UC budget slashed by $100 million

Gov. Jerry Brown slashed the University of California’s budget by $100 million Tuesday, bringing the total budget reductions for the system to $750 million for the current fiscal year.

Since state revenues fell more than $2.2 billion short of projections, Brown was forced to initiate “trigger cuts” to education and social services, based on the state budget enacted in June. Both the UC and CSU systems will lose $100 million as a result of the cuts.

The cuts to the UC, however, will not be passed on to individual campuses and will be absorbed by the UC Office of the President, according to UC spokesperson Steve Montiel.

“We’re using short term bridging strategies — asset management,” Montiel said. “We’re taking certain steps in the short-term basis to move funds from one pool to another.”

In order to avoid a mid-year tuition hike, the university will look to reserves from its employee health care services. The UC will begin to draw from its employee health care reserve fund — which is used to provide for a possible substantial increase in the cost of health care — to account for the cuts, according to Montiel.

While these cuts are not permanent, Brown said that his budget proposal for next year will also include more cuts which will be premised on how the public votes on an initiative he has proposed that would raise taxes. If these trigger cuts become permanent, then the UC will have to consider tuition hikes for the next academic year, according to Montiel.

Because the state revenue shortfall was lower than expected, the state’s K-12 education system will be spared from deeper cuts that would reduce the school year by seven days.

“These cuts, they’re not good,” Brown said in a press conference. “This is not the way we’d like to run California, but we have to live within our means.”

Brown frequently made allusions to Europe’s economic status as a warning of what California would look like if it did not “exercise fiscal discipline.”

Curan Mehra covers higher education.

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • CalKid

    Boy it sure would be nice if the staff of the Daily Cal bothered to moderate their discussion forums at all.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

      As long as they address the trolls who are disrupting the forum.

      • Stan De San Diego

        Yeah I know right, this one guy keeps calling me an imposter

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

          Anyone with a clue can click on your avatar and see you’re the copycat troll, child. Not everyone here is as stupid as you are.

          • Stan De San Diego

            I know you are but what am I? 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Another troll…

  • Stan De San Diego

    The solution is obvious.  Cut the useless departments that are of no use to humanity, arts and science, or learning in general.  Things like the UCPD, the top paid athletics department people, UC Capital Projects, anyone with the words “executive” “vice” “provost” “chancellor” etc in their title and most of their staff.  

  • josh

    Simple answer to all this: Tax the 700,000  Californians with more than 1
    million in fluid assets (not houses) 10,000 each  – that means leave
    them 990,000 in fluid assets – that solves nearly all the budget
    problems, and goes a small but important way to returning some of the
    funds that the state has used to sponsor the asset accumulation of these
    folks. 

    union bosses are a ridiculous category to critique given that they are hardly existent and, for the most part, hardly wealthy – the significant numbers come from folks like the WalMArt family whose 6 children collectively own the same amount of wealth as the bottom 30% of the US – look it up, the concentration of wealth is mind boggling.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

      Raising taxes won’t solve the problem, that’s like giving an alcoholic more booze. The problem is that we have allowed the UC system to grow into a big and bloated bureaucracy with no insistence that they manage their finances effectively. When the administration pushed to award scholarships to people who aren’t even in the country legally, they proved that they have no regard for the taxpaying public. Fire ‘em all and replace them with people who know how to balance a budget.

      • Stan De San Diego

        Yeah!  Find every illegal kid in our schools and fire them all.  Their burning bodies will be a bright beacon to their parents to stop freeloading off the taxpaying hard working non-kooky non-liberal Stans.  

        • CalKid

          When you fire someone, they don’t actually burst into flame.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Word up: the person who posted the comment you are replying to is not me. It’s the work of a troll whose nutty comments earned him open ridicule on this site, so he has taken to hijacking other people’s handles and posting nonsense in on order to create confusion and get people banned whose genuine opinions he disagrees with, but can not refute. The solution to this problem might be to link a single handle to a single IP address, but his type is most likely unemployed and would probably spend all day trying to work a hack around it.

          • Stan De San Diego

            DON’T CALL ME A TROLL I’M NOT A TROLL

            UR A TROLL!!!11!1!!!

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            You’re obsessed with Stan, aren’t you? Are you in love with him or what?

          • Tony M

            Nope, just anyone that takes the internet too seriously

          • Stan De San Diego

            CalKid offers a FACT as part of a reasoned discussion, rather than just calling someone a “troll”.  To rebut CalKid, bursting into flames clearly can happen if accelerants are used, as in Buddhist monk self-immolations during the Vietnam War.  

  • Anonymous

    Okay, have it your way, you’re exploiting a vulnerability in the system which is not unlike what the 1% do to shelter their wealth from unfair taxes.  However, when you post as someone else within the SAME conversation it gets confusing.

    • Stan De San Diego

      “Okay, have it your way, you’re exploiting a vulnerability in the system
      which is not unlike what the 1% do to shelter their wealth from unfair
      taxes. ”

      I exploit this vulnerability in an attempt to remedy reactionary comments rather than sensible conversation.  They exploit this vulnerability for the own benefit at the expense of the people and country that make this wealth possible.  Not all exploitations of system vulnerabilities are created equal. 

      “However, when you post as someone else within the SAME conversation it gets confusing.”  Point taken. 

      • Wawaweewa

        Whoops, totally didn’t mean to post as Calipenguin.

        • wawaweewa

          Sorry, that should read.  “I exploit this vulnerability in an attempt to remedy reactionary comments that take the place of sensible conversation. ”  Looking forward to people pointing out that my internet incompetence must be a sign that nothing I say has any credibility…

          • Stan De San Diego

            STOP IMPERSONATING ME

          • Stan De San Diego

            Nice try. I don’t type in all caps.

          • Stan De San Diego

            Yes you/I did, see the comment above yours/mine

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            The fact you’re playing games pretty much demonstrates that you can’t win an argument by being straightforward and honest, and instead need to misrepresent yourself to confuse others. But then again, isn’t that how liberalism works anyway? Liberals  know they can never win by being honest and forthright, so they misrepresent who they are and what they stand for. Thanks for confirming that to everyone here, you pathetic child.

          • Stan De San Diego

            I am actually in no way related to wawawewa, just thought that this thread was hilarious, told my friends about it, and now there about 5 people posting as Stan De San Diego. LOLS

          • Stan De San Diego

            Maybe you should get 95 more. If they are all bright as you, maybe they can replicate Shakespeare, given enough time at their keyboards.

          • Stan De San Diego

            Because of the fact that you’re insulting my intelligence, I assume you have absolutely no clue what trolling is…

          • Stan De San Diego

            I know you are but what am I? 

          • Stan De San Diego

            Prove it

        • Stan De San Diego

          How about posting under your own chosen moniker instead of impersonating everyone else, asshole?

  • Stan De San Diego

    I like cheese.

    • Stan De San Diego

      Apparently you’re too dim to realize that the people who matter can tell the difference between my posts and your babbling nonsense. As hard as you try to impersonate me, the fact that you’re a liberal idiot still makes itself apparent.

      • Stan De San Diego

        Why did I just call myself a liberal idiot? How do I even know that I’m a liberal?

        • Stan De San Diego

          Everyone who isn’t Stan is a liberal silly kook.  And I don’t like kooky cheese – I like pancakes. 

          • Stan De San Diego

            I’m going to ignore you liberal idiots now.  Except I can’t, because you’re the only people who ever talk to me.  Stan is so lonely.  Does anyone out there love me? 

          • Stan De San Diego

            Oh Stan.  You’re so beautiful when you babble. 

          • CalKid

            Anyone who clicks on your user icon can see that you, the troll, are replying to yourself like this.

            And they can see that the original “Stan De San Diego” is not posting these comments.

             

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Yes, the children are running amuck.

          • Tony M

            Duck Amuck was a good cartoon.

          • Tony M

            GRRRR GET OFF MY LAWN CHILDREN

          • Stan De San Diego

            doesn’t matter, its too late now, the internets have won

  • Stan De San Diego

    TO THE CHILD WHO HIJACKS OTHER POSTER’S HANDLES: Sane, rational, intelligent people don’t need to misrepresent the positions of others to win an argument. The fact that you have resorted to this tactic is merely proof that you’re such a joke that nobody takes you seriously when you post under your own nom de plume.

    • Calipenguin

      I find sometimes that when it’s hard to tell who is posting which comments, people are more likely to take seriously the arguments contained within those posts, rather than trolling and name-calling.  I’m less interested in my positions being attached to my name than the merits of my arguments (and those who disagree with me) being considered by those reading.  People who support Occupy as as guilty as those who don’t of posting ridiculous things every time Calipenguin or you post something. 

      I don’t understand why you spend more time chastizing me for my avatar than engaging with my arguments.

      • Stan De San Diego

        yes, i agree, i’m a joke

        • Stan De San Diego

          In other words, you admit you can’t win the argument under your own name, based on your own logic, so you play games. Yawn.

          • Stan De San Diego

            I’m confused. Why am I talking to myself?

          • Stan De San Diego

            Can someone please 5150 me?  I’m confused. 

          • wawaweewa

            Actually, if you’d read my post, you’d see it’s the opposite.  I don’t want people to agree with me just because of my handle just like I don’t want people to disagree with you just beacuse of your handle.  On rare occasion, you and Calipenguin make reasonable points, and I see no reason why liberals should dismiss you just because you often make silly points, just as I see no reason why conservatives should dismiss me simply because of my handle.

            I think everyone would agree that your ad hominem attacks detract from your credibility far more than my attempts to raise the level of discourse a bit.

          • CalKid

            Hijacking other people’s account names to post idiotic drivel doesn’t raise the discourse at all.

            In fact, it does the exact opposite.

  • Anonymous

    On the same day this cut of $100 million was announced UC also announced fat pay increases to unionized employees for the next five years in a row, regardless of whether UC loses funding from the state in those five years.

    http://www.dailycal.org/2011/12/13/uc-reaches-wages-benefits-agreement-with-employee-union/

    When will the Occupy student members realize that their real enemies are the parasitic labor unions and not the banks?  When student fees go up again next summer they can thank the unions.

    • Stan De San Diego

      The Occupy types are academia’s equivalent of Stalin’s “useful idiots”. They are more interested in feeding their narcissistic need for constant attention than taking any type of critical look at the budget and trying to identify waste that could be cut to minimize or even eliminate the same student tuition increases that  allegedly got them worked up in the first place.

      • Stan De San Diego

        ME NO LIKE OCCUPY, me make wild comparisons

        • Stan De San Diego

          You silly. You act like child.

          • Stan De San Diego

            Typical Stan De San Diego response when they don’t have an answer.  They’re giving Berkeley a bad name – the rest of the world things we are full of kooky Stans who can’t make a reasoned argument. 

    • Stan De San Diego

      A “fat” pay increase?  3%/year for the next several years, which will both keep up with inflation and make up for the lack of inflation-tracked pay increases in previous years?  This at a time when UC executives have received something on the order of $15 million in “retention bonuses” and raises over the last two years?  This at a time when UC is spending hundreds of millions of dollars on construction projects?  This at a time when UC spend $6 million on an online education pilot that has consistently failed at other universities?  This at a time when UC executives last year asked for increases in their pensions to total between $150,000-$200,000 year after retirement?  These are pay increases to keep up with the cost of living who make the day to day operations of the university run.  I think it’s more than reasonable for people to ask the university to give them pay increases concomitant with increases in the cost of living.  These are not the people who “bankrupted” the university.  Those are the banks, which bankrupted the state.  The Regents and the UC executives should be going after the State legislature to pass increased income taxes on portions of income over $1 million.  This would generate  about $6 billion in revenue for the state.  The only reason that these people have millions of dollars in the first place is by putting directly into their pockets the profit created by the people who work for them. 

      • wawaweewa
      • Stan De San Diego

        I see some coward is posting under my name again. What’s your problem, have you lost so much credibility under your own handle that you have to hijack other people’s monikers instead?

        I don’t support tax raises or letting the UC administration off the hook for their incompetence and inability to establish and maintain sensible priorities. Why don’t you grow up and post under your own handle, unless your argument is so weak that you need to misrepresent the views of others?

        • Anonymous

          He stole my handle for a while as well.  I think he or she has a multiple personality disorder. 

          • Calipenguin

            ORLY

          • Stan De San Diego

            Hint for the child trying to impersonate me. Lolcat and text speak don’t pass for adult communication.

          • Stan De San Diego

            ORLY?

          • Stan De San Diego

            Yes, really.

          • Stan De San Diego

            NO WAI!

          • Stan De San Diego

            You’re all being silly kooks!

          • Stan De San Diego

            ORLY is hot.

          • Stan De San Diego

            LOL I THINK OWLS ARE HOT!!!1!

          • Stan De San Diego

            He has obviously embarrassed himself enough with his own nonsense that he realizes that the only way to get attention is to hijack the moniker of the few reputable posters around here.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Nah, he’s merely an attention-starved idiot, same as the crazies who willingly join any protest or demonstration as long as it gives them an opportunity to throw rocks, spray-paint buildings, and fight with symbols of authority.

          • Stan De San Diego

            ME LIKEY ROCK THROWING LAWLZ

        • Stan De San Diego

          Now really guys.  Stop posting as me.  Or I will have satisfaction.  We can have a dance off like in “Beat It”. 

    • josh

      Simple answer to all this: Tax the 700,000  Californians with more than 1 million in fluid assets (not houses) 10,000 each  – that means leave them 990,000 in fluid assets – that solves nearly all the budget problems, and goes a small but important way to returning some of the funds that the state has used to sponsor the asset accumulation of these folks.

      • Stan De San Diego

        I’m all for raising taxes but I don’t like this much.  Having a million dollars in the bank is much, much different than raking in a million dollars a year.  There are people with a million in the bank who are using that as their sole means of retirement income.  If you’re 65 and have a million in the bank, and you live 25 more years, that’s just $40,000/year to live on.  And nursing homes are hella expensive and often not covered by insurance. 

        I’d much rather have taxes on income over $1m that would raise even more money than that.  That’s what http://www.makebankspaycalifornia.com/ is all about. 

      • Anonymous

        There’s an easy way for millionaires to avoid this tax.  Simply buy investment property, precious metals, or treasuries until the bank or money market balance falls under $1 million.  Billionaires can simply change their permanent address to a cheap foreclosed condo in Las Vegas and then “vacation” in California.

  • Guest

    Cut retirement benefits for unionized staff employees.  Easy way to balance the UC budget.

    • UCB Alum

      Unfortunately, it is illegal to cut retirement benefits that are already earned.  In fact, it is unconstitutional under the contracts clause of the federal constitution.  Some kind of pension reform is needed, but the state is caught between a rock and a hard place.  Even though it wouldn’t help the problem in any meaningful way, there should certainly be put in place a cap on pension sizes for future employees.  

      • Anonymous

        Even if no new public employees are hired the existing group of unionized public employees will bankrupt California when they start drawing on their pensions.  The only way out is to oppose tax hikes of any kind until governments run out of money to fund the pensions.

        • Calipenguin

          You’re kidding me, right?  State employees have a contract with government saying that we will work for less wages now, provided that we have pensions that will be enough to support us after retirement.  Often the wages state employees currently receive are barely enough to support their families, and they’ve done a pretty awful job keeping up with inflation.  So you’re saying that government should just do nothing to honor these contracts?  The people who are “greedy” are not state employees, they are UC executives — 36 executives who currently make over $300,000 a year spent their time last year lobbying to have THEIR pensions raised, in some cases to nearly $200,000/year after retirement!  

          It is NOT the unions that are bankrupting Californians.  It’s the state legislature which said, sure, we’ll give you enough to retire on, but then did nothing on the revenue side to ensure they had the money.  If that’s not breach of contract, I don’t know what is.  

          • Stan De San Diego

            Why don’t you post under your own handle, imposter, instead of appropriating someone else’s moniker? Or are you tacitly admitting that you can’t stand on your own argument or your own reputation, so you need to muddy up the discussion and confuse others?

          • Stan De San Diego

            This is my Stan.  There are many like it but this one is mine.  I must type my Stan straight and true, straighter and truer than my enemy, who is trying to mock me.  I will.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Not your handle. Click on the icon, at it will be readily apparent who the troll is here.

          • Tony M

            ORLY

          • Tony M

            YEA RLY

          • Tony M

            I LIKE CHEESE

          • Stan De San Diego

            Unions don’t bankrupt California.  STANS DO. 

    • consrcunts

      Go fuck yourself.  I’m not getting any “retirement benefits” that I’m not having to pay for.

      • Stan De San Diego

        Thanks for that civilized and reasoned reply. People like you are the reason that workers in the private sector are fed up with government employees.

        • consrcunts

          And people like you are the reason I have my handle. 

          • Stan De San Diego

            And opinions that you can’t handle are the reason you threaten others, right?

          • Stan De San Diego

            I want the TRUTH. 

          • Stan De San Diego

            Stan, YOU CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH.  You want me on the Internet.  You need me on the Internet.  You eat breakfast 500 yards from a whole bunch of illegals who want to also eat breakfast.  

          • consrcunts

            A wish that someone punch you in the mouth is not a threat. 

            Unless you’re a hypomanic conservative whose anxiety-meter is pinging at the steady erosion of his privilege.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            Come on, a-hole. You know damn well that if someone with a conservative point of view directed that comment to you, then you would be running in your wetted panties to report them as abusive and get them banned for “hate speech”. One reason most sensible people hate sniveling left-wingers like you is because you are hypocrites who have one standard of behavior for people you agree with, and one for those you do not. Your dishonesty is readily apparent…

          • consrcunts

            You’re just pissed off because I owned your sock-puppet. 

            Do you really think someone with a handle like “consrcunts” is going to blanch at rough discourse from anyone?  At your best, you’re a pissy little nancy who thinks referring to someone as  “child” is a devastating insult.  But please, by all means, keep hopping around in impotent rage, Rumpelstiltskin–it’s very entertaining!

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WRACM77JT2RXUR3LMGDPPUGUYY Tony M

            You’re one tough talker for an admin clerk at Berkeley.

          • consrcunts

            Yeah, and you’re a pussy.

          • Tony M

            Yep, I’d like to agree with your statement.

        • Stan De San Diego

          Well said Stan!  Some of us have real jobs and real responsibilities in the private sector!  Dull hollow thud. 

      • Guest

         Translation:  Go **** yourself, I got mine and I ain’t giving it back, state bankruptcy be ****ed

        • Standy Dandy

          The UCRP is hardly bankrupting the state.  You are confusing it with CALPERS.

  • Anonymous

    A study issued by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), a non-partisan think-tank, just confirmed that during the 2009-2010 recessions, every income bracket in California lost income faster than the rest of the United States. But even more disturbing, all but the top 25% of earners now make less than equivalent income classes in other states. Once known as a job magnet for its sunny climate, world-class universities, and burgeoning high-tech opportunities, California has been transformed into a toxic anti-business state that works hard at drive businesses away.

    From 2007 when the recession began through its end in 2009, family incomes across all income classes dropped by over 5%. But instead of going back up during the recovery, they continued to plummet by another 6% in 2010. The declines weren’t spread evenly across the income classes. Families with incomes in the top 10% saw their family incomes decline 5%, but the bottom 10% of California’s poorest families saw their incomes plummet by 21%.
    In surveys, business executives regularly call California one of the country’s most toxic business environments and one of the least likely places to open or expand a new company. Many firms still headquartered in California consciously refuse to expand their workforce. Brutalized by the bursting of the housing bubble and currently suffering an unemployment rate of 11.7%, 3% above the national average, California family incomes continue to rapidly lose ground.
    Already boasting the lowest credit rating of any state in the nation, State Controller John Chiang just released his monthly financial report covering California’s cash balance, receipts and disbursements for November that demonstrates the state’s grim economic circumstances:
    After accounting for November revenues, total year-to-date general fund revenues are now behind the budget’s estimates by $1 billion, but expenditures for the year are over projections by $1.95 billion… The combined current year cash deficit stands at $21.5 billion.
    The resolve to turn California against business started with Governor Jerry Brown in 1974. Brown saw government’s job as restraining growth, limiting development, and expanding environmental regulations. In 1977, Time Magazine declared “the California of the ’60s, a mystical land of abundance and affluence, vanished sometime in the 70s.” Fifteen years later Gray Davis, Brown’s chief of staff during the 1970s, became Governor in 1999. Davis signed 33 bills that the state’s Chamber of Commerce called “job killers.” Perhaps the most devastating was a restructure of worker’s compensation, which drove an increase in payments per worker from $2.30 per $100 of payroll to $6.44; tripling the annual employment costs to business from $9 billion to $25 billion. Three years later, voters recalled Davis and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger. Unfortunately, in 2006 the “Governator” signed the Global Warming Solutions Act that critics mourn will raise electricity rates in California by another 20%.
    In a 2011 poll of various California business groups, 82 percent of executives and owners said that if they weren’t already in the state, they wouldn’t consider starting up there, and 64 percent said that the main reason they stayed in California was that it was tough to relocate their particular kind of business. For several years in a row, California has ranked dead last in the Chief Executive’s poll about the business environment of states in the U.S.
    Limousine liberals, rich environmentalists, union bosses, and their pet politicians that comprise much of the top 25% of income earners in California have not suffered devastating income declines in the recent recession. Responding to the Chief Executive poll, Steve Smith of the Labor Federation of California charged that it represented “little more than corporate honchos throwing around their weight to try to further strip working people of important protections that improve lives.” But for the 75% of Californians not at the top income levels; California’s anti-business environment continues to inflict real pain on the lives of workers and their families.

    • Stan De San Diego

      I can totally take you seriously with the handle libsrclowns

      • Stan De San Diego

        Never mind the imposter above. Whether you agree with the positions or opinions of librsrclowns or not, he presents and supports his arguments as a responsible adult, not some silly child playing games with other people’s handles.

        • Stan De San Diego

          Why did I just call myself a silly child?

          • Stan De San Diego

            Still playing games, I see.

          • Stan De San Diego

            WHY DO I KEEP PLAYING GAMES WITH MYSELF?!?!?!

          • Stan De San Diego

            I LIKE TO PLAY WITH MYSELF.  MOM CALLED ME SILLY KOOK FOR IT.  

        • Stan De San Diego

          I wouldn’t have said that if his handle was “CONSRCLOWNS”.  I’m fixated on handles. 

      • Stan De San Diego

        Is that Pinocchio or Cyrano de Bergerac or Steve Martin?  I’m afraid of clowns.  They’re too kooky and silly.  

  • Justsaying

    Governor Browns comparisons of Europe’s economic woes and warnings to Californian’s to ‘exercise fiscal discipline’ seems to be understood by the 99%.   Perhaps his message  should be spoken in the language of fatcat so the 1% can understand, too.

    • Guest

      What in the world are you even talking about?

      Do you even go to college?

      These “99%” messages are getting more and more vague.

      • http://twitter.com/lianamulholland Liana Mulholland

        Why are there always trolls on comment pages? I mean, they don’t feel they can say 90% of shit like this to anyone’s face, in the public sphere, but on the internet they suddenly feel like big men. Freakin trolls.

        • Stan De San Diego

          Guest’s point is well made. The blathering about the 99% is simply the refuge of people who can’t think for themselves or support their own ideas, so they need to identify with some supposed super-majority that doesn’t really exist. In reality, the political split in this country is more along the lines of the 53% that pay some semblance of state and/or federal income taxes, and the 47% who pay NO net income taxes. That’s certainly closer to the self-identification of “liberals” and “conservatives” in this country than this concocted idea of the 99% vs. the 1% that the lefties peddle.

          • Stan De San Diego

            jk guys i’m just trollin’

          • Stan De San Diego

            I sense that you’re jealous of the fact that everyone ignores your nonsense when you post under your own handle.

          • Stan De San Diego

            I wish I could be an external observer, it must be hilarious to see me talking to myself.

          • Standee Sandee Eggo

            Hey Stan De San Diego.  You’re a stupid whiny fuck.  Other people can post with your handle.  Get over it.

        • Stan De San Diego

          Welcome to the internet, there are trolls. The end.

  • Cream Get_the_UC

    http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/minutes/2011/comp1.pdf

    Wilton receives $375,000 base salary from UC.
    (18% above market median)
    His immediate predecessor was paid $283,100.

    • Bland

      cut the uc davis football program.  And lose oski’s shirt…that oughta save a few bucks

      • Stan De San Diego

        Thanks for that erudite assessment Bland.  You can’t have a shirtless bear; that would be kooky and silly.  Fail!