#students of color
“We have been waiting for Napolitano to come… and finally she is here, but she is hiding, she remains in one building and does not leave…where she says she is doing her “listening and learning tour” behind doors with only a certain number of students, but you know this is bullshit because she is hiding and for what? What does she have to hide from us? We must ask ourselves this because if she is hiding she is not hiding alone… the regents are behind her… they are not innocent either… they continue to violate student rights like Napolitano continues to violate human rights because even if she is not the head of homeland security department anymore what she has done continues to impact our lives today and this is something we will not forget no matter how hard Napolitano and the regents try…” –S. R.
Nearly one month ago, on February 13th 2014, upwards of two hundred and fifty people congregated at Sproul Plaza to protest Janet Napolitano’s appointment as UC President. News of the last campus visit on her “listening and learning” tour brought us together to mobilize weeks in advance. Leading up to the day of her visit, we circulated a letter demanding her immediate resignation and the democratization of the UC President and UC Regents selection processes. A multitude of student and staff organizations endorsed the letter and committed to participate in the day of action.
There is a great deal of speculation and misinformation concerning the day of action organized by the Student of Color Solidarity Coalition. Although this is not the first action we have taken–our first action protesting Janet Napolitano’s appointment took place in the Fall semester, on the day of Chancellor Dirks’ inauguration, at which Napolitano spoke–we feel that it is necessary to bring clarity to the events of this day. We are taking this opportunity to connect to the local and the statewide UC community and beyond, to those who were watching closely, sending us their support from a distance. We are issuing this statement in order to share what happened during the day of action and the takeover of the Blum Center so we can reflect and formulate future strategies.
At the end of this post, we provide a link to personal statements written by participants from the day of action. Since each person experienced the day of action differently, we believe that these narratives are absolutely essential to understanding that day.
The Rally
The action kicked off with the rally in Sproul Plaza, facilitated by student organizers from the SCSC and was attended by hundreds of students from different communities. On the speakers’ list were Roberto Lovato from Presente.org, the Bay Area historian Gray Brechin, and youth from 67Sueños that performed a song about deportations and violence at the border. Not long after the speakers’ list closed, students began to march to Sutardja Hall. When the march reached Memorial Glade, UAW grad students spoke and led chants outside of Doe Library. Shortly after, the march continued on to the building in which Napolitano was meeting with twenty students behind closed doors. As we reached the area we gathered outside of the Blum center, where students had just successfully executed a building take-over and reclaimed the space outside as our own, making speeches, talking about next steps, and most importantly waiting for those in the meeting to walkout.
Why Students Walked Out
On the last stop on her “listening and learning tour”, Napolitano chose to meet with only twenty undergraduate students in a small conference room on the 6th floor of Sutardja Dai Hall. Fifteen of those students decided to make Napolitano listen to them, organizing a plan to subvert her tour. Napolitano’s office required the list of students that she would meet with weeks in advance. Leading up to the meeting, however, Napolitano changed her schedule multiple times. Moreover, students were lied to about who would be checking ID’s at the door–they didn’t realize it would be so highly policed. It was clear that Napolitano was prepared to meet resistance.
Within the meeting, students spoke from lived experiences, forcing Napolitano to sit, witness, and endure their truths, not giving her an opportunity to justify her actions. Students took turns reading their personal statements to her: student narratives of being undocumented, Muslim, queer, sexual violence survivors, low income, first generation college students. They explicated why her presence on campus is a threat to their communities and an insult to the entire student population. After everyone around the table spoke their piece, they walked out to drive home the message that we are not interested in engaging in conversation with an individual who has caused so much pain to our communities, we were not there to negotiate or work with a human rights violator nor with any of the individuals who impel the privatization and militarization of our campuses. We are fighting to reclaim our university and we want them out.
The Take-Over
The Blum Center take-over on February 13th marked the first successful building reclamation on the UC Berkeley campus since the struggles against the fee hikes of 2009 and 2010. Janet Napolitano spent her entire visit at the private labs of Sutardja Dai Hall–so why didn’t we take over that building instead? In order to gain strategic advantage, we felt that attempting to take the massive and highly securitized Sutardja Dai would be futile and thus should be avoided. Instead, we chose to exert social power by reclaiming a more strategic building. We chose the Blum Center because of its symbolic significance: it embodies corporate interests and forces of global imperialism (“The Center for Developing Economies”, seriously?) and it was funded by the UC Regent Richard Blum, one of the main profiteers of the UCs investments on construction projects. Blum was a key player in the selection of Janet Napolitano as candidate for UC President, and in her eventual appointment.
Why We Chose the Blum Center
Opened in April of 2009, the Blum Center For Developing Economies was made possible by the $15 million donation of the San Francisco based financier Richard Blum. No regent, or private businessman has ever before had private offices on UC campuses. His private equity firm, the $7 billion Blum Capital Partners, owns the largest real estate firm in the world, BC Richard Ellis, of which Blum is chairman of the board. He is also a major shareholder of one of the largest for profit education companies, Career Education Corporation. There is very strong evidence indicating that he owns border-town maquiladoras that build weapons components for the US military.
Blum is one of a number of UC Regents who specialize in leveraged buyouts and privatization of publicly traded companies. They have long practiced this same basic business philosophy on the university. The Regents have effectively pledged student fee increases to the capital bond market, thereby creating a financial incentive for the Regents to continue raising fees, in a scheme that raises money for campus construction projects and contributes to the profitability of for-profit education companies. URS Corporation–a company that Blum partially owns and that made $1.5 billion on contracts awarded by Feinstein’s Senate military construction committee–has been the main contractor for the largest university capital projects in recent years: UCLA’s $150 million reconstruction of Santa Monica Hospital, UC Berkeley’s $48 million nanotechnology laboratory, and Berkeley’s $200 million Southeast Campus Integrated Project, which includes a seismic retrofit of Memorial Stadium and an expansion of the Haas School of Business — the building that was originally slated to house the Blum Center for Developing Economies.
It must be emphasized that Richard Blum was the driving force in choosing Janet Napolitano as the new UC president. In fact, Blum and a very small number of Regents, including Monica Lozano, a board member of Bank of America, and Russell Gould, the former vice-chairman of the 2008 crisis connected Wachovia Bank, are those responsible for the central decisions of the University. These associates–or cronies–of Blum have the most to gain from the gradual death of public education, since their banks will continue to lend to the UC and their construction companies will continue to get priority bids for new projects. Who better to facilitate the continuation of this process than someone who spent the last few years heading one of the largest institutions of social control in the country?
Why We Chose to Leave
We held the Blum Center for 25 hours–the longest building take-over in decades. How could we just get up and leave? What would make staying worth it? What would make leaving worth it? We never expected to stay so long. We were prepared to be arrested by the police within a mere few hours.
Still, making the choice to leave was not easy. Throughout the time the Blum 11 spent inside of the building, the ASUC President and the Dean of Students tried convincing us to leave the building. Our choices were not influenced by promises of amnesty, although organizers did demand amnesty for all participants in the direct action. Each decision we made was informed by care for each other and a consciousness of our group’s capacity both inside and outside the building. We knew that what we were doing needed to be seen within a long term strategy, and that at this moment our demands needed to be clear and widely circulated. We also came to recognize the limits of our capacity. After dusk, the police made dispersal orders on a speaker every hour, notifying protesters that they were trespassing. All night, police in riot gear were shining lights into the Blum center from the next building, making their presence seem bigger than it actually was and causing panic among protesters. Those on the outside were forced to stay vigilant due to police activity and to their commitment to put their bodies on the line to protect those of us inside. On top of that, it rained all night long. Enduring 25 hours of uncertainty, of endless panic, was emotionally and physically exhausting to people both on the inside and the outside–especially on the outside, where the care work was carried out.
Although there were disagreements on how much longer we should hold the building, after intense deliberation we decided as a group that the best next step was to exit the building on February 14th at 5:00pm. Coming to a consensus doesn’t mean that everyone feels the same way–it means that everyone listens to each other and compromises according to the group’s needs. So what had we accomplished? Indeed, we sent a powerful message: we are here, we are growing and we are pushing the limits of what resistance on university campuses looks like. We hope that we set an example of what it will take to change the UC. Holding space was necessary to gain visibility for our movement and prolong our resistance, but it was also strategic in that we were able to critically engage with students and community members who previously had no knowledge of Napolitano’s despicable record, nor of the collusion of the UC regents with private interests.
What We Learned From Our Experience
We learned a great deal from our mistakes, as well as from our accomplishments. One rookie journalist attributed the organization of the action to the ASUC, completely erasing the extensive energy and dedication the SCSC put into planning and executing this action as a student of color led coalition not associated with the university. We received criticisms that we were in the wrong building, as if our intent was to chase down Napolitano and engage her. We have stated that we refuse to negotiate with her. It was on our terms, not Napolitano’s, that the UC administration would be forced to hear us. Students from the SCSC infiltrated the meeting with Napolitano and walked out in a swift, symbolic move to show that we were not interested in speaking with her–speaking with Janet Napolitano on her terms would only legitimize her position. It was unnecessary to be in the same building as Napolitano, to make an attempt to resist under such controlled conditions. The real student power and democracy manifested outside, not behind closed doors in an exclusive meeting.
There were certainly moments when unexpected problems arose. Our responses to them brought to us many lessons that made our experience richer. Now we are creating ways to strategically move forward, adjusting our strategies to focus on how best to achieve the structural changes necessary, in ways that will allow student, faculty, staff and community participation in the decision-making processes of the Public University. As our numbers continue to increase, we know that we have to us the potential of student power to build a base and be able to accomplish what it will take to make that happen.
Ultimately, we realize that there was nothing the university could have done to make us fail. We have succeeded. We accomplished more than we expected. We set a new standard for direct action. From here, things will only escalate until our demands are met.
The Aftermath
The SCSC continues to organize against Napolitano and unveil this so-called “public” and “progressive” education system’s inner workings. We are now in a period of coalition building in order to sustain the momentum created on the day of action. This requires a great deal of collective self care so that we don’t burn out. The UC Berkeley organizing community is not alone in this fight against Napolitano and the Regents. All across the state, even the nation, people are beginning to see what steps will be necessary to make the university safe and accessible for all communities. We know that the fight will be difficult, but it is not impossible. It’s a matter of holding steadfast to our principles, and continuing to challenge the increasing injustices being done in our educational system.
This post was originally published by The Student of Color Solidarity Coalition on February 11th, 2014
September is National College Savings Month, ScholarShare to Award 20 $500 529 Accounts During the Month of September
PR15:28
9/1/15
Contact: Drew Mendelson
916-653-2995
ScholarShare
916-651-6380
SACRAMENTO –ScholarShare, California’s 529 college savings plan, is celebrating National College Savings Month with a College Savings Pledge. Starting today, Tuesday, Sept. 1 through Friday, Sept. 25, Californians who take the pledge will enter for the chance to win one of 20 ScholarShare 529 accounts each in the amount of $500 for their child or loved one. The pledge is aimed at encouraging young children to aspire to go to college – whether that is a community college, four-year university or trade school – and educating parents and guardians about the importance of saving for college and the benefits of California’s 529 plan.
“The great equalizer between the haves and have nots has always been education. However, stagnant wage growth coupled with an explosion in college tuition has pushed that education out of the reach of many California families. Early, steady savings are among the best ways to restore the affordability of a college degree. Parents can open a ScholarShare 529 account with as little as $25 and make a college education – and its many benefits – a real and affordable opportunity for their children,” California State Treasurer John Chiang said.
Now through Friday, Sept. 25, eligible Californians can take the College Savings Pledge at www.CollegeSavingsPledge.com. Twenty winners will be awarded a $500 contribution to a new or existing ScholarShare 529 account, for a California student between the ages of 3 and 14. The teachers of the designated beneficiaries will also receive a $500 Visa gift card, to help support their efforts in inspiring children to dream big and go to college. Additional details about the College Savings Pledge, including the Official Rules, can be found at www.CollegeSavingsPledge.com.
The ScholarShare College Savings Plan is California’s state-sponsored 529 college savings plan, and was recently ranked second in the top direct-sold 529 plans for three-year performance by www.SavingForCollege.com. Since its inception in 1999, ScholarShare has grown to more than 266,000 open accounts with over $6.4 billion in total plan assets. In 2014, ScholarShare helped California families meet their higher education needs, with nearly $300 million withdrawn by families to pay for qualified higher education expenses.
ScholarShare offers a diverse set of investment options, and provides tax-deferred growth and withdrawals free from state and federal taxes when the funds are used for qualified higher education expenses, such as tuition and fees, books or even certain room and board costs. Any U.S. citizen, or resident alien with a valid Social Security Number or Taxpayer Identification Number, can open a new account, for as little as $25. Through ScholarShare’s “Give a Gift” option, parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles and friends can open a new account as a gift or make a gift contribution to an existing account. ScholarShare has no annual account maintenance fee, no income limit and offers a high maximum account balance limit.
To learn more about California’s 529 plan, please visit www.ScholarShare.com.
About the ScholarShare 529 College Savings Plan:
ScholarShare accounts may be opened with as little as $25. ScholarShare has no annual account maintenance fee, no income limit and offers a high maximum account balance. Established in 1999, ScholarShare currently holds more than $6.4 billion in assets in more than 266,000 accounts as of 8/14/15. To sign up for an account or for more information about the plan, visitwww.scholarshare.com. For information about the ScholarShare Investment Board (SIB), visit www.treasurer.ca.gov/scholarshare. Like ScholarShare on Facebook at www.facebook.com/scholarshare529 and follow us on Twitter at @ScholarShare529.
Named for the section of the IRS code under which they were created, 529 plans offer valuable tax advantages. Contributions are made with money that has already been taxed. Once funds are placed in the account, investment earnings, if any, are not federally or state taxed, if withdrawn to pay for qualified higher education costs.
Consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses before investing in the ScholarShare 529 College Savings Plan. Please visit www.scholarshare.com for a Program Disclosure Booklet containing this and other information. Read it carefully.
Before investing in a 529 plan, you should consider whether the state you or your Beneficiary reside in or have taxable income in has a 529 plan that offers favorable state income tax or other benefits that are only available if you invest in that state’s 529 plan.
The tax information contained herein is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties. Taxpayers should seek advice based on their own particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor. Non‐qualified withdrawals may be subject to federal and state taxes and the additional federal 10% tax. Non-qualified withdrawals may also be subject to an additional 2.5% California tax on earnings.
Investments in the Program are neither insured nor guaranteed and there is the risk of investment loss.
The Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote (APIAVote) is a national nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that encourages and promotes civic participation of Asian American Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) in the electoral and public policy processes at the national, state and local levels. APIAVote envisions a society in which all AAPIs fully participate in and have access to the democratic process.
The APIAVote Internship Program strives to encourage and cultivate young AAPI student leaders to explore a career in the public sector or the political arena. This internship program will also provide hands on experience and training on how to organize and implement voter activities to increase the participation of AAPIs in the electoral process. For the Summer of 2015, we are offering paid and unpaid internships.
INTERNSHIPS AVAILABLE
The internship program is tailored per organizational needs and intern skills. Interns may work on any of the following areas: Communications/Technology (new media and traditional), Graphic Design, Field (working with APIAVote partners to mobilize for elections), Research and Policy (research and advocate for policy recommendations), Training (Norman Y. Mineta Leadership Training Institute), or Youth (engaging and organizing our youth coalitions).
In addition, applicants selected for these internships will collectively work on the implementation of APIAVote’s Young Voters campaign. This will include identifying, recruiting, and training student organizers to implement voter engagement activities and developing campaign materials for 2016. General Internship: This internship is opened to any student looking to support APIAVote’s various programs.
Requirements for all Internship Applicants:
College or graduate student
Leadership abilities
Oral and written communication skills
Dedicated to promoting civic participation of AAPIs in the electoral and public policy processes
Applications must include:
Application form
Resume including Education, Work Experience, Political Experience, Extracurricular Activities, Awards/Honors
Copy of most current academic transcript
One page typed essay on your interest in the internship program and describe “What does civic engagement mean to you and how do we increase it among AAPI young voters?”
Two letters of references
FELLOWSHIP
The Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley brings together researchers, community stakeholders, policymakers, and communicators to identify and challenge the barriers to an inclusive, just, and sustainable society in order to create transformative change. The Haas Institute serves as a vibrant network of researchers and partners advancing research and policy related to marginalized communities, touching all who benefit from a truly diverse, fair, and inclusive society. The Haas Institute General and Law Summer Fellowships are fourteen weeks part-time paid internships (pay rate based on educational degree or year in school) running from May 20 to August 21. Two separate fellowship programs are offered: General and Law.
The General Summer Fellowship Program 2015
The General Fellowship Program will take place May 20 to August 21, 2015. All undergraduate, graduate and professional students who are interested in social and racial justice are welcome to apply. Applications are due March 1, 2015. (Details below)
The Law Summer Fellowship Program 2015
The Law Summer Fellowship Program 2015 will take place May 20 to August 21, 2015. All undergraduate, graduate and professional students who are interested in social and racial justice are welcome to apply. Applications are due February 20, 2015. (Details below)
Applications submitted after the dateline or without a cover letter and writing sample will not be considered.
2015 General Summer Fellowship Program
Application dateline: March 1, 2015
The information below is for the General Fellowship program. We are also accepting applications for Summer Law Fellows.
The Opportunity
The Haas Institute Summer Fellowship is a 14-week part-time paid internship (pay rate based on educational degree or year in school) that runs from May 20 to August 21. All undergraduate, graduate, post-doc, and professional students (domestic and international) are welcome to apply. International applicants must cover and arrange their own visa, travel, and accommodations expenses.
Responsibilities
Summer fellows will work on a wide range of projects relating to marginalized groups, racial equity, and social cleavages such as race, LGBTQ, disability, religion, socio-economic disparities, new and emerging research on local and regional governments, and Global North/Global South relations. In particular, summer fellows are expected to assist and work on research and policy analysis; extensive statistical, data and financial analysis; literature reviews, bibliographic annotation; writing for reports, memos, discussion papers, journal articles and book chapters; planning and coordinating meetings, conferences, and other speaking engagements including preparation of presentations.
Commitment
All summer fellows are expected to:
Work at the Haas Institute office on the UC Berkeley campus, or remotely based on project’s needs and individualized work plan;
Have a commitment to social and racial justice, and civil liberties;
Work approximately 20 hours per week for fourteen weeks (May 20 to August 21).
Minimum Qualifications
Bachelors, Masters, professionals or doctoral students (completed or in progress), or equivalent combination of education/experience;
Experience with Microsoft Office suite, including Word, Excel, and Power Point;
Excellent verbal and written communication skills;
Self-starter with ability to initiate and complete work with limited supervision;
Ability to prioritize tasks and meet deadlines.
Preferred Qualifications
Familiarity with data collection, data maintenance and institutional analysis;
Facility for writing and copyediting content that is geared for the Institute’s outreach efforts to stakeholders such as media, policymakers, partners, community organizations, and other audiences.
Knowledge of data science and data visualization;
Knowledge of financial data analysis.
To Apply
Please email your resume and cover letter, and a writing sample—no more than 5 pages (a single PDF file preferred) describing your experience and why you would be a good fit for this fellowship. Please send your application to the Haas Institute Summer Fellowship Program Committee at [email protected] before 5pm of March 1st, 2015.
Applications submitted after the dateline or without a cover letter will not be considered.
——Download Haas Institute General Fellowship Summer 2015 Information.
Please share this widely! OCA-Greater Los Angeles<http://oca-gla.org/> is hosting an APIA U Leadership Training at UCLA on February 7th for college students. All college students are welcome. The training focuses on self-awareness, team-building, and direct action organizing.
Register for free today! https://ocanational.site-ym.com/?APIAUstudentreg
