133 research outputs found
Michael A. Messner et Donald F. Sabo (eds.), Sport, Men, and the Gender Order : Critical Feminist Perspectives, Champaign (Illinois), Human Kinetics Books, 1991
No full textWacquant Loïc J. D. Michael A. Messner et Donald F. Sabo (eds.), Sport, Men, and the Gender Order : Critical Feminist Perspectives, Champaign (Illinois), Human Kinetics Books, 1991. In: L'Homme et la société, N. 105-106, 1992. Vers quel désordre mondial ? pp. 182-183
Sex, Violence & Power in Sports : Rethinking Masculinity
No full textBy Michael A. Messner & Donald Sabo (former College at Brockport faculty member). The authors, both academics and former athletes, examine the culture of male sports and its relation to concepts of masculinity. The basic premise is that male-dominated sports foster homophobia and the denigration of women. This is not new news for anyone who has spent time in an adolescent male locker room. What is news, however, is the authors\u27 linking of locker-room mentality with data indicating that on some college campuses a third of all reported rapes involve male athletes, who represent less than a third of all males on campus. The authors hold that this sort of data--numerous studies are cited revealing the same trend--exposes the inherent flaws in traditional male sports culture. Sports, they say, breed intolerant males more prone to violence, domestic abuse, and homophobia and less likely to sustain a long-term relationship with a woman. This premise may or may not be entirely valid; further research is clearly needed. Still, the authors\u27 findings--especially in context of the O. J. Simpson case--raise points of serious discussion regarding athletes and violence. --Booklisthttps://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/bookshelf/1227/thumbnail.jp
The promises and pitfalls of sex integration in sport and physical culture
No full textScholars working in the academic field of sport studies have long debated the relationship between modern sport and gender (e.g. Hargreaves and Anderson, 2014; Hargreaves, 1994; Lenskyj, 1986; Messner, 2002). Within this body of work, modern sport forms – along with a great diversity of related activities, including dance, fitness training, physical education, etc. – have consistently been shown to carry meanings relative to the structures of gender prevailing in the wider social settings within which they take place, with patterns of participation and consumption clearly mapping onto gendered ideals. However, rather than simply mirroring such social norms, research suggests that many sporting practices were invented or have been purposefully developed in order to train young men and women in socially-approved gender behaviors to begin with (Cahn 1994; Hargreaves 1994; Theberge, 2000). Thus, much of contemporary physical culture finds its roots in the process which scholars describe as the ‘social construction of gender’; in other words, doing sports and other activities in gender-differentiated ways has long been a means of producing and maintaining difference in the lives of men and women, girls and boys.Peer reviewedAccepted author manuscript of a peer reviewed article accepted for publication by Taylor & Francis in Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics online on 28/12/2015
College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Class of 1985. "Senior Banquet" Invitation
No full textCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Class of 1985. "33rd Annual Senior Panorama Banquet" Invitation. Tuesday, May 28, 1985, 6:30 pm. Dinner. Introductions: Dr. Harold H. Wolf, Dean. Preceptor of the Year Award: Mr. Evan Love, Syntex Lab, Inc. Address: "The Pharmacy Organizational World," Dr. Arthur G. Lipman, Chairman, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Utah College of Pharmacy. Adjournment. Guest Sponsors: AMFAC Drug Supply Co., Bergen Brunswig Drug Co., McKesson & Robbins Drug Co. Pharmacy Graduates 1985: Abdala, Mike H.; Aminian, Firoozeh; Balk, Mark A.; Bradshaw, Daniel A.; Burnham, John F.; Carlstrom, Waldemar; Cee, Rick J.; Christensen, Betty R.; Cork-Asher, Cynthia; Craven, Kathryn H.; Doan, Lan-Anh T.; Fannin, Kathleen M.; Fung, Man-Cheong; Harte, Claire J.; Heiner, Christina R.; Holt, Clifford E.; Johnson, James E.; Johnson, Mark D.; Killpack, Roger E.; Kottke, Karin L.; Lew, Evelyn; Messner, Adele C.; Motoyama, Yoshiko; Richardson, Rory M.; Robbins, Glenn B.; Sadiq, Francis J.; Schotik, Debora A.; Scozzare, Monica L.; Sower, Brett; Strzyzewski, Claudia; Thai, Nanci; Tracy, Donald R.; Tsai, Wen H.; Turner, Mona Lisa K.; Webb, William D.; Whittaker, Suzanne E.; Wintch, David A.; Wong, Joseph C. T.; Zargarzadeh, Amir H
Class of 1901
No full textClass composite photograph for Chicago-Kent College of Law class of 1901.
Students and faculty pictured:
Faculty
Elmer E. Barrett
Thomas E.D. Bradley
Edmund Whitney Burke
Orrin N. Carter
Frank Hall Childs
Marshall D. Ewell
William Elmore Foster
John Gibbons
M. Henry Guerin
Edward C. Higgins
Thomas A. Moran
Charles G. Neely
Grant Newell
William J. Pringle
Henry M. Shepard
Simeon P. Shope
J.H. Van Horn
Students
Charles F. Ahern
Carl Barnard
Edward H. Barron
John A. Bauer
Pierre G. Beach
Sidney E. Beach
Maurice Berkson
Joseph B. Beutel
Louis K. Boysen
George W. Bright
Charles R. Brown
James C. Brown
Edward P. Castle
Ainsworth Clark
Charles E. Congleton
Edwin E. Cox
Thomas F. Delaney
Fred L. Divine
David P. Dullard
Theodore F. Ehler
Morley F. Fox
Charles E. Gaylord
Robert Gregg
Mark E. Guerin
Elmer E. Hills
Harry B. Houghton
Wendell Huston
John Jacobson
G. Mostyn Jones
S. Minot Jones
W.J. Kirk
George Kolb
Joseph S. LaBuy
Frank J. Lammers
Richard J. Lavery
Daniel W. Lee
Frank S. Lewis
W.R. Litzenberg
Lewis L. Losey, Jr.
Donald H. Mann
Duncan B. McEarchern/McEachern
Frederick Merce
Max Messner
D. Joseph Normoyle
Charles J. Novak
Albert O. Olson
Richard W. Owen
Charles A. Phelps
Turner Pierce
Bertram E. Pinkerton
John A. Reilly
Frak S. Righeimer
John G. Romer
Andrew Rost, Jr.
John D. Ryan
Louis J. Schmitt
Fayette F. Soule
Charles A. Theis
Walter True
Karl H. Van Hovenberg/Havenburg
Noble S. Ward
William C. Weinert
James S. Wight
Ira T. Wighthttps://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/composites/1005/thumbnail.jp
Laser-fabricated cell patterning stencil for single cell analysis
No full textabstract: Precise spatial positioning and isolation of mammalian cells is a critical component of many single cell experimental methods and biological engineering applications. Although a variety of cell patterning methods have been demonstrated, many of these methods subject cells to high stress environments, discriminate against certain phenotypes, or are a challenge to implement. Here, we demonstrate a rapid, simple, indiscriminate, and minimally perturbing cell patterning method using a laser fabricated polymer stencil. The stencil fabrication process requires no stencil-substrate alignment, and is readily adaptable to various substrate geometries and experiments.The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: https://bmcbiotechnol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12896-017-0408-
Framework for Context-Aware Information Processing for Design Review in a Virtual Environment
No full textDesign review is a process of reviewing construction design documents to ensure that they reflect the owner's design intent, and are accurate in describing the owner's desired building or facility. Information generation becomes more intensive as the design stage progresses. The use of valuable information during design review stage can lead to a more comprehensive and high quality design, and a building or facility that is constructible, and within the intended budget. However, in current design practices, valuable design review information is scattered, ineffectively placed, and is not used efficiently. The design review process will be more efficient if this valuable information is integrated and centralized.
The author developed a framework to improve the design review process by incorporating a centralized repository of design review information and 3D CAD model, in an interactive Virtual Environment (VE). To develop the framework, the author used Action Research style where he identified and confirmed the design review problem area, promoted the potential solutions to the problem, and developed a prototype. In gathering and analyzing the data for the research, the author used the synthesis of three methods. They include review of literature, a case study (interviews with industry personnel and content analysis of design review documents), and dissemination of the author's progressive findings in conferences, conference proceedings and journal publications.
From his findings, the author developed the framework to improve the design review process by using information filtering based on context-aware concept, coupled with the benefits of a VE. The required design review information in the form of textual, numerical and geometric information is processed (queried, retrieved and stored). The author defined four contexts for information filtering: discipline-centric, task-centric, object-centric, and location-centric. IF-THEN rules are used to trigger the processing of the required design review information and present it to the design reviewer in a VE. A low cost 3D Game Engine is used as the enabling development tool to develop a work-in-progress (WIP) prototype design review application in a VE.Ph. D
Louis V. Messner oral history interview: The Office of Budget and Fiscal Affairs, Oral History Project on the Origins of The California State System, Phase II, 1995
No full textOral history interview with a primary focus on the origins of the California State University System and the 1960 master plan for California higher education.Transcripts and cassette tapes of oral history interviews with various individuals involved in the formation of the California State University system.CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES
Oral History Project on the Origins of the CSU System, Phase II
LOUIS V. MESSNER
THE OFFICE OF BUDGET AND FISCAL AFFAIRS, 1967-1990
Interview Conducted by
Lawrence B. de Graaf
February 8,1995
Processed in cooperation with CSU Fullerton Oral History Program
1995
COPYRIGHT
This is a transcription of an interview conducted for the California State
University Archives under a grant from the Office of the Chancellor, CSU.
Scholars are welcome to utilize short excerpts from any of the transcriptions
without obtaining permission as long as proper credit is given to the
interviewee, interviewer, and the institution sponsoring the project. All uses
of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between the CSU
Archives and the interviewee. Therefore, scholars must obtain permission
from California State University Archives before making more extensive use
of the transcription and related materials.
None of these materials may be duplicated or reproduced by any party except
the California State University Archives. However, because it is the goal of
this project to preserve and make accessible significant documentation relevant
to the history of the State Colleges, copies of any unrestricted transcriptions
may be obtained at cost by writing to the CSU Systemwide Archivist at
California State University, Dominguez Hills, Carson, California 90747.
Copyright c 1996 by the Board of Trustees
of The California State University
PREFACE
The purpose of Phase II of the California State University Oral History
Project is to record and make available to researchers using the California
State University Archives the reminiscences of individuals who participated in
development of the CSU system.
Creation of the California State Colleges in 1961 united fifteen formerly
independent colleges into a single identifiable system, with its own Board of
Trustees and a Chancellor to serve as chief executive officer. Using a formula
that stressed systemwide planning in the allocation of resources and programs,
the California State Colleges sought to offer Californians quality higher
education at reasonable cost. Key to the success of the State Colleges was the
decision to implement a Master Plan adopted in 1960 that divided higher
education into three distinctly separate segments. The State Colleges were
mandated to emphasize undergraduate and master's level programs, while the
University of California campuses were to emphasize graduate education, and
the Community Colleges vocational training and college preparation.
The present California State University, starting from a base of fifteen
campuses and 95,000 students in 1961, has grown to where it provides a wide
variety of innovative programs to more than 320,000 students on 22 campuses.
It is the largest system of higher education in the United States and is known
as one of the strongest institutions of higher education in the country.
In September 1979, the Board of Trustees created the California State
University Historical Archives, to be housed on the Dominguez Hills campus.
Since its establishment, the Archives, as a systemwide project, has been
supported by the Chancellor's Office through the funding of a professional
archivist.
The Archives currently houses a collection of materials from a variety of
sources. These include the Chancellor's Office, the CSU Academic Senate,
and private individuals such as former Chancellor Glenn Dumke and former
Trustee Paul Spencer. Consequently, the Archives holds some personal
papers as well as official systemwide documents. As part of its collection
policy, the Archives also has a responsibility to gather individual recollections
and oral histories of the system.
Phase I of the CSU Oral History Project, conducted from 1986 to 1989, and
funded by the Chancellor's Office, covered the formation and early years of
CSU through 32 interviews with participants within and without the system.
These interviews, housed at the CSU Archives, have proven useful to research
into higher education in the 1950s and ’60s. A major quality is their
standardized format, developed at the Oral History Program at CSU
Fullerton.
Phase II is an ongoing oral history project that is decentralized but
administered by the CSU Archives. Its intent is to assure that the
reminiscences of retiring chancellors, principal staff members, Academic
Senate chairs, Student Association presidents, trustees, and local campus
presidents be recorded as closely as possible to their retirement date and that
this be done routinely as a regularized process. Phase II also seeks
information on the growth of the CSU during two mid-decades, 1964-85.
The project has three long-range purposes. First, it will help to increase
interest in the history and accomplishments of the California State University.
Next, it will be a tool in aiding the acquisition of additional materials
concerning the System now in private hands. Finally, it will create needed
documentation for understanding the System's historical role in state and
national education; many issues it has confronted have become matters of
national concern, such as meeting the needs of a multicultural student body
and finding adequate resources in a time of scarcity. Oral history can provide
background information on these developments that is not available in
bulletins, brochures, and minutes.
Funding for the project is provided by the Office of the Chancellor, Dr. Barry
Munitz. We thank the interviewee for generously giving of his time. We also
acknowledge the pioneering work of the CSU Fullerton Oral History Program
in providing a model. Transcribing was performed by Garnette Long, who in
the process contributed many wise editorial suggestions.
Lawrence B. de Graaf Tim Gregory
Judson A. Grenier Acting CSU Archivist
Project Co-directors
MEMBERS, CSU ARCHIVES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Betty J. Blackman
William D. Campbell
Lawrence B. de Graaf
Robert C. Detweiler
David E. Leveille
Gloria Lothrop
Barry Munitz
Lyn Olsson
John Pfau
Teena Stem
Helene Whitson
Samuel Wiley
Donald R. Gerth
Harold Goldwhite
Tim Gregory
Judson A. Grenier
IV
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROJECT ON THE
ORIGINS OF THE CSU SYSTEM
This interview of Louis V. Messner, was done at his home in San Pedro,
California, on Tuesday, February 8,1995, as part of phase two of the ongoing
CSU Oral History Project. The interviewer is Lawrence B. de Graaf,
Professor of History at California State University, Fullerton.
LM: I came to the California State Colleges in 1967. Vice Chancellor
[Harry] Brakebill actually interviewed me, and Glenn Dumke was the
chancellor at the time. Mr. Brakebill had me fly down to L.A. to
interview with Dumke. Actually I spent about three minutes with
Dumke. He basically said whatever Brakebill wanted he would
support, and it was a very simple hiring. Actually, at that time in the
system there was no searching or competition or tests or structure, in
terms of the recruiting process. I know with the State it was very rigid.
You had to take tests and get on lists and compete both orally and on
written tests. I’d been accustomed to that, but this was sort of like I
was handpicked, and it worked out in terms of my career. I think I
was fortunate at the time, being picked.
LD: Excuse me, let me just make sure everything is coming across. Now let
me introduce this thing. This is an interview with Louis V. Messner for
the CSU Archives Project. It's being done on Tuesday, February 8,
1995, in Mr. Messner's home in San Pedro.
All right, Mr. Messner, sorry to interrupt you, but let's go back to your
pre-Department of Finance days. Where were you born?
LM: Actually, I was born in Winnipeg, Manitoba. I was a Canadian citizen;
my family came down during World War II years. My father came to
work in the shipyards in Richmond, California, and so we all came
down, a rather big family, eight children, and my parents.
LD: You were just a child then?
LM: I was about thirteen. The whole family just picked up and moved.
Father worked in the shipyards; ultimately, my father and mother
became naturalized, and I became naturalized under them while
growing up. I went to a minor seminary for five years with my older
brother to become a priest. Both of us dropped out. One of my
MESSNER 2
younger brothers also went to the seminary and is a priest today, so I
had sort of a religious seminarian training, which I thought was pretty
good in terms of educational background that has served me well.
After the seminary I went to the University of California and majored
in accounting. But that was during the Korean War and they were
drafting people, and I was going to be drafted, so I went into the Air
Force and became an Air Force cadet in navigator training and served
my time as a navigation instructor during the Korean War. And then
I got out. I still hadn't completed my college, so I debated going to
UC Berkeley or San Jose State. Because I could get into married
student housing easier, I went to San Jose State and obtained my
degree.
LD: What year was that?
LM: Oh, that was 1957-58. I interviewed with a number of companies. I
had excellent grades at that point. I was more mature, you know,
going back after your service. I had accepted a job with Del Monte
Packing Company. But I had also taken an interview with Sacramento,
the State Department of Finance, for less money. I wanted the job in
Sacramento, I wanted to work for the Department of Finance. So I
called them and I said, "I've got to know within twenty-four hours.”
They sent me a telegram two hours later offering me the job. So then
I had to call back and tell Del Monte that I didn't want to take their
job. They couldn't believe it. But I saw the possibility for
advancement with the Department of Finance much better than with
Del Monte. So I went with the Department of Finance, and I've never
regretted it. It's been very good.
At the time when I was working on the colleges, and the California
State Colleges were going through a tremendous transformation, the
starting of a system not under the Department of Education. They
started off with [Buell] Gallagher as their chancellor. He just didn't
have rapport with the legislative and executive branches of government
on the campuses. I mean, he had done a lot of things, such as moving
the office out of Sacramento in the dead of night, that alienated him.
So then they brought in Dr. Dumke, who had been the president of
San Francisco State and one of the architects of the Master Plan for
Higher Education, and made him the chancellor. Of course, he was an
outstanding academician. And Dumke brought Brakebill from San
Francisco, where he was his vice president, and made him the Vice
Chancellor for Business Affairs. The other problem with the
MESSNER 3
Chancellor's Office is they had very little rapport with the campuses,
very bad alienation: central office versus decentralized institutions.
LD: You could see this from the Department of Finance?
LM: Oh yes, it was evident. In the Department of Finance I developed a
tremendous rapport with the campuses, as well as the Chancellor's
Office, and Brakebill saw that and thought that that would be good.
He also saw that I had some good background, in terms of institutional
budgeting, in terms of formulas and dealing with ten institutions in
Corrections, and eight institutions in Youth Authority, and trying to be
equitable with those institutions on the allocation of money and budget
for them. He liked that, so that's basically why he picked me. And so
I came down to Los Angeles. I was more of a technician to start with,
and I basically designed the system of budgeting. First of all it was a
manual system. Then I hired people that were computer-oriented, and
we computerized the formulas. We developed what is called the
Orange Book, and that became sort of the bible for budgeting for, I'd
say, twenty to twenty-five years in the California State University.
Initially I was not involved with the decision or policy hierarchy of the
Chancellor's Office. I was hired as the Chief of Budget Planning, and
then there was, you know, assistant vice chancellor, vice chancellors,
and then the chancellor. I didn't necessarily relate to the trustees
initially. Brakebill did that. I related to the colleges, and I developed,
I believe, an excellent rapport and credibility with the campuses.
Because of the dissatisfaction with Chancellor Gallagher, Dumke and
Brakebill came into the Chancellor's Office to change the attitude of
the central office towards the campuses. Brakebill had been on a
campus, and he brought several people in from the campuses. Of
course, I looked at Brakebill, you know, as an idol, really. He was a
gentleman all the way, and very, very intelligent and knowledgeable.
And so basically as I developed the budget the need for funds grew
over the years and the role of the budget became a central issue. After
a number of years, they made me an assistant vice chancellor.
LD: What year was that?
LM: It was in 1979 that I became Assistant Vice Chancellor, and then I
became Acting Vice Chancellor of Business Affairs in 1991. In 1992
they made me Vice Chancellor of Business Affairs, and then I retired
when I contracted lung cancer. I'll give you that as sort of a
background. The system that we developed in budgeting was
MESSNER 4
outstanding nationwide. Many other campuses requested it. Of
course, the Master Plan for Higher Education in California, with
Dumke as one of the architects, theoretically became a master plan for
many other states, as you're well aware. They picked up what
California had done and implemented it in Michigan, Illinois, Florida
and, you know, just literally a number of states, and it became the
master plan for the country almost. Then towards the end of my
tenure, when we started getting into major funding problems, the
formulas didn't work. Because irrespective of the formula, they didn't
have the money, and so the formulas became meaningless.
Initially the formulas provided the funds necessary to do the job. But
then when they didn't have the money, then they started moving things
all around, and eventually the formulas became meaningless. So
actually the Orange Book went out of existence and was replaced with
a straight allocation accompanied by greater flexibility. The California
State Colleges, when they started off, had always been treated or
considered as another state agency— you know, a controller's office or
the state libraries or whatnot— and so the legislature always treated the
system as if we were another state agency, and they refused to give us
the flexibility to manage our own funds and control expenditures as
they did with the University of California. Of course, the University
of California had a constitutional exemption, and so they had a rather
broad authority and flexibility and we always had to go back to the
legislature to get little tiny pieces of authority to bring to our board of
trustees. And so, during my career, and Brakebill's too, we were
constantly trying to get our independent authority over not only
academic issues but also for the budget itself. We were successful, but
really complete flexibility came at the end of my career, but at that
point they didn't have the money. Present Chancellor [Barry] Munitz
says, "Well, we know you don't have the money, just give us what you
can. Let us spend it the way we want." And with that a number of
significant changes occurred.
So right now there's a tremendous evolution that's going on in terms
of basics and basis of budgeting. It's essentially taking last year's
appropriation and adding 1 percent or 2 percent or minus 3. But
they've lost any semblance on the basis of all detail, and they're
struggling to find an equitable rationale for future projections and
needs. Because they threw out the Orange Book completely, they had
nothing. They had to go through a change. I don't fault that at all.
But the Orange Book was based on enrollment drives and workload
MESSNER 5
drives,1 and it was developed to be equitable to all the campuses.
Through regression analysis, we set up the formulas and standards, and
we thought it treated everybody the same. Of course, the smaller
campuses thought the larger campuses fared the best; the larger
campuses thought vice versa. I think overall it was equitable, but to
show how equitable it was, even people in my own budgeting office
were unconvinced who fared the best, large campuses or small
campuses. So the Orange Book formulas had always been a bone of
contention over its bias, even though no one could prove it to be
unfair. It served the system well through a period of growing
enrollment. Of course, the enrollment topped off and then literally
dropped with the cutbacks and lower fee revenue. So now they're
struggling to find a way to budget. They haven't come up with a
solution yet. And they'll probably come up with some modification or
alternative to the Orange Book. They won't come up with another
Orange Book because it developed such an animosity between staff and
administration due to the way people used it. For instance, a dean of
students saw that he was entitled to get one administrative assistant
and one clerical position, and for every 200 FTE students he would get
one counselor, etcetera. So he could read the Orange Book and he'd
go to the president and say, "This is what I'm entitled to," and the
president would say, "Well, we don't have enough money," and neither
would end up satisfied. So it started setting up internal problems on
the campuses. A major executive decision was made to just get rid of
it completely. But to this date they haven't been able to find an
acceptable substitute.
LD: This is a very good introductory overview. Now I'd like to now pull out
some specifics and have you elaborate on them. First let's go back
briefly to your work in the Department of Finance. You said earlier
before we had the tape recorder on that you came there about 1958,
and at first you worked on various institutional projects?
LM: Initially they assign analysts to a number of agencies, and I was first
assigned to the Departments of Agriculture, Highway Patrol, Motor
Vehicles, Justice, and you handle their budgets. You worked with
those departments, assist them in developing their budget, presentation
to the legislature, etcetera. And then they'd move you around every
couple of years so that you didn't become too friendly and become an
lAny three or four pages from the Orange Book would illustrate the staffing of a given
office.
MESSNER 6
advocate for those agencies. So I moved around. My first move was
actually to a Methods and Procedures unit for the whole Budget
Division developing methods and procedures for the state budget. I
worked under an individual named Dale Hanner there. That was my
second assignment, and he was, in my mind, an outstanding individual,
in terms of his knowledge and ability, and he taught me quite a bit.
Subsequently, in 1970, when Brakebill was promoted to Executive Vice
Chancellor, he started searching for a vice chancellor. I recommended
Hanner, and he got it. Of course he had moved around. He had been
the Chief of Audits and had held other positions. So Hanner became
the Vice Chancellor of Business Affairs, to the discernment of a
number of people internally, because they thought that they were
entitled to move up to it, and he was an outsider. I think he was an
outstanding vice chancellor. He stayed there for twenty-five years, and
then he retired, and I sort of followed in his footsteps. So, in a way,
I had a link with him that went back over my entire career.
LD: That's interesting.
LM: After my stint with him, I went on to Corrections and Youth
Authority. I spent eight years in the Department of Finance, and I
probably spent five of those eight years with Corrections and Youth
Authority. That was a time when they were building a number of new
institutions and staffing these new prisons— of course, they still are
today. It was similar to the California State University because we
were building and staffing new institutions, so there was a correlation
there and I just happened to fit in. I always maintain that your career
sometimes was based upon a lot of luck, being at the right place at the
right time. I happened to be there, I thought, with Mr. Brakebill, and
it just worked like magic.
LD: Now, when you did these stints at the Department of Finance, were
you essentially helping agencies develop what would become the
Governor's Budget?
LM: Yes. Basically agencies would submit their budget, and we would
analyze their budget, make recommendations to the Department of
Finance, meet with the director of the department and iron out all the
differences, and then come to some conclusion on their budget. Then
that would become a component of the Governor's Budget. The
Governor's Budget would then be introduced to the legislature.
Legislative analysts would attack it, we'd go to budget hearings and
resolve differences. Ultimately the legislature would pass the budget
MESSNER 7
and it came back to the governor for approval. It always happens that
you're working on three different budgets all the time: the current,
past, and future budget. And you also worked with the agency
administration on the day-to-day needs, transfers, etcetera. At one
time, the Department of Finance used to approve all the documents,
all the personnel transactions, equipment purchases, and a numb
Neoplastic transformation of rat liver epithelial cells is enhanced by non-transferrin-bound iron
No full textAbstract Background Iron overload is associated with liver toxicity, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma in humans. While most iron circulates in blood as transferrin-bound iron, non-transferrin-bound iron (NTBI) also becomes elevated and contributes to toxicity in the setting of iron overload. The mechanism for iron-related carcinogenesis is not well understood, in part due to a shortage of suitable experimental models. The primary aim of this study was to investigate NTBI-related hepatic carcinogenesis using T51B rat liver epithelial cells, a non-neoplastic cell line previously developed for carcinogenicity and tumor promotion studies. Methods T51B cells were loaded with iron by repeated addition of ferric ammonium citrate (FAC) to the culture medium. Iron internalization was documented by chemical assay, ferritin induction, and loss of calcein fluorescence. Proliferative effects were determined by cell count, toxicity was determined by MTT assay, and neoplastic transformation was assessed by measuring colony formation in soft agar. Cyclin levels were measured by western blot. Results T51B cells readily internalized NTBI given as FAC. Within 1 week of treatment at 200 μM, there were significant but well-tolerated toxic effects including a decrease in cell proliferation (30% decrease, p Conclusion These results establish NTBI as a tumor promoter in T51B rat liver epithelial cells. Changes in cyclin proteins suggest cell cycle disregulation contributes to tumor promotion by NTBI in this liver cell model.</p
- …
