text:
|Deletions are marked like this.
|Additions are marked like this.
|Line 487:
|Line 487:
''2011-12-06 19:07:23'' [[nbsp]] Protest first, ask questions later! --["Users/NickSchmalenberger"]
Currently: There will be a General Assembly at 6pm in Dutton Hall on Tuesday, December 6. Teach-ins and the occupation of Dutton Hall continue this week and next week (finals week).
A police officer casually pepper-sprays peaceful, seated protesters, 18 November 2011. Photo by Louise Macabitas, used with permission.
In mid-November, a group consisting primarily of students began to gather on the UC Davis campus to protest tuition hikes, express solidarity with the Occupy movement, and to protest the November 10 police response to Occupy Cal, where protesters had been beaten with batons. This group, tentatively referred to as Occupy UC Davis, began with a November 15 rally. On November 17, tents were set up on the Quad, following the model of Occupy protesters around the nation. The protesters were informed that they were not permitted to stay on the Quad overnight, but camped out anyway. The events that occurred the next day between the protesters and the police put UC Davis under international scrutiny and provoked an immense reaction, both within the University community and in discussions around the world. One of the officers involved became a momentarily famous pop icon representing the abuse of authority, and the ramifications locally put campus law enforcement and the administration into a position of having to account for their decisions and actions, with a large outcry for the Chancellor to resign.
UCD Police Pepper Spray Seated Protesters
On November 18, 2011, UC Davis Police were dispatched to the Quad to break up the Occupy UC Davis protest because some people were camping out in violation of university policy. Some protesters sat in a circle around some tents and linked their arms and legs. The police tried to break the circle, without success, by hitting them with batons. They then stepped over them into the circle (entrapping themselves) and damaged the tents by hitting them with their batons. People removed all the remaining tents. Then shortly after 3 pm the UC Davis Police sprayed the seated non-violent protesters with chemical riot control agents. Photos (click here) and video (click here), now published by major media outlets around the world, clearly depict UC Davis Police Lt. John Pike pepper spraying protesters who are seated with their arms linked. Pike sprayed at close range, in the protesters' faces, using several spraying passes that ended up coating the protesters' faces with pepper spray. A second officer who has not been publicly identified, seen in this video, joined in spraying the protesters. Under federal legal precedent, the use of pepper spray on nonviolent trespassing protesters violates their civil rights and constitutes excessive force.
The pepper spraying of peaceful students provoked intense emotional reactions around the world. Within 24 hours, there were public calls for the resignation of the UC Davis police chief and chancellor. Students, faculty, staff, and the public at large expressed their outrage, and thousands came out to support the protesters at subsequent events. Within a few days two separate inquiries began into what had actually occurred, and the university announced it would pay for the immediate medical bills of injured protesters.
Explanations and Immediate Aftermath
Initially, officials essentially claimed that the officers were defending themselves. UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza stated that the officers' safety was a concern. She told the Sacramento Bee that "There was no way out of that circle . . . They were cutting the officers off from their support. It's a very volatile situation." Video evidence proving otherwise quickly went viral. At approximately 2:10 in this video, for example, you see that Lt. Pike calmly and without any opposition stepped over the ring of protesters, exiting the circle. He then began spraying them in the faces a few seconds later.
The day after the pepper spraying, Chancellor Katehi interview told the L.A. Times, Katehi that she authorized police to remove the tents, but not to use the pepper spray in the manner shown on the video — "Absolutely not." At a news conference Saturday, UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza said the decision to use pepper spray was made at the scene. In this video, an unidentified officer can be seen talking on a cell phone and then apparently relaying a message to Officer Pike (3 minutes and 40 seconds into the video). A moment later, Pike walks up to a student named Case, to warn him that he will soon be pepper-sprayed. This turn of events raises the strong possibility that the officers at the scene may have very well been following direct orders as opposed to coming up with the decision on their own. A portion of the conversation between Pike and Case is discernible in some of the videos of the incident and has been transcribed:
Pike: [Walks up to Case. Speaks directly to him for about 8 seconds. Nearly inaudible on video.]
Case: You're going to shoot me? You're going to shoot me for sitting here? Hey officer, is that what you said?
Pike: Yes.
Case: Officer, is that ... [garbled audio]
Unidentified Male Protester: He just said yes.
Unidentified Female Protester: Shoot You. He's going to shoot you.
Case: Alright. Just making sure. Just making sure.
Pike: [pats Case on the back] I'm telling you right now.
Case: You're shooting us for sitting here?
Pike: [garbled ]... That pepper spray gun... [garbled] [pats Case on the back again and starts walking back to the rest of the police]
Case: No, that's fine. That's fine. You're shooting us for sitting here.
On November 23 Katehi stated that she only told the campus police "to remove the tents or the equipment." She stresses that she told them "very specifically to do it peacefully, and if there were too many of them, not to do it, if the students were aggressive, not to do it. And then we told them we also do not want to have another Berkeley" (referring to the UC Berkeley protesters who were jabbed with nightsticks the week before, spurring the Occupy UC Davis movement).
Additional details emerged ten days after the initial incident when Linda Bisson, Chair of the Academic Senate, e-mailed UC Davis faculty. According to Bisson, Chancellor Katehi was meeting with the Executive Council of the Academic Senate at the time pepper spray was deployed against protesters. Katehi told the Executive Committee that she had asked for the tents to be removed and that this was happening as they were being told of her decision; there was no consultation with the Senate regarding this decision. Katehi assured the Executive Committee at that time that although the police had been told to remove the tents, she had clearly instructed them to do it peacefully and without force unless physically threatened or attacked (thus substantiating the claim that Katehi made on 11/23). Bisson stated that the Chancellor was seated next to her and that she did not receive any communication from the field. At some point during the meeting the chancellor was called to the hallway. She soon returned, and her report of what had happened was identical to the statement she subsequently made to the press. When Bisson asked the Chancellor the next day (Saturday) about that statement, the Chancellor said that she had repeated what she had been told by her staff concerning the events of the quad, and it was not until later that she saw video of the event herself.
Man in a Gray Suit?
Bisson's email to faculty also noted that many people had asked her about a man in a gray suit standing with the police and filming the crowd. Bisson said she asked the Chancellor about this man, but that the Chancellor told her that she does not know who that individual is nor why he was filming the crowd. One speculation is that he was monitoring the protest in order to have a record of who was there, as had been alleged with earlier protests. Anyone with information about the man in the gray suit might wish to contact Linda Bisson at <lfbisson AT ucdavis DOT edu>.
Do you know who this person is or why he was there?
The Silence Heard Round the World
One of the most powerful, memorable moments to spring from this incident evolved from a press conference scheduled by Chancellor Katehi and the campus Police Board for the afternoon of November 19. By 4:00 pm, the scheduled time for the press conference, some six hundred protesters had gathered at the campus television studio. The conference began as planned, but ended within about 15 minutes. Davis Patch reports that Ms. Katehi remained inside the building for two hours with police representatives, while members of the public were escorted out. Apparently, Ms. Katehi feared for her safety if she left the building. As detailed in this account, mediators spoke with Ms. Katehi and the protesters, and those gathered outside agreed to remain silent during Katehi's departure.
As seen in this video, at approximately 6:50 pm, almost three hours after the conference began, Katehi walked from Surge II to her waiting car through a stunning and remarkably moving silence. Following what has been called her walk of shame, Katehi responded to a reporter's question, saying that she would address students at the General Assembly planned for Monday. Police remained two blocks away during her departure.
Rolling Heads or Paid Vacations?
On 20 November 2011 two of the officers involved in the incident were placed on paid administrative leave. The next day, campus police chief Annette Spicuzza joined the list of officers on a university-funded vacation. Katehi also said that she would have a task force of faculty, students, and staff convene immediately and give a recommendation in 30 days, rather than the 90 days she had specified the previous day.
November 21 Rally
The rally from a helium balloon. Thanks to Stewart Long, Liz Barry, MicheleTobias, and Alex. Photo CC-By-SA Public Laboratory.
On November 21, the Monday after the incident, an estimated 6,000 students, faculty, staff, and community members showed up for a rally on the Quad. Many speakers took the stage, including Ms. Katehi, who spoke for about two minutes. Choking up a bit, she pointed to a sign that said "November 17, 1973," telling the crowd that she remembered that day. It turns out that Katehi was present at a Greek university on that day when a revolt was violently put down. The event brought attention to her recent role in having the police return to Greek campuses.
Following the rally, the university issued a press release announcing chief Spicuzza's placement on administrative leave. In the release Katehi also took "full responsibility for the events on Friday." It also stated that Katehi had called on the Yolo County District Attorney to investigate the use of force on protesters. The District Attorney agreed to conduct an investigation in conjunction with the county sheriff's department, but after a brief review of the issues they wrote a letter asking Attorney General Kamala Harris to take over the investigation; see this Vanguard article for more details.
Continued Community Response
On 22 November 2011 there was a General Assembly on the Quad at 11 AM. There was also a Town Hall in Freeborn Hall from 5 PM until around 7:40 PM, open to all students, faculty and staff; a recording of part of the meeting is here. The Chancellor made opening remarks, followed by questions and comments from the community. UC Davis announced that the Chancellor has asked Acting UC Davis Police Chief Matt Carmichael to work with the Yolo County District Attorney's Office to drop all criminal charges against the 10 individuals — nine of them students — who were arrested on November 18. Also, UC Davis has decided to pay immediate medical and emergency bills of students who were pepper-sprayed by police. A second Town Hall meeting for faculty and staff was held on November 29.
General Strike of November 28, 2011
At the November 21, 2011 General Assembly there was a vote of 1729 for and about 30 against the motion for a General Strike for Monday, November 28. At least 56 other universities honored the strike. The San Jose Mercury News liveblogged the event; it is very detailed and covers events at the other participating UCs. Occupy California gives a briefer timeline.
The Occupy UC Davis movement used cell phones to help coordinate actions; anyone could text Text "UCDACTION" to 23559 for updates on major strike actions.
The poster at the right identifies the ARC as the location of the Regents Meeting, and calls for students, faculty, and staff to begin assembling in front of the building by 7:30 AM. However, the Davis Enterprise reports: "Whether any appointed regents actually will be on campus remains up in the air... because their presence likely would prompt additional security... it's up to each regent to choose which venue to attend." Indeed, the only Regents to attend were the student regents. The Enterprise article also notes: "People entering the ARC facility should expect metal-detecting security wands and possible pat-downs." If so, there's a question of why they would work to prevent violence when none has occurred — or even been threatened — by any students or Occupy supporters. It's a bit like patting down all attendees of a survivors of violence meeting.
Here is a rough timeline of the day's events: Public comment was taken in the ARC from 9-10 AM; video is here. The UC Office of the President insisted that a tuition increase was not on the agenda for the meeting, and indeed, it was not. Students began the day by unfurling a banner that read "Solidarity against the 81 percent fee increase" outside the ARC. By 8:50 AM, about 50 students were waiting to get into meeting. By noon, protesters had shut down the meetings at UCLA, UCSF, and UCD by making enough noise so that the meetings could not continue. Most protesters then proceeded to the Quad for a General Assembly, and then to the financial aid building, Dutton Hall. About 500 students occupied the building. A big banner over the front door read, "General strike, no more fee hikes." Nathan Brown conducted a teach-in inside. It should be noted that the Regents meeting reconvened, and despite claiming to be on the side of the students, they voted to raise several administrator salaries as much as 22%. Yudof and the Regents also continued to blame state disinvestment, rather than acknowledging legitimate concerns voiced during public comment about bloated administrative salaries, mismanagement of funds, investment of student fees in capital projects unrelated to academic instruction, fee hikes in excess of those necessary to compensate for state cuts, etc.
Teach-ins were held all day and continuing throughout the week — see schedule of teach-ins on this Google doc and flyer below. Please note that the flyer below does not include all scheduled workshops and the Google doc is much more comprehensive. Also, times and dates may be updated/changed, topics may be added, etc., so check back from time to time if you are interested.
"Independent Investigation" of the events of 18 November 2011
Appointment of William Bratton to lead fact-finding effort
William Bratton, former Los Angeles Chief of Police, was appointed as an Independent Investigator by UC President Mark Yudof. However, many faculty have written letters objecting to Bratton's appointment, saying that his background shows that he endorses, implements, and promotes the very same militarized security policies responsible for the initial violent suppression of peaceful protesters last week. They are also concerned that this was a person picked by Yudof. In other words, they are concerned that this will not be a truly "independent" investigation. Instead, the investigator should be picked with input from members of the community (students, staff, and faculty) and should report to members of the community.
Here are some calls for a truly independent investigation:
California Scholars for Academic Freedom — "We petition for an independent investigation of these actions to be conducted by faculty senate members and student representatives appointed by their own assemblies from the UC system free of administrative intervention or oversight."
Reject appointment of Chief Bratton to review police brutality at UCD — A Change.org petition that anyone can sign; "we find powerful evidence indicating that Bratton endorses, implements, and promotes the very same militarized security policies responsible for the initial violent suppression of peaceful protesters last week."
Appointment of Cruz Reynoso to Lead Task Force
On November 28, 2011 President Mark Yudof announced that he was appointing former Justice of the California Supreme Court and UC Davis School of Law Professor Emeritus Cruz Reynoso to lead the task force investigating the events of November 18, 2011. Chief Bratton will still be doing a fact-finding investigation that will report to this task force.
The other members of the task force appointed by President Yudof are:
Patrick Blacklock, Yolo County administrator and immediate past chair of the Cal Aggie Alumni Association;
Peter Blando, business services manager, Office of the Vice Provost — Information and Educational Technology at UCD, and past chair of the UCD Staff Assembly (nominated by the UCD Staff Assembly);
Alan Brownstein, professor in the UCD School of Law (nominated by the Academic Senate);
Tatiana Bush, undergraduate student and former Associated Students of UCD senator (nominated by ASUCD);
Daniel M. Dooley, senior vice president of external relations in UC's Office of the President, designated systemwide administrator for whistleblower complaints, and a UCD alumnus;
Penny Herbert, manager of the UCD department of clinical operations and staff adviser to the UC Board of Regents;
Kathryn Kolesar, chair of the UCD Graduate Student Association (nominated by the GSA);
William McKenna, UCD law student (nominated by the Law Students Association);
Carolyn Penny, director of International Law Programs and principal and mediator of the Common Ground Center for Cooperative Solutions, UCD Extension (nominated by the UCD Academic Federation);
Eric Rauchway, professor in the UCD history department (nominated by the Academic Senate);
Judy Sakaki, vice president of student affairs in UC's Office of the President and former vice chancellor for student affairs at UCD; and
Rebecca Sterling, undergraduate student and former ASUCD senator (nominated by the ASUCD)
UC Davis' web page shortly after the incident. If this is civility, I'd hate to see what happens when this community loses its cool. Upload new image "Cell updates.jpg" Just a portion of the crowd at the noon rally on the quad, 21 November 2011.
Second officer?
The second police officer who pepper sprayed non-violent protesters. He was supposedly suspended for his actions, along with John Pike. Can you identify this man?
This photo clearly shows the second officer as being an "A. Lee." There is an Alexander P. Lee who works for the UCDPD as a "security guard" but that might not be a sworn position so it might not be the same person.
This image was distributed as a poster prior to the November 21 rally. It is freely available to replicate and modify, and you can contact its creator for a blank version. An 18" x 24" color print is $23 at Kinko's; black and white is much cheaper. UCD Reprographics might also be cheaper.
Personal accounts
A timeline of how the news spread on twitter and how the national and international media started to pick up on the story
Prof. Jonathan Eisen from UC Davis on the day of the spraying
Prof. Jonathan Eisen from UC Davis on the "Press Conference" and the protests outside
"They Told Me They Were Gonna Shoot Us" Kase Wheatley Pepper Sprayed UC Davis Protester — video of interview
Reaction and Petitions
General Reactions
Flowers on the Quad on 2011-11-20. Photo by Suzanne Phan, used with permission.
UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi has written a letter (full text below) stating her view that the encampment was a health and safety threat. The letter does not specify the nature of this threat. In addition, it seems strange that her main concern was removing the tents (considering how much she claims to support freedom of speech), since the riot police maced protesters AFTER the tents were no longer in the area.
An online petition calling for the California Attorney General to arrest Lt. John Pike can be signed here. Alternatively, you can also contact Yolo DA Jeff Reisig at http://www.jeffreisig.com to make sure this kind of criminal behavior is not tolerated.
UC Davis Professor Bob Ostertag has written about the militarization of police forces. A broader examination of the system of militarized responses to protests provocatively starts with "feeling bad" for John Pike.
Arthur Shapiro, UCD Distinguished Professor letter to Linda Katehi can be found here.
Peter J. Richerson, professor emeritus, in an open letter to Katehi
Why I'm not visiting UC Davis in April by NYU Professor Alexander R. Galloway
A response from UCD Physics Professor Jim Crutchfield.
Professor Nathan Brown set up an Amazon Wishlist where people can buy tents, presumably for the Occupy UC Davis movement.
Cynthia Ching wrote an open letter apologizing to the students on behalf of the faculty for letting administrators and not teachers run the campus.
Support for Campus PD and use of pepper spray coming from the Davis College Republicans.
Letter from Women and Gender Studies Dept. (Content: 11/20, Pub. 11/21, )
UC Davis School of Law (Published 11/21)
Faculty and staff of the Linguistics Department and Graduate Group (Published on 11/22, but but was the content written before or after the town hall meeting on 11/22?)
Letter from Prof. Mau Stanton (Pub. 11/22 AM)
Reporting from the Town Hall meeting (with video) (11/22 PM) Katehi: "I explicitly directed the chief of police that violence should be avoided at all costs. It was the absolute last thing I ever wanted to happen. [...] My instructions were for no arrests and no police force."
Nov28 General Strike, 11-28 UC Berkeley police department has an open letter to UC Regents: "Please don't ask us to enforce your policies then refuse to stand by us when we do. Your students, your faculty and your police — we need you to provide real leadership."
Concerning Chancellor Katehi's resignation
http://english.ucdavis.edu on the day of the rally, 2011-11-21.
There is currently an open letter by UCD associate professor Nathan Brown, calling for Katehi's resignation: "Your words express concern for the safety of our students. Your actions express no concern whatsoever for the safety of our students. I deduce from this discrepancy that you are not, in fact, concerned about the safety of our students. Your actions directly threaten the safety of our students. And I want you to know that this is clear." This open letter may inaccurately state that officers held mouths open, please see the Nathan Brown page for more information.
An online petition calling for the resignation of Linda Katehi can be signed here. As of 8:30pm on 11/27/2011 over 100,000 people have signed. The content of the petition contains the open letter from Nathan Brown, above.
Davis Faculty Association Board calls for Chancellor Katehi's resignation.
An educator at Chinese College comments that brutality from UCD and UCB police in recent weeks is worse than the police state in China.
The UCD Physics Department issues a press release 11/22 apologizing and asking for Chancellor Katehi's resignation.
Viewpoints: UC Davis chancellor must do the right thing – resign — by David Buscho, one of the pepper-sprayed students.
A large number of faculty signed a letter in support of Katehi. An analysis of the salaries of the signatories was done (all UC salaries are public information); the average was $151,111.50. Average for all UC Davis Professor salaries for 2010 is $138,838.09. Note that salaries vary a great deal by discipline, so the overall averages shown here can be misleading.
Full Text Letters
The full text of a number of letters on this issue, including Chancellor Katehi's letters, letters from the Academic Senate, and letters from the Graduate Student Association can be found here.
The Chancellor's office also produced a "Fact Sheet on Recent Demonstrations at UC Davis", giving answers to the following questions: What happened? What investigations are being conducted? Who oversees the UC Davis Police Department? What is UC Davis' policy with regard to protecting Free Speech? There are five investigations listed: a. Comprehensive investigation By UC Davis, b. Yolo County District Attorney's Office and Yolo County Sheriff's Department Review, c. UC Office of the President-Led Task Force, d. UC Office of the President Systemwide Review of all Campus Police Policies, e. UC Davis Academic Senate Review
It is important to note that the above piece of university propaganda does not actually answer the questions of what happened and twists many facts. For example:
When they closed Mrak Hall on Wednesday, November 16, there were riot cops standing by. This building actually remains on lockdown and even those with appointments have trouble getting into the building.
Obtaining a reservation or permit for use of the Quad kind of defeats the purpose of civil DISobedience.
Their portrayal of UC Berkeley and UCLA police dismantling of encampments in 'generally peaceful fashion' COMPLETELY ignores the beating of students and faculty by UCPD at Berkeley the week prior.
Investigation A, supposedly an "independent" fact-finding investigation, is being spearheaded by Vice Chancellor John Meyer, who is in fact the person the campus police chief reports to!
Starting with the first Town Hall meeting, the chancellor has claimed that she has no authority whatsoever over the police. This is inconsistent with her claim that she specifically ordered 'no arrests and no use of force' (as an aside, it is quite interesting that it took her several days to share this tidbit with the public- why wasn't this the first sentence of her first letter after the attack? She allegedly told this to the chair of the academic senate as the raid was underway). Further, as she is directly above John Meyer, the vice chancellor who supposedly oversees police operations, there appears to be a direct chain of command.
They continue to insinuate that camping on the quad "unduly infringes on the rights and freedoms of others," when anyone is welcome to join the camp or use the remaining 80% of the Quad.
Media Coverage
CNN.com Front Page, 19 November 2011
The pepper-spraying of peaceful protesters was the top story on Google News, 19 November 2011 Huffington Post Front Page, 19 November 2011
November 18
UCD Police remove Occupy UC Davis tents — The Davis Enterprise (Ongoing coverage)
Protestors Face Off With UC Davis Campus Police — The California Aggie
10 Occupy Protestors Arrested At UC Davis Quad — The Sacramento Bee
Students Arrested & Pepper Sprayed at Occupy UC Davis Camp (VIDEOS) — Davis Patch
Police pepper-spraying, arresting peacefully seated students at UC Davis —BoingBoing
UC Davis Officers Suspended After Friday's Pepper Spray Incident
November 19
One day after pepper-spraying, UC Davis students silently, peacefully confront Chancellor Katehi — BoingBoing
U.C. Davis Calls for Investigation After Pepper Spraying — The New York Times Lede Blog
UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute — The Huffington Post (Updated 11/20)
Video shows Occupy protesters pepper sprayed at UC Davis — Los Angeles Times
Video shows pepper spraying of UC Davis protesters — CBS News
Video Shows Pepper Spraying of UC Davis Protesters — ABC News
Video shows office pepper-spraying protesters at UC Davis — New York Daily News (updated 11/20)
The moment police pepper-spray peaceful Occupy protesters at University of California — Canada National Post
UC Davis Police Brutally Pepper Spray OWS Protesters Sitting Peacefully on Campus — Cleveland Leader
UCD Police remove Occupy UC Davis tents — The Davis Enterprise (Ongoing coverage)
Video spreads of UC Davis cops pepper spraying Occupy students — MSNBC.com (Video removed due to copyright claim)
Occupy Maced: Police pepper spray unarmed youth, tear tents down - Russia Today News
Police Should Criticize, Not Defend, Excessive Use of Force at UC Davis — Forbes.com
November 20
California University Puts Officers Who Used Pepper Spray On Leave — New York Times (subscription required)
UCD Police remove Occupy UC Davis tents — The Davis Enterprise (Ongoing coverage)
UC Davis police placed on leave after pepper spray video outrage | World news | guardian.co.uk
November 21
US University Probes Protest Pepper Spray — Al Jazeera
UC-Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi Denies Resignation, Says the 'University Needs Me' — ABC's "Good Morning America", interview with Chancellor Katehi
Occupy UCD calls for General Strike — Occupy Wall Street
[http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4881:district-attorney-and-sheriff-refer-pepper-spraying-matter-to-attorney-general&Itemid=114 DA and Sheriff Refer Pepper Spraying Matter to Attorney General
November 22
UCD Police remove Occupy UC Davis tents — The Davis Enterprise (Ongoing coverage)
Image as interest: How the Pepper Spray Cop could change the trajectory of Occupy Wall Street — Analysis of the (now famous) photos of John Pike at Harvard's Nieman Lab]
November 23
UCD Police remove Occupy UC Davis tents — The Davis Enterprise (Ongoing coverage)
Other websites
Ten things you should know about Friday's UC Davis Police Violence — Student Activism
Humorous Amazon.com reviews of the pepper spray that Lt Pike used
"...Congress will vote on explicitly creating a police state." — Davis mentioned.
Complete trilogy depicting the event from the time the police enter the Quad to the time the police leave the Quad, from user "jhweather":
Another trilogy apparently exists from the perspective of a different student. However, YouTube user "harrisnaemi" has only posted the latter two parts.
Second video from "libbacoop" - shows police confrontations but not pepper spray
Video from YouTube user "asucd", the account for AggieTV
Video from YouTube user "jamiehall1615" (especially good angle)
Video from YouTube user "meggeyhead" (another good angle, pepper spray starts around 2:10)
Compilation by YouTube user "waxpancake" of time-synced videos from briocloud, jamiehall1615, OperationLeakS and asucd
Video from YouTube user "robroy" (a collection of incident photos and pepper spray meme images alng with audio of a Lady Gaga "Poker Face" parody entitled "Pepper Spray")
Video of Town Hall Meeting — with Chancellor Katehi and others, 22 November 2011.
My Fees are Hella High — One UCD student's attempt to refocus on the real issues
Video from YouTube user "Timasu" — Presents a case defending police action.
Another video from YouTube user "Timasu" — with commentary removed, for those who prefer to watch a video without biased arguments the whole time.
Make a Comment
Details, experiences, videos, images, etc:
Note: You must be logged in to add comments
2011-11-19 15:13:17 Where is Surge II?
It's on Hutchison a little west of the Silo. -ChrisDietrich
people need to human mic over the politically correct announcement that surely will occur Daubert
I think in the interests of respecting the dialogue and winning public goodwill, it would be better to let the announcement be made and use any official opportunities for public input, resorting to shouting over the official talk only if the channels provided aren't sufficient for a robust sample of public opinion to be expressed. - KenjiYamada
I agree with Kenji. The human mic should be used as a communication tool, not as a weapon. We have the world's attention; let's show them that we deserve it. —BarnabasTruman
Well said, Barnabas. I took the liberty of putting your last sentence in bold. It's a great slogan in both form and content. - KenjiYamada
2011-11-19 17:51:56 In addition to tents I would suggest they add chem goggles to their wish list, or just put out a bin in the MU to collect donations of barely used goggles. —AlexMandel
2011-11-19 19:20:25 Just left the protest, dead phone and the need to prepare for work before my shift required it. It was peaceful for the most part, however aside from Katehi receiving making the announcement that she will appear at the general assembly on Monday to make an announcement (after receiving a call from the regents), not much occurred. I will write in further detail later on... For those interested, 5 major news corporataions are at Surge II at present and there is a live streaming video of the action on Ustream under the name ChrisGomezone (or ChrisGomez1) —Wes-P
2011-11-19 19:38:16 Katehi claims she was not afraid, but at one point her representatives came out of the building and stated she refused to leave for fear of her safety due to the large number of people present (nearly 800 by the time I left, just minutes before it ended, apparently). Sh would only speak to representatives from the International Graduate Student Ministry claiming all others to be too unruly to deal with... At one point, when she initially prepared to leave the site an hour and a half before actually leaving.. she approached the door, looked at the gathering crowd and stated "this is absurd". Signatures to the petition for her resignation increased by nearly 7000 votes between 4 pm and 7 pm, ending at just over 12,000 by the time it was over. —Wes-P
She seems to see protesters as dangerous enemies rather than as partners in making a better university. Perhaps that is the root of the whole problem. —CovertProfessor
2011-11-19 22:21:11 This whole thing is ridiculous and self-entitling. Plenty of students struggle to pay fees but they get by. I wonder how much of their fees are being paid by their parents?
That said, if you don't like a business stop giving them your money. I don't like Apple products so I don't buy them. I don't like McDonald's "food" or business policies so I don't go there.
I don't like my college's financial actions so I stopped being their customer.
You are NOT entitled to higher education. You are NOT entitled to set your own price in any business.
You ARE in control of whose services you make use of.
If you don't like what's happening in the UC system, go to a private college or, -gasp-, don't go to college at all. There are tons of jobs around for non-skilled laborers if you know where to look and are willing to work with your hands. There's nothing wrong with manual labor. Millions of migrant workers come here in every season because of that, and there is absolutely nothing stopping anyone else from taking up some of those jobs aside from a stupid social stigma, most likely created and encouraged by the very businesses that have been sucking the economy dry.
If you don't want to pay student fees, stop being a student. :) —KBathory
Ad hominem argument. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem). Big Yawn. shraken
Increasing the fraction of the population that is well-educated provides a significant benefit to society as a whole. If we want America to thrive—if we want HUMANITY to thrive—we must subsidize education. Learning should be available to all; no-one should be denied the opportunity to attend college because of numbers in a bank's computer. —BarnabasTruman
Then why not take your money over to a JC for two years and pay a reasonable amount? OR go to a private school? Higher education is not a right and you shouldn't act like it is. 45% of people don't even enroll, almost 75% don't even get an Associate's degree. Point in fact less than 8% of people get Master's degrees. So for those of us who live in the real world and have to work for our keep and don't sink up to our necks in debt, the constant complaining about tuition going up is starting to get personally offensive. —MM
Apparently, you are not familiar with the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education. I suggest you Google it. I also suggest you look at the tuition increases: from $6141 in 2006-2007 to $10,302 in 2010-2011. The new proposal is for increases of 8% to 16% over the next four years, possibly bringing the fee as high as $22,068 for the 2015-2016 school year —CovertProfessor
This particular uproar isn't about the rightness or wrongness of the protest on the Quad. It's about the pepper-spraying of nonviolent protestors. Whether you agree with their protest is beside the point. They could have been protesting for more flavors of yogurt at the supermarket and this pepper-spraying would still have been outrageous, along with the Chancellor's failure to clearly condemn it. - KenjiYamada
Well said, Kenji. —CovertProfessor
2011-11-19 23:37:09 I was at the Occupy Davis meeting at Central Park today. I heard Jerika Heinze who was one of the protesters who was pepper sprayed give more information. The details she gave will be coming out I believe. There was further brutalization of at least one who was blinded and trying to leave. Also she said that she was improperly dealt with later at the UCD Police Station. She said that the police were menacing and made her feel unsafe. She feels that she and others will be unsafe on the campus. —BruceHansen
2011-11-20 13:56:27 Congratulations, UCD. You have replaced Penn State as the current University with which no one wants to be associated. In both cases, the benefits that you provide to the community will be overshadowed by bad decisions at the top. Great job! —JerseyCity
2011-11-20 17:36:07 Thought about this a lot and I feel like Katehi ultimately was screwed either way. The truth behind why the protesters couldn't stay on campus has nothing to do with actual concerns for safety...only concern about liability. I can only assume, but it makes sense to me, that she'd need to get the students off the quad during the weekend because the school does not want to be held liable for anything that might happen to them. UCD isn't going to pay for the increased security that an event like this would need because 1) they aren't going to and 2) I'd imagine doing so would imply taking liability for it. OWS and related movements are getting a lot of press for things like rapes happening, any large group of people (i.e. mob) is inherently dangerous to individuals taking part in it. Obviously they are choosing to partake in this activity, and a simple warning of "we aren't going to be responsible for your actions" should suffice, but we have a lawsuit happy society. So Katehi couldn't take the risk of letting them stay on campus. She called in the police, whose job it is to enforce that she wants them gone, and maybe she didn't care if kids got maced, maybe she did. The problem is that this really was a no-win situation for her. I don't blame her for the actions the cops took. Now if you want to get super technical, there's a lot of other crap worth blaming her for (the obscene pay/benefits she gets for example) and you can argue that this is the end result of her behavior. Piss off enough people, get put in a no win situation. THAT is definitely fair. I just think that from a perspective specific just to the scenario at hand, too much blame is put on her when it was the police that made the initial move. I also think it's ridiculous for the protesters to think that they weren't going to face this eventually for one reason: you've been told you have to move. At this point one of two things are going to happen: you're going to leave on your own OR they are going to forcibly remove you. Combine police with authority to force anyone to do anything, assume something bad is gonna happen. It doesn't always and there are cops who will take the hard road (harder for them I mean) to remove you but there are plenty of other cops who'll use whatever force is easiest for them. I'm not saying this to condone their actions, I think it's horrible. I just realistically know that this is how it goes down from every situation where people are engaging in civil disobedience. After all isn't that kind of the point? Protest something by doing a non-violent act, refuse to cease until the other side does engage in force, get hurt but also get press. Batons, firehoses, tazers, mace...it's nothing new and the organizers usually know what this tactic results in. Injuries and press. Every cause needs a martyr to get media attention that lasts. (In other words my stance can be summed up as: all major associated parties to this event are assholes and the students are getting used by everyone involved.) —OliviaY
Very well reasoned analysis, OliviaY. Thanks for posting it. More people should read it carefully. Calzephyr
I think Katehi can be blamed for the actions she has taken and failed to take since the event: calling for a "let's make this long enough so that everyone forgets about it" 90-day task force, now a marginally improved 30-day task force; not immediately taking responsibility and apologizing; not immediately initiating a criminal investigation into what happened; not considering asking the protesters to leave for the weekend and resume on Monday (if that really was the issue). Calling a press conference also comes off as an attempt to control the message rather than to engage in genuine dialogue with the protesters. We'll see what happens tomorrow; perhaps she'll get it right then. —CovertProfessor
I can agree to that. I just think the general community response holding her responsible for what happened is a bit much. I wish she'd just come out and say "We didn't want to get sued." somehow I think that would go over better. —oy
Well, I think there was a lot of uncertainty in the beginning about what she had ordered — and some may still be uncertain, given the way that she has dribbled out information in various places rather than speaking directly to us. It now appears that she didn't order pepper spraying — that the pepper spraying was an "on the ground" decision. But in the beginning, I didn't know what she had ordered. And in some sense, the buck does need to stop with the Chancellor; she needs to assume responsibility for what happens under her command, because ultimately she is responsible. She might, for example, have explicitly told the campus police that they should avoid violent methods like pepper spray unless they were absolutely necessary. I am guessing that she didn't do that. —CovertProfessor
No idea but even if she had, the police force (this one specifically and police in general) isn't exactly honest. They probably would have done whatever they wanted regardless of her making a request. They have flat out lied about officers being "in danger" on the ground here and that protest tazer incident from a year or so ago....
Maybe so. They certainly tried to claim they were in danger in this case; luckily, the videos make it crystal clear that they were in no danger whatever. And their body language shows clearly that they weren't even (irrationally) afraid. —cp
2011-11-20 18:02:00 The 30 day task force investigation will not provide for any student participation as the students will go through thanksgiving break, and finals during this period with the report coming out during winter break. Not that I think much will come out of it in the first place. —ChrisDietrich
Task forces like this are an administrator's way of pretending to do something about a problem without actually doing anything. —CovertProfessor
2011-11-20 18:48:49 An independent investigation would be good. The Chancellor's task force is questionable, the faculty has taken a stance against Katehi, so their investigation could have a question of bias. Nevertheless they have credibility, so an investigation initiated by them would be, creditable. I see that they have begun action on that. —BruceHansen
2011-11-20 18:58:31 I love the inaccurate reporting... "students flooded the building" "Students rushed in" "No police presence" I was there and these reports are not entirely accurate by any means. —Wes-P
2011-11-21 01:09:03 Having now watched the entirety of what happened from the time the police entered the Quad to the time the police left the Quad, I will say this:
The protesters made one mistake: standing up and walking towards the police. Not a good idea. It APPEARS to be aggressive, even if that was not the intention (and I presume it wasn't). Always leave a potential enemy an escape route if you don't want a fight. Forming a horseshoe shape and asking the police to leave might have been better. On the other hand, the police had just tackled and zip-cuffed a bunch of protesters (apparently at random), and I understand the anger of the crowd.
The police made lots of mistakes: everything they did. What exactly was their goal here? Make random arrests? Goad (unsuccessfully) the protesters into fighting back? Take a leisurely walk across the Quad and hurt people on the way out? Huge errors were made at every step of the way, and I'm having serious doubts about the judgment and competence of every uniformed person at the scene. —BarnabasTruman
2011-11-21 01:12:47 Here is my humble suggestion for a better alternative. (Yeah, yeah, hindsight... but today's hindsight is tomorrow's foresight.)
Mic check!
Attention police!
We understand
that you are somewhat confused
and excited
and maybe think
that we are a threat
even though
we mean you no harm.
We are willing
to give you a gift
of ten minutes
of complete silence
so that you can
calm down,
collect your thoughts,
discuss amongst yourselves,
and decide what to do next.
And now,
silence. —BarnabasTruman
I support your approach. I also think that the next step would be to do without the shouting. Instead of having everyone repeating the same phrase to show "power", pass a mic or a symbolic token to let individuals speak. Even though there is a crowd of people, let them speak one on one, one at a time. It is easier for the police to see that the situation is not out-of-control when people aren't making noises all around. Fundamentally, we are non-violent not because it is "effective", but because we see one another as family members in the same house. Non-violence is not a tactic. We do it because we love people, that includes the police, and the chancellor. This has nothing to do with what they might have done to us. This has only to do with who we are. —EdgarWai
Hear hear, Edgar. —KenjiYamada
2011-11-21 02:35:10 A student named Willee appeared to be the only protester to have an extended dialogue with Pike immediately before the pepper-spraying. Pike came over to talk to him in a fairly low voice at least a couple times over the duration of the protest. Only the last snippet is clear enough to be at least partially transcribed. It has been reconstructed by combining the coherent parts of several different YouTube videos.
Willee: You're going to shoot me? You're going to shoot me for sitting here? Hey officer, is that what you said?
Pike: Yes
Willee: Officer, is that ... [garbled audio]
Unidentified Male Protester: He just said yes.
Unidentified Female Protester: Shoot You. He's going to shoot you.
Willee: Alright. Just making sure. Just making sure.
Pike:[pats Willee on the back] I'm telling you right now.
Willee: You're shooting us for sitting here?
Pike: [garbled ]... That pepper spray gun... [garbled] [pats Willee on the back again and starts walking back to the rest of the police]
Willee: No, that's fine. That's fine. You're shooting us for sitting here.
2011-11-21 10:08:19 can anybody say Martial Law coming to a town near you? Globally these Police are getting rowdy! How is it that police brutality and civil disobedience comes hand in hand?
And i thought we were safe in Davisville..
I wonder if some of these police were also present during the 2009 use of teargas and pellet guns on students.
My, my, who do these piggies and Katehi think they are? —alcatraz
2011-11-21 11:48:46 I'm ashamed that this happened at Davis. However, I'm really proud of the community response, in particular the outstanding efforts by those who contributed to DavisWiki to have such an exhaustive collection of media regarding this event. This wouldn't have been possible 10-15 years ago. —DannyMilks
2011-11-21 15:18:16 Here's SacBee.com's posting. It contains a (frustratingly) short video excerpt: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/21/4071197/uc-davis-rally-each-speaker-gets.html —OldDavis73
2011-11-21 15:44:21 Some quick reflections on today's rally, which I attended about 2 hours of: It was a huge crowd, and it was amazingly calm, peaceful, and well-behaved. I say this as someone who hates crowds and normally avoids them at all costs. It was mostly students, of course, but there were also a fair number of grey hairs in the audience. It was nice to hear many of the speakers talk about solidarity between students, faculty, staff, and community members — as it should be. We are all united in this common cause. Katehi seemed to speak from the heart, and I was glad to hear her give a direct and untempered apology; however, all the things that she left unsaid left a ringing silence, and the crowd was clearly unhappy. As I left, a proposal for a campus-wide strike on Nov 28 was being discussed — the day the Regents vote on the 81% "fee" increase, if I understood correctly. —CovertProfessor
I think it is very interesting that we heard the same speech by Katehi and I feel completely differently about it. I did not hear a 'direct and untempered apology' at all. What I heard was a woman who is tearful about being publicly shamed, not tearful about the why. She claims to take full responsibility, yet she continues to rotate a number of excuses (her newest one is trying to incite fear about "outside agitators" a.k.a. Davis community members). Granted, she did not have time to insert excuses into her short speech today. However, her continued use of passive voice is very telling. She is "sorry for what happened." She has not, however, said "I'm sorry for what I did," "I am sorry for my role in this," "I am sorry for ordering police to remove tents," "I am sorry for continuing to use political doublespeak in every letter I send to the UC Davis community." It is all passive. To me, this belies her true feelings and her failure to admit her responsibility for the situation to herself. -Megan
Yes, we who witnessed as alumni, friends, family, community members, taxpayers, and parents of future students are terribly frightening people, didn't you know? I would blame it on the grey hairs, but mine aren't, yet.... —KrisThaler
2011-11-21 17:06:19 Wow—those pictures say a lot. Words not needed. They're upsetting enough. I signed the petition to oust Kalehi and will encourage others to do so —Users/PeterBoulay
2011-11-23 09:36:17 "Another Berkeley"? —BruceHansen
2011-11-24 07:27:18 Been relatively silent online about all of this but, since discovering the Macing when I returned home from work that evening, I have been actively participating and interacting with the protestors. I am proud to see that so many are active in a peaceful and democratic fashion and have been thoroughly impressed with the student and public response thus far. Speaking to many of my fellow vets, we stand in solidarity with the students. —Wes-P
2011-11-24 08:01:11 Where should I ask questions about the resignation petition? I want to know these: One of the key points supporting the resignation is the authorization to use excessive force. This means that she should resign IF she authorized it. Then, is this a common understanding among the supporters of the resignation that if it is a fact that the chancellor did not order it, the supporters are READY to drop this point? If so, why are people ready to sign the petition when the investigation is not over and we don't know the fact about whether she order it?
To those who signed it, did you sign it because:
a) She ordered the use of excessive force, and here is the evidence that she did it.
b) I already know someone who would have done a better job, not only on how to handle the event, but as a chancellor in general, and that person is ready to take over her duties, and that person is ——.
c) In theory, if Person A does a bad job and Person B does a good job, the best outcome is to let Person B teach Person A how to do a good job, so that we end up with two people capable of doing a good job. However, in this situation, it is better to evict Person A and let Person B take over. And here is the reason ——.
d) I have another reason for her resignation, but since we all want the same result, I signed it. My reason is ——.
e) Everyone is signing the petition, if I don't sign it my friends won't talk to me.
f) If people don't sign it now while people are angry, people's view may change or they may forget, then I would lose this opportunity to oust her for a legitimate reason. My reason is this —-. I have discussed it over and over at —-, but there was never enough attention to act. Now is the opportunity to act. Even though I do not know for certain what happened this time, I need to seize the opportunity to get the effect.
g) Something bad happened so someone needs to step down, the higher the better. We shouldn't need to petition for this, people should automatically offer to resign when something like this happens. If there are other urgent businesses that the chancellor is taking care of, which makes it a bad idea to offer to resign right now, the chancellor should identify those unfinished business, work on hand them over to someone, and offer a schedule to resign once that businesses are completed or transferred. This is what we expect from responsible leaders. It is already a step late if we need to petition for the resignation. It should have been automatic. The protocol should be that they automatically resign, and we write the petition to save them. Not the other way around, which is what we are doing. But since that didn't happen, we do this.
h) Because someone I knew signed it and I trust their judgement.
i) Because of her actions, or lack of actions, since the event itself. She has been slow to take responsibility, slow to condemn the actions, dribbled out bits of information (some of it conflicting), and not shown any indication that she is capable of bringing about real change. She reacts to events and to negative publicity, rather than being proactive.
j) ——.
To those who have not signed the petition, is it because:
a) I don't know enough about what happened to endorse an action that may cause great disruption. I would sign it if I get the information I need. I am particularly cautious because you can sign a petition, but you can't easily un-sign it. If a petition was created based on false information, I could be helping some special interest on an unjust cause. Therefore I need to know before I sign it.
b) I don't care about what happens as it does not affect me.
c) I like the chancellor, because —-.
d) The logic in the petition is unsound. For example, there is no logical connection between —- and —-.
e) The petition has false information, such as —-.
f) By now, the UC President has already expressed support for the chancellor, and the chancellor supports her own decision not to resign. The petition had gotten the attention, and the decision has been made. The petition phase is over.
g) The chancellor is doing a reasonably good job, and there is no other person who could have done significantly better during this time. Here is the evidence that she did a good job: ——. And here is the evidence that there is no obvious replacement for her that would do a better job: ——.
h) The petition shows a signed list of people who are acting out of either their emotion, hidden agenda, and quick to judge in the absence of important facts. The petition shows exactly the type of people we don't want to serve as a chancellor.
i) —-.
Where should I ask questions like this to systematically explore the viewpoints people have, rule out the bad responses, and do it in a way so that people with similar questions wouldn't need to ask it again? —EdgarWai
[Edit: 11/27] Sorry, I posted the above without knowing that a town hall meeting took place on 11/22. —EdgarWai
2011-11-25 11:37:40 Have the protesters apologized for encircling the police? If not I think they should do it first, because apologies are not bargaining chips. It doesn't matter if you perceive that what you need to apologize for is much smaller than what the other needs to apologize for. If you do something wrong, you apologize. That is your integrity. The truly peaceful person is not only defending their own rights. They are also always trying to see the others in their best light, because they know that if the other is actually evil, it would be extremely difficult for them to act. Believing that someone is evil is a last resort. The protesters should also condemn the personal attacks at Lt. Pike and people who are trying to humiliate. Those behaviors are not peaceful people should stand for. Bullying is bad, regardless whether you do through violence or through social pressure. I apologize for not knowing enough to say anything more productive. Right now I am going through peace-related articles and videos to tell which movements are legitimate and which ones are just special interest fighting another special interest under the name of peace. —EdgarWai
I appreciate to effort that you've put into this page. You should check out that the protesters weren't "encircling the police." —BruceHansen
Thank you, could you point me to the resource that said the protesters did not encircle the police? My understand was based on this, it said, "There was still one walkway open that the police were going to use to walk the arrestees out. I saw some friends of mine sit down there, and they were my friends, so I joined them. We linked arms, legs crossed." To me that meant there was a gap initially, but then someone sat there to close the only opening. —EdgarWai
I'm sorry this is not a complete response. The sittting protesters that were pepper-sprayed chose to sit down where they did because it had historical significance. They were in a line. Did they inadvertantly complete a circle? Were the police trapped? —BruceHansen
I wasn't a witness. I am only asking questions based on what I read. According to point #3 here, they completed a circle. According to this, the circle was closed intentionally: "A collective decision was made on the fly to just sit in a circle arms linked legs crossed, with police officers and "prisoners" in the middle because we didn't want them arresting only 3 of us. It wasn't fair that 50 of us were there, and only a few arrested who hadn't volunteered to be arrested. There was still one walkway open that the police were going to use to walk the arrestees out. I saw some friends of mine sit down there, and they were my friends, so I joined them. We linked arms, legs crossed." How do you want to define "trapped"? If you are driving on the road and the siren is sound, and you intentionally don't move away, are you blocking or trapping the police? If you spray water in front of the path that the police (or any reasonable person) would use so that if they walk into it, they will get wet, are you trapping the police? This has nothing to do whether the police could navigate around or over the obstacle, but whether the obstacle is placed. My comment wasn't about whether the protesters formed an effective barrier, but the need to fairly emphasize that the subsequent rallies are less "volatile" than Nov18. We should be careful about this and note the facts. No matter how peaceful the subsequent rallies, we cannot use that as a mean to hide the actual situation on Nov18. The police at this point can no longer point this out or say anything that would not make the matter worse. We have created a situation where the police can only swallow the blame. It is only noble that the protesters keep this reminder and keeps the facts straight, and protect the ones they accuse from false information. The legal system was designed to do this. If we believe that we are morally equal (or greater) than the police, then we should follow the same principle. —EdgarWai
I don't get this. The videos show Pike stepping out of the circle before he sprayed them, and no one tried to stop him. If the police officers could leave the circle at any time without any interference from the protesters, in what sense of the term "trapped" could they have been trapped? They were not trapped at all; the stepping out of the circle showed that the police could get out at any time, and that they knew they could get out any time. —CovertProfessor
I didn't bring up the term "trapped", that was BruceHansen's term, I was asking how he would define it. After that I will probably ask how that would relate to the situation, since according to some comments, the police was not supposed to use pepperspray unless there is physical violence going on. According to this, even if the protestors lock up the police in a room, the police can't use pepperspray. I am not trying to say that laws are stupid, but I would believe that laws are inherently vague because the law can't easily account for all possible situations. I used the word "encircle" because that word was less subjective.
On Nov18, the protestors encircled the police who were trying to leave after making the arrest. The pepperspray that followed was bad. I could only say that it was bad and unlawful according to some comments, but I am not sure, because it would seem inconceivable that the police did not know it, so I would still need to read it for myself. I was asking if the protestors had apologized for surrounding the police and impeding the arrest process. You could argue that they didn't stop Pike when he stepped over, but note that the intention was not to stop the officers, but to stop the transfer of the arrested protestors (see this at 9min). The demand of the protestors was that IF the police let the arrested go, the protestors would continue peacefully. (So, what happens if the police don't let the arrested go?) Therefore, logically, seeing that the students did nothing when Pike stepped over did not disprove the possibility that the protestors could do something if the police were trying to bring the arrested outside the circle. (I am just pointing out the logical fallacy, I believe that the protestors wouldn't because they were nonviolent-trained because I recognize some of them.) We don't have the luxury to know exactly what would happen if the police brought the arrested one by one across the circle.
The police arrested some, and then they were encircled. It was a leaderless situation and the actions of the protestors were quite unpredictable. From the long videos, it seemed that they kept shouting things that exaggerated or misrepresented what the police was doing. For example, in here, they were shouting "stop beating the students", but the police was not beating anyone. I want to know that the protestors are actively correcting any misunderstanding about the event, even when the details are might be inconvenient for gathering a bigger crowd. Sorry my post is long. I want to know if there is a forum for this type of comments. I don't think it is appropriate for this type of discussion to be a comment. What medium should I use? I am asking this because this isn't the main point I want to discuss. The main point I want to ask about is whether the tuition increase is legitimate, whether it was done in good faith by the administration. I want to know the proof of whether it was justifiable or not. Compared to that, the Nov18 event should be a secondary issue. I want to catch up to tuition data to see if there is any wrong doing. I would appreciate if someone knows where that data is to help me catch up on the issue. —EdgarWai
There's some info on the Undergraduate Student Fees and UC Davis Budget Cuts pages. If you did some research and added to those pages that would be fantastic!
Now working on it by collecting and listing references on a timeline, then I want to check if the wiki is missing any information worthwhile to highlight. —EdgarWai
Not sure what you mean by highlighting missing information, but I recommend that you simply add any missing information. It would be especially good have a table with tuition amounts for the last 10 years. If that is what your timeline is (or if it's anything like that), that would certainly be worth having on the wiki, even if some of the information is scattered elsewhere. —CovertProfessor
Sorry about the wording, I meant simply adding any missing information. About the table or tuition over the years, there is already a chart at UC Davis Budget Cuts. But that chart itself does not shed any light on whether there is any wrong-doing. If it is true that the increase is used to close the gap caused by decreased funding from the state, then the main question that determines whether there is wrong-doing is not whether the tuition is increasing, but whether it is a justifiable decision that the gap should be paid by the students, or whether the state budget was allocated in good faith. —EdgarWai
Ok, I just wanted to make sure. Sometimes people just point out missing/incorrect information rather than simply adding/fixing it; I just wanted to make sure you felt free to make changes. I'd also add that, regardless of the reasons for the tuition increases (and I think there are many), we've come a long way from the promises and the intent of the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education. Changing from a public institution to a private one is a concern. Making higher education affordable only to a select few is a concern. Burdening the next generation with huge loans in an economy with few jobs is a concern. We need to do better. —CovertProfessor
I agree that keeping higher education accessible is a serious concern. I want to know whether a protest or a strike is justified, because there is no immediate connection between a concern and a strike. Usually a protest takes place because fruitful communication is absent. A protest is a mean to initiate such lost channel. At this point, is it justified that the communication channel is lost? Secondly, a protest implies that someone has the margin to do something to fix the issue. Do we know that someone has that margin? It is our goal to make education accessible (According to the Master Plan, 1/8 of top high school students, tuition-free for in-state students). But if it is a fact that we don't have the resource to do it (while balancing it on other legitimate priorities), then we have to understand that the goal cannot be met, and a protest at such a time would be counter productive. I can't take a stand because I am too slow in catching up to the situation, but when I do catch up I want to take a stand. (I meant I have no ground to oppose nor to support the protest. I am paralyzed by ignorance.) (currently reading the Master Plan to learn the logic behind it.)—EdgarWai
Go Edgar! - bh
2011-11-28 05:09:59 The police response is indicative of why a protest is necessary. The occupy encampment could have been dealt with without violence. If Larry Vanderhoef were still in charge he would have walked down and talked to the people himself but Katehi instead stayed in her ivory tower and sent the police out to do the impossible job of telling protesters (who, given that Davis is a collegetown, can all be argued to belong in the UCD community) to move off from the most popular gathering place on this public campus during a school day but she also told them to not be forceful. How on earth could she think the protesters, believing they have a constitutional right to peacefully assemble, would simply pack up and go -no questions asked. Facebook posts, letters to the editor, and signing on-line petitions will never elicit as much call for change as human bodies taking a public stand together. What Katehi and the-powers-that-be always forget is that every time they use excessive force is just another chance for the media to elevate a martyr for the protesters' cause. That is what the pepper-spray incident has served to do. I am very much against the police response to this incident but I feel sorry for John Pike. Given the attention to this event, the people that he did the greatest favor for and the same that hate him the most. And now, because Katehi lacked either foresight or forbearance, the occupy movement will stay galvanized on campus into 2012. —RobRoy
2011-11-28 08:03:35 It's amazing to me that about twenty-fonur hours after the pepper-spraying Chancellor Katehi wasn't that aware of it. She viewed videos of it shown to her by mediators for eight minutes at the location of the press conference. —BruceHansen
2011-11-28 11:25:44 Anyone have a sense of how widespread the strike is among students, faculty, and/or staff? The turnout at the ARC 7:30am today didn't look that impressive. Is it picking up steam? —TomGarberson
See this.
2011-11-29 02:26:48 Why Dutton? —BarnabasTruman
It's where they take your money. Also done in solidarity with the Banana Slugs at UC Santa Cruz, who shut down a similar building on their campus starting at 5:30am Nov 28. -Megan
It's also where the Student Academic Success Center offers free tutoring and support workshops for students struggling in math, physics, chemistry, and writing, unless that all gets canceled due to the occupation. Does anybody with financial decision-making power even work in Dutton? Wouldn't Mrak be a better choice? I'm wondering if Dutton's only being targeted because it's an easy target. —BarnabasTruman
Tutoring services are not being disrupted. I do not believe those with decision-making power are in there, but the cashier who takes students' money is. Mrak has been on complete lockdown since they last kicked activists out. You are not even let through the locked doors unless you have a prior existing appointment.
The protestors need to stop disrupting Dutton. I've heard from a student that works there that the protestors are making a huge mess and dropping their trash in the financial aid document dropbox, ruining documents for honest students. They should move to camp outside Mrak and stop disrupting a building that disburses aid to students and offers tutoring services. —EliYani
2011-12-02 16:35:42 Occupy Dutton is getting ridiculous. Tents obstructing the hallways, gatherings of people obstructing the stairways, graffiti in the bathrooms. I've been strongly in favor of Occupy UCD so far but the behavior of Occupy Dutton is making me rethink my position. Go occupy the Mondavi Center instead; that's where tuition money is being wasted on the 1%! —BarnabasTruman
What is this supposed to mean: "that's where tuition money is being wasted on the 1%!" ? —EdgarWai
Perhaps that wasn't the right wording. How much of a typical Mondavi Center audience consists of students? —BarnabasTruman
No clue. How much of Mondavi Center's operation construction / operation fund could have been used to support instruction? How much of Mondavi Center's profit could be used to support instruction (or perhaps also includes art programs)? I have no clue about the facts, but perhaps the Mondavi Center was built with funding that could only be used for building such a building, and perhaps the building is actually supporting undergrad education. If that is the case, then the Mondavi Center is actually on the students' side. (i.e. Robert Mondavi— donated money to let UC Davis perpetually fund its undergrad education.) But who knows? —EdgarWai
2011-12-05 21:52:33 I saw the video. I can't say the protesters were innocent, I just can't. I hope the group mob has learned to behave better or no one will feel inclined to listen to them after this spin game has been revealed ... from davis to greece indeed. :( The police inquiry continues, and I hope the group has had a serious sit-down and scream-at for themselves too. —JeffWood
So, anyone who says "Fuck the police" deserves to be pepper sprayed?? —CovertProfessor
Anyone who says "F#!# the police" does not deserve acclaim as victims. Parents should spank their kids who say this to the police and I fear some parents now wish they had done so earlier. No excuse for that behavior. Anyone training and undertaking the duties and responsibilities of law enforcement deserves ridicule and scoffing disrespect? I think not. —JeffWood
Look, I am not defending them for saying "Fuck the police." They shouldn't have said that. That does not mean that they deserved to be pepper sprayed, or that they are any less victims. The punishment far outweighs the "crime." —CovertProfessor
I agree, they should not have said that. They do cry they are victims though, as we have all heard since the incident until the recent videos of their behavior spread out. Nor am I thinking they were pepper-sprayed for that alone, with the chanting exacerbating the perception that their mindset was dangerous to the police is my thought. Lots of mistakes. The police have their internal inquiries to straighten them out. I am hoping the students take the time to shake some sense into themselves, apoligize where needed, and learn from the experience about how they can present themselves. Otherwise, I just see a mindless rioting mob ready to mug me next time where they would rather I see a peaceful demonstration. Fair enough.— JeffWood
I grew up just down the street from Lawrence Livermore National Lab. It's a facility that does a lot of nuclear weapons research, among other DOD and DOE projects. They have weapons grade materials on-site. Every year, they have many protests. They have people yelling at police, blocking roads, sometimes even chaining doors or gates. You know what the officers there do? They arrest them. You know what they do if the protesters link arms? They pull them apart. It's a lifting game, nothing more. Police have been handling these situations for centuries, and they regularly do it without resorting to force. The notion that police somehow get special privileges, such that they can respond to insults with violence, is ridiculous. It's contrary to both logic and law. While you may favor a scenario in which police have free reign to do violence to anyone who disrespects them, I am immensely thankful that both our laws and our culture wholeheartedly reject that view. Yes, some of those protesters were rude, and sure, maybe their parents should have done a better job. That doesn't change the fact that their civil rights were violated when Pike and Lee used excessive force under the color of law. —TomGarberson
Then let the courts throw the book at them, that is what they are there for, to protect us from mob rule and homegrown propoganda spin tactics. :) I just do not believe that the protesters are an innocent party. An aggrieved party, certainly, and I am curious how the inquiry turns out — JeffWood
Last time I checked there was nothing you could throw the book at us for. I'm pretty sure "fuck the police" (a chant that lasted literally 20 seconds, by the way, and ended because most protesters there shushed them) falls under the first amendment. What else can they do? Charge us with trespassing on our own Quad, on a campus we PAY for? Or reprimand us for "overnight camping," which is actually not a law but a campus policy that should be dealt with by student judicial affairs, not cops in riot gear? Also— these are not "recent videos." If you actually check the history of the page, videos of the incident from start to finish have been up from the beginning. Maybe you should check your accusations of a 'propaganda spin machine' since videos by the activists have been made available, UNEDITED and without twisted commentary, since the day of. But then, I wouldn't expect you to display any common sense since you are characterizing people practicing civil disobedience and peaceful protest as a "mindless rioting mob." -MeggoWaffle
Now don't you feel better? Get out all that rage against one person speaking his own opinion that differs from yours. Of course no common sense, I should be, maybe,...pepper sprayed? I have seen the videos, both commentary and not, and it is obvious the protesters were not innocent, were heard and the tone was threatening. To me at least. I was afraid for the police that were the target of the mob's (which at least one other of your group admit to being an angry one) attention. Your screaming I am wrong does nothing to change my reasoned opinion. —JeffWood
I don't think you've explained the full, reasoned opinion that you've formed. First let me make sure I understand: you're saying the police used pepper spray to defend themselves, right? Assuming that's correct, how do the facts in this incident fit, in your mind, into what constitutes self-defense? While this obviously isn't a criminal case, the law of self-defense basically sets out the common-sense points related to the issue. Violence is used in self-defense where a person actually and reasonably believes that he or another person is in imminent danger of harm. Moreover, there has to be the actual and reasonable belief that the use of force was necessary to defend against the harm. The amount of force justifiable is essentially proportional to the imminent harm.
In this context, we're looking at four key points: 1) did the officer actually believe there was danger? 2) Was that belief reasonable? 3) Was the danger imminent? 4) Was the use of pepper spray necessary to prevent that imminent harm? Officers in the field making split-second decisions are given some degree of deference, but that only goes so far. I think if you look at the facts in an honest, unbiased way, you'll agree that it's doubtful the officers were acting in self-defense. First, Pike's calm, casual demeanor, his visor being raised, and the chatting with a protester before getting out the pepper spray suggest that he did not actually believe he or anyone else there was in imminent danger of harm. I'll leave #2 up in the air, since you seem to think there was reasonably some danger. For the third point, what evidence is there that any danger you think existed was imminent? Was someone about to take a swing? Was the crowd rushing the officers? Had anyone been grabbed, knocked down, or otherwise harmed? In short: where's the imminent danger? Finally, what rational relationship does pepper spraying the seated protesters bear to preventing any danger that may have existed? Were they involved in chanting the "threats"? How was spraying them necessary to prevent imminent harm?
Frankly, your point just doesn't seem reasonable. I've heard and I understand the argument that spraying protesters was necessary to disperse them. I don't agree, both because it's illegal (see the 9th Circuit case cited on this page), and because I've seen similar protests dismantled in nonviolent ways in the past. But I understand that point. As far as I can tell, though, you're making a different argument: you're saying the officers were protecting themselves. Even assuming, arguendo, that the crowd's earlier chant was threatening, the circumstances plainly displayed in all of the videos clearly shows that there was no imminent threat. Furthermore, even if there was some threat, imminent or otherwise, it was from the standing crowd, not the ones who were seated, quiet, and not even facing the officers. Finally, the circumstances strongly imply that the two officers who used pepper spray did not actually believe they were in any danger. Thus I don't understand how you can say the officers were defending themselves by spraying the seated protesters.
Instead, I'm going to hazard a guess that the threat issue is a pretense and that your second comment in this exchange is the real root of your opinion: "Anyone who says "F#!# the police" does not deserve acclaim as victims. Parents should spank their kids who say this to the police and I fear some parents now wish they had done so earlier. No excuse for that behavior. Anyone training and undertaking the duties and responsibilities of law enforcement deserves ridicule and scoffing disrespect? I think not." While this rationale is still not reasonable, it does make some sort of logical sense if you begin with your apparent premise, i.e., anyone who disrespects the police deserves violence. —TomGarberson
From the City of Houston v. Hill court ruling, 1987 "The First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers. The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state." So that means the courts say, in America (and even in Texas), you can yell "Fuck the police" without having to worry about getting fucked by the police. There is no rudeness exception to the first amendment. Should you yell "Fuck the police"? Well, it really doesn't help win over moderate people to your side or make you appear very nice so it is not a wise tactic. It is also not a wise tactic for the police to pepperspray unarmed protesters in front of dozens of cameras and hundreds of people. All that will happen is the crowd will get excited and stick around much longer when you were trying to get them to leave in the first place. A revolution's greatest call to action is the creation of a martyr. UCDavis police usually do a great job. The police are hear to keep us safe and the campus is a rather safe place. UCDavis police are well paid and will receive a decent pension. I'm not going to say it is an easy job but if I had to choose between a factory worker in China and a UCD police officer I think I'd take the police job, even if requires hearing people say a "Fuck you" to me occasionally. You'd think they would recognize that they don't want to walk a beat in Detroit, Michigan or Camden, New Jersey and the UCDPD would show more patience. Is virtue to much to expect from our officers of the law? —RobRoy
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this, but the biggest part imho is the precedent set by the Humboldt case 10 years ago regarding pepper spray on trespassing unarmed protestors Daubert
2011-12-06 18:53:01 After watching the video I think the protestors handled themselves pretty poorly. Seemed like an angry mob taunting and threatening the police. Certainly would not call it a non-violent protest. Fortunately for the protestors, the police handled themselves exponentially worse. I tried hard to come up with a reason for pepper spraying the people sitting down but I just can't come up with anything. It was like the police had no plan whatsoever. It was courageous to sit there and take pepper spray to the face for what you believe in, but I think everyone else, police included, acted pretty cowardly. —MikeyCrews
2011-12-06 19:07:23 Protest first, ask questions later! —NickSchmalenberger


text:
- Description
- Fitment
- Specs
- Reviews
- Catalogs
World's Largest Aftermarket Motorcycle Parts and Accessories Superstore!
Know Your Part Number?
Input the part number and quantity to add a part directly to your cart.
Select your motorcycle to guarantee fitment! Select A Motorcycle
Everyday Low Price: $34.99
Gold Club Price: What's This? $31.49
J&P Part: 2400445
Select your motorcycle to guarantee fitment! Select A Motorcycle
|Electra Glide Anniversary FLH : 1978
|Electra Glide Classic FLHC : 1979
|Electra Glide Classic Side Car FLHCE : 1979
|Electra Glide Fat Bob FLHFB : 1970
|Electra Glide FL : 1973
|Electra Glide FLH : 1970–1978
|Electra Glide FLH 74 : 1979
|Electra Glide FLH 80 : 1978–1979
|Electra Glide FLHB : 1970
|Electra Glide FLHF : 1970–1975
|Electra Glide Police FLHP 74 : 1979
|Electra Glide Police FLHP 80 : 1979
|Electra Glide Police Model FLP : 1974–1975
|Electra Glide Sport FLHS : 1977
|Police Model FLP : 1971–1972
|Police Model FLPF : 1971–1972
dliptakjr Posted:
Finish is reasonably good...some roughness here and there on edges. Moves the pedal location further forward of vertical that the stock FL control, which is a big plus for me. However, neither of the 2 master cylinder clevis mounting holes were inline with the master cylinder shaft, and it was binding on pedal activation in both locations. I had to drill a new hole offset and between the two, even though there's not much room to do so. Now it works great.
firstname.lastname@example.com Posted:
I bought this item because two people wrote that it would move the pedal forward. It does, perfect for me. It was easy to install, works fine, and now I can put my full foot on the floor board.
plt4835 Posted:
Perfect fit, moved pedal slightly forward which is better for me.
keyo Posted:
renewing my 77 flh
Biggoldnugget Posted:
Listed correctly - right application. fit well, looks stock
glainc Posted:
Nice looking, but made wrong. Wrong angle between the pedal and the lever put the pedal too far forward.
darryl9999purple Posted:
Fantastic service!
Requires Adobe Flash Player
Call Us 24/7 1-800-318-4823

subset: commoncrawl


text:
$120 Truffle Beer Headed to NYC Restaurants
"Hand-shaved" black Perigord truffles are the reason for its astronomical price tag.
Skip to content, or skip to search.
Skip to content, or skip to search.
"Hand-shaved" black Perigord truffles are the reason for its astronomical price tag.
Some of the most abhorrent truffle-related misdeeds, ranked from least egregious to most.
Plus, Ippudo at Smorgasburg, brunch at Maison Premiere, and more in today's leftovers.
Turns out truffles and fryer oil are equally appealing targets for burglars.
Plus: new standards proposed for kosher food, Paula Deen's former housekeeper sentenced for jewelry theft, and more, in our morning news roundup.
The chef-owner has been looking at 100-seat spaces in Soho.
The SD26 co-owner bought himself a two-and-a-half-pound white truffle.
They're great on macaroni and cheese, and french fries. Not so great perfuming your apartment lobby.
Head to Queens for a four-course, 60-dollar white-truffle dinner.
Get three Alba-truffle–strewn courses plus dessert for $50 in Woodside.
Everyone's favorite small-time chocolatier is telling big chocolate to kiss off.
According to 'Truffle Tsar' John Magazino, the Waverly Inn's macaroni and cheese is a steal.
Plus celebrity-chef cookware tested, a new Water Taxi Beach–like space in Red Hook, and more, in our morning news roundup.
Junk-food-eating monkeys, why raw vegetables are not always best for you, inflation in food prices, and more, in our morning roundup of news and gossip.


text:
Ugh, spotting again, just a few...m, pg
Find a Conversation
Ugh, spotting again, just a few...m, pg
|Thu, 03-27-2003 - 3:03pm
days short of 6 weeks pg. Please remind me how this is normal and common in IVF pgs! --stacy
|Thu, 03-27-2003 - 3:25pm
It really is common and usual!! I did a lot more than spot during my last pregnancy after IVF and went to 41 weeks!!! Hang in there!!


text:
Bicolor proves simple doesn't mean boring
Two colors and a single shape -- apparently that's all it takes to create a fantastic iOS puzzle game. That's all Bicolor really is, but I absolutely can't stop playing it. It's the kind of game you'll beat your head on the wall over, simply because you'll wish you had thought of the game yourself.
Each level in Bicolor presents you with a rectangular play area populated by square spaces of a lighter color that stand out in contrast from the darker hue of the background. Your job is to cover all the spaces so that they are the same color as the background, and you do this by swiping your finger over them -- but there's a catch. You can only color a certain number of spaces, and only certain spaces can be used as starting points, and on top of that, there are also lighter colored spaces that need to be expanded either before you being canceling the out, or as you play out each level.
If this sounds unreasonably confusing, I promise you it's much more easy to grasp when you go hands-on with the game, and the simple mechanics become second nature in no time. What never becomes easy, however, is wrapping your head around each level, as the seemingly endless number of color, number, and layout combinations means you'll never see a similar level twice.
The App Store reviews for Bicolor call it "brilliant" and "addictive," and I couldn't agree more. It's the perfect relaxation game. The puzzles demand your entire attention, so with every fiber of your brain tossing around possible solutions, the problems of the day tend to fade away. It's just fantastic.
There are 240 levels, which is more than enough to keep you busy for weeks, and since Bicolor is priced at just US$0.99, that's a bargain you really can't pass up.
Subscribe to Newsletter
Software Updatesmore updates
- Dropbox adds file/folder renaming and Office document editing to iOS app
- Vizzywig 8xHD price tag now a very affordable $49.99
- Automatic targets teen drivers with License+ service
- Dropbox adds support for TouchID
- YouTube for iOS gets updated with full support for iPhone 6 and 6 Plus
- iOS 8.0.1 update now available (Updated -- Don't update!)


text:
A Sartorial To-Do List for November
October 31, 2013 | Style & Beauty
Louis Vuitton City Guides
Plan your next vacation with Louis Vuitton's city guides, out this month, for 15 cities such as Cape Town, Mexico City, Beijing, and our own Miami. 170 NE 40th St., Miami, 866-884-8866
Relive Valentino's greatest accessories hits in a new book, Valentino: Objects of Couture (Rizzoli; $75), celebrating the brand's history and couture-minded design of its covetable accessories. Bal Harbour Shops, 9700 Collins Ave., 305-867-1215
Feel good in and about Stella McCartney's newly expanded denim line, to include more than 10 styles in 20 washes, which continues the designer's commitment to sustainability (priced at $350–$595). Bal Harbour Shops, 9700 Collins Ave., 305-864-2218
Visit the new boutique from Delpozo, bringing the Spanish brand's quirky femininity to the States right here in the Design District. 35 NE 40th St., Miami
Get a glimpse behind the scenes at Krysten Ritter's Ocean Drive cover shoot.


text:
promotional discount applied. Cart total will reflect savings.
Buy 2 or more, each at $15.74 Buy 3 or more, each at $15.39 Buy 6 or more, each at $14.87
Quantity discount will reflect in cart.
Sometimes, manufacturers require that products be advertised only at their suggested prices.
When we choose to sell these items for less, we display the sale price only in the cart. To see the price, click Add to Cart.
One-time delivery
Save 15% with Auto Ship
Deliver Every:
2 Weeks
3 Weeks
4 Weeks
5 Weeks
6 Weeks
7 Weeks
8 Weeks
1 Month
2 Months
3 Months
6 Months
Product Summary:
Red Sea Fish Pharm Magnesium Pro Reagent RefillRed Sea Fish Pharm Magnesium Pro Reagent Refill is an advanced level magnesium testing kit in your aquarium. The accuracy rate of this kit exceptionally high. If you are looking out for precise and routine measurement of magnesium levels for ensuring proper growth of corals, then Red Sea Fish Pharm Magnesium Pro Reagent refill is the best bet. It has a guide card, which quickly helps you through the magnesium testing process. Product Features:
Product Reviews by Customers
This item is not eligible for Canadian shipping.
Some items everyday price is so low we can't discount or we have marked down the item to a final sale price. These select items will not be included in your order total when determining if your order qualifies for a promotional event.


text:
#SMI12 presentation: The aim of social business = engagement at scale
And last but far from least, we have our final #SMI12 presentation to share with you. It is Headshift founder Lee Bryant's fascinating keynote presentation on how the companies of tomorrow are deploying social tools within their operations to encourage collaboration, spark new ideas and improve productivity. You'll want to download this one.
There are plenty of big take-away points in this one, namely that companies need to truly be "social on the inside" in order to capitalize on social engagement. Bryant takes us through a few steps on how this is done and how companies can measure the success (or stumbles) of their efforts.
Reminder: if you want to see the #SMI12 videos of Bryant's presentation, plus all the panels and keynotes, click here.


text:
Citizens of Lyons vs. City
Lyons Council Meeting, June 15, 2009. There were over 70 citizens there, and were only given 30 minutes to voice their concerns for this new dispatch system. During the meeting, Lyons City Administrator, John Sweet, admitted that not all the details have been worked out yet. If all the details haven't been worked out yet, then why has the new dispatch system already been put into motion John Sweet lied to the citizens. When the 30 minutes were up, a citizen asked if we could hold a town meeting. Lyons City Mayor, Jim Cowan, said he would take it under advisement. Just like John Sweet, he lied to the citizens, a town meeting was never discussed at the end of Council Meeting. We have to remove these two liars, as they have proven to be unfit for their positions. A change HAS to be made, and it starts now, with the Citizens of Lyons.
No comments yet.join the discussion
Recent signatures
Leah McDermed, United States6 years ago
Jane, United States6 years ago
Robert Renollet, United States6 years ago Comments: This is not the first thing that Sweet lied about. I personally think the whole council needs replaced.
Petition highlights
There are no highlights yet.


text:
for your Home & Garden
Metal Trellises
Vertical Gardening aid
The best thing about our Metal Garden Trellises are that they look great in the Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter.
Our unique aluminum trellises never rust!!! Custom designs and configurations welcome, brackets can be made at various widths and bolt together designs for large walls.
New Modern Cubism Aluminum trellis
Click on trellis for more Information
4x8 and 2x8 grid trellis on arte' moderne' home of Kelleen, Long Island NY
Rick Starke in MO 5' x 5' Textured black grid trellis
Winter with Linnaes' 6' Wide x 7' Tall Aluminum Grid Trellis in Bethesda MD
On the Beach
200 lb Welder scales grid trellis and both are undamaged!!
Tom Franceshini 6x6
5' x 8' Aluminum Grid Trellis with lemon tree and a 8' x 7' Aluminum grid trellis made for a rainville design studio a terrific Landscape Company in Redondo Beach CA
rainville design studio
landscape design + planning
1632 aviation boulevard
Redondo beach, California 90278
tel. 310.863.4367
Click on Picture below for pricing and additional information.
Aluminum Aluminum Aluminum Steel
Sunflower Scallop Fan Tudor
Aluminum 2 x 8 Wall Trellis 4 x 8 Wall Trellis (Custom sizes and designs welcome)
Pictured to the left is a trellis with 1" frame and 3/4" grid material.
Aluminum Fence Style Trellis Aluminum Trellis Arched
Steel Cathedral Trellis Aluminum Art Deco Trellis Modern Cubism Trellis
Parisian Trellis Bocelli Trellis
Obelisque Border Fence Edging
Greco Trellis Woman Trellis Fence Trellis
Savannah Trellis Plain Jane Trellis Fan Trellis
Ginas' Custom Art Deco TrellisFor trellis Mounting Guidelines
because of the large size of our trellis' many will ship via truck only.
Click on sidebar to get details on each trellis
Our Trellis brackets were designed by a NASA space shuttle engineer.
A couple years ago we were welding our trellis brackets to our trellis', (just like everyone else) this would cause breakage and bending during shipping along with stacking problems in the warehouse, the trellis' would get tangled together and the brackets would interlock causing a real mess. Upon discussion of this problem with Archie McMannen a honest to goodness NASA engineer he came up with some novel solutions to our problem.
Archie solved all our mounting & shipping concerns with a simple interlocking design.
1. A 1/2 " x 1" bracket holder is welded to the back of the trellis wherever an attachment point is needed. This looks like
2. The short end of the bracket slides into the above receptacle and keeps the trellis horizontally and vertically stable once the opposite end is screwed into the wall.
3. This design allows for not only extremely easy installation (less than 5 min if you read the instructions) and the option to be locked onto the wall by putting one bracket up and one bracket down.
4. Finished product.
2x6 Aluminum Grid Trellis
Mona and Dave's 4x8 Trellis
Fowlkes, Norman & Associates Landscape
Fort Worth, Texas
Ange Harvey, designer
Ange Harvey from Fowlkes Norman & Associates in Benbrook Texas used a special 8' x 6' Grid trellis with special spacing for Clinton Koerth
Brackets for extra Large Jobs
Special order please call for pricing!
For extra large trellis (such as the 12 x 24' trellis we put on the side of a Dillards Store) we use a more industrial bracket which can be mounted anywhere on the trellis with self-tapping screws and to the wall with lag bolts.
Contact Information: Telephone 800-296-0418 FAX 800-296-0418 Postal Address P.O. Box 41, Pineola, NC 28662
Electronic mail
1. As a garden divider:
Contact Information: Telephone 800-296-0418 or 828-733-1077 FAX 800-296-0418 Postal Address P.O. Box 41 Pineola, NC 28662
Electronic mail: email@example.com
Grid trellis' can be configured to fold or stand on a patio hooked together for support.


text:
You May wish to Search New Available Jobs?
State Program Management Unit
hiring Statistical Officer, Quality Assurance Manager, State ASHA Coordinator, Anaesthetist in Delhi/ NCR
Statistical Officer, Quality Assurance Manager, State ASHA Coordinator, Anaesthetist
0-7 Years
Delhi/ NCR
Statistical Officer Quality Assurance Manager State ASHA Coordinator Anaesthetist
2013-Jan-21 - Last Date to Apply for this Job is Over.
Job Details:
Applications required for:
Statistical Officer
Last date for receiving of application at DSHM is 21/01/2013 at 4 p.m. Applications received after the last date and time, will be rejected.
One application will be considered for one post only.
Applications in the prescribed format for engagement on contract for various posts in State Health Society (Delhi) and Integrated District Health Societies (IDHS) are invited by Delhi State Health Mission (DSHM)
The engagement will be purely on contract basis for a period of 11 months or as per the policy of NRHM
State Program Management Unit
State Program Management Unit Delhi State Health Mission Govt. of NCT Delhi 6th Floor, A and B - Wing, Vikas Bhawan-II Near Metcalf House, Civil Lines, Delhi - 110054