Mark G. Yudof: Response to Events at UCSD

Statement of
Mark G. Yudof, President, University of California
Russell Gould, Chair, UC Board of Regents
February 26, 2010

Last night a noose was found hanging from a light fixture in the Geisel Library on the University of California, San Diego campus. This morning, we were informed by campus officials that a student has come forward and claimed she and two others were responsible. Whatever the intent of the authors of this act, it was a despicable expression of racial hatred, and we are outraged. It has no place in civilized society and it will not be tolerated – not on this particular campus, not on any University of California campus. A full investigation is underway by both campus and law enforcement officials. We support it. Appalling acts of this sort cannot go unpunished.

In the meantime, we will work in every way possible to ensure that all members of the UC San Diego community and the entire University system can learn and live in the safe and civil environment called for in the codes of conduct in place on each campus and facility. To the UCSD students and all others who have been confronted with this ugliness, and who are understandably traumatized by it, we extend both our sympathy and our pledge to root out racism whenever and wherever it arises on our campuses.

Now is the time for all members of the UC community to dig deep into their hearts and consciences and to reach out to one another with compassion and understanding. Now is the time to affirm that there is no place for any expression of racism.


8 responses to “Mark G. Yudof: Response to Events at UCSD

  1. The systematic institutional racism expressed by the Public University is the real “despicable expression of racial hatred” that “has no place in civilized society and […] will not be tolerated.” The symbol of a noose has much less of an impact on students of color than their exclusion at the UC, and easily could have been place by someone who was working so hard in the library to keep up with classes that they thought it might be funny (though admittedly ignorant) to put up a non-functioning, brightly colored noose.

  2. These acts of wasting $3,000,000 for students by President Yudof and UCB Chancellor Birgeneau cannot go without punishment by the Regents of the University of California. $3 Million Spending by UC President Yudof for University of California Berkeley Chancellor Birgeneau to Hire Consultants – When Work Can Be Done Internally & Impartially
    During the days of the Great Recession, every dollar in higher education counts. Contact Chairwoman Budget Sub-committee on Education Finance Assemblywoman Carter 916.319.2062 – tell her to stop the $3,000,000 spending by Birgeneau on consultants.
    Do the work internally at no additional costs with UCB Academic Senate Leadership (C. Kutz/F. Doyle), the world – class professional UCB faculty/ staff, & the UCB Chancellor’s bloated staff (G. Breslauer, N. Brostrom, F. Yeary, P. Hoffman, C. Holmes etc) & President Yudof.
    President Yudof’s UCB Chancellor should do the high paid work he is paid for instead of hiring expensive East Coast consults to do the work of his job. ‘World class’ smart executives like Chancellor Birgeneau need to do the hard work analysis, and make the tough-minded difficult, decisions to identify inefficiencies.
    Where do the $3,000,000 consultants get their recommendations?
    From interviewing the UCB senior management that hired them and approves their monthly consultant fees and expense reports. Remember the nationally known auditing firm who said the right things and submitted recommendations that senior management wanted to hear and fooled the public, state, federal agencies?
    $3 million impartial consultants never bite the hands (Chancellor Birgeneau/ Chancellor Yeary) that feed them!
    Mr. Birgeneau’s accountabilities include “inspiring innovation, leading change.” Instead of deploying his leadership and setting a good example by doing the work of his Chancellor’s job, Birgeneau outsourced his work to the $3,000,000 consultants. Doesn’t he engage UC and UC Berkeley people at all levels to examine inefficiencies and recommend $150 million of trims? Hasn’t he talked to Cornell and the University of North Carolina – which also hired the consultants — about best practices and recommendations that eliminate inefficiencies?
    No wonder the faculty, staff, students, Senate & Assembly are angry and suspicious.
    In today’s Great Recession three million dollars is a irresponsible price to pay when a knowledgeable ‘world-class’ UCB Chancellor and his bloated staff do not do the work of their jobs.
    Pick up the phone and call: save $3 million for students!

  3. In terms of making everything equal–

    One of the key components of the BSU’s demands is the idea that UCSD needs more black students. I agree. In terms of proportionality, 4% more of the university’s total population needs to be black.
    I think we need to target the real racists: the Asians. Somehow, they have ninja’d their way to 48% of UCSD’s campus body while only comprising 12% of the state’s populace.
    That level of favortism is insane! With the 11000 Asians currently on campus, we need only need to expel or compel to transfer 8 or 9000 current students to other campuses so we can make room for a more balanced campus that accurately reflects the contributions of all ethnic groups instead of a racist one that supports Asians. This way, we can make room for the 2500 new black students, 5000 new white students, and 5000 new latinos. I think blacks, whites, and latinos should unite against the racist asians until UCSD is equal.

    (Note: The above is of course intended to be satire. Think about the logic though.)

    • If you remember the statements by Vice Chancellor Rue. The admissions rate for Blacks is not the embarrassing trend here. The embarrassment is in the amount of Blacks who actually accept their admission to come to UCSD. Recruitment and retention. This means convincing Black students that it’s a good idea to come here and that they would be welcome here. The Black Student Union has been doing this work, while being students at the same time. 1.3% is not the rate of admission, it’s the rate of retention+new students.
      As for the argument of Affirmative Action, I am not well versed in its history to defend or denounce it. I admit I’ve had mix feelings about it, but have sympathy for why its necessary to counteract racial injustice. If it were to be implemented again, it would need to be heavily regulated.

  4. Sorry, I mean the rate of retention+new students in relation to the racial makeup of the rest of campus. Why shouldn’t we just ignore those types of categorizations yet? Because there is still an egregious amount of inequality.

  5. Biracial, UCSD, you’re just as ignorant.

  6. Instead of an apology there has been steady escalation and now the noose. So, what exactly will the excuses be for this cowardly act that brings up memories of the confederate KKK of the South in their attempts to keep slavery and the non-whites in fear? Is it that are uneducated, is it that their parents planted these seeds of hate, is it that they are live in fear because our President in the white house is not 100% white. This is what the republican party of “birthers, baggers and blowhards” have brought you. These kids follow what their dullard leaders say, they are young and dumb. Are you surprise at what they do when you know what they think? Of course it could be an off-campus dullard who listens to Beck, Hedgecock, Hannity, O’Reilly, Rush and Savage and the rest of the Blowhards.

  7. moravecglobal

    Yudof address UCB Chancellor Birgeneau’s loss of trust. UCB Chancellor Birgeneau Loss of Credibility, Trust
    The UCB budget gap has grown to $150 million, and still the Chancellor is spending money that isn’t there on expensive outside consultants. His reasons range from the need for impartiality to requiring the “innovative thinking, expertise, and new knowledge” the consultants would bring.

    Does this mean that the faculty and management of a world-class research and teaching institution lack the knowledge, impartiality, innovation, and professionalism to come up with solutions? Have they been fudging their research for years? The consultants will glean their recommendations from interviewing faculty and the UCB management that hired them; yet solutions could be found internally if the Chancellor were doing the job HE was hired to do. Consultant fees would be far better spent on meeting the needs of students.

    There can be only one conclusion as to why creative solutions have not been forthcoming from the professionals within UCB: Chancellor Birgeneau has lost credibility and the trust of the faculty as well as of the Academic Senate leadership that represents them. Even if the faculty agrees with the consultants’ recommendations – disagreeing might put their jobs in jeopardy – the underlying problem of lost credibility and trust will remain.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s