Derek Remsburg/File

A new cardio and weights facility open to all Recreational Sports Facility members is expected to open Oct. 1 at Memorial Stadium.

The $1.8 million facility, called the Rec Sports Fitness Center, repurposes 5,000 square feet of space in Memorial Stadium and will feature equipment for individuals with disabilities and offer those who live on the east side of campus easier access to workout facilities.

The center aims to provide additional workout space for the campus population. A 2007 study estimated that Cal Rec Sports, which provides recreational facilities for the campus, was only meeting 50 percent of demand.

“We need to provide more space and more opportunities for students, faculty and staff to workout,” said Eric Craypo, communications director at RSF, in an email. “When the space at Memorial Stadium became available, we saw it as an opportunity that we could not pass up.”

According to Craypo, Cal Athletics was looking to extend the use of the newly renovated Memorial Stadium beyond home football games, creating an opportunity to collaborate on the project.

The new center will be open to anyone with an RSF membership. UC Berkeley senior Carly Wasserman, who lives on Northside and goes to the RSF every day, says there is usually insufficient time during the school year to walk to the facility on Southside.

“During the summer, I still really have to motivate myself to go down there,” Wasserman said. “And during the school year, it’s hard to work into my schedule.”

The new space will not have any group classes or courts but will have weights and cardio machines, such as treadmills and elliptical trainers. New features also include a small Technogym Kinesis station, new equipment for individuals with disabilities and private, gender-neutral changing rooms and showers.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post Cardio and weights facility for RSF members to open at Memorial Stadium appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Anthony Bongco/File

An AC Transit workers’ union and the AC Transit board came to a three-year contract agreement late Tuesday evening, about an hour before the union had threatened to go on strike.

After working for several months, the union’s negotiations committee reached a tentative agreement with the AC Transit Board that saved about 181,000 daily riders from having to find alternative modes of transportation. Negotiations resolved disagreements over health care premiums and salary increases that required financial compromises from both parties.

“I wanted a contract that was fair to the ATU workers,” said Sharon Cornu, a spokesperson for Amalgamated Transit Union Local 192. “I think this contract reflects that.”

The agreement settled on a 9.5 percent wage increase for workers over the next three years. Originally, employees sought a 9.75 percent increase, and the transit agency was offering 9 percent.

“Wages have not kept up with the cost of living in the Bay Area,” said Yvonne Williams, president of ATU Local 192. “We’ve been behind for quite a while. But it’s an improvement, and we do need that improvement.”

In the last year of the previous contract, which expired June 30, workers had to allocate 3 percent of their salaries toward health care. Now, workers will pay the monthly flat rates of $70, $140 and $180 for the next three years, respectively. The union originally wanted $135 for the second year, and the board asked for $145.

Although the union had received previous salary increases, the money was allocated toward health care. However, there will now be in a net increase even after part of workers’ salaries is spent on health care.

Despite the agreements over health care and salaries, Cornu and several AC Transit bus drivers said that the lack of scheduled restroom and lunch breaks needs to be addressed.

“It’s probably the No. 1 safety issue,” said Drayland Davis, who has been an AC Transit bus driver for the past 15 years. “You try to run to the bathroom, and that’s only if you reach the end of your route early.”

According to Williams, the issue will be on the directors’ agenda next meeting.

Just last Sunday, Gov. Jerry Brown intervened to prevent another BART strike with a seven-day injunction against work stoppage. This incident, in conjunction with the BART strike on July 1, has made many Bay Area riders uncertain about finding transportation in the past month.

“We did not take the possibility of withholding service from public lightly,” Williams said. “That was more stressful than the negotiations process.”

The agreement will be presented to union members shortly, with a simple majority vote needed for ratification.

“I was quite pleased with the fact that this thing went with a whole of respect and relatively very little anger,” said Christian Peeples, who is on the AC Transit Board.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post AC Transit board, union agree on tentative work contract appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The investigation, which is still ongoing, began after several students came forward to report that some students had continued working and shared answers on the spring final for Computer Science 70 after the exam had ended. Recent discussion regarding the incident by was sparked by a post on social news website Reddit on Saturday.

According to students and members of the teaching staff, the crowdedness and logistical difficulties of Haas Pavilion, where the exam took place, made it easier for students to cheat. Although the staff members were aware that the Math 54 class would be taking an exam at the same time, they expected the room to be able to accommodate the 1,000 students taking their exams.

However, the crowdedness forced GSIs to check identification after the exam, causing exam collection to take 15 to 20 minutes. CS 70 students also sat in the back, making it difficult to hear any announcements from the room’s single sound system.

“The Haas Pavilion was so echoey — no one could actually hear,” said Dhruv Garg, a campus junior majoring in electrical engineering and computer sciences. “(When the professor said time was up), it wasn’t clear whether her instructions were targeted towards just her class or everybody.”

According to GSI Chenyu Zhao, witnesses brought the cheating incidents to the attention of the teaching staff after the exam. Within an hour, the professor posted on the class’s forum, notifying the class of the incident and urging the class to take responsibility.

“The cheaters are going to be hurting the grades of all the honest students in the class,” Professor Sahai wrote. “They deserve no mercy or loyalty after doing such a despicable act to their fellow students.”

The electrical engineering and computer sciences department’s academic dishonesty policies recommend that cheaters be failed for the corresponding courses and that students be expelled after a repeat offense. According to the Center for Student Conduct, if students fail to resolve the incident with their professor, they will receive an alleged violation letter to either accept their sanctions or go to a hearing.

Ultimately, less than 2 percent of the class was found to be guilty. For those who confessed before grades were turned in, grades were readjusted to remove points possibly gained on an extra question. Those who still have not confessed, according to Sahai, will at least fail the class, and the university will decide the subsequent punishment. The investigation is ongoing.

Students said that the cheaters had no justification for their actions, given the professor’s helpfulness and fairness throughout the semester.

“The professor and GSIs threw homework parties, which were very helpful,” said Alex Danilychev, a campus sophomore and computer science major. “We also had extra credit opportunities throughout the semester. I could’ve easily gotten three times the extra credit I got if I wanted to.”

The students had a range of responses, varying from surprise to anger, compelling them to report anything suspicious they witnessed. According to the professor, more than 20 people came forward with reports.

“There was a positive side in that the discussion that happened afterwards generated a shared sense that something was wrong and not acceptable,” Sahai said.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post Details emerge about cheating incident in computer science course appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Mary Zheng/Staff

Amid the increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks faced by universities, UC Berkeley is doubling its efforts and allying with other UC campuses to address security risks.

UC Berkeley was previously underfunded for an institution of its size but will increase investment in its central information security program from $1.5 million to $3 million for the next fiscal year. Universities face the extra challenge of protecting intellectual property and the security data of a heterogeneous population while preserving the openness unique to a research institution.

UC Berkeley faces millions of attempts at breaching vulnerabilities every week, according to Larry Conrad, UC Berkeley’s chief information officer.

“Unfortunately, universities are a worldwide destination for hackers,” Conrad said. “To steal a Social Security number or credit card number, you get some financially stable people (in universities) you can leverage. Research universities also create new knowledge — there’s intellectual property, value on the new market.”

These cyberattacks are also becoming more sophisticated, and phishing attacks — which trick people into revealing accounting credentials by replicating login pages and stealing credentials — have seen an increase. According to Paul Rivers, UC Berkeley’s system and network security manager, hackers monitor UC websites so they can replicate login pages as closely as possible.

The number of cyberattacks campuses face may also depend on the size of the institution and significance of its research. UC Riverside receives thousands of attacks per year — compared to UC Berkeley’s millions — and its budget for next year will be far less than double that of UC Berkeley, said Bob Grant, director of technology at UC Riverside.

While corporations also face cyberattacks, the information exchanges in universities entail a more open but more vulnerable environment. Unlike corporations, campus networks allow virtually anyone to connect to a server and access the Internet from outside.

The research focus of universities also brings unique challenges for researchers and professors who want to protect intellectual property. Hackers may not always have the motivation to steal research to make their own patents — sometimes, they only look to take advantage of the information.

Handling stolen intellectual property is also more difficult because of international hackers and the challenges that come with obtaining cooperation from foreign countries, according to Brian Carver, an assistant professor at the UC Berkeley School of Information. Hackers often launch attacks from multiple locations or change locations, making it complicated to trace the origin of the breach.

Looking ahead: taking steps to ensure improved security

In 2009, hackers broke into University Health Services databases, gaining access to 160,000 people’s personal records for six months. Afterward, the FBI and UCPD combed through records extensively to ensure that all students were aware of the security breach and that firewalls were secure.

Now, the campus’s Information Services and Technology department plans on doubling its funding, an investment that will bring the institution up to par with its peers. Currently, the UC Privacy and Information Security Initiative is also seeking to have an advisory board for both the UC president and for each university by 2014 to guide discussions about issues of privacy and information security.

“It really does take a village to try to respond to this,” Conrad said. “The threat is too pervasive. The (other universities) help identify where the exposures are and do a good job of disseminating the info.”

However, each individual will also have to play an active role, as the most important thing for departments and researchers to do is remain aware of what data they have that could be breached, Rivers said. IST has also emphasized clear data classification standards that inform departments of the level of security their data requires.

Hackers target not only high-security computers but also devices as common as personal laptops. Just having anti-virus software does not suffice these days, Rivers said. IST offers a program called Secunia PSI that individuals on campus can use to see whether they have the necessary updated protection.

“Hackers may look for any kind of data system to get into, whether sensitive or not,” Rivers said. “So they spread out and establish capability on the campus network … That’s the basis by which our security standards require patching your system. People wonder, if it’s just my personal laptop, why does it matter to the university? Well, that’s why.”

In 2010, the university moved to create an overarching security policy. The initiative will establish a systemwide advisory board, train campus privacy leaders and form a consistent balancing analysis — a framework for decision-making when competing privacy interests, university values or obligations exist. The university hopes to fully implement the initiative in the next five years.

Despite these steps, the initiative strives to refrain from turning the university’s security program into that of a corporation. Corporations have more restrictions on accessing web servers and may perform stronger monitoring because they regard the computers as company property. According to Rivers, the university does not want to become a “Big Brother” but aims to maintain strong security alongside uninhibited autonomy.

However, security breaches remain a problem for universities. On July 24, Stanford University experienced its own security breach in its information technology infrastructure. Stanford is still investigating the source and impact of the breach but has urged all students to changed their passwords.

“Due to the emergence of so much new technology and the ever increasing amount of data we store it is of great importance that we make security a priority,” said UC spokesperson Brooke Converse in an email. “It is critical that the University be a good steward of information entrusted to it by students, faculty, staff, and community.”

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post UC Berkeley seeks to expand security program to combat cyberattacks appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Sureya Melkonian/Staff

The UC Board of Regents appointed UC Berkeley senior Sadia Saifuddin as student regent-designate at its meeting Wednesday, despite some controversy over her selection. When Saifuddin’s term begins in July 2014, she will be the first Muslim student regent.

Saifuddin’s appointment was met with controversy during the meeting’s public comment session when some raised concerns about her support of a recent movement to divest UC funds from companies affiliated with the Israeli military. In a rare move, UC Regent Richard Blum abstained from the vote to approve Saifuddin, citing similar concerns regarding her political activity. All other regents voted in Saifuddin’s favor.

This spring, Saifuddin co-sponsored a UC Berkeley student government bill aiming to divest ASUC funds from companies that provide equipment, materials and technology to the Israeli military. Supporters cited concerns regarding Israel’s alleged human rights violations in the region and encouraged the UC system to also take action in withdrawing investments.

During the public comment session, Saifuddin’s critics alleged that her support for divestment would be a divisive force within the UC system and would alienate Jewish students.

Some, including ASUC Senator George Kadifa and former student regent Jonathan Stein, refuted those claims, supporting Saifuddin’s appointment.

“Those who do know her personally know her to be a woman of openness,” Stein said. “She invited students to Muslim student town halls (and) Muslim students to Jewish student town halls.”

Although many regents disagreed with Saifuddin’s position on divestment, they largely approved of her appointment, with explicit support from Regents Sherry Lansing, Bonnie Reiss and Frederick Ruiz.

“We disagree with her position on divestment, but we do so respectfully,” Lansing read from a statement she wrote in collaboration with UC President Mark Yudof and Regents Bruce Varner and Ruiz.

Blum abstained from the final appointment vote, saying that he strongly disagreed with Saifuddin’s point of view but did not know her well enough to justify a negative vote.

“When you’re going to be the student representative, you have to represent all the students, and you don’t want to alienate a lot of people,” Blum said.

After the vote, Saifuddin briefly addressed the meeting, thanking both her family for their support as well as the regents for the opportunity to serve the UC community.

“I think that the UC is standing at a critical juncture right now, and it’s really important for us to come together,” Saifuddin said during the meeting.

Later, at a press conference, Saifuddin addressed some of the criticisms she has received in light of her nomination as student regent.

“I think being on the receiving end of these attacks is difficult, but it’s not something that’s unexpected or unforeseen, and it’s something that I’ll learn to deal with better every day,” Saifuddin said.

Contact Simon Greenhill and Mary Zhou at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post UC Board of Regents appoints Sadia Saifuddin as student regent-designate appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Sureya Melkonian/Staff

The UC Board of Regents appointed UC Berkeley senior Sadia Saifuddin as student regent-designate, discussed a proposed increase in some professional degree fees and heard outgoing remarks from UC President Mark Yudof, among other matters, at its meeting Wednesday.

Yudof addressed the board to open what will be his last regents’ meeting before he steps down in late August. Yudof reflected on his philosophy for governing a large and complex university system, which he said requires consistent and balanced progress rather than sweeping change.

“I receive letters all the time that call for UC to sell two campuses or to jettison its graduate programs or to close various departments,” he said. “All of these actions would be ‘spectacular,’ (but) none of them would work. The University of California requires thoughtful, consistent and constant reform efforts — but not extreme ones.”

Yudof also thanked UC faculty, students and regents for their support during his five years as president and noted the UC system’s positive outlook for the future. Janet Napolitano, U.S. secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, is slated to be approved as Yudof’s successor at Thursday’s meeting.

The committee on finance discussed the state’s 2013-14 budget, underlining the planned budget increases and debt restructuring planned through 2015. Preliminary discussion for the 2014-15 budget also began and focused on Gov. Jerry Brown’s call for a tuition freeze. The 2014-15 budget will be discussed in greater detail at the regents’ September meeting.

The finance committee later recommended an increase in the amount UC employees contribute to the UC retirement plan. It also recommended increasing professional degree supplemental tuition, or PDST, for some programs.

If the recommendation is approved, tuition for the system’s four nursing programs — at UC San Francisco, UCLA, UC Davis and UC Irvine — would see an 8 percent increase that would take effect Aug. 1 and result in about $250,000 in revenue per year.

Four new fees for new programs were also approved: Games and Playable Media at UC Santa Cruz, Health Services-Physician Assistant Studies at UC Davis, Technology and Information Management at UC Santa Cruz and Translational Medicine at UC Berkeley and UC San Francisco.

The board also discussed the 2014-15 student regent nominee, Sadia Saifuddin.

Student regent appointments are typically unanimous, but Regent Richard Blum abstained from the vote. He cited Saifuddin’s support for divesting UC funds from companies doing business with the Israeli military, saying that he disagreed with her views but did not know her well enough to justify a negative vote. Other regents also disagreed with her stance but said they did not think those views would impact her ability to act as student regent.

Contact Simon Greenhill and Mary Zhou at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post Regents approve student regent, professional tuition increases at meeting appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Patients from Sutter Delta Medical Center, Eden Medical Center, and Alta Bates Summit Medical Center may have had their personal information leaked, possibly including names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, genders, addresses and phone numbers.

Stephen Light, a detective at the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office, said he had been contacted by about 20 people who were victims of identity theft and thought it was connected to the security breach.

Light worked on the project before transferring it to the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team, a northern California task force that investigates tech-related crimes.

“There are approximately 5,000 victims (of the breach), so it’s pretty overwhelming to investigate with the resources we have,” Light said.

The cause for the leak is still unknown, and REACT is continuing its investigations. After the breach, Sutter Health sent out 4,500 letters on June 7 and offered patients free credit-monitoring services.

“We are concerned about this matter and take protecting our patients’ privacy very seriously,” Sutter Health said in a statement. “At this time we do not know how the information was obtained. We continue to cooperate with law enforcement to investigate this incident.”

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post Security breach affecting 4,500 Sutter Health patients still under investigation appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The amendment, SCA-5, seeks to amend the state constitution, eliminating language added in 1996 by Proposition 209, which prohibited state institutions from considering race, ethnicity, sex and national origin in public employment, contracting and education. If the amendment is passed by both legislative houses, it could be put before California voters as early as this November.

The amendment was introduced by Sen. Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, who in 2011 authored controversial senate bill SB 185, which also intended to repeal Prop. 209. The bill prompted prompted outcry and protests on the UC Berkeley campus, including a contentious bake sale that garnered national attention.

SB 185 passed both legislative houses but was vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown, who said he agreed with the goals of affirmative action but that it was up to the courts, not the legislature, to limit Prop. 209.

Hernandez said he proposed the constitutional amendment so the decision on Prop. 209 would go to the people instead of the governor.

“I think the voters will be more open this time around than in 1996,” Hernandez said. “Let’s compare the gay marriage issue and some of the other social issues and look at how the country is changing.”

A survey released by The Public Policy Institute of California in 2011 found that 75 percent of respondents in California thought it either somewhat or very important to have a racially diverse student body in public universities.

“It’s important our universities and our high education system and at least our public system to be reflective or more reflective of the demographics,” said Meredith Vivian, director of government relations at the California State Student Association.

According to Sen. Marty Block, D-San Diego, a co-author of SCA-5, if the amendment is passed by voters, higher education institutions could consider race and ethnicity as factors in their admissions processes as long as they were within the narrow parameters tested and set by federal law.

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court case Fisher v. UT Austin tested some of those parameters, finding that universities could enact policies to improve diversity as long as they were narrowly tailored to educational benefits.

However, Ward Connerly, who is president of the American Civil Rights Coalition and was a staunch advocate for Prop. 209 when it passed in 1996, said that affirmative action policies are not the solution to underrepresentation of minority groups in higher education.

“You gotta start much earlier in the life cycle of the student,” Connerly said. “It’s the flaw of families, of cultures — a number of things that shouldn’t be corrected by giving some kids extra points or lowering the standard.”

SCA-5 was proposed in December 2012 and has been referred to the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee. Hernandez said he intends for the amendment to be on the ballot this November, but if the amendment does not pass in time, he intends for it to be on the ballot in November 2016.

Block said a constitutional amendment sends a more powerful message than a bill, although it would be more time-consuming and expensive to pass because of election campaigning.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post Constitutional amendment aiming to repeal Prop. 209 passes education committee appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Mary Zheng/Staff

Berkeley City Council approved the construction of an ice cream shop named Dream on Telegraph Avenue across from CREAM at its meeting Tuesday on the condition that a proposed takeout window would be removed from the plans, due to ADA accessibility and traffic concerns.

The Dream project was submitted by Rasputin Music owner Ken Sarachan and approved by the city’s Department of Planning and Development in September 2012. CREAM manager Gus Shamieh appealed the decision later that month to the Zoning Adjustments Board, citing concerns that a takeout window might generate harmful amounts of traffic.

The board affirmed the city’s approval of the project January, but in February, Shamieh appealed the board’s decision to the City Council.

“This is not an issue about competition,” Shamieh said. “This is an issue about safeguarding the right of ADA persons to freely and safely access the sidewalk. This is about protecting bicyclists and motorists from potentially hazardous situations.”

The proposed window would have looked out onto Channing Way, the sidewalk of which is narrowest at 8 feet and widest at 16 feet and 9 inches.

At the meeting, Councilmember Max Anderson raised concerns of space for balance- and sight-impaired people, and Councilmember Jesse Arreguin added that the takeout window would increase the incidence of double-parking and parking in the red curb parking zone.

However, most of the public comment from both sides of the appeal focused on concerns with competition and maintenance of small, local businesses pertinent to the cultural character of the city.

“We have a Dreyer’s and a Breyer’s,” said Councilmember Susan Wengraf in response to these comments. “They are both doing really well … CREAM has a niche market. It has a loyal following. It’s very popular, and other businesses deserve the same chance to make it.”

According to Sarachan, Rasputin recently had a 75 percent drop in sales. Sarachan also closed down some of his stores in other cities and believes Dream would boost sales. As an owner of an organic farm in Fairfield, Calif., Sarachan said he plans to start a line of more organic ice cream products that would offer a healthier alternative.

Councilmember Laurie Capitelli also argued that an additional ice cream store would reduce waiting time and actually increase the number of people coming to Telegraph Avenue. Councilmember Kriss Worthington argued, however, that the crowd around Dream may be located perpendicular to the street, as opposed to huddled against a wall like at CREAM, and cause more disturbance.

Chandna Agarwal, a former CREAM employee, said that the same arguments for overcrowding at Dream could also apply to CREAM.

“(CREAM) may be a store, but it’s practically a booth, a window,” Agarwal said. “In there, there are at most six people being served, and the rest eat standing outside.”

All councilmembers except Worthington voted to pass Councilmember Linda Maio’s motion to allow Dream to open but with no takeout window.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the Zoning Adjustment Board approved the project in September. In fact, the city Department of Planning and Development approved the project.

A previous version of this article incorrectly spelled Chandna Agarwal’s name.

The post Dream ice cream shop across from CREAM approved by City Council appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The court’s decision of 7 to 1 said that when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit judged the case, it did not hold the University of Texas at Austin to the burden of strict scrutiny that was prescribed in previous affirmative action cases, such as Grutter v. Bollinger and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. The decision means the university must prove in a lower court that its admissions practices are narrowly targeted to its educational goals.

Abigail Fisher, a white student, brought the lawsuit against the University of Texas at Austin, claiming she was rejected for admission in 2008 as a result of racial discrimination prohibited by the 14th Amendment. The university argued it had an interest in pursuing diversity for its educational benefits.

In August, the University of California and chancellors from all 10 UC campuses submitted an amicus brief declaring support for the University of Texas at Austin’s use of race in the admissions process.

Since 1997, California public universities have not been able to consider race in admissions because of Proposition 209, a 1996 ballot initiative forbidding state-funded institutions from considering factors such as race or ethnicity in admissions or hiring decisions.

In a statement released following the decision, UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks criticized California’s continued ban of race-based admissions but praised the court’s decision for acknowledging the benefits of maintaining diversity in higher education.

“At the University of California, we have experienced the unfortunate consequences of state law that precludes the consideration of race, even in the context of a holistic admissions review,” Dirks said. “It is reassuring to know that universities in states permitting the consideration of race in admissions will not be compelled to take the same unfortunate path the University of California has been forced to follow.”

However, any immediate effects of the decision on affirmative action in California are unlikely because of Prop. 209, according to Janelle Scott, a professor at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Education.

“We have the Grutter decision … (and) that didn’t do anything in California,” Scott said. “So I think it’s unlikely any other decision will shift 209.”

However, Tony Le, executive director of the UC Berkeley bridges Multicultural Resource Center, said that the decision may recatalyze action for SB 185, a 2011 bill that would have overturned Prop. 209. SB 185 passed both state legislative houses but was vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown.

“If (a similar bill) were to pass, the supporters of affirmative action will push it further, since it was so close the first time,” Le said.

Contact Mary Zhou at mzhou@dailycal.org

The post U.S. Supreme Court sends Fisher vs. UT Austin back to circuit court appeared first on The Daily Californian.