Published July 13, 2019, minor revs. July 14, (including correcting the typo in the title which called my 2019 updates my 2018 updates!).  Post title, with my update year now corrected: CENIC!! (Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California). And National LambdaRail + the New Owner of the Los Angeles Times: My 2019 {{~~ CENIC Notes and Updates.  (case-sensitive short-link still ends “-aed”) (about 10,600 words)

As dramatic in scope and scale of operations as the subject matter here is, writing it up or developing the full plot outline and sequence is not my main priority this season, or on this blog. If I do write or reorganize more, it’s in the process of getting answers I myself would like about collective the bottom lines for customers of CENIC and similar networks which universities and research institutions already depend upon, including hospitals, and what it means for the future, including the future envisioned by some of the controlling personalities with whom CENIC has had to deal over the years. Otherwise I’d wait and finish major revisions, or a follow-up post.

Parts of this situation caught my attention a few years ago when I looked up an unknown (to me) browser name, discovered it was tied to a nonprofit tied to statewide, high-bandwidth, high-capacity communications — something every university, research scientist (in almost any field) and, as it turns out here, doctor with a patented potential cure for cancer, might want, and does.  (Point-of Delivery genetically individually targeted assessment and treatments).

People with actual leisure time and a mind (and the ability) to investigate could write it up in the style of (for example), Edward Jay Epstein’s “The Diamond Invention” (<~on-line book: 22 chapters, prologue and endnotes; I’ve read it and posted on it in the context of the history of the Rhodes scholars/trust; chronology of Namibia, and too-close-for-comfort parallels between the administration of South African apartheid and intentions and policies in the current ‘Welfare Reform’ and Social Services scenarios today.) pulling the narrative together to show agents, actors, promoters, and of course time and place, further illuminating national and global governments in action until this day as pertains to the key subject matter.  Even in The Diamond Invention’s prologue paragraphs, I see parallels to the situation here, although diamonds aren’t drugs.

It’s a short prologue, he’s a good writer — check it out! ).  From that prologue:

In Japan, the matrimonial custom had survived feudal revolutions, world wars, industrialization and even the American occupation …. The ceremony was then consummated, according to Shinto law, by the bride and groom both drinking rice wine from the same wooden bowl. This simple arrangement had persisted for more than a millennium. There was no tradition for romance, courtship, seduction and prenuptial love in Japan; and no tradition that required the gift of a diamond engagement ring.

Then, in 1967, halfway around the world, a South African diamond company decided to change the Japanese courtship ritual. It retained J. Walter Thompson, the largest advertising agency in the world, to embark on a campaign to popularize diamond engagement rings in Japan. It was not an easy task. Even the quartering of millions of American soldiers in Japan for a decade had not resulted in any substantial Japanese interest in giving diamonds as a token of love.

The diamond company already had the product. It perceived an untapped mass market and getting there first, then maintaining control and value indefinitely, which required major persuasion of the popular mindset (at the consumer end), when as it says, quartering millions of American soldiers in Japan for a decade hadn’t.

After a few paragraphs describing the vastly successful results, the prologue assesses the accomplishment:

..The diamond invention was an ingenious scheme for sustaining the value of diamonds in an uncertain world. To begin with, it involved gaining control over the production of all the important diamond mines in the world. Next, a system was devised for allocating this controlled supply of gems to a select number of diamond cutters who all agreed to abide by certain rules intended to assure that the quantity of finished diamonds available at any given time never exceeded the public’s demand for them. Finally, a set of subtle, but effective, incentives were devised for regulating the behavior of all the people who served and ultimately profited from the system.

This example came to mind after writing this post and the most recent lookups (not all posted here yet), some are referenced though. I hadn’t realized at first that both originated, in different ways, in South Africa and with the vision of just a few dominant men intent on success as measured by their personal visions and willing to do whatever it took to get to that point, and maintain it.

HOW MUCH and WHAT ASPECTS of both Africa, Europe, and the USA today has been impacted by diamonds as signs of engagement and true love, whether or not they be ‘blood diamonds’ and regardless of what happened to the people in the mines?  Will we ever acknowledge that this was a scheme, or undue its effects? Has it just maybe affected politics and national economies?

The invention had a wide array of diverse parts: these included a huge stockpile of uncut diamonds in a vault in London; a billion-dollar cash hoard deposited in banks in Europe; and private intelligence network operating out of Antwerp, Tel Aviv, Johannesburg and London; a global network of advertising agencies, brokers and distributors; corporate fronts in Africa for concealing massive diamond purchases; and private treaties with nations establishing quotas for annual production.

The invention is far more than merely a monopoly for fixing diamond prices…

Different times, different products and infrastructure development, but still mega profits, and what seems to me, clear intent to monopolize them.  Here, it’s about research advances, and especially cures for cancer. Billions have already been made with a few proprietary drugs; those billions being invested to developing more AND keeping the money coming in through control of a high-speed, high-capacity (dark fibre?) network where others have failed.

Success builds upon success: here we can see intents to build health hubs in specific cities, a literal internet paradise metropolis (with multiple interlocking nonprofits by founders to keep taxes down).   As the timing here was leading up to 2010, I can only assume there was anticipation that the Affordable Health Care Act might contribute to the coffers.  However, even without it, control of the conduits and access to them guarantees ongoing revenues.

So I think this story could be written equally well as a nonfiction novel, covering about a 50 to 70-year timespan.  The events in this novel are occurring now, but who’s reading the screenplay?

CENIC Network overview (@2019July2). If the map looks unfamiliar (see state outlines), it may because California here is horizontal; in an upright (N/S) alignment it covers a good deal of the USA’s Pacific Coast. Guess it fit the blog page better horizontally! (Notice San Francisco left, Los Angeles, San Diego further right).//LGH

Post Title: CENIC!! (Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California). And National LambdaRail + the New Owner of the Los Angeles Times. My 2019<~~ CENIC Notes and Updates. (shortlink ends “-aed”).  About 9,500 words on publishing.  Might be shortened post-publication with a spin-off post, but as the top of this one says, that also just might not be my calling at the moment.   (Post was originally published with a typo.  Said updates (additions) were as of this week ending Saturday July 13,  2019, not 2018!//LGH).

2011 Businesswire: Change of CENIC leadership.  Current CEO, Louis Fox, took the helm in 2012, succeeding a Jim Dolgonas (running CENIC since 2002), per this Dec, 2011 BusinessWire.  Think “Fibre-optic wire” (then, 3,000 miles, now closer to 8,000 miles):

New CEO for CENIC, California’s High-Performance Research and Education Network Corporation (Dec. 16, 2011, La Mirada, California).  Louis Fox to Lead Non-profit Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California (CENIC) Serving Virtually All of the Golden State’s Public Education System

CENIC designs, implements, and operates CalREN, the California Research and Education Network, a high-bandwidth, high-capacity Internet network specially designed to meet the unique requirements of these communities. CalREN consists of a [then!-] 3,000-mile fiber-optic CENIC-operated backbone to which schools and other institutions in all 58 of California’s counties connect via leased circuits obtained from telecom carriers or via CENIC owned fiber-optic cable.

(There are many Louis Fox’s around; The CENIC CEO Louis Fox’s LinkedIn (#9716404) shows he’d spent about 23 years at the University of Washington in a variety of positions (increasingly more responsible), has a B.A. from Kenyon (Kenyon College is in Ohio) and  notations about (WU and) “Harvard” on the LinkedIn, but in what, not shown… (J. Ronald Fox at Harvard Business School) (<~just kidding, maybe a relative?)(probably much more current Louis Fox photo, at IeBroadband.com (apparently Oct. 2018, or upload that date). Even Bloomberg.com, (person profile #17502032), quite clear on his last three jobs, with big headings for “Career” “Education,” and “About” (CENIC, brief statement), lists the same three (well, one college and two universities) but the whole “Degrees” column is blank.

I don’t see any “Dr.” address throughout, so I’m going to assume that the highest level of graduate education Mr. (Louis) Fox MIGHT have reached would be a masters’ degree.  I hope that working 23 years in increasingly responsible positions (so it seems) at  major university in Seattle might require at least some proof of academia beyond a 4-year bachelor’s degree with no specific major (i.e., B.A. not B.S. or such)…

Right before CENIC he was simultaneously on PacificNorthwest GigaPOP (also a nonprofit, doesn’t post its financials), clearly international, and simultaneously (Mr. Fox was working for) what sounds like a US-based “JPA” | WICHE (Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, a trans-state governmental higher-education authority, like ‘WestEd’ I’ve blogged (this blog) earlier, particularly because its CAFRs are basically, hidden (if there are any being produced). WICHE operates as a nonprofit, lists is HQ as in Boulder, Colorado, includes both states and territories, has been around since 1953 (administering an education compact of the 1950s), and like the others, doesn’t post its financials, or any clear link to them, on a very informative and busy, brightly-formatted (black, white and blue mostly) website. It started at first in Eugene Oregon:

…WICHE began operations in 1953 in Eugene, OR, moving to its present location in Boulder, CO, in 1955. WICHE is governed by three gubernatorially appointed commissioners from each member. Under terms of the compact, each member commits to support WICHE’s basic operations through annual dues established by the full commission.

WICHE’s members include 15 Western states and member U.S. Pacific Territories and Freely Associated States (which currently include the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam).

(Next three images pertain to LinkedIn Louis Fox,  but not WICHE I was also interested to see among PacificNorthwestGigaPOP’s Members, top of the list was EDUCAUSE which (I kid you not) was on my “To-Do” list, some of which is reflected on which windows I choose to keep open (see image gallery, showing some of my (alpha arranged by default) open browser windows, although none of the “NOYB” sort…).

CalREN is the product, CENIC operates it.  CENIC is California only, what about interstate and international? What about networks in other states?  There’s a definite story line here.

I’ve been cleaning up blog formats, and in the process, saw a full post of material on CENIC published, but submerged, as a sort of footnote to a Table of Contents page.  It seemed like its own topic, and “CENIC!!” a natural title.   A look through my saved files on this situation shows the interest went back to about January 2017, getting more serious in Sept. 2017, although it was obviously not the primary topic of this blog.

The bottom half (approximate) of this post, except any footnote, is what I understood on an initial drill-down, as originally published on my 2017 Table of Contents post (completed in early 2018), still one of the top sticky posts on the blog. (There are nine total: It’s ninth from the top, 2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. (case-sensitive short-link ending “-5qz”. Until I publish again, it’s the one right above this post on “Current Posts” page.)

The top half (approximate) here holds my updates made while moving the earlier material.  It’s a fascinating topic. I decided to share it (and take a break from blog administrative cleanup). There’s some repetition between top and bottom halves of the post and I’ve not re-arranged it as one piece with a timeline of news articles and key events by key players, though while reading I keep the general timeframe as attached to individual or entities A, B, or C in mind (a good practice in any reading; wish more people did this when it came to problem-solving the family courts, domestic violence and child abuse issues and causes).

re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019)

(2019 TOC Is now through October 31, 2019, as shown on the link (not the image) and about to be updated through Nov.  The blog right sidebar will show most recent version of TOC 2019, post with shortlink ending “-ayV”)

CENIC had captured my attention back then as:

(1) a private nonprofit providing critical communications infrastructure for all levels (K-12 and universities, including some private and all? public ones in the state) and

(2) holding a strategically powerful position (“Connecting California to the World..” and interconnectivity among research institutions and universities within California: this state has several of famous ones, AND the public school systems K-12).

(3) I’d looked at the tax returns and, it being a California entity, its Charitable Registry annual filings, and quickly noticed failure to follow basic instructions and what appeared to be jacking up the access prices.

It’s obvious that when public institutions pay membership/access fees, the public is footing the bill, but probably unaware how unless actually involved.  CENIC as a nonprofit controlled access to the network and its tax returns (see below) entailed some subsidiary (reported “Schedule-R” related organizations) one of which was “National LambdaRail” whether as an LLC or in acronym (NLR).  etc.

As part of the communications infrastructure, it’s also part of the economic infrastructure of the country (and global communications).  For CENIC’s “CalREN” (Research Education Network) no doubt there are others.  (membership of “NLR” shows in its Wiki, below). The history of the fibre-optics network and “the need for speed” (and high-capacity info-crunching) comes with an economic corporate history also, and is an essential part of the 21st and last half of the 20th century.

[Considered explaining this further; decided “not here.”  “Stay tuned…”]

Meanwhile men and women like myself have at times struggled to even retain access to slow-speed internet access, and at times, even a functional telephone or cell phone (and by “like myself” I mean those whose income depletion stretches over a decade or more in the family courts, especially those dealing with prior or current domestic violence (or should I call it “coercive control” and not violence or abuse?) issues, including stalking).

The top half (portions approximate) is Preview due to my 2019 Updates made while moving what I’d already published in 2017 and 2018.  I’m just pointing out the situation is in motion and has major ramifications for, well, everyone.  It’d be good to know about before all deals are concluded.

IF all this is news to any reader, remember it was simply noticing details and minimal follow-through (with the Form 990s) which alerted me to the situation.  I enjoyed reading about it because it deepened my understanding of some of the infrastructure (communications grid).  It’s good to be aware of who controls what in ANY “grid.”  This situation has several red flags and I learned in the process of updating that I’m not the only one who noticed them.

PREVIEW Why there’s so much additional information on a billionaire (in fact, the world’s richest) doctor below, starting with some news articles from a few different years.  This is LESS THAN the tip of the iceberg, which I’ve been reading about all day (July 13, 2019), especially after a look at the filing peculiarities (and how many ‘related organizations’ and “transactions with interested parties’ (etc.) showed up on The Chan Soon-Shiong Family Foundation (Delaware entity active in California, EIN#264384360), and how it took the State of California Office of Attorney General 3 letters in 3 years to remind the Chan Soon-Shiong NantHealth Foundation (about its third name change since California incorporation in 2011/EIN#273651366) that it’s exempt — at least from filing with them — because organized as a hospital or medical research institute and that further attempts to file or paperwork (‘including any checks’) sent our office will be shredded.”

Can perhaps cure cancer — can’t comprehend basic filing rules — or doesn’t feel with this level at influence, it should have to …. and intends to control the supporting communications network in the process — all organizations, it seems, subject to control by the doctor and his wife…

To say much more than this right now would be to overload a post.  It’s one of those “down the rabbit hole” situations.  I’m just not going to put all the tidbits on the table yet (unlike the good doctor here, I don’t get paid squat for blogging, and it is work….), but began outlining some of the areas of concern and interest, below.

Reminder:  Pharmaceutical organizations are among the largest on the planet, and the individual who seems to have taken over “National LambdaRail” and possibly run it into the ground, or excluded other possibly better infrastructure options, has in this century (it seems) founded two major ones and sold them both, now working on a third (which name I discovered in an obscure place: Schedule D “Other Investments,”, “NantkWest, Inc.”)   There’s much news on these because the situations are just so big.

I made the connections preparing to move this section (not back in Q1, 2018) when I simply searched the term “National LambdaRail” remembering it as part of the original topic because — I READ TAX RETURNS..  And I’d read CENIC’s. Most of the images in my earlier writings below deal with either a CENIC website, explaining itself, or excerpts from its tax returns.  I’d picked up on already that its rapid increase in revenues was coming from “membership fees” for use of a licensed product — represented by the NLR.

I’d also thought it odd how a single medical center called “City of Hope” was the sole corporate member of all “affiliated” members of CENIC (shown below).  The matter of the billionaire (because of a cancer drug discovery, initially, it seems) M.D. (also owner now of the Los Angeles Times) came to my attention through this older article, in a specialized forum about such things (more below; I’m adding some images to show): “The Fate of LambdaRail:  He Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules”

That is why there are several quotes regarding this doctor and regarding the ownership and membership of both CENIC and the (short-lived?) NLR situation.

The larger context of cancer research revenues:  (8-10 paragraphs commentary):

Separately, but in recent two to three years, and again the past few months on this blog, I’ve been mentioning the impact of major tobacco class action litigation (master settlement agreement ca. 1998) and tobacco tax revenues (in California, representing the ‘First 5’ Commissions).  Anticipating this influx, an entire new system of revenues administration, that is, a created new unit of government at the state level (one for each county: separate “Commissions” and a Statewide one). separately and parallel, there are similarly named nonprofits (also networked State, county and region) interacting with their counterparts in government.

• California Manual of Funds (Finance Department) (DOF.financeCA.Gov/budget/.., numeric, highest on top, Fund 0001 is “General Fund,” 0084 is The Corporation Tax Fund (establ. in 1929, recent name change 2013).
• Cigarette Tax Fund, No. 0086 (1 page description with boxes, neat & clean): (since 1959, with provisions addressing a 2009 law, “Prevention of Cigarette Traffcking) distributes to three other funds, including #0623
• California Children and Families Trust Fund, 0623 (1998ff, “Prop. 10”) (click to see the one-page pdf):

Comments/Historical Information

The fund and the Commission were originally named the California Children and Families First Trust Fund and California Children and Families First Commission, respectively, in accordance with the California Children and Families First Act of 1998. However, Chapter 126, Statutess (sic) of 1999 (AB 1576) renamed the fund, Commission, and Act. The Commission is also known as First 5 California. | [para. break] | The fund was established through the initiative process. As such, the only way to abolish the fund is through the initiative process.

I noted (DNK if yet published) how at least one Commission hasn’t filed its required independently audited comprehensive financial reports [i.e., statements with notes and any required schedules] for several years, after being criticized for lack of internal controls on their own accounts.

I have looked up (not posted yet) some of the “relationship coaching” (i.e., “abuse prevention”) organizations involved, and notable lapses in truthfulness about: their own names (website vs. posted legal business names) are showing up (i.e., an early-state name-change recorded at the Secretary of State level somehow never made it out to the entity’s own website, or the First 5 Commission citing (still) to the old name in its “programs and initiatives” list justifying the use of these funds.

Much of the tobacco revenues (whether add-on taxes as in California or master settlement agreements from class action lawsuits by 46 state attorneys and 5 territories (plus litigation results in the other states) are resulting in billions of dollars of INCREASED revenue flow to the state, until the revenues started decreasing when the intended effect — fewer smokers — began to kick in.  So now the programs can complain about revenue losses.  Reports have been assembled on how the funds are being used after receipt (not necessarily for the purposes the litigation outlines)…  One major foundation involved, originally “American Legacy Foundation,” I looked at the chronology of its management of the startup assets (billions of dollars) and how expenses were allocated.  It changed its name to the grandiose “Truth Initiative” some years back.

All of this based on the science that tobacco smoking causes cancer, while the health, medical, science, and in many ways government backing for managing and finding a cure for cancer (including drugs), continues.

I have posts in draft hoping to lay out what I see — how the same infrastructure (expanded as mentioned above with add-on Commissions, or entities to receive the flow of tobacco tax (or master settlement agreement, starting around the turn of this century) — has benefitted existing marriage/fatherhood, “relationship” and “parenting” curricula designers, including (so-identified) at least some long-standing Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (“AFCC”) authors/trainers/certify-yourself-in-our-curricula people (also having obtained some backing from the U.S. Department of HHS through SAMHSA (“Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency”) (This last, a reference to Don Gordon & Jack Arbuthnot, searchable on this blog).

My point being:  After the National Cancer Act of 1971 and massive build-up of the federal medical and health establishment, especially the NIH (National Institutes of Health) with successful and persistent lobbying by Mary Lasker, wealthy (through marriage and long outliving her husband, who died of cancer) heiress to advertising agency millions, and for other reasons, we have (my perception/summary) “A Health System Flush with Cash.“  [[Topics have been summarized with links and details on my Front matter (Front Page and related top pages or posts; searchable on the blog (pick a unique name). Not repeating links here..]]

It’s in that context and the search for a cure for cancer, you can understand anyone with significant initial success on this may want to continue dominating the field, or attempt to, by controlling (a) the competition (which has come up in the news) and (b) the communications networks essential for research, including that used by the competition (which has been noted back in 2011 by people involved in the field), and now (b) a major California media outlet, The Los Angeles Times (mentioned in the news around “(b”))!

How did we get such a world, where billions can be made on a single drug, and the public infrastructure which the public will CONTINUE being billed to access because it’s desperately needed for health, science, national safety (i.e., military operations and technology, etc.), goes private? Is the private control even in the hands of a U.S. citizen?

How is Data Shared among Researchers?  How is Data Analyzed for Researchers?  On what kind of physical infrastructure, created (licensed with access fees), controlled, operated and maintained, periodically upgraded, by whom?

THINK ABOUT IT:  You don’t have to be an engineer or understand all the technical terms and organization acronyms (though some acquaintance will help) to understand the significance of this situation. I think the average person who even thinks about this must realize that the universities and other research facilities (private or public) engaged in high-level science R&D (whether for military, weather, here health & medicine, astronomy, weather, geology, modeling what-if scenarios for earthquakes, plagues, climate change, fires, hurricanes or tsunamis, and for knowledge itself) requires major equipment. The act of continuing to build understanding in the field MUST include high-speed and high-capacity communications between scientists and university systems + government agencies)..  NASA, NOAA, etc.

Here, I learned how the issue was the speed and cost of analyzing DNA data already obtained (i.e., genomics…)….

There’s a major story, ongoing (and it’s been making news regularly because of the size and wealth involved, and access issues) around the NLR (which ceased operations, says Wiki, in 2014) and sole ownership of such major “firepower” affecting all of the above fields because it affects communications.   One of my main points here is, the habit of noticing details: basic curiosity (originally for me, who was the identified visitor to my blog a while back…) and then looking at the component elements within a basic tax return and noticing when things don’t look right, because they aren’t — or noticing where the weight of the revenues and expenses are lodged — can give anyone a “heads-up” to headline news and major issues of our time.  Just, coming in through the back door with some data, even as sketchy-looking as the data provided on most websites granting access to tax returns…

Unless specifically marked “2019 updates”  — and that is a section at the top and some footnoted commentary at the bottom — was all written and previously published on “2017 Continues Themes from 2016” (shortlink ending -5qZ) which I am condensing because it’s no longer the lead page on this blog.

I’m preserving “2017 Continues Themes from 2016” (shortlink ending -5qZ) still marked “sticky” for its links to tables of contents from other years as well as 2017.

CENIC information (<~Network Overview, accessed July 2, 2019), “Connecting California to the World” ” Operates CalREN”..is interesting, relevant, and it turns possibly so closely tied to its own related or disregarded entities shown on their tax returns, which in turn may be owned by a South-African-born M.D. Patrick Soon-Shiong, who (I’m just learning) invented the anti-cancer drug Abraxane®.

CENIC website CalREN coverage + Backbone maps SShots, #1 [Viewed Oct. 2017, previously posted, may be shown also below on my new “CENIC!!!” post].

I’d love to research and write it up even more, but realize posting with captioned, annotated images and commentary is inefficient for a lone blogger.  What’s here still shows how tightly entwined we are through technology, where the public sector feeds in throughout, and that we’d better start paying attention when the billionaire individuals start running their own show, especially in medical research fields. //LGH.

 Search Again.**  (Earlier, I had only YE 2015 as the latest return:  Assets, $89.6M).

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2015	990	34	$89,638,373.00	94-3289022

** Between this search and last search, the database changed its home (search) page and it underwent a merger.  It happens… and the redirect still works.  About two years later (and two more tax filings worth), we’re seeing about 10% growth in “Total Assets.”  That could reflect any number of causes, but for the owners, no doubt that’s good news.  Anyone should be so lucky with normal investments!

“UPDATES”

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2017	990	50	$112,081,194.00	94-3289022
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2016	990	40	$102,747,681.00	94-3289022
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2015	990	34	$89,638,373.00	94-3289022

---

For comparison (excerpts may also be below), FY2006 (YE June) Tax return.

And on looking through the numbers again, remembering my earlier research, I also remember seeing some unusually HIGH profits, and the “National Lambdarail” (NLR) factor.  I googled “National LambdaRail” “highspeed internet or similar content after noticing (on the 2006 return) a $1,000 membership fee in NLR Inc.  I wanted to see NLR Inc.  An NLR, LLC was also mentioned, Level 3, CISCO, other names and concepts you may recognize.

@@@ I found a late 2011 report (The Cook Report, but posted at GLIF) on the ownership and odd behavior (regarding a SuperComputer conference).  Suggest, read the whole page:~~> “The Fate of LambdaRail:  He Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules“, posted at GLIF (Global Lambda Integrated Facility<~~About.  Good explanation for lay readers, like myself).  Click around and under stand that we are talking optical fibre, “lambda” refers to light wavelengths, and that GLIF came together (2001, 2002, 2003 conferences in: Amsterdam, Reykjavik, and Nottingham, England) in 2003; while CENIC earlier in 1998.  Internet2 is in Ann Arbor Michigan) still and shows up on the tax returns.

The following information may help understand several terms and at least one personalities in the article, as a few years later (which this author caught wind of a few years earlier based on certain behaviors he or she (see article I DNR author  name at the moment)  been noticing.  Wikipedia on “NationalLambdaRail“:

National LambdaRail (NLR) was a 12,000-mile (19,000 km), high-speed national computer network owned and operated by the U.S. research and education community. In November 2011 the control of NLR was purchased from its university membership by a billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong. NLR ceased operations in March 2014.

How’d that come to pass I wonder. This network includes public universities.  The article lists 13 members — notice them (CENIC is just one).  Now look at just two images from that Wiki (for the general idea on NLR) (top two on the page, without expanded “contents” widget).  Click either image to enlarge.  Quote continued below.

NLR – National LambdaRail (Wikipedia) #Image 1 of 2) see my 7/12/2019 (or thereabouts) new post ‘CENIC !!’

NLR – National LambdaRail (Wikipedia) #Image 2 of 2) see my 7/12/2019 (or thereabouts) new post ‘CENIC !!’

From that Wiki, cont’d:

National LambdaRail was founded in 2003 and in 2004 its national, advanced fiber optic network was completed. In addition to being the first transcontinental, production 10 Gigabit Ethernet network, National LambdaRail was also the first intelligently managed, nationwide peering and transit program focused on research applications.

In 2008, a company named Darkstrand purchased capacity on NLR for commercial use.^[1] By the end of the year the Chicago-based company was having trouble raising funding due to the Great Recession.^[2] On May 24, 2012 the NLR network operations center services were transferred to the  Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California.^[3]

In October 2009 Glenn Ricart was named president and CEO.^[4] {{{of CENIC, not DARKSTRAND}}}  On September 7, 2010 Ricart announced his resignation.^[5]

In November 2011 the control of NLR was purchased from its university membership by a billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong for $100M, who indicated his intention to upgrade NLR infrastructure and repurpose portions of it to support an ambitious healthcare project through NantHealth.^[6] The upgrade never took place. NLR ceased operations in March 2014.^{[7][8][9][10]}

Because I’m not writing to a specialized audience (and this is not my specialty either), I’m posting various links to my own basic (Google) searches of companies or terms which help show the context, even if the terms are new (although I doubt “fiber optic” is still an unknown concept in developed countries who understand that technology continues to change as it has been as long as we’ve been alive (and our grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.), and faster as communications (at least for some sectors of people) continue to require, demand, and get faster speeds and higher carrying-loads, i.e., the traffic factors and the maintain and upgrade factors.  The question being, at what cost, and what risk when the providers are being bought & sold or discontinued.

Darkstrand’s plans were, having acquired almost HALF of NLR’s “lit” fibers, to commercialize it: offer it far beyond the more government-supported niches; the CEO (Michael Stein; see the next article) understood the new niche, a need for such a stable product for businesses — not just universities and select research institutions.  Sounds like they might have succeeded except for a global event called the 2008 recession.

National LambdaRail Opens for Business Oct. 28, 2008 in HPCWire* by Michael Feldman

*[About] HPCWire (legacy since 1987, “…covering the fastest computers in the world and the people who run them”) is a trademark of Tabor Communications, Inc., …”an international media, services, and events company… “…By facilitating communication at the leading-edge of computing innovation, we accelerate the adoption of advanced-scale technologies for a high performance world. ” (+ two other Tabor publications). (on the link to “TaborCommunications” About/footer, I see a San Diego, California street address).

---

The October, 2011 article from “GLIF” on this situation is long and written by someone in the field, talks about the computing power surrounding genomic sequencing (and analyzing), data issues, and competing interests for, I guess, the university contracts.   It mentions a CSS Institute where “CSS” stands for “Chan Soon-Shiong Institute” with “Chan” being the wife of Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the wealthiest doctor in the world (after invention of the cancer drug Abraxane).  Discussions around which city gets to be the next great healthcare infrastructure hub (Phoenix was mentioned), to parallel Silicon Valley.

I looked up that institute, found a (Businesswire) article on opening a facility in El Segundo, CA (2017) and a Darius Tahir Politico article with a great graphic, noticing that the doctor’s great philanthropy tends to be particularly towards nonprofits and businesses he owns:

“How Washington’s favorite cancer fighter helps himself :Patrick Soon-Shiong is a philanthropist and a businessman. But a prime target of his philanthropy is his businesses.”  4/19/2017.  Great graphic (appropriate, and it moves).

Patrick Soon-Shiong medical empire

Soon-Shiong believes he has found a pathway to turning the disease into a manageable condition, commanding his own multibillion-dollar network of for-profit and nonprofit groups that combines health information technology with genomic testing. He compares himself to the world’s great medical philanthropists, saying he wants to emulate the highly respected Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

But Soon-Shiong’s research foundation — called the Chan Soon-Shiong NantHealth Foundation, after his wife — hardly resembles the Howard Hughes or any other grant-making charity. A POLITICO investigation found that the majority of its expenditures flow to businesses and not-for-profits controlled by Soon-Shiong himself, and the majority of its grants have gone to entities that have business deals with his for-profit firms.

The deals have raised alarms among some tax specialists, who question Soon-Shiong’s use of tax-free dollars to boost the bottom lines of his for-profit businesses. The deals also cast a sharp spotlight on the man who seeks to be the public face of emerging cancer treatments and a major player in Washington’s battles over federal research spending.

Patrick Soon-Shiong medical empire

See also in “Stat” “Expanding his medical empire is good for Soon-Shiong but is it good for patients?” (July 20, 2017, rebecca robbins, see nearby image)

Previously in AZBIO (Arizona Bioindustry association), Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong Launches Chan Soon-Shiong Institute of Molecular Medicine to Transform Health Systems, Oct. 3, 2014 (article lacks a year; Google search results showed 2014. (no nearby image)

| | | | | |

---

Here’s how I introduced CENIC on the other post:

Whenever private entities control public resources, it’s going to affect any local population.

Similar things are happening here, within America, but we somehow don’t seem to realize it, as having been coached not to think about who owns which real estate and assets, but “we’re all in this together” and in terms of social services.  What about the roads, public buildings, dams, levees, schools, universities (public ones I mean) as to their property (real estate); what about access to “the grid” whether it’s electric, and/or communications?  Who owns, and who charges access fees?

I just learned recently [[ at that time — mid-2018?]]  through noticing a certain visitor to the blog, about “CENIC.org” and the Internet2, i.e., that high-speed infrastructure as opposed to the communications network available to most individual taxpayers as individuals (that is, apart from their work or educational lives).  I realize the need for this when it comes to the military and national safety, but still — how many of us understand or even think casually about the entities involved and how this works and is financed? Well, see that website for more information.  It’s one of the best-designed websites I’ve seen in a long time, and deals with the statewide internet access for California.

Context:  I’d had references to the CENIC portions near the top, middle and bottom of that long Tables of Contents post so must’ve been pretty proud of my work or discoveries at the time.  But that post still holds key tables of contents links from earlier on this blog, it’s still going to be kept “Sticky” near the top and because of that, needed a substantial haircut.  This is part of the haircut.

I also felt this information deserves some fresh air and a bit more publicity, even though it’s more correlated/ parallel to than direct-subject-matter-related.** It still shows how I do drill downs and the type of information I’m interested in when I do them. [**Then again, that correlation may be more important anyhow. SEE FOOTNOTE (It’s just commentary)]

---

I had all this material there (seems to be around March – Oct. 2018 additions) because enthusiastically looking it up at the time, and probably trying to give new readers a taste of how doing a basic drill-down WILL bring up some valuable resources (information and insights).  At the time a retired, and conversational Apple Genius who also gave me periodic feedback on the blog (for flow, coherence; and s/he was pretty smart too) also pointed me to more information on the development of the high-speed internet, i.e., different levels of access for different purposes.

---

It’s good to know how key features of any existing state and (as otherwise coordinated) national/international landscape developed, were financed, how administered (and at how much profit, whether or not tax-exempt), and especially who owns the assets.  When it started private (even if financed mostly by public institutions, as this was), it can also change hands and of course change names.  Corporations do that.  If I had staff (or were a decade younger?) I’d like to know about the parallel organizations in other states and/or territories in the USA.  I’m not fluent enough in Canadian or other countries’ accounting (reporting, business registration) systems (yet) to attempt a larger scope.

---

I’m shortening the earlier post, but wasn’t about to get rid of this much information, already prepared and it had been published…//LGH  7-1-2019.

CENIC!!!

CENIC website CalREN coverage + Backbone maps SShots, Overview (Calif) courtesy “Intermapper” (Image 3 of #3) here.

FYI — at the bottom of this post is also some information on the $89M Assets (FY2014) nonprofit called “CENIC” (Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California). (Here’s its Tax Return for FY2015). I talk about it here also as a bit of “show and tell” for some processes I use repeatedly in the blog, whether on family-court-connected corporations, federal grants, or lookups of tax returns.

(2018Oct comment: I’ve run across similar organizations out of state and bet that most states, given their state (public) + private universities, extensive K-12 public school systems/districts and several states, major research institutions at private or other universities, have similar organizations for subscription-based access to high-speed, high-quality and interlinked Internet beyond what the average individual can access).

---

Or the section on “CENIC” (see nearby image from that section here, and the pdf (link repeated below) showing how doing curiosity-driven entity drill-downs almost always deepens one’s understanding on vital parts of an infrastructure often taken for granted.  Here, I’d had no prior awareness or name-recognition of “CENIC until I noticed it under “Recent visitors” to my blog, statistics some embedded software tracks Not to worry:  only business or gov’t entities’ browsers display names.

Who’s not aware that universities and government entities and some major institutions have access to higher-speed and more networked internet that then average person?  But how many know how is this organized, financed, and operated (including revenues and expenses recorded) in their own state? It’s a major part of a different kind of power grid…so why not look into it?  That’s how drill-downs can help, and it’s a process I demonstrate and promote constantly on this blog, although my usual focus for such drill-downs are much more closely related to the subject matter. //LGH 2019July1 comments

Please take a look!
CENIC (Corp for Educ Netwk Initiatives in Calif) Calif DOJ-OAG-RCT Details (@Sep28 2017, 3pp) CalEntity# C2031925, EIN#943289022, first funded only in 1997? <==OAG DETAILS page differs from these images from a single-year Form 990.  Shows entity growth over the years, and some of its filing habits (in “Related Documents” section) Check it out!  To get there, you may need to click once on the link, and a second time, on the “page icon” which displays there under my blog title and the image title:

This tan-background section on “CENIC” added during (2017 Continues Themes from 2016..Tables of Contents) post review early March, 2018. Below it, I show the Tables of Contents and explain how to access them (a variety of ways). 

I discovered CENIC as an organization when it showed up as a visitor to this blog.  Its existence highlights who funds the increased capacity for high-speed internet and institutional connectivity between universities, school systems (in this case), and a few other places — connectivity that we benefit from indirectly, but in general cannot personally access as citizens so much as can the faculty and enrolled students or researchers at the various institutions.  (List of “BIIG” Associates and steps to full connection, where “BIIG” stands for “Broadband Infrastructure Improvement Grant” (from California Dept. of Education) for access to a certain kind of network.  The main concern behind this seems to have been the ability to provide “computer-based assessments” everywhere.  CENIC.org website also has a “Connection Tracker,” by categories.  Here are those categories:

See also BIIG.k12HSN.org (BIIG 2.0) for more description of the network. The improvement was targeted to both schools and districts.; reference is to 2015-2016

It was organized in 1997 (says the tax return) and its main revenues are not from government contributions, but from “program service revenues” — however these are labeled “membership fees/dues” which would in essence be contributions — and generally coming from educational (public) institutions, which (say the tax return, and CENIC’s schedule of revenues and assets over time)  they only increase year after year. Looking at the details of the tax returns helps show where the weight of expenses and revenues is, and related entities, whether taxable or not. Here, one of the largest expenses for CENIC is “Circuit Leases” ($20M/year one year), while its two kinds of activities, one made a significant profit (nearly $12M — roughly) and the other, a loss.  The profit comes from the membership dues.

This next “…@Sep28,2017, 3pp)…” link is to a printout (for CENIC, taken in 2017 Sept) from the California Department of Justice, Office of Attorney General “Registry of Charitable Trusts” — a resource I use a lot (along with a few other main sites to look up tax returns, or double-check tax-exempt status with the IRS) on this blog.  I’m placing it here for familiarity, in general what such a “Details” printout would look like, and some things it reveals about any organization.  The printout also contains active links to “Related Documents.”  By looking here at its “Founding Documents” one can see that certain universities and research institutions were original “Charter members” but considered affiliates — not “members.” (The Corporation has no “members” it says).

Charitable registries at the state level should become familiar. So should Secretaries of State (or as appropriate, other places) “Business Entities Search” sites at the state level.  Each state is different, but so much can be learned there- – including the state of those databases in the first place and how they are organized.  “Business entities” have to have a legal domicile — which should be located.  If nonprofit and required to file, their files should be looked up (i.e., search for the EIN# then go to a database such as “990finder” and look it up).  For government entities — look under the filing entity’s “Comptroller” or “Financial Reports” somewhere and, as much as possible, locate and start reading their “CAFRs”* to discover what, really, are the collective holdings of any such entity — as opposed to the budgets only.

(*A searchable term on this blog will tell much about CAFRs and link to plenty of others who lay it out well too).

Please take a look!  To get there, you may need to click once on the link, and a second time, on the “page icon” which displays there under my blog title and the image title:
CENIC (Corp for Educ Netwk Initiatives in Calif) Calif DOJ-OAG-RCT Details (@Sep28 2017, 3pp) CalEntity# C2031925, EIN#943289022, first funded only in 1997? <==OAG DETAILS page differs from these images from a single-year Form 990.  Shows entity growth over the years, and some of its filing habits (in “Related Documents” section) Check it out!

Click Image to Enlarge — this is CENIC’s explanation for its Gov’t funding (not in compliance with requirements of the simple one-page form). They did send in the FYE 2016 report, but “forgot” the $300 fee, says a letter at the California OAG’s website. (image repeated below with a better caption. Anything not in black and white is my commentary…)

CENIC website CalREN coverage + Backbone maps SShots, Overview (Calif) courtesy “Intermapper” (Image 3 of #3) here.

I believe there are parallel types of organizations in many other states.  Stated purpose:  “To Establish an Advanced Network Infrastructure for the Expanding Needs of Education and Research, for University Faculty and Students.”  It operates “CalREN2.”

After looking at its tax returns, charitable filings at the State level, and realizing how (a) late and (b) evasive it was on certain information required to be reported (i.e., specific contact names where there’s government grants) — “back then,” despite appreciating (not that I have access to!) the need for “multi-functional network” of the highest speed and calibre for educational (K-20) and certain research institutions, I expressed my, well, disgust, in the annotations to a part of its RRF.  (Also shown at the bottom of this post).

---

(SECOND SECTION MOVED HERE FROM BOTTOM OF TOC 2017 POST):

 

This pdf=/= the CENIC website image, but an annotated RRF filing of the organization showing sources of gov’t revenue.  Check it out….

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2015	990	34	$89,638,373.00	94-3289022
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2014	990	30	$74,059,456.00	94-3289022
Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California	CA	2013	990	31	$77,566,613.00	94-3289022

 cenic-rrf-for-2014-p22-only-annotatedfye-was-6-30-2015revs-48m-assets-74m-recd-oag-may-182015-corp-for-educ-netwk-initiatives-in-calif-entity-2031925-ein943289022-821576

 

The image of the detail from a state-level filing by CENIC within California is heavily annotated to express my disgust in basic compliance behavior by anything this large, this government-funded, the government and university-connected.  Who do they think is funding government in the first place?  So ‘fess up, file on time, divulge, and quit placing unnatural time delays, obstacles, or diversions in the public’s face to its required public-access, state-level, required information.

In this case, it filed the information due 4-½  months after the end of one fiscal year instead about 11 months after it, then omitted key information which might lead to verification (i.e., a contact person).   It filed that late, looks like, every year (except the first two) since 2002. In 2015, it “forgot” to enclose a check for $300 as its annual RRF filing fee (for a huge organization) and, I see in 2014 decided to omit who is the “pass-through” agent for its NSF funding, or leave a contact person’s name so it could be found otherwise. (click any image to enlarge).

Maybe a minor (?) oversight, but why make it? “YE 6/30/2015” FYI is Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2014, not 2015…..

I’m not saying it’s not a valuable or essential purpose (in writing this during Sept. 2017 [Table of Contents] update, I also do not remember the exact contents I was responding to below). I just don’t see why responsible professionals in obvious fields cannot ADD to their professional behavior, subjecting themselves to, submitting to, and following instructions on what here is a ONE-page form with about 8 Yes/No questions and simple conditions for any “Yes” answer.  Failure to observe such a simple basic is an obvious red flag.  I also recognize that this is “per the controlling agency” which is the California Office of Attorney General’s (OAG) Registry of Charitable Trusts (RCT) data uploaded under the CENIC information.

The next image is a single page in black and white (as obtained from the Calif. OAG RCT in 2017).  Anything in color, inside a box, arrows, blue borders on the original text, etc. is my response to that information. All the filing entity provided (not even the year on the top of the page) was its Name and EIN#, what part of the Form RRF it was responding to, minus key information — the contact person.  Apparently they answer to the RRF was also a “Statement” on a tax return:

CENIC response to an RRF question from the California OAG RCT (Registry of Charitable Trusts). Click image to enlarge; it contains a link to website for further information if desired. Anything inside a colored box, i.e., most of the page, is my commentary (!!). Company website is CENIC.org. Searchable by EIN# on (web)sites I am often using throughout this blog, i.e. on-line searchable databases).

 

This is an interesting organization whose leadership salaries have increased (along with revenues and assets) about 8-fold (from $160,000 for one person, to $1.2M for several) over about a dozen years (latest IRS Form 990 uploaded to the California OAG is only for FY2013).  Here’s a link to the charitable details page at the OAG (only 3 pages long, which gives access to its other uploaded files at the State Registry of Charitable Trusts (“RCT”).  These sometimes serve as a nice time capsule showing organization growth or change (just click on earlier and compare to later filings….).

I also enclose some screenprints from the earliest year shown there (FY2000) about its purpose, and a Schedule A of support showing that it never was primarily supported by grants, but by Program Service Revenues — rapidly increasing from the start), and at least two from later year showing two “Schedule-R” (Related entities) one, “Disregarded” and the other a corporate partnership, taxable.  The earlier Form 990 shows use of independent subcontractors; but the later does not.

Sched R Pt. I, disregarded entity is a CENIC LLC

Sched R Pt. III tax-exempt related entity is National LambdaRail Inc. (smaller than the Pt. I LLC and showing a negative “income” this year).

CENIC (Corp for Educ Netwk Initiatives in Calif) Calif DOJ-OAG-RCT Details (@Sep28 2017, 3pp) CalEntity# C2031925, EIN#943289022, first funded only in 1997? <==OAG DETAILS page differs from these images from a single-year Form 990.  Shows entity growth over the years, and some of its filing habits (in “Related Documents” section) Check it out!

 

 

~ | ~ | ~ | ~

This “Cenic” material removed July 3, 2019 from the middle of my TOC 2017 page, and probable overlap + duplication, or possibly not.  Either way this is a Copy & Paste action for now..//LGH

“CENIC !!!”  (moved from 2017 TOC page)

CENIC is food for thought also on how the high-speed, school-system (Public K-12 and university) are interconnected within this state, and I’m sure similarly in other states — and how this is funded.  CENIC’s revenues and assets over the past dozen years have expanded dramatically.  While it takes some government contributions, its main revenues have been, from the start, a combination of program service revenues and/or membership fees (which are listed as Part VIII Line 2 program service revenues, not under the IRS pre-printed “membership fees” Line 1 entries).  Where the contracted work and membership fees doesn’t show up as specifically public-funded, I’m sure those development and maintenance — and leasing — costs are passed on to the public as consumers.

In addition it currently has two related entities (listed on Schedule R), one, the greatest income-producer is a CENIC LLC, and the other is a partnership (National Lambda Rail or such) listed as taxable as a corporation or partnership. So I am wondering when I look at the summary page of the tax returns and corresponding detail on Part IX (Statement of Expenses) as “lease” fees, whether these leases are to a for-profit LLC already owned by the same management.

CENIC operates “CalREN” and it just elected some new officers.  The next screenprint and quote will give the general idea of its purposes and the leadership.  Amazingly, with all this information, it does not seem to post its own financials…  CalREN also showed up as a browser name (recent visitor) to this site — perhaps because of the updates to this post, I do not really know why.

Images is followed by a quote in navy-blue borders with link to the 9/19/2017 news article on their website.  In the images, do you see anything which might conceivably link to information about its nonprofit IRS returns or financial statements for public viewing, amid all the other fascinating, useful, and colorful descriptions of its services and target / membership institutions?

Yet those documents are what tell so much about how an organization is funded, operates, grows over time, and a few other characteristics, like tendency to file on time, file accurately, or show respect to those who help fund it by complying with state registration requirements and deadlines.

I show some here, and some below the other tables and their images.

CENIC “About” top menu items. Click image to enlarge if needed.

CENIC.org – Click image to enlarge if needed. See any link on this website footer which might show financial statements or tax returns (Forms 990)?

Under “Sponsored Associates” are only 3 organizations (no links to them provided): Explora-torium (SF Bay Area people will know this one), SFJAZZ and California Academy of Sciences. This means some organization must have an “in” or be otherwise close to an existing member of CENIC; they are:

Cultural, scientific, or artistic institutions or organizations with a close tie to a Charter Associate that serves as a sponsor. Sponsored associates have direct access to an abbreviated portfolio of CENIC’s networks and services

Under “Auxiliary Associates,” (same described access to “abbreviated portfolio of…”) there is as of today (9/30/2017) only 1, “City of Hope” (NO link provided at CENIC, but searchable on-line) which I see is the development corporation behind a primarily a Cancer Research nonprofit, which, unlike CENIC, at least posts its Consolidated Annual Financial Statements, even several years’ worth (found under “Who We Are”) — but not its Forms 990.  City of Hope’s Consolidated Annual Financial Statements, however, are only Audited ones through Sep. 30, 2015, although several years’ worth are posted (YE Sep30 2010 – YE Sep. 30 2016).  I’m writing as of Sep. 30, 2017 so their audited financials possibly are still not really up there), according to the website description.

I took a look, however, and see that the financial statements are for an Affiliated Group (several entities) and that there are also “Auxiliaries” throughout the country.  City of Hope as a corporation refers to the development corporation of a number of (entities), so although its financials don’t seem that large, it seems that taken together they would be.  However consolidated financial statements eliminate “major inter-company accounts and transactions”  (next four annotated images).

My annotation on the image (bottom, fine blue print) mistakenly refers to members as “11,000 … 20,000” but the second number I see refers to users. See website for more info.

Click to enlarge! From the FY2014 IRS Form 990, an explanation why their royalties revenue is so high, and where Genetech fits in. EIN# 953435919.

Hospital organizations and their related foundations, research institutes, actual medical centers, and development corporations (and relationships all of the above) not my specialty; this one has my attention only as it was the sole Auxiliary Associate for an $89M (Assets) CENIC. City of Hope has (as of this year) over $1B assets; $129M invested in “Central American/Caribbean” and over $400M (which may include some of those) in “Alternative” forms. See their tax returns…. These images and any related statements are from a first-time, cursory look and point of reference only. I’ve looked at much more than am posting here, however.

  CENIC (not “City of Hope”) screenprints and quotations, cont’d.—

CENIC page, partial (click image to access) with brief activities statement and invitation to choose from a four-item menu of other promotional downloads. Icons prevail over labeling (“pictures vs. print”) verbiage minimal; readers must pick from only four doors if their category isn’t immediately reflected in titles, and whether or not desired info is found, will be sold on the products and services.

 

CENIC Board of Directors Elects New Officers

SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 · RENS & NRENS
TAGS: POLICY, NETWORK, CENIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS, CENIC

The Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California (CENIC) is pleased to announce the election of five board members to its executive committee. CENIC connects California to the world, advancing education and research statewide by providing the world-class network essential for innovation, collaboration, and economic growth. A nonprofit organization, CENIC operates the California Research and Education Network (CalREN), a high-capacity network designed to meet the unique requirements of over 20 million users. CENIC also provides connectivity to leading-edge institutions and industry research organizations around the world, serving the public as a catalyst for a vibrant California. CENIC is governed by its members.

The Board of Directors is comprised of CENIC’s Charter Associates, the founding and governing members of CENIC. Charter Associates include** the California K–12 system, California Community Colleges, the California State University (CSU) system, California’s public libraries, the University of California system, Stanford, Caltech, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the University of Southern California (USC). The Directors meet six times per year to guide the organization, set policy, and make decisions about its future direction. Newly appointed officers include Tom Andriola and Patrick Perry, serving as Co-Chairs; Terry Walker, Vice Chair; Deborah Ludford; Treasurer; and Joe LoPiccolo, Secretary.

Tom Andriola was appointed Vice President and Chief Information Officer of the University of California System in 2013. (etc. — other officers are also described here). (Read more…)

**”Includes” (if singular, or in the plural “include”) by definition means “but not necessarily limited to”I doubt anyone would question the value of such a network and connectivity for education institutions.  However, it still is a private nonprofit with board members primarily but NOT limited to officials in public office. “Level 3 Communications” has their dark fiber lease until 2040, affecting public and private institutions throughout the state:

CENIC Extends Fiber Lease Until 2040

AUGUST 7, 2017 · CA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, CSU, CULTURAL & SCIENTIFIC, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, HEALTHCARE, K-12, LIBRARIES, PERFORMING ARTS, PRIVATE SECTOR, PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES & NPS, RENS & NRENS, PACIFIC WAVE
TAGS: RESEARCH, NETWORK, LEVEL3, FIBER LEASE, CENIC, CALREN

Berkeley & La Mirada, California – CENIC today announced an agreement to extend its fiber leases, called Indefeasible Rights of Use (IRUs), with Level 3 Communications on more than 8,000 miles of dark fiber until 2040.

This collaboration provides Level 3’s extensive fiber network to CENIC’s 11,000-member institutions statewide. Universities, schools, libraries and other cultural, scientific and arts organizations in California will continue to advance education and research statewide using the world-class CENIC network, of which Level 3’s infrastructure is an integral part. The network is essential for innovation, collaboration, and economic growth. …

____________________________________________________

---

……FOOTNOTE (Commentary):

Then again, as far as subject-matter (or I call it “cause-based rhetoric”) related, our society isn’t really set up that way; the language of causes simply seem to be the drivers, the catalysts to start the funds flowing through an internal structure already in place.  Sure, the structure is evolving, BUT beyond that, it has involved registration of property and companies for a very long time, and national income tax by Constitutional Amendment since 1913, with as I understand it, a test run in the late 1800s.  With 1913 we have to also look at the central banking (Federal Reserve) system and not too long — one generation and one World War later — the 1933/1934 one-two major re-arrangements caused by currency control (remember? no hoarding of gold by private citizens — turn it in, after which the government set the price for its own profit) and the Social Security Act of 1934.  In this, while women got suffrage earlier, it was years later before many states validated what U.S. Congress had.  Then a Reorganization Act (around 1939) applying to the Executive Branch under Presidential Authority, in place for many years (until 1980/Reagan?) and I heard attempts to reinstate it at least by 2012.  See my sidebar on the “Social Sciencification of America”).

It seems operations are really run by the profit (and tax-avoidance) method.  From a lay person’s (I’m no political scientist!) perspective, I’d say we have a capitalist society trying to go (or having already gone) socialist without getting caught at it and saying it openly.  BOTH ways have those at the top doing just fine.

In the USA, for now (the echo still of Senator McCarthy?) the closest that can be safely/politically or politically-correct approached is through the words “social science” “Sociology” and “social services” with a liberal dosage of words like “evidence-based” “promising” and other more user-friendly terms than “social engineering by the very rich, tax-exempt of course, upon the very poor, while trading funds among each other’s many tax-exempt entities and ensuring a steady supply of trained — but not too uppity — workers for shareholder and business owner profits… and profit margins — with of course backing of government resources and force where there’s too much objection.  (That’s at least my current sarcastic summary for today).