Police Attack Students Protesting UCSC Development Plan

damn. I heard fire sirens in the building where my class was, but I completely forgot this was happening and didn't bring a camera. I don't really feel so intensely about the LRDP given certain tradeoffs for allowing access for more students to the UC system, but it's not right to physically attack someone for climbing a tree. There is plenty of grassland space open for housing etc and there is lots of room for moving buildings to non redwood spots.

The grasslands are a protected area and their own unique environment. Stay off and out.

okay - brief report back. It looked really cool, and fun to watch. The police had left and gone to lunch, possibly to return later. 200 students were singing and talking, and there were three sits. During the interlude, sitters were quickly hoisting lots of supplies in backpacks. Someone was dressed up as a paper mache tree.
At the same time, that specific parking lot where this was is ugly, and is already paved. It happens to be where I find my nonmetered parking on Saturdays or Sundays if I have to come in, but it is a parking lot and possibly a good spot for any buildings. The 120 acre plan in upper campus is different, and potentially could be modified to favor tall dense buildings over removal of trees. Just look at some of the urban campuses and how they are able to allow plenty of students in while using a small physical space.

Finally students are doing something to confront this problem that doesn't simply involve a can of spray-paint. Having graduated and left Santa Cruz just this past year, however, I find myself wondering why more organized action wasn't taken earlier. With construction and development having been under way now for years, it almost seems like too little too late. Keep up the fight and good luck, but I can't see the UCSC campus ever being the same again as it was when I first came to the school in 2000. I'm glad that students are taking such a powerful stand against it now, before the pristine beauty of the campus is completely shattered. One thing that has been on everyone's mind, however, since the student protests against the Regents last year, is the futility of even trying to fight the powers that be in the UC system. It seems that the students seem to be on the loosing side of the battle more often than not. I know that all student and community activists out there are equally perplexed as to how to resolve this problem. Just stay peaceful and stay strong. Don't give them a right or reason to shut you up or knock you out of them trees!

it's admirable to see students finally getting off their stoned asses to address problems facing the university they depend on for their education. it's too bad that education is failing them for they do not appear fully informed*. let me say:

1) the biomedical building has been delayed indefinitely due to a poorly constructed EPA EIR and is awaiting an additional EIR. this could take up to five years. where were the students when this was first proposed? are they going to wait in the trees until then?

2) if everyone had just shut up and sat down, the cops would have left a lot earlier without the arrests and the pepper spray. students are allowed to show dissent as long as it is non-threatening and does not infringe on the education of their peers.

3) the LRDP, itself, has an injunction. there isn't enough water available to support UC growth beyond 2015. what took the students so long to take action? yesterday was the day to vote, there should have been something on the ballot if they were so concerned.

with those thoughts, i'm not into the UC expansion, nor am i into population growth. unfortunately, as the population grows, so must the education facilities that educate them. the only question i have is will the regents be bankrupt by the time expansions finally happen?

*based on conversations had with protesters at todays rally.

Under attack, filling the campus -- interesting choice of words.

People have been complaining about how the protesters were not fully informed as to all the details of the project. I was not involved in the protest but was in the area after the clash with the police. Some guy came up to me and questioned me about what was going on, and what was the big deal, etc, I gave what little info I had and pointed him towards a few people with clipboards that I thought could better answer his questions. I saw this same guy go onto a number of other people who seemed to have as peripheral of an involvement as I did in the situation. If myself and these other people are the basis for "the protesters" then, yeah, they are going to be uninformed BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT PROTESTERS. If you want to take a sampling of what the protesters know, you should determine if you are talking to some one who is there to protest. But thats only, you know, if you want to be accurate and stuff.

if the protesters are informed, bert, why are they rallying at a site where a building may never be built?

People need to start thinking more seriously about self defense at UCSC if the cops are going to keep attacking demonstrations like this. Time to start planning self defense workshops and to start bringing goggles, shields, and padded armor if people don't want the cops to be able to just end actions like this.

Some useful links for organizers:
http://www.devo.com/sarin/bodyhammer.html
http://www.blackcrosscollective.org/

here's something I'd like to bring up. I suspect I have very similar values and vision, but I'd like a supporter or participant to clarify the no-LRDP perspective on equity of access to the UC system, which can conflict in some ways with campus constructions.

A) UC should continue to admit 12% of the states graduating seniors, but Santa Cruz campus is least appropriate for growth. Merced isn't full yet
B) Santa Cruz should stay the same size. Racial/class equity can be achieved by using admissions criteria which recognize those with the highest potential instead of the privileged in high school.
C) Santa Cruz can increase in number but using existing buildings and a few new ones in better locations than the plan(there is lots of construction at the entrance to campus)
D) Shut the border. Zero population growth. Then work on equality within this society.
E) Access to higher education won't promote class equity. The non-UC Santa Cruz community has a right to say what is planned on this unique campus ecosystem (I'm pretty certain some 101.1FM speakers could fall here).

Here is why I am concerned. I definitely support democratic and scrutinized land use decisions. Poorly done places like San Bernardino/Orange County, exurban Tracy or east Sacramento are tragedies that will be terribly difficult to undo, and thousands will live diminished lives, frustrated in traffic living with dreary architecture. But at the same time, one of the things I really don't like about this state is the degree to which race and class are such overlapping concepts. Latinos and americans indians are probably the most underrepresented at UC, and that is exactly who would be excluded when fewer students are admitted (there were statements that opposing the LRDP includes the 4000 students, and not just the 120 acre plan). It's really easy to just ignore the existence of the cut-out students. An equivalent sort of thing is the existence of vast exurbs of working class whites and latinos who couldn't make it in California so they live in sub-prime doomed hell Chandler and Gilbert Arizona (more than 100,000 people each) or Las Vegas where there is no water. Those people should still be in California. I value grassland and forestland too, but where is everyone going to fit in a just society.
My solution revolves largely around medium-high density zoning. Much of the land adjacent to campus and Bay Street should allow houses to be sold and converted to apartments of 3 floors. Most of the current campus was done perfectly, in this way. Parking lots should be minimized, and they should run buses much more often on weekends/evenings. Santa Cruz can't turn into San Francisco, but right now there are lots of students living in odd garages and sheds in people's yards for high prices.

As I said before, I am not informed as to the full situation, that's why I wasn't protesting, but as I uderstood it the trees were to be cut down to make way for the building.
Your position seems to be that all the kids there are wasting their time by going out and making a big to-do by climbing up trees and throwing themselves in front of pepper spray. Taking a stand and making their voice heard by staging something that is this dramatic makes a point to the Campus. Irregardless of the bureaucratic nightmare that it sounds like surrounds and is standing in the way of expansion, the proposition of expansion is still on the table, and the students have a right to show that they don't want it to take place.
And climbing into a tree is a lot more impactful than a nicely written letter.

Nice handle btw.

.

-They show a girl jumping on a cops back and iassautling him as he was arresting someone.

-They show kids knocking over a barricade and moving forward after being told to disperse.

-They show lots of "peaceful innocent" protesters coming prepared with their faces hidden behind bandannas.


The film isn't supporting what people here are claiming about innocent peaceful students being attacked by cops.

These tree sits are not to prevent the logging of the specific trees they are in, or in protest of the bio-med research facility. The point is more to bring awareness to the issues that are at hand, to get more people thinking and talking about them so that we can come up with a better plan than the current LRDP. Where should the UC expand? Does it even need to expand? The protests need to take place now while there is still time to have meaningful debates on the subjects. Its about awareness, not some last ditch effort to monkey-wrench development.
I think that the protest actually went pretty well. When the march arrived, police and a weak fence had been set up. There was some scuffle getting to the tress, pepper spray and at least one baton swinging around, but we did get there and a good amount of supplies were hoisted up. I think the police noticed that we were not going to give up and they backed off, guarding just one tree for a while and then leaving altogether. More supplies and one more platform were raised.

The protest is being held there because 1.) it is a public space, open to everyone. 2.) because it is in a very accessible area, if it was held where expansion would take place then no one would even kknow that it is happening!

The reason the protestors had masks at that point was so they could avoid the pepper spray that was being used.

First off, Girl vs Cop doesn't seem like a fairly matched fight. If someone were trying to arrest my buddy for something that I didn't think was fair you bet I'd get in there and try to stop it.

Secondly, I don't know if anyone said either of the words "peaceful" or "innocent."

Thirdly, I wear a bandanna fairy often, hell, I was wearing one today. Does that mean I'm fixing to do something malicious? No.

Though the bandanna has become de rigour for any protest these days it has especially been attached to environmental protests. And with good reasons, the national government has decided that kids who take part in or become members of some environmental groups are terrorists, terrorists! With the prospect of someone opening up a FBI file on me for merely standing up for something that I believed in, you bet your ass I'd wear something on my face to protect my identity.

You wear a bandanna regularly, okay. You wear a bandanna to hide your face regularly? Doubtful.

Hey, I have nothing against people who want to protest and go up and protest. But I do take offense at the double standard of people who go to protest, prepare for unlawful and violent protest, and then squeal like babies when they get what's to be expected.


It doesn't seem like a fair fight, cop vs. girl? For starters, who said life is fair? For finishers, what gives her the right to jump on someone and assault them; cop or otherwise. She chose the fray, she wasn't forced into it. Deal with the consequences.


You'd jump in and help your buddy if he attacked a cop? Go for it dude. But there's a HUGE difference between a cop randomly attacking your buddy vs. a cop hitting your buddy when your buddy jumps on his back and assaults the cop.

It's called the real world kids; deal with it.

Did I ever say that I would help my buddy attack a cop? No.

If the students were prepared for violent protests as you say, wouldn't implements of violence, say like the ones that cops carried, also be in their hands? Or in your mind do protesters have the ability to blow things up with their minds, and therefore need no earthly weapons like pepper spray and batons?

This was no armed rebellion taking place on campus, the kids had no plans to tear down the buildings and kill anyone who stood in their way. This was an act of statement, not of force.

The real world is a messed up place where people on both sides of any line can get out of hand. It is also a place where people can congregate and make their voices heard, hopefully without the fear of violence to keep them quiet. If your real world doesn't involve anyone with dissenting views, I'll stick with my, apparently, deluded one.

If your buddy jumps a cop, and the cop smacks him down..how were you gonna "get in there and try to stop it"?.

As for violent means of protests in the protesters hands? (I'll call em protesters now instead of students, because as usual, I think the violent instigators aren't UC students, but instead people who come down and inflame the students, then melt away when the crap hits the fan, leaving the students to deal with the repercussions).

But as for violent means in the protesters hands ? How do you explain the tires slashed on the cars that were parked in those lots? I suppose the cops did that to create a cloud of confusion?

And don't waste your time claiming it didn't happen; I know the lady who's car had all 4 tires slashed.

hey Get Real let's see if you can follow this, dimwitted, republican, pro-cop aggression, pro develpment twit that you are - For starters, the world isn't fair - hence the protesting which you lie and say you have no problem with but clearly side with the pepper-spraying, baton-wielding losers in uniform that LIVE for this kind of day when they get to suit up and wear their thug-life riot-gear outfits and mean expressions and rep for the administration against a bunch of unarmed students. For finishers GR, it is the overreaction and violence of THE COPS that caused this - the protest wouldve been just fine had they hung back (but then how boring and sensible would that be?) and allowed the students their constitutional right to peaceful assembly and free speech. That said, you love them so much, i'm sure they're hiring folks just like yourself as we speak.

I was at the protest today, and I would like to note that there were many peaceful protesters involved, and not all were "temping" the police. In fact, many of us chose to sat down and simply observe the actions of the po. However, I was simply walking near a police officer when he pushed me in the breast and told me to back up. Is it ok that he used force on me? I would like to note that there was really no reason for the police to be there at all (in fact, without them, there probably wouldn't have been violence). All that we students were doing were practicing our right to assemble, our right to gather and protest what the university is doing with OUR money. Why were the police waiting for us? Why did they arrest the students climbing trees? Is it against the law to climb a tree?

I wonder if your intelligent enough to see the irony of the double standards in your posting, or if it's completely lost on you?

You're comfortable portraying me a as dimwitted republican. You're comfortable generalizing the UCSC PD as overreactive and living for violence.

....but you take offense at me suggesting that you're just as stereotyped and predictable? FUNNY STUFF.

Here's why I laugh at you: Upper middle class white kids, fortunate enough to get into UCSC. Then, with a year or two education from that facility, you decide you're intelligent enough to know what's best for everybody else, and that it's acceptable to force your opinion on us by means of protest, shutting down buildings and supressing free speech (Regents 06), etc.

You're a hypocrite! Yer as credible as a tool driving up in their car to educate me as how I should stop driving mine because fuel consumption is bad.

Wanna be credible? DROP OUT first and foremost. Otherwise, you're the nimby poseur I think you are.

As for it being the fault of the cops? Wake up and face reality. Because they didn't sit back and let the protesters do whatever they wanted, they're responsible for what happened? *LOL*. That's like saying that the bulls in Pamplona are at fault for goring the idiots who choose to run in front of them.

Wait wait wait, they are forcing their opinion on you by protesting? And yet you don't seem to have any qualms with the UC forcing expansion on us, the people who are going to be the most affected by the expansion?
If the expansion goes through, that means that you, me and every single person who lives in the vicinity of Santa Cruz is going to be affected. 4,000 more students means 4,000 more people vying for apartments, jobs, and public transportation and that's not even including the added staff members.
Look at where you're aiming your accusations before you let them loose.

you still want to claim the violent student/protester argument? check out the main picture that goes with the Sentinel coverage. http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/
That girl suuuure looks like she needed to get "put down".

1) Watch the 10pm newscast tonite; in which you'll see the same video footage I refer to in my earlier posts. They clearly show the protesters instigating the action which results in police response, not visa-versa.

2) Don't worry about my posts or opinion. Indybay is not a valid media resource, but rather a propoganda tool. As such, my posts will have been deleted by tomorrow, so they won't offend your sensibilities and you and all the other protesters can feel that everyone agrees with their viewpoint.

Viva La Revelucion! (But drop out anyway, to show your committment.)

I don't have a problem with other people disagreeing with me, I love a spirited debate. What I DO have a problem with is people who aim to be looking for a fight (why else would some one who looks down their nose at IndyBay bother to post in response to something other than to egg someone on to respond?), and I also have a problem with people who do so and don't even have the decency to attach their name to their posts, and hide behind the anonymity supplied by such a forum (and yes, Bert is my name.) Not to mention those who don't respect the laws laid down by the Constitution. Look it up sometime, its a fascinating read.

http://video.knbc.com/player/?id=181670

This actually has 5 minutes of quite decent unedited video of the spraying part and just before that. This link probably won't work after a week.

I think one of the things about this protest was that is being forgotten is that it was essentially a small attempt to combat the faceless bureaucracy that is the UC administration. The expansion of the Santa Cruz campus is a very real problem which will ulitmately effect the entire City. The addition of 4,500 students will not only enlarge the amount of students in already overfilled classrooms, it will make traffic around Mission, Bay, and High St. an even bigger nightmare, not to mention heightening the cost of housing which already reached a crisis point in Santa Cruz. The UC regents refused to listen to the dissenting voices of their own faculty, their student body, and the City of Santa Cruz, instead choosing to blindly follow an obviously faulty plan. Combine this with the fact that many of the corporations that will benefit from this expansion are closely linked to the Regents. I participated in todays actions because I believe that space belongs to the communities that inhabit it, and that the people who work live and work here have a better understanding of the academic situation a board of CEO's who manage to visit every couple of years. For my opinions and actions, I was sprayed with Mace by a police officer, I doubt that this was entirely necessary. I'm not sure if I would define my actions as peaceful or innocent, but I sincerely believe that they were Just.

First of all, the point of a demonstration is to disrupt every day life, to disrupt status quo in order to make whatever issue is at hand become a focus for a minute, thereby getting attention focused on you.

Next, I witnessed the arrests, as well as the pepper spray. The cops were out of line. In case you are unaware of this, mass media has a stake in giving a view of reality that supports the establishment, such as police, and so forth. The video you saw was indeed edited, and edited by someone, like I said, who has stakes in this.

additionally, I was pushed by a cops baton, instead of the cop asking me to move. I was nowhere I was not supposed to be, just walking by to bring food to the tree dwellers. This did not get on the news, as with the many other acts of violence I saw by the police.

Finally, back to my original point: if a protest does not disrupt the every day lives of every day people, than it does not do what it is supposed to do. The protest today was disruptive, but only minutely. The cops beating kids and spraying pepper spray is what made this protest such a big deal. So while the cops were entirely in the wrong, wearing riot gear for a bunch of hippies climbing trees for the love of god, and there were WAY too many of them, in spite of themselves, the cops inadvertently helped spur this protest on. I for one am kicked into gear and will be there as long as the kids are up in the tree: to disrupt (peacefully) and to make sure that I am a witness to whatever the cops try to do.

Also, instead of watching the news and deciding according to that, that the students were not peaceful, I am personally inviting you to join us and come see for yourself.

Paved parking lot. Masked, hooded protesters incite violence by using violence. Watch the video. They use steel barriers to shove their way in. Professing care for the redwoods, they stomp all over the earth, trample delicate roots already constricted by asphalt. Police, working class employees of the administration, ordered to protect the public, attempt to hold the line until the pressure is too great. Videos, camera phones record it all. Watch it. Minds made up, cannot be changed. Climbing trees is fun. I hope no one gets hurt. Think inner cities, reservations, farming towns have adequate health care. Who's going to supply that. You? Maybe you could help the future instead of playing in the woods.

I think what you are saying is that there are a lot of other problems in the world besides this LRDP and then imply that perhaps instead of being at the protest today I should do something to fix those other problems...

I believe that is a straw man, and I'm not going to justify it with a longer answer than: how do you know me, what do you know about me and why are you assuming anything about me, and why does being at one protest negate actions in the community elsewhere?

Hey Addy,
Is there anybody up in the trees still?

I had to leave for class. I will be back tomorrow to bring food and stuff and to check on them and also to maintain a presence. I hope they are still up there though.

that healthcare line really takes the cake! chopping down ecosystems to make a healthy world? hello? one of the most therapeutic things i've done lately is go to upper campus where they wanna build and take a nice hike. i even camped out one night, which is actually illegal. think just for a moment about it being illegal to sleep outside in a forest. before you go crying about Indian reservations, maybe think about the people who used to live here and how they lived and where in the fuck are people going to rehabilitate from their toxic inner city lives......the timing for this action is perfect with the recent berkeley treesits, the cause just and the protestors god fearing anarchists. god bless amerika!

rise up ye infidels!

I've noticed that this action was really unorganized, and also I have not noticed a lot of workshops focused on civil disobedience where we discuss what our rights are if the cops do arrest us, also actually practicing (ie role playing) what to do in situations when cops are getting physical. anyone want to talk about this more with me and maybe get some things started?

You complain about my egging you on? Is it that this site is only for posting by those who march in step with the party line? Not a place for those who dare disagree? Is it an open-posting website, as described, or a propaganda tool only for those who toe the party line, and not a media outlet to freely express one's opinions?

As for your complaint about how you use your name and others such as I don't? Laughable. Like using "bert" stakes your claim to credibility. Bert who? If it makes you feel better, call me Ernie.

(Curious how anonimity is an accepted tactic when you want to hide your identity behind bandannas while protesting, but unacceptable when one's viewpoint is questioned by someone who disagrees with it. Maybe you should complain to Indy Media though, and not me? It's their website and their protocol: "These comments are anonymously submitted by website visitors." I expect that there are far more posters who want their anonimity when fighting the power than there are those who want it when agreeing with it. Also curious that you seem to have no problem with the anonymous posts by Addy, DocFresh, and other anons when they share your viewpoint. I guess agreeing is acceptable, but dissent isn't? Great irony.)

As for your other problem; people looking for a beef and coming to your place to egg people on? Cool, so you DO understand how I feel about you and your fellow protesters actions on the campus yesterday!

However, ernie, you presupposed so much with your posts, and yet you actually say nothing. I would engage in a disagreement with you if I felt there was one. Also, addy is my real name. But I don't personally care about that stuff anyway. I'm wondering why you came to a place called Indy media with a clear left (the term 'left' being relative here in america) but at least a bias that is oppositional to the ten o'clock news.

Also someone made the point that Indymedia is not a good news source, and I would have to say that I agree. However, I take it with a smaller grain of salt than I do CNN or local infotainment news.

Your suggestion about dropping out and facing real life made me think about some things. Additionally referring to the students at the protest as upper middle class white kids also got me to thinking.

First of all, what do you think real life is? If you say working every day of your life, paying a mortgage and such, then please explain to me why you think that is real, and why you think it is somehow more "real" than going to school and getting an education.

Second of all, the generalization of us as upper middle class white kids, and then using that to negate our protest doesn't make sense. How does our class (which is assumed here, not known) make a difference? Also, the idea that the people in this country who get an education are all upper middle class and white is indicative to me of a deeper problem than expansion. It's a great way to suggest that the educated people in this country are rich and white, and the poor and non-white are ignorant. Would you call yourself ignorant, or do you consider yourself among the rich and educated? Additionally, most Americans tend to think of themselves in a class bracket that they are not-IE most working class people in America do not personally identify as working class. It's one of the primary methods of this system.

Finally, and again, why does class negate the fact that expansion is bad for this community, bad for the campus, and will certainly affect the quality of education that I'm putting myself into future debt for? I feel that way, hence I get out and protest. If you feel that it's great, hold your own little protest with signs that read "I support the status quo because I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about and I don't know the first thing about logic but I'm certainly going to attempt to use it, albeit incorrectly, to condemn the people who don't support the status quo? Also I'm going to continue to believe that I've got it good in a system that routinely fucks me over?"

Having said that, would you like to know my race and class?

What I think real life is: accepting that there are costs and consequences for each and every action, and that as adults we have to make a choice, abide by it, and accept the equal reaction to our actions.

I don't like growth or cutting trees either. But since UC is required, by a vote of it's citizens (which includes you and I) to have room to accommodate the top 12% of graduating students each year, I find it disingenuous for this years crop of kids to think they can decide they're going to stop the growth by climbing trees and slashing tires. Valid means, IMO, would include dropping out, as I stated, to show your devotion to the cause; it'll make room for someone else who still isn't in and wants in. Or stopping folks from having so many kids, or changing the law so UC doesn't have to let in 12%.

RE my statement about race and class? It's based upon statistical reality and first hand observation of the protesters. UCSC is a minimum of 48% white. All you have to do is check their student profile page to confirm that fact.

I was on campus today, I saw the faces..it's a sea of white with a sparse smattering of POC. Heck, the very pictures this site is linking supports that reality. Check a few pix such as this and tell me what's represented:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrmatthew/1914532785/in/set-72157603001737530/

I'd say it's 95% causcasian? I'm looking at 184 pix at that flickr link, and I'm having to hunt to find more than a few POC in the mix.

The ironic fact of the matter is that the most diverse group in the photos are the cops.

And you've misunderstood my point when you respond with this statement:

" Also, the idea that the people in this country who get an education are all upper middle class and white is indicative to me of a deeper problem than expansion. It's a great way to suggest that the educated people in this country are rich and white, and the poor and non-white are ignorant." "Finally, and again, why does class negate the fact that expansion is bad for this community, bad for the campus, and will certainly affect the quality of education that I'm putting myself into future debt for?".


My point is that it's arrogant and selfish of a small group (less than 2% of the campus student population if indeed all 300 protesters were actually students. More likely 1%, or 150 of 15,000 students) to presume that they speak for the rest.

My point is that a small group of white kids who were fortunate enough to get in think they can decide for thousands who aren't in yet that they have the right to decide for everyone else that it's too big.

My point is that your arrogant if you think you speak for the "community" or the "campus".

My point is there are probably a few thousand high school students of color who would be happy to come up here and tell you to shut up and let the UC build a spot for them.

You don't have the right to speak for thousands of high school age POC who's opportunity to attend UCSC is being negatively effected by your actions.

You don't have the right to speak for me, certainly. I'm an alum, and I've lived in this town for decades.
In my mind? The campus is more mine than the students up there right now claiming it's theirs. They're recently arrived squatters who'll have moved on and be gone in another year or two.

Tell you what: I'll hold the sign you suggest for me if you hold one that reads "I'm a pretentious twit who thinks they speak for everyone, and is willing to deny an education at UCSC to the generation in line behind me becausse growth is bad.....but its easy for me to say that cause I already got accepted."

When should we hook up and exchange signs?

(And no thanks, I could care less about your race or class; it's irrelevant, because again, you only speak for yourself, not everyone.)



-

I specifically said I don't speak for anyone but myself. Again your logic is twisted if you think that by protesting something I am against that somehow I think I am speaking for thousands of people. I am speaking my mind. That's the point.

additionally, and again, I'm still not sure why class and race negates activism.

You said : "Finally, and again, why does class negate the fact that expansion is bad for this community, bad for the campus"

Your statement, printed verbatim, shows you apparently speaking for the community. You've made an assessment, and a statement, and imply that you speak for many.

If you said "I think it's bad"...different story.


And I again invite you to refute my claim that the protesters are almost entirely the white kids I say you are. I've shown you the pix to back up my statement; show me yours? Where are the POC? IMO, it's nimbyism. You're in, so the trees are more important than the underrepresented POCs who could benefit by UC expansion. Convince me it's otherwise by showing me that they support this cause? Until then, I'll stand by my statement that this is a protest by the entitled at the expense of the future of the disenfranchised.

And could you please point out to me where you say that you've specifically stated that you only speak for yourself? I can't find that quote by you in any of your posts in this thread. I only see the one where you appear to speak for the campus and the community.

That is what I said. I can unpack that very convoluted statement if you need me to.

Exactly how will bringing more students in, when we are already not providing sufficient housing, when we don't have enough TA's for the classes, and classes are already huge help UCSC? In what way will this benefit the community, and the campus? I know you don't want to speak for the community or the campus, so answer carefully.

You say they don't supply enough housing. I'll respond that they supply a higher percentage of housing for their student population, around 50%, than any other UC in the system. Check it out. I'll also point out that the average junior or senior doesn't want to live on campus; they want to live off and in a place of their own. Maybe we could have the UC build more though, and require students to live on campus all 4 years?

...how do you think that would be received by students?

You say classes are already huge. I'll respond by saying it's hard to reduce class sizes when people are protesting to stop the construction of facilities. Seems sort of obvious to me.

I'll stand by my original premise: I don't like the growth either, but it's the responsibility UC has been charged with to have space for 12% of the graduating seniors in CA each year...and that number keeps growing.

Solutions, IMO, are plentiful:

-Put a ballot referendum up and let UC only have space for a lower percentage; but that's not very palatable. It'd cut off primarily low income and POC first-generation applicants who typically come from lower quality high schools and have lower grades/eligibility.

-Stop having kids and stop people moving to CA. Neither one is likely to happen.

-Drop out yourself to show your commitment. If the 400 kids who protested growth Wed. dropped out tomorrow, that'd have a significant impact on the crowded dorms, classes, and need to grow for next year.

-Deal with the reality, as unpalatable as it is.


...but trying to paint the desire/need to grow as an evil plan by corporate demons in high towers is a juvenile pipedream, IMO. I think you're looking for villans to point your fingers at because that's an easier solution than dealing with the difficult choices of the true situation.

stop speaking for the community!