Peevey Party Protest" />

Share Button

CPRA Response of Goldman School of Public Policy re: Peevey Gala

Citizens Oversight (2015-03-25) Aguirre Severson LLP

This Page: http://www.copswiki.org/Common/M1558

The following are responses to CPRA requests for information regarding the unusual sponsorship of the Peevey Gala event and also the linkage between the $25 million in funding provided to the University of California, in the San Onofre settlement agreement. See the lawsuit for background about how these are all linked.

The Documents

Things of note in "Documents_produced_3-25-15.pdf"

  1. (Page 1 and page 325-327) Dec 15, 2014. Michael Peevey himself contacted the school and instead of asking them to sponsor the event, simply informed them that they would be sponsoring it.
  2. (page 3) Dec 22, 2014: Annette Doornbos, the assistant dean to the Goldman School of Public Policy, provided the sponsorship message to appear on the invitations. Please note that this is typical of such sponsorships. You get to use the prestigious name of the institution on your invitations if the event measures up to the criteria of the institution, and it gets part of the proceeds. It is not just a simple donation from a random donor. They did this with no minimum guaranteed return from the event, nor any apparent scrutiny regarding whether it was appropriate for the school to sponsor the retirement of a public official.
  3. (page 6) Feb 10: Email about call from Ray Lutz of Citizens' Oversight. When Mr. Lutz called Dean Brady, he tried to explain to him and advise him that this was a bad step to take, and their only option to avoid intense public scrutiny would be to pull their sponsorship of the event. Unfortunately, they did not accept that advice. They tarnished the name of the institution due to a personal friendship, and misused the sponsorship of the school for the event of a personal friend.
  4. (Page 7) Feb 10: Dorah Shuey Letter
  5. (Page 9) Feb 10: "We are being inundated by abrasive and abusive phone calls", Mentions Tara Sheevey, Bruce Campbell, Patricia Borchmann
  6. (Page 14) Feb 10: Notice that the UT and Sac Bee picked up the story.
  7. (Page 28) Feb 10: "You are now the target of a phone campaign"
  8. (Page 31) Feb 10: It's not our event so our folks should not be in the position of seeking to explain this.
  9. (Page 50) Feb 11: Mike Aguirre's letter & response.
  10. (Page 56) Feb 11: Larry Whittmeyer's email.
  11. (Page 57) Feb 12: Sasha Horwitz's letter
  12. (Page 67) Feb 12, they try to get out of the fact that they sponsored the event. [However, with the name of the institution on the invitations, this is simply not true. Once the invitations went out with the sponsorship and endorsement message, they sponsored it.]
  13. (Page 82) After receiving many emails and phone calls, Executive Asst. Beth Mc Cleary asked "Do you want me to read these to Ray Lutz of Citizens Oversight who seems to be behind the protest and phone calls?"
  14. (Page 89) Feb 12: Joe Holtzman Email
  15. (Page 98+) Letter from Senator Hill, ; Dean Brady discourteously blows off Senator Hill with a one-liner and pre-canned response.
  16. (Page 113) It is suggested that it would be best for the GSPP for more attendees to choose cheaper meals to optimize proceeds to the school. How is it that they can claim this is not a fundraiser?
  17. (Page 117) Feb 13: Serge Jonnaert email
  18. (Page 119) Feb 13: Mary Hoffman email
  19. (Page 122) Feb 13: Post-event comments about the fact that there was not a huge crowd protesting.
  20. (Page 124) Feb 13: Brady says he thinks the ordeal is mostly over.
  21. (Page 129) Feb 13: Alessandra Colfi email
  22. (Page 135) Feb 13: Gene Stone email
  23. (Page 157) Feb 13: Brady comments that a class on ethics as suggested by Sen. Hill's letter would be a good idea, and then further justifies his decision.
  24. They definitely felt the pressure of the phone campaign to attempt to impress on them the seriousness of the situation. Unfortunately, they blew this off as nothing, thinking it would all "blow over" in no time. No records were kept of the calls, in terms of who called, how many, etc. Later, they realized that the story would not go away.
  25. (Page 142) Feb 13: Brady suggests no further response to Sen. Hill's letter, which is later supported by subordinates (Page 155)
  26. (Page 164) Feb 13: Roger Johnson letter.
  27. (Page 167, 178) Feb 14: The only letter that seemed to make an impression was the one from CPUC Chief ALJ David Ganson (page 167) who first wanted to meet with Dean Brady, and then instead goes into detail on page 178. His recommendation was the same as what Mr. Lutz suggested, that they not take the money, and rapidly remove Peevey from the board of advisors.
  28. (Page 181) Sam Singer post. Singer was on contract handling San Bruno's PR.
  29. (Page 188) Feb 16. CHANGE OCCURS HERE Brady contacts Susan Kennedy and tells her not to transfer any funds from the event until they talk.
  30. (Page 195) Feb 16: "Should be prepared for a second wave of criticism" after SF Chronicle Editorial. (pasted in on page 198) See SF Chronicle Editorial It appears they were picking up the pre-print edition of the Editorial the day before.
  31. (Page 197) Feb 16: Brady asks for Peevey's phone number "as fast as possible"
  32. (Page 204) Feb 17: Max Celaya email: "Please disinvite Peevey and cancel the event."
  33. (page 208) Feb 17, even the Foundation executive committee seemed to have no clue that a sponsorship is a very serious undertaking. They seem to think they are getting a donation from this that they are turning down, when in fact no donation was ever guaranteed in compensation for use of the name of the institution.
  34. (Page 211) Feb 18, Apparently the Chancellor's office is finally hearing about this. Claude Steele is Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost, Berkeley.
  35. (Page 214-216) Feb 18, Brady said that the worst of this had passed, and they should just "grin and bear it" and they still had no recognition of the damage they had done to the good name of their institution by going through with it. Adrian Diaz, Interim Director of Government Relations, suggested that they still accept the funds.
  36. (Page 219) Claude Steele says he thinks they did the right thing; Brady says "I chose loyalty over self-serving indignation"
  37. (Page 222) Feb 18, Asst Vice Chancellor Irene Kim also supported Dean Brady's decision to endorse the Peevey Gala.
  38. (Page 224) Feb 23 The official press release proposed by Asst. Dean Doornbos in response to the Chronicle's piece on this, and that the event was NOT designed as a fundraiser! Essentially it means they are willing to endorse questionable events and even put their name on them without any assurances that there will be any return. More likely, at this point, they were trying to distance themselves from the event as much as possible without reversing their original position.
  39. (Page 225) Feb 23 David Lewbin letter.
  40. (Page 226) Feb 23 Letter from Michael Harris from Berkeley OpEd to Contra Costa Times to cover for Peevey affair.
  41. (Page 227) Feb 23, Brady wants to talk with Claude Steele about Peevey event.
  42. (Page 229-252) Feb 24, they blew off Jeff McDonald's questions about the $55K raised according to the CPUC behest report on their website. Page 248 "I'm not following up on this email, but I wanted you to see that this story does not seem to die" Claire Holmes, of Berkeley agreed with the idea of stonewalling.
  43. (Page 256) there is talk of a "confidential document"
  44. (Page 260) Feb 24: an extensive letter to Claude Steele where they actually started to consider their options, includes Chronical Editorial (P 262)
  45. (Page 268) Mar 10, Peevey resigns from the board, and confirms that by that time, they had already announced that they would not accept the proceeds.
  46. (Page 269-274) Emails from 2011, 2014 illustrating the close relationship he had with Michael Peevey and Carol Liu.
  47. (Page 275+) Chronicle editorial and discussions about their plans to respond to it.
  48. (Page 282) Feb 12: Facebook message from Judy Seely Kirk, UCB class 64.
  49. (Pages 286, 315 - 324) Asst. Dean Annette Doornbos and Dean Henry Brady had the Goldman School pay for their $250 tickets. Strange, that the event did not "comp" the school for use of their name. They had some trouble getting the check cut, They said the event would send the money back anyway, so it did not need much scrutiny. Now that they have decided not to accept any money from the event, it looks like the school supported the private event improperly. Henry Brady and Annette Doornbos should have to pay for their own tickets. They made it an "expense" rather than a donation (page 286).
  50. (Page 310) Feb 11: Press Advisory from Citizens' Oversight

It is amazing how disconnected from reality Dean Brady and his associates appear to be. They get 100s of phone calls, letters, and emails. They get a letter from Senator Jerry Hill. Even Mr. Lutz calls his office. But they continue to pursue a mindless belief that they can sponsor an event with the name of the institution apparently with no scrutiny and no forethought whatsoever. Some associates are even thinking it will be best if they can encourage attendees to order the cheaper items on the menu so they can make more money on the deal.

Apparently, these folks have lost their way. There needs to be some serious re-evaluation about how money is raised in the UC system.

The fact that this ever happened is almost inconceivable... except for one very important point. The recent San Onofre settlement deal, concocted by Peevey in the secret meeting in Warsaw Poland, included $25 million in funding directed to the U.C. system, and earmarked Berkeley. Connect the dots.

Responses

News Coverage

Comments

Media Form edit

Title CPRA Response of Goldman School of Public Policy re: Peevey Gala
Publisher Citizens Oversight
Author Aguirre Severson LLP
Pub Date 2015-03-25
Media Link
Embed HTML
Forum Link
Note 327 pages of emails regarding Peevey Gala sponsorship. See also Peevey Party Protest
Keywords California Public Utilities Commission, Shut San Onofre
Media Type PDF
Media Group News, Response Letter
Curator Rating Plain
Book ISBN
Author Name Sortable
Publish Status Published
Static Image HTML
Thumbnail Link
Topic attachments
I Attachment Action Size Date Who Comment
2015-03-26_COPS_Press_Rel-GSPP_Emails.pdfpdf 2015-03-26_COPS_Press_Rel-GSPP_Emails.pdf manage 294.4 K 2015-03-27 - 13:04 Raymond Lutz COPS press release on GSPP emails
2015-03-27_Brady_to_Lutz_email.pdfpdf 2015-03-27_Brady_to_Lutz_email.pdf manage 63.4 K 2015-03-30 - 18:06 Raymond Lutz Email from Dean Brady to Ray Lutz on 2015-03-27
2015-03-30_response_to_Dean_Brady_email.pdfpdf 2015-03-30_response_to_Dean_Brady_email.pdf manage 278.4 K 2015-03-30 - 18:07 Raymond Lutz COPS Response to Dean Brady Email, sent 2015-03-30
CPUC-Linkage-to-Energy-Institute-At-Haas-CPUC_Fundings.pdfpdf CPUC-Linkage-to-Energy-Institute-At-Haas-CPUC_Fundings.pdf manage 40.5 K 2015-03-25 - 21:35 Raymond Lutz CPUC Funding -- linkage of CPUC to Energy Institute at Haas
CPUC-Linkage-to-Energy-Institute-At-Haas-E-mail.pdfpdf CPUC-Linkage-to-Energy-Institute-At-Haas-E-mail.pdf manage 33.4 K 2015-03-25 - 21:35 Raymond Lutz Emails regarding linkage of CPUC to Energy Institute at Haas
Documents_produced_3-25-15.pdfpdf Documents_produced_3-25-15.pdf manage 35471.4 K 2015-03-25 - 21:29 Raymond Lutz Combined PDF of emails, 327 pages.
Petition_for_Writ_of_Mandamus-CONFORMED.pdfpdf Petition_for_Writ_of_Mandamus-CONFORMED.pdf manage 1249.2 K 2015-03-25 - 21:30 Raymond Lutz Lawsuit filed to force production of the emails.
SDUT_gala_emails.pdfpdf SDUT_gala_emails.pdf manage 4384.2 K 2015-03-31 - 14:47 Raymond Lutz CPRA Response to SD Union Tribune, emails regarding Peevey Gala, Picker payment, and Behest report
Topic revision: r11 - 2016-05-16, UnknownUser
 

This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding Copswiki? Send feedback