Davis Faculty Association

It is time to renew the DFA board. In accordance with DFA bylaws, a nominating committee has selected a slate of candidates to fill DFA board positions as listed below with the following code: C – continuing; R – renewing for another 2-year term; N – newly elected. I want to thank the nominating committee for their work and the outgoing board members for their past service on the DFA board.

Chair: Scott Shershow (English) [R]
Vice Chair: Daniel Cox (Physics) [R]
Nathan Brown (English) [C]
Thomas Jue (Biochem & Molecular Med.) [N]
Ian Kennedy (Mech. and Aero. Engineering) [C]
Neil Larsen (Comparative Literature) [C]
Marjorie Longo (Chem. Eng. and Mat. Sci.) [R]
William Lucas (Plant Biology) [C]
Susette Min (Asian American Studies) [C]
Blake Stimson (Art History) [R]
Ex-Officio: Joe Kiskis (Physics)

All nominees have agreed to serve. Newly elected members serve a two-year term of office that will run through September, 2015. Further nominations may be made upon petition of 5% of the membership in good standing. Such petitions must be delivered on or before May 21, 2012, to the DFA Executive Director at 1270 Farragut Circle, Davis, CA 95618. If no nominations are submitted, the slate shall be accepted as elected.

The Board of the Davis Faculty Association endorses the resolutions passed by the Special Committee of the Executive Council of the Davis Academic Senate in favor of the resignations of Chancellor Katehi, Vice Chancellor John Meyer, and Vice Chancellor Fred Wood. Our endorsement is based upon the findings of the Special Committee’s report: http://academicsenate.ucdavis.edu/documents/Executive-Council-Motion-and-Letter-including-Nov-18.pdf

Dear Chair Bisson:

The board of the Davis Faculty Association formally requests that the matter of the so-called “Davis Dozen” be considered as an agenda item by the Executive Council of the Faculty Senate. Specifically, we would like the Executive Council to ask Chancellor Katehi to make a public statement calling for the Yolo County District Attorney to dismiss the charges against the eleven students and one faculty member in connection with their actions at the U.S. Bank. The “dozen” were protesting the administration’s contract with the U.S. Bank, which allowed a private corporation to advertise on UC Davis student ID cards, which also function as US Bank ATM cards, thus delivering our student body to the bank as potential customers. This is particularly disturbing at a time when rising tuition is linked to rising student debt, from which US Bank profits. In our view, the actions of the “dozen” are to be regarded as acts of civil disobedience and political dissent intended to defend the public character of this university. Therefore, the protest at U.S. Bank was not simply the same as any other protest that might happen to take place on a university campus; rather, this was an effort to defend of the essential mission of UC Davis itself as a public university. Nor is the administration to be regarded as a neutral party. The protest targeted actions of the administration, and the charges were encouraged and facilitated by the administration, who allowed the protest to continue for over four weeks and then forwarded names to the DA for prosecution. We now ask the Chancellor to publicly reject this criminalization of principled dissent by asking the Yolo County District Attorney to dismiss all charges.

Sincerely,

The Board of the Davis Faculty Association

Tomorrow, Thursday April 5 at 2pm, there will be a rally on the MU Patio in support of those being prosecuted for participating in the blockade of the US Bank.

Among those charged is one of our faculty colleagues, Joshua Clover, Professor of English. The students charged are Geoffrey Wildanger, Conrad Samaan, Sophia Kamran, Thomas Matzat, Deanna Johnson, Mohammed Shehk, Kevin Smith, Thomas Zolot, Nicholas Malone, Ali Navid, and Evan Buswell.

As many of you will know, these students and faculty are now facing serious charges. The charges are conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor and twenty counts of obstruction. The first charge carries a maximum sentence of 1 year in prison. And each of the second charges carries a maximum sentence of 6 months in prison. In addition, the administration and the DA are seeking to hold those charged responsible for some $1 million dollars in losses due to the closure of the bank branch.

In other words, these are charges that could seriously damage these people’s lives.

Several of these students were among those pepper-sprayed in November.

We encourage you to attend the rally tomorrow, and to publicize this event as widely as possible among your students and email networks.

Dear President Yudof:

The Davis Faculty Association shares your concerns with regard to hateful speech and the intimidation of minority groups at the University. However, we are troubled by some aspects of your recent letter to the University concerning an incident that took place at the University of California, Davis. In particular, you referred to an incident that involved representatives of the Israeli armed force who were speaking at the Davis campus. You stated in your letter:

“It was wrong for hecklers to disrupt speakers on the UC Davis campus at an event entitled ‘Israeli Soldiers Speak Out.’  It was reprehensible that one of these hecklers accused the speakers of being associated with rapists and murders. Under the direction of Chancellor Katehi, campus officials dealt appropriately with this individual, moving him out of the room and barring re-entry. I condemn the actions of those who would disrupt this event. Attempting to shout down speakers is not protected speech. It is an action meant to deny others their right to free speech.”

According to the accounts of multiple members of the UC Davis faculty who were present at this event, however, only a single individual actually disrupted the meeting by heckling the speakers.  The other students who attended the meeting in order to protest staged a silent walkout and then held a meeting outside. Your own description of what happened on this occasion therefore seems to confuse the issue by equating responsible and respectful protest with intimidation and disruption.

You also announced that you intend to consult two particular outside groups for advice and information about how to “improve campus climate for all students.” As faculty members, we do not understand why outside groups should be required in order to observe or define hateful speech at our University. We are concerned that the occasion may arise where students object to the content of a professor’s course and enlist the help of these outside groups.  We are alarmed that you intend to rely on such groups to help you determine the appropriateness of expression of opinions on campus.

We urge you instead to rely on the resources that you already have: the faculty of the University of California. It is surely possible for the faculty themselves to understand these issues and to decide what constitutes hateful or intimidating speech and protest.  To rely on outside groups for consultation or advice risks infringing upon the right to speak freely and responsibly that both students and faculty enjoy as members of the university community.  We ask that you reconsider these aspects of your statement to the University and your undue obeisance to select outside groups.

Sincerely,
The Board of the Davis Faculty Association

cc: Linda P.B. Katehi, Chancellor
John Meyer, Vice Chancellor, Administrative and Resource Management
Linda F. Bisson, Chair Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Bruno Nachtergaele, Vice Chair Davis Division of the Academic Senate