The governor’s May budget revision, released Tuesday, remains largely unchanged from the January proposal. Patrick Lenz, the university’s vice president for budget and capital resources, said the university did not receive any additional increases in funding in the May revision.

The budget also calls for a four-year tuition freeze for all students except those in professional schools, a restructuring of debt and discontinuation of a proposed unit cap on state-subsidized courses, which could have affected 2,200 UC students in the next school year.

Student Regent Jonathan Stein and Regent Bonnie Reiss raised concerns about rising costs of professional student fees while undergraduate and other program costs have been held constant.

“Because Prop. 30 passed and because of new state revenues, we’ve been able to hold tuition constant,” Stein said. “In reality, we’ve been able to hold undergraduate and Ph.D tuition constant while professional schools continue to rise.”

The regents also discussed restructuring the university’s debt. The state of California currently takes out bonds on behalf of the university, but UC officials say shifting the responsibility of the debt to the UC system would help lower the debt.

“That debt is greater because the state of California’s credit rating is not as good as ours,” said Brooke Converse, spokesperson for the UC Office of the President. “What we’re asking is that the state of California let us take over and restructure that debt, because if we restructure it, we’ll be able to save $80 million a year.”

The university is also working with the governor to expand facilities at UC Merced, said Nathan Brostrom, the university’s executive vice president for business operations.

“The highest priority is a classroom and academic building at UC Merced,” Brostrom said. “They are now close to 6,000 students, and they do not have space for continued growth unless they get more classroom buildings.”

The regents also approved a plan to build a new aquatics center at UC Berkeley on the current site of the Tang Center parking lot.

Protesters from American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 3299, a union representing patient-care workers at UC medical centers, also interrupted early in the meeting for about 45 minutes to protest in favor of higher pay and increased staffing.

On Thursday, the regents will meet in closed sessions to discuss collective bargaining matters and lawsuits related to the UC system.

Staff writer Virgie Hoban contributed to this report. 

Mitchell Handler covers academics and administration. Contact him at mhandler@dailycal.org and follow him on Twitter @mitchellhandler.

The post UC Regents meet in Sacramento to discuss budget, projects at UC Berkeley and Merced appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The revised budget, commonly known as the May revision, reflects new spending proposals from state legislators, changes in the state’s economic outlook and decreases in federal government funding since the governor’s first proposed budget in January.

The UC Board of Regents will discuss the revised budget at its meeting in Sacramento on Wednesday.

If approved by the Legislature, the governor’s budget will increase funding for each of the state’s higher education systems above the prior year’s funding. The university will receive an increase of up to 20 percent in General Fund appropriations — about $511 million — over the next four years.

According to the budget, these changes will represent an increase of about 10 percent in total operating funds, including tuition and fee revenues.

The budget includes about $25.4 billion in total funding for higher education in the coming fiscal year, $400 million less than was proposed in January.

In addition, a previously proposed unit cap has also been removed from the budget following rejection from the state Legislature. Faculty groups and lawmakers criticized the 150 percent unit cap on state-subsidized courses for its “one-size-fits-all” model and argued that the mandate would not be as effective as individual campus caps.

According to the UC Office of the President, the unit cap would have impacted 2,200 UC students in the 2013-14 academic year.

“UC will continue working with the governor and the Legislature to address critical funding needs,” said Patrick Lenz, the university’s vice president for budget and capital resources, in a statement.

According to the governor’s press release, the budget is expected to remain balanced in the coming years. Spending cuts enacted over the past two years and new temporary funds brought in by Proposition 30, which was passed by voters last November, are expected to allow the state budget to reduce the state’s debt to $4.7 billion by 2017 — a reduction of more than 86 percent.

“This budget builds a solid foundation for California’s future by investing in our schools, continuing to pay down our debts and establishing a prudent reserve,” Brown said in a press release. “But California’s fiscal stability will be short-lived unless we continue to exercise the discipline that got us out of the mess we inherited.”

Additional elements of the revised budget include changes to the state’s public school funding system, investment in job-creation programs and an additional $72 million for county probation departments to compensate for their increased responsibilities as legislatures try to reduce the state’s prison population.

Brown will now have to convince the state Legislature that his plans for higher education and the state merit passage. After discussion from state senators and assembly members, the budget will be finalized in June and take effect July 1, the start of the 2013-14 fiscal year.

Alex Berryhill covers higher education. Contact her at aberryhill@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @berryhill93.

The post Brown releases revised state budget maintaining tuition freeze appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The regents will also review a special report by UC President Mark Yudof on the current and future challenges facing the university, a report on the university’s academic performance and a proposed design for a new aquatics center at the UC Berkeley campus.

On Wednesday morning, the board will hear an update on Brown’s revised budget, which reflects new revenue estimates and the effects of new proposals by the state Legislature on the budget.

Later that day, the Committee on Educational Policy will hear a report on “academic performance indicators” at the University of California. The report summarizes two decades of statistics collected from the 10 UC campuses and finds that despite declining state support, the university has continued to excel by a number of performance indicators, including graduation rates and number of students enrolled.

Over the last two decades, four-year graduation rates have increased substantially. The entering class of 2007 had a graduation rate of 60 percent, up from 37 percent for the entering class of 1992, according to the report.

The report also recommends that state legislators give the university and individual campuses greater flexibility, authority and resources. The positive outcomes seen over the last two decades show that the university can function better independent of the state, the report says.

The committee will also discuss a proposal to increase investment in the university’s Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources for new research that includes work on invasive pests and diseases, childhood obesity and sustainable food projects.

The Committee on Grounds and Buildings will vote on a proposed design for a new aquatics center on the UC Berkeley campus. The $15 million project, which was announced last month, will be funded entirely by Cal Aquatic Legends, an independent nonprofit donor group founded to raise money for the project. The center would only be used for athletic training.

The project requires an amendment to the UC Berkeley 2020 Long Range Development Plan, which the Committee on Grounds and Buildings will be asked to certify and approve.

The Committee on Finance will vote on the 2013-14 financing of Cap-Equip, a universitywide program that aims to restructure capital financing and save money on research, telecommunications and software equipment. The committee will also vote on maintaining the expenditure rate for the university’s endowment pool.

The Committee on Oversight of the Department of Energy Laboratories will hear updates from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on climate research, a new X-ray laser that determines protein structures and a recent grant from the Department of Energy for the Joint BioEnergy Institute in Emeryville. In April, the department promised about $25 million annually through 2018 for the development of new biofuels.

On Thursday, after a public comment period, the regents will hold closed meetings with the Committee on Compensation and the Committee on Finance as well as other regents-only meetings.

Alex Berryhill covers higher education. Contact her at aberryhill@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @berryhill93.

The post UC Regents to discuss revised budget in Sacramento appeared first on The Daily Californian.

About 80 students and faculty members attended the forum at Anna Head Alumnae Hall. Students asked questions that spanned student athletics, Dirks’ time as dean of the faculty of arts and sciences at Columbia University and his relationship with the UC Board of Regents.

At the event, Dirks said he supported UC Berkeley’s public mission and that he hopes to have a positive influence on the university.

“I believe that UC Berkeley is not just the greatest public university, but it is the best university because it is public,” Dirks said. “I want this university to be a place that educates both undergraduate and graduate students and makes them future leaders.”

Dirks also said he hopes to work closely with student groups and the ASUC, noting that at Columbia — where he previously worked — there was no student group like the ASUC that directly represents the interests of students.

“Berkeley has a long tradition of making students’ voices heard, and I am willing to listen to those issues and address them,” Dirks said.  “I want to set up regular evening sessions in the University House with multiple student groups and have open discussions to bring attention to not only problems in the student community but to solutions as well. Together, we can resolve any issue.”

ASUC President Connor Landgraf said it was valuable that students met Dirks at the forum so they could see he was willing to take on the challenges facing UC Berkeley.

“I think it’s really important for him to meet with students,” Landgraf said. “This shows that he wants engage with students and know them personally.”

On Wednesday, Dirks met with the ASUC Senate at its weekly meeting. Dirks aimed to address senators’ concerns and answer their questions, Landgraf said.

“The meeting last night went very well,” Landgraf said. “He is very respectful to students and their concerns, and he spent a lot of time answering questions. I think he will be a fantastic chancellor because he understands the students’ needs and concerns. I’m excited to see what he does.”

After the forum, campus freshman Riley Murray said he believes that Dirks’ background makes him well-suited to address the problems facing the university. Murray was impressed by Dirks at the meeting and thinks the chancellor-designate will have a calming influence on the university.

“He’s not what I expected,” Murray said. “He made it very clear that he hasn’t yet gone into the intricacies of all of (UC) Berkeley’s issues, but he displayed a curiosity and a willingness to solve these problems rather than just being obliged to solve them.”

Contact Seif Abdelghaffar at sabdelghaffar@dailycal.org.

The post Dirks speaks with students, faculty at Anna Head appeared first on The Daily Californian.

“It at some point struck me that (his photos) were somehow too perfect,” Kempf said. “Few, if any, of his photos explicitly highlight dissent. A utopian symbol for excellence in public higher education, Sather Tower, is visually put where it belongs — in the center of a debate about affordability. I aimed to communicate that dissent can be beautiful as well.”

Kempf’s photograph was one of two grand-prize winners of the Fiat Lux Remix project, an intercampus and interdepartmental endeavor designed to provide “a springboard to think about our present-day university and imagine the future university we would like to create.”

The project, created by the campus On the Same Page program and the College of Letters and Science last summer, was centered on the 1967 book “Fiat Lux” by Ansel Adams and Nancy Newhall. The book was commissioned by then-UC president Clark Kerr to document a vision of what public higher education at the University of California would look like in the next century.

This past fall, all incoming students received copies of the book and were advised to read through it and pay attention to Adams’ photos so that they could be fully prepared to participate in the upcoming programs set for the fall.

On the Fiat Lux agenda were dozens of seminars in numerous academic disciplines and the tour-de-force: the remix project. Participants in the project were given a semester to complete one simple directive — to use Adams’ photos or Newhall’s writing and remix them into a work that reflects the students’ views on the future of higher education.

“He wished for his own negatives to be made available in a university setting to advanced students and artists for them to ‘play’ and perform the score,” said Catherine Cole, the contest coordinator and a professor of theater, dance and performance studies.

These conversations started in seminar classes like Michael Macsuch’s rhetoric class titled “Ansel Adams’ ‘Fiat Lux’ and the Visual Rhetoric of Berkeley in the 1960s.” Taking the photography collection as a “corporate advertising brochure,” Mascuch asked his students to consider “what photographs can do that words cannot” in terms of communicating the university’s values.

After receiving hundreds of submissions, a panel of faculty judges from the departments of art, literature, film, environmental design and performance studies chose seven winners — two grand-prize winners and five honorable mentions. Along with having their work on display in the Bancroft Library, the winners were given the chance to meet with Gov. Jerry Brown and the UC Board of Regents in March to share their views on higher education.

“I think many people recognized a kind of disconnect in rhetoric between (the 1960s) and now,” Cole said. “My overall goal was to provoke different kinds of conversations about the future of the university than we have been having in the past three or four years. We need to have big-picture conversations, and that is difficult to do during a time of rapidly decreasing resources.”

UC Board of Regents chair Sherry Lansing agrees with Cole’s sentiments, noting that she found great joy in seeing the values and aspirations of the student winners who attended the regents’ meeting in March.

“It’s a fabulous project, and timely,” Lansing said. “Now more than ever, we need expansive visions for the future of the University of California. The regents welcome the engagement of our students and other members of the UC community in helping the public see higher education as a public good.”

Sophomore Sheila Wagner, who received an honorable mention, found her creative vision in the form of a collage. An avid collage-maker with vintage magazines, Wagner immediately thought of using Photoshop to put her own digital spin on the art form she knows and loves. She combined the images of hands cupped around a ball of light surrounded by students of a variety of ages and ethnicities involved in various projects on campus, including a candid aerial view of a people-packed Sproul Plaza.

“(I) looked through all the photographs and picked out parts that I thought represented what the university means to me: a culturally diverse place where the arts and sciences meet, a guiding light for the young and old,” she said.

While Wagner says she learned a great deal about the value of the university through the project, she got just as much out of her “lengthy and lively” meeting with Brown and even got an official pardon for missing a French test.

“The governor sent an email to my French teacher excusing my absence,” Wagner said. “She was pretty excited about that.”

Other winning submissions included essays, artwork and photographs from grand-prize winner Luis Flores and honorable-mention winners Pauline Autet, Yuan Chen, Everto Gutierrez and Joseph Mann. Their pieces and other submissions will be on display in Zellerbach Playhouse from April 19 to 28 as a part of the “Exposures” installment.

Beyond the submissions, Cole took away several big ideas from the project’s success, including the possibility that students could contribute to the very design of the university’s future. Though the project is in its final stage, Cole recognizes that its impact on the campus dialogue is far from over.

“What is especially fun is that some of the more recent collaboration and iterations of the work have come about without my own provocation,” she said. “So yes — let there be light, and then light has a way of spilling and radiating in ways that you can’t always control.”

Contact Hailey Simpson at hsimpson@dailycal.org.

The post Fiat Lux Remix project allows students to imagine UC’s future appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The campus accepted 9,219 in-state freshman applicants for fall 2013, a decrease of 1.4 percent from 2012 numbers. The drop in in-state admissions follows a year of continued debate about the role of nonresident students within the UC system. Despite a drop in nonresident admissions last year, UC Berkeley saw a 26 percent jump this year in out-of-state student admissions and a 46.4 percent increase in international student admissions.

This increase is intentional, according to Amy Jarich, assistant vice chancellor and director of undergraduate admissions, who said the campus has been working toward a goal of 20 percent nonresident undergraduate enrollment, a target she said the campus could meet by the 2014-15 school year.

“(Rising admission for nonresidents) is something that we’re doing just to be able to bring the numbers in line with the available state funding from California,” Jarich said. “The increase definitely is a reflection of the campus’s ongoing effort to build the overall percentage of undergraduate nonresident students.”

The university saw a similar decrease of 2.2 percent in admission for in-state students systemwide. The university admitted 14.3 percent more out-of-state students and 28.5 percent more international students, as compared to last year.

According to a statement from the UC Office of the President, “The slight decline in the number and proportion of admitted students who are Californians reflects the fallout from years of severe budget cuts to UC, which has enrolled thousands of California students for whom it received no state funding.”

Michael Trevino, UC director of undergraduate admissions, echoed this sentiment in a press conference Thursday, noting that nonresident students pay around $23,000 more than resident students annually.

The university has looked to nonresident tuition as a source of potential revenue in the past. The UC Board of Regents considered adopting a formal policy to increase out-of-state enrollment at its November meeting, but UC Student Regent Jonathan Stein and others have voiced concern about further opening the university to out-of-state students.

“There are consequences to dramatically increasing our out-of-state student body,” Stein said at the November meeting. “There’s far less racial diversity, and because the tuition for out-of-state students is higher, there is a corresponding lack of socioeconomic diversity.”

According to UC Berkeley admissions data, 3.6 percent of newly admitted students from California are African American, 0.7 percent are American Indian and 17.7 percent are Hispanic/Latino. Jarich said the campus is looking to increase these rates — which have remained relatively stable over recent years — in part by continuing to work with campus groups such as bridges, the UC Berkeley multicultural center.

The data also report that UCLA had the lowest admission rate across the system, accepting 20.1 percent from an applicant pool of more than 80,000. UC Berkeley accepted 20.8 percent of its applicants.

Libby Rainey covers higher education. Contact her at lrainey@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @rainey_l.

The post UC Berkeley boosts nonresident admission, maintains similar ethnic composition in admits appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The $15 million facility is set to be constructed adjacent to the Tang Center on Bancroft Way in order to take some pressure off the overcrowded Spieker Aquatics Complex and provide more space to train student athletes. Its strongest selling points are that it will allow more students to use the Spieker complex and that it is being funded entirely by a private donor group called Cal Aquatic Legends.

But as it stands right now, the new aquatic center is not completely in sync with the surrounding environment. First of all, the campus intends to build it on a parking lot, taking away about 180 parking spaces in a part of the city where parking is already impacted. The UC Board of Regents should not approve the project until an adequate resolution to that problem has been offered.

Similarly, the project likely does not align with the city’s Southside Plan. A March draft subsequent environmental impact report for the proposed aquatic center acknowledged that the facility could conflict with the Southside Plan’s vision for how land in the area should be used. For example, two local business leaders requested in a letter included with the EIR that the space contain “retail, service, cultural, or other interactive pedestrian opportunities.” Proponents of the new facility need to prove how its construction will positively impact the quality of life for all Southside residents.

So far, officials have also indicated that the new facility would be primarily a training center, but the community might receive the project better if it hosted all aquatic competitions, allowing for increased access to the Spieker complex. No matter what, as plans continue to develop, the proponents of the new facility must work closely with local officials to make sure that Berkeley as a city benefits from another campus aquatic center.

Overall, the project is promising. As demonstrated by UC Berkeley’s dominating presence at the Olympics last year, the campus’s aquatic athletic programs are a huge source of pride for students. They deserve state-of-the-art facilities so they can continue to attract top-tier talent. Yet the new center would do more than service some of the campus’s best athletes: By easing the burden on the Spieker pool, it would allow more people to use campus aquatic facilities. Because of this, the project would be a net gain for the campus.

The post Aquatic promise and conflict appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Nevertheless, California State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, introduced a bill in late February that would require the 50 most impacted lower division courses in the California higher education system to be offered online. The bill follows Gov. Jerry Brown’s public advocacy for online education to the UC Board of Regents and also at San Jose State University in January.

But rest assured: This is no educational apocalypse.

Although Steinberg’s bill was criticized by the UC Academic Senate for its foolish outsourcing of education to for-profit third parties, it’s heartening that at least one California legislator is finally beginning to catch on to the most important question in higher education today. As New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote earlier this month, “The best part of the rise of online education is that it forces us to ask: What is a university for?”

If online education is just as capable of communicating at least technical and procedural information (former Stanford professor Sebastian Thrun’s online STEM courses at Udacity can attest to this) — then what, exactly, is the purpose of a university?

Brooks, a notable champion of online education over the years, answered that question for his readers two weeks ago — online education can teach technical knowledge; while “practical” knowledge, the richer and more elusive lessons we learn in college, should be left for traditional universities. That’s a start, but I suspect the actual answer is more far-reaching — and it might leave UC students uneasy.

Ever since the 1944 GI Bill enabled thousands of young Americans to attend college, higher education has proliferated throughout American society and evolved from privilege to workforce prerequisite. Embracing the shift in their clientele and inspired to create a more educated American workforce, colleges and universities across the country drifted from their roots in classical education in favor of the pragmatic knowledge that was and continues to be in high demand. Largely abandoning their position as lofty country clubs for the upper crust of American society, universities nationwide embraced a new role as the engines of the American economy.

Offering vocation-centered, concrete education to a mass audience is admirable — both dreamers and pragmatists are vital to American society. Universities tried to find a middle ground, attempting to instill a sense of purpose and meaning in the lives of students and provide them with the pragmatic knowledge necessary for success in the American economy. Today, when online universities offer technical training at a fraction of the price of a traditional college, it’s clear the dual-purpose model needs rethinking.

I’ve argued for classical education in the past, but I know “Walden” and “Julius Caesar,” as much as I love them, aren’t for everyone. My father was an adjunct professor at a California community college in the Sacramento area a few years ago. He met a student one day who’d been attending a two-year institution for 10 semesters. That’s three years longer than the expected time to earn an associate degree — and he was still a freshman.

Beyond the technical learning, job training and lower-level workforce experience — the vocational schooling — necessary for 21st-century competitiveness, most Americans don’t need or desire the watered-down classical education most universities force down the throats of disgruntled students. Not everyone is meant to go to college, and not everyone should have to. College is about pushing the limits of our feeble understanding to reach unforeseen conclusions and immersion in a culture of constant intellectual challenge to reach into the depths of the elusive truth. College is a sort of education that can’t be forced.

Online education, on the other hand, has the potential fill the gap in American vocational schooling that traditional universities have failed to address.  Like the “pragmatization” of American universities in the 1950s, the Internet is the next medium that will expand education to a wider audience worldwide. The Internet can be a forum for the democratization of technical education — a place where all Americans, for the first time in history, can learn the skills necessary to compete in the 21st-century global economy rather than hanging on in community college for five years or more.

For students like the young man my father taught, for American industrial workers left without jobs after production-line outsourcing, for anyone left behind in the relentless race of the modern economy — online education just might hold the promise of the future.

Contact Connor Grubaugh at cgrubaugh@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @connorgrubaugh.

The post The promise of online education appeared first on The Daily Californian.

A public hearing took place on Wednesday regarding the construction of the $15 million aquatics center, which was proposed to address concerns of inadequate swimming facilities on campus. The Spieker Aquatics Complex, UC Berkeley’s only aquatic center, is used by NCAA athletes as well as community swimmers, students in physical-education classes and postgraduates.

“Currently, (users of the facility) share one pool for all training and competition at Spieker, which … puts pressure on the facility seven days a week,” said Herb Benenson, spokesperson for intercollegiate athletics. “These scheduling challenges reduce the availability for all who want to swim at Spieker.”

The new facility will be used for athletic training purposes only but will take much of the pressure off the Spieker Aquatics Complex to accommodate too many swimmers, according to the intercollegiate athletics website.

The proposed location for the new facility is a university-owned parking lot next to the Tang Center. If the proposal is approved, the parking lot will be destroyed and replaced with the campus’s second aquatics center.

“The location is important for its proximity to Spieker pool,” said Jennifer McDougall, the principal planner responsible for review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act. “The near-campus location helps meet project goals to reduce scheduling stress on student athletes.”

The proposal of replacing the parking lot is problematic, however, because the project is not strictly consistent with the city’s Southside Plan, a plan passed in 2011 to revitalize the area south of campus. Those who regularly park in the lot will have fewer spaces available to them and will have to consider alternatives to driving to campus or find parking elsewhere, according to McDougall.

The aquatics facility project is entirely funded by Cal Aquatic Legends, an independent nonprofit donor group founded to raise money for the project. The group will handle the building of the facility, overseeing the entire process from architectural plans to actual construction on the university-granted land, unlike similar projects typically controlled entirely by the campus.

“The facility is basically an exceedingly generous, in-kind gift,” McDougall said.

The public has the opportunity to submit commentary on the project’s Environmental Impact Report and its compliance with the Southside Plan until April 24. The UC Board of Regents will review the report and will have a chance to approve the project at its meeting in May.

“A new pool will provide the time, flexibility and space the Golden Bear teams need to continue to achieve at such a high level,” Benenson said. “The fact that Cal’s aquatic teams and so many individuals continue to excel is a remarkable accomplishment and a testament to their perseverance and the abilities of the coaching staff.”

Contact Claire Chiara at cchiara@dailycal.org.

The post Campus announces plans to construct new aquatics center appeared first on The Daily Californian.

This is not a case about the public’s right to know, nor is it about government transparency. This is an unprecedented attempt by a monied commercial interest to use the university to seek out proprietary information from private parties — information the UC  system does not have, has never had and never used. In direct violation of legislative statute, Reuters is attempting, for its own financial gain, to reach through the university to get information it could not otherwise obtain.

Reuters makes its money by selling financial information. It publishes the Venture Capital Journal and the website Private Equity Hub and has a commercial interest in publishing stories about the private equity firms Sequoia and Kleiner Perkins, which are highly protective of their data. After the regents were forced to disclose private equity records in 2003 (as a result of a lawsuit), these and other firms blacklisted the university from future funds. This compelled the Legislature in 2005 to enact six new exemptions from disclosure under the California Public Records Act so that public pension funds would be able to continue investing in these funds — which have proved extremely profitable for the university and have greatly benefited our students, faculty, employees and retirees.

The lower court ruling, if allowed to stand, would set a dangerous and unsupported precedent with far-reaching consequences.  Nobody who does business with the university, or any other government agency, could be assured that otherwise confidential information would not be disclosed to any competitor or critic or whomever.

The lower court agreed that the university does not have, has never had and never used the documents that Reuters seeks. Nonetheless, the trial court ruled that the UC system should seek out these documents on Reuters’ behalf.  If this chilling ruling is allowed to stand, it would represent the judicial rewriting of the CPRA — without legislative involvement or approval — and place an impossible burden and expense on public agencies. It must be reversed.

— Dianne Klein,
Spokesperson, UC Office of the President

Contact the opinion desk at opinion@dailycal.org.

The post Letter: An erroneous court ruling against UC appeared first on The Daily Californian.