I am certain that Napalitano lied and saw the request for DeVry. How about doing a PRA for that information? The legislators? Give me a break – anyone checked who they take money from lately? We’ve handed McCarty – in the ever growing non-sustainable, non-collaborative ‘we don’t believe in climate change’ suburb of the Sac region – the means to hurt the Davis community and the campus – for a “crime” allowed by policy.

    AND everyone here piling on has helped this effort instead of pushing back and saying UC Davis is a great campus and has done wonderful things and we’ll get this sort out.

    I know I’ll get slammed in the comments for this, but I really believe that what is happening is wrong and hurtful to us all.

    1. Tia Will

      ContextMatters

      there are – literally – 10’s of press releases daily from UC Davis on the good stuff the university is doing. No one picks that stuff up and runs with it. They only focus on and escalate the negative”

      so much so that Forbes calls it the best place for STEM education.”

      These two statements would seem inherently contradictory to me. Obviously UCD did not get the reputation for being the best place for STEM education as well as the acknowledged best Veterinary Medicine and ag school, as well as a very highly regarded medical school, by no one acknowledging the good things that happen.

      The piling on of Katehi has hurt UC Davis as a whole”

      On what are you basing this statement ?  Do you have statistics to support this claim ( fewer donations, fewer grants, fewer top student applications, fewer applications for graduate positions, lecturers, professors, researchers ) ?  I do not believe that an institution is ever strengthened by hiding its errors and weaknesses. I believe that strength is derived from building on one’s successes and by acknowledging openly and freely where there is room for improvement rather than attempting to hide these areas. Ideally this would be done proactively by the administrators themselves. However, in the absence of this proactive approach, encouragement of transparency from the outside becomes necessary.

      There is no doubt that UCD has been successful in self promotion to its credit. For me, that is not the issue. The issue is its dishonesty and its intent to deceive with regard to adverse actions and many, many poor judgment calls on the part of the Chancellor. This is not to say that there are not other administrators involved in worse activities, just that they have not yet become public knowledge.

      this whole thing with Katehi is sexist plain and simple”

      Speaking only for myself, this a patently ridiculous remark. I myself am a women whose career over time has been built in both non STEM and STEM fields. My daughter is a STEM graduate from Berkeley. I have been a strong advocate for women’s education in all realms. My take on the position of Chancellor is that gender is completely irrelevant. The person who holds this position should receive no special consideration either favorable or unfavorable based on their gender.

  12. Jerry Waszczuk

    Bravo ContextMatters
    You may not like what Katehi did with media or the boards, but it was allowed by policy; Devry was dumb.The pepperspray incident – terrible – but did any of you actually read the Cruz report? It exonerated Katehi and laid the blame squarely on some key people, including the police chief.
    In these current things, UCOP has allowed her (and the UC Davis campus) to take the hit for a much, much larger and more egregious group of individuals (check the SF Chronicle on UCSF). I would also say I amcertain that Napalitano lied and saw the request for DeVry. How about doing a PRA for that information? The legislators? Give me a break – anyone checked who they take money from lately? We’ve handed McCarty – in the ever growing non-sustainable, non-collaborative ‘we don’t believe in climate change’ suburb of the Sac region – the means to hurt the Davis community and the campus – for a “crime” allowed by policy.” 
    Perfectly outlined . I read the Cruz and Kroll Report
    The legislators are doing dirty job for Napolitano and for UC Regents by calling for Katehi’s resignation ? 
    This whole soap opera entitled ” Fire Katehi” stinks 
    The DeVry board and the John Wiley and Sons board did not work to fire her than evil forces threw the $175,000 monkey wrench into the battle against Katehi to crucify her. 

    Regents and Napolitano are waiting to issue a statement that Katehi has  resigned and  that they are  sorry and wishing Katehi all the best.

    This is a disgusting show off of the UCOP and UC Regents totalitarianism to condemn Katehi by the masses, selected legislators and by the well-directed media to fire Katehi . This is a standard procedure in UC.

    UC General Counsel Charles Robinson is on PJM Board and nobody give a damn about.
    Robinson , Appelsmith and Napolitano most likely gave ok  for Katehi to be on serve on other boards
    This is a North -Korea type style of condemnation and this is  just another tactical move to divert attention from the rotten by corruption UC administration with Janet Napolitano and Regents in charge . http://www.pjm.com/about-pjm/who-we-are/pjm-board.aspx
    Instigators and agitators to fire Katehi used  disoriented students as  a human shield to protect themselves to be hit . I seen before in my life in communist Poland when communists were using disoriented workers against protesting students in 1968. Exactly the  same scenario.

  13. Jerry Waszczuk

    The November 18, 2011, pepper spray attack was nothing else but a well-planned provocation and action to remove UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza, Captain Joyce Souza, and Lt. John Pike from the UC Davis Police Department, besides hassling and removing protesters from the UC Davis Campus premises.

    In a different scenario, Lt. John Pike most likely would have been promoted to rank of Captain, and Chief Anette Spicuzza would have received a bonus and salary increase for such action, regardless of media coverage and court action against university administration.

    After I was removed from the premises in September 2011and not realizing why I am being so viciously attacked by the UC Davis administration and I am not allowing to work, I asked UC Davis Police Department Captain Joyce Souza whether somebody filed against me a report with UC Davis Police because of the accusation I am receiving from the UCDMC Human Resources Department.

    Afterward, I received a response from Captain Joyce Souza on October 6, 2011, providing information to the UC Davis Police Department, Captain Joyce Souza, Chief Annette Spicuzza, and Lt. John Pike about the corrupted management in the UC Davis Medical Center Plant Operation and Maintenance Department, hostility, suicide of my coworker Tod Goerlich, child pornography issue condoned by HR investigator, etc. EXHIBIT # 33

    Any investigation by UC Police of the UC Davis Medical Center Plant Operation and Maintenance Department could lead to disclosure of the unlawful operation of the 27 MW cogeneration facility, child pornography issue, blackmail 12 % pay raise for Central Plant operators in December 2010, and general corruption among UC Davis Medical Center management. UC Davis administration, including Chancellor Lind Katehi, UC Davis Chief Counsel Steven Drown, and UC Davis Chief Compliance Officer Wendi Delmendo were perfectly aware that I am sending my correspondence to Captain Joyce Souza, Chief Annette Spicuzza, and Lt. John Pike, because I  CC:-ed in correspondence to them .

    There was no needed to be a former Professor Emeritus, School of Law, UC Davis, and Former Associate Justice, California Supreme Court Cruz Reynoso, Professor, School of Law, UC Davis Alan Brownstein or Senior Vice President, External Relations, UC Office of the President and Designated System-wide Administrator for Whistleblower Complaint Dan Dooley to figure out that something was wrong with the national media’s publicity of Lt John Pike’s action by portraying him as a walking prima donna with the can of M-9 pepper spray and spraying protesters without any hesitation. It looked on video that Lt. Pike was doing it with joy and pleasure.

    However, UC Davis Police Department Lt. John Pike did not spray protesters with joy and pleasure. According to the Kroll Report marked Confidential—Do Not Distribute, on the relevant Friday morning, November 18, Lieutenant Pike and Officer P contacted Campus Counsel Sweeney and discussed their concerns with him. Sweeney told them he would get back to them, and at around 1:00 p.m., a conference call was conducted in Chief Spicuzza’s office with Pike, Officer P. Sweeney and Steven Drown. Both Officer P. and Pike “had several questions about the legality of conducting a planned operation during the middle of the afternoon versus the early morning hours. Pike’s description of the subsequent discussion on the conference call was redacted, apparently due to attorney-client privilege.

     
    Furthermore the same Kroll Report states that Chief Annette Spicuzza was the representative of UCDPD on the Leadership Team and communicated her understanding of the guidance from the Leadership Team to Lieutenant Pike and Officer P., including that the operation was not to be “like Berkeley” and was to be conducted on Friday afternoon.’ When her Lieutenants questioned the legal basis for the operation, she joined them for a call with Campus Counsel Steven Drown. When her Lieutenants called the 3 p.m. period a “bad idea,” she told them that this direction came directly from the Chancellor’s office. At UCDPD headquarters, during the 24 hours leading up to the police operation on November 18, the legal basis for the operation, the timing of the operation, and the use of force options were questioned by Lieutenant Pike, Officer P., and other officers.

  14. ssc

    UC Davis WAS a great campus. Under the Katehi administration it has become at best a bad joke, and at worst an international pariah. There seems to be no limit to the damage to the reputation of this campus that she is willing to countenance, in order to cling to her job. Personally, I couldn’t care two hoots about the gender of any administrator. It is irrelevant to the individual qualities of honesty, humility, openness, and selflessness that are essential to successful academic leadership. It is the exact opposite of these qualities that have reduced UC Davis to its current dismal state.

  15. Alan Miller

    Perhaps what is not known widely (and should be) about the withdrawl from Mrak Hall is that the protestors  steam cleaned the carpets, cleaned up the entire area, and sprinkled flowers throughout the waiting area before leaving.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for