ISLA VISTA, CA — Amid nationwide protests and the growth of a unified movement against police brutality, the role of police officers in day-to-day life has been called into question during the last few months more than ever before.
Some believe police departments serve a vital community role in maintaining order and safety. Others point to their racist, bloody history and claim otherwise. There have been calls for abolition and negotiations for reform, but almost everyone agrees on one thing — increased accountability.
But regardless of one’s personal belief or opinion on the role of police in society, as of Wednesday, Sept. 16, UC Santa Barbara students have a new reason to pay close attention.
On Wednesday, the university announced the appointment of a new UCPD chief: former UC Berkeley police captain Alex Yao.
This move comes two weeks after the Santa Barbara News-Press published an article about a sexual assault and battery lawsuit aimed at the now-former interim UCPD Chief James Brock (for those keeping score, this is the seventh lawsuit against the Santa Barbara UCPD). But looking at the history of the new chief, we at Gauchos 4 Transparency must ask ourselves — is this choice the right one?
A quick Google search about Alex Yao gives the basics about his career, his history, and his accomplishments. A UC Berkeley news article from 2013 paints him as a gentle, but commanding presence focused on creating better communication between administration, police, and students. Another, more recent article praises him for bringing 4,500 toys to victims of the 2018 Camp Fire.
And yet the same search reveals far less uplifting and far more worrying instances from Captain Yao’s past.
According to a 2010 print article of the Daily Cal, Yao (then a Lieutenant) acted as the UCPD spokesperson after campus police violated the Clery Act at Berkeley.
To those unaware, the Clery Act is a federal statute signed into law in 1990 after a gruesome, violent crime at Lehigh University was left unreported. It requires colleges and universities to keep a public log recording all crimes within the last 60 days.
The article describes the report of a prowler on campus. It then goes on to inform readers that said report was logged by the UCPD without a time of the incident’s occurrence or any further details.
Given that the law demands all details must be inputted within two business days (which in this instance Berkeley UCPD had failed to do), the failure of the department to act on this was considered a violation of both the Clery Act and of student safety.
In the article, Yao chalks the mishandle up to a technological error and makes little effort to rectify the situation beyond entering in a time of reporting (and not actual occurrence, which the law demands) while still withholding other details from the public.
Some would say this is a minor violation of campus and student security, or that because no one was injured as a result, there was “no real harm done.”
It may have been the first time Yao had a public issue with student safety, but it was nowhere near the last.
A 2012 article by the Eagle reported in the wake of Occupy Cal protests, 32 students and faculty members were arrested by the UCPD — to quote then-Lt. Yao — “on suspicion of resisting and delaying police officers and failing to disperse.”
Yes, you read that right. On suspicion of resisting and delaying police officers.
After a peaceful rally and march, protesters voted to form an Occupy Cal group and set up tents near Sproul Hall. Police from the campus and Alameda County sheriffs broke through their human barricade and took the tents Wednesday November 9, 2011.
The First Amendment protects the right to peaceful political assembly. According to the article, the students — who voted to stay in the protest area overnight in tents, against university policy — were then pulled from the steps of the building and “nudged with batons” by police in riot gear.
Eight years and countless protests later, reading about such a flagrant incident of university police exerting power over peaceful protesters should leave behind a bad, sour taste in your mouth.
To make matters worse, this was not an isolated incident— there were reports of similar violent altercations in 2009 and 2011.
Police brutality has never been something to be taken lightly and looking at these instances in a time where activists and moderates alike have called to defund and abolish police departments across the country, it only reinforces the vital need for community safety in Isla Vista and surrounding areas.
Unfortunately, that isn’t even the end of the story. As of this article’s publishing, there have been two lawsuits against Captain Yao.
“Changing the leadership will not change the culture at UCPD,” said Izzy Mitchell, President of G4T.
The first, in September 2017, came as part of a First/Fourteenth Amendment case against him and the University of California Regents after he worked with Berkeley administration to prevent prominent right-wing speakers David Horowitz and Ann Coulter from giving talks on campus.
Within the emails included as evidence in the settlement, university officials kept their ‘High-Profile Speaker Policy’ hidden from the student organizers attempting to set up these events, forcing them to schedule them during class hours or in the middle of the day; in other words, times when very few people would be on campus.
It becomes clear in reading the emails listed as evidence that Captain Yao was involved in discussions about these events. Although he acknowledged the need for a clear, open, and accessible policy, his actions show that he was directly involved in keeping it hidden from the student organizers when transparency was most necessary.
The second lawsuit, dismissed with prejudice in April 2020, was far more recent. Although the case itself — number RG19005239 on the Alameda County Superior Court database — cannot be directly linked due to a paywall, the Daily Cal wrote in February 2019 that UCPD security specialist Sparky Carranza was in the process of filing a civil suit against the UC Board of Regents and Capt. Yao for creating a hostile work environment.
The suit came after a 2017 internal investigation against Carranza resulted in her being isolated from her coworkers, verbally harassed by Yao, and kept in the dark about why any of it was happening, as she was denied information regarding her role in the investigation.
An important thing to note: Carranza was the only LGBTQ+ member of her team, identifying as homosexual.
Out of every person working with her, she was the only one cast in suspicion of inappropriate behavior. Carranza stated that she was verbally disciplined by Capt. Yao as a result, and criticized the UCPD and Board of Regents for failing to uphold anti-discrimination policies designed to protect her rights.
It feels hard to think that we may be reading too much into it — especially since some would call it a coincidence and move on — when, historically, members of the LGBT+ community have an increased likelihood of experiencing unlawful or unfair treatment by police, even by their co-workers.
When looking at all these incidents together, it may seem like a stretch or an overstep of boundaries to call the university’s decision a bad one.
But what I know is this: if the UCPD’s role on campus is to protect students’ well-being, they cannot claim to adhere to that role when their chief has a long, recorded history of involvement in police brutality and discrimination.
Considering that Yao is someone who has been directly involved in arresting and brutalizing students during peaceful protests, withholding information from both students and his own team, and failing to address workplace discrimination, we cannot trust that he has our safety in mind. We have no evidence that any affirmations or promises of transparency will be implemented. Yao’s actions speak louder than his words.
As an organization focused and committed to the truth and the safety of our peers, Gauchos 4 Transparency has no intention of supporting the university’s decision. Yet again, the university conducted another “nationwide search and extensive consultation” seemingly ignorant of the fact that it hasn’t worked in a long, long time.
Of all the people interviewed for this position, Yao — with two — had the least amount of lawsuits. The least.
How are we, a top six public university, settling for someone with the least amount of lawsuits? How do we not understand that this issue is not solely with the police chief, but is a deeper, cultural issue within UCPD?
“Changing the leadership will not change the culture at UCPD. It has failed countless times and will continue to. This is an issue with everyone within UCPD. UCSB did not even publicly address the previous lawsuits. All I have received from administration is that ‘we are deeply upset about this situation as well.’ These are the people who can actually enact administrative change. But instead, let’s just appoint someone new and call it a day,” said Izzy Mitchell, President of G4T.
Now more than ever, we find ourselves in a new era of calling for accountability in those we consider authority figures. But more than that, we as students are members of a shared community.
It is our duty and our responsibility to hold our administration accountable and demand better from them. That is the only way to protect the safety of our community, our peers, and our families and keep each other safe from harm.
Comments