Comments by hmarcuse
Previous | Page 3 of 3
Posted on January 4 at 10:03 a.m.
I live near Devereux slough, and in years past after the first rain the sound of "spring peepers" in the low-lying areas would be deafening. This year nothing, zilch, zip. A friend thought she heard a single frog one evening, whereas we used to be inundated by the critters after a rain--on the sidewalks, under flowerpots, in watering cans, everywhere.
It sounds like this fungus is at work here in Goleta as well.
Posted on November 6 at 10:29 a.m.
In response to that low-taxer, above: One of the consequences of Prop. 13 was that CORPORATE property taxes were locked in at 1970s pre-boom rates (at least until a different corporation takes over--and when does that happen?). That gives such entities a long-lasting tax shelter. And, no surprise here, their contribution to property tax revenues in the state budget has declined precipitously over the years. So it isn't just the little ol' retiree who benefits from Prop 13. We really need to close that corporate tax loophole. And by the way, raising student fees is just another way of taxing those less able to afford it. Taxing the corporations who benefit from the brainpower of the UCs and their alumni would be a much more progressive way.
Posted on September 7 at 11:16 p.m.
It would be very helpful to have a map accompanying this description--a link to google maps perhaps, or one like this one of the same region:
http://venturacountytrails.org/TrailM...
or
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sourc...
Posted on May 21 at 11:43 a.m.
Aside from the issues of relevance and appropriateness of sending that email, which (in contrast to wwsword) I think a faculty committee can well judge, there are questions of due process and outside influence interfering with internal matters of the university. That is where academic freedom comes in.
The normal process in a case of student grievances like this one would have been for the department chair to begin an investigation, which might then have continued to a faculty senate review whether the faculty code of conduct had been violated. That process includes notification of the faculty member concerned at most stages of the process. In this case, that was NOT the course of action.
My understanding is that Prof. Robinson was not informed of any proceedings against him until long after the event itself, and well after those proceedings were implemented--proceedings that did not follow the prescribed course of actions. Additionally, UCSB faculty and administrators met with an outside lobbyist in a closed meeting at which the case was discussed at length. It is unclear to what extent the UCSB process was implemented before that meeting, or accelerated after it. UCSB administrators MUST disclose the timeline so that the university community can see whether due process has been followed.
Beyond that, imagine the chilling effect on instruction if faculty had to worry that the administration might implement secret proceedings against them because agencies outside of the university complained. That would spell the immediate end of UCSB as a world class institution--no clear-thinking faculty or students would want to work at an institution subject to outside censorship.
Harold Marcuse, UCSB Professor of History
On None
Previous | Page 3 of 3
Previous Month
Posted on January 24 at 11:45 p.m.
Great article, names most of the major annoyances I as a cyclist & pedestrian experience. I'd add one more: the huge disaster that UCSB did in redesigning El Collegio from Los Carneros into the campus. Not only did they WIDEN the road to 8 lanes (!!) for cars, but they NARROWED and PUT CROSSINGS and SHARP CURVES into the previously straight and crossing-free bike path. Oh they did add a bike lane to the road, but with 4 (I think) long, new, uncoordinated traffic lights, I have never seen a bicyclist using those. What absolute lack of intelligent planning prevailed there! In spite of all those lanes, it's not even car-friendly. Kudos to the car-heads.
On Dead Pedestrians Make Poor Shoppers