Highlander Newspaper

Issue date: 11/24/09 Section: News

Media Credit: Alex Madueña Demonstrators gather outside Covel Commons at UCLA, the location of the Regents meeting.

Of the students who walked onto the UC Los Angeles campus Wednesday and Thursday, many marched straight past the classrooms and libraries. They carried signs rather than books and chanted instead of passively scribbling lecture notes. In place of desks, they chose to occupy the areas around Covel Commons, the scene of the Nov. 17 to 19 Regents meeting. This time around, they hoped, the Regents would be the ones taking notes.

Many of these students traveled to UCLA from their home campuses, including UC Riverside, to protest the Regents meeting. This display of opposition was one in a string of many protests part of a fierce, ongoing debate between the University of California administration and the many students, staff and faculty from all 10 UC campuses.

Despite such criticism, the Regents approved a 32 percent fee increase.  The hike was passed by the Committee of Finance  on Wednesday and forwarded to the Board. The only dissenting vote came from student regent Jesse Bernal, a current graduate student in education at UC Santa Barbara. The increase was given final approval by the Board on Thursday.

The fee increase will be implemented in two stages. First, starting January 2010, there will be a 15 percent hike for undergraduate students and a 2.6 percent hike for graduate academic degree students. The summer of 2010 will bring 15 percent increase in fees  for all students.

This decision will bring fees above $10,000 for the first time in the history of the UC. This has prompted some to accuse the Regents of trying to make the UC, widely recognized as one of the best public university systems in the world, a private institution. The rising cost of attending a UC, paired with fewer classes and reduced services, also has many questioning if the quality of the UC system can be maintained.

In a less controversial decision, the Board also approved the reopening of the Martin Luther King Hospital in South Los Angeles. The hospital was shut down in 2007 after numerous citations regarding improper patient care. The UC will work on this project with Los Angeles County.



Protesters at UCLA versus the numbers

Architects love numbers. The façade of UCLA’s beautiful Royce Hall includes two towers, two arcades, three doors, six major arches used to support the ceiling. There are 18 windows, large and small, 52 intentional errors for every Sunday in the year and 108 ornamental arches bordering the key lines of the architecture.

The protesters below on its steps do not seem to display such an enthusiasm for numbers. Five hundred eighty-five. That is the number of additional dollars which students around the state will need to spend in order to receive an education from the University of California this coming winter quarter. One thousand three hundred forty-four. That’s another number known by many, loved by few. It’s the number of the additional dollars which will be added on top of 585, the number of additional dollars which students will be paying come next fall.

That comes to a total of $10,302 annually. As the many protesters below Royce Hall continue to restate, it comes out to a 32 percent increase in student fees or tuition. The two words are used interchangeably, though the UC is not allowed to levy the latter on students.

Only fees are allowed, and the fees, so the protesters say, are unacceptably large. The fees will now act as a barrier to lower incomes students, thus keeping the UC from fulfilling the promise made in the Master Plan in the 1960s, they say. “Democratize the UC,” say others. They say that the increase was formulated, and will be implemented, without enough input from the students or faculty.

Then the shout. “They’re voting on the increase right now,” yells an anonymous protester. It is a call to action, a command to move to the Covel Commons where the Regents are holding their meeting.

The group of protesters makes its way to the Covel Commons, meeting up with an already present group in the narrow plaza. A moderate estimate by this reporter places approximately 1,000 students, faculty, staff, and alumni squeezed into the narrow plaza before the Covel Commons.

The Regents are inside, Yudof is inside, and the crowd knows it. “Shame on you,” they yell in unison, hoping that their collective voice is heard through panels of glass windows and stucco walls. The shouts are passionate, the voices loud, all chanting “Shame on you.”



Speaking up outside the Regents meeting

Outside the Regents meeting, the demonstration turns away from Covel Hall, focusing its attention to an elevated patio lining the opposite side of the plaza. From the patio, looking out into the protest it is clear that here too numbers are known, but unloved. Multiple signs held by protesters display these numbers.

There is the sign held by a member of the University, Professional and Technical Employees Union, displaying the number “33.” A “33 [percent] researcher turnover” is what the sign protests (nearly one-third of researchers at the UC leave for higher paying jobs annually). More UPTE signs criticize the UC for not keeping pace with the external labor market. The number here is 25 percent, or $11,818, the amount of pay that separates the UC job from higher paying, comparable positions outside the UC system.

Elevated above the crowd, above the signs and on the patio, multiple speakers have been set up and a series of demonstrators take to the microphone to address the crowd and, on occasion, to address the Regents and other administration.

Katherine King, professor of comparative literature at UCLA, is one such speaker. Her speech becomes critical of what she feels is the Regents lack of critical thought. King urges that students address the issue critically; that, as an institution of higher learning, the student body could, and should, use the methods of critical and analytical reasoning to challenge what is presented before them.

“[The Regents] can’t prove that it’s necessary; they can’t prove we need tuition hikes,” King says, to the cheers and applause of the many protesters. She continues: “We don’t know what they know, we have to stop it [the fee hikes] and stop it now!”
Marcy Winograd, congressional candidate for California’s 36th district, also addresses the students: “There is no excuse for privatizing the UC,” she says. “It is time to invest in our future. You are our future.”

Other demonstrators address the crowd to turn their attention back to the Regents meeting, to face the Covel Commons, to again and again shout “Shame on you!” And then they ask “Whose university?”  The crowd responds with “Our university!” The noise is deafening.



Protesters take the the street, block garages

The vote is in, the proposal is passed. Word spreads amongst the crowd, quickly reaching the speaker’s patio. From the sound system someone announces the news to those who have not yet heard. The crowd, understandably, grows angry. The abstract numbers have now taken on an all too concrete reality.

The goal then changes. Voicing their discontent has done nothing to sway the Regents; the vote has been passed. The crowd’s objective has turned from being heard to being noticed. Students, then, with arms locked and knees braced, form a chain around the building. The Regents are suddenly very popular; no one wants them to leave.

Another group of protesters, the great majority of them, in fact, have taken to the street behind Covel, blocking off two parking structures. The police inevitably arrive.

Two lines of officers in riot gear set up lines at opposite ends of the street. If one wanted to prevent a protest from getting out of hand, it would seem counterproductive to surround a crowd in such a manner, limiting their options for leaving the space. Crowds, after all, can be claustrophobic.

Speaking with the police on the ground, they know little about their purpose, having no sense of a general project overview. They only follow orders, they say. The few spoken to had little motivation to do anything but to maintain the peace.

Amongst the crowd a few students, seemingly unaware of the goal of having a peaceful protest, try to irritate the police, shouting taunts and moving the barricades put in place.

 Yet for every moment of tension, there seems to be a student or faculty member who arrives to mediate between the two. In this way, the crowd is able to control itself.

But the crowd is not a thing in and of itself. There are faces and names, individual voices.

Voices such as that of Derreck Polka, a fourth-year student from UC Santa Barbara: “We’re here trying to demonstrate to the Regents that we were not going to let this happen. While in Europe we saw the same thing happening to their university system.  It’s an outrage that Yudof is getting away with this.”

Or the voice of Dr. Devra Weber, a professor of history from UCR: “I hope that more students, faculty, and staff in the UC, Cal State, and Community College systems, that the parents and citizens of California, realize what is happening to public education in the state.”

The democratization of the Regents is a larger concern here than it had been during the walk-out in September. Numorous protesters are vocal about the selection process to become a Regent of the University of California.

“The Regents are not speaking for us. Yudof is not speaking for us,” Andrew Ojeda, a second-year history major from UCR, says.

The Regents are currently appointed by the Governor, who is himself an ex-officio Regent.

The problem, so the protesters say, is that the Regents, do not, indeed cannot, have any sympathy to the middle and lower economic classes of California. Accessibility, so some say, is a thing beyond understanding by the Regents.

Of the 19 appointed Regents and the President, only six list themselves as alumni of the University of California on the Regents’ website.

The numbers are a curious thing, indeed.



Love in the time of Yudof

It is known that a man truly in love will stop at nothing to catch the attention of his heart’s desire.

This is one of those instances.

The protesters have barricaded themselves around two parking structures, blocking off any outgoing traffic from leaving. There are rumors that within some of these cars, there are a few of the Regents.

As mentioned before, lines of police in riot gear have blocked off two ends of the street and have set up a line within the structures to prevent protestors from entering. The lines of police-officers and the conglomerate of protesters exist in an uneasy tension.

And then, something curious happens. Love, it seems, can drive the sane into dangerous situations.

An unidentified student has climbed onto a ledge above the entrance to a parking structure, acoustic guitar in hand. Below, wary eyes have caught a hold of the spectacle, and soon they direct all eyes to the scene of a guitar-strumming gentleman walking the narrow ledge.

He sits. The protesters and police continue to watch. He plays.

A few badly tuned, badly executed bar chords strum out of the guitar. This is a love song to Mark Yudof, says the guitar-strumming gentleman.

The inelegant ballad moves all. It is a much needed break of humor, even the frigid lines of police begin to show hints of a smile; a few chuckling bellies betray what the face is trained to hide. 

For a few surreal moments the air is almost jovial, not a single despised number is proclaimed here.
The rising tensions between police and demonstrators, fueled by unconfirmed rumors about the use of pepper spray and tasers, are forgotten.

Love, albeit sarcastic love, provides for a moment of relief. One only wonders if Yudof’s heart too, was fluttered.

 

UC Riverside, Wednesday Nov. 18

“It does not stop on Thursday; we’re tired of being passive,” says Veronica Hernandez, a fourth-year sociology major from UC Riverside, late Wednesday afternoon.

The evening before Thursday’s protest sees moderate number of demonstrators march around the campus, “at the spur of the moment,” as Hernandez describes it. The protestors have taken the west side of the Student Life building, noticeable, but not obstructive.

A group is also present in the lobby of Hinderacker Hall. Here they’ll remain until nighttime.

They’ve brought along laptops, books, pens and pencils. These, after all, are students, students with commitments to classes.

While there, Jessica Maldonado, president of ASUCR, expresses concerns for the future of the UC system and concerns for the future of UC Riverside.

One of UC Riverside’s most important claims, that of diversity, could be threatened, she said. The higher costs of the UC would turn away minority students of lower, and even middle, economic classes. UC Riverside, it was suggested, could be hit especially hard by the fee hikes. The numbers are not so kind to UC Riverside.

The police, understandably curious, arrive and refuse to allow any more students to enter the building. The move irritates the student demonstrators. “We’re only studying,” many say.

Nothing is being done that may be deemed violent or destructive. They are there, they say, to show solidarity with the other UC’s, to draw attention to the plight of the UC system.
Assistant Dean of Students, Alfredo Figueroa, is also present.
“I think what the students are doing here is commendable,” says Figueroa. “It’s good that they should be concerned about their education.”

The demonstrators leave at 10:00 pm, as has been agreed upon between themselves and Chancellor White.
“I was very proud of our students and how they participated in a way that was respectful to themselves, as well as to the university. These men and women are much more sophisticated than just protesters. They are dismayed, frustrated, they wonder if there is hope, if their voice is being heard,” said the Chancellor.



Let there be light...

“The Gonda (Goldschmied) Neuroscience and Genetics Research Center,” reads an engraved slab of marble at the foot of a building bearing that name. A series of protesters have walked past this building on their way to downtown Westwood, but if one turns and explores the surrounding area, an area surrounded by some of the top research centers in the nation, if not in the world, one again begins to think of numbers.

But these numbers are to be loved. Fifty-seven. That is the number of Nobel prizes earned by faculty of the University of California. Twenty-four of these have been earned since 1995. One of these was in literature, nine of these for economic sciences. Eleven have been earned in medicine, 15 in physics, and 20 in chemistry. One, awarded to Linus Paulin in 1962, was awarded for fostering peace. The motto “Fiat Lux,” let there be light, has certainly not been an empty slogan in the past.

But there are more numbers to be admired.

According to a report completed by CB Richard Ellis Consulting,  from 2007 and 2008, UCR provided a seven-fold return to the state’s investment. For every dollar entered by the Inland Empire alone, UCR returned $5.60. The numbers on other UC campuses are just as positive.

And then there are the numbers that cannot be counted or measured but that the mind strives to know when walking past the series of medical research buildings. Numbers are wanted to answer questions such as: how many lives have been saved because of the research done by the UC?
How many lives have been improved, how many diseases cured, how many pains eased?

As the towers of Royce Hall appear in the skyline, yet more unanswerable questions appear. How many lives have been enriched by the creative processes fostered at the UC? How many minds have been lighted while here? These are indeed interesting questions.

As one returns closer to the site of the protests, the shouts of “Shame on you,” again become audible. The day, coming to an end, has seen the UC take on, some say forced to adopt, the high-fee, high-aid model.

“The UC model—providing universal access to a top-notch, low-cost education and research of the highest caliber—continues to be studied around the globe among those who would emulate its success.

And yet, this model has been increasingly abandoned at home by a state government responsible for its core funding.” These words were stated in an “open letter to UC alumni and friends” signed by Richard Blum, the most former Chair of the Regents; Russell Gould, the present Chair; Sherry Lansing, the vice-chair; and the President of the University of California, Mark Yudof.

“Shame on you,” the last of the protesters shout. “Shame on you,” they say, voices hoarse from hours of yelling, “Shame on you.”



The University of California and a high-fee, high aid model

“The University of California has become an unreliable partner,” some protesters quipped, repurposing a statement that Yudof and other UC administrators have repeatedly used to provide justification for controversial decisions made because of the budget cuts. While easy to lampoon, the oft-used phrase “The state of California has become an unreliable partner” does reflect the gradually decreasing level of state support for higher education. The amount of support from the state has decreased 51 percent since the 1990 to 1991 academic year; UC students now only receive an average of $7,730.

“Protesters’ problems [are] not with me or Regents, but with Sacramento and even voters,” Yudof wrote on Twitter on Wednesday, linking to an article by Peter Schrag that supports this assertion.

Despite the reduced support from the state and the increasing fees, UC administrators maintain that the UC will remain accessible because of the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan.  The Blue and Gold Plan was originally intended to cover the fee s for all California residents whose families make under $60,000 per year. Although the Regents raised fees at the meeting, they also expanded the Plan by raising the income limit; students whose families make up to $70,000 will also be covered now.

At a meeting with student journalists on Oct. 3, Yudof said that the fee increases would not impact UCR as much as other campuses: “[Riverside] has a very large share of low income students so I think a much larger proportion of the student body at Riverside will be eligible to be in the Blue and Gold program […] than, say, UCLA […] or Berkeley.”

Because of this reason, Chancellor Timothy White has said that he does not expect that UCR, which has the fifth most diverse undergraduate populations in the nation, will experience any reduction in ethnic or economic diversity. He also mentioned the “comprehensive review” admissions process approved for the UC. Under this process, factors such as economic hardship or the lack of availability of certain AP courses will be taken into account when considering a student for admission.

With the fee increases and the promise of the Blue and Gold Plan, the University of California is moving toward a high-fee, high-aid model such as the one used at the University of Michigan. This model depends on the idea frequently called “return-to-aid”; under return-to-aid, part of the money gained from increased tuition goes back to financial aid for lower income students.

The high-fee, high-aid model has been criticized not only by demonstrators but also by the UC’s Committee on Planning and Budget. In a 2006 report entitled “Current Trends and the Future of the University of California,” the committee cited several reasons against depending on return-to-aid, including a reduction in diversity and a tendency for universities to give aid to higher rather than lower income students.

“Universities that use tuition revenues to support financial aid must take funds away from other educational endeavors: this is one reason why, since the 1990s, colleges have in effect kept only 46 cents of every dollar received from tuition increases,” the report states.

On the issue of diversity, the report mentions that high tuition universities do not have the same level of diversity as less expensive public ones.

According to an April 2009 report by the Economic Opportunity Institute, several universities that adopted this model saw drops in the enrollment of low income students. “High sticker prices – total tuition amount before financial aid – deter students from enrolling for reasons including lack of knowledge about available aid packages, fear of incurring large sums of debt, or fear of burdening their families,” says the EOI report.

 These universities also saw a reduction or a stagnation of the number of minority students enrolled, according to the report.


Reporting contributed to by: Sara Truitt, Kevin Longrie and Jonathon MacLaughlin

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools