Katehi Pushes Back, Attorney Calls Probe Hopelessly Compromised

Chancellor Katehi in February
Chancellor Katehi in February

It has been just over a month since Chancellor Linda Katehi was put on administrative leave by UC President  Janet Napolitano.  On Friday, her team held a press conference in Sacramento, calling on President Napolitano “to drop an announced investigation of Katehi,” calling it “hopelessly compromised” and “incapable of the objectivity or due process her client deserves.”

Melinda Guzman, the Sacramento attorney representing Chancellor Katehi, said that President Napolitano’s choice of a lead investigator “with an ownership interest in a law firm handling millions of dollars of UC business was reason enough to scrap the investigation, which was announced by Napolitano in late April.”  The investigation, Ms. Guzman said, “has to start over.”

“The investigation of Chancellor Katehi was compromised from the start,” Ms. Guzman said.  “Its integrity has steadily evaporated since the moment President Napolitano demanded Chancellor Katehi’s resignation with no notice, announced this case in the media and chose a lead investigator with a potential financial interest in the case’s outcome.”

“President Napolitano has no choice but to hit the reset button, scrap this investigation, name a new lead investigator, and make a good faith effort to get to the truth and allow Chancellor Katehi a fair hearing,” Ms. Guzman said.

You can watch the video here: https://www.periscope.tv/w/1vOxwBonwMdJB

On April 27, a statement by President Napolitano indicated there was a formal investigation and that Chancellor Katehi was being put on administrative leave.

The President, in a letter, stated, “Information has recently come to light that raises serious questions about whether Chancellor Katehi may have violated several University of California policies, including questions about the campus’s employment and compensation of some of the chancellor’s immediate family members, the veracity of the chancellor’s accounts of her involvement in contracts related to managing both the campus’s and her personal reputation on social media, and the potential improper use of student fees.”

She continued, “The serious and troubling nature of these questions, as well as the initial evidence, requires a rigorous and transparent investigation.  As such, President Napolitano will  appoint an independent, outside investigator to conduct the investigation and submit a report, before the start of the 2016-17 academic year.”

She concluded, “The president, with the support of the leadership of the Board of Regents, has determined it is in the best interest of UC Davis that Chancellor Katehi be placed on investigatory administrative leave from her position as chancellor pending the outcome of this investigation.  Pursuant to an existing delegation of authority, UC Davis Provost Ralph Hexter will fill the chancellor role on an acting basis.”

“I am deeply disappointed to take this action,” said President Napolitano. “But Davis is a strong campus, nationally and internationally renowned in many academic disciplines.  I’m confident of the campus’s continued ability to thrive and serve California students and the Davis community.”

On Friday, Ms. Guzman argued that when President Napolitano placed Linda Katehi on paid leave, it was in violation of the chancellor’s rights of due process and rules concerning academic integrity and shared governance.  “Dr. Katehi is a tenured professor of electrical engineering at UC Davis,” she argued.

Meanwhile, UC Spokesperson Dianne Klein argued that the Linda Katehi is not cooperating with investigators.

“We are disappointed and confused by this behavior,” said Dianne Klein. “It does not advance the truth. We hope to conclude this investigation with the cooperation of the chancellor.”

“We have asked them repeatedly – 11 times – and there is no indication they are going to cooperate,” Ms. Klein added. “We certainly hope they do.”

In press release, newly-hired spokesperson Larry Kamer laid out a litany of concerns including:

  • Baffling delays in UC’s disclosures of information requested by news organizations, a situation that is greatly troubling to Chancellor Katehi given that she had provided all such information prior to her leave in April
  • Disparate treatment of Chancellor Katehi versus other senior UC senior administrators
  • Questions of how President Napolitano has managed confidential personnel issues
  • How the announcement of Chancellor Katehi’s “administrative leave” violated confidentiality and longstanding rules governing academic integrity
  • Recent heavy-handed tactics by UC investigators
  • Issues concerning the financial arrangement between UC and the Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe law firm, specifically those regarding payments for this investigation.

The press conference on Friday signals that Linda Katehi is digging in for a fight.  The chancellor reportedly is precluded from speaking to media, but her spokespeople were able to.  The Vanguard will have further coverage on this in the coming days.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts


          1. David Greenwald

            There are multiple funding sources, so I don’t know where this one comes from.

            This is just an example: The University of California’s projected operating revenue for 2011-12 is $22.5B. The state of California provided 11% of the UC’s 2011-12 budget.

            There is a huge variety of sources of funding from hospital revenue to sales to grants and private sources. It may be government findings, but it isn’t necessarily. They may have a special fund for these kinds of investigations just as they have an insurance pool for risk management. I just don’t know.

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Most likely all costs of Napolitano’s witch hunt would be paid by Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. or from Employment Practices Liability (EPL) Programs .

          It does not matter which funds are being used for the  irresponsibility  of  the reckless UC  President and  rotten by corruption the  UCOP administration .  This is  just waste of the university financial resources .

    1. Jerry Waszczuk


      Why you care ? Melinda Guzman’s Law firm is private professional law corporation  which  is  defending Greek born Chancellor Katehi against  UC  President Janet Napolitano of Italian decent.  If you read the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano than you will find out as follow.
      “Discrimination lawsuit[edit]
      In July 2012, Napolitano was accused of allowing discrimination against male staffers within the Department of Homeland Security.[56][57] The federal discrimination lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, was filled by James Hayes Jr. who is presently a special agent of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement in New York City.[58] The suit alleges that Dora Schriro and Suzanne Barr mistreated male staffers and promotions were given to women who were friends of Napolitano, and when the abuse was reported to the Equal Employment Opportunity office, that Napolitano launched a series of misconduct investigations against the reporting party, Hayes.[59] The Immigrations and Customs Enforcement’s spokesperson stated that he would not comment on “unfounded claims”.[60]
      Suzanne Barr, who was one of Napolitano’s first appointments after she became secretary in 2009, went on leave after Hayes filed his lawsuit and then resigned on September 1, 2012. She called the allegations in the lawsuit “unfounded.”[61]
      Napolitano was sued by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who claims he was pulled from his post interviewing suspicious travelers at JFK Airport after making a series of employment-discrimination complaints.[62] In November 2012, Hayes’ attorney in Maryland, Morris Fischer, said the “parties have come to an agreement in principle”[clarification needed] to settle the case for $175,000. In addition to the money, “a formal settlement agreement will be executed within the next several days” that will include other conditions, including Hayes keeping his job.[63]
      Chancellor Katehi is just another prey  for the   Ursus arctos horribilis  who  was sent by  President Obama  to  the   “Safe Haven”  called  the University of California Office of the President.

  1. Tia Will

    My understanding is that she is on paid administrative leave during the investigation. This leads to the sticky situation in which whomever provides the money for her compensation ( students, families, taxpayers…) are paying not only any UCD related costs for the investigation but also the Chancellors’ costs for the investigation. It would seem to me that prolonging the investigation for whatever reason financially benefits only one individual and that is Linda Katehi.


    1. Biddlin

      In a different era, anyone as embattled and as scorned as Katehi would have had the good grace to resign and move on. today, everyone stands their ground.

      1. Napoleon Pig IV

        “. . . the good grace to resign and move on.”

        Biddlin’s observation pretty well sums it up. The rest is about how much money the lawyers can make before the moving on part starts.

      2. DavidSmith

        Why would you resign if your reputation is wrongfully harmed with false allegations and no evidence? If I were Katehi, I would certainly follow the same steps as she is following right now, that is to restore the reputation.

        1. Justice4All

          She didnt hire and promote her daughter in law to the tune of six figures? She doesnt have an inherent conflict of interest with a for profit university or a textbook company? She didnt play an important role in the pepper spray incident? Come on now.

    2. Jerry Waszczuk


      Chancellor did not place herself on administrative leave. It never should happened  regardless  whether  Chancellor dis something wrong or not . Napolitano was  out of her mind by placing Chancellor on  investigatory leave . This is a University Chancellor not some Waszczuk , an  power plant operator  in  the UC Davis Medical Center .  This what Napolitano did  to Chancellor  Katehi is  a worse image  than  the November 18, 2011 image of Lt. Pike with the  M-9 pepper spray can.

      Incredibly  stupid move.

      1. Tia Will


        Chancellor did not place herself on administrative leave. It never should happened  regardless  whether  Chancellor dis something wrong or not “

        I find your comment confusing on two points.

        First, I do not believe that anyone thinks that the Chancellor “put herself on administrative leave”. There are however, many, myself included that believe that the Chancellor should have resigned when it became clear that she had gone outside regulations in her acceptance of the DeVry board position without prior approval. However, I do realize that poor judgement is in the eye of the beholder and that the Chancellor has many supporters who do not believe that her “missteps” as she has characterized them warranted resignation.

        Your second assertion is more troublesome to me. But perhaps I misunderstand. It seems to me that you are saying that the Chancellor should not be investigated even if she did something wrong. If this is your position, then I could not disagree more. When one has “done something wrong” there are only two acceptable ways forward. 1. The individual either admits to the wrong doing and there is a restorative action taken which hopefully is in proportion to the infraction. In this case Chancellor Katehi was fulfilling the first part in admitting “missteps” but I so no evidence of a proportional restorative action. 2. In cases where the conditions in #1 are not met, there is need for investigation. This is the case regardless of who happens to support, agree with or is friends with the individual who committed the infraction.

        Also, I would assert that there is a point at which, even if the individual has been willing to admit error and compensate accordingly that if enough of these errors in judgement have accrued, that one can only conclude that the individual is not a good fit for their position in which the honorable course of action would be resignation. This is what I would have recommended for the Chancellor.


        1. Jerry Waszczuk


          Did you watch Melinda Guzman press conference video?

          Napolitano has no case . Katehi was singled out . Ketehi will emerge from this mess which was crated by Napolitano  with a big chunk of money paid by university .

          It is not only Katehi herself but also her family is a stake . It is not such simple .

        2. DavidSmith

          Tia, through all your writing, I can see that you are so preconceived that the Chancellor has indeed done something wrong. What if she hasn’t? What if it is Napolitano who has wronged? Have you let your emotion overtake the reasoning? Have you thought about all the possibilities?

          I agree with Guzman that our Chancellor has been singled out because she is a woman and because UC Davis is a “weak” campus that Napolitano thinks that she could manipulate.

          Have you or your fellow writers investigated into other UC administrators’ outside board positions? Do you know how much they make? Napolitano picked on Katehi for a reason, and that reason is certainly not justice.

          Damage has been done and is being done to UCD because of the stupid actions that Napolitano has taken. It makes me sad that you cannot see through this.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Napolitano needs to hit reset button for herself but who will hire her after she was fired by President  Obama. It can’t  get any worse  than to be fired by President Obama. Maybe Ms. Napolitano is trying to demote herself to  the UC Davis Chancellor position  because she can’t  to handle her job as a UC President ?  Melinda Haag will not rescue Napolitano from the mess she crated for herself. . Chancellor Katehi’s legal counsel most likely would  take appropriate action against Melinda Haag with  the state bar due to  Haag’s conflict of interest to represent university and Napolitano against Chancellor Katehi.

      1. Tia Will


        It can’t  get any worse  than to be fired by President Obama”

        Again, a point of disagreement. For me the point is not who does the firing, or resignation with change of position, it is the reason for this action.

        The point for me is always, is the individual a good fit for the position they are in ?  This does not mean that they are good or evil, or like almost everyone, somewhere in between. It means are their goals, strategies and actions in alignment with the position that they hold ? I believe that regardless of Napolitano’s strengths and weaknesses, Chancellor Katehi had demonstrated through her own actions that her goals, strategies and actions were not a good fit for a public university. As such, as others have pointed out, the gracious and time, money, and energy sparing move would have been for her to find an alternative position where she would be a good fit and move on voluntarily. Her choice to not do so, is in my opinion, simply another example of poor decision making and a clear demonstration that she has consistently put her own interests above those of the university and its students.

        1. Jerry Waszczuk


          It is not for me and you or public to decide weather Chancellor performed her duty up to  the university expectation .  The Regents hired Chancellor and Regents will let her go if they decided to do so.  Napolitano is regent’s  marionette who will sign the paper  and she has no any  power to pull the trigger on Chancellor. I am dealing with  this stuff for some time. If the  regents  had to made decision to fire me from the job after over one year I spent on administrative leave than Chancellor Katehi’s  is in the Regents hands for sure.. Melinda Haag and this witch hunt show is just a  mitigation of damages which Napolitano caused  for  unknown reason to us .

          Let me rephrase  my statemnt.

          It can ‘t get any  worse for Janet  Napolitano who is trying to send  the UC Davis Chancellor to the unemployment office after being fired herself by President Obama.

          Napolitano will fry herself by this witch hunt. Regents probably scratching their head how to resolve this conflict with out more harm for university .


    2. Tia Will


      I really, really did not want things to get to the point of firing. But, with Chancellor Katehi choosing a retributive course of action through prolonging an investigation that she knows does not benefit the university, I am approaching agreement with your point of view.

      This in no way is an endorsement of Janet Napolitano, but is certainly a desire to see Chancellor Katehi removed permanently from the position of Chancellor at UCD. Whether or not one likes Chancellor Katehi or not, for me is moot at this point in time. The steady drip, drip, drip of poorly thought through decisions made only by her is enough for me to desire her removal, preferably through resignation, but if need be by firing.

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        I  am not sure which Chancellor’s decisions you have in your mind which justified that she should be removal from the position . If you are talking again about DeVry and the other allegations outlined in Napolitano’s  administrative leave latter that no one is a cause for removing Chancellor from the position .  If  the  university starting to firing chancellors for such allegations and tolerate of occupation of the university building by group protesters fired up by media mockery  than university would have to be outsources to China to operate .

      2. DavidSmith

        Tia. I think you don’t see or have even thought of the other side of the issue. A thorough investigation is certainly good for UCD and more importantly for the UC system as a whole in the long term even if it’s going to cost some money now.

        An open and truly independent investigation will bring to light all the shady business at the President’s office.



  2. Marina Kalugin

    Maybe some people should get a clue and get the Napo removed?

    Napo was hired by the Gov to “clean up” UC>>….the Napo however is using military tactics to accomplish her feat…

    In addition to the gov, there are several “new” regents who are young and kinda clueless and besides the only reason they got the job is because they are buds with the gov…

    Then, you throw in some young and kinda clueless legislators who are also in cahoots…and it becomes quite obvious….what and why and how…and who.

    Napo’s problem is that she thought she could bring down someone who wouldn’t cow down to her….who stood up to her… who is so much above the Napo in all ways…education, national standing and so forth.  An internationally ranked and truly brilliant Chancellor… Linda Katehi….

    Linda Katehi does not NEED this job….she likely could retire and make billions on her research and millions on her publc talks of “what is wrong with the UC”  and how the “state funded model is a farce” and hardly better than for-profits like DeVry..


    Marina Kalugin (Rumiansev)

      1. Marina Kalugin

        hpierce   – wouldn’t you want the truth out and have your name cleared?

        she doesn’t want to come back, but many of us are working on her…

        first the Napo needs to go….

    1. Tia Will


      Maybe some people should get a clue and get the Napo removed?”

      This might well be true. But it remains irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Linda Katehi is well suited to the position of Chancellor. I have chosen to limit my comments to this issue.


    2. Alan Miller

      Napo was hired by the Gov to “clean up” UC>>….the Napo however is using military tactics to accomplish her feat…

      And ironically, Katehi used military-grade pepper spray against her protesting students . . .

  3. Marina Kalugin

    The only reason Linda is speaking out is because she has the complete support of every high level faculty member and many mangers throughout campus.

    I’m taking about the NAS members, the only HHMI senior investigator, any chair who I have talked with….the Directors who are still here….

    Even my UCD primary care, who I saw last week….

    Kathi still has the support of all the most brilliant faculty, lecturers etc.   The newer and hopefully better Dean’s than the good ole boys.

    I post a lot of things because it truly has become a fight of the Chancellor supporters versus the union funded mealy mouthed good ole boys on the campus….

    It is the Chancellor Katehi (David)  and the  Goliath…Ex-Chief of Homeland Security  Janet Napolitano on the other side…..you know….Ed Snowden and the NSA?   the movie documentary Citizen4″?

    If not for Putin, Ed would be dead by now….trust me on that…..

    If you are still on the idiots side of the framed case against our Chancellor….I wish I had an ignore button for you….

    1. hpierce

      Last sentence… I fully agree… I wish I had an ignore button for you and Jerry…

      I understand that everyone who disagrees with your view(s) are “idiots”… back at ‘cha…

      1. Biddlin

        “You are ignoring content by this member. ”
        hpierce, have you PMed David and Don with your wish? Frankly, in the legitimate usage, on other fora I frequent, populated by guitar players and builders, any members who were so persistently impertinent and argumentative would be “banned,” either for a predetermined period or “life.” To be honest, I find David’s patience both admirable and cloying.

        And remember BP and Frankly, you could click to ignore me……


    2. Jerry Waszczuk


      Napolitano’s mind is set in the  U.S Homland Security and she will never get over with .  She is in trauma stage and her  despicable action against Chancellor will most likely  end her  post Obama’s journey with the University of California.

  4. Marina Kalugin

    Would someone, like Barack, please show the docs since you brought it up?

    The last I was at a UC Wide managers meeting, we had a presentation that the state only funds less than 13% of the cost of education….

    That was 2 years ago, as I was not able to get there this year…

    Marina Kalugin (Rumiansev)

  5. Marina Kalugin

    PS>  There is NO transparency for the UCOP…..and little on the campus, regardless of all the hype…

    If anyone could truly get ALL the dollars and sense it would make more sense who is funding what.

    But, since the Napo and the gov have the same agenda…..it doesn’t matter which funds she uses for what…

    PS>  The Gov wants to kill off the Delta with that idiotic tunnel idea……and Linda and some of our faculty speak out against THAT idiocy..    LOL

  6. Marina Kalugin

    those of us who stood up to and then fled communism are not quite as cowed or feel the need to be “polite” in life and death matters…..

    and, it is becoming very clear who are the ones who think they are so smart and yet are terribly clueless…and also hide behind their psydoneums…

    you now who I mean..

    one even complained to the moderator about me….and that is a funny story  which I think I will share if the idiots continue to make me mad…   LOL

    1. hpierce

      those of us who stood up to and then fled communism

      Strategic retreat? or cowardice/lack of conviction?

      I agree with the insight that you are mad.  But no one can MAKE you mad… it’s your choice… unless you believe others control you…


    2. Tia Will

      Marina and Jerry

      those of us who stood up to and then fled communism are not quite as cowed or feel the need to be “polite” in life and death matters…..”

      She is in trauma stage….”

      I understand that those who fled communism will have a very different perspective on events than those of us who did not have that experience. I am wondering if either of you has considered that this experience may have served as similar trauma for you and may continue to color how you view events.

      Your reference to being polite in “life and death matters” makes me wonder if you consider Janet Napolitano’s position and/or who holds the position of Chancellor at UCD to be “life and death matters”.

      1. DavidSmith

        Tia, you may not have realized that the matter is indeed “life and death matters”. Not to a particular person though, but to UC Davis. If you truly wish the University to do well, you should be vowing for Napolitano to be fired right away.

        Chancellor Katehi has done a wonderful job in bringing UCD to the next level. And in order to do that, she has got to fire a bunch of incompetent people. These people are those who plagued the system and making the noise again Katehi right now.

        I implore you to do more investigation before you pick your side.

    3. ryankelly

      Marina, I do think you cross the line often with your name calling and many off topic comments.  I also take offense with your disparaging comments about students, your employees, and your employee’s union representation.  For someone who has enjoyed stable employment and generous benefits, you sure have a lot of complaints about your employer, your co-workers and the students that you are supposed to serve.  We’re all idiots to you.  So why expect us to listen to you?

  7. Mike Hart

    Hire Katehi!!!

    Its about time we put all this silly BS behind us and get our Chancellor back on the job she is paid for doing exactly what she has been doing so well during her term thus far!

    1. Tia Will

      Mike Hart

      Do you consider :

      -the handling of the student protest culminating in the pepper spray   incident

      – the choice to join the board of DeVry without prior approval

      – the choice to lend her name to KAU

      – the contract to “improve her image and that of UCD” through selective manipulation of internet and social media

      to be “doing so well” ?  If so, we would simply have to disagree about what doing well means.


      1. Marina Kalugin

        Tia, if you make it through the hour long press conference…and Jerry just posted the link yet again I believe, you could answer your own questions…..

        and perhaps you might even blush since I called you out on it…

        once you watch and listen, perhaps you wouldn’t mind to post the answers here for OTHERs to see also..

        I am trying to work……I have deadlines this week….due to idiots at work….like what’s his name….oops….Lawlor…. of course, he is not there anymore….but I have been mentioning him in many of my rants on Campus for many months now….OOPS>>>>

  8. Frankly

    This Katehi debacle, that really started with pepperspraygate, is rooted in the national political meltdown we are seeing all around us.  And that political meltdown is rooted the changes to our national economy that have been both caused by and then exploited by a certain class of establishment politician that infest our political systems.

    It is very interesting that this national conflict between economic classes exists within one of the most prestigious state universities… one where there is copious privileged just to be admitted.

    The main UCD campus does not have a business school.  Otherwise the balance would tilt in Katehi’s favor.  UCD has STEM and liberal arts.  And the professors and students of these two camps have some relationship problems that match a similar problem nationwide.

    STEM graduates generally go on to earn a living in the new upper class.  Liberal arts graduates are more likely to find their economic prospects more and more diminished by comparison… and landing them in the lower economic class.

    You can see how this plays out watching the videos of the anti-Trump mobs… low-income working class and immigrant hotheads mixing with those sporting multiple tattoos, piercings and hair colors.  They all tend to live in the same neighborhoods where housing is more affordable.  They both look at those exclusive gated communities filled with BMW and Prius cars and stew.

    But these liberal arts types are their own worst enemies for their cause.

    – They demonize and protest business and economic success.

    – They demand and vote for higher taxes in some twisted logic of righteousness to take from the “rich” and give to the “poor”… as if this is really going to help improve their human condition.

    – They demand government mandated wage rates and employee benefit costs on private business.

    – They adopt the religion of antropogenic climate change and then demand and vote for increased environmental regulations.

    – They lament the loss of open space and demand and vote for regulations to stop development.

    – They continually vote for politicians that waste our tax money increasing the population of government worker upper class in payback for campaign donations and help.

    And what this all adds up to is their contributing to their very economic misery by demanding and voting for things that reduce their economic opportunity.

    The liberal arts mob is feeling left out (and we know that they FEEL very strongly) and in their emotional response they are really biting the hand that would feed them.

    The private economy and those that create and grow successful business are the root for how everyone else can achieve a good life.  Liberal arts people and their low-income partners in tirade need to have some epiphanies on this… instead of drawing battle lines over feeling left out, they should be working more closely with the STEM side in partnership to exploit their combined talents.  Someone like Katehi leading UCD should be seen as being beneficial to those protesting against her… but this assumes a rational consideration not an emotional one.

    1. hpierce

      Yeah, right… just look at the private medical providers have increased their rates for insurance over the last 10 years… far less than general inflation, right?  NOT!  Given the effect on Medicare, public employee rates, private medical compensation, etc., strong case for re-thinking your position…

  9. Tia Will


    The liberal arts mob is feeling left out (and we know that they feel very strongly) and in their emotional response they are really biting the hand that would feed them.”

    Very interesting choice of words coming from you. “The hand that would feed them”. Has it occurred to you that what many on the left desire is not a handout, whether it comes from the government or from the leavings on the plate of some billionaire, but rather a level playing field to begin with. What many are seeking is the opportunity that increasingly is available only to the elite and privileged have ( as you alluded to about entrance to UCD) and that is the ability to pursue their talents and dreams with the same opportunity as those who consider a million dollar loan to be a “small loan from my father”.

    1. Frankly

      “The hand that would feed them” is a metaphor not to be taken literally.  The “feeding” in this case is economic opportunity that would allow an individual to leverage his/her unique talents to pursue his/her self-interests while making a reasonably good living.

      Where this gets screwed up is that the collection of liberal arts people tend to be wired as political liberals and liberals tend to be wired to filter on fairness and harm more than any other consideration.

      And unfortunately it makes them short-sighted.   And this shortsightedness makes them systematically destructive to their own well-being.

      The bottom line is that otherwise able-minded and able-bodied humans will never be self-actualized receiving government handouts as part of their feeling for achieving economic self-sufficiency.

      Given this, then why the hell to liberals demand greater taxation on business for redistribution?

      Why does almost every change and every policy they advocate for punish the very people that can provide them economic opportunity?

      This gets us back to the Katehi debacle.  She is being attacked by this liberal arts mob for doing things like sitting on the board of DeVry… when improving the success of private for profit higher learning business could provide future job opportunities for UCD graduates.  The comments in opposition to this are clearly based on an emotional or symbolic issue… the business THEM against the liberal arts US.

      Again, biting the hand that would feed them.

      Where the hell do these highly sensitive artistic types think economic opportunities originate from?

      Instead of having to take so many politically-biased social science classes, maybe we should require that all liberal arts students take at least two semesters of economics.  But before that, their professors should be required to do the same.

      1. Tia Will


        The “feeding” in this case is economic opportunity that would allow an individual to leverage his/her unique talents to pursue his/her self-interests while making a reasonably good living.”

        This would be fine if this was indeed the outcome of our system. Unfortunately, it is not. Our current system does not come anywhere near to providing an opportunity for every individual to “leverage his/her unique talents to pursue his/her self-interests while making a reasonably good living.

        If it did, we would not be having this conversation. We would not have individuals having to work two and three jobs in order to make a “reasonably good living”.

        But what we do have are individuals so enamored of the idea of capitalism and a free market that they cannot see that we have confused an aspirational state with our current reality which falls far short of that ideal. We have some individuals who have achieved either for themselves or through the help of others a “reasonable living” and then are willing to vilify those who have not achieved the same and those who actual care that this is the case.

        Getting back to the issue of Katehi :

         She is being attacked by this liberal arts mob for doing things like sitting on the board of DeVry… when improving the success of private for profit higher learning business could provide future job opportunities for UCD graduates.  “

        This may be true for some of her critics. However, it certainly does not apply to all. It is her judgement that is at issue for me. She has made many of what she herself characterizes as “missteps” through the years. How many, missteps would it take to consider than someone was not a good fit for their position. Or to put it in my terms, how many surgical errors would it take before a surgeon should be frank about their need for either retraining or to take only less challenging or limited types of cases. Errors do not make a person bad, but they should be assessed regularly to see if the individual is truly an appropriate fit for their position. This is the route that I believe that Chancellor Katehi should have taken before this turned into this total debacle.


        1. Frankly

          What a crack up.  You basically cannot see the points I am making and are demonstrating the very self-destructive attitudes I am talking about.

          You are unhappy with the system providing enough equal opportunity, so you are demonizing it and demanding it be reformed… to what?

          From this article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/whats-killing-jobs-and-stalling-the-economy-1464992963

          a 2010 report for the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration, researchers at Lafayette University found that the per employee cost of federal regulatory compliance was $10,585 for businesses with 19 or fewer employees, compared with $7,755 for companies of 500 employees or more. Large and established businesses navigate through rules and compliance requirements. Small and new businesses often find them prohibitive.

          Note that in the Obama era the number of regulations on business has exploded.

          In 1950, 5% of workers required a license or certificate. Today that number is close to 30%. Fortunetellers, party planners, florists, shampoo assistants, cosmetologists, manicurists, beekeepers, librarians and many others have joined the ranks of licensed workers. As the rate of private-sector unionization has fallen, occupational licensing has become a new barrier to entry into the workplace and a tool to protect incumbents from competition.

          Another troubling economic undercurrent is the decline of churn in the labor force. The flow of unemployed to employed has declined from close to 30% in 2007 to 16% at the trough of the recession to roughly 20% over the past two years. There has been a shift from full-time to part-time work, and the flow of workers to and from jobs has been dropping since the early 2000s, despite the drop in the unemployment rate.

          n every quarter during the 1990s, six of every 100 workers moved to new jobs, while 5.5 out of 100 workers left their jobs. When they are not fired, many employees move from firm to firm, or different jobs within their firm in search of broader experience, better pay, better prospects for career-building and advancement or greater compatibility with personal needs. Historically, young firms have been dynamic job creators, but they now account for a smaller share of new hires, down from about 38% in the late 1990s to roughly 33% today, according to the Kauffman Foundation.

          And then the summary:

          Washington and state governments need to wake up and remove obstacles to investment, new business formation and labor mobility. Encouraging investment in human capital and productive infrastructure is essential, and so is moving to financial and interest-rate conditions that promote investment and growth. That might give American investors and workers the bounce they deserve. What we’ve been doing so far hasn’t worked. Time for something new?

          But instead those hypersensitive liberal arts types and political liberals demand we fire the Katehi types and install people more like them… so they can all continue to demand all the things that continue to demolish their opportunity for a good life.

  10. Tia Will


    Thanks for taking the time to clarify your position. I have one more issue with many of your statements. You frequently use the phrase “witch hunt”. To me this phrase implies a search for something that does not exist or has not occurred. This phrase is not applicable when there has been actual wrong doing. I completely understand that this is not yet “proven” to a standard that the regents have considered reason for removal.

    However, I would point out, that without investigation, anyone who does not freely admit to wrongdoing would never be removed. Are you arguing for a system in which investigation does not occur, or are you opposing this only because of your personal support for Chancellor Katehi and obvious dislike of  Janet Napolitano ?

  11. tj

    Katehi’s husband:  No one here has mentioned his unusually high pay and his special designation, along with the surprisingly few hours that he works, compared to other lecturers.

    The resignation of UCD’s financial officer might well be related to this.

    1. Erin Knuth

      The CFO was fired by Napolitano because he prepared a budget that shows that UCD was receiving disproportionally low funding from the UCOP for admitting the most in-state students among all UC campuses. Napo was not happy to see the budget.

  12. Tia Will


     It is not such simple “

    Well on this point at least, we are in agreement. This is not simple. A witch hunt would be simple. A confession of errors and attempt to right any wrong doing would be simple. This situation is far from simple and there are many different ways of interpreting various actions on the part of all parties.

    I have not seen this press conference or any other press conference. But truly, what would you expect a lawyer for a litigant to put forward but the best possible interpretation of your client’s actions along with the adamant claim of their innocence ?

    1. Marina Kalugin

      tia – so why didn’t you see it?   it is kinda long…most of todays folks are the twitter generation.

      I am sure Jerry posted the link,   right Jerry?  or should I?

    2. Jerry Waszczuk


      Witch hunt is not simple . I was witch hunted for six years by army of lawyers and other UC perpetrators  and I did not not know why I  was witch hunted .  I found the reason three years after my termination of employment . I spent over one year on paid  administrative leave . I never have heard during the  13 years of my employment with UC that any employee  could be kept on administrative -investigatory leave for over one year . It had to be very serious problem  to be investigate for over one year.

      Here everybody whining that chancellor is on administrative leave for one month.

      I defeated  regents in arbitration process myself and the  regents signed  settlement- agreement  than shortly after the regents  trashed the agreement and attacked me again`.  This what  is happening today  to Chancellor Katehi. This  like  a copycat scenario what was happening to me in December 2006-December 2012.   The first attempt to remove Chancellor was November 2011 and this is the second operation against her  with  more powerful forces like Neapolitano,  Melinda Haag and McGregor Scott.  However  the chancellor is in a lot batter position than I was  because she has more more money and resources to defend herself and her family  and she knows a lot more than I do .

      If I would know in 2012 that the regents misappropriated $65,000,000 of the  public funds and tax payers money than I would be in a  lot better position today .

      I see this action against Chancellor as new can of warms which could be fully opened or completely sealed.  It depend  on how much regents are willing to pay to seal the can.

      Seems to me  that Janet Napolitano and Jacob Applesmith  were hired in 2013  to take care of Linda Katehi , taking  into consideration that Napolitano (General Counsel) hired Haag and McGregor Scott against chancellor. Looks like that  since  2013  Chancellor  and her family were placed under the magnifying glass and the  DeVry and the  scrubbing Lt. Pike image from internet were the planed causes of action against Chancellor.



      1. Tia Will


        This what  is happening today  to Chancellor Katehi.”
        Although I do not know the particulars of your situation, I doubt that you committed the same errors of judgement as the Chancellor. Since you cannot read my mind, I will list a few of the judgement errors, and other acts not truly befitting a Chancellor in my mind. You most likely will not agree, but at least you will know what I see as her short comings.

        1. The series of decisions she made that culminated in the pepper spray incident. Specifically she over road the warnings of her own police department that the day and time she chose to clear the quad were not optimal. She did not listen to her own “on the ground” advisor who told her and her leadership team that the protestors where only students, UCD affiliates and a few community supporters, not hired thugs or rapists from outside. Instead, she chose to act on unfounded fears due to the events in Berkeley. Nothing nefarious, but a series of bad decisions leading to the illegal pepper spraying of peaceful protestors.

        2. Her choice to involve herself in the 3 boards. True, only one of these was without prior approval ( DeVry), but all three selections demonstrated in my view extremely poor judgement. Then even, when called out on it, she chose to divert only a portion of her proceeds to benefit students. Finally the choice to lend her name, and thus the name of UCD to the sleezy operation that is KAU is in my  mind extremely poor judgement.

        3. The choice to engage the services of a company whose mission was to make her and UCD “look better” ( mind you not be better, but only to look that way) through internet and social media manipulation. I do not care if this is common practice. I do not care if “she cannot be expected to read every contract”. This one was specifically about her image and that of UCD, and as such she demonstrated extremely poor judgement, either in approving it personally, or not accepting responsibility for not having done so. Either way, very poor judgement.

        4. I realize that if is very common for a spouse to be hired when their partner has a very high position with the university. I have no problem with this as long as the position and compensation is commensurate with their qualifications. I do not know the specifics of the Chancellor’s husband’s employment, however, I do think that if his compensation or position were exceptional for his actual role, then this again is an example of very poor decision making and at the very least, poor optics

        5. I inherently do not like people taking more credit than is their due. In my view the Chancellor has done this repeatedly. I have three examples. 1. The increase in women in STEM. While it is true that the Chancellor has presided over more women entering the STEM fields, what is also true is that UCD going back at least 30 years has been a leading school in women going into science based fields with medicine and vet medicine being two obvious examples. The Chancellor has continued this, but was far from an imitator of this trend at UCD. 2. Fund raising – yes, Chancellor Katehi has been successful in this area. But I would say that this is actually the work of those who are employed specifically for fundraising for the various academic fields and less directly the Chancellor who was obviously very successful in making money for herself, but perhaps overzealous in accepting credit that actually should go to her “boots on the ground” fundraisers.3. One last example. The nursing school. Doubtless a major asset in the area of medicine. However, not a project of Chancellor Katehi’s and yet she was positioned to accept the accolades.

        6. Finally, one last word about judgement. I have nothing to say one way or the other about Napolitano. My criticisms of Chancellor Katehi are solely with regard to actions or “missteps” as she has called them that were her decisions, and hers alone. It is not one single judgement error that I feel disqualifies her for the position of Chancellor. It is the repetitive nature of these so called “missteps” that leads me to believe that she is not a good fit for her position and should have had the good grace to step down voluntarily. I know from personal experience that this is not an easy choice. Within the past year I voluntarily stepped away from a more lucrative position when it became clear that I was no longer optimally effective in that role even though I had the full support of my supervisor. I had made choices that compromised my effectiveness, and it was time to move on.

        I believe that this is the position of the Chancellor and she should choose the most responsible and gracious exit strategy for the good of the university. Whether or not she wants to go public with her version of the truth after that is another matter. Her current course of action is an ongoing source of damage to the university that she choose to serve.


        1. SODA

          Tia, you have once again given your reasons for ‘advising’ the Chancellor to resign before she was placed on               ?90/?120 day leave and I agree with all and would add another; I am a proponent of free speech yet cringe at the whole press conference situation. I wonder why her ‘team’ waited well into the 90/120 day leave to react to events which appear to have happened early in the leave….and it just appears unseemly and to once again strengthen the tarnish she has left on UCD during her tenure.  Would you agree?

      2. Tia Will


        I apologize for any confusion caused by my comment about witch hunts. I did not intend to imply that the process of a witch hunt is simple. Only the concept. I realize that you had a prolonged battle with the university. I just do not see your situation and that of the Chancellor as equivalents. Perhaps I do not know since I have not followed the particulars of your case, but I think I can be sure that the decisions of the Chancellor that I  listed in response to your question are not the same as the issues that you had.

        1. Jerry Waszczuk


          My issue are not same as Chancellor’s issues but were handled by UCOP  and Regents and UCOP made decision to let me go. Nobody in UC Davis wanted to deal with my termination beside the  UC Davis Medical Center  Gestapo which was carried out attacks against me by the orders from the  UCOP.
          Everything what you wrote  about Chancellor Katehi’s   performance  should be resolved between Chancellor , Regents and  former or Present UC President in professional way with hand shake and thank you for your service instead of plotting mob attacks and provocations in forms of TV show  Mrak Hall occupations by group of agitated by media students which was similar to December 18, 2011 TV show.   
          November 18, 2011 was the  Steven Drown’s , Matt Crmichael’s  and few others more important personas TV Show to remove Chancellor Katehi and Annette Spicuzza . If  Yolo County  not refuse to file criminal charges against Lt. Pike that we would know today who was behind the provocation beside Steven Drown and Matt Carmichael.    
          lucky that he was not charged criminally by Yolo Districtrict  by  Steven Drown who handle him M-9 pepper
          So far Chancellor did not do anything wrong and nothing was proved that she did something wrong which is out of scope of university policies or Chancellor’s independent judgment for which she was entitled to as Univesrity  Head with her power.
          As I understand, the most of the participants on this blog are educated and intelligent people with perfect knowledge of English including you.  As I respect everybody’s view and opinion here, I fail to understand why most of you acting like a mob and trying to lynch Chancellor Katehi and her family over and over and over. Chancellor’s  life and her family’s life is already devastated by Janet Neapolitan for the reason you don’t know and I don’t know. Repeating over and over the alleged Chancellor Katehi’s missteps or her alleged mistakes which have occurred in the course or the UC Davis business are not the proof of guilt or reason to humiliate Chancellor and her family and it shall not be used  for destruction of their normal day by day life.
          If you look closely at Chancellor known record, you can’t find complaint against Chancellor from the faculties, students or staff in form of the complaints under the university polices which stated that she abused her power, retaliated against faculty and staff members.  This is mean to me that she is a good human being and good person beside her professional life achievement of which most of us could only dream.  I don’t know and I have no clue where the hate against Chancellor Katehi on this blog is coming from. Most of you discussing the subject like you trying to please somebody. Is maybe not true but it looks like.
           I am not associated with Chancellor or her family in any way. I never met any of them. I am completely neutral in this discussion. I am purely looking facts, legal ground especially the university policies which I know quite well and policies have same meaning and power as a state statutes by  the law.  In my worker career I represented quite few victimized by UC Gestapo employees. I am using the term GESTAPO for the reason. I was told by the UC manager that he will send UC Gestapo on my ass and it happened.  This was witnessed documented and is in court file .
          This is what is going today with Chancellor Katehi and her family. Not the UC policies but the UC Gestapo got into business to finish Chancellor and her family for reason I don’t know yet why and no one on this forum knows why.  
          Look only how much support Napolitano got in this assault aimed at Chancellor and her family. You have a  few legislators who are  quiet now because they embarrassed themselves  with their support for Napolitano . You have  fired up students as a shield for the assault. The occupation of the Mrak Hall was a provocation to get Chancellor  similar to the November 18, 2011. It failed big time .  
          Yesterday I posted the UC Senior Vice Chancellor Daniel Dooley’s letter addressed to UC President Janet Napolitano and Regents Chairman Varner. I posted this letter in comparison with alleged Chancellor Katehi’s violations.  The Regent De La Pena behavior if true is falling into category of serious white collar crime and racketeering similar to Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. If any of California legislator would do what De La Pena did (if true) than he would land in the federal prison like Senator Leland Yee who was brought down by Napolitano’s buddy Malinda Haag.
          Senior Vice President Daniel Dooley quit his $ 400, 000 job in January 2015 but Napolitano was employing him to investigate Regent De La Pena’s white collar crime under UC whistleblowing policy
          Senior Vice President Daniel Dooley was on the Carlos Reynoso’s Task Force Team which was assembled after November 18, 2011 TV Show pepper spray with unforgettable and priceless image of Lt. Pike with M-9 pepper spray can.
          Senior Vice President Daniel Dooley was on investigation team to investigate for 18 months my whistle blowing retaliation complaint and issued half page decision covering up further the UC Regents Misappropriation of the $ 65, 000, 000 of public funds and related to millions of dollars’ tax fraud.
          Let me know if you misunderstand any of my statements. Response is not proof- read

  13. Marina Kalugin

    tj,  where have you been?   it has been mentioned ad infinitum…and also, likely he should be stellar to keep up with the likes of his wife….

    most men who are willing to take a second seat to the wife, understand that the woman may have better options….at least, if both are academics…

    his salary is based on what the person would accept, and negotiated with the UCOP and the Regents have to approve over a certain dollar amount….don’t recall if he makes more than the “dollar amount” or whether he did when the Chancellor was first hired…

    another non-issue…or is it because those who are not stellar and sit in the assoc prof ranks for eons simply have sour grapes?

    as I said, one won’t see the STELLAR faculty on campus throwing stones at the Chancellor…

    1. tj

      I said “here”, Marina, not elsewhere.  Before criticizing, you might want to consider your trouble with English and whether it affects your understanding of one comment or another.

      1. Marina Kalugin

        I am now saving my posts before I post them.

        I told the idiots about my life and my relatives lives…

        and said that you should share yours….

        these same incompetents who are now moderators, think that nothing is worth posting…

        unless one plays nicely in the sandbox and unless one shows proper decorum….

        obviously the didn’t read the brilliant work by Chekhov called the Idiot……and if they did, they likely did NOT read it in the original Russian…

        like you and I did……of course, ones experiences color ones judgement.

        for those who are not educated enough, they can look back to the 70s and see that ENVIRONMENT always trumps genetics….and they could then learn something also…



        1. hpierce

          Uh, ‘The Idiot’ was written by Dostoyevsky… not Chekhov… so much for your “scholarly credibility”… do you recall the reason folk called the character an ‘idiot’?  I suspect not, but you can always ‘google it’… read the book as a young college student… recreational reading, not an assignment…

          The better referent might be Dostoyevsky’s other book… ‘Crime and Punishment’.

          Oh, yes, I only read those books in English… mea culpa…

        2. Marina Kalugin

          good call hp   – you passed…   LOL

          but did you read the THREE sisters – that one also had lots of idiots in it… LOL

          I don’t know if you saw my response before the moderators erased it….but you may have found it interesting… not sure though…it was grossly off topic…

          how about War and Peace…. I read that first in grade school – then in HS and then at UCD>>.each time in the original russian..

          I later read it i English…it loses a LOT in translation…

          PS> in the Russian language, idiot is a very mild and even a playful derogatory word…. but lots of americans take offense….like my current hubby…..ooops…

        3. hpierce

          Marina, recall that the “idiot” suffered from epilepsy, as did Dostoyevsky… epilepsy is not a ‘choice’… nor a sign of intellectual ‘lacking’… your equation of the character to those who disagree with you is truly disturbing…

        4. Marina Kalugin

          hpierce:   a quote in English from Chekhov

          “The unhappy are egotistical, base, unjust, cruel, and even less capable of understanding one another than are idiots. … Note-Book of Anton Chekhov (1921)”

          In Russian language, there were many connotations of the word “idiot”…

          it often meant a simple folk, someone who was below the mid point on IQ tests…

          there were the “village idiots”…and there were also those who simply were slow…perhaps a bit on the retarded side mentally

          physical disabilities were typically not made fun of, as is so common in the US….

          I must confess, it has been more than 4-5 decades since I read any of the idiot books.

          most Russian books of that era included idiots in various roles……

          it was most often not used meanly however ….




  14. Marina Kalugin

    the other site was better, the periscope or whatnot?   or it that on the twitter account?

    that was very long…lets see how the twitter generation feels about spending so much time on a long video…


  15. Marina Kalugin

    did no one ever learn as a preschooler….sticks and stones may break ones bones, but words can never hurt you?

    of course, they only never learned that sometimes one needs to yell to be heard…..and survive and live or die…

    in the US many think that money is what gives a good life.

    it is not….as someone who scrapped by babysitting while putting myself through school including UCD>…

    and had nary a penny while spending 7 years in a cult…..and then bought my first house while a UCD reentry student, but needed roomates to pay expenses.

    who now has the money and the attorneys at my disposal to fight ANY nonsense claim against me..

    LOL>… have at it….

  16. Marina Kalugin

    JEez Frnakly…..in my older, wiser and more cynical age, I am now more liberal again…wonder how THAT happened…

    ps who has time to fix wordos and typos…not bothering anymore…

  17. Jerry Waszczuk


    March 25, 2015

    Re: Whistleblower Complaint against Regent De La Pena related to alleged violation of Regents Policy 1110 (Conflict of Interest)

    Dear Chairman Varner and President Napolitano:

    I oversaw the investigation of whistleblower complaints filed against Regent De La Pena under the University of California’s Policy on Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Suspected Improper Governmental Activity (Whistleblower Policy) in my capacity as the Systemwide Locally Designated Official. I recently retired, but I am continuing to serve as the Special Acting Systemwide Locally Designated Official at the University’s request.
    The complaints raised a number of questions about Regent De La Pena’s conduct related to the potential acquisition by UCLA of Regent De La Pena’s ophthalmology clinics. The specific questions raised by the complaints were:
    ·      Did Regent De La Pena repeatedly request that Dr. Feinberg find a way to purchase his clinics outside of the Regental process?
    ·      Did these alleged efforts by Regent De La Pena include a suggestion to orchestrate a sale of his clinics to the Doheny Eye Institute weeks before the UCLA Doheny deal to avoid a conflict of interest on his part?
    ·      Did Regent De La Pena retaliate in any manner against Dr. Feinberg as a consequence of his refusal to involve UCLA in the purchase of his clinics?
    An experienced outside investigator, Keith Rohman, Public Interest Investigations, Inc., was retained to investigate the allegations. Mr. Rohman interviewed numerous witnesses and considered voluminous documentation gathered during the course of the investigation from Regent De La Pena and other witnesses. Mr. Rohman prepared a substantial written report detailing his findings.

    Chairman Varner
    President Napolitano
    Page 2
    March 25, 2015
    Using a preponderance of the evidence standard, he made the following findings:
    ·      Between October 14, 2013, and November 26, 2013, Regent De La Pena
    repeatedly requested that Dr. Feinberg find a way to purchase Regent De La Pena’s clinics outside of the Regental process;
    ·      Regent De La Pena suggested that a sale of Regent De La Pena’s clinics to the Doheny Eye Institute be orchestrated in the weeks before the UCLA Doheny deal to avoid a conflict of interest on Regent De La Pena’s part; and
    ·      Regent De La Pena did not retaliate against Dr. Feinberg and UCLA for Dr. Feinberg’s refusal to involve UCLA in the purchase of Regent De La Pena’s clinics.
    Based upon findings in the report, I find that Regent De La Pena continued to engage in discussions regarding the Doheny deal after Regent De La Pena had been recused from participating in the matter. I also find that Regent De La Pena continued to pursue alternative scenarios by which Regent De La Pena’s clinics could be turned over to UCLA, up to the time of the January 2014 Regents meeting. I further find that Regent De La Pena did not retaliate against Dr. Feinberg and UCLA for his refusal to involve UCLA in the purchase of Regent De La Pena’s ophthalmology clinics.
    Importantly, the University adopted Regents Policy 1110 to conform to the Political Reform Act of 1974, rather than assert that its Constitutional autonomy exempted the University from provisions of the Act. It is reasonably settled in the law that it does not matter whether a designated official under the statute and corresponding conflicts of interest code initiated the prohibited contact or not. The facts are clear that Regent De La Pena engaged in a series of discussions about a potential transaction in which he had a financial interest from October 14, 2013 through and including the January 2014 Regents meeting.
    I have carefully reviewed the investigation report, which analyzes the evidence and provides Mr. Rohman’s findings of fact. I have also consulted with an attorney with substantial experience in California law related to conflicts of interest codes. Based upon a review of Mr. Rohman’s report and advice I received from the conflict of interest attorney, I am adopting the findings of Mr. Rohman. Consequently, I find Regent De La Pena’s conduct to be a substantial violation of Regents Policy 1110 regarding conflicts of interest. Pursuant to the University’s Whistleblower Policy, this clearly constitutes an improper governmental activity.
    In a separate matter, Mr. Rohman was also asked to determine if the preliminary signature that Dr. Feinberg provided for the UCLA Project Angel deal was appropriate under Regent Bylaw 12.7. In an email on September 18, 2014, Dr. Feinberg wrote to Dr. Stobo regarding Project Angel stating, “I made a decision to give a preliminary unauthorized signature knowing full well that Regental approval was needed but that we hadn’t achieved this yet.” Dr. Feinberg stated that the deadline to sign had arrived for the deal which required Regental approval, since the transaction involved entering into an LLC arrangement. This matter subsequently received

    Chairman Varner
    President Napolitano
    Page 3
    March 25, 2015

    Regental approval through an Action Under Interim Authority dated September 26, 2014. Based upon the information in the investigation report, I find that Dr. Feinberg violated Regent Bylaw 12.7 in signing the Project Angel document prior to it being considered and acted on by the Regents Committee on Health Services. While this action was contrary to Regent Policy, I do not find, based upon the factors involved, that it constituted a substantial violation that would rise to the level of improper governmental activity.
    In light of the seriousness of Regent De La Pena’s conduct, I recommend that you consider removing him from the position of Chair and member of the Health Services Committee and that he be precluded from participating in any Regental decisions arising from the Committee’s deliberations.


    Very truly yours,


    Daniel M. Dooley

    Special Acting Systemwide Locally Designated Official
    cc: Senior Vice President Vacca
    Director Lohse

  18. Jerry Waszczuk

    Why Napolitano did not hire Melinda Haag for  investigation against Regent De LaPena ??????

    This was a lot more serious stuff than DeVry.

    1. Tia Will


      This was a lot more serious stuff than DeVry.”

      For me, this while it may be true, is not the point.

      With my posts to the Vanguard, I remain focused on the performance of Dr. Katehi, not the performance of Ms. Napolitano.

      Actions that are wrong should not be tolerated. I can never answer the question of why another individual did not choose a different course of action.  But what I can be sure of is that lack of follow through on one problem, does not justify lack of  appropriate investigation of another wrong.

      1. DavidSmith

        Tia, to your point, I believe Chancellor Katehi has done a great job in bringing UCD to the next level. It would be tragic if we lose her. And truly, it would be difficult to find someone as capable as her. People make a lot of noise about her $40k salary. If only people could do a little investigation, they would find that presidents/chancellors at similar scale institutions are making way more than her.

  19. Misanthrop

    “”Dr. Katehi is a tenured professor of electrical engineering at UC Davis,’ she argued.”

    So Katehi has the right to return to a faculty position. Perfect, let her go back to research. Then she will retire soon enough. She is already in her sixties. At the end of the day this is another marker in negotiating the terms of surrender. Even her attorney seems to recognize Katehi will not be returning to Mrak unless its to clean out her desk.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Katehi was hired as a Chancellor and it is  her job . She has no right to take any position in UC Davis beside what she is now.

      Eventually  it  could  be negotiated  and if she agree by the  settlement to  surrender the Chancellor post and take a  faculty position than it could be done. Everything is negotiable in California with so many practicing  law attorneys.  1 attorney per  210 people. Maybe Chancellor  Katehi has a  contract which guarantee  her a different position if  she  decide not to continue her job as a Chancellor .

  20. Misanthrop

    “PS>  The Gov wants to kill off the Delta with that idiotic tunnel idea……and Linda and some of our faculty speak out against THAT idiocy..    LOL”

    When did Katehi speak out against the tunnels?

  21. Tia Will

    Hi SODA

    Yes, I agree. I can only think that at this point her legal advisor must have seen some strategic advantage to waiting this long. Either strategic, or perhaps financial. One possibility that might make sense is to buy time for Dr. Katehi to firm up a new position before moving on while still having the opportunity to build as strong a legal case as possible before assuming any new responsibilities.  I also agree with Marina  that it is unlikely that Dr. Kathi would be eager to return to the position of Chancellor under the current circumstances.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk


      Melinda Guzman is not Chancellor’s legal  advisor . She is highly skilled attorney who will put Napolitano in place and she slapped Napolitano and Haag quite good already if you watched the video. Now is everything  about money and damage control done by the Napolitano’s irresponsible action. Is hard to believe for me me that Napolitano with her skill ( she is a lawyers also) got herself in such mess that even regents and General Counsel Charles Robinson who is totally corrupted  don’t want to deal with.

    2. SODA

      It wouldn’t surprise me if she continued to fight. This whole episode has been a series of surprises! I do not think she has ever ‘gotten Davis’ and has rarely ventured beyond the campus, not engaging with the community and not much more with campus life. She rarely attended Mondavi events which was an easy way to engage.

      Coffee soon Tia?

      1. Jerry Waszczuk


        Why you surprised ? Chancellor from  the beginning was not welcomed warmly by the UC Davis and Davis . In 2009 Chancellor became a subject of vicious attack  from  some legislators. Chancellor did not fit the profile UC Davis  establishment could accept and I see t see this problem on this forum  as well .  This call the  diversity of opinions. This forum is like  story about the  Dr. Luther King’s  Day  and  Saint  Patrick’s  Day.

      2. Marina Kalugin

        gee Soda….now how would you know that she has not been in town much….docs please…


        frankly with so much of what YOU post, have you ever been in town? LOLLLLLLL

  22. Tia Will


     performance  should be resolved between Chancellor , Regents and  former or Present UC President in professional way with hand shake and thank you for your service”

    And this is exactly what would have happened if Chancellor Katehi had demonstrated some insight into the fact that her “missteps” ( her word, not mine) ,were piling up, and were an indication that she was no longer serving the best interests of the students and the university. She then could have made the choice to secure a new position, resign, and move on with dignity. When it gets to the point where you need a PR firm not to promote the greatness of your university, but to hide what has gone wrong, then I think it is time to do a serious assessment of your own efficacy. It is apparent that the Chancellor did not show this type of introspection.

    No one is saying that Chancellor Katehi has committed any crimes. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal construct, not an assessment of whether one is a good fit for their position. I do not know where you get the idea that anyone “hates” the Chancellor. I see her situation as very sad. I see this as the situation of a brilliant woman who accepted a position that was not in alignment with her philosophy which clearly favors privatization over public education. This is reflected in her management style, the types of partnerships she forged and the boards on which she chose to sit. None of this makes her a bad person. What it does is to place her in a position in which her values are in conflict with her mission which was to represent and serve all of the UCD students and staff, not merely those in her preferred fields.

    I have no personal knowledge of the Chancellor and therefore no animosity towards her. I just find it very sad that the legacy that she will be leaving, which could still on balance have been positive, will now be tainted by a  costly attack on the university that she was employed to represent and promote. How sad that in the end, it would appear that she has chosen to place her personal interests above those of the university.

    1. Marina Kalugin

      Tia…the protestors were VERY vocal in their hate of the Chancellor…especially the union paid ones…LOL

      some of the most mediocre of the faculty and staff  like to also send pothots at those more successful…..that is, unfortunately, human nature…

      I was surprised to what extent those in academia would go to try to take down the brilliant….

      that is common among the lower paid and lower educated ranks, but expected better from those with PhDs….

  23. Jerry Waszczuk


    This is not I am talking about. If  something was wrong that it should be resolved between Chancellor , UC President and UC Regents long time ago  and this is what happening now should never took  place . Napolitano  did not produced any record which shows  that  Chancellor was a bad  Chancellor and leader .  The  latest propaganda about nepotism and  transparency are  just  a   buzz words or opium  for masses .  Public versa private education is  separate and  more complex . Look who we have a  Regents. Private enterprise folks. They hired  Chancellor which met their expectation to do business .  If Chancellor will reject settlement and will  file the lawsuit  what most likely is not possible than she will write the  book and will make tons of money. She is  getting good commercial since November 18, 2011 for the book  to write  . My opinion about removing Lt. Pike image from internet is like everybody else but it is a mystery for me how the  Chancellor got set up for this deal . Knowing how UC Gestapo operates , setting  up provocations to fire employees ,  conducting  phony investigation , destroying the evidences than I am  very skeptical .  I have a quite file on this subject  which is not only from my case . 

    UC  Davis is  a Larry Vanderhoef  university  and  it is one of the reasons that Greek born Chancellor became vary unpopular from the beginning and UC Gestapo was close to depart her in 2011. Hexter is  not  a new Larry Vanderoef either.

  24. Jerry Waszczuk


    This is not what I am talking about. If  something was wrong that it should be resolved between Chancellor , UC President and UC Regents long time . What is  happening now should never took  place . Napolitano  did not produced any record which shows  that  Chancellor was a bad  Chancellor and leader .  The  latest propaganda about the  nepotism and  transparency are  just  a   buzz words or opium  for  the masses .  Public versa private education is  a separate and  more complex  issue . Look who we have as a   regents. Private enterprise folks. They hired  Chancellor which met their expectation to do business .

    If Chancellor will reject settlement and will  file the lawsuit  (not likely)  than she will write the  book and will make tons of money. She is  getting good commercial since November 18, 2011 for the book  to write  . My opinion about removing Lt. Pike image from internet is like everybody else but it is a mystery for me how the  Chancellor got set up for this deal . Knowing how  the UC Gestapo operates , setting  up provocations to fire employees ,  conducting  phony investigation , destroying the evidences than I am  very skeptical .  I have a quite file on this subject  which is not only from my case . 

    UC  Davis is still  a  Larry Vanderhoef’s   university  and  this is  one of the reasons that Greek born Chancellor became vary unpopular from the beginning in UC Davis  and UC Gestapo was very  close to depart her in 2011. Hexter is  not  a new Larry Vanderoef either.

  25. Marina Kalugin

    Today I got my official reprimand for 1) even sending that letter to Ralph in response to the email which he sent to faculty and staff   and 2) for posting THAT response openly on the Vanguard….

    I was told that because the Interim Chancellor and the interim Provost are such pals, that I could have hurt our Dean’s search for the College..

    The same faculty, chairs AND directors that had nary a good word to ever say about the Interim Provost, now are accusing ME of spoling the Dean’s search..


    We need Katehi back in the driver’s seat……..and Ralph back where he was a more than adequate Provost….

    I was trying to finish a few projects at the office prior to heading on vacation and then retire.

    My target was to leave on vacation in mid April…and here I still am trying to keep things afloat and trying to finish the never ending deadlines……

    24/7 ….that is me….

    This is the last on this topic for me.

    I expect Jerry and others will keep the fire glowing….

    1. Jerry Waszczuk


      You are nuts . I knew it is going to happen . I think I mentioned it to you . You assign me as your  your rep. if you get the  Letter of Expectation or Written Warning  or bad evaluation than we  file PPSM 70 complaint against  Ralph Hexter  . I know  everything about  the procedure  UC and UC Davis policies and the state and federal law in this matter . Just kidding . Time to retire .

  26. Marina Kalugin

    was the Chancellor pepper spraying anyone Alan?

    The Spicuzza and the Pike went kinda rogue…and then the good ole boy Matt C was brought in to help clean up.

    I actually kinda liked him until I found out some of what ELSE he has done…..and the other coverups and that he was reporting to the Napo sighhh….

    1. The Pugilist

      The biggest culpability for Katehi was that she overrode her commanders on the decision to deploy the police to clear the quad at 3 pm rather than in the middle of the night, when the number of protesters would have been far fewer.   “It was the systemic and repeated failures in the civilian, UC Davis Administration decision-making process that put the officers in the unfortunate situation in which they found themselves shortly after 3 p.m.”  She also failed to adequately convey the message of not using force to the commanders.  So she didn’t pepper spray anyone, but she bears responsibility for what happened.

      1. Jerry Waszczuk


        Decision to replace Spicuzza and Lt. Pike was made long time before peeper spray and were used to create the image of  pepper spray to fire Chancellor . Chancellor was lucky that Yudoff was  a  UC President and whole plot  orchestrated by Steve Drown , Charles Robinson , Steven Chillcott and Hexter failed . After the plot failed , everything was covered up very quickly by  the settlement in federal court.  Chancellor Katehi ordered confidential report on me before pepper spray in November 2011. Matt Carmichael was Lt. in UCDMC in 2011.

        When I got this report in 2012 under the  Public Record I was scratching  my head why  the UC Davis Chancellor  inquired confidential report on the worker from the UCDMC HVAC shop. I know now . If it is what is happening today with Chancellor would not take place than I never would found  out the reason. Uncontrolled corruption and conspiracy.

        1. David Greenwald

          That’s probably true. November 18, 2011 wasn’t the first time either of them had serious problems. Spicuzza had a long series of badly handled protests and Pike had a long history of use of force complaints.

        2. Jerry Waszczuk


          I know  quite well Annette  Spicuzza  and John Pike employment  record  .  Their employment record is quite impressive . If Pike and Spicuzza would refuse to follow  the order on November 18, 2011 than   they will be fired anyway for insubordination. Everything was perfectly planned  for  the pepper spray TV show . Chancellor has nothing to do with . She was victimized and she  had to take blame to safe herself . If would be something different than it would be  no quick settlement in the Federal Court . Too many leads were pointing at  the  UCOP  and scheme of the pepper spray conspiracy  was buried by lawyers .  Eventually everything will surface if  UC will refuse  to pay Chancellor mega dollars in the settlement to keep her quiet.

          You probably don’t  know that  when UC  wants  to settle quickly the  case than case being  filed or being   move to  the Federal Court  from the Superior Court . In the different circumstances Pike would receive promotion to  Captain and Spicuzza will  get big bonus . This how  UC administration is awarding managers who are crooked and corrupted and willing to cover up corruption and wrongdoing. I  have many examples and documents to back up my allegations

          I want to point again that Pike was walking like a Primadonna with the  M-9 and changing cans like on reality TV show and no one protester took off and tried  to escape the assault . 

          Look who  was awarded after the  TV show pepper spray and who was victimized . I have docs  which you don’t have because you don’t have lawsuits.  This whole pepper spray  settlement is a total fraud .

          1. David Greenwald

            I had a pretty big file of complaints on her and her senior staff. There was the 2008 protests at Mrak were she and her senior captains illegally arrested the protesters during business hours leading the charges to be dropped. She also tried to illegally reprimand one of her Lts for that arrest when he refused. He eventually left to become chief in Santa Cruz, I believe. There were at least two incidents of excessive force in 2010. We had a huge file of complaints on her. However, I don’t see any evidence the University was willing to move on her until after Pepper Spray. Pike was his own problem separate from this.

        3. Jerry Waszczuk


          I know what do you have. Cpt. Souza was forced to retired as well.  She was on the pre -November 2011  list to go.    The pre -November 2011 public information you have are completely irrelevant for the November 18, 2011 . Nada.  Did you read ever a pamphlet how the civil disobedience is controlled by police in State of California. Cpt. Souza had this special training since she was UC Davis police sergeant.   The last correspondence I received from was Cpt. Souza was June 2012 when new Chief Carmichael was plotting with others how to get me in trouble with Lodi Police and with the criminal law like it was done to my psychologist family shortly after pepper spray in November 2011.

          Beside all other facts, Chief Spizuzza , Cpt, Souza and Chancellor Katehi are women which  were employed by UC  Davis and their careers and their lives were put upside-down because  of  conspiracy and uncontrolled corruption and lawlessness in the upper circle of UC regime .  Sickening.


          Vanguard provides lot of good information but half a true is not the true.  You have go a little dipper to find the true without any bias or if you know the true you should disclose it . My comment does not mean that I have negative opinion about your blog . It is excellent source of information with a little of red color which I don’t admire so much for known reason.

  27. Marina Kalugin

    yes…..fortunately for me this stuff is after the Official review period which ended April    30….

    I didn’t mean to leave on such a note,but heck…..sometimes even I have limits….you might even see me at more council meeting and school board meetings  now…it has been a while since the No on Fluoride and the NO on the Water project…and so many other things……

    but, first I have to figure out my priorities as I not going to be in the office again…..

  28. Marina Kalugin

    Jerry ….do not worry about me….I have SO many options and I don’t need this job..and so on…..

    I am 8 years past my target retirement date…and over 60, the OLD magic number…

    but, I am considering how best to spend my final days on payroll…..it could be as long as over a year….LOL

    but none of that will be in the office….

  29. Jerry Waszczuk


    I am not worry , I said that I was  kidding but you mentioned Hexter and Matt Carmichael  in your response . Look at the photo of them together. in http://www.davisvanguard.org/2012/04/appointment-of-carmichael-to-chief-for-one-year-raises-questions/

    Look how joyfull they are on this photos. They are laughing like two  hyenas after killing the prey. Sickening .
    For their effort to remove Chancellor Katehi , Chief Spicuzza and Lt. Pike, the UC Davis , Matt Carmichael got Anette Spicuzza’s  job; Chief Counsel Steven Drown was awarded by the regents with a 21.9% pay raise, effective December 1, 2011. The UC Davis Vice Chancellor Ralph Hexter was awarded $113,916 of extra pay for the year 2011. The UC Board of Regents were awarded raises, effective Dec. 1, 2012, during the protests and turmoil on the UC campuses, with only Regent Eddie Island voting in opposition.

  30. Marina Kalugin

    I knew you were joking, but I was truly hoping you would share some other docs and this link…thank you….

    you continue to make MY point

    As a SENIOR manager at UCD   (according to the annual document I am required to sign at Fiscal Close…..) .I earned at my highest,….now just barely over $100K….  I have worked for UCD since 1979..

    Most of that was hourly and not fulltime due to being a single mom raising kids..but I worked unpaid overtime EVERY single week as I always was involved in projects outside of and above my job title.

    Many years no increases and if anything  pittance…not even keeping up with inflation,

    I got a big increase when I got my first career job in 1981….and that was to $1111 a month….. WOW>>>>>anyone want to do the math……do I even make what I did then, with inflation and COL included….doesn’t seem like it….

  31. Marina Kalugin

    now Jerry, MY faculty and our college truly welcomed her – a really bright international STEM star…and a woman and truly not just a good ole boy in the most important ways..

    CBS and COE were THRILLED>>>>.and so was COA, and the professional schools and the Cancer Center and the list goes on..

    I think that perhaps the med center was too removed on that one…

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Faculty knew  what she is worth. I am talking about old boys and girls from administration who were attached to Vanderhoef  included but not limited to  Steven  Drown , Tollefson ,  Conny Melendy , Robert Taylor from UCDMC , Shelton Durruseau  from UCDMC , Gloria Alvarado, Dennis  Shimek, Ann Mad Rice , Robert Waste ; Lossenberg -Zahl , Bruce Hupe, Elizabeth Meyer  etc,

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

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