From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: Santa Cruz Indymedia | Education & Student Activism | Legal Support | LGBTI / Queer | Police State and Prisons | Racial Justice | Womyn
Administrators Back Off from 3 yr. Suspension of Prominent Activist
by UC Activist Defense Committee (contact[at]
Friday Jun 8th, 2007 2:29 PM
June 8, 2007
Administrators Back Off from 3 yr. Suspension of Prominent Activist
Student Mobilization Ensures Alette Kendrick’s Future at UCSC as Deal is Reached

SANTA CRUZ, CA – On Wednesday, May 30, black student activist Alette Kendrick and the administration of the University of California, Santa Cruz reached a landmark deal ensuring Alette’s future at the school. While the administration had previously announced their intention to suspend Alette for 3 years, she will now only be suspended for the Summer and Fall Quarters – returning to UCSC next Winter. Acting Vice Chancellor, Jean Marie Scott signed off on the deal Friday, June 1.

The day before, the University was notified of Alette’s intention to file a writ directed at the university for denying her legal representation within a closed-door formal hearing process. While administrators had stalled for months, a lawyer from the University of California responded immediately, hammering out the deal by dinnertime Wednesday.

The deal, as agreed to on May 30, includes:
• Suspension of Alette for the Summer and Fall Quarters – returning next Winter. During suspension, she will be banned from campus.
• 100 hours of community service
• 2 quarters of ‘stayed’ suspension – a sort of probation where if she is accused of violating university policies again, she could be suspended for another 2 quarters.
• A general apology, similar to the one she read at the Santa Cruz County Courthouse on May 22, not referring to specific accusations but apologizing to anyone hurt by her actions on October 18, 2006.

On Thursday, May 24, over 500 members of the UCSC community joined faculty member Angela Davis and others in a protest at the Chancellor’s office where Acting Chancellor George Blumenthal insisted he would not take prompt action, regardless of whether the process was “fair or unfair.” This rally was the culmination of a whole Week of Action, including the flooding of administrators’ voicemails, faxes, emails, and mailboxes with messages of support for Alette, a mock-trial and mock-pie-ing of administrators, and consistent efforts to inform the campus community about the intermingling of racism and political repression in Alette’s case. The deal was negotiated less than a week later.

Alette Kendrick was racially and politically targeted at a student speak-out against the UC Regents on October 18, 2006. Her supporters include the United States Student Association, UCSC’s Student Union Assembly, the African/Black Student Alliance and over twenty other local and national organizations. Acknowledging the University’s ongoing practice of racism and political repression, supporters vow to continue working towards a safer environment for people of color and activists.

# # #

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by Message from Alette (fwd by friend)
Friday Jun 8th, 2007 11:36 PM
Hey everyone,

I know that last time we said we had big news, and i’m sure some of you have heard by now. But here’s the story- I’ll be returning to school next winter quarter!!

Less than a week after the rally the university called and said they wanted to negotiate. For the two violations of “interfering with a public assembly” and “resisting arrest,” i’ve been suspended through fall quarter, but will return in the winter. The scheduled judicial hearing was canceled and all other allegations dropped.

This is a true testament to the power of solidarity. It is only because so many students, workers, faculty, and outside supporters came together through letters, petitions, phones calls, and donations to support this effort. It is because of all of our voices together on May 24th that this victory was gained! And this is no small point to forget. Thank You!

Yet just as important to remember, is that there are still nine other demands on the petition you’ve all signed. It’s true i’m not being suspended for three years, but this concession doesn’t mean all the issues we’ve discussed here have gone away. The struggles faced by communities of color on this campus continue everyday, and I strongly urge and hope you’ll all continue to support those struggles in whatever way they manifest themselves. An obvious point being the campaign for an Ethnic Studies Program on our campus. The Ethnic Studies Committee (formed by students) is working hard to make it a reality and could use all of our support!

Don’t let the university forget that we’re still here and we’ll keep fighting for what’s right!

by gareth
Saturday Jun 9th, 2007 4:57 PM
what were alette's actions on October 18, 2006?
by &
Sunday Jun 10th, 2007 6:31 AM
It is certainly good that Ms. Kendrick was not suspended and is expected to return next winter, but that is the best that can be said about this settlement. Since Kendrick did nothing wrong and was in fact viciously and brutally singled out in a racist manner and dragged and beaten by the thug UC police, who also used pepper spray on all of the students, all at taxpayer expense, there is no reason for any suspension from campus probation, community service (also known as slave labor), and threats of more suspension from campus, and to top it all off, another apology for doing nothing wrong.

This whole settlement as well as the threatened 3 year suspension, the pepper spray, the probation for 2 others for doing nothing wrong, and the very existence of the Regents rather than having all UC campuses be part of the state university system, such as San Jose State University, under the state Department of Education, is further evidence that UC is just a rich folks' finishing school. No tuition has been lowered; no military contracts have been cancelled; and UC is still a separate entity. According to the list of supporters, we saw no vote from UC's academic senate on Ms. Kendrick's threatened suspension or any of the demands. This whole institution is rotten to the core and as a taxpayer, I resent paying for any of it.

My advice to Ms. Kendrick is to spend as little time on UC Santa Cruz's campus as possible when you return to school as it is not a good atmosphere at all. You can get your teaching credential at San Jose State University and then you will have the dubious thrill of teaching in our rotten public school system, one of the worst in the world. This decline did not just start; it received its biggest push toward decline in 1978 with Prop 13, and a corresponding cut in the progressive income tax, or tax the rich, so that the schools were starved for money and no worker has money to donate to a school and get a tax writeoff which is how the rich kids' public schools survive. And then, as a teacher, you can ask the parents why they do not protest, why they keep voting for the Democrat-Republicans who promote the rotten school system. The decline, by the way, started in the 1960s, as the war against Vietnam escalated as we cannot have guns and butter.
First, one correction, Kendrick was suspended but just for 2 quarters instead of 3 years. In fact, she should never have been suspended or put on probation at all. This is outrageous.

The demands are from and follow:

No academic repercussions for Alette Kendrick! The University should cease all attempts to suspend, expel, or further injure Alette.

A formal apology to Alette and the communities of color on campus for the institutionalization of racially motivated targeting, arrest, and assault.

Financial restitution to all students who suffered injuries from the police brutality that occurred on October 18, 2006.

Ban the police use of pepper spray, tasers, and all forms of chemical weapons on campus

Immediately stop surveillance and infiltration of student and worker organizations

The immediate resignation of UCPD Officer Brian Hughes, who has a long history of violent and hateful behavior against students and workers

Dismiss the Demonstration Response Team and the Demonstration Planning Report

Creation of an Ethnic Studies Program and tenure for all faculty of color, both of which have been traditionally denied within the institution

Quarterly student town hall meetings with the Chancellor & other administrators beginning Fall 2007

Fundamentally rework the University judicial process so as to guarantee due process, a jury of one’s peers, and protection against double jeopardy.

AND, to this you should add, abolish the UC Regents, put UC in the same state university system as San Jose State, et al, in the state Department of Education, with the same academic requirements, with the goal being open admissions to all high school graduates and no tuition at all, guaranteeing more ethnic and class diversity. We do not need rich folks' finishing schools at taxpayer expense, nor any undemocratic governing board such as the UC Regents.
by Ike Solem
(ike_solm [at] Sunday Jun 10th, 2007 9:34 AM
It's important to recognize that the direction of the UC and the UC Regents have taken over the past few years (or more) is toward turning the University into little more than a privatized corporate research park. The fundamental legal framework that has allowed this to take place is tied to patent and intellectual property laws.

Research done with public dollars should be available to all companies in California under non-exclusive royalty-free licensing agreements, rather than being put under the control of private interests.

The current administration, however, is entirely devoted to the 'corporate-university partnerships' concept. However, the relationship is more like the 'partnership' that existed between masters and slaves on Old South plantations. The current arrangement leads to proprietary research, an aura of secrecy which promotes scientific fraud, and professors whose primary agenda is making a buck, rather than doing research and teaching students.

Not only this, it has lead to lack of support for all areas of the university that do not produce profitable, patenable research - arts, social sciences, and many areas of physical science.

The University does not want to see these issues subjected to public debate, nor do the UC Regents. They don't want to discuss how the current administrative culture at the university is destroying academic integrity and the free and open exchange of information.

As part of this overall strategy, they are attempting to crack down on all dissent, whether it be Students Against War or any other group that opposes University policy and the UC Regent's agenda. Many of the UC Regents are tied to private interests that hope to control all research and patents produced by the University.

For more on this huge problem, and how the situation arose, see Jennifer Washburn's excellent book, "University, Inc.: The Corporate Corruption of American Higher Education (2005)".
by did it
Monday Jun 11th, 2007 6:00 PM
If you really want to make an impact on the UC the fastest way is to go to school somewhere else that puts teaching over money first. If students stop coming to UC's, they lose money, they go broke, they change or vanish. As long as people are willing to fork over the money to go to a UC they will continue to do what they are doing. Take your money elsewhere and see what the impact to the UC system will be. Use their thinking, "money talks!"
by public money
Monday Jun 11th, 2007 7:11 PM
This does not cut it: "money talks!"

The University of California is a public university paid for by the tax payers, right. Students will continue to seek an education through the UC schools. We need to make the UC, a public institution for higher education in California, serve the people, not the corporations.
by -
Tuesday Jun 12th, 2007 4:49 PM
The state, year after year after year, has reduced its funding of the UC system.

The amount of funding that each campus recieves varies somewhat, but on average, the campus gets less than 2/3 of the money it takes to educate a student from state fees, federal fees, and tuition. The beakdown is something like:

.27 cents per dollar of cost to educate a student comes from the state.
.25 cents per dollar of cost comes from tuition.

...and then there's a .48 cent per dollar, or 48%, deficit. And the campus' have to raise that money from private and corporate donors.

And we as taxpayers are the ones who continue to vote "no" on bills that would fund the system. We are essentially requiring the campus' to become semi-private entities that are beholden to corporate donors.

So go vote "yes" next time were asked to fund public education, and THEN we can own it and tell it what we want it to do. Or vote "no" on govt. officials who don't support the funds for public education.

But at present, were hypocrites who don't fund the system, require it to go beg for its own money from big business, and then complain that its become too corporate and too wed with big business.

by Roknich
(roknich (at) Sunday Jun 17th, 2007 9:02 AM
UCSC makes a profit each year - in 2004, it was approximately $US500Million, and over the years it has illegally accumulated a
war chest totalling over $5 Billion that was designed by the legislature to provide a FREE college education for citizens of the state.
An accounting was done in 2004, and protests waged.
The impact on the local real estate market and the "complexion of the campus" was revelaed.

Has this been forgotten?
It is no less true today, and with the attempt to divert funds designed to pay fair wages to custodians, the crime spree of the USCS administration continues.

Hold the criminals accountable. Each day they are allowed to profit from the public coffers, and nures their young at your expense they grow more deadly.

The details of the "accounting" can in found in the archives of Santa Cruz Indymedia at about the time of the Tent University, and there is no doubt in my mind the the light cast on the illiciti money trail is what brought down the hammer on a seemingly harmless festival of protest. (though of course, there were many ancillary issues -:) )
by Ms Mirror
Thursday Jun 21st, 2007 9:33 AM
Maybe all of the UCSC students who keep demanding a radical transformation of the entire UC system should consider something:

Why do you keep giving them your money?

Why would you give money to racist, sexist, imperialist, nuclear weapons producers?

If you really believe that UCSC (and all UCs) should be just like San Jose State, then why do you put yourself so deeply in debt to go to UCSC? Save some $ and go to SJSU!

You claim that UCSC is just some "rich kids finishing school" but you JUMPED at the chance to go there! Every one of you could've EASILY gotten in at SJSU, but for some mysterious reason you chose UCSC.

How come people don't take you seriously? Maybe because you're self-righteous hypocrites who always point fingers at everyone but yourselves.

Or is this part of your super-secret extra-radical strategy to change the system from within?
by macdoodle
Sunday Jun 24th, 2007 12:35 PM
well. to respond to the comment above. or see how a bigot warps logic. im disbeld and find even inthe disbeld community there is much seperation and segregation..not dev delay or blind ...a dull knife lops us off to the wrong side of the divide and conquer.. dont try to change anyhting. you should never consider your to have equal rights adn opportunities everywhere.. what are you thinking? youve got some pretty damned high expectations us instead of state wehn your black/disbeld /hispanic /etc etc.. ( AND when the republicans are in charge?!) there are seperate places fro you.. and who would want to be in sant cruz,when they could be in san jose? i mean, really... that must be hypocritical casue you must have been reaised poor and prefer the middle of state to the beach which we all know is for the white peoples.. im white with freckles. am i allowed to prefer uc to su ? especailly considering the below.. or would getting the degree id prefer in a palce i'd rather live also be hypocritical?. sorry for typos..disbeld no accessibel typing avail
by Betts
Monday Jun 25th, 2007 2:15 AM
Hi, I have read this story with horror and outrage at this treatment of a student(s) by campus 'police' and by your own governing bodies! I wasn't able to find any information from the Acting Chancellor or UCSC Regents to explain their position or justify what was done - not that I expect it will be convincing but being over here in England (but American) I would like to get a wider picture, can anyone fill me in? thanks
by scmoderate
Monday Jun 25th, 2007 9:38 AM
The activist in question was involved in an effort to trap policemen and university workers within a campus building as part of a protest. While I support their basic issues with the UC, the protest was not handled well. When the police used force to get out of the building (what the hell did the organizers expect?), the activist Kendrick resisted and bit an officer on the leg. There has been an effort to portray this as "racial" due to Ms. Kendrick's skin color and because two other people, who were apparently white, were not cracked down as hard on by the UC.

However, not ONE person on this board has ever claimed that the other two activists bit or attacked police officers, nor has anyone ever denied that these events took place. So, to the logical person, why should two people who DIDN'T attack police officers get the same punishment as someone who DID? A person who has ADMITTED these acts and apologized to the police and UC for them? In other words, while it is good to be skeptical of the corporate media, never assume that the versions of events one finds on Indymedia are an accurate portrayal.
by scruzman
Monday Jul 9th, 2007 11:26 AM
Did she really bite the cop? I think you get in trouble for that.