Things I hope stay—

• +1 on the 6ft rule. We have a lot of NY/NJ transplants in my area and they still don’t get it.
• work from home - I can do 40% of my job and Mrs Fugawe can do 100% of her job from home. We are much happier without the aggravation of a commute.
• online order for pickup - I’ve realized I actually prefer not talking to anyone at restaurants sometimes. And some stores like Home Depot and Best Buy are pretty good about telling you online if an item is in stock so you don’t waste a trip. Grocery and houseware retailers need to figure this out because the instacart model doesn’t work.
• telemedicine - for routine items like renewing a prescription it is much better to have a video chat with the doctor rather than taking time off work to sit in a room full of sick people. Likewise, a video call with the pharmacist feels more private than trying to talk softly in a busy Walgreens.
• cleaning shopping carts - should have always been a thing.
• limiting number of people and party size in stores - makes shopping more pleasant for those of us who want to be in and out. Was so tired of families descending on the grocery store with 2 kids in soccer cleats running amok, mom taking on speakerphone, and dad just staring into the dairy case like it’s Narnia. Get out of my way, thanks.
• booze to-go - my state is allowing bars to serve to hard drinks in to-go cups and liquor stores to do home delivery. And nobody is really checking IDs because everyone has a mask on. Drunk driving is actually way down. Hope this can stay if people can keep their heads about them. It’s not a horrible thing to have a 32oz margarita delivered to my back porch.

A CNN/FoxNews survey reveals that truths, half truths, alternative truths, and wish-it-were truths posted on a football forum with a dozen regular offseason posters are unlikely to change anyone’s mind on political matters, but that 100% of those people agree that Sac State sucks.

Today is I think the first Picnic Day since WWII not held. Hopefully back twice a good next year. Go Ags!

I don’t think the question is about whether a particular game still happens but might be who still has football a year from now. March madness a revenue flop, football revenue in jeopardy, potential for state budget cuts, potential for reduced revenue from endowments and donors if market stays down. Question is how much are expenses also down and do schools have enough gas in the tank to get over this hill.

I hate to see people lose jobs, but I would venture there are tough times ahead for state agencies as a drop in tax revenue reverberates through the next fiscal year. Perhaps perspectives will change as to what jobs are “critical” moving forward. Also wonder if some students (and staff) might opt to stay online only/work from home permanently and how that might change the university’s structure.

Interim Vice Chancellor Emily Galindo came out with a statement today blaming coronavirus on the Band-uh students and their boisterous limericks. The university will be issuing a strongly worded letter condemning coronavirus for infecting people orally without their consent. They will also be hosting a Principles of Community virtual group hug and solar-powered carbon-neutral digital vigil.

the all you can eat may be referring to the dorm dining hall. A few years ago they changed the model from “x” number meals per quarter to a 5 day or 7 day per week option, where it’s as many visits as you want on those days. Idea being to encourage small meals and snacks throughout the day rather than holding out for a bomb of a dinner. They’ve had an Asian fusion station for 15 years at least, perhaps it has sushi now.

I'm not a fan of Best's style and I think even when he wins his tactics are in conflict with most self-respecting institutions. And the report is fair to point out that the Big Sky is no SEC when it comes to cash value. But I would venture that athletics are not the cause of the university's woes. Probably other things at play like location, majors offered, and cost to value proposition. Seems like faculty looking for something to cut as they don't want to admit that their life's work in comparative literature isn't really an in demand topic. As far as only 5% of the student body going to games, that's about the percentage of people colorblind to red. Nobody else can look at that field for 3 hours.

they aren’t real specific other than saying they are doing everything to keep the cost low ($6 per issue is low?). The magazine is published by the Mrak Strategic Communication office and the money will be collected by the bookstore. I’d venture soft costs exceed printing and postage. I’m guessing current distribution at about 40,000 but I’d be surprised to see more than 5,000 pay their $12 through the bookstore’s barely functional website.

kind of fun that there is at least a hypothetical route to a postseason causeway.

I’ve come to conclusion that Emily Galindo is incompetent and should be removed immediately. Gary May is down several notches in my book for continuing to promote her. She was hired as a secretary in the 80s and was continually promoted because the person ahead of her retired. Several promotions with no relevant education, through she later got a mail order MBA. Not a PhD and never a teacher. Reminds me of Celeste Rose. Also claims on LinkedIn she’s been vice chancellor for 34 years, because why proofread when you’re important. Researching her, I believe she is afraid of student and alumni leaders. The band scared her but not as much as the activist complainant. Nuke one and placate the other to sweep any problems under the rug for at least 2 or 3 years so she can max out her retirement at VC level, protect whatever legacy she thinks she has, and then when the unsolved problems re-emerge she’s retired and can let the news blame it on the next person.

You’ve got it on point. Here’s where it gets interesting and the real motives are coming out. The Band-uh has a $1M endowment fund that has specific language saying it can only be spent on a student run band and if the Band-uh is ever shut down, basically the alumni band board decides what happens. Kicking the alumni band off campus in the same swipe, the university is now attempting to steal the money and is saying the chancellor can override donors wishes anytime. Donors are screaming and the university has basically told them to pound sand. Don’t know where Gary May stands on this but Vice Chancellor Emily Gallindo is buddies with all the retired admins from the 90s that hated the band so she may be in his ear. It appears more and more this action had nothing to do with assault victims, that this was just a politically convenient reason.

Latest news is that the administration has caved to some pressure and will allow the Band to have a “coordinated presence” at the next home game, specifically they may stand together and lead coordinated cheers but no instruments allowed “for the safety of the students.” Write your letters folks because this is looney. 1. The alleged misconduct was at private parties, not any band performance. 2. If we have decided it is “safe enough” for the band to now congregate in a very public setting, why isn’t it safe enough for them to play? The drum major has confirmed a whole season’s worth of shows are written and ready to go.

I never know whether to take these things at face value, that he just wants to get back to classics, or if there’s dirty laundry in play, either being forced out politically or cutting and running before some controversy implicates him.

IIRC, it went for a considerable period of being a pub minus alcohol. Sodexo owned the liquor license and when they got kicked out and the University decided to self-manage it a few years ago, it took a while to get a new license. Don't think it did well during that time.

Rumor is that the University is paying the Mandarins. Can’t verify that, but if true is an outrage. For decades didn’t give the band-uh a cent and now to replace so easily.

Every year the week before classes the band-uh would host band retreat, 4 days of welcoming freshmen and teaching them to march. The university has decided there are too many negative connotations to “retreat” so in the ultimate tone-deaf move, they are renaming it “band camp,” because there are no sexualized connotations there... and no, I’m not joking. These people are morons.

I am not aware of Ms Pena doxxing anyone. I’m referring to someone from the first Aggie article. Was trying to avoid using names.

As far as alumni, the vast majority of us only came around at picnic day and homecoming and mainly interacted with people from our own eras. Occasionally would talk career advice with students interested in my field, which I thought was benign. Apparently there were a few recent grads who were not moving on with life and it was problematic.

As far as hazing, the hat activity was sanctioned by and overseen by university staff as a team building activity. It’s double speak for the university to say this was problematic but their staff did nothing wrong. The bigger problem seems to be perceived/unspoken peer pressure to participate in off-the-clock shenanigans. Like, “will I be uncool if I don’t jump on this hot tub naked?” A name change doesn’t address the root issue here. For the record, this “old tradition” is less than 10 years old and foreign to most of us alums. There is a warped sense of time and tradition in play.

A band will play at the home opener in the stands, no field show. TBD what it will be called. Unknown if any of the music or marching will be retained. They will be fundraising for new uniforms that they delusionally think alumni will fund. Not sure if there will be a Battle of the Bands anymore. If the staff director doesn’t feel like it, it ain’t happening. The alumni band is dissolved as a chapter of the cal Aggie alumni association but may still exist as an independent entity as it predates the alumni association. Unclear what that looks like but probably would not be welcome on campus.

From what I understand, the university presented 2 options, the current option A or option B to permanently disband for at least 4 years and prohibit anyone from the past being involved ever. And the basic overtone is that if anyone gives them much crap on Option A, they’ll just pull the trigger on B. I think there are also people holding their tongue because they don’t necessarily want social justice warriors to publicly paint them as rape apologists. Even if patently false, the accusation may not go over well at work.

I’ve read the report and I have to disagree with Bob. I get that he has to sell papers in the People’s Republic of Davis, but come on man, read the whole thing not just the slanted executive summary.

1. University sent an email survey over the summer. Predictably, did not have a great response rate. Many of the questions were leading or extremely broad as if they were trying to coax an affirmative response. The most damning questions were actually left blank by a lot of respondents. So in real life it’s not 40%, it’s 40% x 0.5 survey response x 0.5 question response. A small sample size with no controls applied to ensure a representative sample.

2. About 20 people participated in personal interviews. They volunteered on the email survey. So by design not a representative sample. It was people in Davis over the summer and probably especially passionate one way or the other.

3. The report acknowledges that a on significant number of specific instances described, the respondent was not a witness and had only heard about it second hand. A least one incident described occurred more than a decade prior, so was entirely hearsay.

4. The university painted the alumni band in a really negative light. While there was certainly work to be done in this area of helping students and alum understand each other, the question was very vague “have you ever had a negative experience with an alum” - you could substitute professor for alum and probably get a similar response. They did not research whether it was a few or a lot of alumni on a few or a lot of occasions causing this. What we do know is that the specific incidents reported all centered around 2 individuals, who were promptly and permanently removed.

5. No work was done to establish baseline comparisons. Are concerns about alcohol, hazing, time management, sexual harassment higher among band students than the student population in general or other student groups? Maybe this is actually a University or America culture issue.

Nobody is saying work wasn’t needed to keep the student and alumni bands relevant to 2019. Any organization must engage in continuous change and improvement. And in fact some of that change was happening. The student and alumni groups were working with campus recreation and the alumni association to make changes and updates. The vice chancellor pulled the plug before any of those could take effect. The fact of the matter is that the University has been at serious odds with the band since at least 1981 and previous attempts to take it over have failed. The administration isn’t really that concerned about alleged victims, they saw this as their chance to squash the band because in 2019 if you are accused of sexual misconduct, you are guilty until proven innocent and if you try to defend yourself you are branded a rape apologist. Facts be damned.

Over the last 90 years and 1000s of band members, there have certainly been a few bad apples who have victimized others. Statistics wouldn’t allow otherwise. To those individuals, a collective apology for your experience and we as a society must do better. But sadly this wasn’t your day in court and you’ve received no justice. Changing a name or a uniform in a top down action will do little to change things that happen in private homes among adults, which is where all of these allegations center. That needs a bottom up solution, which the University can’t seem to wrap their head around. That, and the fact that the chief complainant has been spotted on campus and social media harassing and doxing band members. Not typical victim behavior and in fact perpetuates the very behavior they/them so loudly protests. Makes me think, at least for that person, this was more about some personal vendetta.