UrsaMajor said:

---

Had some interesting conversations before the game yesterday. After a full AM of conversation, Asimov rewrote the article about the stadium debt:

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/UC-Berkeley-to-tap-academic-funds-to-help-bail-12330822.php

Of course, the rewrite doesn't change the print version. Turns out, she never went to the Senate meeting, and relied on a single anti-athletic prof for her information. btw, the French prof. who gave the ridiculous quote is a real nut-job: she believes CMS should be torn down and the university should just default! She's also a big supporter of Antifa, including their violence.

Asimov doesn't get $ at all. She couldn't understand the idea that money is fungible, and that the debt is being paid regardless of which account is debited. As an aside, there was a conversation with her in which she was questioning why donors were given "free meals" at university events. It was explained to her that the donors were buying tables for $25,000 apiece, which included dinner (news flash: the dinner didn't cost $2500/person), but she still couldn't get it.

Yogi is, of course, correct that the debt attributable to seismic retrofitting is a dollar amount, not a percentage. I believe it is expressed in %age terms for ease of communication. I was originally told around 54%; I hear the figure is now closer to 60%. The reason it is difficult to calculate is because some of the work was done in part because of the retrofit and in part because of improvements. For example, the press box needed to be torn down for safety reasons; however, the upgrades to the clubs weren't necessary. How do you apportion that?

---

I have long thought that Asimov doesn't really "get" education, either, which raises the question, "What the heck DOES she get?!?".

Of course the Merc would have the story correct. Whether you love Wilner or not, he's obsessed with this story. so he studies it hard.

I always figured the Chron's policy was to write sh*t about Cal...because it gets more eyeballs than positive coverage. No one pay attention to good stuff at Cal. Typical, "if it bleeds it leads" media philosophy.

UrsaMajor said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

As for People's Park. If you've been reading carefully my earlier posts, the Chancellor has a plan that she's trying to work out with Berkeley mayor (he's receptive, btw) to put student housing, homeless housing, and a smaller "memorial" park on the property. She's already moved ahead with planning for that, although the blowback from the fringe in Berkeley is going to be massive.

---

The optics of that seems a bit curious. "Hey mom and dad, congrats, you son/daughter got student housing right next to our homeless shelter. No, don't worry about crime or drugs or personal safety, everything is going to be just fine."

I lived 3 apartment buildings away from PP. it was bad enough being near that cesspool when it existed through indifference and some random sense of cultural history. But to put kids next to homeless people by choice, as part of a grand plan? Meh.

---

The idea behind permanent housing for homeless (they are envisioning around 50, btw) is to get them off of the streets. The park would be one with facilities, like a normal park, and the hope is to make the area no longer a magnet for drug users/dealers. Using the entire plot for UC purposes isn't going to happen, so this would appear to be a win-win if the city remains on board.

I agree that PP is currently dangerous, but assuming that people who choose to use the housing there are dangerous or undesirable simply because they have been homeless sounds a bit mean-spirited.

---

I don't mean to be mean spirited. Homelessness is very often a condition intertwined with substance abuse, mental health issues, etc. It is the reason why solving homelessness very often requires a holistic approach and isn't just about building structures. People who are suffering those maladies are at higher risk for an assortment of things, none of which are great for creating a closely shared cohabitation environment with young people.

With a very smart design and with a very real commitment to providing social services and safety resources it could work. Based on past history I am very skeptical the university and city have the desire or resources to do that. So I'm concerned for the safety of the students.

71Bear said:

---

Golden One said:

---

They should move all the debt for the rebuild off the Athletic Department's books.

---

I disagree. Only the portion associated with the retrofit should be moved. It was the piece the Regents authorized. Nobody compelled the AD to build a lavish athletic center.

---

The athletic department has been taken advantage of by the campus for 60 years. Since Chancellor Tien forced Dave Maggard out, forced the women's and men's AD's together, and took 10 million out of the title IX budget, the department has never had a chance. The athletic department is one of the campus' biggest customers. The campus charges the AD for everything! So, it's about time the campus participated in helping intercollegiate athletics. Btw, the "lavish athletic center" is just like every D1 program has and only average in terms of the Pac 12. In order to continue with a competitive program it was a necessity. Thank goodness Chancellor Christ understands the value of athletics and has the pragmatic sense to move forward with What's best for the campus in the long run and understands the benefits the campus enjoys by having a competitive football program. She is almost universally respected on campus.

okaydo said:

---

Of course the Merc would have the story correct. Whether you love Wilner or not, he's obsessed with this story. so he studies it hard.

---

Nanette "the hater" Asimov should study Wilner's piece. Her typical propaganda is straight out of Barsky's mouth.

barabbas said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Golden One said:

---

They should move all the debt for the rebuild off the Athletic Department's books.

---

I disagree. Only the portion associated with the retrofit should be moved. It was the piece the Regents authorized. Nobody compelled the AD to build a lavish athletic center.

---

The athletic department has been taken advantage of by the campus for 60 years. Since Chancellor Tien forced Dave Maggard out, forced the women's and men's AD's together, and took 10 million out of the title IX budget, the department has never had a chance. The athletic department is one of the campus' biggest customers. The campus charges the AD for everything! So, it's about time the campus participated in helping intercollegiate athletics. Btw, the "lavish athletic center" is just like every D1 program has and only average in terms of the Pac 12. In order to continue with a competitive program it was a necessity. Thank goodness Chancellor Christ understands the value of athletics and has the pragmatic sense to move forward with What's best for the campus in the long run and understands the benefits the campus enjoys by having a competitive football program. She is almost universally respected on campus.

---

I agree with most of what you say, although I disagree with the implied criticism of Tien. Maggard was a hopeless AD for modern times. He had no sense of administration or finance and was a loyal Old Blue, but out of his league. And merging men's and women's athletics was necessary if any kind of administrative sense was to be made. Otherwise you had duplicate administrations and no joint scheduling for facilities. One of the problems solved by the merger was that prior to it, the Men got all the prime times at Harmon, Spieker, etc. and the women basically sucked hind tit.

Dave Maggard is a great Golden Bear...but he ran the AD like a high school gym teacher.

barabbas said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Golden One said:

---

They should move all the debt for the rebuild off the Athletic Department's books.

---

I disagree. Only the portion associated with the retrofit should be moved. It was the piece the Regents authorized. Nobody compelled the AD to build a lavish athletic center.

---

Thank goodness Chancellor Christ understands the value of athletics and has the pragmatic sense to move forward with What's best for the campus in the long run and understands the benefits the campus enjoys by having a competitive football program. She is almost universally respected on campus.

---

I agree 100%.....