Dear Friends at the UCSC Alumni Association and at UC:

Recently you have called me to renew my contributions to UCSC.

I cannot in good conscience contribute to any University of California charity while the present situation continues.

I am a proud graduate of the University of California. Today some of my close friends are professors at various campuses; others are staff members at UCSC.

Today I am absolutely shaken, shocked and ashamed of the University. If I were a student today, it would have been me they were pepper spraying.

When I was at UC there were protests over the apartheid regime in South Africa, among other issues.  Students erected encampments to show the bantustans forced on the black population by that racist government. Would campus adminstrations have used pepper spray to break up these encampments? I would have been unthinkable.

To use pepper spray, which is outlawed by international conventions for use in warfare, on citizens nonviolently expressing their rights to dissent is despicable. Such police state tactics have no place in a democracy.

Those responsible for outrageous police brutality, up to and including the chancellors, should be dismissed.

Most sincerely yours,
Jeremy Grainger
Cowell College, UCSC, 1980
BA Women’s Studies 1980

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor: Police Brutality Has No Place at UC

While I greatly support holding Student Governments accountable, as was stated in the 11/17 Editorial “SUA Mismanaged Funds”, [retitled "Students Must Stay Informed About SUA Decisions"] I wanted to address a gross inaccuracy within that editorial.

The ReFund California campaign is a statewide coalition of many organizations, including a number of Unions.  A statewide Day of Action on November 16 was organized by this full coalition, which includes both UCSA as well as UAW 2865, the UC TA Union.  The UAW had already chartered multiple busses for this event before engaging the
UCSC Student Governments, asking for our support in filling the busses with people, not with funding them.  The sentiment that TAs “picked up the slack” from the SUA is flat out incorrect. The editors should be
applauding the SUA for not spending money on something that was already funded, and instead working with the ReFund California campaign on filling the spots on the already-chartered busses.

While I greatly appreciate the recognition of the work of TAs on campus and in campus organizing, pitting the Union against the SUA is not a worthwhile or effective strategy for either of our organizations, and I think the Editorial Board should be ashamed for engaging in such tactics.

- Erik Green, President, UCSC Graduate Student Association, and Member, UAW Local 2865

Editor’s Note: The editorial to which this letter refers, “Students Must Stay Informed About SUA Decisions,” has been amended  in response to concerns expressed by readers. Some of the details mentioned in this letter are no longer included in the online version of the Nov. 17 editorial.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor: SUA Editorial

In 2003, at UCSC 90.74 percent of voting students made a monumental decision to pass Measure 7, the Campus Programs Fee, in an effort to preserve valuable student services cut by the state, students agreed to levy a tax of up to $51 per student per quarter. At the time an overwhelming majority of students believed the University’s and the State’s budget would equalize and the state would restore funding to the University. As every student today knows, this never happened. Today Measure 7 is the life source for many students’ services, funding programming, staff salaries and benefits.

Eight years later, UCSC students now face another student services funding crisis. Measure 7 was not designed to permanently backfill state cuts to student services. Instead, the money was supposed to temporarily subsidize state cuts that would be eventually restored. Nevertheless, it has become a crucial component funding approximately fifty campus services, including some of the most recognizable units providing campus services. For example, the Resource Centers, the Educational Opportunity Programs (EOP), OPERS, SOAR, SHOP, etc. receives substantial Measure 7 funding to support staffing. As a result, Measure 7 is now in a deficit. Measure 7 does not generate enough revenue to fund programming and the increasing costs of salaries and benefits. As such, we must confront Measure 7’s devastating structural deficit. Without an increase or cost of living adjustment, the $51 per student per quarter will not cover the increasing costs of staff salaries and benefits that support student services. We, the Student Fee Advisory Committee (SFAC), have been consulted by administration in an attempt to resolve this major campus issue. As an advisory committee to the administration, we are confronted with a daunting challenge. One the one hand we do not want to return Measure 7 to the ballot to increase the fee amount, thus allowing UCSC students to fund this structural deficit. Nonetheless we must be faithful to the student’s desires for quality student services.

To successfully accomplish this goal, we must ask every UCSC student: are you willing to tax yourself more to fix this problem? If not where are we willing to cut?  In other words, is the student body willing to tax themselves more to preserve staffing for student services? To solicit feedback, SFAC now turns to City on the Hill Press. It is our hope that the publication of this letter will spark a conversation about student referenda and, more importantly, encourage every UCSC student to actively engage in the decision making process regarding funding of student services.

To voice your opinion on student services, send an email to: sfacmail@ucsc.edu.
For more information visit: http://www2.ucsc.edu/sfac/

Sincerely,
The Student Fee Advisory Committee

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor: Is the Student Body Willing to Tax Themselves More to Preserve Staffing for Student Services?

In response to your article “Of Porn and PETA” (6 Oct. 2011), I would like to provide some insight into the motives behind PETA’s PETA.xxx website. PETA’s job is to draw attention to animal suffering, and we have found — and, as the author noted, your article confirms — that people do pay more attention to our racier actions. As a result of our tactics, PETA representatives have been interviewed and our ads have been run — for free — allowing us to reach audiences numbering into the millions. This means that people across America are hearing about how animals suffer in the industries that use them and that more people than ever before are taking a stand against such companies.

All the activists featured on PETA.xxx are adults dedicated to helping animals by drawing attention to how foxes are electrocuted and skinned by the millions for the fur industry; calves are torn away from their distraught mothers and slaughtered for the meat industry; elephants are beaten bloody and forced to live in chains year after year in circuses; rats, mice, rabbits, cats, dogs, primates, and other animals are confined to cages and mutilated in laboratories; and billions of other animals endure torture, maddening isolation, starvation, terror, and violent deaths for various human amusements and industries.

We must make our message impossible to forget, and launching a website with a .xxx domain name helps achieve that goal. For more information, please visit peta2.com, where you can also request a free vegetarian/vegan starter kit.

Sincerely,
Amelia Jensen
College Campaigns Assistant
peta2.com

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at PETA: “Of Porn and PETA”

I am writing to you in response to a column that appeared in your back-to-school issue, Primer. The piece was written by Blair Stenvick and was titled “Welcome to the Neighborhood – Here’s Your Pepper Spray.” I realize that columns are essentially opinion pieces, and therefore do not necessarily require quoted sources to support the points or overarching message raised by the writer. I also realize that opinion pieces reflect the opinions of the writer, and not necessarily the paper in general. However, the fact that such an ignorant, uninformed piece was published — whether opinion piece or not — shocks and even offends me.

After reading the piece and deciding to write this letter, I went through the column highlighting the components I found particularly problematic. When I came to the end, I found that a decent percentage of the page ended up a lurid yellow. As a result I have decided to address the main problems of the piece generally and use some examples, as opposed to dealing with each one specifically.

To begin with, houseless (which is what they actually prefer to be called since most consider Santa Cruz their home) is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide variety of situations, from those who are down on their luck to trust fund babies, who have money and the option of owning a house but who simply reject social expectation and prefer a vagabond lifestyle. It is a problem that the writer is associating behaviors and semblances that she finds menacing with her own subjective and limited perception of what it means to be houseless. She is perpetuating the very ideas she claims to be speaking out against. For example, she uses “sketchy-looking guys in baggy clothing and hoods” as an exemplification of human degradation and danger. How do people in baggy clothing and hoods have anything to do with the houseless? She is describing athletes in warm-ups, non–skinny jean wearing men standing in the cold, or any number of nonthreatening people. There are dangerous people in the world, that is a fact. Many of those people have houses, some of them do not. Assuming certain people are inherently dangerous, simply by looking at them, is naïve at best.

In addition, the column has no logical form. It is a stream of consciousness rant: no research, no information, no premises supporting her position. Again, I appreciate the fact that it is an opinion piece, but it does seem to be arguing for something, namely, that humans are humans and should be considered and respected as such. The sentiment is meaningful to be sure. But it’s a bunch of haphazard sentences (some of which just beam with pride and love for the writer’s own writing and it is apparent) and a couple offensive anecdotes strung together. I think that I would have at least semi-appreciated the column if it had simply been finished with an inquiry about why certain people have certain perceptions that might turn to prejudices; just one thoughtful, introspective, considerate paragraph evaluating the rest of the column. In my opinion, it would have improved the column threefold.

Furthermore, her misuse of terms is really irresponsible. Though it may not be her intention to present certain misconstrued ideas, she often forms parallels between completely unrelated things. For Example, “low income” refers to households whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the median income for the area, as determined by HUD. In Santa Cruz County, this refers to any individual earning $16,840.00 or less. So why does the writer group “homeless” and “low-income” people in her article? Had she taken the time, this information would have taken less than a minute to obtain. But it is not entirely the writer’s fault. Where were her editors? Where were the fact checkers?

I want to make clear that I am neither claiming to be an expert nor houseless myself. I have enjoyed a privileged lifestyle from birth and am thankful every day (I’ve never cursed my “middle-class roots” because I misjudged a situation). I am quite sure that there are large flaws in my thinking on the subject as well, but I fully acknowledge that fact. I do not believe that my opinions on houslessness are entirely responsible or even fully developed and thoughtful. Houselessness is something easy to take for granted while sitting on your couch in your heated apartment. I know nothing of how it feels or what it’s like. Though those are things that I am sure change houseless person to houseless person (something not acknowledged in the column, all houseless people are just lumped together). However, I am also not preaching to my peers about the need to be high-minded; I am not trying to absolve myself of misguided thinking by explaining to everyone why I believe some scruffy people are scary and where I learned to think that way so really it’s not my fault.

In the article the writer asks, “But isn’t a little fear a good thing? Where does being smart and cautious end, and discrimination begin?” I would like to propose that being smart and cautious ends with a lack of information, and discrimination begins with ignorance.

—

To City on a Hill Editors,

Thank you for your very informative article on bicycle safety that appeared in the Sept. 15 Primer. Your writers touched on numerous concerns when bicycles and motor vehicles have to share the road and offered some very good suggestions for bicycle safety around Santa Cruz.

I wanted to take this opportunity to remind readers that the California Vehicle Code applies to bicycles as well as cars, and University Police will enforce the rules of the road. Bikes need to ride on the right side of the road, stop for stop signs and red lights and use a hand signals when turning.

Additionally, bikes need to be equipped with lighting if riding between dusk and dawn. Many people do not know that bicyclists, like drivers, may not have both ears covered by headphones or ear buds while operating a bicycle. These are all citable offenses and the fines can be steep, especially for the moving violations.

In order to keep the campus community better informed and aware of the resources for bicyclists, the UCSC Police Department will be working with Transportation and Parking Services staff to encourage the campus community to participate in their Fall 2011 Bike Safety events.

For example, events include weekly bicycle maintenance clinics, the October 6 Fall Bike to Work Day, and an October 11 Smooth Cycling: Urban Cycling Skills class. More information about the Bike Safety program can be found at http//:taps.ucsc.edu/bicycleprograms.html.

The UCSC police officers are committed to campus safety, are available 24/7 and can be reached at 831-459-2231 for non-emergency calls, 9-1-1 for emergency calls.

If we can save someone from being involved or injured in a serious accident, then we have done our jobs!

Thank you,

Nader Oweis

Chief of Police

UCSC Police Department

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letters to the editor may be emailed to letters@cityonahillpress.com. Letters for print publication should be no longer than 300 words. Letters may be shortened for space requirements. Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing letters@cityonahillpress.com.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: “Welcome to the Neighborhood”

Illustration by Bela Messex.

Yes, there is an art to this that can speed up the entire process and get you on your way quickly.

1. If you see the bus has been fully loaded, but you are still strolling along some distance away, don’t expect the bus to wait for you. If, on the other hand, you are within a reasonable distance and start running toward the bus before it has been fully loaded, the chances are very good that the driver will wait for you. If you are over 60 yards away – probably not – unless you put on a really good burst of speed.

2. If you are unable to speed up because of infirmity, wave your hand or something to get the driver’s attention. Definitely if you are on crutches a quick wave of your hand to get the driver’s attention and they will usually wait for you.

3. If you are crossing the cross walk at Kerr bridge and the bus is already waiting at the cross walk in the traffic lane, it is not reasonable to expect the driver to pull over at the last second when they have already passed the bus stop. The trick here is to catch the driver’s attention as you cross and before they get to the stop, and indicate you wish to catch the bus.

4. Speaking of the Kerr stop, and any other for that matter: if you are sitting at a stop and the diver beeps to get your attention, in effect asking you to indicate whether or not you want to catch the bus – if you just sit there like a lump expecting the bus to stop just because you are sitting there – it is quite likely that the bus will just drive on by. I have had people wait until the bus was driving past them before they made a move to either raise their hand or get up. Too late folks!

5. Please do not stand close to the curb at bus stops as buses pull in. There is every chance that you could be hit by a mirror hanging down from the front corner of the bus.

6. Remember standard bus etiquette – let passengers get off the bus before you try to get on the bus – otherwise there is total confusion.

7. At the uphill Kreske stop and the uphill Oaks stop, the buses load at the upper part of the stop, not right beside the bus shelter – so move up when you see the bus coming that you want. Don’t wait until the bus comes to a stop before you move because you are holding others up and the driver may assume that you don’t want that bus.

8. Always remember that once the bus is loaded and ready to move, no passenger is allowed to be forward of the yellow line (sometimes white line) to the right and just behind the driver. If the police see people riding in front of that line the driver could loose both license and job. Don’t force the driver to remove you from the bus if you can’t get behind the line.

9. When there are a lot of people waiting to get on a bus, please use both entrances, and load quickly. Those getting on at the front entrance, please take it upon yourself to move quickly toward the rear so as many people can be loaded as possible. I find myself having to tell you to move quickly toward the back of the bus, and I shouldn’t have to do that.

It never ceases to amaze me how so many people wait at the rear entrance, even though they see a lot of people waiting to get out from that door. If no one is exiting from the front door, you could actually move up to that door, enter the bus, and move toward the back of the bus even as others are still exiting the bus. And the people still waiting outside the back door will probably end up standing because you took the good seats. It’s called independent thinking – the opposite of the “herd mentality”.  Try it sometime!

10. And if you are getting onto the bus, your first priority should be getting on the bus, not finishing that cell phone call or hugging your friend. The more you delay, the longer you hold up others.

Getting Off The Bus

1. When you wish to get off the bus, please make sure that the driver knows you need to get off at the next stop. Normally you would do that by pulling the stop request chord. On some buses, like my own, the upper stop request indicator may not be working, however you should hear a “ping” sound when the chord is pulled the first time after the doors have been closed.

2. If you are on the back of the bus, and the stop request does not work, and the music is a bit loud, please do not be afraid to speak up and call – “Next Stop Please!” If you whisper quietly, you probably will not be heard.

3. Just because the driver announces a stop, does not mean that they are necessarily going to stop. Just like the Metro, if there is no one at the stop indicating they want to get on to the bus, and no one on the bus indicates that they want to get off the bus as described above, the driver will drive past the stop. Just because you shift your books around or stand up will probably not signal the driver that you wish to exit the bus. Please make it clear that you wish to exit the bus. And only one person needs to do this for any given stop.

4. Please get all your stuff together and be ready to leave the bus before it arrives at the stop – then exit quickly so that others can get on. Please don’t stop to talk to someone on your way off the bus.

Smokers and The Bus

1. Obviously you cannot smoke on a bus!

2. Not so obvious, perhaps, is that your breath is very offensive to non-smokers for some time after you put down your cigarette. 

I propose that you take this into consideration as a common courtesy and do not smoke for at least 5-10 minutes before you get on a bus. If you have a breath mint (recommended) you might even take that right after you put out your cigarette.

3. You may NOT bring your cigarette butt with you on the bus. It will leave the bus smelling really terrible for literally hours after you have left with your butt. Please find one of the provided cigarette butt receptacles at many of the bus stops long before you get on the bus. If you plan to load at a stop that does not have a receptacle, such as the east-bound science hill, or the Barn Theater stop – please do not smoke on your way to the stop. It is really an abomination to leave your cigarette butts on the ground.

Thanks letting me vent my concerns and suggestions,

Dave (the “Epic Bus” aka “Dramatic Bus” driver)

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Bus Etiquette

Thank you for taking the time to cover Friends of Community Agroecology Network’s (FoCAN) Food Systems Week. I was very excited to see a full page dedicated to an event that I helped coordinate this quarter with an amazing team of individuals. The quality of the coverage, however, was disappointing.

For one, this was not the sixth annual event, contrary to what the article’s subtitle says, but the first. And although the article proclaims the purpose of Food Systems Week is to raise awareness about the problems rural communities in Latin America face and how Santa Cruz has improved some of those conditions, that is not quite true. The goal was celebrating our campus food movement, and exchanging perspectives about local and global food systems with peers from rural communities in Mexico and Nicaragua. The youth visitors were actually not all students, despite what was reported. All are active leaders in their communities working on food sovereignty issues. They were at UCSC’s Sustainable Living Center (SLC) for a 10-day intensive agroecology training course, organized by the non-profit CAN. One of the course’s goals was to network with youth movements here and to learn about our food systems.

Another concerning error was the repeated mention of how FoCAN’s events supported free trade. This is completely incorrect. We support fair trade, a system that works towards creating sustainable trading partnerships and empowering marginalized producers.

Also, CAN’s international internships encompass more than interns “sustaining rural livelihoods.” Interns work in CAN’s partner communities in Mexico and Central America on local, community projects and actively engage with the realities of global trade systems.

Many of these inaccuracies I believe are due to sloppy researching. In the future, please be more careful to quote interviewees accurately and to do a more thorough fact-check.

Thank you,

Rachel Ross
Food Systems Week Coordinator
Friends of CAN

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: “Food Systems Week”

Thank you for your concerned and informative article on single mothers at UCSC. Students with children work hard to provide for their families while attending school, and I am happy to see that we are getting some recognition from our peers.

I would like to raise two points that were not addressed in your article, however. The first is that not all single parents are single mothers. For example, I was a single dad at UCSC for two years. (I remarried last summer, to a single mom.) During that time, I dealt with many of the same issues Ms. Perez and the other moms are dealing with now. In addition, however, I had to face the problem that it is very difficult for a single father to remain in the lives of his children, because society views single dads as deadbeats who abuse and abandon the mothers of their children and then refuse to pay child support. Of course most single dads aren’t like that, but the stereotype remains, and unfortunately your article seemed to reinforce this myth. How about interviewing some single dads?

My second point is that you failed to mention the most important fact of all about being a parent, namely that it is the most wonderful thing in the world. However many struggles we go through to provide for our children while finishing school, we do these things with joy because the wonder we see in our the eyes of our children reminds us that we are ourselves wonderful people in a wonderful world. You make it sound as if it’s all horrible bus rides down to the welfare office. But you forgot to mention that a bus ride with a toddler, while certainly not easy, is also a chance to see a beautiful new human being who loves you with all his heart watch and learn and babble and smile about birds and puddles and rainbows. Surely Ms. Perez, after “exhaling deeply” in her “dimly lit apartment,” told you that, eh?

Orville Canter
Ph.D student in philosophy

~~~~~~

City on a Hill Press welcomes your feedback. If you would like to send a letter to the editor, e-mail us at letters@cityonahillpress.com. Or, join our online community at cityonahillpress.com and get into the discussion on our comment threads.

Please note that letters to the editor are published at the discretion of the editors-in-chief. Letters should be around 250 words and should relate to recent City on a Hill Press content. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, brevity and clarity.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

I wanted to send a special thank-you to City on a Hill Press and Kara Foran for your efforts to publicize the Student Health Center’s new self-directed testing for sexually transmitted infections (Dec. 2). Your assistance in reaching students about this important issue demonstrates your commitment to the well-being of the community.

I have one important clarification. For those students who have the student health insurance plan (USHIP and GSHIP), we have succeeded in obtaining complete coverage for the cost of these tests. About 8,000 students are covered under these plans. This means that students with SHIP insurance can be tested with no out-of-pocket expense. This required quite a bit of negotiation with Anthem Blue Cross. As a result, we have removed one more important barrier to getting people tested. I hope you will help us publicize this. Inadvertently, this important fact was omitted from the article.

For students who have other forms of private insurance (not SHIP), the tests are available for a $20 lab fee plus the cost of each individual test. These tests range from $1.43 to $11.40. A student with no insurance who wants all four tests would have a maximum fee of $51.50.

We are concerned that the article may have left students with the idea that they will all face charges for these tests. In fact, only those without SHIP insurance would have out-of-pocket expenses. In many cases, the private insurance companies may reimburse students who submit these charges to their carrier.

It is sad to think that this generation was born in a time when there are so many dangerous risks from unprotected intimacy. Anything we can do to promote safer sexual practices and prompt identification of disease is critical. Once again I appreciate the work of City on a Hill Press to make our community healthy.

Beth Hyde, NP
Family nurse practitioner
Patient care coordinator

~~~~~~

City on a Hill Press welcomes your feedback. If you would like to send a letter to the editor, e-mail us at letters@cityonahillpress.com. Or, join our online community at cityonahillpress.com and get into the discussion on our comment threads.

Please note that letters to the editor are published at the discretion of the editors-in-chief. Letters should be around 250 words and should relate to recent City on a Hill Press content.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

I would just like to say that your article about vanishing manliness entitled “In Defense of Unabashed Testosterone” (Oct. 28), was very well written and brings up many valid points. But I have a few thing to say to sports editor Joey Bien-Kahn. He speaks of the dying breed of the man’s man at UCSC. There you are very wrong, sir. We honorable, determined, and devoted men of the UCSC men’s rugby team are actually growing in number. In your article you wrote about unabashed testosterone. We pick up a ball and run with it at full speed into our fellow men. We gather in scrums of eight men to ram each other. We tackle and maul and ruck and dip and toss and kick and stiff-arm relentlessly in 80-minute games. You drew the picture of a manly guy wearing shorts in the rain. We play in the rain and hail and mud in short-shorts. You speak of shotgunning beers as being manly… Well, we won’t get into that. If you have ever seen your fellow man vomit after sprints on a crisp Monday morning with the sun barely rising over the hills across the bay, you know what it takes to play rugby. If you want to see what men look like, come to a rugby game. If you think you are a man, come to a practice.

Dan O’Leary
UCSC vice president of men’s rugby

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

Ending cannabis prohibition and extermination in North America is one of the most important issues of our time.

Stan White, online reader
Dillon, Colo.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor

To: Chancellor Blumenthal

From: Renya Ramirez (CAAD member, American Studies, Associate Professor).

Bettina Aptheker (Feminist Studies, Professor),

Amy Lonetree (American Studies, Assistant Professor),

Carla Freccero (Chair, CAAD, Literature, Professor),

Raquel Prado (CAAD member, Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Assoc. Professor),

Pradip Mascharak (CAAD member, Chemistry, Professor),

Steve Knipp (Chair, National Education Association, American Indian Caucus),

Simón Sedillo (Community Rights Defense Organizer),

Nicholas Hartlep (AERA, Fellow at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee),

Colin Hampson (Stanford Law School alumni and tribal lawyer),

Winona Simms (Stanford, Associate Dean and Director American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian Program/Native American Cultural Center),

Marta Frausto (California Otomi Coordination Project),

Janeen Antoine (Director, American Indian Contemporary Arts),

Michael Duran (Counseling Director, Indian Health of SCV, UCSC alumni),

Laverne Roberts (President, American Indian Alliance of Silicon Valley),

Micah McNeil (UCSC Native Alumni, SANAI Co-founder)

Mirasol Ramirez (UCSC Alummi, AIRC Co-founder),

Andrea Smith (UCSC Alumni, AIRC Co-founder, Media and Cultural Studies),

Irene Vasquez (UCSC Alumni, SANAI Hunger-striker),

Lela Cast (UCSC Native Parent, AIRC)

Tomas Alejo (Sociology, AIRC intern, Undergraduate),

Amalia Coronado (Language Studies, AIRC intern, undergraduate),

Cristal Olivas (LALS, undergraduate, AIRC),

Madana Cast (Health Sciences, AIRC intern, undergraduate student),

Juan Ramirez (American Studies, AIRC, undergraduate),

Soma De Boubon (History of Consciousness, AIRC, graduate student),

Chris Cuadrado (undergraduate, El Centro Intern),

Esmirna Perez (Community Studies, UCSC alumni),

Pablo Viramontes (UCSC alumni, former SANAI member, AIRC volunteer),

Noah Tamarkin (Anthropology graduate student),

Cynthia Dorantes (UCSC undergraduate student)

Andrew Coppens (Psychology, graduate student),

Alexander Hirsch (Politics, graduate student),

Aimee Garza (Anthropology, graduate student),

Edward Noel Smythe (History, graduate student),

Stephen Wiard (American Studies, Politics, undergraduate student),

Miye Tom (University of Coimbra, Portugal, doctoral candidate, UCSC Native alumni), Kirsten Moore (Health Sciences, undergraduate student),

Katya Adachi (UCSF Native Medical student),

Lisa Rofel (Professor, Department Chair, Anthropology),

James Clifford (History of Consciousness, Professor),

Lisbeth Haas (History, Professor),

Rob Wilson (Professor, Literature),

Judith Habicht-Mauche (Professor, Anthropology),

Mark Anderson (Anthropology, Assistant Professor),

Melissa Caldwell (Anthropology, Associate Professor),

Michelle Erai (UC Riverside, UC Office of the President, postdoctoral fellow),

Daniel Guevara (Associate Professor, Philosophy)

Shelley Streeby (UCSD, Literature, Professor),

Lori Liawa (UCD, Native grad student)

Araehana Sharma (Wesleyan University, Anthropology, Associate Professor)

Kathleen Coll (Stanford Lecturer, Anthropology, Feminist Studies)

Sarah Cerdenak (Assistant Professor, African American Studies, UNC, Greensboro)

Joo Kim (UCSD graduate student, Literature)

Jon Daehnke (Stanford Humanities Post-Doctoral Fellow)

Mark Francis (Nebraska Accountant)

Curtis Marez (UCSD, American Quarterly Editor, Ethnic Studies, Associate Professor),

Inez Hernandez-Avila (UCD, Professor, Native American Studies),

Deborah Miranda (Chumash/Esselen, Washington and Lee College, Associate Professor), and Robin Butterfield (Native American educator).

We as the UCSC Native American community, including Native students, and faculty, and our allies, are concerned about the “Managing Director, Resource Centers” position recently posted. The American Indian Resource Center Director will be expected to manage the American Indian Resource Center along with five other Resource Centers. This position gives the American Indian Resource Center 50% less staff time than other Resource Centers, and therefore is inequitable. This is especially difficult when there are so very few resources available for Native students. Indeed, a Managing Director of Resource Centers position is redundant. Lastly, Native faculty and students were not officially or broadly consulted in the development of this position. In the following, the major concerns will be discussed in more detail.

1)Reducing the American Indian Resource Director position to a 50% position is an inequitable use of resources as compared to the other racial groups, including African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos. This decrease of 50% in staff time is inequitable and unfair.

2)As a Native American community on campus, we have very few resources allocated for Native students. Other groups on campus have multiple areas of support and resources, including staff in EOP, research centers, events, and courses that are relevant to their communities’ needs. The American Indian Resource Center is one of the few culturally relevant sites available to them. Indeed, the American Indian Resource Director must act in a central role, because there are so few resources on this campus for Native American students. Hiring an American Indian Resource Director who must also manage five other centers will be an extremely difficult job, and Native students can very easily be lost in the shuffle.

3)This position, some argue, is an efficient use of resources, since it “doubles up positions.” However, adding another layer of administration to manage the Resource Centers, duplicates the duties of other positions, and is therefore redundant.

4)Native American students and faculty were not formally or broadly consulted in the development of this job description. Because of the administration’s top down nature of the job description’s development, it is similar to the paternalism used by the Bureau of Indian Affairs in working with Native Americans. Indeed, we have heard that the establishment of this position is “honoring” the Indigenous people of the area. “Honoring” is about respect and working in collaboration. It is not about paternalism.

The UCSC Native American community needs an American Indian Resource Center Director who can devote 100 percent time of his or her time to the Native students. We as the Native American community, including Native faculty and students, hope to work in collaboration with administration in the future in order to develop a job description and serve on the hiring committee to hire an American Indian Resource Director that focuses all of his or her time to fulfill our Native students’ needs. We as members of the Native American community at UCSC would like to meet with you, Chancellor Blumenthal, to discuss this very important issue.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

After reading your article on the actions taking place downtown on Saturday, I have become completely un satisfied with your singling out of a particular political ideology, anarchism. The article clearly shows that you have no understanding of the principles and ideology represented by those of us who embrace the belief in anarchy. It appears that you are only perpetuating fear of an ideology that is coming under increasing scrutiny. To claim that the acts of Saturday night are the doings of an anarchist organization is false and presumptuous. I identify as an anarco-collectivist, meaning I combine the ideology of true anarchy (the rejection of capitalism and authoritative regimes in all shapes and forms) and collectivism (believing that all voices within a community share an equal and important role in decision making for that community). True anarchy is an ideology based on complete rejection of the authoritative structures of the government. It is a belief that all authoritative structures should be abolished in favor of personal and community responsibility. We live in a society where rather than hold wrongdoers accountable we call in the police to deal with it. While these police often act outside of the law under the cover of keeping the peace. The police did nothing at all to stop what happened Saturday night, seems odd to swear to keep the peace then sit idly by and allow destruction. It is apparent in society today that capitalism is responsible for most if not all the injustice we see. The allowance of the rise and extreme protection of corporate interests over individual freedoms flourishes under capitalism. The majority of the stores that were assaulted on Saturday are direct representations of these injustices. Urban outfitters is known to charge exorbitantly high amounts for clothes that are produced in third world countries under the most appalling work conditions known to man. Jamba juice sells products under the guise of health that are made for agricultural products form nations where farm workers are treated as expendable and are forced to pick produce while being paid below poverty wages and are exposed to some of the worst chemical compounds known to man. The jewelry store carries products that are mined by impoverished peoples and often used to fund genocides abroad. I don’t think that Saturday was the right venue for these statements, but I find it extremely hard to sympathize with companies that exploit their workers and further a system in which efficiency at the cost of human life is acceptable. If nothing else this article is sympathetic to the same types of caustic cancer that plagues the world under the guise of local businesses. Anarchists are not the cancer that plagues society, capitalism and its exploitative structures are and must be purged from society in order to allow a world in which all peoples are equal. While the businesses are indeed in a local venue, the money spent there by no means supports the local economy. When was the last time urban outfitters gave anything back to Santa Cruz, but a legion of mindless hipsters? Your paper comes off as progressive, yet condemns any ideologies that envision an alternative society free of authoritative repression and oppression. When you report on an incident, as the doing of one group of people, when I can vouch many of the anarchist community had no idea who these people were or had any intention of causing damage, you seem to lose journalistic integrity. It just reeks of the McCarthy era witch hunt for communists. So I must say this simply, it is unfair to single out an ideology with which you seem to know nothing about and spread fear of said individuals for being violent radicals. If you feel that property has more rights than people, and the capitalistic structures attacked on Saturday are innocent or local in any way, then shame on your ignorance. Please don’t continue to spread lies about something you do not understand.

Sc anarco-collectivist

~~~~~~

Dear Students of UCSC,

As some of you may have heard, there is a planned student walk-out for the days of May 18 and 19, coinciding with the regents meeting on the Commission on the Future. We are writing to include you in the preparations for this walk-out as a pedagogical endeavor. A lot has been said about these actions as “teachable moments.” However, in practice that has obliged us to learn and teach around or after these actions occur, rather than from within. This walk-out is not planned as a campus shutdown; the intent is not to disrupt class or education. Instead, we propose that this walk-out will push education outside the institutional spaces of the university. Rather than walking out of your education, the organizing committee is encouraging you to “walk out to your education.” This is in part symbolic: as students, we increasingly feel that our education is becoming peripheralized by the budgetary policies of the regents and the administration.

The emphasis of our preparations is on offering a pedagogical itinerary for these two days. These two pieces are practical workshops, student and graduate student -led discussion groups on topics ranging from the financial crisis to student debt. We invite you to join with us in practicing our education outside the divisive and precarious spaces which are increasingly disrupting our learning experience.

There are four things you can do to support this effort.

— If you are scheduled to attend a class between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on these days, you can encourage your instructors to re-locate their classes to the West entrance on the 18th, or the main entrance on the 19th. The walk-out committee is currently working to provide an infrastructure for class re-locations, and we would appreciate any of your suggestions.

— Encourage your instructors to excuse absences for this event, if they do not decide to re-locate their class.

— Consider holding a talk or discussion groups during these days of action. We are compiling a list of speakers for our itinerary.

— Don’t go to class and encourage other students to take advantage of the pedagogical opportunities being organized.

Please feel free to contact us if you are interested in participating, or if you have suggestions for how to make this a productive, teachable moment for the students of our community.

In solidarity,
Madeline McDonald Lane, PhD student, Department of Literature,
mmlane@ucsc.edu

Katie Woolsey, PhD candidate,
Department of Literature,
kwoolsey@ucsc.edu

http://walkouttoeducation.wordpress.com/

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

“I’m writing to address the context given for an article that went up following my interview for the 4/1 A Changing UC series. While I’m sure that the author was well intended, I feel that my interview was misused to cast negative light on management of budget cuts in theatre arts (a position I was not willing to express). Instead, I’d like to highlight that the transparency in the theatre department and the activities going on in the barn are an example of what to do right during budget cuts. The budget cuts are nothing new, but the positive community effort to maintain the integrity of our field of study while creating more opportunities in theatre despite the lessening of our resources is something inspiring. This is was what I was attempting to spotlight; I don’t believe that pointing fingers is is a productive means of addressing the issues at hand.

Sincerely,

Kayt Ahberg

*This story has been removed from the City on a Hill Press website.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor

Rosie Spinks’ “Culture Shock Confessions” (published March 9) provides valuable insights for all students considering education abroad.

Becoming a member of another university, culture, and society is an exciting, and many say life-changing, opportunity. More than touring a great city or cruising to port, UC Education Abroad Program participants are learning to independently negotiate new experiences and different cultures that will allow them to meaningfully contribute to a global society.

To assist students as they move through various stages of cultural adjustment, our local staff members introduce and orient EAP students to local daily life, academic and institutional norms, and help them prepare to keep themselves safe and healthy while exploring their new environment. As Rosie aptly puts it, “the ‘real’ education you aren’t receiving” on campus will likely require street-smarts and the ability to cope successfully with and take advantage of the differences between life on a UC campus and life abroad.

We’re pleased that the vast majority of the 4,500 students who participate each year on an EAP program enjoy what they often call a once-in-a-lifetime experience. They are making an investment that will reward them not only academically but beyond the classrooms in their personal and professional life. I encourage all your readers to consider the benefits of the kinds of immersive experiences Rosie describes, and to meet with their campus EAP representatives to explore the over 200 programs throughout the world offered by EAP.

Sincerely,
Michael Cowan
Executive Director
University of California Education Abroad Program

~~~~~~

We are eager to hear your opinions, so please e-mail editors@cityonahillpress.com. Letters should be around 250 words, and ideally will have to do with recent CHP content. We reserve the right to print, or not print, anything we receive.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor

I am curious as to why names of the alleged are presented in every story except those involving UCSC students. Even in the instance of the three teens caught burglarizing a Coral St. business, names were provided of all adults involved.

A glaring example of your school-chum bias can be seen in the entry titled “UCSC student arrested in stolen bike ring.”

Why was this student’s name not provided? You must know that I am not alone when I say that I would like to know who can and cannot be trusted among my peers, and that as a community crime information source, you do not afford us this by sheltering those accused of thievery.

Regards,
Brad North

~~~~~~

We are eager to hear your opinions, so please e-mail editors@cityonahillpress.com. Letters should be around 250 words, and ideally will have to do with recent CHP content. We reserve the right to print, or not print, anything we receive.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter to the Editor

So now what do you do?

After decades of gradual fee increases, the latest “deal” struck by the UC Regents to raise fees an unprecedented 32.5 percent has finally crossed the line. A world class education — essential for the success of yourself, your state and your nation — is slipping away from California’s social contract.

Since realizing the inevitable last fall, you’ve walked-out, sat-in and spoken-up. The outrage — real outrage — on UC, CSU and community college campuses is palpable. In fact, your reaction has received global media coverage. Of your massive protests last September, the UK Guardian first wrote of the “shock” it sent throughout the capitol, and then it described the students and faculty as “meaning business.”

So the die has been cast. The state of California has crossed the Rubicon. Sacramento wants your education back.

What do you do?

You’ve blamed the regents, suspicious of how readily they accepted the cuts and questioning of their compensation, you want answers. You’ve blamed the governor for heaping the fallout of California’s colossal dysfunction onto the shoulders of its children, and for seeming aloof from the plight of California’s students. You’ve blamed the state legislature for doing its best to undermine your education, and for allowing nearly every other function of the state to grind to a halt on its watch.

But something about these enemies doesn’t stick.

The regents are only reacting to what’s coming down on them from the state capital, and their compensation alone doesn’t come close to closing the hole.

The governor, too, is hamstrung. Even in good economic times, he and the legislature only control about 20 percent of the budget. The rest is “locked-in” by the spending priorities and restrictions by the political movements of yesterday.

The legislature is a tempting target… but wait. Fees have increased during periods of Republican control and Democratic control; when liberals were in charge of the legislature and when conservatives were in charge; in good economic times and bad. You have every reason to believe that you will continue to receive less education for more money no matter who wins what election where or when.

No, the fee hikes, the layoffs and the furloughs (like the IOUs, the prisons and the water) are bigger than Arnold Schwarzenegger, and they are certainly bigger than the regents. For this reason, you and your fellow students have been visibly frustrated trying to find the right target for your wrath and the most effective avenue for your collective action.

Should you look to Sacramento? Today, the capitol exists in a state of controlled anarchy. Every lobbying firm and every interest group scavenges whatever it can from the public body; the beast has no strategy, no master plan and no guiding principle. The beast has shown itself capable of devouring water systems, prison systems, roads, bridges and the social safety net, and now it’s hungry for the greatest university system in the history of our species. The monster cannot be tamed or captured, and its gluttony is ravaging us all.

Then it hits. The problem is Sacramento. Your enemy is Sacramento.

What do you do?

When who controls the legislature or the governor’s mansion has largely ceased to matter, and when the system and all its parts have become so fundamentally committed to destroying everything you love — from your parks to your health to your education — where do you turn? Do you tinker around the edges? No. You get a new system.

Last month, a coalition of advocacy groups called Repair California finalized and submitted two ballot measures to do just that, by calling California’s first constitutional convention in 130 years. If the measures succeed on the ballot we would be enabled to scrap the old system and build a new one that learns from other states and reflects the California of tomorrow. No other reform proposal offers anything even close to such an opportunity.

I don’t know about you, but I refuse to accept the status quo and what it’s doing to us. It’s time for us to seize our future. California needs you. This movement needs you.

Adrian Covert
Member, Repair California
CSU Alumnus

~~~~~

Administration Should Have Delivered Greater Consequences to UCSC Protesters

I am writing to object in the strongest terms possible to the handling of the Nov. 18 protests at UCSC.

While I am not unsympathetic to the point made by the protesters that day, I object to their method, and must equally fault the administration for allowing them to close access to campus.

Those who engage in civil disobedience must also accept the consequences, and I saw no sign whatsoever that those in authority intended to impose consequences upon the protesters. Absent that, the protesters’ actions were mere thuggery and those who turn a blind eye to them are complicit.

As far as I know, campus authorities have an obligation to enforce the law. I don’t know whether or not there is a legal obligation to assist students, faculty and staff in getting onto and off of campus, but it certainly seems like there should be.

Instead, parking officers blocked off the streets approaching the main entrance and in essence aided the protesters.

As a commuter student who had to work all morning, I was unaware of the protests or the reason for the road closure until I checked online while in stopped traffic on Empire Grade approaching the west entrance to UCSC. I know for a fact that several students in my class commute from work in Santa Clara or San Mateo counties, and they were likely caught in the same mess — as were hundreds of others, as evidenced by the mile of traffic leading up to the west entrance.

At the west entrance, I was forced to turn around by a mob of students; the single campus police officer visible, while cordial, made clear that his instructions did not allow him to take any action to allow traffic through.

I missed half a day of work to attend class today, and was prevented from doing so by the actions of a small handful of misbehaving students. The responsibility for this does not lie solely with those students, but at least equally with the administration, which coddles them.

I’m not sure that your administration is not more culpable: as a society, we make an allowance for “kids” like most undergraduates, while we expect responsible professionals to live up to full adult standards.

I strongly urge the administration in the future to take whatever actions are necessary to ensure that protests remain peaceful and do not disrupt the normal operations for campus. If student protesters will not cooperate, they should be subject to the normal legal and academic penalties.

Regards,

Nathan Edel
UCSC Graduate Student
Computer Science

~~~~~

To My Fellow Students…

Last week, as we all know, the Regents approved a 32 percent fee increase for the University of California prompting students to occupy buildings on many UC campuses in protest of the decision. Unfortunately, the manner in which these protesters have chosen to voice their dissent — especially the occupation of Kerr Hall here at UCSC — has cast a shadow of immaturity and foolishness on what could have been a very effective strategy of civil disobedience.

I am personally embarrassed and disappointed in my schoolmates who chose a route of vandalism, disruption of the peace and delinquency — actions which are not covered by the First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and assembly.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., perhaps the most adept mastermind of civil disobedience in modern times, urged his followers to use non-violent means of protest, for he understood the need to accrue sympathy for his cause from the public. When I hear about the property damage students keep doing to buildings on campus and the demonstrations that lead to altercations with the police, I find myself beginning to sympathize more with school administrators than with these students even though I am a student.

Why are students ripping phone lines out of walls and barricading doors instead of showing solidarity and singing “We Shall Overcome?” How does blocking off the entrances to campus for hours during class time help support access to education?

As a student who does rely heavily on financial aid, I completely understand the devastation and frustration that prompts people to resort to such undesirable means of protest. However, I also have enough common sense to realize that to be taken seriously and given the respect we deserve, we need to come together in a mature, civilized way to show our disappointment. If we want change, we have to garner support from the wider community of voters and taxpayers, and acting like a pack of criminals isn’t getting us any compassion.

Please, I urge you to cease all violent, illegal and destructive forms of protest immediately for the sake of the reputation and future of UC students everywhere.

Yours Truly,

Miriam Veiss Creque
UCSC Fourth-Year
Psychology

~~~~~

A Response to “Misinformed Enthusiasm” in Defense of the Nov. 18 Protests

I feel some facts need to be straightened out from City on a Hill Press columnist Lollie Brande’s recent editorial entitled “Misinformed Enthusiasm.”

Yes, Mark Yudof’s salary is closer to $600,000 than $900,000. However, that is before factoring in his roughly $230,000 annual pension funding. Altogether, Yudof’s compensation plan is much closer to the $900,000 students are protesting, and to try and downplay that is misleading and a disservice to the students who are trying to improve our situation. In addition to that, he receives a handful of other bonuses, including University-supplied lodging. All of this info can be found on the UC’s own Web site.

As for the allocation of funds, one-third is pledged for financial aid, but the other two-thirds are simply designated to “close a widening budget gap.” No specifics are given, although a very broad outline for fee hikes in general is. Again, this info can be easily found on the UC’s Web site.

Claims that the money is going towards construction stem from this lack of transparency — something that the protests demanded of the regents. The UC is selling roughly $1.5 billion in bonds to gather revenue for construction and proudly touts the favorable rates the bonds have (again, see the UC’s site). They give no information on what is being used as collateral to get such favorable rates, and research has shown that our student fees can and are being used as that collateral. This is explained in far better detail than I could ever provide at the Council of UC Faculty Association’s Web site (http://cucfa.org).

Therefore, while some protesters may not have all the right info, there are definite factual backings to the assertions the protesters are making.

As for why we protest the way we do about the things we do: as previously proved, the UC is misleading about what it does with our funds and the “sacrifices” the higher-ups are making. We want transparency and honesty if they are going to keep taking more money from us.

People will blame the economic crisis our state is in or the national recession we just faced. While these exacerbated our situation, they are not the roots of the problem. In 2004 our UC Regents unanimously agreed with Gov. Schwarzenegger on a compact that would shift the UC to being primarily funded by “private sources,” or student fees and tuition. They are responsible for setting us on this path towards privatization that has since been escalated and accelerated by the state’s continuing budget woes. We want a return to the old terms, in which the UC was a predominantly state-funded school.

They say the fee hike is essential to keep or improve our quality of education, yet we’ve had constant fee hikes these past few years, our class sizes are still increasing, classes and faculty are still being cut, and the library now has ridiculous, borderline useless hours of operation. We have every right to be skeptical that these fee increases will be the ones that change things. Why wait until we’re paying the same price as kids at Harvard or NYU before we start making a fuss — especially if we’ve seen no increase in the quality of education these last few years as a result of them?

The UC Regents should be our allies in this fight, not accomplices of the governor and legislature that have worked against us. Money is tight and state funding needs to be reallocated and new revenue raised — things that ballot initiatives in 2010 will hopefully start to fix. But there is no reason the regents, governor and legislature can’t start fixing things now.

We blocked the streets and disrupted campus because that is what gets attention. In September, I was one of the students who was frustrated by the protests and saw it as just alienating potential allies. I was especially dismayed by the occupations (and I am still opposed to the vandalism and will never see that as a useful tactic, but neither do the majority of us protesters).

But these recent actions forced me to get involved. I went to general assemblies. I went to teach-ins. I shared my ideas and heard theirs. I was educated on the details of the situation by faculty and staff who are our allies. And so on the 18th I proudly joined their ranks, because the protests do exactly what they aim to do. They get attention and they start a dialogue. If we all could just happily join together and do a peaceful, non-intrusive act that would solve the problem, but that’s not going to happen. There have been multiple general assemblies and dialogues to share ideas, and the masses don’t turn out. There is too much apathy.

By blocking entrances to campus and disrupting campus life as a whole, we accomplish a campus-wide shake-up with the numbers we have. We provoke those who haven’t gotten involved to get involved. It’s what did it for me, and hopefully it’s what will do it for others. Already, our numbers this protest dwarfed those in September.

The attention our protests get and the dialogues they start are necessary for keeping the ball rolling on fixing this mess. If we simply gathered in the Quarry Plaza, waved our signs, and went home, how many people would be talking about the problem compared to the numbers that talk when we block off a major intersection and briefly disrupt the whole campus?

People are working to get initiatives on the ballot and promote those that already are on it. Others are e-mailing and speaking with those who have more pull in the matter. Even more ideas are brewing. The occasional visible, disruptive gesture is necessary to help spur this all and keep it alive and in the public eye. We protesters are just a part of the process — one that may draw the ire of our peers, but an essential one nonetheless. Standing aside and deriding us will accomplish nothing. Engage us, share your ideas, contact faculty, regents, and legislators, come to general assemblies and join the overall cause.

Wednesday, Nov. 18 was a success. Next Wednesday and all subsequent ones can be too. We have been patient, we have organized, we have discussed, and we will continue to do so. We just need you to join us.

Thanks for hearing me out,

Bryan Brown
UCSC Third-Year
History

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

~~~~~

October 8, 2009

Dear Chancellor Blumenthal,

The McHenry family is greatly distressed by the personnel/finacial cuts being made to the UCSC Arboretum. The Aboretum is a living monument to the life work of Dean and Jane McHenry, both of whom worked tirelessly for higher education for the citizens of the once great state of California. Dean, with Jane at his side, influenced many lives as a political science professor at UCLA, a major contributor to the Master Plan for Higher Education for the State of California (1960), and as the founding chancellor of UCSC.

This unique Arboretum is an important place for all of us as it has been a special project of Dean and Jane’s since the beginning. It was started with plants from their travels to far corners of the earth. There is a garden named in Jane’s honor, a plaque honoring Dean’s mother, and a recently dedicated amphitheatre honoring Dean.

This shortsighted cuts by the UCSC administration not only disrespect their historic contributions, but also threaten the future of a valuable, irreplaceable educational and public asset.

Sincerely yours,

Members of the McHenry Family

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

Summer 2009 is almost here, and everyone knows what that means: people from all over the world will be stampeding to the beaches in Santa Cruz to enjoy some of the most beautiful coastal scenery in California. There is no feeling quite like the one you get when you are standing on the cliffs at Seabright Beach, looking down at the pristine white sands, beautiful people and deep greenish-blue of the ocean. 

What you probably don’t notice is the amount of trash piling up beneath the blankets and umbrellas. One of the largest threats to the health of our beaches is marine debris, which is trash that ends up in the sea either from land-based or ocean-based sources. In the past 50 years this problem has worsened due to the increased use of convenient plastic containers rather than reusable ones. Cigarette butts, plastic and glass bottles, aluminum cans and every other forgotten piece of trash left on the beaches of Santa Cruz every day by the throngs of visitors diminishes the landscape’s postcard perfection.   

We are not the only ones who have to deal with the consequences of marine debris. Every year, an estimated 100,000 birds, sea turtles, dolphins, whales, seals and other animals will ingest plastic debris or become entangled in it. Everything from lighters to small toys has been found in animals washed up on the beach, who were just trying to eat and survive. 

Plastic material is mainly responsible for the ongoing massacre of marine animals, forever floating around brightly-colored and appealing to hungry creatures. Americans each use about 200 pounds of plastic every year, and that number is predicted to become 300 by the end of the decade. With our reckless use of this long-lived petroleum product, it’s no wonder that the environment is suffering. 

By now, many people have heard of the horrifying North Pacific Gyre trash heap in all its plastic splendor: a mass of trash the size of Texas in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, containing an estimated 3.5 million tons of trash. There is not a better visual example of the consequences of our careless use of plastics than the garbage patch. 

The amount of trash on Santa Cruz beaches is staggering, but there are many dedicated locals who don’t mind cleaning up the mess. The annual International Coastal Cleanup Day happens every summer at beaches all over the world. Last year, over 3,000 volunteers cleaned up 10,200 pounds of trash off of the beaches in Santa Cruz County alone. Worldwide, people from 104 different countries picked up 6.8 million pounds of trash from their beaches, rivers and streams. 

The good news is that it’s not too late to diminish our impact on our coastal environment. The main action that we should all take is simply to use fewer plastic containers. Be aware of your surroundings on the beach, keep track of the trash that you end up with and make sure that you pack it up when you leave. If you smoke, don’t throw your cigarette butt away in the sand. These simple actions could save thousands of marine animals’ lives and keep the beaches in Santa Cruz looking beautiful. 

There are several organizations in Santa Cruz dedicated to keeping the beaches clean and looking for volunteers to help. Save our Shores has been organizing coastal clean-ups in communities of California for the past 30 years. Pack Your Trash is another agency promoting the health of the coastline with their anti-littering campaigns, and is located on Pleasure Point.

So when you trip down to the beach this summer, just remember to leave it how you found it — you’re not the only one enjoying the sun, sand and surf.

By Kathleen Mullen-Ley 
Fourth-year environmental studies major

~~~~~

We are eager to hear your opinions, so please e-mail editors@cityonahillpress.com. Letters should be around 250 words, and ideally will have to do with recent CHP content. We reserve the right to print, or not print, anything we receive.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

——–

Dear City on a Hill Press,

It was no surprise that President Obama retained the language that prohibits spending federal funds on syringe exchange programs in the President’s Fiscal Year 2010 Budget. We had been receiving that message since the inauguration. 

Fortunately, Obama’s disappointing inaction is not the major loss it might appear. The main mechanism for removing the ban is Congress, and currently the U.S. House of Representatives. The timing for removal of the ban in the 2010 budget is now, as the Labor, Health and Education Appropriations bill, in which the ban lies, will be put together in the next couple of weeks. 

We have shown the support for its removal by getting co-sponsors onto HR 179, the Community AIDS & Hepatitis Act, and getting promises on votes from those who have not signed on but would support removing the ban in the Appropriations process. Obama says he supports lifting the ban, but has punted it back to Congress. Our response now is critical.

Truth is, we know there is no real organized opposition to syringe exchange, we won the debate long ago, and besides being the right thing to do, the political risk is vastly overstated. For Congress to believe us, they need to hear from more of their constituents. 

First, if your Representative has not cosponsored HR 179, send them a letter asking them to today. Visit http://salsa.democracyinaction.org to learn about the Harm Reduction Coalition and its initiative to gain support for HR 179. 

Second, call Rep. David Obey (WI) at 202-225-3365, Chair of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and ask him to take leadership to remove the ban in the 2010 Appropriations. 

Hilary McQuie
California Director
Harm Reduction Coalition
1440 Broadway, Suite 510
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: 510-444-6969
Fax: 510-444-6977
www.harmreduction.org
mcquie@harmreduction.org

——–

We are eager to hear your opinions, so please e-mail editors@cityonahillpress.com. Letters should be around 250 words, and ideally will have to do with recent CHP content. We reserve the right to print, or not print, anything we receive.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

  

Photo courtesy of Dennis Schwartz.

On April Fools’ Day, Daniel Press, the head of the environmental studies department, wrote an opinion piece in the San Jose Mercury News deriding UCSC’s recent purchases of renewable energy certificates, calling them a “feel-good scam” and saying that the school, which purchased certificates for 57,000 megawatt-hours of clean energy in 2007, “was getting fleeced by green-energy scammers.” Despite the cover date, however, his piece was no joke, and it was completely wrong.

In 2006, UCSC students voted to raise their tuition by $3 in order to purchase renewable energy certificates to reduce the carbon footprint of the school’s electricity use. Because its utility, PG&E, doesn’t have a green power program that would allow the school to pay extra for a greener mix, the school chose to buy certificates. In 2006, they were for California-based geothermal power. In 2007, over half came from California wind, the rest from a mixture of biomass in Florida and wind in Oklahoma, Texas, and the Dakotas.

In his piece, Press said “certificate brokers have persuaded hundreds of colleges to buy the ‘environmental attributes’ of wind, landfill gas and solar energy – but not the electricity itself.” And he is exactly right. Renewable energy certificates are a market-based answer to a simple physics problem that Press understands well: once electricity is on the grid, you can’t route “clean” electrons to those who pay extra for it and away from those who don’t.

Part of that has to do with the sheer complexity of the electric grid. With the need to respond instantly to shifts in demand and the lack of ability to store energy, the grid is a deeply intertwined, delicate system, cobbled together from midcentury infrastructure designed to service always-on coal plants and the comparatively recent additions of intermittent renewable resources like wind and solar. It’s a mixed-up, tumbled-around creature, and the power you get out of the outlet under your desk is a mashup of electrons from any number of sources, much like a cup of water dipped from a river formed by a thousand small tributaries. Trying to divine where each drop came from is impossible.

Normally we don’t care about the details – the lights turn on just the same whether the electricity was generated from coal plants, wind power, or gerbil wheels. But now that we’re demanding cleaner electricity from renewable resources, we want to be able to pay extra to get our electrons from the wind and sun, not belching smokestacks. By paying extra for green power, so the argument goes, it should incite investors to build renewable energy, which is more expensive to build than fossil fuel plants and has a longer payback time. But if we can’t route green power straight to our homes, how can we give people and universities the ability to send an unequivocal economic signal to build more wind farms and solar arrays?

The idea, first instituted in the late 1990s, was a pretty revolutionary one, and went like this: assign every megawatt hour of clean energy a unique serial number (a certificate), and then sell the certificate as the sole claim to that generation, but independent of the actual electrons. That way the wind farm has two things it can sell: first, the undifferentiated electricity (it’s not “wind power” anymore) to the local utility, and second, all the good environmental benefits of that electricity embodied in the certificate, which can then be sold to the highest bidder on national commodities markets. The final buyer (say, UCSC) has sole claim over the renewable attributes, and once the transaction takes place, the serial number is retired so no one else – not the state it was generated in, or even the owner of the wind farm – can claim the environmental benefits of that megawatt hour.

There’s no other system quite like it, but it works. Individuals and companies can buy renewable energy whether their utility offers it or not, and renewable energy generators get paid for more than just the electricity they produce. They are compensated for the environmental benefits we all enjoy. Before this system of certificates, our common natural resources were given away free to industry to use up and pollute, and there was no financial gain in avoiding the environmental pillaging that was fully allowable by law. The system of renewable energy certificates is an artificial system, but it’s effective as both a way to monetize the act of not polluting, and to incentivize new renewable development. All this in a market-based system of commodity trading where the market determines the price.

And here are the results: wind power capacity has grown on average by 24 percent per year in the U.S. since 2000, 46 percent in 2007 and over 50 percent in 2008. Certificate prices rise and fall but have trended sharply upward over the last decade, improving financing options for new facilities. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, in the last decade households and businesses collectively have provided a larger market for new renewable energy developers than all state government renewable programs combined, and these voluntary purchases support more than 4,000 MW of new renewable energy capacity nationally, steadily increasing over time. Every state uses certificates to track their renewable energy generation and progress toward their renewable energy goals, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recognizes big purchasers of renewable energy like UCSC and Intel as part of its Green Power Partnership program.

Columbia Energy Partners, a developer of wind energy projects in the northwest, finds certificates are crucial for getting new projects in the ground. “Wind projects are immensely capital intensive, often requiring funds way in advance of project development,” they said. “As wind turbines are becoming more and more expensive, you have to have every revenue stream on the back-end to cover your costs. Renewable energy certificates are critical to our projects. Apart from the financial imperatives, in the presence of global warming, any incentive for renewable energy only makes sense.”

Basin Electric Power Cooperative, a utility purchaser of wind energy in North Dakota, has a similar story. “We started out planning for one turbine, but then when we started seeing the interest from the U.S. government and from [consumers] in purchasing renewable energy certificates, we decided that we could build more wind. Certificates make wind competitive with coal or other traditional forms of energy.”

Because of its purchases, UCSC is No. 6 on the U.S. EPA’s Green Power Partnership Top 20 College & University list, just below the entire California State University system. Chancellor Blumenthal is a signatory of the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment, a pledge by over 600 college and university presidents to at least partly reduce their schools’ environmental impacts by purchasing or producing at least 15 percent of their institutions’ electricity consumption from renewable sources. The only way this purchasing can be done is through certificates, and in purchasing 100 percent renewable energy, the school has done far more than the minimum required by the commitment.

President Obama’s energy plan calls for increasing the nation’s use of renewable energy to 25 percent by 2025, up from the current 2 percent. Twenty-five percent might not sound like much, considering the urgency of the climate crisis, and it is far less than the 100 percent goal Al Gore challenged the nation to last year, but getting there will take all the political will, private investment, and public action we can muster.

This means that we have to start cutting back on our energy use and buying renewable energy now, just as the school is doing. Renewable energy sales last year to individuals and businesses were responsible for more demand than all the state goals put together, and we need both markets if we’re going to build enough renewable energy to wean ourselves off foreign supplies, stop destructive coal mining, and stave off the coming climate crisis. Along with reducing our overall energy use, buying renewable energy is one of the most important environmental steps we can take, and UCSC should be commended for doing both. Keep it up.

 —–

Jeff Swenerton is communications director of the Center for Resource Solutions, a San Francisco-based nonprofit working to advance sustainable energy. He can be contacted at jeff@resource-solutions.org.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at UCSC is a Green Power Leader

Dear Editor,

I find this latest City on a Hill issue to be extremely problematic in regards to the history of pornography article. In addition to one past issue on the controversy of masturbation, the cover images of these papers consistently exploit women’s sexuality and furthers their stereotypical forms of "seduction." In the case of this current article, women’s sexuality and objectification is never mentioned — the negative repercussions of the pornography industry and the effects it has on popular culture (and perhaps rape culture) is never addressed. You portray pornography as an art form and seemingly praise it in your article in describing a rather biased history of porn. City on a Hill Press fails to address the darker history of pornography and blames its downfall on the rise of conservatism. I find this article problematic because it fails to acknowledge and validate the negative aspects of pornography in the promotion of violence against women and male dominance.

Lately, City on a Hill Press has been continually trying to write about taboo and controversial issues in American society today and in doing so has also portrayed women in very sexualized and objective ways. I would greatly appreciate it if some thought could be given to these "controversial" topics in regards to the portrayal of women and NOT have sexualized images of mostly white women on your covers. In your writings, please apply a critical consciousness in regards to your subject and how you are constructing certain identities in you articles.

Thank you,

Lun Wang

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Your recent coverage of the Free Palestine rally on campus in January was skewed highly toward the ultra-right wing Israeli zionists here on campus. As well, the recent CHP ad quoting Obama’s support of Israel’s twisted and perverted policies just goes to show how morally and spiritually depraved and bankrupt the ultra-right wing Jewish racist zionists are on this campus.

Both the USA and Israel are failed international states — their collapses are BOTH imminent.

I stand with the President of Iran in denouncing Israel as “a stinking corpse,” and call for its leaders (and the leaders of International Jewish Zionists in both the USA and the UK) to be immediately arrested, prosecuted and executed by the International Criminal Court for the vicious WAR CRIMES they have ALL recently committed against the Palestinian people of Gaza.

Steve Jones

UCSC Alumnus

Santa Cruz, California

—

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your coverage of the Jan. 21 Gaza demonstration. One of the “counter-demonstrators” carried a sign that read: “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children as much as they hate us.”

This is a racist statement. If “Israelis” were substituted for “Arabs” you’d be called an “anti-Semite.” As for the Palestinians, maybe they “hate” the Israeli military for killing 350 Palestinian children in its most recent act of ethnic cleansing.

Regarding the present situation in Palestine/Israel, we need go back only to 1948 (not “2,000 years”), when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were driven from THEIR ancestral homes after acts of terror by the Irgun. The majority of the Palestinian descendents of those victims of ethnic cleansing now subsist in refugee camps, where they continue to be killed and maimed by the Israeli military’s U.S.-supplied WMDs.

The main obstacle to peace is the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. Noted Israeli scholar and Oxford University professor Avi Schlaim recently said “that throughout its 60 years, Israel has been remarkably reluctant to engage in meaningful negotiations with its Arab opponents to resolve the dispute between them and only too ready to resort to military force. … And the current vicious Israeli assault on the people of Gaza is the climax of this longstanding Israeli policy of shunning diplomacy and relying on brute military force” (Democracy Now!, 1/14/09).

Peace will come when Israel ends the occupation and its military respects Palestinian children as much as its own.

Sincerely,

G. deSilvas, Santa Cruz

—

Dear Editor,

In response to those who wrote letters to the editor (1/29/09) voicing complaints about CHP’s article, “Gaza Conflict Demonstrates Campus Division,” I have one simple question: where is the power? Israel, with all of its military might and the backing of the biggest bully on the block, the United States, literally holds the people of Gaza captive. Although I do not purport to defend Hamas’ strategic modus operandi, the firing of rockets and mortars into Israeli territory has been met with extreme and utterly disproportionate force. Moreover, Israel’s response has shamefully targeted civilian populations that have no control over the actions of Hamas. As an imprisoned people, Gazans have nowhere to seek refuge. There is a cruel irony to leaflets that the IDF drops on civilian neighborhoods “warning” inhabitants that their homes will soon be subject to attack. This is nothing short of apartheid and fascism by the Israeli government. Meanwhile, the mainstream press in the U.S. does little but give the Israeli government a pass on behavior that amounts to war crimes. Therefore, I applaud any attempt by CHP to overcome this power imbalance in its coverage of how this terrible conflict plays out on the UCSC campus. If readers want to see more knee-jerk placation of the Israeli government’s behavior, there are plenty of outlets to choose from. Try the New York Times … or perhaps Fox News. But don’t for one minute pretend that this is an even-handed debate.

Robert P. Doyle, J.D.

Predoctoral Graduate Student

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

Dear City on a Hill,

I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the article in the music/arts section about Pete Seeger. I’d never heard of him, but his story makes me happy about our new leadership in Barack Obama (and overall a better country). I feel triumphant for our country in that we have been able to elect a black president, and that freedom of expression is as free as it’s ever been. The fact that this man was once blacklisted is shocking. It just makes me happy that he closed the inauguration with his music.

Jordan Topf

—

As a UCSC alumnus, I am saddened to see that the quality of CHP’s journalism has regressed considerably. I was taken aback by your feature article entitled “Gaza Conflict Demonstrates Campus Division,” which does not quote or even paraphrase the opinions or arguments of the demonstrators protesting in SUPPORT of Israel. It is an utterly one-sided article. To include interviews with all perspectives except theirs is bad journalism at best and propagandist at worst. As student media, you have a responsibility to give voice to ALL students — not just those your reporters happen to agree with.

Sincerely,

Zack Miller

—

My name is Marielle Basseri. I am co-president of the Santa Cruz Israel Action committee and would like to express my deep concern with CHP’s reporting on Wednesday’s demonstration.

First, you misjudged the number of people involved. There were far more than 30 people supporting Israel. Furthermore, reporting that “dozens” of people protested on the anti-Israel side suggests that side was the more populous. Why did you hazard a guess on the number of people supporting Israel but left the number of people opposing Israel to the reader’s imagination?

Most importantly, NO ONE from our side was interviewed in the article. Instead, your reporters exclusively interviewed the anti-Israel protesters and a person “in the middle.” How does this accurately represent what happened at the protest? How can you, in good faith, pretend to cover both sides of the issue, but actually only give voice to one side?

And finally, the Second Intifada — about which the anti-Israel protesters chanted favorably — is NOT a term “referring to the intensified violence between Israel and Palestine from 2000 to 2008” as you inaccurately reported. It refers to suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks against Israelis during those years. To miss that distinction is to miss the awful sight of UCSC students publicly advocating hate and terrorism. It also leaves readers wondering what exactly Mr. Oron meant when he was quoted as saying, “How can you be pro-peace and chant ‘Intifada, Intifada’?”

I ask City on a Hill Press to please release a statement correcting the article. I also hope CHP will improve the quality of their reporting and not continue to publish inaccurate, blatantly unbalanced news articles. I realize that CHP is a way for many students to learn the art of journalism; therefore I hope you take this opportunity to explain and teach the difference between shoddy reporting and journalism with integrity.

Thank you,

Marielle Basseri

—

Many in the Jewish community are concerned about not having a representative perspective in your paper’s coverage of the Gaza Conflict Demonstration. There were quotes from the CJP and quotes from moderate perspectives but no quotes from the pro-Israel silent protesters. Consequently the pro-Israel community is feeling marginalized.

Are we in such a state of social shock on this campus that the only voices which receive coverage are pro-violence groups? One of the silent protest group’s main goals was simply to show that students have a right to express alternative views without being marginalized and that this can and should be conducted with respect.

In response, we are planning to hold a pro-Israel rally at the Plaza where we are allowed to make noise. We will be doing Israeli folk dancing and singing. I will be speaking on some of the effects Israel going green is having on American electric car development, and much more.

Keith Tschudi

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters

I second your editorial “The Only Way To Know: Let The Journalists In.” It is crucial that journalists be allowed in to investigate the situation on the ground in Gaza. Israel should immediately permit the entry of the foreign press, something that should have happened from the beginning. By keeping out the media, the Israeli government may be gambling that once journalists finally do get in, the world attention will be focused elsewhere. But it is in the best interest of all involved to have the press covering events on the ground fully and immediately. Finally, despite the closure, there are several very dedicated BBC and Al Jazeera reporters who were already in Gaza before the Israeli invasion. They are doing an excellent job under the circumstances. Therefore there are some things that we do know. Since Dec. 27, over 1,180 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli army, half of whom were civilians, including over 350 children. U.N. schools sheltering civilians have been shelled on several occasions; U.N. aid workers and paramedics have been killed; three hospitals and the U.N. compound were bombed, destroying tens of millions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid. The Israeli army had the exact coordinates of these buildings and bombed them anyway. This is why the Red Cross, the U.N., and Human Rights Watch are all saying that Israel may be committing serious war crimes in Gaza. Yes, we need journalists in there ASAP, but there are some sources we can look to right now.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Journalists Need to tell the Story in Gaza

Dear CHP,

As I was walking around campus this afternoon, my eye was caught by the latest edition of City on a Hill Press. The cover is of an incredibly thin white woman with her manicured hand suggestively moving down into her underwear. While the article that was attached to this image was very good at describing women’s agency, sexual freedom, and self-determination, the picture both on the cover and in the article were nothing but degrading objectifications of the woman’s sexuality. These pictures present women as passive sex objects whose sexuality is only for the pleasure of her partner (which, given the nature of the audience who a woman is usually objectified for, is presumably a man). By showing a disembodied pelvis of some white model-sized beauty with fake acrylic nails, women are reminded that not only are they supposed to live up to unrealistic racist beauty standards, but also that their sexuality is always an object to be consumed. Additionally, the picture that was presented in the article does not look like a woman who is sexually empowered, but instead she looks scared, her shoulders hunched forward and her arms covering her private areas almost out of defense. This picture looks more like a woman being sexually abused rather than a woman reclaiming her sexuality.

Because this article was great at presenting sex-positive and empowering discussions about women’s sexuality, it is particularly disappointing that such degrading images were chosen to represent it. The move to dismantle sexist structures and to eliminate the objectification of women’s sexuality doesn’t just take place in written discourse, it must also be altered in the images put forth by the media. In the future, don’t objectify women’s bodies for the purpose of having people read your newspaper. Try something different and be creative about how to visually represent what women’s sexual freedom would look like.

Renee Terrebonne

Fourth-year, Feminist Studies and Sociology major

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: From Renee Terrebonne

Dear CHP,

This issue’s photo essay on fixed-gear bicycles seems to blame automobile drivers for all the accidents between bikes and cars. While there is blame on both sides, I see many fixed-gear riders blasting past stop signs, ignoring red lights, and riding at night with no lights. Is it really smart to ride a bike you are not capable of stopping quickly? In addition, the vast majority of fixed-gear riders do not seem to wear bike helmets (including the riders in all the pictures in the photo essay), which have been shown to reduce traumatic brain injuries by up to 88 percent. Fixed-gear riders need to take responsibility for their reckless riding habits.

Henry Symons

Third-year, Environmental Studies and Politics major

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: From Henry Symons

Dear Editor:

It is absurd and arrogant for a bicyclist who advocates riding without a brake to admonish drivers to share the road ("Ghost Bikes," CHP, Nov. 20).

Conspicuously missing from Toan Do’s complaint about drivers’ "utter ignorance for bikers" are selfish cyclists who endanger everyone else –pedestrians, drivers, and fellow bikers– by ignoring basic rules like stopping at stop signs, using lights at night, and in Do’s case, using a brake. In his complaint about recent car-bike accidents and deaths Do also failed to note that SF State freshman Lucien Gregg [1] was killed last January in an accident with a van on East Cliff Drive while riding a fixie purist style: brakeless and without a helmet [2]. While nobody can say whether or not Gregg could have saved his life with brakes, physics dictates that two or even one set of brakes clamped around a rim will stop a bike quicker than a backpedal or skid stop, which is why brakes were invented and are required by law. The

California Vehicle Code section 21201 (a) that says, "No person shall operate a bicycle on a roadway unless it is equipped with a brake [3]" is not the fist of a police state bent on taking away Do’s "utter joy" of biking. It is a social contract for mutual safety. Accidents happen because people break it.

Automakers profiled SUV drivers to shape SUV ads. They found that SUV drivers like the feeling of superiority they get from being elevated in a big vehicle and drive more aggressively than others [4]. A similar antisocial bent exists among many fixie purists who think it is cool to emulate the supposedly macho messengers who started the trend [5]. In citing his "love for the…adrenaline that comes with riding fixed-gear bikes" Do confuses public streets with a racetrack. Do has no right to endanger others in the public commons by inconsiderately forcing them to participate in an extreme sport. Brakeless fixies belong at events with athletes who choose to be there, not on streets shared by elderly, kids, and others simply going from point A to B.

I’m all for the joy of biking, which is why I biked solo from Maryland to Santa Cruz after finishing high school and regularly bike in town. But whether I am walking, biking, or driving, I will never share the road with a biker without a brake, nor will I heed a traffic scofflaw who has the audacity to tell me to drive safely. We cyclists have enough problems advocating for safety without fakengers bullying the scene. Put a brake on your fixie or get off our streets.

Sincerely,

Nigel Self

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: From Nigel Self

to whom it may concern-

your most current issue of city on a hill press presented a very controversial picture on the cover. the title of the issue is "getting off" – and it depicts a white female touching herself, indicating sexual activity. after reading the article and finding that it’s main point is females taking their sexuality into their own hands, i found that the cover picture did not match the topic at all. instead of empowering women, your cover simply promotes the subordination and sexualization of women. this is a faceless woman, who is objectified – i find that this disagrees with the message that you are attempting to convey.

i believe that in order to stop promoting such objectification within our society, we must start at the source. as your newspaper is a source of media, i felt it necessary to voice my opposition to it.

i appreciate your time,

gianna monardo

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letter: From Gianna Monardo