Don’t Yell “Fire” in a Crowded UCSD Bureaucracy!

The Eviction Crisis and Steps Toward Solutions
or Don’t Yell “Fire” in a Crowded UCSD Bureaucracy!

C.H.E. Cafe Collective Statement to ASUCSD and GSAUCSD

In anticipation of committee reports to both the Associated Student Council (AS) and to the Graduate Student Association Council (GSA), we want to present our perspective, the relevant history, and clarify what we are asking of both councils. We hope this will enhance the discussions.

We are presenting this in two parts. Part 1 is “in a nutshell” what we are asking of the ASUCSD and the GSAUCSD. Part 2 is discussion of our perspective, analysis, and some historical background.

PART ONE

What the C.H.E. wants

The C.H.E. wants the university administration to vacate their eviction lawsuit, withdraw the notice of termination of the lease, and to allow the C.H.E. the full use and enjoyment of the facility in the usual and customary manner that the C.H.E. has enjoyed said space for the past 35 years. In return, the C.H.E. pledges to work in good faith with the AS and the GSA and the administration both to work out a mutually agreeable (and fundable) schedule for undertaking building repairs and safety improvements and to develop a framework that maximizes the student and educational benefits derived from the C.H.E. Cafe facility space.

What the C.H.E. Requests from the AS and the GSA

1) That you formally call on the university administration to withdraw their eviction lawsuit, withdraw the notice of termination of the lease, and to allow the C.H.E. the full use and enjoyment of the facility in the usual and customary manner that the C.H.E. has enjoyed said space for the past 35 years; and
2) That you formally find that the co-ops (expressly including the C.H.E. Cafe) are of benefit to UCSD students (i.e., certification).
3) That you formally create a task force, in accord with the dispute provisions of the Master Space Agreement (MSA), that will work with all parties to: a) develop and implement a plan for needed capital and safety improvements, b) develop a framework to maximize the student and educational benefits of the C.H.E. Cafe facility space; c) formalize the findings in the MSA and lease agreements for the future. We (and all the co-ops) need the AS and GSA to enforce Dispute Resolution, per the terms of the lease, we need you to have our backs and to DEMAND the administration honor that process.

PART TWO

Discussion and Analysis

(1) Some of the Reasoning for our Requests
(2) a summary of the current eviction crisis
(3) a brief review of the history of conflicts between the co-ops and the administration

(1) Some of the Reasoning for our Requests

1) That you formally call on the university administration to withdraw their eviction lawsuit, withdraw the notice of termination of the lease, and to allow the C.H.E. the full use and enjoyment of the facility in the usual and customary manner that the C.H.E. has enjoyed said space for the past 35 years.

Given the complex history of the MSA — and of the previous Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) — as documents reflecting the many conflicts and the hard negotiations for compromises between the UCSD administration and students, the administration was wrong to issue a notice of termination of the lease, without both the AS and the GSA agreeing and telling the administration to do it, in writing. The administration was wrong to ignore the Dispute Resolution procedure required by the MSA. It was inconsistent with the UC San Diego Principles of Community that the administration chose to issue the notice of termination of the lease on June 13, 2014, while many students and faculty members were leaving for the summer break.

It is UCSD policy, consistent with UC-wide policy regarding self-assessed student fees and facilities funded with those fees, that the University Centers Advisory Board (UCAB) has jurisdiction on the allocation of space to student organizations and others, in the University Centers facilities, which include the C.H.E. Cafe facility. It was wrong for the administration to bypass UCAB’s jurisdiction on space allocation by filing the eviction lawsuit. The administration was wrong to ignore the Dispute Resolution procedure required by the MSA. It was inconsistent with the UC San Diego Principles of Community that the administration chose to file the eviction lawsuit (unlawful detainer) in August of 2014, while many students and faculty members were gone for the summer break.

Is Fire Safety a Legitimate Basis for Immediately Shutting Down the C.H.E.?
It was inconsistent with the UC San Diego Principles of Community that the administration chose to make several public statements that “safety” was the main motivation for termination of the lease and for seeking an eviction order from a court. “Safety” has become the mantra of the administration in its public relations campaign to win over the sympathy and support of the student body, and of the campus and San Diego communities. “Safety” has been held up as the reason for demanding that the C.H.E. Cafe Collective cease all programming and meetings in the facility.

The undisputed facts tell an entirely different story. The C.H.E. Cafe facility has never been “red tagged” as unsafe or uninhabitable. Our insurance policy, which we maintain at our own expense separate from the University’s insurance, would have been cancelled if the building was unsafe. Our insurance remains in full effect. Our Safe Space Policy –guaranteeing everyone fair and equal treatment and respect at all C.H.E. events, regardless of race, sex, gender, orientation, etc. — makes the C.H.E. one of the few places on campus providing an all ages, sober and SAFE space for events.

Our research has uncovered the fact that the California Fire Code section (903.2.1.2) mentioned in the Campus Fire Marshal’s 2012 site inspection report does not apply at all to our type of building! (see sections 903.2 and 1103.5) It is the UC system-wide policy, as adopted by the UC Office of the President, that the state Fire Code is the policy of the University (see http://www.ucop.edu/construction-services/facilities-manual/volume-3/vol-3-chapter-4.html#4-1) . UCSD is bound by the Fire Code. The state code was amended to follow the 2003 amendment of the International Code Council’s model code. That amendment requires NEW buildings similar to the C.H.E. Cafe facility, and which have occupancy loads of 100 people or more, to have an automatic fire sprinkler system. The change was that the occupancy load was previously set at 300 people or more. (See http://media.iccsafe.org/news/eNews/073008/codeupdate.html). It is this new code change which the Campus Fire Marshal cited in his 2012 report. He failed to explain that elsewhere in the new code sections, adopted at the same time, all EXISTING buildings of the type of the C.H.E. Cafe facility are expressly exempted from any requirement of retrofitting to install these automatic fire sprinkler systems. This goes a long way toward explaining why the Fire Marshal never ordered the C.H.E. Cafe to close and why he said that a new sprinkler system would be “strongly recommended” and why he never said it is required by law. It is not. [See California Fire Code Chapters 9 and 11 at http://www.ecodes.biz/ecodes_support/Free_Resources/2013California/13Fire/13Fire_main.html]

Did this plain omission of the fact of the Code exemption ever get communicated to all the relevant UCSD administrators? Have UCSD administrators been aggressively demanding immediate “safety” upgrades to the facility in the belief that they were acting in good faith and according to sound legal advice from the Fire Marshal? It would be good to know.

What we do know now, at least, is that there is absolutely no legal basis in the Fire Code for requiring that the C.H.E. Cafe facility be shut down. There is no legal and industry expert consensus that any urgent safety problem exists if a building of our type does not have an automatic sprinkler system — providing that all other Code requirements for fire extinguishers, exits, exit signage, etc., are met.

The C.H.E. Cafe Collective might indeed say that adding an automatic fire sprinkler system to the building seems to be a fine idea — if we ever see a specific proposal with costs we can afford. Or, we could welcome the addition if the university agreed to pay for their installation. However, it is an outrage that the UCSD administration has misrepresented the law and has sought to convince everyone that “safety” forces them to NOT negotiate and to BULLY us into shutting down our business.

2) That you formally find that the co-ops (expressly including the C.H.E. Cafe) are of benefit to UCSD students (i.e., certification).

Per the terms of the MSA, it was supposed to be done in 2014. We should act as though the lease is still in effect and follow it (even though it is a question mark as long as our appeal of the unlawful detainer ruling is pending). It has always (previously) been the position of the administration and all parties to the MSA that lack of a two-year extension of the lease resulted in holdover status, month-to-month, with ALL of the other terms of the lease in full effect. Over the more than four decades that hundreds of students have worked at one or more of the UCSD co-ops (and thousands have used the products and services of the co-ops) the hands-on ‘laboratory’ type education people have had from this experience is of incalculable value. We need to sustain and strengthen the co-ops.

3) That you formally create a task force, in accord with the dispute provisions of the Master Space Agreement (MSA), that will work with all parties to: a) develop and implement a plan for needed capital and safety improvements, b) develop a framework to maximize the student and educational benefits of the C.H.E. Cafe facility space; c) formalize the findings in the MSA and lease agreements for the future. We (and all the co-ops) need the AS and GSA to enforce Dispute Resolution, per the terms of the lease, we need you to have our backs and to DEMAND the administration honor that process.

We ask the AS and the GSA to endorse our Settlement Proposal, as a framework for negotiations with the administration. [We note that language therein which refers to restoration of our IRS tax-exempt non-profit organization status is moot. Our non-profit status has been reinstated by the IRS.]

(2 ) A summary of the current eviction crisis

[ Press reports should be integrated into this chronology to provide a fuller picture of the unfolding of the crisis. A compilation of links to these numerous press reports can be found at http://checafe.ucsd.edu/?page_id=58 ]

A. Inception to 2008
The C.H.E. Cafe Collective began approximately 34 years ago, on or about May 1, 1980. Since that time, the C.H.E. Facility, 1000 Scholars Drive South, has been leased continuously by Plaintiff from Defendant, the Regents of the University of California. It has been and currently is used to operate a cafe, library, and a music-and-theater programming space, and to host other student organizations and events.

As one of the original buildings of Camp Matthews, the C.H.E. Facility was originally used by the University of California, San Diego (“University”) as a diner and cafe in the 1960’s, called “The Coffee Hut.” It is known as the original student center. When there was an attempt to turn it into a faculty club, students argued that since student fees had paid for the building and its maintenance for many years, students should rightly take possession and operate it from that time forward. Thus, all students of the University have an ownership interest in the C.H.E. Facility as their referendum-based fees and other student fee revenue directly maintain the building and have since before the C.H.E. Collective even inhabited the Facility. See University Centers’ website (“UCEN” site) www.ucen.ucsd.edu. Pursuant the Lease, the C.H.E. Facility’s maintenance is paid for by student fee funding. All fixtures, alterations and tenant improvements are the financial responsibility of The C.H.E. Cafe Collective as a tenant. (Space Agreement, §9). Unlike other facilities that the University Centers directly manages, The C.H.E. Facility is unique in that it is leased independently to the nonprofit and student organization The C.H.E. Cafe Collective under the Space Agreement lease.

In 1992-1993 there was an unlawful detainer lawsuit with the University during which the Co-ops, namely the General Store, sought and obtained an injunction against the University. (Burnett v. Regents, San Diego Superior Ct. (1992) Case no. 658358 [unpublished]). A resulting memorandum of understanding (“MOU”) was negotiated to settle the dispute and keep the Collective in possession of the C.H.E. Facility. Ibid In 2006, the MOU was renegotiated and superseded by a Space Agreement with all four Coops. It is the current commercial lease contract known as the “2006 Space Agreement Lease” (“Space Agreement” or “Lease”) (“Exhibit A”).

In June 2008, when the original two-year lease term under the Space Agreement expired, all four Coops, including the C.H.E. Cafe, continued to seek a lease extension and new terms. Pursuant to the Lease, the “2016 Extension” provisions (“Extension”), and other relevant sections, the University and Coops were obligated to exchange new terms for an extension and obtain a renewed certification from the student government bodies, the Associated Students (“AS”) and the Graduate Student (“GSA”). See, Space Agreement, §1, 2.4, 2.5.

Repeated assurances and conduct of the University administrators, led students to believe an Extension was still realizable and “missed” preconditions would be waived. (Aronson Decl.). This was not unprecedented in the course and dealing of the parties and was done with respect to another matter, namely, changed terms for rents related to a rent dispute and amendments that were made to the lease and made retroactive for 5 years from 2013 to 2008. A true and correct copy of said Rent Amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit D.

The University’s waiver of the timeline for certifications encouraged AS and GSA to pass certification in June 2008 though outside of the required timeframe in the lease (January to April 2008), so that an Extension could still be completed. (Aronson Decl., Vera Decl., Morales Decl.). Therefore, on June 2, 2008 the GSA certified the Cooperatives as in the best interest of students. On June 4, 2008, AS certified the four cooperatives as in the best interest of students. These certifications were not passed
within the time frame described in Section 2.2 of the Space Agreement (which would have been between January 31, 2008 and April 30, 2008). See: University Centers website (“UCEN” site) www.ucen.ucsd.edu and Space Agreement, §2.

B. 2009-2012
The Co-ops and the Plaintiff diligently continue to pursue an Extension containing various lease amendments from 2010 through present, relying on assurances that they had an Holdover because of Extension negotiations through 2010. (Aronson Decl.). In 2010 all four Cooperatives were eventually in rent disputes and renegotiations with the University. (Id., Morales Decl., and Rent Credit Agreement, A true and correct copy of said agreement and is attached hereto as “Exhibit D).” There was an agreement between the University Centers Director Paul Terzino and the Co-ops that no default
action would be taken as a result of rent non-payment (Aronson Decl.) .. The Co-ops relied on these representations (Ibid.). Paul Terzino left in mid-2011, stalling the process (Ibid.) .. A settlement and lease amendments as to rent were finalized in March 2013 (Rent Credit Agreement, Exhibit D). A further agreement on the credits owed the Co-ops and their distribution was signed in October of 2013 (Rent Credit Agreement, Exhibit D).

C. 2012
From 2010 to 2013, The Co-ops and the C.H.E. Cafe made tireless and strident attempts to achieve Extensions and reach agreements on changed lease terms therein (Aronson Decl.). The Co-ops and thus the Plaintiff as a member, was unsuccessful due to the University’s delays, avoidance and conduct that not only prevented a grant of an Extension but did so while communicating the opposite and giving explicit reassurances to Plaintiff as to them enjoying Holdover status until the Extensions were agreed to, signed and in place. (Ibid).

In 2012, the AS and GSA certified the Cooperatives, acting with the understanding that it was needed to realize another two-year Extension (Aronson Decl. at 37-39). Director Van Bruggen, reassured the Plaintiff once more and agreed that the Co-ops did enjoy holdover status for negotiations and seeking an extension or renewal under Section 2.5 and 2.5 and that the University’s position was, as a result, the terms of the Space Agreement still applied (Aronson Decl. at 37-39).

D. 2013
In late 2012 and into 2013, with the University Centers (UCEN) closing the Craft Center and implementing other austerity measures to compensate for its budget crisis resulting from financing and overspending on a new student center, “The Price Center,” the University’s attitude in negotiations and dealings with the Co-ops began to change and become more oppositional. (Aronson Decl. at 9-40,
and UCSD Craft Center Website on Closure http:// crafts.ucsd.edu/),

Throughout 2013, the University violations increased markedly as to Plaintiff. In late Summer 2013, Despite some progress with student bodies and the UCAB board to finalize amendments and a lease Extension, University staff avoided meetings and only wished to discuss rent issues that had already been settled and other issues Van Bruggen thought to be violations of the lease. (Vera Decl.) Van Bruggen further assured Vera that the University would not be issuing any notices of default if proof and sufficient progress was made towards these matters and that the University did not want to find cause to close down the Ch6 Cafe Facility. (Ibid.) C.H.E. Cafe representative Vera relied to his
detriment on these assurances of good faith and proceeded to trust in the Co-ops status under the Space Agreement and that the University would proceed with renegotiations to realize an Extension or renewal of the agreement (Ibid). Therefore, the Co-ops continued to negotiate in good faith. (Aronson Decl. at 35-36).

However, concerned with the lack of progress representatives of each Co-op reached out to and met with the UCSD ombudsman in their offices to discuss the Space Agreement amendment negotiations. Nothing further came of this process. Following it, the University did not make any proactive attempts to effectuate extensions or renewals. Further the University would not meet or cooperate with students in their attempts to effectuate Extensions or renewals. (Aronson Decl. at 27-29).

In November 2013, the Co-ops again met with Van Bruggen for the last time before the C.H.E. Cafe Collective was given a notice of a health and safety violation, requiring the Cafe to install a fire suppression system under the hood in the kitchen. Though at this time Van Bruggen further communicated and gave assurances that the University had no intent to terminate the agreement or evict the C.H.E. Cafe Collective from the current facility, and that the C.H.E. Cafe was still on holdover for negotiations under the Space Agreement under Section 2.4 of the Agreement. (Aronson Decl. at 30-32).

Then again December 17,2013, despite repeated assurances the University would not hold the Co-ops in default given the Co-ops progress, University Director Van Bruggen sent a formal written notice of default of the lease for insufficient progress made to cure the default based on the C.H.E. losing and needing to reinstate its nonprofit status. (Vera Dec1 at 4).

E. 2014
This prompted the Plaintiff to hire an attorney and reply as of January 2014, to the University as to Plaintiffs progress made on reinstating its tax-exempt status and now just waiting for an IRS reply, and that the default should be cured if requires longer than 30-days under the lease section 17.1(e). (See Exhibit A, Space Agreement)

On April 17, 2014, at the request of the University, the Campus Fire Marshal conducted a second follow up inspection and walkthrough of the Facility with Assistant Director John Payne. That same day, John Payne writes the C.H.E. Cafe Collective and email thanking the C.H.E. Cafe and signing off on all fire and fire code related issues until next year’s inspection. A true and correct copy of said email is attached hereto as “Exhibit E” (See Exhibit D, Payne Fire Marshal Email).

On April 28, 2014, Van Bruggen sent an email with documents attached from the UCAB Budget committee meeting of April 11, 2014 to UCEN staff, AS, GSA, and UCAB but not to the Co-ops. The email and attachments are all regarding the planning for the relocation of the C.H.E. Cafe Facility. These were given to the Plaintiff on May 1, 2014. The non-negotiable proposal was to terminate the C.H.E. Facility and listed the terms and plans that would govern the Collective’s ouster and move from the C.H.E. Facility to operate out of either the UCEN-run Facility, The Loft or Porter’s Pub, which is leased by another commercial tenant, subject to their already-existing programming and calendars.
A true and correct copy of the proposal is attached as “Exhibit H” (See Exhibit E, C.H.E. Relocation). As a result, Plaintiff retained counsel.

The University on multiple occasions over time, made incorrect statements and gave misleading information to students and C.H.E. Collective members regarding requested fire sprinkler upgrades, inter alia, that it said were necessary and that it said were University “deferred maintenance” obligations but ones for which the University did not have adequate funds to allocate either now or in the foreseeable future. (Party Admission of Sharon Van Bruggen, UCAB Meetings, May 10, 23 and private May 20, 2014, meeting with Co-ops and UCAB Chairs).

Lack of University funds for necessary fire sprinkler and other upgrades was the first reason given for why it was necessary that the C.H.E. Facility be shut down. All throughout May, the Collective Members were frantically trying to convince the University Centers Advisory Board (UCAB), who controls the allocation of student fee funding, that Plaintiff was worth allocating funding to and keeping open. This was a distraction from the University’s plan and already made decision to issue a 30-day Notice of Termination, which they did on June 13,2014. (See Exhibit B) Defendants, however,
maintained for the entire time prior to June 13,2014 (when it gave Plaintiff a “Notice of Termination”) that it was UCSD’s obligation to make fire sprinkler and alarm upgrades that were recommended by the campus Fire Marshal in 2012. On June 13th the Defendants changed their stated position and claimed that it was the Plaintiff’s (i.e., the tenant’s) obligation to make the fire sprinkler and alarm upgrades. (Campus counsel admission in June 13,2014 meeting). In the Notice of Termination, there is no mention of any fire upgrades or health-and-safety reasons, which the University later asserted as
reason for termination and which for the entire month of May, the University told Plaintiff was the reason for closure. (See Exhibit B).

On May 20, 2014, formal notice was sent to all necessary parties: the Director of Facilities, to UCSD legal counsel, to GSA and AS, as well as the other Co-ops, to request and initiate informal dispute resolution (attached as “Exhibit F”). Dispute resolution was requested to address issues of disputed amounts of rent owed, clarifying the resolution of the C.H.E.’s nonprofit status, addressing Defendant’s denial of approval for fire hood upgrades the tenant’s requested, and the many University breaches of their own obligations of good faith and fair dealing. (See Exhibit F, Notice of Dispute Resolution)

During the first UCAB meeting, Van Bruggen directed UCAB Chair Sammy Chang when many people showed up to their meeting, that only 16 people could be in the room and all others could not attend the meeting except to cycle in when they wanted to give their two minutes of comment. Upon vocal protest from dozens of C.H.E. supporters the board relented and moved to a larger room and allowed the many people to be in the room. The second UCAB meeting tried to restrict public
comment in various ways. The last UCAB meeting went into Executive Session for their vote.

At this third UCAB meeting on May 23, 2014 at l pm, the UCAB Board like in other meetings where people were excluded from the room voted to first to restrict public comment to students only and then voted to go into executive session. Then the UCAB Board voted on the annual budget and passed it 9-4 (See website http://ucab.ucsd.edu/ for May 23, 2014 meeting minutes)

University legal counsel Park did not attend any of the UCAB meetings but did attend to assist the GSA Council president in editing and drafting the June 2, 2014 GSA resolution in the meeting to reflect what campus counsel advised. A true and correct copy of said minutes are attached as “Exhibit c.” (See Exhibit C, GSA June 2, 2014 Minutes)

The administration constantly directed these “independent” representative student bodies as well by: (1) advising them in and out of meetings; (2) directing them as to who they may and may not communicate with; (3) stating the University is representing them; (4) assisting them in drafting resolutions; (5) restricting them from communicating with the Cooperatives and Cooperative legal counsel; and (6) restricting the passing along of information the Coops sought to provide these student “independent” representatives.

On June 4, 2014, University administrators, the AS and GSA presidents and campus counsel emailed C.H.E. Cafe students and principal core members asking for a meeting, without including Plaintiff’s counsel. It, according to the University Campus Counsel was to be “a productive opportunity for University administrators and the C.H.E. Cafe student leaders to have a frank and candid conversation about the future of the C.H.E. Cafe facility. Finally, we hope to be able to answer at this meeting at least some of the questions raised in your email. As I said earlier, we will also be interested in the students and your thoughts, ideas, and perspectives.” (Fwd: The C.H.E. Cafe Meeting, Email from
Campus Counsel to Plaintiff’s Attorney, June 6,2014)

On June 13, 2014, the University, served upon Plaintiff a 30-day Notice of Termination (attached as “Exhibit B”) of the 2006 Space Agreement lease (hereinafter also referred to as “Agreement” or “lease”), maintaining that no lease Extension was in effect, and ignoring that Plaintiff had been trying to seek and effectuate an Extension since the original term expired, and refusing to stay the notice or acknowledge Plaintiff’s holdover status under Section 2.4 and 2.5 of the Agreement (“Exhibit A”).
Subsequent to receiving the notice of termination, a renewed request for dispute resolution and/or mediation of disputes was made by the Plaintiff’s counsel to the University’s counsel and to administration. Campus counsel again in an email dated June 20, 2014 responded that the University was not interested in any dispute resolution (Re: University Notice, Email from Campus Counsel to Plaintiff’s Attorney, June 20, 2014)

July 10, 2014
In a hearing on a temporary restraining order, a judge ruled to keep the C.H.E. in possession of the space and preserve the status quo until a more full hearing on the merits can be held. This preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for August 1, 2014. If the C.H.E. prevails in the injunction hearing, it will maintain possession of the space until a final resolution is reached in the breach of contract lawsuit filed by C.H.E.’s legal counsel, Andrea Carter, against the University Regents and by extension, the University of California San Diego (UCSD) on July 7, 2014.

The lawsuit takes issue with University breaches of the Space Agreement lease signed in 2006 and whether the University is able to give a Notice of Termination pursuant to the terms of the Agreement. It also contests the University’s actions in denying dispute resolution and avoiding the grant of an extension to the C.H.E.. It further alleges the University has acted in bad faith by seeking or instigating lease violations or other reasons to displace the Café.

The University officially gave its Notice of Termination for the lease due to the failure of the Graduate Student Association (GSA), one of two representative student government bodies charged with certifying that the all the campus cooperatives are financially sound and in the best interests of students, to certify the C.H.E.. These determinations are to be used for extending the lease and as measures for determining student support for the venue’s continued functioning. However only the GSA Board passed a resolution not to endorse the C.H.E.’s continued operation. The Associated Students (AS), the representative undergraduate student governance body did not pronounce on the matter. The GSA decision was arrived at after considerable involvement and influence from University administrators and legal counsel, who helped draft the resolution.

The University also continues to avoid full disclosure of its rationale for seeking the closure and displacement of the Café, which so many view as a legendary jewel and valuable asset to the University. It has offered many pretextual reasons and concerns that defy common sense or are matters that cannot be quickly addressed and remedied without terminating the Café’s possession and lease.

In public statements, UCSD administrators have alleged that the decision to terminate and close the Facility involves matters of health and safety, citing a 2012 Fire Marshal recommendation that upgrades be made to the building. These include an overhead fire sprinkler and fire alarm system. If these upgrades were actually vital, they would have been deemed mandatory rather than recommended, and the Fire Marshal would have ordered the venue closed. Instead, the Fire Marshal signed off on the cafe for the year in a follow up inspection of April 17, 2014. Further, the building has been in use by the C.H.E. Café and other university affiliates before it for nearly fifty years without any safety incident or any expression of safety concerns by UCSD administrators. As well, the C.H.E. Café has insurance and a full indemnification agreement with the University.

The C.H.E. Café points to a long history of UCSD administrators falsifying estimates for building maintenance costs and purposely misleading student government and student centers’ boards which oversee the annual operating budgets. UCSD currently estimates that over $700,000 of repairs are needed. However, independent estimates amount to less than ten percent of that amount.

UCSD waited to give termination notice until the end of the Spring term, as students were leaving campus for the summer. Despite UCSD’s underhanded tactics, students continue to campaign on behalf of the C.H.E. Café. To date, it has amassed huge support from its attendees and musicians. This is evidenced by the outpouring of public comment and letters of support addressed to the University, not to mention the over 11,500 signatures on an online petition. The online comments posted by petition signers show a broad base of students, alumni, campus staff and faculty and the surrounding community in strong support of the C.H.E.. The C.H.E. Cafe is one of the few affordable entertainment and live music venues not to serve alcohol. It promotes a safe, respectful space that all people can enjoy and often offers local and independent or student-programming. All this is extremely rare in San Diego and increasingly everywhere in the U.S.

July 29, 2014
The C.H.E. Cafe Collective approved a Settlement Proposal written by C.H.E. Cafe Support Network attorney, Cecilia Brennan. The proposal was sent to the UCSD administration. With initial favorable response from the UCSD administration’s lawyers and to encourage an atmosphere of negotiation, the collective withdraws its lawsuit against UCSD. The UCSD administration then refused to negotiate and filed an unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit against the C.H.E. Cafe Collective.

August 26, 2014
The Collective has filed a new lawsuit to challenge the basis for the eviction. The lawsuit alleges that the University colluded with key members of the Graduate Student Association (GSA) to secretly push through a flawed resolution “decertifying” the Collective so the University could bypass the space agreement negotiated in 2006.

“If the University wishes to decertify the C.H.E. as a student organization, it should do so in a fair and open hearing and give proper notice of the hearing so members of the campus community can participate,” states Bryan Pease, attorney for the C.H.E.. “Instead, this hearing was held with basically no notice, and only one student could give public comment.”

The one student who was able to find out about the hearing in time to give public comment is also a petitioner in the lawsuit, which alleges that the GSA abused its discretion by failing to support its decision with substantial evidence, and failing to proceed in a manner authorized by law.

Meanwhile, support for the C.H.E. grows, with over 11,000 signing the online petition in support of the C.H.E., and dozens of emails, letters, and other comments pouring into
the University. Organized labor has taken a stand, including the statewide UC Council of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), who sent a critical letter to the
Chancellor and the Regents urging that they reconsider their decision to try to remove the C.H.E. Cafe from its current space. Two UCSD Campus unions, the graduate student teaching assistants (UAW Local 2865) and the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE-CW A 9119), have also sent letters to UC officials in support of the C.H.E. Cafe.

In the midst of the dispute, the C.H.E. continues to operate as it has for the past 34 years as a student-controlled, democratically-run space on campus for students to have a safe and alcohol-free atmosphere for entertainment and meetings. Although the University shut the gas off at the Cafe, without its consent, and blocked a grant that the Cafe received to upgrade cooking and refrigeration equipment, the Collective continues to provide healthy
vegan food to its guests utilizing the limited resources it now has.

Friday, October 10, 2014
At the trial call for the eviction lawsuit, over 50 C.H.E. Café supporters and media packed the courtroom. Trial is set to begin on Wednesday October 15.

The University argues that the 2006 Space Agreement between the University and the UCSD student/worker cooperatives, including the C.H.E., should be ignored. The agreement was intended to last through 2016, when the parties could then re-negotiate it. Instead, in late May when students were leaving for the summer, the University, along with members of the UCSD Graduate Student Association (“GSA”), secretly pushed through a flawed resolution “decertifying” the Collective, so the University could bypass the agreement.

Despite receiving hundreds of emails, calls, and letters of support from UCSD students, alumni, faculty, staff, organized labor, and community members, as well as petitions signed by over 14,000 supporters, the University refuses to negotiate with the Collective to preserve the space. In fact, the University rebuffed several good faith attempts to negotiate the issues and a proposed resolution, and instead continues to sink valuable public and student funds in pursuing the unfounded eviction.

It is estimated that the University has likely spent at least $70,000 in public and student funds on its high-paid outside attorneys, including the firm Kimball, Tirey, and St. John, who was recently replaced by the firm of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP (“Paul, Plevin”). Paul, Plevin specializes in the aggressive defense of employers when sued by workers over discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination, and wage & hour claims.

The eviction is the latest in the ongoing historical attack on the Collective by the University, which not only refused to meet with students to discuss any issues related to the Café, but actively interfered with the C.H.E.’s ability to operate as a café, including blocking a $35,000 grant to the C.H.E. by another student organization and cutting off the gas lines at the Café so it could no longer cook and sell food (a large part of its revenue). Despite these attacks, the Collective repeatedly requested meetings with the University administrators, but the University continued to ignore and/or rebuff attempts to work together.

Tuesday, October 21, 2014
San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal issued a ruling in favor of UCSD in the eviction lawsuit filed by the Regents of the University of California/UCSD at the behest of a select core of administrators (“Administration”) against the C.H.E. Café Collective over the use of the iconic 34-year old, vegan, student-controlled venue and creative space, the C.H.E. Café.

Upholding the Collective’s main legal theory, Judge Bacal rejected the Administration’s claim that the dispute resolution provisions of the lease did not apply to the termination at issue in this case. However, she also found there was insufficient evidence that a formal request for dispute resolution had been made by the Collective, thus permitting the Administration to terminate the lease at will. Yet, the Administration had acknowledged a request for dispute resolution had been made but had argued it was mooted by a previous lawsuit filed by the Collective that was later dismissed. In addition, the Collective was reassured in various conversations that it was protected by a ‘holdover status’ provision in the lease and that it did not need to worry about an eviction. Completely disregarding these earlier reassurances, the University filed its eviction lawsuit and argued in court that dispute resolution was never formally requested by the Collective. Ignoring the true facts and history of negotiations, the Administration was able to convince the Judge that the formal requirements for invoking dispute resolution had not been followed by the Collective, and the Court ultimately held that thus the Administration had a right to terminate the lease with the Collective.

“I am glad the judge sided with our position that the dispute resolution provision portion of the lease applied to this termination,” stated Bryan Pease, attorney for the Collective. “I am just a bit perplexed that the basis for ruling in favor of the University was lack of evidence that dispute resolution had been requested, when there was evidence before the Court that it had been, and when both parties addressed it in closing arguments. The University misled its own students throughout the last several years by consistently asserting that dispute resolution did not apply, and that the Collective did not need to formally request dispute resolution as part of the lease terms. Unfortunately, apparently applying the same tactics, the University was able to convince the Court that it had the right to evict the Collective at will.”

The Collective and its supporters are disappointed by the ruling which upholds the Administration’s unfounded attack on the San Diego artistic landmark, but vow to continue to maintain its existence and legacy. Preparation for a possible appeal of the ruling and other legal action will continue. Organizing protest activity and lobbying will also continue. The C.H.E. Cafe and supporters believe the student government councils and boards will do the right thing, once the true facts and history are laid bare. Likewise we believe that the Academic Senate and the State Legislature will be strongly opposed to the UCSD administration’s abuse of power, once they are fully familiar with the facts.

The Collective and its current supporters renew their request that the Administration return to the negotiating table toward a mutually-beneficial resolution to this dispute. The Collective invites any and all supporters to join it in DEMANDING that the Administration cease its attack and roll back the eviction process. We note that this is not the first time that the UCSD Co-ops have been threatened with completely unjustified evictions. On more than one occasion students have been compelled to physically occupy and sit-in at the Co-ops to block eviction attempts by the University.

Monday, October 27, 2014
UCSD Chancellor Khosla met with a delegation of concerned faculty to discuss the administration’s eviction actions against the C.H.E. Cafe.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014
A protest rally and march is held from the C.H.E. Café to the UCSD Chancellor’s office to personally deliver 14,000-signature petitions and open letters* demanding that UCSD stop the eviction actions against the C.H.E. Cafe, restore basic building maintenance funding, and that he order his administration to return to the negotiation table. Students and alumni are seeing the UCSD administration’s attack upon the C.H.E. Cafe as the opening salvo in a new war against all of the student-run campus cooperatives. The four campus co-ops share the same Master Space Agreement lease terms with UCSD. All four co-ops have been unable to get the administration to negotiate terms for an extension of the lease, since 2008. In the courtroom, lawyers for UCSD painted the picture that the lease negotiation problems were just about the C.H.E. Café, when in reality they followed years of refusal by the administration to meet with students and supporters regarding the lease at issue.

Students and alumni are alarmed that the UCSD administration took the eviction action into court without the consent of the student body. The C.H.E. Cafe building is one of the complex of facilities on the campus which are funded by self-assessed student body fees, not UC Regents’ funds. Because of this distinct status as student-fee funded facilities, it is the policy of the UC Regents and of the UCSD administration that a student-controlled board has jurisdiction over space allocations to student organizations housed in the Student Center, the Price Center and the C.H.E. Cafe building. That board is the University Centers Advisory Board (UCAB), comprised of student representatives and non-voting representatives from the faculty and campus staff. The UCSD administration completely bypassed UCAB’s jurisdiction by filing the eviction lawsuit against the C.H.E. Cafe. The alleged “de-certification” action by the Graduate Student Association (“GSA”) that the Administration also relies on was equally flawed and is being challenged by the Collective in court.

Built in 1942, the C.H.E. Cafe building is one of the last of the original Camp Matthews, World War II era buildings still in use on the campus and also became the first student center on the new UCSD campus in 1966. UCSD administrators have claimed the building is “too old” to be worth maintaining and have stated in writing that they “may” save the murals on the building, if it is not “too expensive”. The muralists include a number of highly-respected local artists. Supporters want the building to have protected historic site designation.

Members of the University, San Diego, and art/music communities are also outraged that the entire public relations campaign the UCSD administration has waged against the C.H.E. Cafe has been based upon demonstrably false premises. There is no urgent fire safety issue. There is no repair or upgrade to the building which requires completion this year. There is no funding crisis because the Cafe generates most of its own essential operational revenues. One alumni, Monty Kroopkin, observed that “The UCSD administration has chosen the aggressive abandonment of reason and the sort of anti-collaborative, non-negotiation tactics we sometimes see when corporations engage in illegal union-busting campaigns.” Kroopkin is a former co-chair of the UCSD student government and a union shop steward.

The C.H.E. Cafe, for over 34 years, has been one of the only (some say the only) Safe Space for campus events. Rather than recognizing the invaluable contribution the Cafe’s Safe Space Policy has made to the lives of women, LGBTQ and other minority students, faculty, staff and community members – especially high school students — the UCSD administration is arrogantly threatening to destroy it.

“We Shall Not Be Moved!” is echoed in the views of hundreds of supporters of the C.H.E. Cafe. To voluntarily vacate the building and to comply with an immoral and totally unjustified eviction order is regarded by many as the wrong thing to do. A number of legal rights trainings have been conducted for prospective demonstrators and more trainings may be scheduled.

October 29, 2014
The ASUCSD Council adopts a resolution to form an ad hoc committee to investigate the status of the C.H.E. Cafe Collective and the C.H.E. Facility, and calls upon the University to refrain from immediate action regarding the C.H.E. Cafe Collective and C.H.E. Facility until this Ad Hoc Committee has issued its final report.

Wednesday, November 5, 2014
When the new Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Juan Gonzalez, addressed the UCSD Associated Students Council (AS) on November 5, he told them that the eviction would go forward because the administration had no choice because the court has a concern about the “safety” of the building. The issue of “safety” was not raised in the eviction trial and was not the basis for the court ruling. The administration has not cited any specific legal code to support its public claims of a “safety” problem at the C.H.E. building. The Fire Marshall did the annual C.H.E. Cafe building inspection on April 17, 2014 and wrote up his findings that the building is safe.

Thursday, November 6, 2014
Clare M. Kristofco, UCSD Associate Chancellor told concerned alumni that Chancellor Khosla would not meet with them to discuss the situation. A newly formed alumni group, UCSD Co-ops and Collectives Alumni, seeks the meeting. The alumni group represents the thousands of former students who either worked at one of the UCSD student cooperatives or used their services. Kristofco told the group’s representative that Khosla was not interested in talking with alumni. Kristofco was told to tell Chancellor Khosla that “not meeting with alumni is not acceptable.”

An open letter from alumni to the UCSD administration and to the UCSD Regents has called for a public meeting on the campus to discuss the issues. The letter also raises the threat of an organized alumni boycott of donations to the University if the C.H.E. Cafe is destroyed by Khosla’s administration.

Alumni and other supporters of the C.H.E. Cafe are now calling on the public to make phone calls to Governor Brown’s office, state assembly and state senate representatives, and state Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins office. Callers are asked to have the governor and representatives immediately call Chancellor Khosla and UC statewide President Napolitano to press them to:

— stop the eviction

— respect the ASUCSD resolution calling on the administration to NOT go ahead with eviction. ASUCSD represents 20,000 UCSD students and the building is funded by self-assessed student fees.

— stop the false statements about the “safety” situation, to the press and public, and admit the Fire Marshall’s annual inspection found the building safe;

— stop threatening students with the use of armed UC police officers and forcible removal from the student fee-funded C.H.E. Cafe building

— return to the bargaining table and sign new lease agreements with the C.H.E. and the 3 other student-run campus cooperatives

November 12, 2014
Vice Chancellor Juan Gonzalez issues a press release about the C.H.E. Cafe and the co-ops. He claims UCSD supports the co-ops and has no plans to do away with them. He repeats the claim that the C.H.E. Cafe must be shut down pending “safety” upgrades. He offers no citation of any legal statute or regulation to support his claim. The building has never been “red tagged” (as uninhabitable) and the Co-op’s insurance policy remains in full effect.

November 12, 2014
ASUCSD Council amends its 10/29/14 resolution, calling, in part, for the UCSD administration to issue a written guarantee that the eviction will not go forward pending the production of the ASUCSD committee’s investigative report, provided that the C.H.E. collective stop all programming and meetings during this time, and, in part, calling on the C.H.E. collective to stop all programming and meetings during this time. (As of 1/4/15, the administration has not issued any such public written guarantee.)

November 14, 2014
UCSD Founder’s Day gathering of the current and past Chancellors is protested by supporters of the C.H.E. Cafe.

November 19, 2014
C.H.E. Cafe Collective responds to 11/12/14 ASUCSD Council resolution. The collective explains that it cannot agree with the need for the immediate shut down of vital functions of the Cafe; that the building has never been “red tagged” as unsafe for human occupancy; that our insurance policy has never been cancelled. The collective asks ASUCSD to endorse our August 2014 Settlement Proposal and assist to get the UCSD administration to adopt it also.

November 20, 2014
UCSD Public Records officials told the C.H.E. Cafe Collective that there is no Fire Marshal Report from the April 17, 2014 inspection of the C.H.E. facility that was performed by the Fire Marshal under the supervision of University Center Assistant Facility Director, John Payne. C.H.E. Cafe members were at the UCSD public records office earlier this week to pay for the copies of a large release of UCSD records regarding the Cafe. They say the official told them almost all of the records were ready to hand over, with the exception of the 2014 Fire Marshall’s report, which she was still “working on”. The C.H.E. members say the official had the Fire Marshall’s report up on her computer screen, and that they should have taken a picture of the screen when they saw it!

In Payne’s email to the C.H.E. after the inspection he stated: “I wanted to Thank you for all your efforts in keeping the C.H.E. Cafe facility safe. The Fire Marshal was extremely pleased at all the efforts that have been made and has signed off on the inspection. Other than 1 minor item in the Darkstar [non-C.H.E.] space the facility is looking good in terms of safety. He will return annually to inspect the facility based on my conversation with him this morning. Once again thank you for all your efforts in keeping a safe facility.”

Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Attorneys for UCSD decided to seek a writ of possession to enforce the earlier unlawful detainer judgment and evict the C.H.E. Cafe Cooperative and any students from the cafe space it has continuously occupied for over 34 years. Despite a resolution by the UCSD Associated Students Council (AS) asking the Chancellor to not proceed with posting a 5-day notice to vacate, and 14,000-signature petitions and open letters demanding that UCSD stop the eviction actions against the C.H.E. Cafe, delivered to the Chancellor earlier this month, action by the administration to evict the C.H.E. Cafe continues rather than negotiations for a new lease agreement with the Co-op. The Clerk of the Court rejects UCSD’s application for the writ due to incorrect address information on the application.

November 21, 2014
Students occupy Peterson Hall. The sit-in demands No Tuition Hikes and Hands Off the C.H.E. Cafe.

December 3, 2014
Vice Chancellor Juan Gonzalez sends an email to the C.H.E. Cafe Collective. He presents the fire sprinklers question as though it is a legal requirement, rather than the “recommendation” made by the Campus Fire Marshal in 2012. He flatly claims, without providing any substantiation, that “Continued programming of activities at the Che Facility poses a life safety concern.” He writes “…you are requested to cease immediately programming events and meetings at the Che Facility.” He concludes with familiar bullying language “I urge you to not take this appeal lightly…”

December 5, 2014
Vice Chancellor Juan Gonzalez sends a proposed agreement to the C.H.E. Cafe Collective. It states the administration will refrain from serving the writ of possession pending the ASUCSD report, but adds a deadline of early January 2014, provided that the C.H.E. Cafe Collective cease all programming and meetings in the building. It goes on to state that this agreement would not waive UCSD’s right to proceed with the eviction. The proposed agreement does not commit the administration to relenting on the eviction process if the ASUCSD’s Final Report requests it.

December 5, 2014
C.H.E. Cafe Collective attorney Bryan Pease filed an appeal of the unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit ruling of October 21, 2014. The appeal is based upon the court’s finding that the collective had not requested dispute resolution, per the terms of the lease agreement, and that therefore the UCSD administration was not obligated to go through the dispute resolution process specified in the lease. The appeal points to the documents which were actually part of the trial record and which show that the collective had in fact requested dispute resolution per the lease terms.

December 11, 2014
C.H.E. Cafe Support Network attends the Holiday Event sponsored by state legislators Shirley Weber, Toni Atkins, and Lorena Gonzalez, to lobby them to take action to support the C.H.E. Cafe and stop the eviction.

Dec. 15, 2014.
Members of the performing arts community have called a boycott of all artistic engagements on the U.C.S.D. campus. While the student cooperative and non-profit organization, the C.H.E. Café Collective, is waiting on a legal resolution to their lease and repair issues with the University of California San Diego, local, national, and international artists and performers continue to rally to show support to allow the C.H.E. Café to continue to operate in the same building and space it has for the past 35 years.

To demonstrate just how far and wide-reaching the support/impact the C.H.E. Café is in the performing arts community, a letter is circulating asking for a concerted effort to boycott all artistic endeavors in any way associated with U.C.S.D. and demand that the U.C.S.D. administration:

1. Stop all attacks on the C.H.E. Café and reverse its eviction efforts.
2. Refrain from enforcing a lockout of the C.H.E. Café and refrain from using any form of violence, force, law enforcement, or other drastic and coercive tactics against members of the C.H.E. Café Collective and its supporters.
3. Work alongside representatives of the student body to recognize the C.H.E. Café for the historical landmark and unique creative venue that it is.
4. Restore funding to the C.H.E. Café and allow students and supporters to fulfill a dynamic and creative vision for the use of the space.

These artists, labels, bands, and musicians have committed to the boycott:
Bob ‘Barley’ Beyerle -Vinyl Communications Records/ Titwrench/ Neighborhood Watch, Rob Crow – Pinback, Collin Corrigan – Rockfish, Jello Biafra – Alternative Tentacles Records/ Guantanamo School Of Medicine/ Dead Kennedys/ LARD, Spinach Williams – The Last Barfighter, Mar Moreno – Diatribe/ Outlaw Bastards, Justin Pearson – The Locust/ All Leather/ Retox/ Head Wound City, John ‘Swami’ Reis – Night Marchers/ Drive Like Jehu/ Rocket From The Crypt/ Pitchfork, Jason Soares – Physics, Mauro Coddelupi – Raw Power (Italy), Mark Wilson – The Mob (UK), Brandon Cruz – Dr. Know/ The Courtship Of Eddie’s Father/ The Bad News Bears, Zack De La Rocha – Rage Against The Machine, Armistice (Los Angeles), Dan Faughdner – Sledding With Tigers/ Grim Luck, Anachronism, Days Of Light And Gravity, Glow And The Dark, Filthy Flamingos, Atticus And The Boo Radleys, Ghetto Blaster, Death Eyes, Ben Ziff – Di Nigunim/ Thieves Lineage, Man Vs. Man, Trash Axis, Cryptic Languages, Age Of Collapse, Jose Palafox – Struggle/ Swing Kids/ Bread & Circuits/ Yaphet Kotto/ Baader Brains, Gregg Paiva – XHostageX/ YourEnemy, Eskera, Per Thunnel – Sex Dwarf/ Raped Teenagers (Sweden). The letter is online at https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=381173525380791

Members of the arts community wishing to publicly state their support of the UCSD boycott are asked to contact Mar Moreno.

December 16, 2014
C.H.E. Cafe Collective responds to 12/5/14 VC Gonzalez’ proposed agreement. The collective explains that it cannot agree with the need for the immediate shut down of vital functions of the Cafe; that the building has never been “red tagged” as unsafe for human occupancy; that our insurance policy has never been cancelled. The collective asks Gonzalez to consider our August 2014 Settlement Proposal and to assist to get the UCSD Chancellor to agree to implement it. The collective asks “as a show of good faith” that Gonzalez make a public retraction of the “safety” statements he made in his 11/12/14 press release.

December 19, 2014
Gonzalez replies to C.H.E.’s 12/16/14 response. He declines to meet to negotiate. He defers to the ASUCSD and GSAUCSD deliberations. He claims the collective is taking the 4/17/14 administration email (about the Fire Marshal inspection concluding the building is safe) “out of context”. He claims that the state Fire Code is only a “minimum standard” and that UCSD administration “believes” [all] student facilities “should” have automatic fire sprinklers — implying that the UCSD administration can make up its own (higher than legal code) standards.

[Source for most of the above is the complaint for breach of contract and other causes, filed by attorney Andrea Carter on behalf of the C.H.E. Cafe Collective. ]

(3) A brief review of the history of conflicts between the co-ops and the UCSD administration

• 1974 — Student Center opens. Groundwork one of first tenants, early in 1975.
1980 — UCSD Police officer caught burglarizing Groundwork Books using a University key. This is the fifth series of unforced entries traced to University keys. Groundwork removes University locks and installs its own.
• 1981 — Roland Buck (Student Center Director) writes Ray Dye (Assoc. VC Undergrad Affairs) requesting that the roles of the Student Center Director and the Student Center Board be reversed, making the Board advisory to the Director. He cites the transitory nature of the student board and the frustration inherent to the Director’s position as having to implement the decisions of the Student board.
• 1984 — Aug. 7 Shortly after entering into negotiations with the Campus Bookstore to add it to the University Center, Tom Tucker (then Student Center Director) tells Groundwork to stop selling textbooks or he will shut it down. Threatens audit. The audit is completed 2 years later, and makes only suggestions to improve co-op accounting procedures. Tucker threatens to close Groundwork unless the suggestions are implemented (see letter from Tucker of June 27,1986).
• 1985 — Nov. General Store Co-op promised various benefits if they turn over their resources to the University and become an auxiliary enterprise (a staff position, investment money, computer, lifting of the prohibition of sales to univ. depts, space in the University Center). Also they are told that University Policy would not allow them to have a full time staff position, which is necessary to their operation, unless they became an auxiliary enterprise (untrue, they later got the staff position without becoming an enterprise).
• 1987 — Jim Carruthers fails to renew co op leases which expire in June. Security guard informs Groundwork that it has no lease & they must sign a form if they are in bookstore after Student Center doses at 5pm (Groundwork is open til 8pm.). This leads Groundworkers to conclude that Carruthers is implementing his belief that the co-ops are ‘owned’ by the University.
• 1987 — Sept. Jim Carruthers decides not to renew co-op leases: “Co-ops don’t need leases, they’re owned by the University” (they’re not), University Centers Board (UCB, aka, the renamed Student Center Board) mandates him to offer the co-ops “space agreements.”
• 1987 — Fall General Store Co-op tries to fill its staff position with a co-op member. Carruthers objects saying she is not qualified. Gen Store insists that 3 years co-op experience qualifies her rather than an MBA in Human Resource Management. Carruthers finally accepts their choice, but insists she must be directed by and responsible to him rather than to the co-op.
• 1987 — Oct 8 Carruthers states “students are incapable of making business decisions” after UCB meeting to Food Coop (David Zipin) & Groundwork (SR Jones & Kathleen Kennedy).
• 1987 — Nov. Lynn Peterson (director Student Affairs & Univ Events), Jim Carruthers and Tom Tucker meet and decide to hold up Groundwork’s student organization registration on the basis of the existence of the Groundwork Resource Center, a non-profit corporation which functions as a support group for the Collective — despite the fact that the GRC and relationship has existed with knowledge of the University for at least 5 years. Tucker directs Peterson to write a letter to UCB Chair Evan Weisenfield who will ask Jim Carruthers to “investigate” the GRC and its relationship to Groundwork Collective.(no carbon copies to Tucker)
• 1988 — March Groundwork’s Student Org status is still on hold while the Business Office and the office of Student Affairs “investigate” the Groundwork Resource Center. In an effort to help GW end this problem, David Antin (Vis Arts) has a meeting with Watson to discuss the Groundwork Resource
Center Problem. Watson says he’ll pay GW a visit sometime soon (he never did).
• 1988 — May 14 Carruthers closes C.H.E. Cafe because of the lack of maintenance by University Center Staff, violating an oral agreement with C.H.E. members to allow the work to be completed. In subsequent efforts to deal with the securing of the facility, C.H.E. workers must complete most of the work supposedly the responsibility of his department.
• 1988 — UCB decides to develop new co-op leases by forming a space allocation committee. By the end of the year. the committee is disbanded and Carruthers creates his own lease. This new lease is a 11 page document (the previous leases were 2 pages) and worded in such a way that the co-ops feel the need to seek legal advice.
• 1988 — Spring Food Co-op purchase of a fruit cart (for use in Revelle plaza, etc) results in Carruthers
insisting that capital purchases must be approved by the Director (untrue). He contacts Business Affairs and the Food Co-op is informed that they cannot take the fruit cart anywhere on campus until Business Affairs has finished “studying” the problem of Fruit Carts.
• 1988 — July 21 Tom Tucker shuts down the C.H.E. Cafe’s programming and orders the trailer shared by the C.H.E. and the Recycling Co-op dismantled. Written requests from the C.H.E. for an explanation are ignored. The new tradition (since Tucker) of ignoring the UCB is continued.
• 1989 — Feb. Carruthers, embarrassed by his inability to let a vendor into “his” Food Co-op, has maintenance remove the dead bolt from Food Co-op doors. For 2 nights, they have no secure lock on their door. He says he had it removed because the Policy & Procedure Manual forbids a dead bolt (untrue).
• 1989 — June 30 Co-op leases expire. Co-ops unable to reach agreement with Carruthers over new leases.
• 1989 — July 14 Carruthers arbitrarily (without stating reason) cancels a C.H.E. event. Harasses patrons. Tucker, Carruthers and Lynn Peterson all claim that event is closed on orders of Joe Watson, who was unreachable as he was absent on vacation. This is just one of a multitude of arbitrary decisions which could be described & documented.
• 1989 –July 21 Lynne Peterson claims she can give material accounts of the reasoning behind the closure of the C.H.E. event. At a meeting with the Collective, she fails to present any material evidence.
• 1989 — July 22 Under orders from Carruthers, C.H.E.workers and collective members told to leave the facility by Rob the Night Manager.
• 1989 — July 25 Lynn Peterson bans the C.H.E. from programming at any campus facility.
• 1989 — July 28 Carruthers attempts to limit food production at the C.H.E. to hours of 6am to noon and reiterates that the C.H.E. facility cannot be used for C.H.E. events. Provides no substantiating evidence for the decision.
• 1989 — Dee 5 Carruthers sends the co-ops a letter stating that if they fail to sign the administration’s lease by Dec. 11, the Administration will “assume … you have chosen not to utilize the space … ” and will reallocate the space (thus usurping the University Center Board’s function). This is one of many threats received from Tucker, Carruthers, and Watson.
• 1990 — Feb 3 University Center Board sends a committee to negotiate with the co-ops after the year long impasse. Negotiations result in an acceptable lease in 2 hours. This lease is formally approved by the Board 2/12/90.
• 1990 — Feb 14 Groundwork & General Store notified that UCSD Business Office forbids University
Departments from making purchases from the Co-ops. This ruling includes books for the library as
well as instructor desk copies. As of April, the Business Office refuses to change its policy, stating that
it is waiting for Undergraduate Affairs to resolve the problem with the co-ops. (force co-ops to become
auxiliary/university owned organizations?)
• 1990 — Feb 23 University Center Director Carruthers sends co-ops a different lease than the one approved by the UCB, demands that the co-ops sign it by March 9 or face eviction.
• 1990 — Feb 26 University Center Board passes resolution stating that it recognizes only the UCB lease as an option, that eviction of the co-ops is against its policy, and that it will not reallocate the spaces held by the co-ops to another group.
• 1990 — Feb 27 Joe Watson (Vice Chancellor: Undergraduate Affairs) writes to the co-ops stating that the UCB lease is “not an option.” In subsequent discussions with co-op members, he says that the 2000
signatures and numerous faculty letters are inconsequential.
• 1990 — March 6 Co-ops sign and return for signature the UCB approved contract, requesting a response on or before March 9. As of 4/11/90, no response.
• 1990 — March 23 C.H.E. members find Physical Plant employee alone in the C.H.E. after hours. Employee claims to be checking out electrical equipment.
• 1990 — March 30 Co-ops informed that the lease offered by the administration is withdrawn as a result of coop “disagreement and contention” and that instead the administration would initiate an investigation of the co-ops and their accountability to “students” (codeword for administration, in this case).

[Source: A Student Democracy Movement Close to Home Needs Your Help, by The Student Cooperative Union's Student Rights Campaign . More complete information on several of these episodes is available in that text.]
• November 19, 1991: UCSD administration sends letter threatening Groundwork books with “permanent elimination” if it does not agree to sign over all assets to the university within 30 days. Other co-ops are given the same threat but given 90 days time.

• December 19, 1991: Co-op members remove all textbooks that had been stocked for over 100 winter 1992 classes off campus, occupy Groundwork Books store, and chain closed the building. UCSD administration cuts off electricity.

• December 20, 1991: UCSD administration agrees to 30-day extension for Groundwork in exchange for Groundwork returning merchandise to campus, after faculty members respond to local television news segment about the threatened closure.

• December 1991- July 1992 — the Co-ops filed formal non-academic grievances against the UCSD Administration on December 24, 1991, February 3,1992, and July 2, 1992.

• January 15, 1992, at about 1:30 am: UCSD Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Tom Tucker, accompanied by campus police, use emergency key to enter the General Store and try to seize accounting records (which, however, were being stored off campus since co-op members didn’t trust the university after the December 19-20th incident at Groundwork. Tucker sets off the store’s alarm while doing so and calls the alarm company, unsuccessfully impersonated a store employee. Locks are changed so that store members are locked out of the store.

• January 15, 1992, at around 3 am: General store co-op members and supporters from other co-ops break a window and reenter the General Store. A window repair and locksmith are hired, the window is repaired and the store is opened for business.

• January 15, 1992, at around 10:30 am: UCSD Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Tom Tucker, accompanied by campus police, re-enter the store and shut it down.

• January 15, 1992, 12 noon-1 pm: More than 500 students gather for an emergency demonstration. The General Store Co-op lead manager, who has the keys to the store, reopens the door: students occupy the store and the police and Tucker exit out the back door.

• January 15, 1992, afternoon — General Store Co-op files lawsuit against UCSD/Regents for damages, declaratory relief and injunctive relief.

• January 16, 1992: Court orders a temporary restraining order (TRO) against UCSD administration. This is the first time in the history of UCSD that a student organization has won a TRO against the administration.

• December 15, 1992 — the UCSD Administration filed Student Conduct Code charges against the Co-ops and individual Co-op members.

• May 3, 1993 — C.H.E. Cafe and the other campus co-operatives enter into a Memorandum of Understanding between themselves and the University administration. Co-ops’ 3 grievances against UCSD administrators withdrawn and UCSD Student Conduct Code charges against co-ops members withdrawn as part of the agreement.

• November 24, 1994 — Co-ops, AS/GSA, and UCSD administration agree on revision of the 1993 MOU.

• 2000 — Citing a ‘fight between patrons’ UCSD administration, in the middle of the night, changes the locks on the C.H.E.. The C.H.E. collective responds by staging a ‘lock-in': entering the space and refusing to leave. The administration eventually caves and allows the locks to be changed back.

• October, 2000 — Co-ops together file a formal non-academic grievance against UCSD administrators, for violation of University policies and violation of the Co-ops MOU. Most (not all) of the charges concern administration actions toward the C.H.E. Cafe.

• 2002 — In association with the Groundwork Bookstore Co-operative, the C.H.E. collective agrees to help finance the BURN! collective website – a directory page for radical resources. UCSD administration claims that C.H.E. is allocating funding for a terrorist organization and files charges against members of the collective. The charges are quickly dropped after the administration realizes it has no substantial basis for the charges.

• 2010-14 — Between 2010 and 2014, the UCSD administration attempted to close the C.H.E. on a number of occasions, even going so far as removing the gas line to the kitchen without the collective’s consent. Most recently, the administration has issued a report necessitating more repairs using an astronomically inflated estimate, while refusing to allocate funding for them, and instead threatening to shut the C.H.E. Cafe down.

Artists’ Boycott of UCSD Begun

LA JOLLA – Dec. 15, 2014. Members of the performing arts community have called a boycott of all artistic engagements on the U.C.S.D. campus. While the student cooperative and non-profit organization, the Che Café Collective, is waiting on a legal resolution to their lease and repair issues with the University of California San Diego, local, national, and international artists and performers continue to rally to show support to allow the Che Café to continue to operate in the same building and space it has for the past 35 years.

To demonstrate just how far and wide-reaching the support/impact the Che Café is in the performing arts community, a letter is circulating asking for a concerted effort to boycott all artistic endeavors in any way associated with U.C.S.D. and demand that the U.C.S.D. administration:

1. Stop all attacks on the Che Café and reverse its eviction efforts.
2. Refrain from enforcing a lockout of the Che Café and refrain from using any form of violence, force, law enforcement, or other drastic and coercive tactics against members of the Che Café Collective and its supporters.
3. Work alongside representatives of the student body to recognize the Che Café for the historical landmark and unique creative venue that it is.
4. Restore funding to the Che Café and allow students and supporters to fulfill a dynamic and creative vision for the use of the space.

These artists, labels, bands, and musicians have committed to the boycott:
Bob ‘Barley’ Beyerle -Vinyl Communications Records/ Titwrench/ Neighborhood Watch, Rob Crow – Pinback, Collin Corrigan – Rockfish, Jello Biafra – Alternative Tentacles Records/ Guantanamo School Of Medicine/ Dead Kennedys/ LARD, Spinach Williams – The Last Barfighter, Mar Moreno – Diatribe/ Outlaw Bastards, Justin Pearson – The Locust/ All Leather/ Retox/ Head Wound City, John ‘Swami’ Reis – Night Marchers/ Drive Like Jehu/ Rocket From The Crypt/ Pitchfork, Jason Soares – Physics, Mauro Coddelupi – Raw Power (Italy), Mark Wilson – The Mob (UK), Brandon Cruz – Dr. Know/ The Courtship Of Eddie’s Father/ The Bad News Bears, Zack De La Rocha – Rage Against The Machine, Armistice (Los Angeles), Dan Faughdner – Sledding With Tigers/ Grim Luck, Anachronism, Days Of Light And Gravity, Glow And The Dark, Filthy Flamingos, Atticus And The Boo Radleys, Ghetto Blaster, Death Eyes, Ben Ziff – Di Nigunim/ Thieves Lineage, Man Vs. Man, Trash Axis, Cryptic Languages, Age Of Collapse, Jose Palafox – Struggle/ Swing Kids/ Bread & Circuits/ Yaphet Kotto/ Baader Brains, Gregg Paiva – XHostageX/ YourEnemy, Eskera, Per Thunnel – Sex Dwarf/ Raped Teenagers (Sweden).

The letter is online at

https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=381173525380791

Members of the arts community wishing to publicly state their support of the UCSD boycott are asked to contact Mar Moreno at punkmar77@ymail.com

While the Che Café is appealing an unfavorable unlawful detainer judgment that was issued last month Che Café members and supporters are urging everyone to make phone calls or send emails to faculty and alumni you may know as well as to U.C.S.D. Chancellor Pradeep Khosla, Vice Chancellor Juan Gonzales, and U.C.S.D. Legal Counsel Daniel Park’s office and urge the above stated bullet points. Supporters are also urged to contact Governor Jerry Brown, state legislators, UC system-wide President Janet Napolitano and the UC Board of Regents.

Donations to the Save the Che Café campaign, for legal defense and to mitigate lost revenues can be made at: http://www.gofundme.com/b4hda8

 

 UPDATE – ARTISTS JOINING THE BOYCOTT SINCE THIS ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED ON 12/15/14:

Ian MacKaye, Dischord Records.

 

2 New Articles on C.H.E. Cafe

The UCSD administration has still not posted the 5-day notice to vacate the building. Maybe now they are planning to wait until people leave the campus for the winter vacation?

Meanwhile two good articles have come out. One is by Ken Leighton in the San Diego Reader and it explodes the Big Lie that UCSD administrators have been concerned about the “safety” of the C.H.E Cafe building. The other article is by Arun Gupta in Telesur about the importance of community spaces like the C.H.E. Cafe.

Here are the articles:

“A question of safety…and address”
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/nov/24/blurt-question-safetyand-address/

“Spaces of Hope:
Radical Movements Need Radical Spaces”
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Spaces-of-Hope-Radical-Movements-Need-Radical-Spaces -20141202-0023.html

 

Legal expenses continue to mount and business (and revenue) has been substantially disrupted by the uncertainty of if and when a 5 day notice to vacate may be posted on the building. Donations to the fund to Save the C.H.E. Cafe can be made at http://www.gofundme.com/b4hda8

 

UCSD ADMINISTRATION PLANS EVICTION OVER THANKSGIVING?

_MG_3211March on the Chancellor. Photo by Fred Lonidier.

LA JOLLA – November 21, 2014. On Wednesday, November 19, UCSD administrators decided to seek a writ of possession to enforce an earlier unlawful detainer judgment and evict the CHE Cafe Cooperative and any students from the cafe space it has continuously occupied for over 34 years. Despite a resolution by the UCSD Associated Students Council (AS) asking the Chancellor to not proceed with posting a 5-day notice to vacate, and 14,000-signature petitions and open letters demanding that UCSD stop the eviction actions against the C.H.E. Cafe, delivered to the Chancellor earlier this month, action by the administration to evict the CHE Cafe continues rather than negotiations for a new lease agreement with the Co-op.

When the new Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Juan Gonzalez, addressed the UCSD Associated Students Council (AS) on November 5, he told them that the eviction would go forward because the administration had no choice because the court has a concern about the “safety” of the building. The issue of “safety” was not raised in the eviction trial and was not the basis for the court ruling. The administration has not cited any specific legal code to support its public claims of a “safety” problem at the CHE building. The Fire Marshall did the annual C.H.E. Cafe building inspection on April 17, 2014 and wrote up his findings that the building is safe.

UCSD Public Records officials said on November 20 that there is no Fire Marshal Report from the April 17, 2014 inspection of the CHE facility that was performed by the Fire Marshal under the supervision of University Center Assistant Facility Director, John Payne. CHE Cafe members were at the UCSD public records office earlier this week to pay for the copies of a large release of UCSD records regarding the Cafe. They say the official told them almost all of the records were ready to hand over, with the exception of the 2014 Fire Marshall’s report, which she was still “working on”. The CHE members say the official had the Fire Marshall’s report up on her computer screen, and that they should have taken a picture of the screen when they saw it!

In Payne’s email to the CHE after the inspection he stated: “I wanted to Thank you for all your efforts in keeping the Che Cafe facility safe. The Fire Marshal was extremely pleased at all the efforts that have been made and has signed off on the inspection. Other than 1 minor item in the Darkstar [non-CHE] space the facility is looking good in terms of safety. He will return annually to inspect the facility based on my conversation with him this morning. Once again thank you for all your efforts in keeping a safe facility.” All other documents the University is relying upon as to safety and necessary maintenance upgrades are from 2012 or earlier and have been contested and challenged by independently hired engineers and experts.

The Co-ops were hopeful when UCSD Chancellor Pradeep Khosla sat to meet with faculty, expecting negotiations may be moving forward. Some members of the faculty have publicly warned that using the UC Police Department to force students out of the CHE Cafe could result in violence. All that was offered from the administration was that the University’s deferred maintenance on the CHE Cafe could possibly be funded through a student fee referendum that would also mainly include funding for the University Center’s buildings and programs which are also running huge deficits and in crisis. This is an unreasonable and non-concrete proposal and offer.

The CHE Cafe remains flexible and open as to a range of possible solutions that would allow it to continue leasing and operating in the facility. Some alternatives might include allowing the Cooperative to fundraise money and contract for any necessary repairs or safety issues. It could include allowing the space to be shared and co-funded with other entities such as the Craft Center that have been shut down and left empty for the same reason. It could involve the University borrowing or using other funds to start any maintenance which is shown to be immediately necessary. So far, the University has not asserted any safety issue concern is an actual legal or lease violation. The building has never been “red tagged” (as uninhabitable) and the Co-op’s insurance policy remains in full effect.

Despite adding so much value to the University and the overall San Diego community the Cafe receives no student fee money for events and costs the University virtually nothing for its programming and is self-sustaining, unlike most University programming. All the University was obligated to pay for under the lease was building and structural maintenance. The University has spent very little over the past 34 years to maintain the structure and now it is attempting to punish and evict the Co-op as a result of its deferral of that structural maintenance.

The 4 UCSD student co-ops were owed several lease extensions but UCSD staff and administrators avoided, stalled and misled students into thinking they were safe under the existing lease and could not be given notice while lease modifications were being negotiated. Now the University has terminated the CHE lease and seeks a forcible eviction.

CHE Cafe members and supporters are urging everyone to make phone calls or send emails to faculty and alumni you may know as well as to Chancellor Khosla, Vice Chancellor Gonzales, Legal Counsel Daniel Park’s office and urge the administration to:

1– stop the eviction
2– stop the false statements and justifications about “safety” issues with the building when the building is perfectly approved and insured to be in operation;
3– stop threatening students with the use of armed UC police officers and forcible removal from the student fee-funded C.H.E. Cafe building
4– return to the bargaining table and sign new lease agreements with the C.H.E., the 3 other student-run campus cooperatives, and the Craft Center.

_MG_3186

 Pre-March Rally at CHE Cafe, for March on the Chancellor.
Photo by Fred Lonidier.

To read comments from supporters, show your support, and/or donate to the C.H.E., please visit:
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/?page_id=58#HowToHelp
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/
http://thechecafe.blogspot.com/
http://www.gofundme.com/b4hda8
https://www.facebook.com/savetheche

MUSIC, ART, AND A SMALL PART OF THE C.H.E.’s LEGACY:

A short list of national and international indie acts who played the C.H.E. includes:

At the Drive-In, Blonde Redhead, Black Dice, Blink 182, Botch, Bright Eyes, Citizen Fish, Billy Corgan, Chumbawamba, the Descendents, Deerhoof, Dum Dum Girls, Green Day, Hella, Inside Out, Jawbreaker, Jets to Brazil, Jimmy Eat World, Lightning Bolt, Los Crudos, Mike Watt, No Age, Pennywise, Rise Against, Sleep, Subhumans, The Dillinger Escape Plan, The Get Up Kids, The (international) Noise Conspiracy, and Unwound, among many, many others.

A few of San Diego’s seminal artists that have been hosted by the C.H.E. include:

Album Leaf, Antioch Arrow, Aspects of Physics, Crossed Out, Clikatat Ikatowi, Crash Worship, Rob Crow, Diatribe, Drive Like Jehu, Gogogo Airheart, Heavy Vegetable, Heroin, Physics, Pinback, Pitchfork, Patricia Rincon Dance Collective, Rocket from the Crypt, Struggle, Swing Kids, Retox, The Black Heart Procession, The Locust, Three Mile Pilot, Mario Torero, and Weatherbox, among several others.

 _MG_3185Pre-March Rally at CHE Cafe, for March on the Chancellor.
Photo by Fred Lonidier.

Monday, 11/17 Benefit in Support of the C.H.E. Café

Monday at 6:00pm, November 17, 2014
Tiger!Tiger! 3025 El Cajon Blvd, San Diego, California 92104

Hosted by Tiger!Tiger! & the C.H.E. Café Support Network, the evening will feature DJs Rob Crow (Pinback) and Justin Pearson (the Locust) as well as an Art & Photo Auction with lots of musical offerings to choose from and bid on.
And we’re happy to offer a screening of the brand new documentary by Bill Perrine -> “It’s Gonna Blow!!!” Screening at 7:30. Doors open at 6.
Come out for a celebration of the C.H.E. Cafe’s history, and a fundraiser!
Suggested donation $5.
Monday Nov. 17, 6 pm, at Tiger Tiger.
3025 El Cajon Blvd, San Diego, California 92104
Donations of art/photos/any CHe-related stuff welcome!
Kids welcome!  Please distribute widely!
image1.PNG
“THIS IS A SAFE SPACE. Regardless of your race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, religion, abilities or background, you will each receive the respect you deserve. Remember that your words have power. If you are made uncomfortable by a fellow attendee’s words or actions, please inform a volunteer. Homophobic, sexist, racist, or transphobic language will not be tolerated in this space, nor will physical violence. Respect each other and respect this space. Be kind.
–The CHE Cafe.
 

3 Save the CHE events, Sunday and Friday

 

Sunday, November 9, 10:00am – 5:00pm:

C.H.E.CAFÉ BEAUTIFICATION BONANZA
and Know Your Rights training at noon
 

Friday, November 14:

SAVE THE C.H.E. RALLY: THE C.H.E. TAKES FOUNDERS DAY

 

Photo by DeeDee Halleck

This Sunday, November 9th, we are gathering together to give the C.H.E.Cafe some T.L.C. We will be doing a general cleanup, drought tolerant plant planting, and simple interior/exterior beautification. There’s no better way to stave off this early darkness than by planting the seeds for more luminous days ahead!

WHAT’S NEEDED:

1) YOU! – Come hang out, lend a hand, and get caught up on all the latest happenings going on with the fight to save The C.H.E.!

2) General Cleaning, ELBOW GREASE – Smell that? ::SNIFF:: Smells like a reckoning for unwelcome grime. Arm thineself with crisp lemon scent!

3) Donations – In an effort to make the C.H.E. Café a more beautiful bastion for all to enjoy, we are asking for any donations of:
- drought tolerant plants
- planter boxes/pots
- and/or other garden materiel
- paint brushes
- brooms
- mop heads
- miscellaneous cleaning materials!

These are lasting gifts, and will go a long way to convey the convergent growth now being felt in daily operations of the cafe. Help make the C.H.E. look as great as we know it is!

 

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS TRAINING

 

At noon, we’ll have another know your rights workhop for any who couldn’t attend the last one, or would like to learn more.

 

Finally, the C.H.E. will be open 24/7 from now until our legal struggle gets sorted out. If you’d like to drop by and see how things are progressing, feel free. Again, we can’t thank you enough for your assistance through all of this. The C.H.E. Cafe has been a home for so many musicians, artists, students, and misfits over the course of it’s 34 year history, and because of your continued efforts, we can make sure the C.H.E. will be around for the next generation to enjoy.

Support DIY Spaces!

The C.H.E.Café is a volunteer run, safe(r) and sober space. Please leave the booze/drugs and bigoted words/actions at home Invite friends, spread the word!

(A)(E)

 

Photo by DeeDee Halleck

FRIDAY 11/14 MARCH ON THE CHANCELLOR(S)

On October 28th we rallied and delivered a petition with over 14,000 signatures to the office of the UCSD chancellor, requesting the university cease the eviction actions against the C.H.E. Café. We left with them with the promise that if they didn’t respond within 14 days, WE WOULD NOT BACK DOWN AND WE WOULD BE BACK TO DEMAND AN ANSWER.

_MG_3228100 march on Chancellor and deliver 14,000
petition signatures. Photo by Fred Lonidier.

Since then, the student governing body A.S. has passed a resolution demanding a moratorium on eviction proceedings until they are able to make further determinations about the status of the C.H.E. Members of UCSD faculty have also met with Administration officials and requested that they cease the eviction. The Chancellor and the rest of the UCSD administration have decided to completely ignore both the voice of the students in A.S. and members of the Faculty. The administration’s plan to carry on with their attempt to evict the C.H.E.continues.

On Friday, November 14th UCSD is celebrating our founders by throwing a big festival, complete with speeches from both past and present chancellors! Our plan is to march through campus and get ANGRY and LOUD until we hear a response from the chancellor, once again, demanding the university end their eviction actions against the C.H.E. Café and return to the negotiating table. If they won’t answer us – WE WON’T let them carry on with business as usual.

This is the beginning of a larger attack on the co-ops. We can’t let the UC dismantle all the student run co-ops. We have to rise up, we have to act up NOW!

ALL POWER TO THE CO OPS

We ask everyone to bring your own signs and banners, and music and noise makers. Let’s bring the ruckus.

DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS.

In Solidarity,

The C.H.E.  Cafe Collective

 Photo by DeeDee Halleck

C.H.E. Cafe Rapid Response Team, please sign up!

 
On Monday, UCSD Chancellor Kholsa told a delegation of faculty supporters of the C.H.E. Cafe that the eviction will go forward (despite the UCSD Associated Students Council resolution against it, adopted a week ago). He said the 5 day notice will be posted on the building as soon as UCSD gets the final court papers in their hands.
.
If the UCSD administration tries to carry out a court eviction order and lock us out, it could happen at any time of the day or night. We would need as many supporters as possible to come to the Cafe to show support. UCSD Co-ops had to do this in the past, and hundreds of people did show up at 3 a.m. It saved the day.
.
We need as many supporters as possible, who live in the San Diego area, to sign up for our rapid response team. If needed, you would agree to be called at any time, 24 hours a day. If called and if able to do it, you would agree to come to the Cafe immediately. If you could not come immediately, you would agree to come as soon as you could.
.
Please use our online sign-up form to join our Rapid Response Team. Click here (or copy/paste it into your browser):
.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kJpw2Ostc3KfHtheAqp5vKDTkmNn88mjMiEFoOuUhT4/viewform?embe dded=true

 

click here to see

SAVE THE C.H.E.! PHOTO BLOG BY DEEDEE HALLECK

See also  photos by Fred Lonidier, of the 10/28/14 March on the Chancellor,  at photos.

A.S. to Chancellor Khosla: Stop the Eviction!

The Associated Students Council of UCSD, representing 20,000 undergraduate students, adopted this resolution at their meeting of Wednesday, October 29, 2014. The resolution refers to the “GSA”. The GSA is the Graduate Students Association of UCSD, which represents 5,000 graduate students. The GSA Council voted on Monday, October 27, 2014 to conduct its own investigation of the UCSD administration’s lawsuit to evict a student organization from a student fee-funded facility. The C.H.E. Cafe Collective is a registered student organization. The C.H.E. Cafe building is maintained by self-assessed student body fees, approved by student body referendum, as opposed to public tax based University funds. The ASUCSD was not consulted about the UCSD administration’s decision to evict the C.H.E. Cafe.

 

RESOLUTION TO FORM AN ASUCSD AD HOC COMMITTEE WITH THE PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATING THE STATUS OF THE CHE CAFE COLLECTIVE AND CHE FACILITY, AND TO CALL FOR THE UNIVERSITY TO REFRAIN FROM IMMEDIATE ACTION UNTIL THE ASUCSD AD HOC COMMITTEE HAS ISSUED ITS FINAL REPORT

Sponsored by AVP EJA Sierra Donaldson, Women’s Commission Chair Simran Anand, and First Year Senator Philip Huh

WHEREAS the GSA, on October 24th, has formed an ad-hoc committee to investigate the future of the CHE Cafe Collective, and

WHEREAS the written notice of eviction by the University is impending and action by ASUCSD is timely and necessary, and

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that ASUCSD will form an ad hoc committee effective immediately until the end of the 2014-2015 academic year in order to investigate the status of the CHE Cafe Collective and the CHE Facility and provide weekly reports to the ASUCSD Council, and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the ASUCSD calls upon the University to refrain from immediate action regarding the CHE Cafe Collective and CHE Facility until this Ad Hoc Committee has issued its final report.

 

 

Know Your Rights legal training, Friday; updates

This e-blast was sent to the C.H.E. Cafe’s new supporters’ email list on Tuesday, October 28, 2014.

 

Dear Friends of the C.H.E. Cafe,

This email is to provide you with a quick update on the C.H.E. Cafe in light of the UCSD administration’s recent legal attack and attempt to evict the Collective from the space.

As you are well-aware, the C.H.E. Cafe (originally, “Cheap, Healthy Eats”) (the “Che”) has been a student-run, cooperative, all-ages, sober café, venue, and creative space on the campus of UCSD since 1980. For thirty-four years, the Che has promoted socially-conscious thought, hosted new ideas, musicians, and artists, and nurtured the DIY (do it yourself) spirit. It has allowed people of all ages to experience culture and diversity in a positive, progressive, safe environment. In this way it has become an iconic, historical space in San Diego.

As you may also know, UCSD filed an eviction notice to shut down the Che. Last week, a judge ruled for the University, giving it the right to proceed with a lockout. Contrary to what the University expected, the Che, its community, and its supporters are not going to fold. The attempted eviction has spurred us into action and we are asking you to join us in continuing this fight. Some examples of the exciting things happening now are below.

This morning, a Save the Che rally of 100 people met and marched to give the University chancellor a copy of the petition that you and 14,000 other people signed. The chancellor was not available to take them, and we promised that if we don’t hear from him in a week, we’ll be back. Further details on further protests will be available in the near future.

Tomorrow, 10/29/14, at 8:45 a.m. in Judge Bacal’s court room, 330 W. Broadway (downtown San Diego), Department 69, the Collective’s attorney will present a challenge to the court’s ruling, a proposed statement of decision, and the evidence relied on. Please come to court if you can. Like all our court cases, the more people we have to represent us, the better. Please remember to dress appropriately for court.

Tomorrow evening, UCSD’s Associated Students will vote on a proposed resolution to support the Che Cafe. Like the court date, we would be greatly helped by a demonstration of support.. The meeting is at 6:00 pm on the fourth floor of the Price Center on the UCSD campus. Following that meeting, we will be having a show at the Che Cafe. Having a fun time in the space is as much a part of the struggle as anything, and we invite anyone supportive of the Che to come party.

This Friday, October 31st (exact time TBA, but likely starting at 3:00 p.m.), there will be a know-your-rights workshop by civil rights attorney and USD law professor Alex Landon to provide training and information to those of us who will engage in more protests and civil disobedience to stop the Che’s eviction. Frankly, the UC has already demonstrated that they’re willing to fight dirty in their efforts to shut down the Che, and we want to ensure that everyone is informed and empowered if the UC continues to exert their power at our expense. We will likely be holding a legal observer training that day as well, if you would like to learn how to be an effective witness when there is a protest/civil disobedience action.

Various other actions and fundraisers are planned, so please stay tuned! If you are unable to come out in person, please consider lending your support with a letter, email, or phone call to the administration (links below), and/or making a donation (link also below). We also greatly appreciate your comments, re-tweets, blogs, likes, words of encouragement, agit-prop ideas, and any other actions in solidarity!

Thank you for helping to ensure that the Che Cafe can continue to entertain, feed, and inspire people as it has for 34 years!

For more information and to lend your support, please go to:
http://www.gofundme.com/b4hda8
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/?page_id=58#HowToHelp
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/
http://thechecafe.blogspot.com/

In Solidarity,

The Che Cafe Collective
You are receiving this email because you signed our petition to support the Che Cafe Collective in its current struggle. We thank you for your continued support.

unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences

Student and Community Outrage Following the UCSD Administration’s Legal Attack on the Historic CHE Café

 

The Collective and Its Supporters Vow to Save the CHE:
Rally and March at UCSD on Tuesday, October 28, 10:00 a.m.

LA JOLLA – Tuesday, October 28, 10:00 a.m., – rally and march from the C.H.E. Café to the UCSD Chancellor’s office to personally deliver 14,000-signature petitions and open letters* demanding that UCSD stop the eviction actions against the C.H.E. Cafe, restore basic building maintenance funding, and order his administration to return to the negotiation table. Students and alumni are seeing the UCSD administration’s attack upon the C.H.E. Cafe as the opening salvo in a new war against all of the student-run campus cooperatives. The four campus co-ops share the same Master Space Agreement lease terms with UCSD. All four co-ops have been unable to get the administration to negotiate terms for an extension of the lease, since 2008. In the courtroom, lawyers for UCSD painted the picture that the lease negotiation problems were just about the C.H.E. Café, when in reality they followed years of refusal by the administration to meet with students and supporters regarding the lease at issue.

Students and alumni are alarmed that the UCSD administration took the eviction action into court without the consent of the student body. The C.H.E. Cafe building is one of the complex of facilities on the campus which are funded by self-assessed student body fees, not UC Regents’ funds. Because of this distinct status as student-fee funded facilities, it is the policy of the UC Regents and of the UCSD administration that a student-controlled board has jurisdiction over space allocations to student organizations housed in the Student Center, the Price Center and the C.H.E. Cafe building. That board is the University Centers Advisory Board (UCAB), comprised of student representatives and non-voting representatives from the faculty and campus staff. The UCSD administration completely bypassed UCAB’s jurisdiction by filing the eviction lawsuit against the C.H.E. Cafe. The alleged “de-certification” action by the Graduate Student Association (“GSA”) that the Administration also relies on was equally flawed and is being challenged by the Collective in court.

Built in 1942, the C.H.E. Cafe building is one of the last of the original Camp Matthews, World War II era buildings still in use on the campus and also became the first student center on the new UCSD campus in 1966. UCSD administrators have claimed the building is “too old” to be worth maintaining and have stated in writing that they “may” save the murals on the building, if it is not “too expensive”. The muralists include a number of highly-respected local artists. Supporters want the building to have protected historic site designation.

Members of the University, San Diego, and art/music communities are also outraged that the entire public relations campaign the UCSD administration has waged against the C.H.E. Cafe has been based upon demonstrably false premises. There is no urgent fire safety issue. There is no repair or upgrade to the building which requires completion this year. There is no funding crisis because the Cafe generates most of its own essential operational revenues. One alumni, Monty Kroopkin, observed that “The UCSD administration has chosen the aggressive abandonment of reason and the sort of anti-collaborative, non-negotiation tactics we sometimes see when corporations engage in illegal union-busting campaigns.” Kroopkin is a former co-chair of the UCSD student government and a union shop steward.

The C.H.E. Cafe, for over 34 years, has been one of the only (some say the only) Safe Space for campus events. Rather than recognizing the invaluable contribution the Cafe’s Safe Space Policy has made to the lives of women, LGBTQ and other minority students, faculty, staff and community members – especially high school students — the UCSD administration is arrogantly threatening to destroy it.

All are invited to join the protest action.

See the students’ notice of the action at http://thechecafe.blogspot.com/2014/10/save-che-rally-che-chats-with-chancellor.html

* See enclosed electronic copies of online petitions and open letters. A hard copy of the additional paper petitions is available on request.

 

To read comments from supporters, show your support, and/or donate to the C.H.E., please visit:
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/?page_id=58#HowToHelp
http://checafe.ucsd.edu/
http://thechecafe.blogspot.com/
http://www.gofundme.com/b4hda8