Editorial: Spirit Squad investigation reveals how UCLA prioritizes donations over students

The single most important role of any university should be to protect its students.

But UCLA proved it was willing to sacrifice that duty for a couple extra donations.

UCLA removed Mollie Vehling, the former UCLA Spirit Squad director, from her position May 17 following a Title IX investigation for inviting members of the Spirit Squad to a sexually explicit Las Vegas show with UCLA alumnus and major donor Alan Robbins. Robbins bought tickets to the show for six members of the team, which Vehling allegedly forced them to go to.

During the investigation, a dance team member said she felt Vehling had coerced them into spending time with Robbins, who had made them uncomfortable.

The influence Robbins waved over Vehling and the students on her team speaks to a troubling pattern of undue donor power at UCLA. Clearly, Robbins abused his position as an individual, but it is the university’s responsibility to evaluate a system in which he could leverage his donations for influence.

Vehling is to blame for sacrificing student safety in an attempt to cozy up to donors. But her removal is also a distraction from a bigger issue: the ease with which UCLA turned a blind eye to the behavior of a major booster like Robbins. Whether it be Vehling or the next coach, donations continue to carry enough influence to negatively affect both students and the faculty that are hired to support them.

Ultimately, UCLA maintains a system in which donations are valued over students. And with a systemic lack of oversight, donors won’t be held accountable anytime soon.

The commitment to students lies somewhere deep in UCLA’s heart – if it didn’t, the university wouldn’t be fundraising for scholarships or facilities. But UCLA has made it clear that it’s willing to sacrifice more than just the True Bruin Values if it means extra income.

And this isn’t the first time it’s done so.

While the university sits perched between inconsistent state funding and a national battle for prestige, the debate over its increasingly privatized funding system rages.

 

Whether it be David Geffen gracing campus with yet another building, scholarship funding being left in the dust or donations outright influencing admissions at the UCLA School of Dentistry, to say there’s a pattern would be an understatement.

And though it may come as a surprise to the university, there are caveats to accepting money as a public institution – especially from someone like Robbins.

A former state senator, Robbins resigned prior to serving five years in prison for tax evasion, bribery and extortion in 1992. A decade before, he was charged and acquitted of having sexual relations with minors.

Robbins’ behavior with the Spirit Squad members was deeply disturbing, but it merely unveiled the potential for damage in a consistently exploitative system.

That is not to say the university shouldn’t accept donations from anyone without a pristine background. Like most public schools, UCLA isn’t one to turn away money – nor should it. But when that money jeopardizes the safety of its students, the university must realize greater responsibility in a system so easily manipulated by its desire for donations.

Private funding and basic culpability for those providing it are not mutually exclusive.

But it seems UCLA hasn’t figured that out yet.