Men’s volleyball looks to temper opponents’ offenses in top-10 matchups this week

The Bruins will travel to the Midwest to face two top-10 opponents this week.

No. 5 UCLA (6-2) will play No. 7 Loyola Chicago (6-2) and No. 10 Lewis (6-3) on Thursday and Saturday, respectively.

Coach John Speraw said the Bruins are looking to improve passing and hitting on this road trip.

“I don’t think our offense has been that sharp,” Speraw said. “Our ability to pass the ball as well as we can, our ability to get out of difficult situations with better high ball hitting – that will be important.”

UCLA first plays a Loyola team that has kept all but one of its opponents under a .300 hitting percentage, highlighted by a game in which it held Mount Olive to a -.093 hitting percentage.

Loyola middle blocker Paul Narup is tied for sixth in the nation for blocks per set, with 1.286.

Senior setter Micah Ma’a said the Bruins will try to minimize Narup’s impact by using multiple attackers.

“When we have a lot of guys coming down the pipe, we got three guys and a (back row quick), hopefully it’ll slow (Narup) down and make him think a lot more,” Ma’a said.

Redshirt junior opposite Brandon Rattray said Narup does not intimidate him.

“We can’t be scared of (Narup),” Rattray said. “We have to attack him fully. He hasn’t seen our team play, so he has it coming for him.”

Following the Loyola match, UCLA will face Lewis in Romeoville, Illinois.

Lewis middle blocker Tyler Mitchem leads his team with 83 kills, with a .511 hitting percentage.

“We’re going to have to block (Mitchem),” Rattray said. “We’re going to have to read his tendencies through the scouting report. We just got to get a lot of touches, not necessarily big stuff blocks. Our offense is so strong that all we need to do is get a couple touches.”

Lewis had its two worst hitting games this season in two of its three losses, hitting for .104 against No. 4 UC Irvine and .244 against No. 6 Pepperdine.

Speraw said the Bruins must get better on both defense and offense to beat the Flyers.

“It’s cliche for coaches to talk about how they’re more concerned about their side of the net,” Speraw said. “But, at this point, there’s just so much that we need to work on on our side that will contribute to our offensive and defensive efforts.”

However, Rattray said UCLA will emphasize defense against Lewis.

“Our offense is so strong,” Rattray said. “We don’t really need to focus too much on our offense. That will just come as is, but we really got to focus on our defense.”

Campus Queries: How can college students care for their eyesight?

Campus Queries is a series in which Daily Bruin readers and staff present science-related questions for UCLA professors and experts to answer.

Q: What is the best way to preserve eyesight?

A: Aside from getting glasses or going through laser eye surgery, there is little people can do to slow the rate of eyesight degradation, said Joseph Demer, an ophthalmologist at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. The best thing people can do for their eyesight is to maintain a healthy, balanced diet and refrain from smoking cigarettes, he said.

Eyesight worsens with age, just as most organs do from being worn out, Demer said.

“Eventually everyone gets clouding of the eye – this is called a cataract – if we live long enough,” Demer said.

Proteins in the eye that have existed since birth gradually deteriorate due to light exposure, he said. Taking health supplements is often ineffective unless the patient has age-related macular degeneration, he added.

A good diet helps ensure that the arteries connected to the eyes function properly. These arteries transport nutrients and oxygen to the eyes. Kale, salmon, oranges and black-eyed peas are particularly beneficial for eye health, according to an article published by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Because the National Institutes of Health does not sponsor research relating to smoking marijuana, it is unknown whether it affects eyesight or not. However, it is clear that smoke has a negative impact on eyesight, Demer said. Smoking can increase one’s risk of developing cataracts, AMD and glaucoma among other ocular issues, he added. Smoking also increases the chances of heart disease and strokes, medical afflictions that can also hurt the eye.

Contrary to some rumors, glasses do not worsen their user’s eyesight, Demer said. However, he added lenses that are not properly prescribed can have severe visual consequences in some cases.

Demer said some ophthalmologists believe it can be harmful to undercorrect nearsightedness, but UCLA ophthalmologists do not believe that glasses can harm their users.

Demer added that there is no strong evidence to suggest that prolonged exposure to computer screens or handheld devices causes any more damage to eyesight than reading a book.

Ocular problems such as myopia are prominent in more educated populations, such as universities, because those populations spend more time doing close-up reading, Demer added.

Eyesight can be affected by a combination of environmental and genetic factors. For example, myopia has become more common across several generations in some Asian countries.

“You can see grandparents with no nearsightedness, and then 50 percent of the parents will have nearsightedness and about 90 percent of the kids will have it,” Demer said.

Some people believe myopia has become more common because people are going outside less and receiving less exposure to sunlight, which can help maintain healthy eyes, Demer said. Others believe it is due to increased exposure to blue light from phone and computer screens, he added. However, he said the exact cause of the increased rate of myopia is still unknown.

Proposed state budget would increase funding for UC, aims to support students

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed budget for next year would increase funding for the University of California.

The proposed budget would allocate $36.4 billion for higher education, an increase of $1.4 billion from this year’s budget. According to the proposal, the budget would add $240 million in ongoing funds for operating costs, as well as efforts to increase student success, improve health services, and address student hunger and homelessness at the UC. The budget also includes a one-time fund of $138 million for the UC to fix unaddressed maintenance issues and another $15 million fund to support degree and certification programs at UC extension centers.

The goal of the funding increase is to ensure affordability by preventing rises in tuition, according to the budget proposal.

The UC system enrolled 19.2 percent more students between 2010 and 2017, and Newsom hopes to help more students from disadvantaged backgrounds graduate in a timely manner with the proposed budget, according to the proposal.

George Kieffer, chair of the UC Board of Regents, said in an email statement that Newsom’s proposal is a substantial investment in higher education.

“The $240 million he has proposed for ongoing funds will be used to support our core budget which goes to classrooms, teachers and support staff,” he said.

He added he thinks the proposal will benefit students and contribute to the financial success of the UC campuses.

Kieffer and UC President Janet Napolitano said in a statement they were pleased Newsom wants to increase funding for students and families across California who rely on state funding in the UC.

“Gov. Newsom’s budget represents a welcome step and a solid down payment in addressing priorities of the university’s 2019-20 budget plan. … The university looks forward to working with the governor and the Legislature to address our priorities … and to maintain the academic and research excellence of UC,” the statement said.

The statement also said the budget will support the University’s goal of awarding 200,000 more degrees by 2030 and enable the University to upgrade classrooms, increase financial aid and help students graduate on time.

Daniel Mitchell, a professor emeritus at the UCLA Anderson School of Management and the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, said he is unsure of how well the budget would be able to withstand potential economic downturns in the future.

Mitchell said California’s economy is currently stable, but he is concerned about how a recession could negatively impact the budget and funding for the UC.

He added budgeting is an uncertain practice because it requires making decisions based on future economic conditions that may or may not occur.

“Budgeting is essentially forecasting, which is inherently uncertain,” he said.

Mitchell added that funding for the University is not permanent and is usually the first part of the budget that gets cut during an economic slowdown.

“We know from history what happens when the economy gets bad – the state cuts the UC budget because every other program is on lock,” he said. “We don’t have any protection written in the constitution by some past proposition.”

Mitchell said he does not think it is surprising that Newsom is increasing funding for the UC since he was an ex-officio member of the UC Board of Regents for eight years.

He added he does not think one-time funds for infrastructure will be effective because buildings require constant maintenance and more funds in the long run due to deterioration.

Mitchell said he thinks the proposed budget will undergo various changes by the time it is enacted because the state Legislature will have to review and approve it.

“The Legislature will not be in accord with spending the same (amount) as last year,” he said.

Westwood groups oppose student high-rise project, cite planning discrepancies

This post was updated Feb. 1 at 1:22 p.m.

Westwood community members oppose a proposed housing project because they think it will replace existing affordable housing and cause traffic congestion.

Two physicians filed a plan with Los Angeles to build a 16-story housing development, called The Agora, on Hilgard Avenue in November. Several community organizations, including the Westwood Neighborhood Council and the Holmby Westwood Property Owners Association, oppose the project.

The developers stated in their original proposal there were zero residential units and that the building was vacant. In fact, two businesses currently occupy the Hilgard property, including 27 residential units.

Aaron Green, an Agora spokesperson, said Agora developers bought the property in 2016 and subsequently rented out the current building’s three stories. NuORDER, an e-commerce brand company, occupies the first story. Ashley Miniard, manager of PodShare, said the co-living affordable housing company operates residential units on the second and third story.

Green said the vacancy classification was due to a clerical mistake and the developers will revise the application.

Green added the project is estimated to take two years to gain approval from the city. If the city council approves the project, NuORDER and PodShare’s five-year lease will end a year and a half early due to a clause in their lease which states the developers have the right to develop the building after three years, Green said.

Construction will begin after approval from the city and continue for three years.

PodShare offers 90 beds at $840 a month for one bed, Miniard said. Residents can also stay for one night or a week at varying costs.

The proposed Agora project would house 462 beds at $1,000 to $1,200 a month per bed, said Ted Khalili, co-principal developer of The Agora. At least 52 beds will be Measure JJJ-compliant, which means they will be priced less than the proposed standard rent range. However, Agora representatives did not specify how much this would equate to.

The initial application said the housing project would only house 231 beds. Green said the developers decided to double the beds after listening to community feedback. Each room will now have two beds, rather than the single-person bedrooms as originally planned. However, rental rates remain unchanged despite the decreased room space.

Greg Billo, a PodShare resident, said he thinks the proposed project is misguided because The Agora would replace what already exists on the property. Billo said more than half of PodShare’s beds are empty each night, and he thinks filling the proposed high rise would be difficult.

Earl Goldstein, a board member of Holmby Hills Homeowners Association, said stakeholders shared similar concerns with Billo at their January meeting, adding that the association opposed the project at their monthly meeting due to concerns of traffic congestion along Le Conte Avenue and the feasibility of the project.

Several homeowners created Save Hilgard Avenue after estimating the project would cost $100 million, which they believe is too costly for the property’s proposed rent prices. However, Green said the cost of the project is about 50 percent less than the homeowners’ estimates.

Marcello Robinson, a member of the WWNC, said Agora developers asked the city attorney’s office to prevent the neighborhood council from speaking on the matter even though it was placed on the agenda for their January meeting. The council voted in opposition of the project at the meeting.

Green said the developers also offered to purchase three homes surrounding the Agora building out of courtesy so that residents would not need to live by a construction site. The developers have already purchased one of the neighboring houses in November, according to a city grant deed. Green said the developers have no plans to use the adjacent property.

Soon Chung, a pastor at University Presbyterian Church, said the University Presbyterian Church owns the house directly behind the Agora and fears the project would devalue his property and neighboring properties. Chung added he was contacted by brokers from the Agora developers but did not respond.

Green said over the next two years, the developers will conduct a large-scale environmental impact report and will work with nearby residents to amend the project to address their concerns.

Several homeowners also expressed concerns regarding the unauthorized usage of the photos in the project’s ad campaign and the campaign’s suggestion that the Agora project would help combat homelessness in Westwood.

To promote the housing development, The Agora project used a social media campaign featuring a UC Berkeley student holding a sign saying “Hug me I’ve been a homeless student,” as well as statistics on UC student homelessness and a petition to LA City Councilmember Paul Koretz to approve the project.

Taylor Harvey, the subject of the photo and a fourth-year art practice and social welfare student at UC Berkeley, said she was offended when she saw her photo on the ad from the Agora developers.

“I never gave them permission to use my photo,” Harvey said. “It’s exploitative and an invasion of privacy.”

The photo was initially used for other campaigns by UC Berkeley’s Homeless Student Union, a school organization she founded four years ago to combat homelessness, Harvey added.

Green said they found the picture from a German student publication. The developers removed the social media advertisements Monday, after the Daily Bruin inquired about the photo. The German publication was not immediately available to comment on where they found the photo.

Several students said they think the Agora project could provide much needed housing in Westwood, but they do not think it will be very affordable.

Preethika Kiruveedula, a second-year computer science and engineering student, said she thinks the project is no more affordable than the average Westwood apartment, but added she thinks the project could help alleviate the issue of housing availability.

“I think that a development like this would help because I feel like the reason Westwood is so expensive is because there isn’t a lot of space or housing available,” Kiruveedula said. “If there’s more apartments they would start to become more affordable.”

Daniel Lee, a first-year cognitive science student, said off-campus housing is limited and difficult to secure because of the large number of students looking for apartments, which he thinks The Agora could alleviate.

“It’s not too much of a question of affordability but rather availability as everyone scrambles to find a spot,” Lee said. “Honestly the building seems more like any other luxury apartment that’s just trying to brand themselves differently.”

The North Westwood Neighborhood Council voted to show preliminary support for the housing project at its December meeting. However, Michael Skiles, president of the NWWNC, said the council would not fully approve the project until it is certain the project is only intended to provide affordable student housing.

Skiles is also the president of the Graduate Student Association, which voted to support the Agora project at its January meeting. However, he was not involved in the forum that determined the GSA’s stance.

“Ultimately I think GSA supported the project because they saw in the project a serious hope for mitigating the student affordable housing shortage in Westwood,” Skiles said.

Green said the majority of homeowners the developer’s lobbying team have spoken to expressed support for the project.

The developers aim to continue working with the community to incorporate their feedback into the project in hopes of gaining city approval, Green said.

USAC uses surplus funds for own projects, leaves the rest for student applicants

This article was updated Feb. 1 at 1:29 p.m.

Student government officials split surplus funding between their own projects and student groups.

The Undergraduate Students Association Council received $424,885 in surplus funding to spend at its discretion. Surplus funds are funds made available by increased revenues from student fees or USAC programs costing less than initially expected. The council allocated $170,000 to their own offices and $150,000 to the USAC Programming Fund, Capital Items Fund and Contingency Programming Fund. The remaining $104,885 will be allocated to student groups.

Student groups will be able to access funding through an application similar to already existing USAC funding forms, said Nidirah Stephens, Academic Affairs commissioner.

There is no formal process for allocating surplus funds, which vary year by year. Last year, USAC had $149,770 to allocate following a university accounting error.

Council members had to fill out a form, present proposals and answer questions to receive funding. The council did not use a specific formula or scoring criteria to determine which proposals would be approved. The student group application will be more regimented, using a formal application and scoring criteria.

Fieldman said some USAC offices run on budgets of under $1,000. She said she thinks surplus funding will allow these offices to fund initiatives they would not have been able to otherwise.

“We’re trying to figure out how to find a balance between funding our initiatives we don’t have the resources to fund and making it accessible to the folks beyond the 14 sitting on the council table,” Fieldman said.

Most of the $170,000 allocated to USAC projects has already been distributed. Allocations include $2,620 to general representative 3 for a lobbying trip to Washington, D.C., $10,000 to the Financial Supports Commission’s Attire for Hire program and $6,000 to the transfer representative office for office renovations.

The council voted down a proposed $2,840 request from the internal vice president to install massage chairs in Kerckhoff Hall.

Some council members have said extra funding helps commissions which start off with low funding allocations. Jay Manzano, Financial Supports commissioner, said his office initially started with $1,000 in funds and that the surplus funding will allow the FSC to pursue more long-term programs.

Manzano said the $3,000 the FSC applied for will allow the commission to have enough money to provide three years of transportation scholarships, which the commission’s current funding allocation of $1,700 would not be enough for.

Fieldman said surplus funding allowed her to fund $10,000 for her office’s UC women’s leadership conference, which her office is co-programming with the Cultural Events Commission.

Stephens said she wants to ensure that student groups get a fair share of the funding.

“We have our initiatives as a USAC council, but they don’t fit the needs of all students. Not that council initiatives are bad, it’s that we can’t necessarily speak for everyone and that’s not our job to do – it’s (to) open up and facilitate a platform for students to do that.” Stephens said.

Stephens said her office is working with the council to create a transparent and easy-to-use funding application for student groups, similar to already existing forms for funds such as the Contingency Fund. Applicants will not be subjected to the specific restrictions of other funding forms such as the Contingency Fund.

The council will hold a town hall Tuesday at 7 p.m. in the Bruin Viewpoint Room to help students workshop their applications.

California’s multistep marijuana permit process rightly impedes weed rollout

One year ago, California stoners and casual marijuana users alike expected to have a bustling legal recreational weed market by now.

Contrary to popular belief, though, the deal didn’t make the state into a forest of weed by 2019.

While the state government expected around 6,000 legal recreational dispensaries at this point, only 547 have received the proper licensing to operate.

Although California is not the free-flowing market that many voters hoped for when they passed Proposition 64, the ballot measure allowed dispensaries to get licenses to sell recreational marijuana. The state government then passed a series of laws to ensure that not just anyone can open a dispensary wherever they want. Voters are now being confronted with the reality they thought they could avoid: California has a multistep legal process to obtain a marijuana license, and it’s not easy for a good reason.

Marijuana is still federally illegal, although it’s not clear if that will remain the case. Previously President Donald Trump overturned former President Barack Obama’s policy of noninterference with states’ marijuana policy. On top of that, the Department of Justice under the Trump administration stated it would prosecute state governments and municipalities that allow retail weed.

This has been one reason recreational marijuana licensing has been slower than expected. California municipalities ultimately get to decide if they will give licenses to recreational marijuana businesses within their jurisdiction. And that’s been the kicker: Less than 20 percent of cities in California have voted to allow retail recreational marijuana sales. It will take time for the retail weed market to reach the levels many citizens want, but that’s the nature of living in a government system where cities have the right to make decisions about the sale of substances in their borders.

Additionally, city councils in suburban areas with family-oriented populations would face political punishment if they voted to allow recreational weed sales. City politicians across the state decided to play it safe, rather than face the uphill battle of implementing a licensing system and facing political retribution.

This has caused some to impulsively believe the state government should be the sole regulator of the industry. But that’s fraught with a slew of issues. For one, business licenses, zoning laws and permits for certain kinds of sales are all under city governments’ authority, so it makes sense they would be the ones to decide if they want marijuana within their municipality.

That’s also a benefit. As a voting bloc, pot consumers can make retail marijuana a political issue across municipalities throughout California by voting out council members who oppose recreational marijuana sales, or by putting pressure on them to permit it before the next election.

Steven Davenport, a cannabis research expert from the Rand Corp., said many municipalities are implementing a wait-and-see approach to examine how recreational sales fare in other cities.

“Probably a lot are thinking, ‘If we have one dispensary, do we need another?'” Davenport said. “The idea that localities have to open stores to close the black market or raise tax revenues, maybe that’s not enough for some localities. They may be concerned about the influence of dispensaries in their community.”

Davenport added that every state that legalized recreational sales has seen a slow rollout of municipalities permitting retail weed.

“For instance in Washington, the rural half of Washington had more prohibition early on. We see this again with Oregon,” Davenport said. ” Localities quite rationally want to play it slow.”

The marijuana black market might be incentivized by the state’s regulations, but that may be inevitable simply because there is any kind of regulation. The question is how to best reduce the size of illegal sales.

“We never expect the black market to go away entirely,” Davenport said. “There’s a tradeoff between regulations, which impose constraints on consumers, and can be evaded, always incentivizing some black market. The real issue is looking at each one and deciding if the regulation outweighs the cost.”

On the issue of taxes in particular, Davenport said his research has found that municipal taxes are not as bad as they are made out to be. For example, the Los Angeles Times reported some municipal weed taxes could reach up to 45 percent, but that oversimplifies the actual price to consumers.

For example, Washington has a 37 percent sales tax on recreational weed, and the black market has shrunk considerably because production costs are low, and taxes haven’t had that much of an impact on consumers, Davenport said.

“The laissez-faire cost is so low even if you add 50 percent to 100 percent tax, that’s still lower than the black market cost,” he added.

So the actual cost consumers are paying is minimal and mostly soaked up by heavy consumers.

Additionally, some of the largest cities in California have already legalized recreational sales. San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland and San Diego all have begun the marijuana permit process. While none of these cities have given out as many permits as Californians would have hoped, that’s understandable given many were testing the waters in the first year of legalization to figure out how to reform regulations before allowing more firms to enter the market.

It’s just a matter of waiting.

So let’s just all chill out and take a hit. The high will come soon.

Editorial: USAC’s questionable spending of excess money puts students on back burner

You would hope managing a multimillion-dollar budget would teach you a thing or two about fiscal responsibility.

It’s only made the Undergraduate Students Association Council spendthrift, though.

The council broke political and economic tradition Jan. 22 by refusing to tally the amount it wanted to spend in surplus funding, some of which went to student groups. Note that this action comes before leaders of any of these groups could make their case about the amount of funding they would need. The council unilaterally – and arbitrarily – assigned a dollar sign to the student groups they are supposed to represent, before actually seeking their input.

Students each pay more than $200 in fees to their student government. This impressive collection of fees is used to fund lobbying trips, put on concerts, pay officers and their staff, and enable hundreds of student groups to operate.

Managing that complex funding matrix requires a careful hand that prudently spends by prioritizing certain directives and programs. It shouldn’t entail avoiding the advice of financial bookkeepers, arbitrarily allocating fees and leaving essential programs to wither away.

But USAC has been doing just that.

Take last week’s allocation. The council put aside $104,885– nearly $5,000 more than its earlier-agreed $100,000 – to fund its 14 offices, many of which operate on meager budgets. The six-digit number came from the council being hit with a sizable surplus windfall.

Yet the seemingly worthwhile allocation had eyebrow-raising line-items that included a suggestion to purchase massage chairs to help students’ mental health – as if Bruins in need of mental health care would trudge to Kerckhoff Hall to sit on a pair of massage chairs.

Luckily, the ludicrous allocation did not pass. But the notion that student government leaders would expend student fees on all kinds of expenses without consideration from the student body has been haunting this campus since last year. After all, last year’s council table set the precedent for arbitrarily putting aside $100,000 in surplus funding for student groups without first identifying which groups needed funding, how to advertise the opportunity and why such grandiose surpluses – an indication of excess student fees – were happening.

This fixation on writing off excess money in a knee-jerk fashion has resulted in a missed opportunity to expand programs that already do a lot of good on campus, such as the Financial Supports Commission’s textbook scholarship program. The program, which began in 2008 and offered 50 scholarships of $200 each per quarter, has since dwindled to a program that offers 40 scholarships of $50 – and not even every quarter.

Textbook fees can be upwards of $150 each, and yet massage chairs somehow supplanted them in USAC’s agenda last week.

This is just one of many examples of how the council can ensure student fee allocations actually make their way back to the students who pay for them, rather than serve as a last-ditch effort to discard money that would otherwise go into its endowment.

Yes, USAC offices need money and excess money should be given back to students and student groups. What Bruins expect, though, is that money be doled out responsibly and in a productive way.

Not in a whimsical, late-night sign-off. And certainly not for services no one asked for.