Robert J. Naples, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Student and Campus Life, responded to a letter of concern submitted by UCLA-SPME Chapter Coordinators, Prof. Leila Beckwith and and Bert Raven, concerning the scheduling of a program on the Israel-Lebanon war, scheduled for the first night of Passover. What follows is Professor Beckwith’s response to Vice Chancellor Naples and his response to her. Despite Prof. Beckwith’s pointing out that the program was in violation of policy regarding University and Departmental sponsorship of events, Naples claims it is a student event and then adding…

While several University departments are supporting the event, the University is not in any way endorsing any of the speaker positions. There also is no representation that any of the speakers are speaking on behalf of the University. Under these circumstances, the University’s actions are fully consistent with the law and policy.
****************************

Dear Professors Beckwith and Raven:

I just read your letter expressing concern with a planned campus activity. I have also taken the opportunity to discuss the matter with Mike Cohn, whom you copied on your letter.

Let me attempt to address your concerns in the order in which you state them. You point out that the conference is being organized by a student with funding from the Campus Programs Committee of the Program Activities Board. As you may know, the Campus Programs Committee of Program Activities Board funds requests for monetary events that will enhance the cultural and/or educational mission of the University as demonstrated by the contents of the proposal submitted by a registered
campus organization. As I intend to follow up with the PAB advisor, I would encourage you to express your concerns to the sponsoring academic departments as well.

I believe that conducting a conference of this nature on the 1st day of Passover is unfortunate and displays a lack of sensitivity. In facilitating such an event, however, there is no University policy that
would restrict an event from taking place on any religious occurrence of any denomination.

If the intent is to have a balanced educational endeavor, it is apparent that the sponsors have missed an opportunity to maximize that endeavor. However, even if the intent was to present a one-sided or bias activity, it would be allowed to occur. As a public institution, UCLA is subject to all of the prescriptions and proscriptions embedded in the First Amendment. In that regard, we do not determine who may or may not speak on our campus on the basis of the viewpoint of the speaker; even if we were inclined to make viewpoint judgments, the law will not permit it. Accordingly, we do not prohibit speakers from expressing viewpoints which many, and oftentimes most, of our campus community find uncomfortable and occasionally heinous. May I remind you, that you would have the same opportunity to publicly present your, or differing perspectives, should you desire to do so.

I will ask the advisor who has been working with Ms. Livescu to share your concerns with her, including that there be a public apology at the opening of the conference for scheduling on Passover, and an acknowledgement that the perspectives presented at the conference will be those of the
organizers.

I appreciate your bringing your concerns to our attention. I hope that you appreciate that position we are taking is the one that is most compatible with the role and responsibility of a public university such as UCLA.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Naples
Assistant Vice Chancellor, Student and Campus Life

—–Original Message—–
From: Leila Beckwith
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:25 PM
To: Naples, Robert
Cc: Cohn, Mike
Subject: RE: conference

Dear Vice-Chancellor Naples,

We thank you very much for your very prompt reply to our concerns, and your acknowledgement
of the insensitivity of the timing of the event and the failure of the organizers to maximize the
educational potential of this event. We appreciate the delicate position of UCLA as a public university and its required respect for academic freedom and for the 1st amendment. However, given that 3 departments have given their official names to this event, and perhaps even public monies, this is not an issue of Free Speech of individual professors or students. The issue is whether this event,
since it is sponsored and promoted by UCLA departments, is speaking in the name of the University and using the resources of the University to advance a political —-rather than educational—agenda. A political agenda by academic units of the University, using University resources, violates State Laws, Directives, Standing Orders and Policies of the State of California, as summarized below:

1) Article IX, Section 9, of the California
Constitution (since 1879) provides that the
University “shall be entirely independent of all
political and sectarian influence.”

2) California Education Code Section 92000:
a) The name “University of California” is
the property of the state. No person shall,
without the permission of the Regents of the
University of California, use this name, or any
abbreviation of it or any name of which these
words are a part, in any of the following ways:
1) To designate any business, social,
political, religious, or other organization,
including, but not limited to, any corporation,
firm, partnership, association, group, activity, or enterprise.
2) To imply, indicate or otherwise suggest
that any such organization, or any product or
service of such organization is connected or
affiliated with, or is endorsed, favored, or
supported by, or is opposed by the University of California.
3) To display, advertise, or announce this
name publicly at, or in connection with, any
meeting, assembly, or demonstration, or any
propaganda, advertising, or promotional activity
of any kind which has for its purpose or any part
of its purpose the support, endorsement,
advancement, opposition, or defeat of any strike,
lockout, or boycott or of any political,
religious, sociological, or economic movement, activity, or program.
b) Nothing in this section shall interfere
with or restrict the right of any person to make
a true and accurate statement of his or her
present or former relationship or connection
with, his or her employment by, or his or her
enrollment in, the University of California in
the course of stating his or her experience or
qualifications for any academic, governmental,
business, or professional credit or enrollment,
or in connection with any academic, governmental,
professional, or other employment whatsoever.
c) Every person violating the provisions of
this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

3) Directive issued by Clark Kerr, President of
the University of California, September, 1961:
“University facilities and the name of the
University must not be used in ways which will
involve the University as an institution in the
political, religious, and other controversial issues of the day”.

4) The Policy on Course Content of The Regents
of the University of California, approved June
19, 1970 and amended September 22, 2005: “They
(The Regents) are responsible to ensure that
public confidence in the University is
justified. And they are responsible to see that
the University remain aloof from politics and
never function as an instrument for the advance
of partisan interest. Misuse of the classroom
by, for example, allowing it to be used for
political indoctrination… constitutes misuse of
the University as an institution.”

5) Excerpt from a letter from UC President
Charles J. Hitch to members of the Committee on
Educational Policy dated September 11, 1970:
“There are both educational and legal reasons why
the University must remain politically neutral.
Educationally, the pursuit of truth and knowledge
is only possible in an atmosphere of freedom, and
if the University were to surrender its
neutrality, it would jeopardize its freedom.
Legally, Article IX, section 9, of the State
Constitution provides in part that “The
University shall be entirely independent of all
political or sectarian influence and kept free
therefrom in the appointment of its regents and
in the administration of its affairs…”

6) Directive issued by Charles J. Hitch,
President of the University of California,
September 18, 1970, “Restrictions on the Use of
University Resources and Facilities for Political
Activities” (still in effect):
1. “The name, insignia, seal, or address of
the University or any of its offices or units
shall not be used for or in connection with
political purposes or activity except as
consistent with University regulations.”
2. “In correspondence, statements, or other
material relating to political activities or
issues, the University title of a faculty or
staff member shall be used only for
identification: if such identification might
reasonably be construed as implying the support,
endorsement, or opposition of the University with
regard to any political activity or issue, the
identification shall be accompanied by an
explicit statement that the individual is
speaking for himself and not as a representative
of the university or any of its offices or units.”
3. “University equipment, supplies, and
services—duplicating machines, telephones, mail
and messenger services, vehicles, computers,
stationery, and other equipment, supplies or
services—shall not be used for or in connection
with political purposes or activities.”
7) Academic Personnel Policy (APM) 015 –
Faculty Code of Conduct: Types of unacceptable
conduct: “Unauthorized use of University
resources or facilities on a significant scale
for personal, commercial, political, or religious purposes.”

Sincerely,
Leila Beckwith
Professor emeritus in pediatrics

and
Bertram Raven
Professor emeritus in psychology

Professor Beckwith:

Thank you for your further comments. Please understand that the conference is an event of The Comparative Literature Graduate Student Group at UCLA, not a University event. While several University departments are supporting the event, the University is not in any way endorsing any of the speaker positions. There also is no representation that any of the speakers are speaking on behalf of the University. Under these circumstances, the University’s actions are fully consistent with
the law and policy.

Sincerely,
Bob Naples