UC Responds to Allegations from Katehi’s Attorney



Yesterday the Vanguard published an interview with Melinda Guzman, a local attorney representing embattled chancellor Linda Katehi. “The April 27 letter (has) the allegations that supposedly supported this so-called independent and neutral investigation,” she said.  “Each instance, we are contesting these allegations.”

Now Dianne Klein, spokesperson for the University of California Office of the President, has responded, telling the Vanguard that, despite delays and what they are calling lack of cooperation on the part of the Linda Katehi and her legal team, the investigation is still due to be completed by August 1.

Last week, Ms. Klein told the media that Linda Katehi was not cooperating with the investigation.  Melinda Guzman told the Vanguard that claims of the lack of cooperation on their part “is absolutely incorrect.”  She explained their attempts to communicate with UC.  She noted they identified two dates for Linda Katehi to be interviewed.  “There’s no issue there,” she stated.

She argued that delays have been evident on the part of UC as well, noting again that it should not have taken three weeks to get Chancellor Katehi’s personnel file.  There have also been exchanges on the conflict of interest issue that have not been resolved either – and they have not received a response to their most recent letter.

Dianne Klein responded, “What I said previously is correct. We are disappointed that Chancellor Katehi and her counsel have repeatedly said they were unable to meet with investigators.”

She continued, “Likewise, they have not provided investigators with access to the University owned devices — cell phones and iPads — that may well contain information germane to the investigation.”

Ms. Guzman had expressed concern to the Vanguard that these devices contained privileged information.

Ms. Klein continued, “Yesterday I learned that there is now an appointment scheduled between an investigator and the chancellor for the end of the month.”

Contrary to the claims of Ms. Guzman, Ms. Klein stated that Ms. Guzman “has sent several letters on a variety of topics, and all issues have been responded to in writing or by phone.”

However, Melinda Guzman has now responded with documents showing that UC had indeed responded in writing, but not until 5:06 pm on Thursday.

Ms. Guzman expressed to the Vanguard that the letter dated April 27 from President Janet Napolitano to Chancellor Katehi was “unprecedented” and breached her right to confidentiality. “In California, there are rights of privacy,” she stated.

Ms. Klein argues, “The release of the letter, which was in response to media requests, did not violate personnel confidentiality policies”  She explained, “As a general matter, when media request University documents that could affect the privacy rights of individuals, California law requires us to balance the public’s interest in the disclosure of records relating to public business against an individual’s interest in non-disclosure.”

She added, “One factor that influences this balance is the nature of an individual’s position. The higher the level of one’s position, the greater likelihood that the balance tips in favor of the public interest in disclosure. In light of the many weeks of media attention arising from Chancellor Katehi’s leadership, UCOP determined that, in this case, the balance favored disclosure when the letter was requested.”

Dianne Klein also sees nothing unusual about the handling of this matter, noting, “It is certainly not unusual that UC undertakes investigations where there are allegations of policy violations.”

Melinda Guzman has argued that the hiring of the Orrick firm and Melinda Haag represented a conflict of interest.  She questions whether Ms. Haag and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe are “independent and neutral.”  “In this case, because Janet Napolitano, herself, has made herself a witness, and she has basically claimed that Linda Katehi has maybe misrepresented statements to her – she’s a witness.”

“So when the university announced that they have selected an independent and neutral investigator, they should have done what they said they were doing,” she said.  Instead, they hired a law firm which has been a partner with them for years and they hired an attorney who has represented Ms. Napolitano when she headed up the Department of Homeland Security.

She clarified that they are not asking to be able to select an investigator agreeable to both sides.  “I am asking for fairness and due process,” she said, by selecting someone without a preexisting relationship to the president.  She said she wants “a fair investigation of the facts.”

Dianne Klein counters, “There is no conflict.”

She explained, “Melinda Haag, a former U.S. Attorney, is extremely well qualified to lead this investigation with the help of others in the Orrick firm. The Orrick firm does provide legal services to the University in unrelated matters, but Ms. Haag has played no role in any of those engagements and we are confident she will fulfill her obligation to be a fair and independent investigator.”

“Ms. Guzman has also said that Ms. Haag has represented President Napolitano in other matters. As you may be aware, Ms. Haag previously served as a United States Attorney when President Napolitano served as Secretary of Homeland Security,” she continued.

“Often, when a federal agency is sued, the U.S. Attorney will represent that agency in the litigation. Frequently, the head of the agency is listed as the defendant in his or her official capacity. For litigation against the Department of Homeland Security that occurred in the Northern District of California during President Napolitano’s tenure as Secretary, President Napolitano was named as a defendant and Ms. Haag represented the Department as U.S. Attorney, but President Napolitano was not individually represented by Ms. Haag and she was a party in name only.”

She argued, “They know each other casually — having met twice at social events in the Bay Area. They have never had a discussion about legal matters.”

Ms. Klein would add, “Ms. Haag has never represented the University or any UC leaders as individuals.”

As mentioned, the investigation is set to be completed in early August.  Ms. Klein said, “When the investigation is complete, a decision will be made about next steps.”  She added, “The Regents have been advised of the process regarding Chancellor Katehi before and during the current investigation.”

—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

52 thoughts on “UC Responds to Allegations from Katehi’s Attorney”

  1. The Pugilist

    I’ve been skeptical up until now about Katehi’s claims, but after reading the responses here from UC, I’m starting to believe there is something amiss.

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        Ms. Palin

        It seems to me that others on this did not notice or they  don’t like to notice that you IQ is beyond and above of any participant’s IQ on this forum including myself.  In this particular few statements about being rich we are dealing here  with folks who are deliberately  shredding  $ 10, 000, 00 lottery winning  ticket and they are  forgetting about  it within  next minute . Hopeless.

  2. Jerry Waszczuk

    She argued, “They know each other casually — having met twice at social events in the Bay Area. They have never had a discussion about legal matters.”Ms. Klein would add, “Ms. Haag has never represented the University or any UC leaders as individuals.”
    The above  statement remains me my unemployment case  which is pending in the Sacramento  County Superior Court The cases was decided by Judge Sheleyanne Chang who worked as a  Chief Deputy  for  recalled  California Governor Grey Davis.
    I would like to present  the fragment from  my May 25, 2016 Request for Extension  to File  the Appellant Opening Brief I am representing myself  in this case in the Court of Appeal 3th Appellate  District . (The extension was granted by the Court)  The presented fragment shows how the  corruption work in UC system which is interconnected  with  the state government and California legislature .  New UC Davis Chief Counsel Jacob Appellate is another example . He is former Deputy Chief for  the present Governor Jerry Brown who as former Attorney General is linked to cover up of  the UC Regents misappropriation of $ 65,000,000 of  the tax payers money and public funds .


    2.                  The other factors per Rules of Court, Rule 8.63(b)(11), that constitute good cause to grant the requested extension are the following:
    a)      Waszczuk’s discovery after filing the Notice of Appeal on May 7, 2015, in this case and the Notice of Appeal for interconnected Case No. C079524 on June 11, 2015. Waszczuk closely reexamined the court files from both cases and produced documents by the Defendants’ Counsel in Case C079524.
    To properly handle the ongoing appeals, it was necessary for Waszczuk to find out why Sacramento County Superior Court judges Hon. Shelleyanne Chang and Hon. David Brown were bluntly biased against Waszczuk and ruled in favor of the Defendants in both cases without any sense or logic to the point that Waszczuk, during the court hearing in Case No. C079524, asked Hon. David Brown if Waszczuk had to go outside the courthouse and shoot himself to make the judge look for truth.
    b)                 The documents produced by the Defendants’ Counsel in Case C079524, which should have been produced in December 2014
    c)                  The UC Davis assistant vice chancellor Dr. Shelton Duruisseau’s 2012 interview with the Sacramento Cultural Hub, where he stated:
    We sold enough power to the State for the central plant to be paid for in the first four years. Lots of energy companies like Enron all around the country caused prices to go up. The plant provides stable power for the campus without interruption and without blackouts. This plant was built out for 50 years’ capacity; we are only using 9%, so we have lots of room built in for growth.” http://www.sacculturalhub.com/headlines/a-look-back;
    and the  Hon. Shelleyanne Chang’s disclosure in her decision dated March 2, 2015, in which she stated:
    “Preliminarily, Judge Chang discloses that she and Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Tays worked together in the Office of Legal Affairs of Governor Gray Davis in approximately 2001 or 2002 for about 6 months. All Tays was on temporary loan from another state
    department to the Governor’s Legal Affairs Office; Judge Chang was the Chief Deputy Legal Affairs Secretary during that time frame. The Court knows of no reason that it cannot be fair and impartial in this matter.”
    The psychological terror aimed at Waszczuk did not stop with attempt to provoke Waszczuk’s and to end his employment on May 31, 2012 in UC Davis Medical Center Trauma Unit # 11 and Waszczuk’s employment termination in December 2012 . The psychological warfare was continued by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board (CUIAB) and in Sacramento County Superior Court rooms, which not only caused that Waszczuk’s normal life was completely devastated due loss of an enormous amount of money, his home, and employment but also causing him nervous breakdowns and deterioration of his physical and mental health.
    By reading and examining the FERC’s documents, Waszczuk discovered that Waszczuk’s employer, the Regents of the University of California, with help of the State of California Governor Grey Davis’s administration, of which Hon. Shelleyanne Chang was important part , acted in 1999-2003 and in 2012-2013 like the Al Capone mafia by generating and illegally selling electrical energy and defrauding the U.S. federal government of millions of dollars of taxes from illegal power sale profits from the UC Davis Medical Center 27 MW cogeneration power plant. Waszczuk was employed in this plant from June 1999 to March 2007.
    Contrary to Al Capone, who was convicted for tax evasion due to illegally selling alcohol, landing him in California’s Alcatraz Federal Prison, the Regents of 

  3. Jerry Waszczuk

    Missed part of the sentence  from the previous post .
    Contrary to Al Capone, who was convicted for tax evasion due to illegally selling alcohol, landing him in California’s Alcatraz Federal Prison, the Regents of the University of California protecting  themselves from prosecution for their similar crime by hiring as UC president the former U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

  4. PhillipColeman

    I’ve seen playground squabbles between two kindergartners that had more intellectual and legal merit that these two purported representatives. Stay tuned for the next column to include, “No, you can’t,” and “Oh, yes I can.”

    And we, the taxpayers, pay hundreds of dollars AN HOUR for them to write this dribble and then read it. David, ask for one-percent commission of the take for both these attorneys as a publishing fee. There be no need to ever ask anybody to donate to the Vanguard.


  5. Jerry Waszczuk

    Where do you see  the  LA RAZA in this translation ?
    There were so many people at the concert I couldn’t see the stage.- HUBO TANTA GENTE EN EL CONCIERTO QUE NO PUDE VER EL ESCENARIO.


        1. Jerry Waszczuk


          Beside that I have Mexican buddy , my daughter in law is Chicana and her father from Mexico is American Citizen (very smart guy) and he is a hardcore Republican and he knows exact meaning of LA RAZA  term . Is no much  closer to “the people” it is far away from the people and closer to goose steps .

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        Give an example because my Mexican buddy never uses La Raza in any context . I think that your Master in Political Science will not  help in this subject . The  La Raza is THE   RACE and is  what is stand for.   The Mexican nationalism.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk


      Chancellor will not comeback but  eventually Napolitano will go to the drain for participating in the plot to remove Chancellor .  Power play .  Looking the facts and documents I have   it is  appears   that  this action was planted since 2013 after Jacob Appelsmith replaced Steven Drown and Janet  Napolitano replaced Mark Yudof .  Appelsmith and Napolitano are the  two top guns from  the state and federal agency who were hired at the  same time .  Melinda Haag and McGregor Scott joined them  in  their assault against Chancellor   As we know they are two  former  top prosecutors from U.S Attorney office.  Quite  a team to get Chancellor.  The Mrak Hall occupation/provocation did not work .  I think  that the  Mrak Hall occupation supposed to be final solution but Chancellor did not fell in  the trap and did not order UC Davis Police to remove  occupiers from the Mrak Hall . Psychological terror and warfare.  Sickening and scary.

      1. DavidSmith

        I agree with you that the Chancellor will not come back and it makes me truly sad. After so many years, we finally had a competent and visionary leader to take UCD to the next level and poof it’s all gone.

        1. Marina Kalugin

          Agreed, DavidSmith and she went up against the likes of Deans who were not competent or played favorites..

          We are now replacing one of those who left before his 5 year review period was up….

        2. Tia Will


          we finally had a competent and visionary leader to take UCD to the next level and poof it’s all gone.”

          I do not agree with the idea that all the success that has been seen at UCD in recent years is directly and personally attributable to the Chancellor. Many of the programs and advancements that have occurred during her tenure were set into motion long before she arrived. The idea that all advancement is due to the Chancellor belittles the hard work of the many, many academicians, fund raisers and UCD promoters who actually did the work to build UCD into the major university it is today.

          One can argue whether Chancellor Katehi was an overall asset or detriment to the university, but to say “poof it’s all gone” is to belittle the contributions of all of those whose actual work, not titular leadership, have made the university what it is today.

        3. DavidSmith


          I work for UCD and I have witnessed the significant positive changes that the Chancellor has brought to this campus. She is a true visionary who knows how to bring UCD to the next level and I truly believe that if she could continue to lead UCD for the next 10 years, UCD will rise to the top of the UC and the top 10 of the nation.

          There is no denying that UCD had many excellent programs before Katehi arrived. I don’t think anyone is trying to argue that she created these programs. However, UCD is a vast institution and there are many many colleges/departments where being mediocre was the standard. This is a direct consequence of Vanderhoef’s leadership; under him, some programs received preferential resources whereas others, many of which are very important programs for a comprehensive research university, basically stalled. While UCD was a great school, we all know that it’s not the top. I don’t think you can deny that.

          Through all my discussions, I have never said that Katehi is responsible for creating ALL the excellent academic programs we have today. I have repeated said that she brought the leadership we need and created the momentum for UCD to go beyond what it was and become a truly top-notch university. Now if you are going to say that UCD should stay where it is, then there is no need for us to engage in this discussion any more.

          I don’t blame you for your ignorance of the inner workings of UCD. After all, you don’t seem to be working for UCD and you don’t have the first-hand knowledge like many of the posters here do. But I’m truly truly saddened that you let your pathetic ideology take over critical thinking. You kept saying that the Chancellor admitted to “missteps” and therefore she did do something wrong and should resign. In my opinion, and many many other faculty members opinion, such so-call “missteps” are so trivial, to the extent of being laughable, when compared to the great things that she has accomplished in a short period of time.

          You, and many others, fail to see what is really going on here and you never tried to investigate even a little deeper, even when many of us (MK, Jerry, etc) have provided you with so many clues and hints.

          Maybe I should stop here. It has become increasingly clear to me that you are an outsider of the university and you don’t have UCD, its wonderful but often times naive students, faculty members, and staff at heart.

  6. Erin Knuth

    Nobody noticed the resignation of the UCD CFO? He was basically 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. 

    This is why an independent investigation is needed to shed light on all the shady business in the UCOP

    1. Jerry Waszczuk


      Grand Jury to do independent  investigation . Maybe I will fail complaint with Grand Jury in Yolo County Superior Court . I have a good ground to do this  and I know how to do it .

      This what UCOP called independent investigation is a total fraud and misleading people propaganda. I know everything about UCOP’s “INDEPENDENT”  investigation and investigators .

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Indirect Complaint linked to this stuff . It is way to do it . UC Davis is not isolated enclave from the law . Is difficult to do it but it worth to try .

    2. Jerry Waszczuk


      On of the California  legislators agreed with me that the corruption in the  UC system is a lot  stronger than the California lawmakers and the California law .  How do you see the independent investigation ? Who should order the investigation and who should conduct the independent investigation .

      State of California Auditor or  the U.S Inspector General Office ?

  7. Marina Kalugin

    Jee, Pugi ….finally WELCOME to the party.

    something amiss?   have you not read any of my posts…jeez…

    If anyone thinks the Napo is better for UC than our Chancellor…well, you know what I’ve been calling those kinda people….

    1. Tia Will


      If anyone thinks the Napo is better for UC than our Chancellor…well, you know what I’ve been calling those kinda people….”

      I have not seen anyone argue that Ms. Napolitano is better for UC than Chancellor Katehi. I have been consistent in my opinion that we know of wrong doings by Chancellor Katehi, who in her own words admitted to “missteps”. These should be taken into account in deciding her appropriateness for the position of Chancellor. In exactly the same fashion, any wrong doing on the part of Ms. Napolitano should also be investigated and used in the decision making regarding her appropriateness for her position. Disliking the actions of Ms. Napolitano should not preclude a full and fair appraisal of the “missteps” of Chancellor Katehi with regard to her fitness for this position.

  8. Marina Kalugin

    it is NOT corruption…it is that the UC is SEPARATE from and does not have to comply with CA law.

    Look up land grant institutions and so forth….

    newer and dumber legislators and Regents don’t get that fact.

    The Napo and the Gov are in cahoots to “clean up” and yet, go after the likes of Katehi, who did NOTHING wrong  rather than the good ole boys who are criminals…..

    perhaps….I don’t know… there could be criminals elsewhere, but I have tons of evidence that the Napo is a criminal….there was even a movie made..  “Citizen4″….watch it if you have not.

    you know about Ed Snowden…..that one…

    but Katehi has done a very admirable job of “cleaning house” of good ole boys on campus….to the displeasure of some of the good ole boys>..

    Want names, look it up….. I am no longer going to bring up any names here, or you can contact ME back channel…

    1. Tia Will


      who did NOTHING wrong”

      Then why please Marina, did she admit to many mistakes over the years ? Not one, or two, but many “missteps” in her own words.

  9. Marina Kalugin

    Look up the Gov and the “gang’ of two….err they called it the committee of two…the Napo and the gov doing ILLEGAL activities…..the Napo sent a letter out to all constituents once their illegal meetings were finished.

    Back in 2014….I was in a tizzy about that, and no one would listen to me…

    Look at the result…look at what they did to the UC retirement plan….open your eyes and do your own research.

    The Napo has put the NSA into the UC…and she is not caring about long-term staff, nor the students.

    She was the who behind the pepper-spray and tried to take out the Chancellor.

    If we are truly fortunate, Linda WILL come back…but she only will because she CARES about UC…not because she needs the money…   LOL

    1. Tia Will

      anyone recall the names Spicuzza and Pike?”

      No need to Google. I remember both graphically and do not have the vaguest idea what your comment has to do with the current topic.

  10. Marina Kalugin

    Focus on your health, Jerry, I think enough are waking up around here to keep fighting this fight in your absence.

    PS>  be thankful the medical establishment in Poland is now way better than in the US>>..enjoy and relax


  11. Marina Kalugin

    PS>  If I needed money, I would be out on WC stress leave right now…but I don’t so I am on “self- requested”  leaves to deal with too many issues before I can retire.   🙂

    I have worked for some of the very best Chairs ever in the 2 very best departments ever, in the very best college ever since 1999….gotta keep that up.. and not cause them too many issues…

  12. Marina Kalugin

    fortunately,  I am always over maximum on vacation and have nearly a years worth of SKL>….due to never being sick over the decades,  because I don’t listen to the AMA, ADA, FDA and the other of the alphabet soup who run this country these days…..   and if you are on ANY meds, one would be wise to get off them, unless it is life/death…. and go to Poland for a health break….

  13. Tia Will


    Now there is the height of irony. Pairing a “successful businessman” who enriched himself while running multiple enterprises into the ground and running many people’s businesses and lives along he way with the Chancellor. I am not sure that you understand that this is exactly how some of us see Chancellor Katehi’s actions. Self enrichment and self aggrandizement to the detriment of the entity that they claim to “love” whether it is the country or UCD.

  14. Jerry Waszczuk

    If anyone thinks the Napo is better for UC than our Chancellor…well, you know what I’ve been calling those kinda people….”
    ‘I have not seen anyone argue that Ms. Napolitano is better for UC than Chancellor Katehi. I have been consistent in my opinion that we know of wrong doings by Chancellor Katehi, who in her own words admitted to “missteps”. These should be taken into account in deciding her appropriateness for the position of Chancellor. In exactly the same fashion, any wrong doing on the part of Ms. Napolitano should also be investigated and used in the decision making regarding her appropriateness for her position. Disliking the actions of Ms. Napolitano should not preclude a full and fair appraisal of the “missteps” of Chancellor Katehi with regard to her fitness for this position.’

    Ms. Tia
     Janet Napolitano was not brought to the UC system by Senator Dianne Feinstein and her husband Richard Blum who is very influential  UC Regent for long time to be investigated .for her wrongdoing . Ms. Napolitano  was brought to the UC system as a  lobbyist (because of her previous position )  and as guard for UCOP corrupted hen house to preserve the status quo of the the UC corrupted establishment .In contrary to Ms. Napolitano  Ms. Katehi was hired because she had a qualifications for the job . She no needed Senator Feinstein’s and Nancy Pelosi’s  help to get the UC Davis  Chancellor position . You have to look whole picture.


  15. Jerry Waszczuk

    “who did NOTHING wrong”
    Then why please Marina, did she admit to many mistakes over the years ? Not one, or two, but many “missteps” in her own words.”

    Ms. Tia 
    This is means that Chancellor is  a honest person and no one of these alleged mistakes or missteps are shall be a reasons that Chancellor has to be treated like a piece a disposable garbage. I think we had a discussion about oppression. Right Ms. Tia ?  Chancellor is not  the oppressor, She is 62 of age women from other state with her family here which have  been terrorized by Napolitano and her thugs . Napolitano and her thugs should be ashamed.  Chancellor ‘s legal counsel Melinda Guzman show incredible amount of patience and good will and faith.  If I would in the place of Chancellor and have her resources than Napolitano together with Regents would be in Court of Law already for constructive discharge, defamation of character, humiliation of family, destruction of career etc. I see Chancellor situation as mirrored situation of mine and the several UCDMC employees I was helping to deal with UC Davis Medical Center Gestapo from the HR Department.   
    This a naked true. Please don’t have two faces. Chancellor did not act against anybody in the way Napolitano is acting against Chancellor and her family.
    The Chancellor’s alleged mistakes and missteps are nothing in comparison with the crimes the white collar criminals from UCOP and other campuses committed over decades. Their crimes cost taxpayers and increase in tuition a real money, Millions of dollars
    . You have to be fair in your judgment without singling out anybody. You are educated person and I have pleasure to have discussion with you and I respect your opinion but when you bringing stuff which is supposedly to be investigated and you playing prosecutor and judge than it is not the way to do it in the United States of America.  This is belonging North Korea and Cuba ideology.
    Kind regards
    For fiscal year 2015–2016, the UC Regents allocated $24,742,000 for employment practices liability to pay and conceal its discrimination and violation of employee civil and human rights, rather than spending this huge amount of financial resources to hire qualified job managers and supervisors and for proper training to supervise personnel. 
    The enormous $22,500,000 fine for Medicaid and Medicare fraud committed by five University of California medical centers
    In 2003, tens of thousands of students were suddenly struck with tuition increases. A class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of 56,864 students who enrolled prior to 2003 in professional majors and students enrolled in the spring and summer 2003 sessions whose tuition was raised after they had already received bills for a lower fee. The lawsuit claimed breach of contract related to fee increases. A San Francisco judge has ruled that the University of California must pay a $33.8 million class action settlement. 
    In November 2003,  $ 18 million settlement has been reached in the class action lawsuit filed on behalf of 3,200 female employees that alleged that the controversial ranking system for most of the lab’s administrators, clerical staff and technicians was discriminatory, and that they were working longer hours for less pay
    In July 2004 a $1.3 million settlement has been reached in the discrimination  lawsuit filed by former medical intern David Dixon who alleged that he was dismissed from UCLA’s family medicine residency program in 1994 because he is black. 
       A class action lawsuit was brought against Los Alamos National Laboratory, claiming that the University of California, which ran the laboratory from 1943 until 2006, discriminated against women and Hispanics in pay, promotions, and educational opportunities. As part of a settlement reached in mid 2007, a federal judge ordered a $16.4 million payout.
    In 2007 Karen Moe Humphreys, a former Olympic gold medal swimmer who became a coach and administrator at UC Berkeley, brought a gender discrimination lawsuit against the university. The suit claimed that Humphreys, who worked at UC Berkeley from 1978 until she was laid off in 2004, allegedly lost her job in retaliation for complaining about the treatment of women by the university’s athletic department. The university denied Humphreys’ allegations. It also denied her claim that her layoff was unlawful, though it did agree to pay more than $3.5 million to settle the gender discrimination lawsuit she brought against them. As part of the agreement, Humphreys will be reinstated and then retire in January 2008 when she reaches 30 years with the university.
    The imposed penalty $82,500 and proposed imposition of civil penalty in the amount of $220,000 by the U.S. Department of Labor was for the establishment of an unauthorized nuclear facility by the University of California-operated Los Alamos National Laboratory. 
    In September 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture charged the university with 61 violations of the Animal Welfare Act. The lawsuit claimed UC San Francisco researchers kept animals in dirty cages and over bred them as well as improperly anesthetized sheep and kept poor records of monkey studies. The university has agreed to pay the U.S. government a $92,500 fine for alleged violations
    A lawsuit was filed in 2006 by the Coalition for Limiting University Expansion and later joined by the city of Santa Cruz against the University of California, Santa Cruz. The lawsuit accused the campus and its contractor of violating the federal Clean Water Act by allowing water polluted with sediment to migrate from several construction sites into nearby creeks, ponds and groundwater. In a settlement reached, the city and university agreed to revive a stalled project to reduce sediment runoff into the city’s Pogonip park, 640 acres of open space below the campus, and ultimately into the San Lorenzo River. UCSC, under the agreement, will pay $110,000 to restore damaged gullies in the Pogonip, UCSC’s building company Devcon Construction will contribute engineering and construction services valued at $40,000, and the city will chip in $90,000.      
    Michael Burch worked as a wrestling coach for the University of California Davis from 1995 through 2001. In April 2001, Arezou Mansourian and Chris Ng were removed from the team. Burch publicly supported the two female wrestlers when they filed a claim with the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. One month later, Burch was informed that he would no longer be retained. He filed a wrongful termination lawsuit claiming the school failed to renew his contract because of his outspoken support for the two female wrestlers. In 2005, the Supreme Court found that the Title IX law protected whistleblowers from adverse action of employers. Michael Burch will receive $725,000 from the University of California to settle the retaliation lawsuit.
    Further, the U.S. Department of Labor proposed the imposition of a civil penalty in the amount of $159,375 for radiological contamination committed by the University of California-operated Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; 
    Anneliese Yuenger died in 1999 at age 82; her family donated her body to the university’s medical school. A month later, Yuenger’s ashes were returned to the family in a plastic bag. An investigation revealed the ashes came from miscellaneous body parts burned several months prior to Yuenger death. An internal review exposed that the university could not determine the final destination of more than 300 bodies donated between January 1995 and August 1999. The University of California Board Of Regents agreed to pay a $500,000 settlement to the Yuenger family. The former director’s business partner, Christopher Brown, has also agreed to pay the family a $200,000 settlement.
    Donna McDaniel, who committed suicide after years of enduring what she considered to be a hostile work environment at UC Davis, 
    The amount of $ 113,098 was a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice for the University of California’s Art History Department discrimination against Meribeth Graybill and violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    UC Davis Medical Center cogeneration power plant worker Todd Goerlich’s suicide in December 2010 caused by the hostile working environment in the UC Davis Medical Center is still unresolved and never was investigated.
    Todd Georlich’s suicide  took place  ten years after UC Davis employee Donna McDaniel tragically took her life is the path of destruction chosen by a patholog­ically dysfunctional institution run by arrogant and ruthless administrators at the University of California’s ten different campuses.
    The U.S. Department of Labor imposed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,707,000 by the U.S. Department of Energy for multiple violations of law and federal regulations in the Los Alamos National Laboratory. There was also a $9,350 penalty for violation of the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (15 USC §§ 2601 et seq.) in the University of California Los Angeles’
    Deliberate and unlawful discharge of machine oil for seven years to the Sacramento River via a city storm drain from defective gear boxes in the UC Davis Medical Center’s cogeneration power plant facility. 
    In 2008 the University of California  settled a lawsuit brought by Officer Chang, a gay man who was employed as a campus police offer, paying him $240,000.00.
    The University of California has agreed to pay $375,000 to settle a 2008 lawsuit stemming from the suicide of a prison inmate who was under the supervision of university psychiatrists.
    The November 18, 2011  pepper spray attack orchestrated by UC Davis  Campus Counsel Steven Drown , Matt Carmichael , Charles Robinson , Steven Chilcott and others  to remove Chancellor Katehi, Chief Spicuzza , Captain Souza and Lt. Pike from the job  , resulted in a settlement in the amount of $1 million for victims and $250, 000 in legal fees. 
    The  2011, an illegal medical experiment conducted by two neurosurgeons at the UC Davis Medical Center under the supervision of UC Davis Vice Chancellor Claire Pomeroy resulted in the deaths of several patients. 
    In 2011, credit cards embezzlement in the UC Davis Medical Center was uncovered and reported by two UC Davis employees and confirmed by auditor William Prindible, who conducted an audit. The two employees who reported the credit card embezzlement and 60-year-old auditor, Prindible, were fired from the job and the white-collar UC Davis Medical Center criminals who committed the crime are still being employed by the UC Davis Medical Center. The  Prindible’s case ended in a January 2015 settlement in federal court, Is unknown  of the amount of the sum that was paid to the victimized William Prindible (Federal Court Case No. 2:13-cv-02256-KJM-EFB). 
    The October 2013 investigation report issued by former State of California Supreme Court Justice Honorable Carlos Moreno stated that several high-profile incidents of racial and ethnic bias and/or discrimination have occurred on the University of California Los Angeles campus in recent years. The  climate and culture of sustained abuse, bullying, discrimination, retaliation for whistleblowing, harassment of all kinds, intimidation, retaliation, favoritism, nepotism, health and safety violations, falsification of documentation, fear of retaliation for reporting misconduct, and research misconduct was again publicized in 2014
    In April 2014 the University of California regents agreed to pay $10 million to the former chairman of UCLA’s orthopedic surgery department, who had alleged that the well-known medical school allowed doctors to take industry payments that may have compromised patient care. 
     On August 11, 2014 a Sacramento jury found in favor of Janet Keyzer in wrongful termination case against UC Regents and awarded damages to her  in amount of $730,000.00 plus Plaintiff’ and Defendants attorneys fees and cost amounted over $5,000,000.00. ( Case published on Vanguard) 

    Charges are pending in the discrimination case against UC Davis Medical Center with the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed in November 2014 by the UC Davis Medical Center involving a 60-year-old worker who was attacked by UC Davis Medical Center management during his mother’s funeral and upon his return from workers’ compensation disability.( I am representing this UCDMC worker Mexican -American with the U.S EEOC) The EEOC has very big problem to find an investigator for this case . Attorney for the  EEOC is UC Davis graduated.  The EEOC office is located in Oakland. 

  16. Tia Will


    I see Chancellor situation as mirrored situation of mine “

    I realize that you see the situation as mirrored with yours. I do not see it that way. I believe that each individual needs to assume responsibility for their own mistakes and inadequacies. It is fine to say that admitting “missteps” means that the Chancellor is honest. But how far are you willing to take this argument ?  Should there be no penalty for rule breaking?  No penalty at all for putting your own financial interests ahead of those of students whose costs are steadily rising ?  Would it be ok for someone guilty of let’s say fraud, to keep their ill gotten gains because they were willing to say “I am sorry, I made a mistake.” ? Let’s suppose the prosecutor was biased against this individual, should they get off the hook and be allowed to continue in their job because of this prejudice ?  It seems to me that you and some others here cannot separate wrong doing on the part of Chancellor Katehi ( which she has already admitted to so this is not a matter of innocent until proven guilty) from the wrong doing of others. I do not believe that  ( based on your account of your situation) you did anything to breech the trust of the students of UCD nor to compromise your integrity, but this is not true of the Chancellor who you defend despite her admitted wrong doing.

    Jerry, this is simply not about you. It is about the Chancellor and the fact that you do not seem to be able to differentiate the two for emotional reasons does not strengthen your case.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Ms. Mia

      You wrong. “

      Exactly I see  the Chancellor situation as mirrored situation of mine and not only mine  due to the  tactics of the  UC Gestapo in assault aimed at Chancellor and her family.

       . I think you are perfectly know and you are aware  where is the problem but as a assigned writer to Vanguard  you have  to keep this blog going by  stirring controversy . You noticing only what is convenient for you stay in line with political orientation of Vanguard. Very small group of similar view and orientation  is writing here than we have what we have . A little “Pravda”   & ‘”Cosmic People”

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