Open House and Environmental Impact Report Scoping Meeting associated with the proposed project, namely the North Torrey Pines Living Learning Neighborhood. The event is planned forMay 8th (see below). While this is open to those interested and RSVP’s are not required to attend, it would be good to know from a logistics perspective – name tags, parking and refreshments purposes – who and how many people are planning on attending. The event is an open house format so feel free to stop by anytime between 4:30 PM and 7:30 PM.
Also, if you are on the UC San Diego environmental mailing list, you should have received the Notice of Preparation, released on April 20th. In the event you may not have received it please see included below.
In compliance with the State and University of California guidelines for implementation of CEQA, included is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) web link Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that the University of California, San Diego is preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Report on the North Torrey Pines Living and Learning Neighborhood project http://physicalplanning.ucsd.edu/environmental/pub_notice.html
Due to the time limits mandated by state law, the 30-day scoping period extends from today, Thursday, April 20, 2017 and closesMonday, May 22, 2017. Your scoping comments can be sent at the earliest possible date, but not later than 5:00 PM on Monday, May 22, 2017. Please direct any comments on the project’s NOP to:
Physical and Community Planning
Attn: Catherine Presmyk
University of California, San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0074
La Jolla, CA 92093-0074
Telephone: (858) 534-6515
As the Lead Agency, we need to know your views as they relate to the scope and content of the environmental information, which is germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. All comments received in response to the NOP will be considered during the preparation of the EIR.
UC San Diego Campus Planning also invites you to an informational Open House and EIR Scoping Meeting on Monday, May 8thin the Atkinson Pavilion at the UC San Diego Faculty Club. This is an open house style meeting, so please stop by anytime between 4:30 PM to 7:30 PM. To learn about the project. Parking is easy and directions can be found here.
The University of California System has a $25.6 billion operating expense. We are proposing a ballot proposition to the Attorney General to make Regents Elected like four other states in the country like Colorado and Michigan. People are starting to ask why tuition fees had increased three times faster than inflation since 2010; why administrative and athletic salaries seem high; and why the California in state attendance is at an all-time low.
The Regents are populated largely by wealthy alumni and political appointees. Tuition escalates, along with questions about what students and their families are getting for their money and why outside students are gaining in population.
Many Regents receive no financial training, and more than a quarter admit that they do not undertake much budgetary or financial oversight. Since governor often chooses Regents, the Regents sometimes become vehicles for the Governors’ views, and that means good governance means you’re supposed to be there thinking about the best interest of the UC institution, not lobby on behalf of narrow interests or politics.
Please contact me if you would like to discuss.
The administration of the University of California (UC) system hid $175 million in budget reserve funds from state officials, a new review found, prompting the state’s auditor to call for “significant change” at the top to strengthen public trust in the system.
In the audit, released Tuesday, State Auditor Elaine Howle urged California Gov. Jerry Brown and other lawmakers to increase oversight of the office of President Janet Napolitano.
In a letter accompanying the audit, Napolitano, a former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, said the report “fundamentally and unfairly mischaracterizes” her office’s budget “in a way that does not accurately capture our current operations nor our efforts and plans for continued improvement.”
“In fact,” Napolitano wrote, her budget and financial approaches “reflect strategic, deliberate, and transparent spending and investment” in the system’s priorities.
She said, for instance, that nearly half of the amount cited, $83 million, supports “groundbreaking research” in healthcare, as well as investments in public policy and sustainable energy, among other areas.
In the report Howle also said Napolitano “intentionally interfered” with her efforts to survey how well the president’s office serves its 10 campuses. Howle said statements that were critical of Napolitano’s office were “removed or substantially revised,” with negative ratings changed to be “more positive.”
The university system, one of the largest in the USA, enrolled 251,714 students last fall. Among its alumni: 61 Nobel Prize winners, 16 Pulitzer Prize winners and 90 MacArthur Foundation “Genius” grantees, according to the system.
The audit also found that UC pays more for top administrative talent than other state agencies, with Napolitano’s top executives earning “significantly higher salaries” than state employees in similar jobs. The 10 executives analyzed had combined salaries of $3.7 million, or $700,000 more than those of their highest-paid counterparts statewide, after adjusting for cost of living.
In 2014-15, Napolitano also maintained many more top managers than needed, the audit suggests. Executives at the larger California State University (CSU) oversaw 13 more campuses than UC and 200,000 more students, yet CSU has only seven executive-level staff, while Napolitano had 42, the audit found.
Napolitano said most of Howle’s recommendations are reasonable, but added, “For others, we agree with the spirit and intent of the recommendation, and will take a slightly varied approach to address the underlying concerns.”
Follow Greg Toppo on Twitter: @gtoppo