UC Regents meet next week. Agenda includes ... pic.twitter.com/YyJR9Y4hBw
— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) January 16, 2024
Quote:
The Regents of the University of California may conduct closed sessions when they meet to consider or discuss any of the following matters:
***
(5) Matters involving litigation, when discussion in open session concerning those matters would adversely affect, or be detrimental to, the public interest.
Multiple swimmers have sued.WalterSobchak said:
Says right on the notice Wilner posted that it pertains to litigation. So it's litigation related to the athletic department that may warrant a full audit.Quote:
The Regents of the University of California may conduct closed sessions when they meet to consider or discuss any of the following matters:
***
(5) Matters involving litigation, when discussion in open session concerning those matters would adversely affect, or be detrimental to, the public interest.
Cal. Ed. Code 92032(b)(5)
bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Cal. Ed. Code 92032(b)(5)Pittstop said:
What is the litigation statute # cited at the bottom of the notice? Does anyone know what that statute refers to?
No clue.Pittstop said:
What is the litigation statute # cited at the bottom of the notice? Does anyone know what that statute refers to?
harebear said:Cal. Ed. Code 92032(b)(5)Pittstop said:
What is the litigation statute # cited at the bottom of the notice? Does anyone know what that statute refers to?
The 92032 refers to "Special Meetings", the "b" refers to closed sessions and the "5" refers to "Matters involving litigation". I think that's as much as we're going to get.
I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Bear Naked Ladies said:I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
This is the second most typi-Cal thing I have read about Cal in the last few months. Only at Cal would it make sense to not only have a mostly absentee athletic director, but to commit to such a person long-term. And that's even if he was doing his job at an average level.calumnus said:He and his wife live, pay taxes, vote and donate our money to the local Republican Party in Colorado Springs (and Colorado generally) where he also invests in real estate with his sons. Apparently he is renting a place on the other side of the Caldecott for when he can't do zoom calls and he has to be in Berkeley.Bear Naked Ladies said:I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Bear Naked Ladies said:This is the second most typi-Cal thing I have read about Cal in the last few months. Only at Cal would it make sense to not only have a mostly absentee athletic director, but to commit to such a person long-term. And that's even if he was doing his job at an average level.calumnus said:He and his wife live, pay taxes, vote and donate our money to the local Republican Party in Colorado Springs (and Colorado generally) where he also invests in real estate with his sons. Apparently he is renting a place on the other side of the Caldecott for when he can't do zoom calls and he has to be in Berkeley.Bear Naked Ladies said:I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Chancellor Christ may be a brilliant Victorian scholar, but when it comes to contemporary financial and organizational matters, she is an idiot. She could not be trusted to run a coffee shop.calumnus said:Bear Naked Ladies said:This is the second most typi-Cal thing I have read about Cal in the last few months. Only at Cal would it make sense to not only have a mostly absentee athletic director, but to commit to such a person long-term. And that's even if he was doing his job at an average level.calumnus said:He and his wife live, pay taxes, vote and donate our money to the local Republican Party in Colorado Springs (and Colorado generally) where he also invests in real estate with his sons. Apparently he is renting a place on the other side of the Caldecott for when he can't do zoom calls and he has to be in Berkeley.Bear Naked Ladies said:I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Well when you get $1.3 million a year from the California tax payers you need to make sure you don't pay any California taxes on it yourself. Own the libs and all.
Hopefully this all comes out in the UC audit.
I'm sure he still won't do his job.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Appalling. How the State lets him get away with that is beyond me. He has no investment here.calumnus said:Bear Naked Ladies said:I actually didn't know this. This guy that we're paying millions of dollars to doesn't even live near the job that pays him millions of dollars?.bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
He and his wife live, pay taxes, vote and donate our money to the local Republican Party in Colorado Springs (and Colorado generally) where he also invests in real estate with his sons. Apparently he is renting a place on the other side of the Caldecott for when he can't do zoom calls and he has to be in Berkeley.
Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
WalterSobchak said:Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
No problem. And if it makes you feel even better the key word in my reply is "trying." CA has one of the most aggressive tax regimes in the world. It's hard to imagine the FTB taking the position that an exempt, full-time State employee isn't a resident for ALL income because the purpose of his presence here almost certainly cannot reasonably be described as "temporary" or "transitory."calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
Thanks for the correction, I don't remember seeing it in another thread (there have been many).
At least California is getting back a small portion of the $millions he is stealing from the state's taxpayers.
WalterSobchak said:No problem. And if it makes you feel even better the key word in my reply is "trying." CA has one of the most aggressive tax regimes in the world. It's hard to imagine the FTB taking the position that an exempt, full-time State employee isn't a resident for ALL income because the purpose of his presence here almost certainly cannot reasonably be described as "temporary" or "transitory."calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
Thanks for the correction, I don't remember seeing it in another thread (there have been many).
At least California is getting back a small portion of the $millions he is stealing from the state's taxpayers.
I'm still not convinced that's the case. The university has payroll information for out of state employees directing them to complete an out-of-state tax withholding form.calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
Thanks for the correction, I don't remember seeing it in another thread (there have been many).
At least California is getting back a small portion of the $millions he is stealing from the state's taxpayers.
Knowlton is in the second category. He is a non-resident who sometimes works from California. The portion of his income earned in California is subject to California income tax. The rest is not.Quote:
The Out of State Income Tax Withholding form assists Payroll Services in determining the tax withholding for an individual who works and lives in a state other than California.
Employees are categorized as one of the following:
- California tax residents - subject to tax withholding on their world wide income regardless of where the work is performed.
- California non-residents who work in California - subject to tax withholding on their portion of income that is earned in the state of California.
- Non-residents working and living outside California - not subject to California tax withholding. They may be subject to state income tax withholding in the state in which they are working.
Possible. I kinda doubt it though.calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:No problem. And if it makes you feel even better the key word in my reply is "trying." CA has one of the most aggressive tax regimes in the world. It's hard to imagine the FTB taking the position that an exempt, full-time State employee isn't a resident for ALL income because the purpose of his presence here almost certainly cannot reasonably be described as "temporary" or "transitory."calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:Yeah he's definitely paying CA income tax on his CA source income. It's his side hustle income he's trying to protect from CA rates by domiciling in CO. We've been around this block before in another thread. Not sure why the misconception persists.Goobear said:
Well if he is on a W-2 than most likely he is getting taxed in CA. I doubt he gets paid on a 1099 or his enumeration is paid to an entity he owns....
Thanks for the correction, I don't remember seeing it in another thread (there have been many).
At least California is getting back a small portion of the $millions he is stealing from the state's taxpayers.
I wonder if that can be included within the scope of the UC audit?
Do we have the most incompetent administration in the country when it comes to athletics? Not sure if we actually do, or if it's my focus on Cal and blissful ignorance of most problems at other institutions that leads me to that conclusion.calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Or not. He still has a lot of years left on that $1.3 million a year guaranteed contract. Getting fired with a contract payout is not a hardship. He just has to do enough not to breach his contract and get fired for cause.
WalterSobchak said:
I don't think our posts are inconsistent. I think 18 CCR 17014 describes the test to determine whether an employee is a "California tax resident" (first bullet) or a "California [tax] non-resident" (second bullet). It's possible Knowlton falls under #2, but doubtful IMO based on the 17014 test. I'm not attempting to make any final determination on that here.
gobears15 said:Do we have the most incompetent administration in the country when it comes to athletics? Not sure if we actually do, or if it's my focus on Cal and blissful ignorance of most problems at other institutions that leads me to that conclusion.calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
Poor Jim,
All these outside influences (conferences imploding, coaching vacancies, audits, lawsuits, and investigations) forcing him to stop telecommuting from Colorado and making him do his fscking job.
Or not. He still has a lot of years left on that $1.3 million a year guaranteed contract. Getting fired with a contract payout is not a hardship. He just has to do enough not to breach his contract and get fired for cause.
these audits don't mean crap. Ever worked at a public company? Plus they happen with regularity and by magic everyone's nose is clean.westcoastdude said:
I hope this is an audit into the much too late firing of McKeever. Could portend the dismissal of Knowlton.UC Regents meet next week. Agenda includes ... pic.twitter.com/YyJR9Y4hBw
— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) January 16, 2024
Yeah there certainly could be, but I think (but don't know for sure) that would be a matter for the FTB to investigate rather than the Regents. It's also possible there could be some specific exemption from normal residency rules for UC / CSU employees that I'm not aware of.calumnus said:WalterSobchak said:
I don't think our posts are inconsistent. I think 18 CCR 17014 describes the test to determine whether an employee is a "California tax resident" (first bullet) or a "California [tax] non-resident" (second bullet). It's possible Knowlton falls under #2, but doubtful IMO based on the 17014 test. I'm not attempting to make any final determination on that here.
There is also coukd be a difference between what he claims and files and what a California tax audit would conclude, correct?
